Churchill Books

I didn't finish this book. Jenkins just throws his note cards at the hapless reader. The editor was awol. Stick with Gilbert. Alternatively, start with Manchester's unfinished bio (to 1940) & then switch to Churchill's memoirs.

This is too long - all biographers should read and learn from Lytton Strachey.

But Churchill's life was so over the top that its nevertheless an enjoyable read; more so with two provisos:

1. You have to be at least constructively disposed to Winston. Better still if you downright adore him, as Roy plainly does.

2. The most lovingly recounted incidents are those that took place in and around parliamentary life, the life that Roy Jenkins himself knew best. Its very, very well told, but if you didn't happen to be an MP yourself you might find it a little too detailed, in the sense that what others might consider to be the main story seems to be lost sight of, sometimes.

For several years I have wanted to read a biography on Churchill. This past summer I finally broke down and purchased the 900+ page book written by Roy Jenkins.

It has only taken six months to finish it. True, I had a dissertation to write and exams to study for. But regardless the book was slow going.

The author is a politician and a writer - much like Churchill. Consequently, Jenkins focuses the book on the intricacies of Churchill's political and journalistic careers. Fair enough.

Churchill's political life and to a lesser extent his various literary endeavors are key to understanding Britain's greatest prime minister. But the details, though interesting, slowly wear down the resolve of the reader.

For example, the beginning and ending of the book flows well as Churchill's family heritage and retirement are explored; in other words, the parts of Churchill's life which are the least political and literary.

Yet by the time we reach his parliamentary career and the two world wars the book descends into minute detail. Minute details about his toast filled summits with Stalin - interesting. Minute details about his administration of the Admiralty - not so much.

Further, he dedicates a surprisingly small amount of space to some very important events - such as the Battle of Britain.

Yet, to be fair, Jenkins provides an excellent overview of Churchill's life. It is also inevitable that certain areas of interest to the reader will not coincide with that of the author.

Indeed, the biographer's experience in British politics provides rare insights: the great PM's great ambition was getting power, using power and retaining power. So, the way Jenkins skillfully dissects and interprets Churchill's various power struggles makes the book worth reading.

Summary: The book is a great introduction to Churchill, with a special focus on his political and literary careers. Yet the combination of the books length and the author's devotion to great detail could prove fatal to the unmotivated.

I would recommend the book to anyone interested in 20th century history, modern British history and of course Churchill. But I would recommend that the reader take long breaks between each of the six sections.

Think Robert Kosowsky's review is pretty much on the mark.

Historical events are not presented except in relation to timing and political positioning by Churchill and others. For example, if you don't know about the Dardenelles operation of WW1, this book will not help you. Despite the final line of the book, this is not uncritical of Churchill and at times makes him appear to be motivated by politics as much as anything else (the author was a MP and in the Cabinet so was a political animal too). This does not ring entirely false as it makes it easier to understand his switching of political parties. And this makes it a good counter to Churchill's own books which are at times clearly self-serving.

This was a fine biography on Churchill. At its heart, this book is a comprehensive political summary of one of the world's best politicians. Jenkins does a great job of surrounding the moment with context and analysis. His mastery of British politics is unreal.

With all that said, the book did have a few flaws. First, it was hard to grasp the ins and outs of the British political process which Jenkins discusses at great lengths (this could be my fault as I am an American). Second, there was not enough character development. Jenkins references countless people, but does not take the time to highlight, or bring about, who ultimately has a major role. To this end, I feel there was a certain extent of "name-dropping" in the tome. At times, this made the book harder to navigate through with ease. Finally, I don't know French or Afrikaans, or Latin. So those phrases in foreign languages fell upon deaf ears (or perhaps blind eyes is the more appropriate description).

Overall, a great book. I enjoyed Jenkins mastery of the subject matter, and his writing is fantastic. I have not read other Churchill bios before, but would certainly recommend this to a history buff.

"Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization", best-selling author Baker's first work of non-fiction, is a history of the buildup to World War II as told via snippets from newspapers, personal diaries, memoirs, etc. Baker provides a minimum of personal interjections or opinions along the way, preferring instead to let the chosen selections speak for themselves. The end result is a grim and depressing narrative that shows the breaking out of World War II as the inevitable conclusion of the machinations of American industrialists looking for new markets in Asia and Europe, Roosevelt's desires to impose his visions of an Anglo-American order upon the world, and, particularly, Winston Churchill's ruthless and bloodthirsty pursuit of a wider and more devastating war.

It needs to be said by the reviewer and, hopefully, known by the reader that Baker is emphatically not a historian. The text itself and post-release interviews with Baker himself indicate that the author had a thesis in his head before the book was written, and the material presented is that which most strongly supports it. The result is a tale of a haunting descent into both total war and industrial holocaust that, possibly, could have been, if not avoided, at least mitigated, had the men in power simply had the moral fiber to choose differently.

This book is going to appeal strongly to a certain subset of readers that wish to believe that capitalism, anti-semitism, etc., were stronger factors in the outbreak of World War II than, say, fascism and national socialism. The supposed anti-semitism of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt gets almost as much ink as that of the Nazis, particularly as it involves the USA's (along with most every other nation on the planet) unwillingness to take in more Jewish refugees than our immigration laws at the time allowed. Likewise, the push by American aircraft manufacturers to design and sell new warplanes to all and sundry in the 30's, even though the total figures involved come out to about 100 planes total throughout the pre-1939 period, gets more consideration as a cause of the increasing belligerence and actual combat around the globe than does the considerably more gigantic buildup of the fascist and Soviet militaries during the same time.

Likewise, a lot of pages and ink are given over to the pronunciamentos and goals of various pacifist movements through the first decades of the 20th Century, with the clear subtext of "had we listened to them, the war would never have started, or at least not been as vicious". While there is much to be said for studying the pacifist movement prior to and during the start of World War II, there is little to be said for believing for an instant that, had Churchill or Roosevelt just listened more closely to the them, Hitler and Tojo would've somehow been less warlike as a result.

That leads to the biggest problem of the book; it's _incredibly_ biased. All histories are, to some extent, a reflection of the author's biases, sure. However, the lack of any context being provided here would lead the uneducated reader to assume that the viciousness of the war itself and the Holocaust need not have happened as they did. The lack of much editorial context by the author actually serves to reinforce this aspect; the reader has no guide as to why Baker chose a given text in the first place. The reader, if not Baker's argument, would actually be better served if Nicholson had chosen to provide more editorial context for his selections. At least that way, the pro-pacifist, anti-Churchillian bias of the author would be a known quantity instead of something just hinted at.

The obvious counter-argument can be made that, well: these ARE Churchill and Roosevelt's and Chennault's own words, are they not? Sure, they are. However, the context that would clearly show that these men were emphatically NOT the primary actors driving the events of the era is simply not there. We hear much of the bloodthirsty-ness of Churchill, Bomber Harris, etc. The comparable and considerably more voluminous and damning words of the Hitlers and Mussolinis of the era are much less present.

When they are present at all, they've been chosen to show the rare moments when these men were hoping for an end to the war they had started (so long as it ended on their terms and with their bloody conquests already made allowed to be kept).

While a very engrossing and emotionally effective (and affecting) read, I could not recommend "Human Smoke" to anyone whom I was not already aware of possessing a clear understanding of how World War II came to be. While the study of pacifism in the 30's and early 40's has its merits, the conclusion that it would have been effective had just certain men in the West been willing to listen to it, is unsupportable.

How is it possible that so many people rate this book so high? Do they want to believe in passivism so much that they will accept distortions, errors, and lies from a man who is not a historian? Good grief! Baker used Wikipedia and the NYT as references. Wiki is a great casual reference for ordinary usage, but a book about such a serious topic needs primary sources. The NYT unaccountably under reported the slaughter of Jews throughout the war, yet Baker calls Churchill antisemitic. Even the title of his book "Human Smoke" is based on an error; Baker places imprisoned German Chief of Staff Halder in Auschwitz [where human smoke drifted into his room]. But...Halder was never there. The other distortions and errors would take more time than this books deserves or this space provides.

If you are pacifist who desperately wants to believe that the solution to all wars is to -- simply not fight. Then by all means read this book.

If you are a journalism teacher looking for an excellent example of how errors, half-truths and distortions can be made to sound authoritive. Then by all means read this book.

HOWEVER...if the truth of history, and if ethical writing are important to you, this book is a horrible waste of time.

Reading this book makes me wonder -- can the US really entertain a black president? (I hope so.) We've certainly come a long way re acceptance of Catholics, Jews, women's and black's rights. But we still have a long way to go.

But what struck me after reading the book was, how would history have been changed had we applied the Marshall Plan (or similar) to post WW I Germany? The Marshall Plan has taught us (or should have) how completely our prosperity and well being is linked to the prosperity and well being of others.

What more can you ask of a book than that it make you think?

Human Smoke is the most unusual book on World War II which I have read. The reason is the format. Award winning American pacifist author Nicholson Baker has told the grisly story by using a Wikepdia approach to his narrative structure. In succinct paragraphs he tells how the world entered the Dantean hell of World War II. A war in which over 50 million people died of battle, bombing, starvation, disease and execution. Baker's
book is perfect for people who have limited time or short attention spans. It is a technique which would do well in textbook histories used in the classroom,
Baker begins his book by looking at prewar Europe, Japan and the United States. He keeps his opinions to himself letting the paragraphs of current events at the time tell their own story. We learn among many other facts that:
a. Great Britain failed in its policy of appeasement towards Hitler.
b. Great Britain was not prepared in a military way to go to war with Germany to aid Poland in September 1939.
c. Winston Churchill was a war hawk who called for war against the Reich. Churchill was no saint! Baker's intensive research reveals him as inimical to the work of Gandhi in India; the advocacy of poison gas against the enemy; the proponent of a blockade against German held Europe despite massive hunger and starvation among innocent women, children and other civilians. The reader will admire Churchill's tenacity and determination to defeat the Axis powers. Churchill was a complex genius!
d. Hitler did not want to conquer the USA. He did want to rule continental Europe with England reigning over the seas and her colonies. Japan was to hold sway in Asia.
e. Charles Lindbergh was an anti-semite and Nordic supremacist who led American First attempts to have the US follow a policy of isolationism.
f. FDR worked behind the scenes to support Great Britain through his Lend-Lease plan.
g. Baker tales the story of Quakers like Rufus Jones and Rev. Harry Emerson Fosdick who were opponents of the war. Many went to prison for their refusal to be drafted and participate in a bloody holocaust.
h. Hundreds of voices speak in these short snaps of the historical newsreel. The voices range from the evil cries of Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin to Jews trapped in Germany such as Victor Klemperer. Holocaust victims, world leaders, famous writers such as Christopher Isherwood and Stephen Zweig all have their say.
The book teaches us that the so called "good war" was an unspeakable tragedy with millions losing their lives. Baker's work will immerse you with the sights,sounds and actions that led the globe from peace down into the murky and bloody pit of total warfare waged with horrific modern weaponry. The book ends in December 1941 as America is sucked into war's maelstrom of death by the attack of the Japanese at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.
As one who has read hundreds of books on World War II this is one I highly recommend and will use often in my own research on the war. The title comes from a remark made by Nazi General Franz Halder. As Baker states on page 474 in quoting Halder: :...Halder told an interrogator than when he was imprisoned in Auschwitz late in the war he saw flakes of smoke blow into his cell. Human smoke he called it."
Nicholas Baker dedicates his fine book to all the pacifists who were for peace and not war. This reviewer also hopes we all honor their memories by serving the blessed cause of peace. Read and learn!

Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization is Nicholson Baker's history of the lead-up to World War II and the United States' involvement in it. Rather than provide a continuous, blow-by-blow account of things, Baker uses hundreds of brief news items, averaging perhaps half a page in length. These range from 1892 to the end of 1941 (the vast majority of the book deals with the thirties and forties). As Baker recounts a wide assortment of events, he has several questions in mind. As he states in the afterword (p. 473): "Was [World War II] a `good war'? Did waging it help anyone who needed help?" Ultimately, Baker challenges World War II as the exemplar of just war.

Baker's prose is engaging. He quotes whenever possible, and doesn't editorialize much. The brevity of his entries keeps the book moving at a fast pace. Baker draws heavily from newspapers, diaries, memoirs and public statements, and ties each news item to a specific date. This helps keep the material honest.

A lot of what Baker focuses on reveals another side of World War II, one many Americans aren't familiar with. Baker works to show that World War II did quite a lot more harm than it did good. Nevertheless, he at no time sympathizes with the Nazis - he accurately portrays how terrible they could be. Baker explores the warmongering side of Roosevelt and Churchill as well as Hitler. There is a side of the U.S. and Britain that he is keen to show, and some of the things these nations did might amount to shocking revelations for many people. World War II was brought about, to a great degree, by that great confluence of warmongers.

-The United States sold arms to Germany and Japan in the 1930s.

-Franklin D. Roosevelt, along with a great many other Americans and citizens of the world, was blatantly anti-Semitic.

-Before the Holocaust, Germany spent years trying to ship the Jews out. Nobody, including the United States, would take them. While this does not mitigate the horrors the Nazis perpetrated, it is alarming that by and large the rest of the world didn't care what happened to the Jews. Certainly this helped cultivate the environment for the Holocaust.

-The British blockaded continental Europe, and would not allow food shipments through, even food intended for starving citizens of occupied France. Herbert Hoover, the much-reviled, erstwhile president, fought tooth and nail for the food shipments.

-For years, Roosevelt taunted and provoked Japan, hoping to lure them into striking first, so that he could bring the United States into the war without reneging on his campaign promises to keep the country out of war.

-Bombing, a major war strategy for both sides, was notoriously imprecise. An unbelievably small percentage of bombs hit their intended targets. Additionally, both Germany and Britain deliberately, purposely and repeatedly bombed civilian targets.

Human Smoke is recommended to those with an interest in World War II, and to those who believe World War II was a just war, or that it was fought according to the criteria of just war by any nation.

In the same line of "The Day of the Jackal" Meade offers an entertaining WWII thriller. The story is a little farfetched, another conspiracy to assassinate one world leader and change the course of the war. Nobody has done that better than the original Frederick Forsight. But the recreation of Africa on the verge of War is still first rate.

If you are not very demanding and forgive some plot holes this will make a very nice reading and you will enjoy the adventure, heroism and romance

the plot to make did not make any sense.
send two people who hate hitler and his cause to kill Roosevel and Churchill.
the germans in this book are portrayed as pure evil.
like in the starwars series where the sith and darth vader are pure evil.
it seems to may as yet another copy of The Day Of The Jackal where one man can change the course of history and bla bla bla.
even though The Jackal is by far the best book I ever read.
as i already mentioned, the germans are potrayed as pure evil and the allies as pure saints.
the plot doesn't make much sense as i don't see the dificulty of assassinting two men.
if your german, DON'T READ THE BOOK.
if you hate germans, you'll love to see how "coldblooded" they are.
instead, read The Day Of The Jackal if you like them conspiracies.

Sands of Sakkara is set in 1943. The war is starting to go bad for the Nazis, so they decide to launch an audacious plot to murder U.S. President, Franklin D. Roosevelt, as he meets British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, for a conference, in Cairo. They hope this assasination will turn the tide of war back in their favour.

Enter the books main characters, Harry Weaver, Jack Halder, and Rachel Stern. Three people from different backgrounds, who became close friends, during an archelogical dig, in Egypt, back in 1939. However, the fortunes of war sees them on opposing sides, and their friendships tested to the limit.

I found this book an enjoyable read, with a relentless pace, particularly towards the end. Character development is good, and I really felt for two of the protaganists, in particular, and the desperate situation that they had been forced into, by the Nazis.

The only drawback to the book, I felt, was that there was an element of 'Keystone Cops' at times, when the authorities were trying to chase down the spies. Overall, though a good read.

This is a wonderful World War II story. It is unique in that it details the attempted assassination of Roosevelt and Churchill by the Germans, during their Cairo Conference in Egypt. There are three key characters in the book, Jack, Rachael and Harry, who were friends, and at times lovers, before the outbreak of the war. Each is extremely well developed, as are the convoluted and at times desperate relationships between the three of them. The story essentially deals with a contest between Jack, who has been dispatched to Cairo by the SS with the task of carrying out the assassinations, and Jack, who has been assigned (by US military intelligence) the task of preventing the assassinations from happening. This novel is a wonderful combination of suspense and adventure, set in wartime Berlin and Cairo, and I believe that Meade has done an excellent job of describing the atmosphere of those two locations during World War II. The novel is classical Glenn Meade and I wholeheartedly recommend it.

I'm a fan of this genre and was looking forward to my first book by this author. Very disappointed. The idea of a plot against FDR and WC is fine (though we know outcome ahead of time) but the writing sinks the book. The coincidences relied upon to keep the plot moving are rediculous (coincidences usually play a role in spy thrillers but here seem to be used simply out of laziness or lack of imagination). The dialogue is wooden beyond belief as if taken from Hollywood B movies of the 1940s. If the book was "extensively researched" (see Amazon review) it doesn't show. The period touches amount to the simple mentioning of makes of old cars, military planes and weapons. For far superior WWII espionage fiction read Alan Furst.

In his book, "The Abolition of Britain", journalist Peter Hitchens states profoundly what many millions of Britons currently think - that the cultural revolution that swept the nation in the aftermath of Sir Winston Churchill's death has made many feel like foreigners in their own land. Particularly poignant is his contrast between the years 1965 and 1997, and the funerals of the Greatest Briton, Sir Winston Churchill, and Diana, Princess of Wales. In 1965, Britain was a restrained, conservative and patriotic society. A nation mourned at the death of a great man, but it did so in a solemn and dignified manner. Cranes were lowered in respect along the Thames and people filed quietly along to catch a glimpse of Churchill's coffin. Hitchens also makes marked contrasts between the general perceptions of the populations of both years. In 1965, Britons looked towards the Empire as an achievement to be proud of, and they looked back with pride over the 1000 years plus of British history. How different it is today. Hitchens' most potent revelation is his description of the marked contrast with the funeral of Lady Diana, when an outpouring of emotion swept over the nation in torrents. The funeral processions were most unlike those of Sir Winston. Hitchens correctly highlights Churchill's death as the point when the Britain of old, the Britain whose values it's gallant soldiers defended against the menaces of Hitler and the Kaiser, began to be seriously undermined by the politically-correct leftists. Hitchens' book is a profound indictment of Blairism and the fuzzy "Third Way" political system which it has created. This is a book that needs to read by ALL Britons, for it explains where the entire concept of Britain and the British became undermined. Excellent.

30 years ago I lived up-country, deep in the African bush. Every evening I twiddled the dials and adjusted the antenna on my short-wave radio. I was tuning into the World Service of the BBC and its radio serial "the Archers - an everyday story of country folk". This serial was the epitome of Englishness - robust, honest and worthy farming families leading their lives steeped in the rich cultural heritage of England. It was a world immensely civilized and comforting - it reinforced my identity - a universe woven through with integrity, self reliance, generosity, self restraint and common sense. Its institutions, parishes, policemen drew their strength, legitimacy and harmony from a centuries-long process of growth and adaptation.
Peter Hitchens describes how this world was subverted and finally chain-sawed into oblivion by an unholy coterie of jealous and doctrinaire do-gooders, misfits, intellectuals and an evermore influential leftwing media.

We now live in a geographic entity called Britain where state schools are obliterating our extraordinary achievements with a Stalinist airbrushing of history; where policemen operate like an occupying army; where the media indoctrinate the population with trash culture and scandalously biased `news' and opinion.

Now I know why I became out of sorts with the Archers. Those stolid farmers had become uncertain, self-critical, simpering, lap-dogs to masterful, bossy, manipulative and crusading wives. They were eating quiche for tea and measuring their manure in "kilos". In the novel `1984' George Orwell invoked a creepy feeling of alienness in the reader by having his hero go into an English pub and order a "litre" of beer. Well, pints are still in English pubs - just, but the new Archers' Britain invoked exactly the same feeling of alienness in me. And Peter Hitchens has explained why.

That Archers' England has been captured by scriptwriters, politicians and activists who have a clear agenda - to mock, denigrate and finally wipe out all that they could find of beauty and strength and worth - and replace it with a gender neutral, guilt-ridden, multicultural nightmare. Meanwhile the general population is sedated into apathy by consumer prosperity and brain rotting, social conditioning TV. It is an England that "would have lost at Trafalgar and Waterloo, and given up on the attempt to colonize America, because of the absence of safety nets, sexual equality and proper child care."

This same coterie hypocritically sends their children to élite schools to avoid them being turned into "mannerless, uncultured ignoramuses" by the state cooperative.

Peter Hitchens' work challenges head-on the new taboos and shibboleths erected by this coterie. Of course they spit and fume in frustration when he mercilessly dissects the cancerous, illogical and spiteful nature of their doctrines. Some of them have written sulphurous reviews on this page. Pay no attention to them - they are the Little Folk. Low self-esteem, the worm in the wood, the taint in the blood. They might change masters but they will be forever slaves.

As Anatole Kaletsky wrote, "a nation that loses its self awareness will lose its self-respect" and "Many people have become embarrassed, even afraid of being British". On those nosey, multi-racial official forms I am reduced to writing `Native English' in the `Other' box...

Is there any hope? Peter Hitchens book is a magnificent call to arms. It is required reading for the British people to confront the dry-rot that is eating the heart out of their cultural identity.

This is an extended lament of what he sees as the social decline, a "cultural revolution", of Britain. By "abolition", Hitchens means that the carefully constructed and venerated institutions and social strands that bind together a large population on a small island are coming unwound, and the result will be nothing less than the overthrow of the social order and its replacement with who knows what.

There is much to regret. Many large bureaucracies have been infiltrated and hijacked by a few with, no doubt, good intentions but shocking results. Thus he gives examples of an Anglican church with bishops who no longer believe in God, or government-funded organizations that provide for sex education for "people" as young as 7. Other chapters, such as the creation of suburbs amongst charming country villages, or the sexual revolution wrought by the contraceptive pill, will resonate with conservative audiences but will be unconvincing to liberals and libertarians. But even here, his deliberately stodgy conservative perspective is meant to show how unimaginable today's Britain would be to, say, a mourner at Churchill's funeral 40 years ago.

Overall, this is a very well-written conservative essay in the classic and ongoing debate, in which liberals wish to overthrow a social order they see as class-based, racist and standing in the way of progress, while conservatives see the status-quo as virtuous, and the embodiment of a deep-rooted compromise arrived at only after great upheaval. Whether or not we care about the debate, we are all certainly subject to its outcome.

As a lad of 1970's England, I was treated to many of the socialist inspired cultural reformations that hurt Hitchens' heart. I didn't have a maths class, I had a class called "Logic." Sex education consisted of a film shown to my fellow 8 year olds of naked pre-pubescent kids jumping into a swimming pool...oh how we all cringed in embarrassment. We didn't read "Great Expectations" we read "Stig of the Dump." No school desks, we sat on tiny armchairs in a circle and discussed subjects.
There is a brilliance to much of Hitchens' lamentations in this work that makes for a sadness when one is made to realize all that has been forgotten and wrecked that was good about Britain.
That said, there is much I do not miss that he waxes nostalgic for. Society and culture rarely remain static, and the old adage about hindsight being twenty twenty applies to this book in many ways.
We had a TV commercial back in the 70's that pitched a brand of "brown bread" (it was colored that way, it was not whole grain)called Hovis. It depicted a young working class boy and his dad walking up a steep hill in the early part of the 20th century in a North England town. When they arrive home, cheerful mum has plenty of Hovis on hand. The music in the background, a traditional English brass band, plays a solemn yet cozy tune. By implication it was great back then, everyone was chipper, life was wholesome and of course, so is Hovis bread. A comedian, Tony Capstick, soon recorded a send up song to that tune speaking in voice over as the lad now all grown up that went something like this: I'll never forget that first day down pit(coal mine), me father and me worked a 72 hour shift, then walked 43 miles home in the freezing snow wearing sacks for clothing...we had a lot of good things in them days, rickets, diphtheria.
The book at times does come off as a little like the Hovis ad, and perhaps Hitchens' misty eyes for the past are at points clouded more by sentimentalism than reality. He is a conservative but a statist conservative. He wants the government to nanny society just as liberals do; just in opposite ways. It is perhaps this facet of his thinking that I find most disagreeable. If there are now schools in Britain that are essentially Islamic madrassas that he dislikes, it is a consequence of the state sponsoring Christian schools earlier on that he liked. If homes have become cookie-cutter and characterless it is a consequence of government provided housing. The decline of the church, perhaps a response to having religion as an arm of the state. Hitchens' dislikes the virtual disappearance of the British Union Flag in preference to the specifically English St. George Cross. I consider myself English and not British, because like many of my countrymen I realize that Britain is a political contrivance not an identity.
Hitchens' makes his case eloquently even if not in my opinion always accurately, but we both agree that what Britain is now is a pitiful spectre of it's past great attributes.

Peter Hitchens writes a devastatingly effective portrait of the loss that Britain has sustained primarily at the hands of the cultural and political Left. There are many impressive things about this book, but, for me, Hitchens' pellucid explanation of the process of moral inversion is priceless.

One example, perhaps one of the most important is the transformation of government policy on the issue of illegitimacy. Initally the British government defined illegimat births as a problem and something to be discouraged. First under the banner of "compassion" the social penalties associated with illegitimacy were removed and out-of-wedlock births were treated as normal and nothing to worry about. Lest you acuse Hitchens' of cruelty, he points out that removing penalties suffered by the child were proper, but, that the government led society far further to the complete abandonment of the position that children deserve to be born into a home with a married mother and father. The phrase "single-parent families became the standard description demonstrating a complete lack of moral disapproval of illegimitacy. In the end, those who wished to discourage illegitimacy were condemned themselves with the standard description of "judgmentalism." Society could not exist without adults exercising judgment and distinguishing between wise and moral conduct and careless, damaging and immoral conduct. The moral inversion was now complete, the only immoral act was to criticize illegitimacy.

Again, Hitches' gives on of the best explanations of why it is important to maintain the special place of marriage in society. Traditional Britain reserved sex as a privilege enjoyed by those who TOOK ON THE LIFELONG RESPONSIBLITY for their spouse and any children that the marriage might produce.

Women are just beginning to realize the damage that they have done to themselves by the near destruction of traditional marriage. Men have little incentive to marry and potentially subject themselves to the gristmill of divorce in modern times. Women have lost the benefit of a true, life-long spouse, a benefit provided by society and supported by all of its institutions. Now, as Hitchens' points out women must constantly compete for their men's attention and devotion because "relationships" can be ended at any time for any reason with little or no consequence. As long as women are young, beautiful and/or well-to-do they will win the competition, how will they fare in their later years? No one dare ask. Our grandmother's generation endured much that was difficult but few faced the prospect of a lonely old age without a companion. Today's feminists have one a very stark prospect at the end of their lives, along and with no children to ensure their proper care. Not pretty.

Culturally a society that abandons its own children to television cannot compete with a more disciplined society. Family cohesiveness is necessary to develop disciplined and focused individuals that can truly lead a society. Computer game obsessed, semi-literates will not be able to compete in the world economy and their country will end up dominated by others.

Hitchens' notes that the very culture that birthed the stable and prosperous democracies of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and India has nearly been destroyed without proper remembrance: music, literature, poetry, architecture, military tradition, true parliamentary democracy, nearly all gone or distorted in despicable ways. The loss of Britain is
truly a blow to the world and to the hopes for the survival of freedom on this planet.

Let us pray that the brilliant Mr. Hitchens is wrong and that the leadership exists to bring Britain back from the brink.

Most importantly for Americans, all the forces described by Hitchens' are at work in America and they have made substantial inroads. Our universities are almost totally corrupt, politicized propaganda mills for cultural Marxism and we, the general public, have been helpless so far to re-assert control even over our public institutions.

I am a teacher who has used the CD-ROM from this course as well as the CD-ROM for the Cambridge TOEFL course, and have used the ones for Barrons and Kaplan as well. I haven't used any of the books from these four, so this review is for the CD-ROM only. By the way, it is standard practice in English as a Second Language texts, including TOEFL texts, that the audio CDs for the book must be purchased separately, and for a high price, so this is not something unique to this set.

Of the four CD-ROM TOEFL practice texts I've used (Longman, Cambridge, Barrons, and Kaplan), I like the Longman CD-ROM the best, with Cambridge as a close second. First of all, I like the CD-ROM as a TOEFL practice format to begin with because it most closely resembles the real test. So my reviewing of this comes from the assumption that this is the best way to practice.

The Longman CD-ROM has two sections, a skills section and a practice test section. The skills section has all the parts of the test, but without timing, and with helpful hints you can view when needed. This is ideal for becoming familiar with the nature of the test--what it looks like, what the questions are like, and how to navigate through the test. After you are finished answering the questions, you can check your answers, and there are explanations to help you understand why the correct answer is correct. For the writing portion of the skills section, it takes more of an instructional nature than writing practice. You are given sample essays and asked questions to identify the different parts of the essays as ways to help you understand what is required for the essays on the test.

After you have gone through the skills section, there are practice tests you can try. They are set up as mini-tests so that you can work on them in pieces, as you have time. (The actual TOEFL lasts 4 to 4 1/2 hours, so being able to break it up for practicing is convenient.) The mini-tests, unlike the skills practice, are timed, just like the regular TOEFL, so you'll know how much time you have. There are 8 mini-tests for each of reading, listening, speaking, and writing. You can record your speaking and listen to the recording, and use a checklist to evaluate how you think you did. For the writing, you are given a screen to type on just like what's found on the actual test. Afterward, you use a checklist to review how you think you did on the writing.

Finally, there are two complete, timed practice tests that you can practice with.

Of the four companies' CD-ROMs (Longman, Cambridge, Barrons, and Kaplan), the Longman CD-ROM is the easiest to navigate through. I also think it has the most flexibility for practice and has the most helpful instruction. The material does seem to be a little easier than Cambridge, for example, but especially for someone new to the TOEFL iBT, Longman is a better place to start to become familiar with how the test works. For example, the Cambridge doesn't really have a skills practice section; it's all just timed practice tests, so it has less flexibility for learning, and it's not as easy to navigate for checking your answers. I have found the Barrons and Kaplan CD-ROMs to be totally unacceptable.

So, for someone who has never taken the TOEFL iBT, I definitely recommend the Longman CD-ROM. For someone who has but wants more practice, I think the Longman and Cambridge are both good, but the Longman software is easier to get around in, and the instruction is more helpful.

fantastically helpful for those in need to acquire over 105 in the IBT
as most international students will need at least 106 to get into MBA programs

Many questions are asked as a run on sentence. Students would lose time by trying to understand and answer the questions.

Although it explains all sections (Reading, Listening, Speaking and Writing), has a lot of tasks and offers a CD containing enough tests, its only serious problem is that it doesn't have such difficult tasks as the ones, which were in the real test. It's level of difficulty is too low, so I spent about seven months preparing for my test day and payed $185 to take TOEFL and then realize that I wasted my time and money, and now I need to spend more time and money to re-take it.

Well I have also had to read the listening,speaking and writing parts of the book in the end in answers.and it's not the same as to listen to it as I'll have to do on my TOEFL test:(
The CD accompanieing the book was very good but only after I staretd to do some listening parts I noticed on the back of the book that there should be 8 more CD disks.
And as I opened the CD already.I mean I torn the envelope with CD I coudln't even return the book.The book itself seems to be a very good one.
But without 8 more CDset it's not such a good preparational material for listening, writing and speaking sections.And I need to train mainly in speaking, writing and listening.

The wording of the book is very descriptive and written in plain english for most of us to understand. unfortunately the labelling on the black and white illustrations is often difficult to read. None of the illustrations are in color except the front cover.

The current edition (8/08) is the 39th published in 2004, there are British and American versions which differ slightly in terminology.

The 40th edition will be published at the end of September 2008. So if you are looking for the current text book then order either the 39th or 40th.

Have wanted to purchase this book for years, now it is available and affordable.
Such a great educational tool for anyone interested in medicine and the human body.
Thank you Amazon for making this possible.

This is, of course, the classic Gray's Anatomy, but I was slightly let down when I attempted to look up some anatomical structures, and there was no illustrations provided. I thought EVERYTHING was illustrated and explained. Fortunately, most is both, but some structures just get a brief explanation, but no illustration.

I ordered this book (even after reading reviews) because the price was right. I had hoped to have some drawings for the art student. I decided to send it back. The book is three inches thick, is 95 percent text (hard to read), and has poor quality drawings. The book cover has the best drawing. It was not suitable for my purposes.

Caryl Churchill has written many strong and valuable plays, many of them about female identity and social roles, but none has supplanted Cloud 9 as her masterwork.
A biting farce of sexuality, gender, traditional familial and class roles, and pointedly, the mask of the Victorian and the Modern English persona, Cloud 9 is as funny as it is awkward, deep as it is quirky.
A true classic of the English stage. Read and if you can, see this.
Highly recommended.

Caryl Churchill's dark comedic play, "Cloud Nine" is a masterpiece. Though written in 1978, its commentary on gender roles and sexuality is quite compelling to our youngest generations. With the current controversey over homosexual relationships/marriage, Cloud Nine serves as window into the frustrations and fears of gay characters. People who have a hard time identifying with alternative lifestyles would have a lot to learn from reading through this play. In a way, Churchill's play is a bridge builder between the heterosexual world and the gay minority.

Cloud Nine follows the story of a family. The first act takes place on a South African plantation during the English Victorian Era, while in the second act, though the characters have only aged 20 years, the action takes place in London, England in the 1970's. Clive, the family patron, is the center of a male-oriented soceity and incourages traditional family and gender roles. For the first act, his wife Betty is played by a man, his gay son Edward is played by a woman, and his black servant is played by a white man. Immediately we learn that only Clive is satisfied with his station in life, where the other characters suffer many indignities to themselves that go unnoticed by everyone else (i.e. Edward is being molested by a friend of his father, who eventually attempts to seduce Clive as well). By the second act, time has moved forward and we watch the characters trying to adapt to an ever changing world in which parts of them is too withdrawn.

Chruchill's play is clever and intense with emotion. To connect with one character is to really experience the mental frustration and the indignities that we suffer from a judgemental society. I praise Caryl Churchill for this commentary in hopes that readers will gain a sense of sympathy for such people and in turn will promote tolerance.

For those of you who are familiar whith Brechtian practices this is a very good source. However, if you are not into the study of performance this might not be the book for you. It is very explicit with sexual orientation and questions gender and social status.

When you first start to read this play it will strike a few cords. If you can get past the enormous amount of sexual activities that goes on in just the first act, then you will find this play very interesting. What makes this a must read is the way the author has men playing women, women playing men and a doll for a baby. The explanation the author gives for doing this will causes a few hairs to stand up, but that is what makes the book. You won't know whether to hate the author or love her. I feel the author's talents really show in the way she transforms the characters. Betty who is Clives wife is played by a man in the act one. She is confused and incapable of making her own decisions, but by the second act she is played by a woman and she is more independent thinking on her own. Edward is another character that I find very interesting. In act one he is played by a woman because his desires are that of a woman, but by act two he start to accept his homosexuality and is then played by a man.
Cloud 9 is full of dramatic irony as well as plenty of oxymorons. If books had to come with warning label this one would definitely qualify.

As far as Brechtian plays go, Churchill is a master at alienation and disidentification- characters in this play are played as the protagonist's projection of who he thinks they should be (ie: the westernized African servant is played by a white actor). Although the effect is extremely powerful onstage, particularly when it raises up complex social and ethnic issues, the different characters can be hard to keep straight on paper. This play works far better in performance than it does in print, but it remains a valuable teaching tool for both Brecht and World Theatre studies.

It's Jane Jeffry, Amazon housewife!

Mulch has it all. Hot toddy for your soul; cool for your jets. This author covers your escape reading bets (and includes satisfying sleuthing).

The lemon yellow cover with stalking cat captured my winter-edge need to slow down and do nothing.

When I picked up my copy of MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING, the sunny yellow cover stuck to my soul craving dawn. A happy surge flooded the dark spots in my mind when I decided to temporarily table the "earn-my-keep" work in progress, and begin reading that book. I had missed Jane and wanted her light touch with fun, snarly undercurrents, and the play in quirky friendship with her neighbor, Shelley. The notes exchanged on their houses' doors gave an intriguing, quick entry into the story, and the irony of a wrong delivery (of flowers) and the machinations from that were genius plot ploys. The tension building between Jane, Shelley, and Mel were great stick-to-ribs for enhancing and percolating the story as well.

Loved the side-plots of Jill's solving mood problems, her own and her kids (sending Katie to a cooking school), and the compassion Jill shows for Arnie's grieving his late wife, even though she had to stretch her own views to realize his experience with death of a spouse was different from hers.

Insights into gardening were well beyond 101. This side(sub)-plot dug into genetics and patents for new breeds, and it excavated with entertainment rather than trenching the reader in ennui. Not being a gardener, I was surprised at how interesting the green thumb stuff could be, and how it tunneled through the plots, like ground-hogs in hay days. Ah, ah, ahchhooooo.

Of course, Churchill always gives the reader enough subplots to keep the story percolating, always at the edge of the pops, gurgles, and hisses of a drip coffee pot ending its cycle, giving sound to the anticipation of a fresh, hot drink craved with every surge of hope which comes with sunrise and spring.

Another of these subplots, one upon which much of the plot percolation pivots, launched with Churchill's usual spicy, easy flow syntax:

>> "They're (the flowers) probably evidence, Jane said, turning on her heal dramatically to get back into the car. She tripped over the curb and came down hard on her right foot, and her shoe turned sideways with a sickening popping noise that made her yelp involuntarily. Mel set down the flowers and he and Shelley rushed to scoop her up. <<

Throughout this plot Jane was on crutches with a cast reaching almost up to her eyeballs. At first she openly relished being able to soak up sympathy and give herself a break, using the cast as an excuse, and it was certainly a legitimate one. A TV in the bedroom was the main side effect splurge, after which she slipped into a heroine mode of getting around the crutch & debilitation, carrying on with her life and responsibilities at near full speed. Then the other characters got the bashes and bruises (from getting in the way of Jane's flying crutch).

Prior to Jane's "slip, fall, crash, and burn" her pride had been heated so badly, she had leaped out of a blush-inducing, stainless-steel frying pan into a hotter, heavier, cast-iron one (this is a metaphor mixed into the other cast, not of characters, but the one covering Jane's foot, shin, and thigh). The pushed pride thing had hit the fan full swing after Mel snapped at Jane when he found her at a murder scene, and snarled that her presence at a crime scene was "gawking." Of course, on THIS rare occasion Jane & Shelley had been innocently and sweetly delivering flowers to a neighbor who (as the ladies didn't know yet) just happened to be dead (flowers which would blossom into the gardening prime-subplot and which had been delivered to Jane's address by mistake). Who knew?

Literally and figuratively on the ground for all the above reasons, Jane was provided (by Jill) with her usual self-honesty:

>> Jane felt like crying, not because her foot was hurting horribly, but because she had made a big fool of herself by flouncing off like that. <<

Love the precision of the word, "flouncing," and its alliteration with "fool."

These are the types of descriptions which Jill so naturally slips into the flow of things, they give their effects effortlessly; Churchill's plots don't plod, they percolate. Like that drip coffee pot popping its cycle end mentioned above.

What with all my metaphor mixing, I really should get an electric beater, the kind with the huge, heavy bowl held-in-place by a swivel plate. This hand grinder is probably giving me carpel tunnel, or whatever you call that ailment, especially when I'm using the heck out of the hand beater simultaneous to typing like the mad woman I am. I, too, can use it or lose it. If I'm able to figure out what it was I was using, or losing. Probably my long lost train of thought.

Whoo, whoo. Toot. Toot.

Okay. That was enough. I'm done tooting my horn now. Back to the coffee pot. Ahhhh... Sip.

Check my review of Cleo Coyle's "On What Grounds," for proof of my insanity. Slurp. That novel would be a great follow-up to Mulch; you could put pink daisies in your coffee pot, then weed the roses and drink the steaming brew vicariously, like I live life.

I'm not really here in any fleshy, breathy sort of way. Lost my Proof of Existence Papers the other day. They went "Poof!" into the ozone during one of my nearly continuous flights there (I made the hole once when I sneezed). So bear with me as I bare my soul while I'm trying to relocate my ID, as I munch vicariously and precariously one of Joanne Fluke's chocolate chip cookies. Her Cookie Jar shop is right around the corner (where I'm holding as hostage one of my reviews on the Hannah Swensen series, trying to find my cached X-Files spotlight).

Well, what do you expect, this is a culinary review of a cozy mystery. Both came out of the oven, fresh, hot, and ... burning my hands! Oooochhhh! Those pot holders are for what?

Gotta go reread my reviews on EO's (Essential Oils) to find out what works for burns. Oh, yeah, aloe. Need to put that in my Listmana.

I should issue a warning to not get used to my silly, sudsy, dud-ly humor.

I live on the edge of the banana peels littering my kitchen tiles, but as a moody person, sometimes I get tired of slipping, and execute some serious housecleaning (in my dreams). So, as soon as you get used to something in my many modes of style (and the high class syntax up my a..); as soon as you begin craving more of something, that's exactly when my mood will change and I'll leave you high, dry, and pounding the table. Chust (I review Amish, too) don't go to Amazon and rip my off-base moods, already. I can be as dangerous as Stephen King to people who don't praise my work to high heaven, though low heaven is acceptable once in a while. Believe me. I'm BAD. Yes. (At 58 yrs old it isn't easy to maintain a bad-gal facade, especially when I'm hiding such a genuinely sweet sensitivity.)

Asides simmering aside (in my witch's cast-iron kettle; I do curses, too, but I make them fizzle before they flop), this is another delightful read from Churchill with an entertainingly fascinating sideline of gardening genetics, which is explained and dramatized with just enough depth to be comprehended easily with a kick of advanced flavor (it's not labor intensive, no plucky or puky puns are intended). Yum.

So, what do you do with mulch? Use it, or lose it (as it decays into Sacred Fertilizer, which is my lady's term for Holy S...). Scarab Beetles do know what they're about as they burrow into their own dung. How could they not? Being from Egypt should give anything an edge in the ancient-wisdom, sphinx games, due to proximity to The Great Pyramid. Maybe I should go there to write my next mystery series? (And not return until I get a grip on my keyboard?)

Going, going, gone. Lost it. Maybe I'll find whatever "it" is before I write another review. Maybe I should snooze a while first. But, isn't that when you're supposed to lose?

What's that white corner over there under the leg of my bar stool, which is perched on my black-and-white, ceramic tile, fictional floor? Oh. Wow. It looks like the Proof I've been looking for, the geometric one which will give me a clue, maybe even two. Who am I? That Paper says it all!

Burp. Bending over. Streeeeeettttcchhhing...

CRASH!

Oh no! Oh dear. Oh my.

I'm NOT getting a type cast, or an iron cast (or would that be clad?), or a ... whatever. Thank heaven I just ran out of words.

Read Jill Churchill's Jane Jeffry. You'll never run out of anything you need. A Staple. That's what she is. Like sugar for your coffee. Cream for your tea. Lemons for your ade. And I don't mean that tool for holding pages together, though she has that, too. It's called a publisher. That's what I need. Jill? Don't run and hide! I'm CHUST kidding!

But, I'm serious when I rave Jane Jeffry. I'm deadly serious when I rave any murder mystery. You'd better believe it. That's a threat by Stephen King's apprentice.

Shut my mouth! Before I spout a curse and regret it.

Gritting teeth, clamping lips (that makes a grimace, not a grin), oh man, I've gone too far.

Off the edge, I leap,
Linda G. Shelnutt

P.S. You may never hear from me again. Don't ask if that's a warning, a curse, or a threat. I'm not Stephen, yet. He, he, he. Heh. So mote it be (all in good fun).

Todd was at soccer camp, the cooking lessons were to keep Ursula away, who cares what Shelley's husband was doing? Or Jane's in-laws? Or if a murder doesn't actually happen until late in the book? It's still got a mystery in it! I liked Shelley's and Jane's gardening solutions, too!

I picked up this book at the grocery store when I was desperate for something to read while visiting relatives. What a joy! Although this was my first Jan Jeffry novel, it's not my last!

Jane Jeffry and her friend Shelly Nowack offer some laughs while they work to solve a crime. In this case they signed up to take a gardening class when the instructor is attacked and the substitute instructor is killed. While Jane juggles house work, raising children and a gardening class, her and her friend work to solve a the murder.

If I could rate it a 4+ I would have done that or a 5-. Mainly because I thought the ending was a little bit abrupt. However, it was a great read and I'm buying more of her books today.

Enjoy.

I was very disappointed when I read this book. I wouldn't miss a Jane Jeffry mystery novel, but this is something that even a fan like myself can pass on. This book is lacking in plot and concentrates too much on the gardening. The mystery is mentioned in the beginning, and seems to falter off as the story slowly wears on. With a few mentions every twenty pages or so, the mystery seems to be forgotten. Suddenly, the reader is hit in the face with the solution and the killer. It comes to an almost abrupt end, and is definitely not Jill Churchill's best work.

If you like light, frothy and cozy mysteries, this is the book for you. I enjoy Jill Churchill's books even though I have been able to guess the murderer in each, but this does not deter me from further reading.

Jane and Shelly are best friends living next door to each other. Jane (not unlikely for a cozy mystery) has a detective boyfriend named Mel. So when a murder does happen, he is conveniently there to help her and her friend solve it.

In this book, Jane and Shelly enroll in a gardening class, but the teacher has bludgeoned and lies in a coma. A stuffy plant researcher takes over the class but instead of teaching the basics of gardening, he immediately delves into plant patents by showing off his pink marigolds.

The class itself is made up of an odd assortment of garden "lovers" who want to show off their particular gardens to the others--some of which are very good and some horrid.

Then, the substitute lecturer is found dead in his own compost pile, and Jane and Shelly are off to find who in the class did him in.

Mulch is an enjoyable and quick read with many humorous touches thrown in by the author. Plan to read Jill Churchill's books if you want to be entertained, and you won't be disappointed.

I actually got this because I missed issue two in this series and this was the cheapest way to get it. All the other issues here were previously read. not a bad story and the art work was nice

supergirl is back. this book is a fantastic, fun read. i enjoyed every page. it follows the turner batman/superman return of supergirl. being a new fan to the supergirl universe i had a great time reading this book. the art is top rate and the story is good.
plus watching an evil supergirl kick the crap out of lex and the jla is a blast. it's worth it for that alone. so go on, buy it!

Whether you like Superheroes romantic approach or not you can not deny Supergirl is a strong part of the Superman mithos. The fact that some incredible genius RESURRECTED her these last years brings JOY, PEACE and a overwhelming feeling of GRATITUDE to these guys. I have tons of comics of her and let me tell you the story is HARD and HEAVY, it really rocks, the art is beyond words and I got to tell you that Jeph Loeb and Ian made a remarkable team for one of the best comics I could ever purchased! I love Supergirl and maybe I am being a little partial, but believe me, if you like good comics get this one, it will trap you to follow up the story of the Girl of Steel. I salute you!

This incarnation of Supergirl was introduced in the Batman/Superman series. And this collection is really where she (sort of) comes in to her own. She learns a bit about herself, and really, teen angst on a superhuman level, it can get interesting.

'Supergirl: Power' (or as I like to call it 'Kara vs. DCU') is the immediate follow up to the 'Supergirl' story arc in the 'Superman/Batman' series. It documents Kara Zor-El's first adventures as The Girl of Steel and raises a lot of questions about the true motives of her arrival here on earth.

'Power' collects issue #19 of 'Superman/Batman' and issues 1-5 of the regular 'Supergirl' series.

Someone is keeping tabs on Kara, and it isn't Batman. Whoever it is has been setting up disasters around the world to 'test' the new kryptonians abilities. These 'tests' include blowing up the Hoover Dam, sending terrorists to the Eiffel Tower, and shooting down Air Force One. After dealing with Poison Ivy, Harley Quinn, and Clayface, Kara goes looking for someone she can talk to, someone to be a friend, someone who can answer all of her questions. Her travels bring her in contact with the Justice Society of America, Teen Titans, Outsiders, and even the League. They all confirm her suspicions; there is something dark inside her. Kara discovers that the person who has been spying on her is non-other then Lex Luthor. After a little showdown she is exposed to black kryptonite and has a 'splitting of the minds' so to speak. Kara has to figure out who she really is, was she a good girl gone bad? Was she always evil? Or is blue, yellow, and red her true colors after all?

The reason I called this arc 'Kara vs. DCU' at the beginning of this review was because it basically is. Kara (in one form or another) takes on all of the major hero's in the DC Universe. She fights Power Girl, Superboy, Wondergirl, Raven, The Outsiders (minus Nightwing), The Justice League, Wonderwoman, Batman, and finally Superman himself. She even occupies a Green Lantern power ring for a short while.

I loved this arc, it wasn't as good as 'Superman/Batman: Supergirl' but it was still good enough to earn a five star rating from me. The art is brilliant and the story is as good as you can expect coming from a literary genius such as Jeph Loeb.

I do however suggest reading 'Superman/Batman: Public Enemies' and 'Superman/Batman: Supergirl' first. I mean, you don't really have to, Loeb provides a quick recap of how Kara Zor-El came to be on earth, but everything will feel a lot more complete if you've read the arcs leading up to this series first.