Robertson Books

It's perfect! all receipe have perfect explication and recomnedations!!!, ademas casi todas las receipe have sus fotos!!! Perfect pictures!!
Love it!

I think that the quality of the pages of the book, is an immediate turn off. A pity, since I awaited in such anticipation after seeing the book advertized on the Martha Stewart show, and the fact that it was quite expensive to have it sent to Israel. Maybe i am being a little picky, but the feel of the pages add to the desire to roam through the book, no excitement, and sorry that it cost me so very much.

I agree with K Cole and Cricket's reviews. There are quite a few typos in this book. Some apparent prior to baking and some only apparent upon tasting the baked goods. I bake daily and I have had one too many failures with this cookbook even when scaling all of my ingredients. I can only hope that someone gets in the test kitchen and corrects the errors for the next edition.
I will give this cookbook two more recipe tries because I want to love it. Paging thru it makes me wish the bakery were in my city and right up the road.
I'll follow up again and with fingers crossed I'll be adding stars to my review

After a visit to Tartine (which was well worth the 25 minute wait and the packed dining area), I knew I had to buy this book. It's gorgeous, has dependable recipes, and brings back great memories of a wonderful trip to San Francisco with good friends.

I've received many complements on the desserts I've made from this book. A couple of friends have bought the book on the strength of tasting those creations, despite not having visited Tartine itself.

I have many baking books, but turn to "Tartine" often, especially when I want something classic and a cut above average. It's probably not a beginner's baking book, but if you have some experience, or are a confident beginner, you won't go wrong.

I made the truffles, toffee, and almond rochers. The truffles were not nearly as tasty and creamy as Mark Bittman's two ingredient truffles, nor have they stood up to storage as well. I made the toffee twice, since I messed up the recipe for the first time but still it tasted delicious, only to discover that my mess-up was better than the recipe, which crumbled in a disastrous way. I'm convinced there's too little butter. Only the almond rochers came out halfway decently.

I see other reviewers mostly adore this cookbook. Maybe I chose bad recipes. But I do bake a lot, so I know my way around the kitchen pretty well. And with me, three strikes and you're out.

This is a very literate book, full of a great deal of philosophy and academic intellectualism. It is also witty and well written and tells a fascinating story through the voices of two narrators: Maria Magdalena Theotoky, a graduate student, and Simon Darcourt, a university professor and Anglican priest.

Darcourt and two other professors--Clem Hollier and Urquhart McVarish-- are given the task of sorting out the collection of the recently-deceased Francis Cornish, a great collector of valuable art, books, and manuscripts.

Hollier knows that among the manuscripts is one by Rabelais that he wants very badly to get his hands on, to work on with his student Maria. The manuscript, however, is not among the collections. Hollier suspects that McVarish has it, but he denies it.

Hollier becomes obsessed with getting the manuscript, and even tries to enlist the aid of Maria's gypsy mother to put a curse on McVarish.

Meanwhile, John Parlabane, an old friend of Hollier and Darcourt, turns up on the doorstep, having run away from the monastery he had joined after decades of debauched living. He proceeds to sponge off the two men, as well as Maria, "borrowing" money from all of them, but never seeming to improve his lot in life. He sets out to write a great novel, and when it fails to interest publishers, he comes up with a fiendish way to get the book published, as well as to help Hollier and Maria.

It's definitely intriguing and makes one eager to read the next two books in this trilogy.

I was at my favorite second hand bookstore, and picked The Rebel Angels up on a whim. I had been looking for something that I could not find. I honestly no longer remember what I was originally looking for-- nor do I know what possessed me to pick this little Davies novel from the shelf. I can only tell you that I am glad that I did.

The Rebel Angels is everything I like in a novel. Academics, art, philosophy, history and romance-- all tied up in a witty and well-written package. I would call it a cozy for intellectuals, but that would be unfair and making it sound a little bit more trivial than it is. Still, there is something to the description. It made me feel good to read it. It manages to convey experience without ever falling prey to cynicism. This is no mean feat.

When Parlabane comes back, Maria Theotoky is not quite sure what it is going to mean for her and her desired romance with her professor/advisor Clem Hollier. She only knows that once she meets him, she does not like him, and she does not trust the influence that he will have on her future.

The Rebel Angels is told by turns from the point of view of Maria and Reverend Simon Darcourt. Although the shifting voices took some getting used to, the device worked well and by the end of the book I found nothing jarring about the transitions.

Highly recommended, particularly if academic fiction is one of your interests.

I had to give this wonderful book 5 stars even though there are some flaws in the plot that are especially evident toward the end of the novel. HOwever, it is a delightful read, full of history, and philosophy, and base instincts wrapped up as academic intellectual whimsey.

The beautiful, brilliant and wealthy Maria Theotoky is a Ph.D. graduate student who becomes involved in an interesting academic power struggle for both her affections and for a discovered manuscript from the Middle Ages. He major professor, Clem Hollier; another professor who narrates much of the book, the Reverend, Simon Darcourt; a renegade gay dope-addict monk, Brother Parlabane; and a bright young billionaire, Francis Cornish, all compete for her mind, her attention, her love and finally, her hand in marriage.

Clever, witty, intelligent, absurd, and insightful are the odd mix that describes this book. It is Jungian in it symbolism but also very knowing of university politics and ambitions. It is amusing and thoughtful, entertaining and stimulating. It is a winner.

The Rebel Angels starts off Robertson Davies's Cornish Trilogy by introducing us to a cast of characters and a mood that are the raw material of the collection of related stories. Davies is an author who utilizes a palette of archetypes, applying them again and again in successive snippets and passages. This first book of the trilogy serves as a kind of under-painting for the books that follow. It sets the stage and lays a foundation. But, like all under-painting, it is incomplete in itself. It needs the detail that comes from what follows. In a sense, then, this book is not truly complete apart from the other components of the trilogy. But, that said, in no way should the reader be dissuaded from reading this novel, for the rewards are deeper than the limitations.

Davies gives the reader a rich feast of characters and experiences, heightened and exaggerated, but never untrue. His pages welcome us into reflection upon the common chords of life found mirrored back to us by somewhat uncommon people in somewhat unusual places. A few of the characters stand out. Parlabane, for instance, gives us an annoying villain who is both disturbing and likable. Sometimes the tidy fence between goodness and evil seems to melt away in this story, leaving the reader a bit unsettled by the dark shadows within him or herself. This is, however, merely a minor - not too jarring - revelation of what we attempt to hide from ourselves. Robertson Davies gives us, in The Rebel Angels, an uncommon window upon the common human experience. If you are like me, you will find that you remember less of the details of this book than you feel that you have been reminded of the characters and experiences of your own life that sometimes too easily pass from notice.

I highly recommend this book; but only for those who are willing to commit to reading the whole of the trilogy. Without the other volumes, you will feel cheated. But with them, you will find yourself greatly enriched by having read The Rebel Angels.

The Rebel Angels immediately entered my personal canon of favorite works of literature. Could it be the perfect novel? It features astounding characters, well defined and memorable (especially the unforgettable John Parlabane, almost as singular a character as Liesl in Davies' Deptford Trilogy). It features a page turning plot. I was initially hoping for a literary mystery, along the lines of Eco, when the "lost manuscript" is introduced. The plot doesn't exactly lead that way, but creates its own twists and turns, both comic and tragic.

Davies' fine novel is an erudite display of knowledge, philosophy, emotion. There are no blacks and whites, nor even shades of grey. Each character is peppered alternately both black and white...each an incredibly real person encompassing friendship and selfishness, good and evil.

This is the kind of novel you feel better for having read. It impressed me on each page; a great work of literature as well as a very enjoyable read.

This meaty (in more ways than one) trade paperback collects all six issues of Marvel's "Fury" mini-series of a few years back. From its adult "Max" line, the story initially presents to us a morose, depressed Nick Fury who misses the glory days of blood-and-guts violence and bosses who didn't worry about politics all the time.

But then he gets involved in a mission just like the old days and we learn a little bit about Nick Fury. Mostly, we see that, though personally capable of committing violence- and I'm talking extreme violence- without batting an eyelash, Nick Fury always (no pun intended) has an eye towards avoiding larger violence. So, if he has to destroy every soldier in a small battalion (and destroy them in the most colorful ways) to avert a world war, especially a needless one, he's there.

So, throughout this bloody, profane, and (I have to admit) extremely readable story, we see a Fury who despises weak men with no stomach for violence when it's called for, yet also a man who has no patience for the kind of wars that waste lives for some marginal political benefit. Just on an engaging, story-telling level, I found that notion interesting: a personally violent man who nevertheless abhors needless violence and wasted lives.

If you occasionally enjoy a good blood-and-guts tale laced with take-no-prisoners profanity and over-the-top action, then "Fury" is for you. Be warned, though, there's some genuine thoughtfulness and complexity among the spurting blood and frequent F-bombs.

Lazy, lazy work from everyone involved.

Ennis first portrayed Nick Fury in his Steve Dillion-partnered run on the Punisher: Welcome Back, Frank Premiere HC (Punisher) and this is an uninspired, insipid spin-off. The gags are dull and plot is recycled. Even the patented ultraviolence (and the deliberately offensive dialogue) feels watered-down and off-key. The slapstick goofiness is a sour note as well - this miniseries feels like something crafted from Ennis's cutting-room floor.

Not even worth it for the Ennis/Robertson completist - read The Boys Vol. 1: The Name of the Game instead.

I bought "Fury" because I've always liked the character of Nick Fury and because Garth Ennis did some good work with the Punisher. The idea of a hard-core warrior like Fury having to deal with the Big Game (the Cold War) being long dead and SHIELD having gradually turned into a bureaucracy was, or could have been, interesting. Too many straw men were created, too many superfluous sidelines included. For instance, the addition of a geeky 'nephew' for Nick to put up with was unnecessary, silly and added nothing to either story or character development. The defaced (pardon the pun) Russian giant was also silly. Ennis seemed to undermine himself at every turn.

The art could have helped salvage the book but didn't. Darick Robertson's style is too slick. The pencils needed to be rougher, more in line with what appeared in most of the Punisher MAX comics (apart from the ones that Robertson did). His work on the character F*ckface was just bad.

Overall, this was a good idea poorly done.

Whew. Now I know what the MAX label means when it's placed on the cover of a Marvel graphic novel. It means harsh, bloody, brutal action, as well as foul, filthy language. And nauseating gore (yes, I already mentioned bloody, brutal action, but you have to add nauseating gore--the bloody, brutal action is during the quieter parts of the story, usually before, and leading up to, the gory nausea, sorry, nauseating gore, whatever. The blood and intestines).

The word MAX is a warning; NOT for kids!

Nick Fury, on the outs with the new, red-tape laden S.H.I.E.L.D. as exemplified by the smart-mouthed, smooth-dressed and so young Mr. Li, sits down at a bar to drown his sorrows, only to bump into an old enemy of the USA and democracy, Rudi Gagarin. Not too long after that--after Fury has fantasized about feeding his loser nephew to tigers, after he has entertained several prostitutes at his apartment, after he has visited old warhorse pal Dum Dum Dugan's humble suburban abode and insulted his friend's quiet retirement from govt.-approved murder, after he has bullied S.H.I.E.L.D. in their new HQ, after his home has been invaded by a cadre of Gagarin-appointed assassins in preemptive-strike mode (can you say "dogmeat once you pick out all the guns and put what's left in a big bowl"?)--Fury goes to war against Gagarin, on a small island, between mainland USA and Hawaii.

Gagarin seems to have invaded the island purely to manufacture a useless war that will bring Fury and a fresh, hand-picked team of crack soldiers into glorious battle. But his plan to shoot down a plane full of Chinese military advisors while making it look like the work of a US Taskforce gives him a shot at an added bonus: possibly starting a major global conflict.

Fury and his intrepid team execute a clever plan to arrive on the island undetected, and Fury's initial operation involves stopping Gagarin--and making US plans to bomb the island into flaming oblivion unnecessary--with minimal bloodshed. But then everything goes crazy, Fury's team gets smaller by the minute, and a final deadly confrontation with Gagarin and his main muscle, a giant, hideously-disfigured killer with a name that's mostly a swear-word and so I can't give it to you here, is inevitable. Amid the hellish flames of battle, Fury and Gagarin square off for the last time. The ensuing combat is disgustingly over-the-top, and that's just the foul language, never mind the gut-wrenching gore.

This isn't for kids. Honestly, this isn't even for me. I give this a reluctant four-star review, because, well, I was riveted. Nick Fury is a juggernaut here, commanding allies and enemies alike to bend to his will, strafing political correctness, and detonating previous notions of how comics should behave. I know all this is old-hat for Garth Ennis fans, but it's all new to me, and I'm shocked but entertained. Risk-taking is appreciated, and I don't have to read graphic novels like this all the time. And I won't. But the vicious humour, the cynical worldview, and the vile characters--including perhaps Fury himself--make this a strangely satisfying nightmare. I didn't delight in the graphic violence--I discovered that, just like I still close my eyes at the gory moments in a movie, I move my eyes swiftly over the bloody panels of Fury without lingering--but the carnage, and the foul language, does make reading Fury a memorable experience. War as a result of some kind of macho bar bet, war as a way to make the world exciting--what a terrible concept. But, in this tale, we're still left hoping the good guy wins, even if the good guy worries that he's not much different than the bad guy.

I kind of wish I was young enough to give this a one-star review, but I confess I did like it. Now back to comics that don't leave me feeling so nauseated.

Sherman may very well have been right, and War may be Hell---but Peace can be boring.

That goes double if you're Nick Fury, aging, semi-retired from S.H.I.E.L.D., playing nanny for his not-too-bright nephew Wendell, and fallen from a state of bloodthirsty grace that included killing for Queen & Country (and President & Congress) to hiring a battalion of hookers to slake your thirst for a little excitement, to getting nixed from SHIELDs more interesting real estate---Well, if you're Nick Fury, Peace can be Worse.

What's a former roving government super-operative to do?

How about start another war?

Our man Nicky is drinking---alone---in a Manhattan bar, lamenting the fallen state of the world. He can't even smoke his trademark stogie in NYC---because he's "offending other patrons", even though it's 10:30 PM, and the bar is cleared out, and he's the only patron. Dig? It's post-9/11, the City has suffered a brutal attack that left its trademark Twin Towers a smoking crater, and the city government says---Hey! let's ban smoking in bars!

It's that kind of petty tyranny Nick Fury was designed to fight, you know?

Anyway, the other guy in the bar that night happens to be his old Nemesis Yuri Gagurin (or somethin' like that, JEEZUS)---big former Soviet killer, KGB, Spetsnaz, Russian Murder Society, the works. Real horror-show, baby, you know it. And Yuri, well, he's feeling the lull, just like Nicky, peacetime ain't pleasant, it's like an ex-con his first few months out of the joint, craving the action---you know where I'm going with this?

No? Well, the ex-con would wanna pop a Burger King, or a small backwater bank, just to get the juices flowing. Gagurin wants to fly down with some Boyz to a small Caribbean Island, help the little tinpot Despot there seize total power, start importing arms and nukes and microwave weapons and ASATs into this little offshore Tyranny, and start World War III. The Big One.

Hell, it's something to do, and beats the hell outta waiting for the Oakland Raiders to turn things around. Right?

Except Fury is still the Good Guy, so he doesn't accept. I mean, Yuri was gonna split it right down the middle, which is pretty damned decent for a Rooskie, yeah? Anyway, a month later and Fury gets the news about Napoleon Island, and the coup, and the Russian and Chinese advisors, and---well, he's gotta do *something*, right?

So it's on!, and you're invited: Nicky gets wind that something's up, pulls together the best squad he can muster, and bludgeons his way through the new S.H.I.E.L.D bureaucracy and gets his island hopping pass and baby!---have 9MM FN Browning (with laser-scope sight, UV/night-vision), will travel!

Note: a few critics have said this is "not your Father's Nick Fury"---but that's not right: this *is* you Daddy's Fury, it's just the world ain't. It has passed Fury by. It has become peaceful, fat, indolent, safe, secure in its high walls bought and paid for by the blood of stogie-chomping patriots.

Sound familiar?

Garth Ennis writes & directs, very cynically, just fine. Darick Robertson illustrates, plenty bloody, very "Preacher", lots of brains and gore and popping eyeballs, the works. If that's what you dig, you'll dig it.

In the meantime, it's about that time, and I've got a cigar. And a 9MM FN Browning. Mind if I light up?

Smoke 'em if you got 'em, Gentlemen.

JSG

Robertson Davies' "Salterton Trilogy" is a well-written, often funny and sometimes poignant look at the realistically odd occupants of Salterton, the deceptively quaint Canadian city with two cathedrals and one university.

"Tempest-Tost" opens with the organization of an amateur production of Shakespeare's "The Tempest." A motley crew of actors join it, including an exuberent professor, his quiet daughter, a quiet mama's boy, a beautiful rich girl, a womanizing soldier, and an infatuated schoolteacher. Love, ambition, jealousy and infatuation rapidly tangle together, climaxing in an unusually dramatic opening night.

"Leaven of Malice" is half satire and half mystery. The Salterton Bellman announces that Solly Bridgetower and Pearl Vambrace are engaged -- the only problem is that it isn't true. Professor Vambrace sees it as a personal affront, and sues the paper. Pearl and Solly are haunted by false rumors, reports, and claims about who faked the announcement. All they can do is try to find out themselves.

"Mixture of Frailties" opens with the death of Solly's domineering mother. Her will leaves money to Solly's family only if he produces a male heir with his wife Veronica (previously known as Pearl); until then, her money is to be used in a trust for a young female artistic hopeful, who will go to Europe for a few years to study whatever she is good at. And finding the right girl is only the start of Solly's problems.

The tone of the Salterton Trilogy is lighter and less introspective than Davies' other books. Sometimes it's outright hilarious (there's a girl called The Torso, for crying out loud!). The first book is perhaps the funniest and most real-seeming, but it's also rather unfocused because there is no plot. The second and third books are tighter, but a little more rarified in humor and a little more surreal in tone.

Solly Bridgetower is the unacknowledged center of the trilogy. He barely registers in "Tempest-Tost," but becomes the central figure of the second and third books. He's not a strong person, but he is a likable one. Pearl is only a little more prominent at first, but it's great to see her break out of her shell and become her own person. And without a doubt, Humphrey Cobbler is Davies' best character -- a vivid, devil-may-care artistic genius who winks and nudges in every book.

The Salterton Trilogy is often eclipsed by Davies' better-known Deptford Trilogy, but that doesn't mean it's bad. By no means. It's a pleasant and warmly amusing trio of interconnected stories, and ones you won't forget in a hurry. Highly recommended.

I am an incredible Davies fan, and have lived in and/or travelled to many of the places he writes about. This trilogy takes place in "Salterton", a thin veiling for Kingston, Ontario, Canada, and Queen's University, located there.

Unlike his other university-set novels, Salterton features contempt for the frivolity of faculty and persons who live in a small town. While not entirely inaccurate in his portrayal of a small university-centered Canadian town, it doesn't relish academia in the way that the Cornish trilogy does.

As always, the pages are rife with attention to detail and tangential storylines are fleshed out with loving care. It is as if seven or eight short stories collide into three great novels. If you enjoy these, I strongly recommend the Deptford and Cornish trilogies; both are better examples of Davies' literary gifts.

I'd read the Cornish Trilogy and some of the Deptford Trilogy a few years before picking up the Salterton Trilogy. I read the Salterton books straight through, and enjoyed them. Unlike the other two, the Salterton Trilogy struck me as just a little dated, not because it doesn't discuss email or reflect recent political developments, but because social mores have changed somewhat over the last half-century, and so at times it seems a bit quaint. I could be quite wrong, but I suspect that even in a small, conservative Canadian town, folks may not be as prissy today as the characters in these books sometimes are.

Davies' style here also is "old school;" there's nothing experimental, or even modern, about his prose, which could have been written in the nineteenth century. But unless the reader would avoid any novels written more than twenty years ago as being too old fashioned (like some people won't watch a movie from the 1940s), none of this really detracts much from the experience, which is still a lot of fun.

Particularly compared with the other trilogies, the Salterton novels are light; there are many funny elements throughout the other trilogies, but the first two Salterton novels are frankly comedies, and the third is melodrama. The plots of all of them are rather slight, and in Leaven of Malice in particular, the ending is broadcast almost from the start. The characters, though, are very well developed, if a bit cartoonish. Davies is a masterful wordsmith, and excels at psychological detail. He delights in revealing imperfections; in fact, he seems unable to resist poking fun at all of his characters, so none of them comes off as particularly admirable, but at the same time none of these books shows any real darkness.

A number of the characters are found in each of the three novels, and there's just enough that ties them together to make reading them in order a good idea, so having the trilogy is convenient.

And I don't actually mean that in a derogatory sense. What I do mean is that the Salterton Trilogy is a compelling romp of a read with enough intelligence and wit to cause one to want to read it in front of the fire come February. BUT...you can put it down and pick it up again weeks later and not feel disconnected.
I came rather late to Robertson Davies (university age), even though I grew up in Toronto and even went to Trinity College, U of Toronto, the fictionalized setting for "Rebel Angels"; my problem was that we were force-fed "Fifth Business" in high school. I hated the book (as it was taught, at least) so much that I never wanted to have anything else to do with Robertson Davies, ever. Fortunately, a friend in my sophmore year urged me to pick up Tempest-Tost, and a die-hard convert was born. Again, perhaps. The Cornish Trilogy is certainly more complex, and the Deptford astonishingly onion-like in its layers, but the Salterton is the most fun. Although the town of Salterton (in reality Kingston, Ontario, a charming old Loyalist city on the river) seems to exist as a somewhat rarefied sugarplum of 1950s sensibilities and prejudices, the characters are remarkably believeable and personable, the plots well paced and the action eminently suited to a comfy chair and a cup of tea.

The best characters in Tempest-Tost are Freddie Webster and Hector Mackilwraith, but Humphrey Cobbler is perhaps the most memorable. He manages to assert himself in all three of the books, if memory serves correctly, and it's a good thing. He is the epitome of the mad musical genius without being a complete cariacture.

The Salterton Trilogy is a perfect introduction to a great Canadian author, and a great cheer-up if life has been treating you shabbily.

This is Davies first trilogy, and, if I remember correct, his first novel was the lead-off to this, Tempest-Tost. Before writing novels, however, Davies had written several plays, so his first novel is quite accomplished. The Salterton trilogy is almost misnamed--yes, it does center around the town of Salterton, but the real center of the three books is Solomon Bridgetower. Although he is almost a minor character in the first book, he and his family are front stage in books two and three.

Tempest-Tost is about an amateur production of Shakespeare's The Tempest. The Salterton players assume they can have the use of the garden of their most famous citizen, and it is this assumption of community use that leads them into trouble. While no characters in the book undergo a sea-change, several characters do awaken from passive slumber to new lives, sometimes with mixed results. For anyone who has ever been involved in amateur theater, this is an extremely amusing tale. Others might find it belabored.

Not so with the second novel, which is about class and prejudice, but told in a Wodehousian manner. Winner of the Stephen Leacock Memorial Medal for Humour (a Canadian award for best humor novel--I wish I could find a list of past award winners), Leaven of Malice concerns an engagement announcement in the local paper that was placed by neither bride nor groom. The resulting conflict between the two families brings up old academic rivalry, the worst of the new goody-two-shoe couple in town, and an escalation of lawyers. In some ways it is a mystery, too, as the two "lovers" attempt to find who had the malice to link their names in the public eye.

The concluding volume, A Mixture of Frailties, is about a trust established by Solomon's mother, and how it must be awarded to a specific individual. But finding the individual is only the start of Solomon's trouble, and the story follows two separate lines: one regarding Solomon and his need for a heir to rid himself of his mother's legacy, and one regarding the lucky trust recipient, and her entry into the world of opera.

There were certain things near to Davies' experience, it seems: theater, academic life, and trusts. Trusts can be found in both A Mixture of Frailties and the second and third books of the Cornish trilogy, academic life is featured in Leaven of Malice and The Rebel Angels, and theater productions in Tempest-Tost and The Lyre of Orpheus. I can easily see myself rereading Davies in ten years, and rediscovering all of this once again.

This is yet another fantastic pop-up book. I collect pop-up books and I certainly was not disappointed with this one, DRAGONS: A Pop-Up Book of Fantastic Adventures.

This book has beautiful illustrations (lovely color and details) with simple, but impressive, pop-up art. As another reviewer noted, complex pop-up stuff is easily destroyed by kids. My four year old likes to feel the fangs and make the dragons 'fly' by opening and closing the book. It has remained durable over the past several months, unlike other pop-ups. This is one of his all time favorite books.

Although the retellings are rather dry, I like the fact that it includes dragon stories from a wide range of cultures: England, China, Sweden, Japan. With a (very little!) extra imagination, it is easy to fill the stories out. My husband uses fake British and horrid Scottish accents that make our son giggle. Discussion about how fables and rules work (Why did the Dragon Princess leave?) generate more discussion... and at bedtime, I appreciate being able to tell my kids they only get one or two dragon stories, if it's already late. Or, if it's the only story, even reading all 5 does not take that long.

Because these are familiar legends, one can find other versions, and I think it's really good for kids to learn that there are different ways to tell the story of St. George and the Dragon. Or that in some versions of Maud and the Wyvern the knight who kills the Wyvern is named Garston, and in some versions he's a high born local Knight, and in other versions he's a prisoner who figured that the risk of fighting a wyvern would be worth the possibility of freedom. We parents can learn a lot with a little research!

Some of the stories are a little boodthirsty, so it could be scary for young children, and when my son finally gets to take it to share at his preschool, I am planning to let the teachers know which stories are best for the littlest ones...

This is a beautiful book. It is the second one I've purchased for a gift. I think if you are a person interested in dragon lore, then this is a great book to buy. The quality of the "pop ups" is amazing. The text interesting and informative.

I bought this for my 4-year-old son because he loves pop-up books and is very interested in dragons. This book was a disappointment, though. There are only five pop-ups really, to go with five dragon stories, each told in a two-page spread. The stories, drawn from common legends around the world, are retold in a summary form that takes all the magic and drama out of them. The popups are also disappointing. Only one is reasonably sophisticated and well-done; the rest are rather simplistic. Most of the other pop-up books we have are much more creative and compelling in their storytelling, design, or both.

[...]

The illustrations are quite lovely, and the little stories explaining each dragon are nicely written. I give it only three stars because there are so few pages, and the construction of the pop-up features are very unremarkable.

Of all the movies I've seen about the life of Christ, including the recently released "Gospel according to John" by the same company, this one stands out the most in my mind. This portrail of Jesus is one of a living man, not a stiff person who merely died on a tree. It helped me tremendously in my understanding of the Bible, so much so, I have bought the DVDs when they're on sale here to give to friends.

The costumes and acting are very well done, and the actor who plays Jesus helps the viewer realize that his life was not only about the sacrifice for all, but about love. This is the New International Version word for word. Not one word is interjected into the script, and it's absolutely amazing that it could be acted out with such continuity. Even the "begats" (the lineage part most of us skim over) had some memorable moments.

I highly recommend this to anyone who wants to know more about the life of Christ, or who is tired of hearing that God is all about punishment and wrath. "What you have done for the least of these you have done for me". "I tell you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you".

You might even get the impression He has a sense of humor.

I enjoyed these films. The acting is, for the most part, excellent. The "Matthew" films are a word for word account of the NIV bible. Of coarse Jesus is by and far the most used character in the Matthew films, which could cause you to loose some interest. Bruce Marchiano portrayed Jesus. Although he is, at times, refreshingly humorous as Christ, most of the time the humor was over the top.

"Falling Fire" is the bonus film in my version of the "Matthew" series and it too is a well-done film where some literary license is taken, and appropriately. Only problem: Bruce Marchiano began to get on my nerves by the end of the three films. Again just a little over the top with the "happy guy".

In "Jesus", played by Jeremy Sisto, they struck a wonderfully believable balance of a Jesus as a human being and the Christ. The Jesus in The Living Bible Series was a difficult person to accept as Christ. He seemed a bit more like a comedian than a Savior, just a bit too much humor.

The "Acts" films, which I also own, are a blow-by-blow account from the NIV bible as well. They took little literary license, as it was very straight forward and, obviously, as accurate as the NIV is.

Now the "Healing Touch", which is part of the actual film titled "Jesus, the Christ", on the other hand, is where they took the literary liberties and done quite well. Again the acting is good and the story is pretty accurate.

This film was such a blessing to my wife and I, it is about time we see a film that depicts Christ as a joyous loving savior that is excited to be in the midst of his creation. You see him delighting in all things, especially in his people the Jews. We are finally given a glimpse of a Lord that has compassion on his people and is not afraid to be corny, to step out and touch the leper, it is like he is saying "BE HAPPY, IT IS OVER I HAVE FINALLY COME. I AM HERE. I AM IS HERE. THE GREAT I AM IS HERE. THE CURSE WILL BE BROKEN REJOICE, REJOICE!!!

So when you get to the scene that makes those that will believe - live (the crucifixion). It will rock you, because you see someone laying down there life, someone that truly does not deserve this payment. Christ the perfect sacrifice. It is a great film, and you can never go wrong when media is being spoken word for word, and this is word for word out of the book of Matthew.

I watched this Matthew DVD with eager expectation, since I really liked the Acts DVD set.

The good points:

It is word-for-word from the NIV version, thus the movie is very faithful to the Bible. The actors, for the most part, are fairly decent.

The not-so-good points:

a) The depiction of Jesus

I know that Jesus smiled and laughed and probably was not as serious as Robert Powell in Jesus of Nazareth, but Bruce's depiction was a little bit too much. Yes, Jesus was happy but sometimes he was serious, angry, and disappointed. He most likely didn't walk around with a huge grin on his face all the time. Bruce's Jesus was continuously gleefully happy and whenever he talked to people, he always touched them on the face or hugged them. After watching this movie for an hour, I felt somewhat annoyed or irritated at this depiction of Jesus. It was distracting to me.

b) Scenes of narration by Matthew which interrupts the flow of the movie

Richard Kiel's narration is great but often times, his narration scenes break up the flow of the movie. There would be scenes of Jesus talking to his disciples and then it changes to Richard Kiel playing Matthew as he talks to his family, and then back to Jesus & the disciples. This was also pretty distracting. At other times, I wanted certain scenes to be shown where Jesus would be talking to his disciples (i.e. Matthew 24 -- the Olivet discourse), but what we get instead is Matthew narrating the text in a house to his family members.

Some of the background to the scenes didn't make too much sense. When Jesus tells some of his parables, the scenes show Jesus soaking by the river with the disciples. Where did they think of that as a backdrop? It would be much better to have Jesus speak to the disciples sitting down.

c) Mary the mother of Jesus at the end

When Mary cries over Jesus's dead body, she has a sizeable nasal dripping coming out of her nose. This was pretty distracting, to say the least!

As you can tell, I was somewhat disappointed by this movie. It could have been much better.

I highly recommend The Gospel of John instead of this one. The actor (Henry Ian Cusick) and narrator (Christopher Plummer) are excellent and the movie is expertly directed by Philip Saville; it flows much better as a film than this one of Matthew.

I have used this in class, sunday school and church. Having a good portrayl of Jesus done helps with understanding the Bible. They are mostly accurate on historical details and things going on. I have been really impressed.

This was a very engaging account of this families survival at sea. Told in an understated and concise voice, I couldn't put it down.

I thought this was an excellent book. I have read several ocean survival tales & this is one of the best. The five other people that were stranded at sea , besides the author, I feel owe their lives to the author. He made some very important decisions & most had lives hanging in the balance. Most other people lost at sea just seem to drift aimlessly until they are sighted by another ship, hit land or die looking for help. Dougal Robertson had a far better knowledge of the prevailing winds / currents / weather systems than your typical person stuck in the same situation. He didn't have any maps to rely on.

The book does an excellent job of telling you how to make a little go a long way. Another thing I thought was very well done in the book was the illustrations - sometimes he would describe an item he made & on the next page would be a detailed sketch of that item. Worth reading for both the adventure part of it & the survival knowledge you may gain.

I thought it was a great book. I still think I enjoyed "Adrift" slightly more - just because it was a solo effort.

this was a great book- i liked "adrift" better but this was still very enjoyable and an amazing true story- it was maybe too technical for me but not unbearably so- the dad is a bit pompous in his writing and tries to sound like a better writer than he is and the infighting he recounts was a bit unpleasant for me, but it was still very interesting to read their survival techniques and see their eventual rescue- i mentioned to my friend (who had also read the book) that i was disliking the father while reading it but his response was "the man is a hero for goodness sake! he single handedly is responsible for saving this entire family plus their guest!" and you know what? my friend is absolutely right, you may not like the father (or not mind him at all like my friend) but what matters is that he saved his entire "crew" and didn't play favourites with his family- he was brilliant and if my boat ever capsized, i would definitely want him on board with me- this is a good story that all should read-

In this fascinating book, Dougal Robertson describes the survival at sea of six people for over a month. Their 43-foot schooner sank in only a minute after being attacked by killer whales.

Um, killer whales? A couple of hundred miles west of the Galapagos? In warm water? That's pretty rare. That was truly awful luck. They were lucky to get their life raft and 9-foot dinghy launched, so that they did not go down with their ship.

Surviving at sea is not easy, but the most critical elements are buoyancy and water. We see plenty about both. The life raft lasted a little more than two weeks, and the dinghy only had a few inches of freeboard when all six people were on board. Any swamping would almost surely be fatal, so they sailed their dinghy stern-first, with a flotation collar at the bow end and a sea anchor behind the bow.

What about water? There wasn't going to be much near the equator, so they chose to sail north. At around 5 degrees north, rain is more plentiful. It took two weeks to accomplish this, and the day after that, it rained enough to give them good chances to reach land (in fact, they did run low on water again, got more rain, and finally were rescued by a Japanese fishing boat when they were less than 300 miles from Costa Rica). By the way, one can drink sea water, but it just makes things worse. The Robertsons were wise to avoid trying it.

And, of course, what about food? They did catch some fish and turtles, and they eventually wound up with adequate provisions.

I was curious to see what stores Robertson advises for life rafts. There's a discussion of food and water, as well as a rain-catcher. And there has to be a means of propulsion. A useful knife. Fishing equipment (a gaff is the most important of these). A spear head. A bailer. A first-aid kit, a repair kit, and some line. A couple of sea anchors.

And, oh yes, some navigational equipment, including a clock and compass, as well as "dividers strong enough to be used as small fish spears." Along with a series of world charts "showing shipping lanes with frequency of use, ocean currents with set and drift, seasonal weather with, most important of all, rainfall expectations."

All these things probably ought to be made to float, and there probably needs to be an instruction manual.

Of course, as Robertson mentions, it would be useful to have a (battery-operated) phone or radio phone. He does not discuss beacons, and while I think these are better than nothing, I'd rather have two-way communications before staking my life on staying put.

Given that the life raft did not last all that long, Robertson also has some suggestions for making rafts that might last longer.

Of course, none of this will do you much good if you go down with your ship, so the most important thing is to make sure that you can get yourselves and the lifeboat off the ship very quickly, and under terrifying and unexpected conditions.

I recommend this book.

I tried to read this book, but only made it about 50 pages. Despite the many rave reviews and status of this book, it did not ring true to me. I read it while vacationing in the Galapagos, and I just didn't buy it. I love the genre, Krakauer being number one. In the Heart of the Sea, etc, all good. But this one did not work for me. Sorry.

Well, what exactly to say about this trilogy stretching to over eleven hundred pages? So many things come to mind, and it would be impossible to give them all due consideration without writing a review at least half as long as the book(s). -- I'll deal with what I don't particularly fancy about the trilogy as a start: I don't like being confronted with gypsy Tarot readers who put menstrual blood in a fellow's drink to besot him, female spies with bedazzling psychic powers who also offer a good tumble when the praeternatural reading is over and art connoisseurs endowed with a very effective "evil eye" who bequeath their fortunes in Swiss numbered bank accounts upon their demise (and such like figures) around every corner. But such are the characters who populate all three books of the trilogy and whom we are supposed to take (to a certain extent at least) seriously. But these improbable characters are merely bothersome, it seems to me, on a rather comedic level. My deeper problem (and this was a problem with The Deptford Trilogy as well) is Davies's professorial tone here. Another reviewer has already remarked on his lack of passion. I should rather frame it thusly: Davies writes quite well and extensively ABOUT passion and characters - to borrow from Yeats, as Davies frequently does herein - full of passionate intensity, but he does not write WITH passion. He is not lyrical, not a stylist, not poetic. Rather, parts of this book read like Jungian sermons (coming, of course from Simon Darcourt, so obviously an alter ego of Davies himself). - This is, summarily, what I find problematic and dislike about the trilogy.

What I appreciate about The Cornish Trilogy is that it at least makes an attempt, however excruciating in the execution, to deal with the depths in us all. This is the reason I would recommend it, despite misgivings, to any literate and contemplative reader; there is at least a trace, certainly of Simon Darcourt, probably of Francis Cornish, in anybody even considering reading this opus - not to the exclusion of other characters, however rum.

E.T.A. Hoffman, as Davies portrays him, shuffling about in Limbo, awaiting his Fate, exclaims, "Undine- yes, my wonderful tale of the water nymph who marries a mortal, and at last claims him for her underwater kingdom; what does it not say about the need for modern man to explore the deep waters that lie beneath his own surface?"

Somewhere in this rambling, shaggy dog trilogy full of parodies, grotesqueries and academic in-jokes, the persevering reader is destined to come upon his or her undertow into the depths. - Reason enough to read, I say.

Davies's Cornish trilogy should be read by anyone with an interest in the philosophy of art -- questions of attribution, forgery and fakery, and authenticity pervade all three novels, which deal with literature, painting and music respectively. Art in general, and art objects in particular, take on a shadowy, slippery aspect in spite of the very palpable (and almost erotically desirable) qualities they have for Davies's characters. Aesthetic and spiritual experience are intertwined. But the style, while elevated, is never dry or preachy -- the characters are rounded and often delightfully vulgar and even the most intellectual threads of the story are brimming with life and humour.

Robertson Davies' greatest strength has always been in his ability to create a protagonist whose adventures quickly intrigue you. One can debate the virtues of each novel in this trilogy, but the simple fact remains that as parts of a trilogy the story remains incomplete without reading all three.

Stories as intriguing as this do not often appear. You will travel between a thinly veiled Toronto and war-torn Europe, through generations of a family and across decades of time. A master storyteller, you will need to pay close attention (perhaps create a family tree) to understand how everyone fits together. The literary allusions could have you researching for months, and pepper the pages with just enough spice to add creedence to the education levels of the characters.

The main thread that ties all three books together is the main character, Reverend Simon Darcourt, who is on a quest to write the biography of a philanthropist with whom he was acquainted. To say that this is the entire story would be a gross understatement. The plot leaves few stones unturned in the lives of its characters, who three-dimensionally number in the dozens.

Give yourself a lot of time to read this book, because once you start you won't be able to put it down.

The Cornish Trilogy is a beautiful work of fiction as Robertson Davies takes the reader on a trip across Europe and North America to unravel the mysteries of the rather unusual Cornish family. It sheds light on the human condition as it explores such things as culture traditions, societal class barriers, love, desire, power, altruism and morality as part of a historical journey.

Robertson Davies' Cornish trilogy is good, in fact a kind of work of art. Its the second book (which I have already reviewed) which is the main attraction throughout. In fact the second book should be read first of all of the three, followed by the first and third in that order. The second book is a great piece of work and without it the other two would not stand as they do. Its much like a painting and the technique of preliminary drawings of the main work. The main work being the second book and the drawings the first and third books.

Although there are characters in the other two books who are interesting in their own right they have nowhere near the life and depth of Francis Cornish of "Bred in the Bone". These two books surround the great one on either side sort of like hangers on to a great man hoping for some of the glory themselves.

The first is concerned with the academic life in a Canadian University especially concerning the life of Maria Theotoky a great student of Renaissance legend Rebalais being mentored by the brilliant but socially inept Professor Hollier who is overwhelmed by the arrival of his old friend, the obnoxious Parlabane. Although interesting especially when discussing academic life and the jealousy evident when a reputation or fame is at stake, the novel does not really come to life in the same sense as the second. There are some characters who liven things up such as Maria's mother Mamusia the gypsy half of her. To be honest its difficult to tell where the male leads end and Maria begins, there is really little differentiation. A woman's aspects, as compared to the men involved, do not really come to light. The somewhat stale atmosphere of academia is never expunged by any kind of life, even from the female heroine. Still not bad at all.

The third book details the life of another of the characters in the first, i.e. Professor Darcourt, a priest but now successful academic and his and other's attempt to execute the estate of Francis Cornish, especially the use of the Cornish Foundation and its attempt to support the PhD of a gifted composer Hulda Schnakenburg. It's her fascinating mentor Dahl-Soot, as well as the spirit of Hoffmann who keeps this going.

All told the books enliven each other but the second one gives the whole thing a semblance of greatness. Its Davies' inability to really produce passion and spontaneity which prevents me from singing the books praises.

Good as a whole.

I will start off by saying that I am biased because I used to work for suburban daycare centers in college and I decided then that I was never going to leave my own children in daycare. Kids wander around aimslesly just waiting for parents, the food was unnutritious, coworkers chat and pay no attention to the kids, and the turnover is outrageous as these people make little over minimum wage.

When I started this book I thought it was a little sensational talking about how the killers in the Columbine shooting were raised in two income familes. It is not likely your child, even if in 80 hours of daycare a week, will turn out that bad. However, you had kids and someone has to take care of them. Who do you think is best qualified for that job? Hopefully it is you. The bond between mothers and infants is not myth. However, I think some people feel this bond more than others. I think a lot of women try to deny it as they head out the door to work.

Now, I am aware that some women do not have a choice in working because of their families' financial situation. This book describes policy (usually disguised as something "family friendly") that makes it easier financially for women to work than stay at home. The book also points out that daycare is a billion dollar a year profit industry that pushes propaganda so that it can get profits-as it is a business. Parents at home are a negative economic force, they do not have the political pull that the massive daycare industry has in creating policy.

The author points out that the business you work for has weighed you leaving against inticing you to stay with "family friendly" benefits. They have done their math and figure it is cheaper for them to give you these benefits, than to have you leave. So, they get to keep you as an employee and your child gets to be in daycare. Businesses are concerned with what is most profitable for them, not with what is in the best interest of your children.

I have nothing but praise for this book.
As a mother of four children, and an educated woman, I have been called a "traitor to feminism" for choosing to stay home with my four children.
Mr. Roberston's book illustrates, and provides data to support, just how important the mother-child bond is during the first four years of life. Day care is not, and never will be, an appropriate substitute for being a mother. Mr. Robertson goes into great detail to explain, with evidentiary support, why the media exhalts the "superiority" of day care without cause and/or data to back it's claims. Mr. Robertson also provides examples of more sinister tactics taken by the media and/or policy makers to wilfully misrepresent data to fit their agenda.
If you have your children in day care, or are thinking of placing your child in day care, the statistics and references in this book are hard to ignore. If you're a stay-at-home mother, this book will reaffirm your decision to stay at home.

As a former accountant, I prefer hard numbers to mere opinions. This was exactly the book I needed to read when I was debating whether to continue working or start staying at home with my children. I suggest it to my friends, family, even strangers because the information is so well presented. Some of us may not be able to replace the years we had our children in day-care, but we can move forward with the valuable information provided in this book. Sure, it requires some sacrifices when you depend on one income to raise a family, but isn't the outcome of your children more important than the size of your apartment/home, etc.

It's about time that parents start realizing that the "mommy wars" and the "daycare wars" are not about THEM, but the KIDS. Daycare is hurtful to children, and that's more important than any mother's "guilt" over the issue.

I spent some time after college "teaching" in a "preschool" which was nothing more than a hyped up babysitting service. One of our teacher's was even investigated for stomping on toddlers. It was NOT enriching for the children, and not worth anything except a last resort for parents who had no choice. But parents like that would never have been able to afford the tuition!

As to the woman who wants to know how she can afford to give up her income when her husband only makes $30k/year, my husband makes just that and I do not work. Our fifth child is due in about a month. We live in a modest home in the city (Houston), with two cars and cable internet. We are not on any kind of welfare, and our kids are well fed. It can be done. The question is -- are you willing?

As a graduate of Barnard College, I would consider myself a feminist. However, after reading this book, I must say that I am disgusted by the influence of the modern feminist agenda in the media, acadamia and politics, and the subsequent damage which this "feminist" influence causes to children.

New mothers who are trying to make a crucial decision about whether or not to stay home or to return to work are unwittingly given incomplete information. Isn't the women's movement about educating women and giving them the freedom to choose their own path? If so, shouldn't feminists be truth-seekers, educating themselves and other mothers about both the pros and cons of daycare? In Robertson's book, I found example after example of the opposite happening in our society.

Studies showing detrimental effects of daycare have been vilified, or simply refused publication. Childhood experts have taken their anti-daycare (or pro-mother-at-home for the child's early years) comments out of their books because of backlash from feminists. I could continue to give mortifying examples, but please read the book because Robertson does a very thorough job of spelling out for the reader just how bad daycare is for children and why we never hear anyone say so.

I recommend this book to any parent struggling over their employment-childcare decision. I would also recommend this to mothers raising their children full-time because it will support your choice to put your children first. Most of all, I recommend this book to policy makers who falsely believe that government funding of center-based childcare will solve problems. Please read this book.

For the people who have pen pals, this book is an eye opener. Tells them to be aware of the people you write to, especially when it comes to the one's that is constantly asking you to give, give, give, or the one's that need something all the time. Excellent read and a quick page turner.

The flow of this book kept me reading way past bedtime. I finished it in one day and was sad when it was over. Hope there's a part 2.

i don't know where the author got this story from, but all i can say was damn! page 1 was the start of no cleaning, no cooking, nothing. i loved this book so much. i gave all my friends this book to read. awesome book
keep it coming melvin.

This book was eye catching right from the beginning. I couldn't believe how cold Tyrell could be towards people just to get what he wants, but he paid for it all in the end by a gay man who had to get his revenge for being used. By the way it ended seems like there may be a part II, and if so i'll definitely check it out.

Usually the hero of a novel is a man or woman with exemplary qualities, someone the reader wants to root for. Not true with Double Dose. Tyrell Stants is a remarkable villain whose words, charm, body and determination get him sex and money from the pen pals he had while in prison and some others he meets on the outside. Now, out on parole, Tyrell is bad incarnate. He cons just about everyone and has no remorse, a truly amoral creature. I found myself shaking my head and smiling as to how he did it. The main characters are wonderfully drawn and the action is fast-paced and suspenseful. Hope there's a sequel.