Clarke Books

Picture an England during the Napoleonic Wars of the early 19th century, very much like the historical England, recognizable in many ways to readers familiar with the period, except that this England has a magical past, a distant connection to medieval English magic which has dissipated and diminished for hundreds of years but is now starting to come alive again. This is the setting of Susanna Clarke's wonderful book, which conjures up a familiar alternate England which becomes progressively more strange and fascinating as the story unfolds.

The seminal figure of English magic was The Raven King, a mysterious figure who emerged fully formed in the 12th century, a human child raised in Faerie, to become the ruler of the entire north of England for the next three centuries with his capital in Newcastle, and additional demesnes in Faerie and on the far side of Hell. The last of the golden age magicians, Dr. Martin Pale, was nearly contemporaneous, and upon his death the decline of English magic became manifest until our story opens in the early 1800s, when the self-taught bookworm Gilbert Norrell emerges in Yorkshire as England's first practical magician in nearly 300 years.

Like J.K. Rowling, to whom her work has been compared, Clarke is adept at plotting and characterization. Clarke has said that her favorite character is Childermass, Norrell's loyal and highly competent servant; my favorite characters are the Gentleman with the Thistledown Hair (a powerful, volatile and amoral Otherlander) and Stephen Black, an admirable person who reminds me of a personal friend with a similar name. My favorite plot device is the hidden and indescribable double life of Lady Pole, which is as frightening as anything in Robert W. Chambers. Please believe that I have said nothing that will ruin the experience: you will enjoy this book. ***

This would be a very enjoyable book for a very sheltered kid who isn't afraid of a big book. Maybe this is who gave 5 stars.

Everything other reviewers have said is true. Boring expressionless characters. Painfully simple plot that never builds up to any climax.
This is like the scenes in Harry Potter when they go to the the strange train station and then see the school with its oddities for the first time It is wonderous for the first 100 pages but instead of the story continuing this scene just keeps looping endlessly with different descriptions and dialouge for 900 more pages.
Mabye this is enough for some people.
If I had spent the countless hours watching clouds pass, it would have been more exciting.

Only the most acute and active animals are capable of boredom.-Nietzsche

As a lover of 18th and 19th century literature, I was very happy with this book. I read it as a prose experiment on the order of Possession, or some other such title. It is fantasy fiction in that it employs elements of the magical and surreal (it is about the relationship between two magicians and an enemy from the fairy kingdom). It is in part historical fiction utilizing fictitious characters along with historical characters in the manner of Sophia Lee. I read this book immediately on the heels of reading Camilla, by Frances Burney, and so I was struck at how well she captured the prose style of that same time period. Frances Burney would have been alive at the time in which the novel's events take place. She was even part of Napoleon's court for a time, and Napoleon is very involved in this story.

I was impressed at how Clarke's prose in this book resembles Burney's, and I believe it was because they are both writers of comedies. With one exception, all of Burney's works were comedies, and Clarke's book is in fact a comedy written in period prose. However, Clarke's book is funnier because it caters to more modern sensibilities. It employs a more modern humor, though still written and packaged in the style of another age. As good as it is, Johnathan Strange & Mr. Norrell would never have been published during the times that it describes. I remember one passage in which the author comments on the poverty of the royal princes, who were obliged to support households full of illegitimate children. Such a sartorial comment would never have made it into print in early 19th century England.

This book has been described as a sort of Harry Potter for adults, but I don't know about that. Certainly it shares some elements with the Harry Potter story. I think it is a very different story and the comparison with the Harry Potter books is a bit of a stretch. The novel just has a different quality and is really trying to achieve something else in terms of the prose and its play with mythic themes. While reading it I wondered what A.S. Byatt might say about it. You might remember the fuss that she made over the Potter books. Would she perceive this novel as being more "tasteful", or "highbrow"? I don't know.

It is very much a historical novel, and among other things, it's good comedy. I didn't find the prose boring at all, nor even slow-paced. I found this book so engrossing that I finished it in 3 days, and this is an 800 page novel! Even if you don't like Harry Potter, you may still enjoy this book very much especially if you are a reader of classics and the so-called "serious" fiction.

Here is my 5 theses regarding this horrid novel
First, Clarke uses the plot mainly as a giant anticliche against all other fantasy books
Second, She elaborates more on insignificant people by writing long footnotes that only stress your eyes with the sall print
Third, She lacks good variety in character, and her style practicaly causes characters to contradict themselves
Fourth, the story is MASSIVELY discursive
Fifth, you say the writing is beautiful? Her style is very modern and, once again, discursive. She directly refers to and converses directly with the reader too infrequently, as well as writing rhetorical questions, prose of her own. Her style is a sad attempt to bring the book an antique feel to it, but I myself write like that, and I'm twelve...HER WRITING IS CHILDISH!
Any good quality there may be is definitely overshadowed by the above.

I have mixed feelings about this book. "Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell" has been referred to as "Harry Potter for adults." The story is set in England in the early 1800s, where two very different men are trying to revive practical magic. There's bookish Mr. Norrell and the younger, more affable Jonathan Strange: two very different men who have similar goals, but approach them in very distinctive ways.

Author Susanna Clarke is a very gifted writer. The style of this book is very unique, and Clarke manages to seamlessly blend elements of fantasy, mythology, and a good old-fashioned comedy of manners into one giant novel. However, "giant" is the key word here. I'm not one to shy away from lengthy books, but I had a very hard time getting into this one. Although extremely well-written, "Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell" is also incredibly dense and difficult to get through. The pacing of the novel is ungodly slow, especially during the first two-thirds of the book. Clarke constantly shuffles back and forth between hundreds of characters (many of whom aren't all that significant) and often goes off on random tangents that detract from the main core of the story. The book is also full of numerous false footnotes, which are obviously intended to enhance the story, but I found them to be very annoying.

Don't get me wrong here: this is an amazing book, and it's unlike anything I've ever read before. The basic storyline is fascinating, but Clarke failed to hold my attention for long periods of time (until the very end of the book, where the pacing finally picks up a bit). If you are like me and prefer largely plot-driven novels, you'll probably have a tough time with this one. I hear the book is being made into a movie, and this is one of those rare occasions where I'll probably enjoy the film more than the novel. But, to each their own.

Picture an England during the Napoleonic Wars of the early 19th century, very much like the historical England, recognizable in many ways to readers familiar with the period, except that this England has a magical past, a distant connection to medieval English magic which has dissipated and diminished for hundreds of years but is now starting to come alive again. This is the setting of Susanna Clarke's wonderful book, which conjures up a familiar alternate England which becomes progressively more strange and fascinating as the story unfolds.

The seminal figure of English magic was The Raven King, a mysterious figure who emerged fully formed in the 12th century, a human child raised in Faerie, to become the ruler of the entire north of England for the next three centuries with his capital in Newcastle, and additional demesnes in Faerie and on the far side of Hell. The last of the golden age magicians, Dr. Martin Pale, was nearly contemporaneous, and upon his death the decline of English magic became manifest until our story opens in the early 1800s, when the self-taught bookworm Gilbert Norrell emerges in Yorkshire as England's first practical magician in nearly 300 years.

Like J.K. Rowling, to whom her work has been compared, Clarke is adept at plotting and characterization. Clarke has said that her favorite character is Childermass, Norrell's loyal and highly competent servant; my favorite characters are the Gentleman with the Thistledown Hair (a powerful, volatile and amoral Otherlander) and Stephen Black, an admirable person who reminds me of a personal friend with a similar name. My favorite plot device is the hidden and indescribable double life of Lady Pole, which is as frightening as anything in Robert W. Chambers. Please believe that I have said nothing that will ruin the experience: you will enjoy this book. ***

This would be a very enjoyable book for a very sheltered kid who isn't afraid of a big book. Maybe this is who gave 5 stars.

Everything other reviewers have said is true. Boring expressionless characters. Painfully simple plot that never builds up to any climax.
This is like the scenes in Harry Potter when they go to the the strange train station and then see the school with its oddities for the first time It is wonderous for the first 100 pages but instead of the story continuing this scene just keeps looping endlessly with different descriptions and dialouge for 900 more pages.
Mabye this is enough for some people.
If I had spent the countless hours watching clouds pass, it would have been more exciting.

Only the most acute and active animals are capable of boredom.-Nietzsche

As a lover of 18th and 19th century literature, I was very happy with this book. I read it as a prose experiment on the order of Possession, or some other such title. It is fantasy fiction in that it employs elements of the magical and surreal (it is about the relationship between two magicians and an enemy from the fairy kingdom). It is in part historical fiction utilizing fictitious characters along with historical characters in the manner of Sophia Lee. I read this book immediately on the heels of reading Camilla, by Frances Burney, and so I was struck at how well she captured the prose style of that same time period. Frances Burney would have been alive at the time in which the novel's events take place. She was even part of Napoleon's court for a time, and Napoleon is very involved in this story.

I was impressed at how Clarke's prose in this book resembles Burney's, and I believe it was because they are both writers of comedies. With one exception, all of Burney's works were comedies, and Clarke's book is in fact a comedy written in period prose. However, Clarke's book is funnier because it caters to more modern sensibilities. It employs a more modern humor, though still written and packaged in the style of another age. As good as it is, Johnathan Strange & Mr. Norrell would never have been published during the times that it describes. I remember one passage in which the author comments on the poverty of the royal princes, who were obliged to support households full of illegitimate children. Such a sartorial comment would never have made it into print in early 19th century England.

This book has been described as a sort of Harry Potter for adults, but I don't know about that. Certainly it shares some elements with the Harry Potter story. I think it is a very different story and the comparison with the Harry Potter books is a bit of a stretch. The novel just has a different quality and is really trying to achieve something else in terms of the prose and its play with mythic themes. While reading it I wondered what A.S. Byatt might say about it. You might remember the fuss that she made over the Potter books. Would she perceive this novel as being more "tasteful", or "highbrow"? I don't know.

It is very much a historical novel, and among other things, it's good comedy. I didn't find the prose boring at all, nor even slow-paced. I found this book so engrossing that I finished it in 3 days, and this is an 800 page novel! Even if you don't like Harry Potter, you may still enjoy this book very much especially if you are a reader of classics and the so-called "serious" fiction.

Here is my 5 theses regarding this horrid novel
First, Clarke uses the plot mainly as a giant anticliche against all other fantasy books
Second, She elaborates more on insignificant people by writing long footnotes that only stress your eyes with the sall print
Third, She lacks good variety in character, and her style practicaly causes characters to contradict themselves
Fourth, the story is MASSIVELY discursive
Fifth, you say the writing is beautiful? Her style is very modern and, once again, discursive. She directly refers to and converses directly with the reader too infrequently, as well as writing rhetorical questions, prose of her own. Her style is a sad attempt to bring the book an antique feel to it, but I myself write like that, and I'm twelve...HER WRITING IS CHILDISH!
Any good quality there may be is definitely overshadowed by the above.

I have mixed feelings about this book. "Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell" has been referred to as "Harry Potter for adults." The story is set in England in the early 1800s, where two very different men are trying to revive practical magic. There's bookish Mr. Norrell and the younger, more affable Jonathan Strange: two very different men who have similar goals, but approach them in very distinctive ways.

Author Susanna Clarke is a very gifted writer. The style of this book is very unique, and Clarke manages to seamlessly blend elements of fantasy, mythology, and a good old-fashioned comedy of manners into one giant novel. However, "giant" is the key word here. I'm not one to shy away from lengthy books, but I had a very hard time getting into this one. Although extremely well-written, "Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell" is also incredibly dense and difficult to get through. The pacing of the novel is ungodly slow, especially during the first two-thirds of the book. Clarke constantly shuffles back and forth between hundreds of characters (many of whom aren't all that significant) and often goes off on random tangents that detract from the main core of the story. The book is also full of numerous false footnotes, which are obviously intended to enhance the story, but I found them to be very annoying.

Don't get me wrong here: this is an amazing book, and it's unlike anything I've ever read before. The basic storyline is fascinating, but Clarke failed to hold my attention for long periods of time (until the very end of the book, where the pacing finally picks up a bit). If you are like me and prefer largely plot-driven novels, you'll probably have a tough time with this one. I hear the book is being made into a movie, and this is one of those rare occasions where I'll probably enjoy the film more than the novel. But, to each their own.

"You can't run away from trouble. There ain't no place that far." Uncle Remus

Huck and Jim take to the river to escape their troubles, but trouble dogs them every foot of the way. In fact, both Jim & Huck were within days of liberation when they eloped. They literally escaped from freedom.

The slavery and such are interesting sideshows, but Twain makes it pretty clear Jim wasnt mistreated, and freedom was always across the river, north & east, if Jim wanted physical freedom. Freedom was NOT down the river in the heart of the Deep South. All of this is metaphor for running away from your troubles.

This book accurately depicts the lifestyle and thoughts and feelings of Americans during the time slavery was legal. This book incorporates many concepts from other books such as Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet when the Grangerfords and Sheperdsons feuded against each other over a marriage. I recommend this book.

How can one critically review what is arguably the greatest American novel? Very carefully! Twain, who briefly served the Confederacy was a river boat pilot, miner, reporter, lecturer, acerbic wit, devoted family man, was the premier writer of 19th century America.

In "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" Twain thoughtfully and compassionately weaved a tapestry of mid-stream American life and culture which probably did more to positively change white America's view of its black minority than any legislation ever could. He achieved all that while creating a timeless world of youthful adventure to where countless generations can escape.

This wonderful volume is a replica edition that contains almost 200 original illustrations by E. W. Kemble, which conveys the raw excitement of life on the Mississippi. It should be given as a present along with "The Complete Tom Saywer," so the reader can have access to the the entire mythos that Twain recorded.

I have read and enjoyed "Huckleberry Finn" many times; but this recording enhances the text and makes it that much more enjoyable. The narrator, Tom Parker, does a superb job of bringing this odd assortment of strange and humorous characters to life. He does an especially fine job of pronouncing the numerous dialects that Twain put down for posterity. Hearing Mr. Parker's pronunciations and articulations brings these characters to life in all of their mid-nineteenth century motley. If you close your eyes you can picture Huck and Jim conversing as they travel on the Mississippi, lazily wasting their days and outwitting the numbskulls they encounter along the way. Parker does an especially fine portrayal of Pap Finn when he rants about the Guv'ment in a drunken stupor. His Duke and King are also delightfully portrayed in all their vainglorious pomposity.
I was really impressed by how much value I received for so little cost. I laughed many times while following along with my text of the story. After all, Twain was primarily a humorist, and what's the point of reading a story like "Huckleberry Finn" if you refuse to see the humor in it? And Tom Parker's dramatic skills embellish this humor by bringing the text to life. Aside from the humor, Mr. Parker elicits the heart and soul of both Huck and Jim and shows how their views of each change as they both realize just how human and decent the other is. This is a story of some very human people from a time and a world that no longer exist. It's like reading a dream of a foreign world.
This CD set is worth the money. It's a delightful and heartfelt reading of a most wonderfully compassionate and funny story about the common sense and innate humanity of an "uneducated" boy from the back woods of Missouri who discovers his own sense of morality and humanity while living by his wits and travelling up and down the Mississippi while meeting an assortment of colorful characters along the way. And, yes, it is unabridged.

Twain's Huckleberry Finn has derived much controversy from its use of the "n" word in the dialogue as well as what some believe are stereotyped characters within the novel. As some have noted in defense of Twain, Twain's main object was to portray and depict the typical Southern dialect of this time period, and so his use of the word was to mainly show that this was a common expression used. This "overuse" of the word is most obviously an attempt at debunking the idea that people should speak this way. What some forget while reading Huckleberry Finn is that it is a satire aimed at breaking down and making fun of many of the conventions of not only the South, but other aspects of social life. Perhaps the biggest indicator of Twain's intent of facetiousness is in his "Explanatory" and "Notice" in the book's preface, where it is inferred that we are not to take everything so seriously in the book. There are many other things going on in the novel, and it is a shame that often we overlook that a classic like this has so much more going for it.

For one thing, the novel is as much about growing up and striving to do good as anything else. Huckleberry Finn has this battle throughout the book, and mostly after he meets up with Jim on Jackson's Island and must do some serious soul searching to figure out what is right and what is wrong. An abolitionist wasn't thought of lightly in this setting, and so Huck is not easy to let go of society's laws. However, through much of Jim's guidance, Huck does learn morals and principles of life. Jim represents the father-figure in Huck's life, mainly because Huck's "real" Pap is an alcoholic, abusive, neglectful and mean-spirited to his son. If there ever were a case for a character breaking the stereotype idea, it would be Jim. After all, isn't it Jim who questions what Huck believes about him running away from slavery? When Huck examines ironically to himself is, and will always be, a "no good abolitionist", this admission and growth of character can be chalked up to Jim, who has already influenced Huck by then. Jim helps Huck grow up and be a more thought-provoking character. Huck gains a better picture as the novel progresses; for instance, he comes to understand that the duke and the king are not only frauds, but that they are lower than low because of their greed and callousness to the Wilks family.

On another level, the novel is a lot about light-hearted fun, satire, poking fun of society and just Huck's imagination. Huck is a child who is not easy to civilize; he wants to be out in the world and living an adventure, being in a band of robbers with Tom Sawyer or adding "style" to a given situation. Huck often lives life by the moment, and has to use his "street smarts" to get out of predicaments, which might mean making up a story, faking his own death, dressing up like a girl to get information or using quick wit to escape a sticky situation. He seeks freedom and adventure, and the Mississippi River, where Jim and he spend much of their time on the raft, is a symbol for this escape.

Over all, I found this to be a difficult review because Huckleberry Finn is probably one of my favorite books and Twain is one of my favorite authors. But, I think if you read Huckleberry Finn in the right light, it is an amazing read about adventure and growing up. Definitely recommended!

As targets of the political mass suggestion discussed in my reviews of: Propaganda, U.S. Television News and Cold War Propaganda, 1947-1960 (Cambridge Studies in the History of Mass Communication), and Dictators, Democracy, and American Public Culture: Envisioning the Totalitarian Enemy, 1920s-1950s, we must be careful with books like this from an "insider". The pattern is the same on all these books "written" by insiders who have "left" the administration: There is one and ONLY one controversial assertion given in the book (the hook to generate sales and publicity), with the remainder of the book running parallel with the party line.

I have no doubt, given corroborating evidence from other authors, that Clarke is correct that Bush and his cabinent were planning an Iraq invasion well before 9/11. The "Downing Street Memo" is the smoking gun on this.

The much bigger purpose of this book, in my opinion, is simply to disseminate the party line, yet again, that Osama bin Laden is the boogeyman, that his world-threatening military is al-qaeda, and that they can deliver mass destruction anytime, anywhere (you know, the Cold War program). It's the repeat, repeat, repeat that we get from George Tenet, Michael Scherer (sp) and all others who are wittingly or unwittingly part of the propaganda campaign.

The only question on Clarke is: is he witting or unwitting? The answer, however, is moot. As long as he is spewing party-line propaganda, his books are worthless to a suspicious public.

Rather interesting book by an counter-terrorist insider to several administrations. Clearly, he doesn't like Bush and his court very much, so it seems a wee bit partial. However, there is also some real insight about what it means to be tasked with keeping a democracy safe in the face of terror.

You get the impression that he would have liked a more nuanced, more cooperative and diplomatic approach to neutralizing international terrorists. In fact, he compares Bush senior's handling of the diplomatic runup to Gulf War I with GW's go-it-alone policy in 2003.

Nevertheless, no peacenik he. He strongly regrets having released the noose around the Republican Guards armor in 1991, in what people usually refer to as the Highway of Death. To him: escaping armor => Saddam stays in power and threatens neighborhood => US stays in Saudi => propaganda for Bin Laden's jihad. Mind you, as ugly as the Highway of Death was, Iraqi soldiers, maybe those troops, were soon afterwards involved in savagely repressing the Shias.

One annoyance is his heavy use of "I, I, I" and tendency to put himself forward at every turn. Though he also says several times that he, and his team, failed at preventing 9/11 and that they failed at protecting their country. No one else from this administration accepts blame or admits mistakes, so that's refreshing.

Concerning the pre-9/11 hunt for Al Quaeda, he often criticizes the CIA and the Pentagon, but just skewers the FBI and its director. Broadly speaking, he seems to sing the same tune as Ghost Wars, except that he thinks the CIA had unequivocal backing to kill Bin Laden and wasn't justified in hiding behind legal fig leaves.

After more than 1,000 reviews, what can I possibly add? I noticed one little thing, a very small point, in the book that kind of twisted my jaw.

Clarke is very clearly partisan in tone in the book. I think he comes across as being in the leftist/liberal mold politically. OK, that's fine, sometimes the libs get it right and sometimes the conservatives do. (Myself, I have no love or loyalty to either political party and prefer to endorse viewpoints that represent ordinary, self-supporting, responsible, hard-working people, as I think the majority of us are. Frankly, anymore, I think people who obey the law, work to support themselves and their families, pay their bills, try to teach their kids right from wrong, etc. are the most underrepresented and disenfranchised bunch in the country. Neither party represents us, in my view.)

With that out of the way, the little point I caught in this book refers to Clarke being advised by the U.S. Secret Service that he needed to carry a handgun for self-protection. He describes being "issued" a semi-automatic pistol for this purpose. He mentions something to the effect that he is a big supporter of gun-control, but in this case he felt he should carry this weapon.

Well, I'm glad he was issued this pistol and carried it. The underlying tone in his comment is that the rest of us really shouldn't have handguns, because guns are bad, kill people, etc. But of course, HE needed one for self-protection; so what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander. If he was true to his liberal view of the right/need of a handgun for self-protection as it applies to citizens, he should have been abhorred at the thought of a civilian carrying a weapon for protection and vigorously declined this advice--after all, he was not a law enforcement officer! (For what it's worth, I have been a federal law enforcement officer required to carry a firearm etc. so I have some sense of this.)

I admit I have figuratively expressed his views, he did not use verbatim the words I have used above. If you read this passage though, it was relatively early in the book, I suppose somewhere in the first 1/4 of it, I think you will see what I mean.

Does Clarke represent truthfully what really happened or does he have his own axe to grind? ONLY GOD KNOWS.

I am writing this some 4 years after the book came out though I read it right after it was published. Subsequent events have left more data for people to digest about the truthfulness of the Bush administration. Still, I recommend people read the book to receive one view of events and judge for themselves.

I see also now that Clarke has come out with a new book in the last couple of weeks. That should be an interesting read as well.

Thanks for listening.

People can say what they want about Scott McClellan, but there is no comparison as to the character differences between these individuals. Whereas Scott had no courage to do what he is now doing, Dick Clarke, here, had all the gull to infight with some of these individuals and let his discontent be known right off. Of course his book did come out a little over a year later, but that is still much more than most "tell-all's".

Now, there can be no doubt that some of this was done out of saving his own arse, it still has to be said that he DID do what he was supposed to. He informed, time and again, and was treated as if he weren't there. Richard's job was to analyze, then inform. He did that. The president ignored what was given to him. It was then astonishing to learn that the new "goal-post" for where the buck stops, was, suddenly, not with the president, but with others.

A sad-but-true tail, indeed.

This is a necessary book. Thanks, Dick.

Richard Clarke's account on how Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton and Bush Jr. dealt with terrorism. Honest, insightful and non-partisan.

I have just "reread" H. G. Wells classic of science fiction (actually I listened to the audiobook version on my iPod on a long flight). And it is still as gripping to me as it was many years ago when I was a young teen. As the grandfather of all science fiction concerning invasions of alien beings from advanced interplanetary civilizations "The War of the Worlds" always will be considered a seminal work of science fiction.

The book is a first person account, by a survivor, of a Martian attack on the south of England during the late 19th century. Human armies and weapons are totally inadequate to stop the invading alien army. The Martian technology that Wells describes would have been frightening to anyone living in the late 19th century. Rapidly moving fighting machines, heat rays, and poison gas attacks all at the command of a totally inhuman and merciless enemy whose attack was entirely unprovoked. However, we had only had to wait for 2 decades to experience tanks and poison gas on the battlefields of Europe. A few decades more and we had atomic bombs and lasers. Neither did Wells depict the Martians as invulnerable. After all, the torpedo ram "Thunderchild" took out two and possibly 3 of the Martian war machines before it was sunk. Of course today a squadron of modern F16s could wipe out the entire invading Martian army of 1898 in a few minutes. Followed by a thermonuclear attack on Mars iteslf, of course. We clearly have outstripped the technology that Wells imagined.

However, futuristic technology is not the point of Wells' book. Wells knew that human machines were advancing at a rapid pace. He probably would not be surprised at today's technology. Wells book actually is a social commentary and a condemnation of the British colonial system and the cruel indifference with which Europe exploited less technologically advanced peoples. The Martians that he describes could well become us. Sluggish beings, entirely dependant on machines, living on the life blood of the less fortunate. This is in fact what half of humanity does become in Wells' equally important novel "The Time Machine." So the theme of "The War of the Worlds" is as important today as it was in 1898 in spite of the admittedly dated technology that it describes.

I bought this for my 10 year old son who saw the movie (Tom Cruise). He loved the book and because it's in paperback we took it everywhere.

BAM went the heat ray as it was fired by the aliens. If you want to hear what happens next then go read War of the Worlds.
War of the Worlds, by H. G. Wells, was written 110 years ago in 1898. It takes place in a small town in England. One day a mysterious black cylinder falls out of the sky. A couple days later the cylinder opens up and a cylinder is fired. Many people are killed but the main character just manages to escape. The aliens build up a ship thing and call for other cylinders to come. The aliens try to take over the town, then the world!
I did not have a favorite part in War of the Worlds. I thought War of the Worlds was actually a pretty boring book because there was barely any good and exciting action at all. There was a lot of shooting, but all they shot at were the alien's ship things and the bullets just bounced off.
H. G. Wells described almost everything way too much. For example: he uses 3 pages describing a dead horse and 2 pages describing fire.
I thought the whole plot of War of the Worlds was good except for the beginning. For no reason at all a cylinder from Mars with Martians in it falls out of the sky.
I do not recommend this book for people who like action. If you want a lot of action, I recommend the movie War of the Worlds starring Tom Cruise.

I love this book. It truly kept me on the edge of my seat as I followed characters and their exodus from Martian tyranny.

I have been planning on reading this book for over 10 years. I remember watching the movie when I was little (and then the remake a few years ago). First of all, this was far better than either of the movies.

Written in first person from the account of a survivor of the attack (who is never named) and then recounting the tale of his brother, this is a very immediate and unsettling tale. What I did not expect was the time frame the book was written in. I assumed (for some idiotic reason) that it would take place in the twentieth century. Instead, for those of you who like myself, forgot the timeframe that Wells lived in, this book takes place in the nineteenth century. The Martian attack occurs prior to the weapons of warfare that we are so used to thinking about; there are no tanks, no planes with bombs. Hussars and artillery are their greatest defense. People couldn't hop in their cars and drive from the invaders; they were instead in horse drawn carriages, communicating the disaster via telegraph and daily papers. This put a whole new twist on the tale from what I was expecting.

Our narrator lives only a few miles from where the first "ship" lands and we follow the town's initial curiosity and complete lack of fear as they peek into the hole in the ground created by the wreak. Even after the first "heat rays" are fired and people are killed, there is still no sense of fear. When the action comes, it comes quickly. Separated from his wife and family our unnamed narrator survives mainly through luck and the fact that he never stops moving. The entire story takes place in less than a month, from initial landing to total devastation. There is a lot of science involved, discussing the physiology of the aliens, speculation on their planet, and how they evolved. For the casual reader it's not too bad and doesn't bog down the story. For the rabid science hound, please remember when this book was written before you blast the scientific inconstancies and flat out scientific errors.

I highly recommend reading this book, to just about anyone. It is a fast read, which manages to keep your attention from beginning to end. The political and social commentary though written for another time still holds value today. The religious implication is not jammed down your throat. This is a fun yet chilling read, which you will find yourself pondering over long after you have put the book away.

One thing you will hear over and over is that once you pick up one book by Coelho, you end up reading them all. I, like so many, started with the Alchemist and was just blown away. I approached this book, as I do all of Coelho's creations, with anticipation and VERY high expectations. Anyone capable of the writing the Alchemist has the potential for great things. My anticipation was justified by this poignant, and very touching book. This is Coelho at his best. An intensely personal tale that must be read and lived

Coelho is, hands down, my favorite author. After reading several of his novels, I couldn't wait to read this book. And I was not disappointed. Although there are countless formulas for writing love stories, somehow this book was different. I was captivated. Coelho has such an amazing way of expressing the character's feelings that you come to really know the characters in his stories.
All of Coelho's novels have themes, this one being 'forgivness'. At first, I didn't really grasp why, but after reading it, I think its a story about forgiving yourself.
Pilar (the main character in this story) takes you through a week that she spends with a childhood friend whom she hasnt seen in over a decade but happens to be in love with. During this week, Pilar experiences a huge 'ephinany' and begins to rediscover her faith. (I thought this novel focused a little to much on religion, but the concept of religion can be looked upon as a metaphor).
When I finished the book, I literally sighed with relief. I'm not sure why. Coelho's language brings you into a completely alternate world than your own and makes you actually feel the character's feelings.
READ THIS BOOK!!

I have this book since I am 16 years old. I've read it so many times and it always get me emotional... No matter what book they release, this is my FAVORITE BOOK EVER!

Pilar grows-up becoming a lovely, strong independent woman! Her childhood friend has become some more handsome, charismatic spiritual leader, making use of his religion as a refuge from his raging inner conflicts. He is said to be one who is even able to heal persons!

This lovely crafted story begins like a poetic narrative until Pilar is introduced to the gripping surprise of her lover having become a Seminarian. His whole life has been turned into an adventure shaped by his studies and new committment! When the italicised poetry becomes more narrative, the story moves more quickly and has numerous fascinating twists and turns. "It's risky falling in love." Their love simply moves gradually into new adventures and amzing enw pictures of their interesting culture!

Although I had read early on THE ALCHEMIST by Coelho, this story grew more lovely and compelling the more I read. It is well-worth discovery as another winner by Paulo Coelho. In-spite of the reviews making far too much of its strong religion that Spanish flavor of Cathoicism is totally tempered by pictures of beautiful love-making!

As I discovered after reading other stories of Authur Golden, Memoirs Of A GEISHA and Rosamunde Pilcher, The Shell Seekers this story seemed to stay with me longer to become another model of poetic beauty and pictures an eternal love spanning this world and the one of the Great-Not-Yet! Gratefully from Retired Chaplain Fred W Hood

Excentlant book, a pretty fast read with lots of meaning.
I recomment Paulo Coelho as a writer one of my favourits

Roddy Doyle was born in Dublin in 1958 and saw his first novel, "The Commitments" published in 1987. It was later adapted for the big screen, a version that saw Star Trek's Colm Meaney and a very young Andrea Corr among the cast. Doyle went on to win the Booker Prize in 1993 with "Paddy Clarke Ha Ha Ha".

The book is set in the 1960s Barrytown, and is told by Paddy Clarke- the eldest child of his family. Although he has a few younger sisters, it's only his younger brother Sinbad who features to any degree. He's a Manchester United supporter, and particularly idolises George Best. His chief hobbies involve playing football, and messing around with his friends on neighbouring farm and nearby building sites.

Sinbad doesn't always get a fair deal from his brother. He cries constantly, wets the bed and as a baby, he once got his head stuck in the bars of his cot. He never smiles in photos and doesn't eat his dinner - something that particularly infuriates his Paddy Sr. Despite wearing glasses with one black lens - to deal with an eye problem - he's a great dribbler on the football pitch. (Paddy and his friends used to make Sinbad be Nobby Stiles when playing football - so he stopped supporting United, and started following Liverpool).

Out of Paddy's friends, he's probably closest to Kevin Conway - though, to be honest, Kevin isn't an entirely likeable kid. James O'Keefe, for the most part, is a good deal more - deapite being, quite possibly, the biggest liar in Barrytown. O'Keefe is hated by their teacher Mister Hennessy - he even gets blamed on making noise in class when he's off sick. (Henno does appear to have a slight vindictive streak in him - in fact, he reminded me a little of a teacher I once had at secondary school). The two most likeable of Paddy's friends, however, are a pair of brothers called Liam and Aidan. The boys' mother is dead, and though their father is trying his best, he seems to be a little lost. The neighbours aren't above gossiping about him and - although they are officially part of the gang - Liam and Aidan are also on the receiving end of a fair few nasty comments. As much as Paddy loves going over to their house, even he's not immune to a touch of snobbery.

The story is told more from a child's point of view rather than by an adult looking back on things. There are some things that raised a smile - the childhood theories about Purgatory, for example - and it even inspired a touch of nostalgia sometimes. However, it's set at a time when not only is Barrytown changing, but Paddy's home life is changing dramatically too. Naturally, Paddy doesn't always understand his parents and the things they say - so it's only gradually, as the frights become more and more frequent, that you come to realise there are problems between Paddy's dad and mum. There's a certain sadness about watching Paddy grow up as the story is told, while the difference between Paddy at the book's beginning and on the book's final couple of pages is tragic. A lovely book, though very sad.

Imagine someone filled you full of 3 beers and a few shots of whiskey, then grabbed you, groggy, by the collar and dragged you through a bittersweet nostalgic trip back through childhood. Doyle reminds you of the kid's-eye view of life, less naive and ignorant than we generally mis-remember. The mixture of cruelty and enjoyment is realistic, not exaggerated like, say, Lord of the Flies. The view of teachers and parents is forgiving, as all children are wont to do. But then the shock when you realize you are a parent now, and G-d forbid that Paddy Clarke's descriptions should sound familiar.

I doubt that I have any control over Amazon's combination-purchase recommendations, but if I did, I'd say "better bought with A Death in the Family by James Agee".

My second Roddy Doyle book and it was no less impressive than the first. Paddy Clarke Ha Ha Ha is the story of a 10-year-old boy growing up in Ireland. His experiences range from boyhood friendships to the classroom to his parent's increasing fights. Doyle is immensely talented and consistently manages to embrace his characters and represent them in a nearly too real fashion. Paddy Clarke not only feels like it's a story of a 10-year-old boy but is specifically narrated by a 10-year-old boy and by the end of the book one has to wonder "Doyle, who's he?" Doyle's narrative is addicting and moving and I had to have spent half the book asking people, "Do you remember when..." A definite must read for everyone.

While this book does an excellent job of capturing what it's like to be a 10 year old boy growing up in Ireland, it just didn't give me much reason to care enough about that boy to really enjoy the book.

This is a well-written book about a young boy in Ireland, but I'm about 137 pages into it and I'm struggling to finish. Doyle's quality prose isn't enough to keep you interested in Paddy Clarke's story, which is told from the first-person perspective of the boy himself. There's just never enough insight into the boy to really care. If you want to read a bunch of vignettes from a boy's point of view, knock yourself out, but know what you're getting.

This is the fourth Roddy Doyle book I've read and frankly it is his least engaging. "The Van" is one of the funniest books I've encountered and I'm going to steer you towards that. Also, if you've got the stomach for it, you might want to check out Irvine Welsh's "Filth." It's not for the squeamish, though.

Never would I have thought anyone could write this well about such a devastating battle. I had previously read of the battle at Franklin, but this novel adds the necessary context to many of the events that took place. A great deal of research and thought went into writing this well, and the author is to be highly commended for his work!

I originally read this book upon checking it out at the library. However, I simply enjoyed reading it so much, it became necessary to purchase a copy for myself. There are so many new insights to be gained upon reading a book the second and third time. I felt this was one of those books. I will ALWAYS treasure this novel as it speaks to the very human and caring side of everyone's character...

I loved this book so much that I dragged my family down to Franklin, TN, just to visit the place. Yes, it's fiction, but it is a great story. Hicks does a fantastic job detailing the area, and it has really paid off for Carnton and for Franklin. Many of these more obscure Civil War sites are struggling to remain in existence, and the success of this book has really put Franklin on the map.

Whether one is a "Civil War Buff" or not, this is a must read and a page-turner. The central character, Carrie MacGavock, takes a long and arduous journey while never leaving home. She "travels" from being a well-protected and privileged plantation owner's wife, through being nearly crippled with grief over the loss of three children to death, to a power-house nurse for the wounded and dying, and finally to a no-holds-barred developer of a sanctuary for the dead and a life-long mourner for those interred upon her land.

Robert Hicks has produced a work that not only deserves to be made into a movie, but he has written it in such a way that the opening and closing chapters set a perfect opening and closing scene sequence.

As an avid reader of historical fiction - personally, I really enjoyed Hick's story.

As a previous reviewer stated - historical fiction is after all "FICTION" and it's weight is not held purely on precision. Rather, it is a creative expansion of a time and place within history, and I believe as a debut novel Hicks has done a superb job.

I am a novice writer, who after reading this book felt that if I could manage to produce a story as entertaining as Hicks's - then I would be more than happy to take a bow for it.

This compelling story was hard to put down. Both Carrie and Zack were strong, well-developed characters, a bit quirky for their time, but highly believable.

As a Civil War buff, I love reading ficton from that era. I found the book to be flawlessly accurate on the historic details surrounding the story. It was so nice to read about a Southern belle who wasn't a vain scatter-brained flirt, but rather a strong heroic woman.

I finally had the chance to read Jules Verne's classic tale of the eccentric Englishman and his famous bet. Just to round out the experience I also watched the Mike Todd film, also a classic with an endless collection of superstars including David Niven and cameo appearances by Charles Boyer, Frank Sinatra, Noel Coward and Edward R. Murrow.

The story was written in serial for the magazines and this adds to the richness as each chapter tells a story. My favorite part is Paspartou and Fogg being re-united in the circus after a separation of more than one week and several ports of call.

Around the World in 80 Days is an adventurous book. Mr. Fogg is a man that will do just about anything to win his 20,000 dollar bet, like spending as much money as he wants to get where he needs to. Throughout his journey his mood will change. O gave this book three and a half stars out of five because it had a lot of interesting parts with just the right amount of reality. I like this book and can see it being well known for many years to come. Around the World in 80 Days by Jules Verne is a fun, adventure book that is good for people of any age. i feel that this book is the best of the series.

Note: Some immature Mormon has been slamming my reviews because I wrote some negative reviews of books attempting to defend the Book of Mormon.

So your "helpful" votes are greatly appreciated. Thanks

In my opinion, a short review is best if you haven't read the book. I always read the longer reviews afterwards.

I read this book forty years ago in college and loved it. I also saw the movie, but as one reviewer pointed out, Phileas Fogg traveled by boat, train, car, sled, and even elephant, but never by balloon. The balloon scene was added to the movie.

Nevertheless, I loved all of Jules Verne's stories, and I highly recommend this one, whose title says it all--"Around the World in Eighty Days" on a bet that it couldn't be done.

I enjoy collecting paperback books with neat covers, and I have a couple of "Around the World in Eighty Days."

Oh, and I hope this is helpful. Read "The Other Log of Phileas Fogg," by Philip Jose Farmer. This retelling of Verne's story has Fogg going after Captain Nemo. It's great Fun. Farmer also wrote novels about Tarzan and the "Barnstormer in Oz"--very sexy.

The Other Log of Phileas Fogg
Barnstormer In Oz/a

A book based around a bet. Two adventurers, one a gentleman, and one not so nice, make a not so small wager, on Fogg's ability to circumnavigate the globe in 80 days or less.

When something like that happens, of course there will be villainous nogoodniks trying to stop you from accomplishing your task, winning the bet, getting the girl and all the good grog, etc.

Around The World in Eighty Days by Jules Verne is more true to life than
other books by Verne. The movie starring David Niven is a good movie.
By Danny Karl Fleming, author of How to Prove The Collatz Conjecture.

The basic premise of the book is tantalizing enough - Man seeks to colonize distant stars as Earth is consumed by the sun. Unfortunately, the book is poorly executed. Characters are hastily constructed with little or no depth. Love triangles have a sterile feel that lets you shrug your shoulders and care for no party in particular. While the ambiance of the novel is attractive enough - interstellar travel, a space elevator cameo, a new planet to explore - the actual action occurring within the setting is of very little interest or substance. Clarke does manage to cobble together snippets of philosophical thought - 90% of humans in this future world are bisexual, God has (to the relief of mankind) finally been dispensed with, etc.

My lasting impression is that the novel, quite simply, is utterly without a "good story".

Songs of Distant Earth is in my Top 5 sci-fi books of all time...Great concept, heart-wrenching at times..Mike Oldfield actually wrote music for this book (the cd has the same title). Need I say more?

Well written story of the last ship (Magellan) to leave a doomed earth making a pit stop for some agua on the previously colonized ocean world of Thalassa, before heading on further to the barren world of Sagan 2. Great characters from the ship Magellan and inhabitants of Thalassa and believable science await the reader of this book.

I picked up this book thinking I was going to get to read Clarke's vision of the End of the Earth. I had previously read some of his other books and knew what to expect of his style. This, I thought, would be an intriguing look at the future of Earth when faced with impending destruction, as told by one of the great masters of the genre.

WRONG. This book picks up on a colony of humans living on an ocean world a thousand years after the destruction of Earth. They are visited early on by some of the last humans to escape the solar system, who need to strike a deal with the colonists to continue on their own journey. What followed was a huge disappointment for me. In between the fantastic depiction of Earth's final years (complete with ideas on technological development, sociological processes, doomsday cults, projects on a gigantic scale, etc.) is a clunky personal story about a handful of the colonists and a handful of the interstellar travelers. There's some weird romantic troubles and some unnecessary deaths, and the book develops a secondary plot that doesn't seem to fit the rest of the story (but ends up being more interesting than the fates of the main characters...?)

One thing I will give credit to: this book was printed 30 years ago, but the vision of future technology is still pretty good. Computer terms are getting dated (gigabytes and terabytes no longer inspire the kind of awe they once did), but Clarke has looked ahead in most all areas of life, and I appreciate that attention. I was most impressed that he remembered to think of political progress as well - most authors forget this and instead latch on to either socialism or American democracy as the only two viable governments of the future, so it's nice that Clarke had hoped we would some day have something even better.

Besides that, about the only thing it did well was to analyze the effect that hundred-year journeys would have on the travelers. Flying about the solar system takes a lot of time, even near the speed of light, and so people would experience an odd grieving process when they awake from suspended animation and realize their loved ones have all died three centuries ago. It's not particularly well done in this book, but at least it is captured.

I don't even feel like discussing the rest of the story - it's standard sci-fi fare about aliens and interplanetary colonists, tinged with all the free-love and semi-atheistic stuff I've already read a dozen times over. Maybe I'm being too harsh here, but I was very disappointed with where Clarke took his story. The book I was hoping to read is buried too far under bland storytelling to even be worth searching for.

Well written story of the last ship (Magellan) to leave a doomed earth making a pit stop for some agua on the previously colonized ocean world of Thalassa, before heading on further to the barren world of Sagan 2. Great characters from the ship Magellan and inhabitants of Thalassa and believable science await the reader of this book.