Rowe Books

A celebration of fifty years of THE MORRIS RING 1934-1984 - a historical record in superb photographs and contemporary drawings of morris dancing and morris dancers.

30 pages, beautifully produced, over 80 black and white photographs of all aspects of traditional English dancing.

Memories of Cecil Sharp, Headington Quarry, Abingdon, "hankies, sticks 'n bells", Bampton, Eynsham, Abingdon, Mummers, Abbots Bromley Horndance, Padstow Oss, Clog dancers, Rapper and long-sword, and many others.

Comes available in white cover or the (seemingly) rarer green cover

I found it intreging and captivating. Couldn't put it down. Can't wait for the second book to come out next summer!! I would recommend it to all avid book readers!

Recently, I read Robert Mackes' "Story"; I thought it was absolutely fabulous. When I saw a short list of books suggested by Robert, I thought it would be worth buying them. After all, Robert himself acknowledges that there was a golden age when some authors were serious about what it takes to write a good story; Thorpe is one of them. So, I bought "Write that Play".

First of all, as you might have noticed, in comparisson with other books related to the subject, "Write that play" is a bit expensive. For that reason I think you should get a better idea of the book if you intend to buy it.

The edition I have of the book was published in 1939, that is probably the reason for its price. The date of publication also shows in the kind of examples and the language used through out the book. At moments, you might find the author is giving you an example of a famous play of the time, so you might wonder what the hell he is talking about.

Personally, I didn't really mind about the time of publication and the others details I just mentioned. I even found it rather interesting that some of the troubles in writing a play remain the same regardless of the time.

The book has 418 pages.

The content of the book is as follows:

I. The eagle screams, on drama over America.
II. What a play is
III. Finding dramatic material.
IV. Building the play.
V. Analysis of a great play.
VI. More about one-act plays.
VII. Characterization.
VIII. Dialogue.
IX. To the long play.
X. Analysis of a long play.
XI. Before and after the first draft: Scenarios and Revisions.
XII. Variety.
XIII. Historical conventions.
XIV. Functions and values.
A note on what to do with a play after it is written.
Chapter analysis.

In the first chapters Thorpe explains the trouble the craft was going trough at his time, the content and structure of a good play, and where to find material for a good story. Reading these chapters you can get a pretty good idea of how this author influenced Mackees' undrstanding of the craft.

Almost half of the book is play analysis.

The last part of the book is more about what sort of aspects you should take into consideration after finishing your first draft.

I found the content of the book quite interesting. There are some brilliant paragraphs which show that Thorpe knew very well what he was talking about. Also, altough the theory of writing a good story remains the same as that of Aristotle, I found the examples presented by Thorpe very usefull to understand the more subtles aspects of writing a good story.

If you are serious about screenwriting or playwriting and want to get a fine collection of books on that topic, then you might want to get this one. Though, be aware that if you have read many books on the topic, you will certainly not find this book a revolutionary one.

I don't regret buying it. After all, Mackee was right: Thorpe was one of the masters in the golden age of Hollywood, he had a solid understanding of the craft.

I have watched the movie Carrie in the past and couldn't wait to get my hands on the book. When it finally arrived I couldn't put the book down. I still want to get Stephen Kings to sign this book when he starts signing books again and get another Stephen Kings book since I will only get to send two books in my life time.

I've been one of Mr. King's "Constant Readers" for years. However, my reading of his tales began with Gerald's Game and, until this past year, I never read anything published before it.

I now realize how unfortunate that was! The past few months have allowed me to rediscover Stephen King in an entirely new light. I finished Carrie this evening from my Kindle. (I've been THRILLED about all the classic King works popping up reguarly, as of late, in Kindle format. KEEP THEM COMING AMAZON!) While it hasn't been my favorite of the older works (Hey I read It and The Stand during this team; tough acts to follow to say the least!) it was an utterly captivating read. The printed version is some 200 pages, and it did feel such. It's a must read, for... well... anyone.

Carrie

By Sai Hendrij


Stephen Kings Carrie is a book of the horror genre; it describes the isolation of teenage youth at an evanescent level. Basically often unseen by anyone who is not a teenager themselves or someone who can relate to that feeling. That's the main reason I recommend it to the teenage public more so than adults and much more so than the younger audiences.

To start, Carrie is a teenage girl who still has not reached puberty. Until now on her sixteenth year and with it has come a new type of power. The TK gene in her body is growing and is now taking affect and when her mother and the whole student body takes their cruel jokes a little too far Carrie will pull the strings in the biggest and worst, first, and last joke of her life

Overall review
All in all I thought that Carrie was an awesome book. Considering the fact that horror stories are the only ones I can really get into. I think Stephen King did a great job especially for such an old society he lived in. I feel that I should also commend on the news articles that switch time schemes from the past and present without being confusing about what was still happening. It was also a different kind of way of building suspense up to the pinnacle of the story.
This is a book you should definitely read.

Recommended for ages 15+
For alcohol sexual references and violence

The first novel from Stephen King shows the beginnings of what most people have come to love in his works, but the book has lost some of its impact as the years have gone by. Still a really good read and considerably short compared to most King novels. Great place to start if you have never read Stephen King before (if there is anyone out there who hasn't)

Good story idea, especially for a guy to write. I was suprised at how the writting style is different from stephen's other works, this is more like a story and has articles from witnesses and other people added in. Very easy to read, I read it in about a 6 hour car ride.

After being disappointed by the first Dark Tower book, "The Gunslinger", I was hopeful that the second installment would entertain me to a much higher tree. Jackpot!

Whereas "Gunslinger" had a little too much storytelling and a little too little explanation, "The Drawing of the Three" takes a bit of a step back to help explain exactly what type of world Roland is living in.

For a quick summary of the text (without spoiling anything!), Roland finds out that doors exist between his world and other worlds...doors that he can enter. By entering those doors (as prophesized by the Man in Black in "Gunslinger"), Roland draws some of the companions that will help him on his quest to find the Dark Tower itself. First, Roland meets Eddie Dean, a heroin junkie, who has trouble trusting this gunslinger from another world (imagine that!). Roland also becomes acquainted with Odetta Holmes/Detta Walker, a multiple-personality woman whom Roland must make whole again if she is to help him on his quest. Finally, Roland again comes face to face with another incarnation of the Man in Black, which he must destroy if one world will ever be stable again.

The real entertaining portion of these books, however, is seeing how each character interacts with each other. Roland is completely lost (yet remarkably savvy) in Eddie and Odetta/Detta's world, while they have a difficult time coming to grips over where he is from. Of course, this being Stephen King, there is plenty of action to keep the story moving along, and the reader begins to get a better understanding of what exactly is going on in this series (something completely lacking in "Gunslinger!).

So, if you read "The Gunslinger" and were disappointed or confused, PLEASE don't abandon your quest for the Dark Tower yet. Instead, give this book a try. I can almost guarantee you that you won't be disappointed!

This is a great book. It's one of my favorite series, because it is epic fantasy told by a master of supernatural horror whose strongest talent as a writer is his ability to depict realism, particularly realistic people and human interaction -- that's a good combination. Stephen King's books feel real, which is why his monsters and things are so very creepy, because they seem like they're actually happening -- and his other great talent is in picking monsters and evil events that, if they were to actually happen, it would be the worst thing imaginable: we'd have to confront some really nasty things about ourselves and our world. Take Storm of the Century, for instance. The worst thing about that isn't Legion (Though he's extremely cool in his badness -- another King talent is how well he understands cool), the worst thing about that is that, if it happened, that is exactly what people would do. The audience would make the same choice that the characters do. And we know it. Most of us would be paralyzed with fear by It, most of us would either join Flagg or fail to live up to the requirements of being a hero in The Stand. Most of us would be completely sucked in by Needful Things -- hell, if you take it as an analogy for Wal*Mart, most of us have been completely sucked in by Needful Things.

Anyway, this book might just be my favorite in the series, though I need to do my second reading of the last three books, all of which I've only read once. I know I think Eddie's a good character, and I really love Roland in this one; I absolutely can't stand Detta, which is as it should be. I realized this reading that I really don't care for Odetta, either; she's way too prissy and privileged, way too soft. People should have that softness, but it shouldn't be all they have; they should have the strength, too. Like the fact that she had to stay in jail after their civil rights protest until she peed herself; she should have either peed on the floor, just to irritate the guards, or she should have recognized it as something totally beyond her control and been angered, not shamed. Detta would have peed on the guard, of course.

The lobstrosities are an incredible monster, and Jack Mort is a great bad guy; the chapter where Roland travels into Mort's mind is one of my all-time favorites. This is a great action book with some wonderful characterization, and I loved it. Again.

I read this directly after The Gunslinger. This book was very imaginative and actually not what I was expecting but I did really enjoy it. I kept wanting more because I couldn't predict what was going to happen next, which was really refreshing since that hasn't happened to me in a while. A lot of this book is set up for character development and sort of drawn out in places. The new characters are very interesting and should be fun to watch progress through the series. I was caught off guard, but also liked the way Roland actually draws the other players into the quest. Very different which is what I thought made it enjoyable.Good action with some cool creatures. The gunfights are very fun to read and King really sets a great tone for the next coming books.

The Drawing of the Three is the second novel in Stephen King's Dark Tower series. It picks up right where The Gunslinger ended, and chronicles Roland's efforts to "draw" three people from Earth, from various times in the twentieth century: a drug addict, a legless schizophrenic, and a serial killer. The reader is not told nor do any of the characters know why exactly any of this is taking place.

King is back to his usual style here: well-developed characters, a focus on minute details of personality, and his distinctive foul-mouthed dialogue, all of which make for engaging reading. The Drawing of the Three has plenty of action, including a couple of very well-done gun fights.

The Drawing of the Three is primarily setup for following volumes. There are some new characters, and we spend most of the book getting to know them, and we don't get the background on Roland that The Gunslinger had (this is an observation, not a criticism). And in the end, Roland isn't too far from where he started. Ultimately, this is an entertaining, necessary part of the series.

Dad-a-Cham? Did-a-Chick?

There goes King's imagination again, thinking up the most bizarre events known to the literary world. What an awesome, amazing thought process this guy has, totally outer limits!

Roland wakes up on the beach he found in the first book, The Gunslinger. Some very wierd lobster-like creatures come tumbling out of the surf, clacking to each other in some bizarre language known only to them. Roland is sick, exhausted and doesn't really pay them enough respect. He pays the price for it, and then has to walk the length of the beach to continue his pursuit of his goal. What he finds there can only come from a mind like King's.

I was blown away by the description of Roland drawing his three companions to him. They would become integral components in his search for the Dark Tower, especially Eddie Dean. Dean would save their bacon in the next book, but back to the tale at hand.

When I write, or when I talk to students about writing, the first thing I always talk about is writing freely, with abandon. King is a master of this talent, and it shows in this book. Nothing is held back as Roland and his band of reluctant compatriots venture forward in search of the tower. It's a great read, and it leaves you hungry for more books.

It certainly did with me, and I waited impatiently for more novels. Alas, they came at greater intervals, and I eventually lost interest in the series. I recommend it highly, though.

Kevin Gerard
Conor and the Crossworlds: Breaking the Barrier
Conor and the Crossworlds, Book Two: Peril in the Corridors

This book is highly Recommended! Very Inspiring!

It reveals to the reader the treasure that is within, if you would but search a little deeper instead of looking else where or to others. It causes you to really think and tap into the hidden gifts and potential that is on the inside of oneself. 5 KUDOS!!!

Lanesa Stubbs

Timeless wisdom. Proves once again the principles of success do not need to be re-invented. Everything needed to be successful in life has already been written, and is available to all of us! Excellent

First given as a lecture at the beginning of the 1900's, the inspirational thoughts contained in "Acres of Diamonds" are still as relevant today as ever.




Consider how the following passage plays into today's headlines, "I hear sometimes of men that get millions of dollars dishonestly.





But, they are so rare a thing, in fact, that the newspapers talk about them all the time as a matter of news until you get the idea that all the other rich men got rich dishonestly." The Reverend Conwell of the Baptist Temple Church in Philadelphia was so successful in attracting people to his "Acres of Diamonds" lectures that he made enough money to found Temple University.





How Religion and Capitalism work together and how money could be made right in one's backyard if a person knew of a need and did something to meet that need were the tenets of Conwell's lectures. Conwell's inspirational examples of success are worth a look.





Spend a lunch hour, a commute in or back from work or another quiet break in the day to read Conwell's stories of those who missed finding diamonds and gold in their own backyards because they were too busy focusing on finding their fortune in faraway lands. Since the book is under 100 pages, even if you don't find your eyes have been opened a little wider, at least you haven't wasted much time giving the stories a try.

Poor copy of a great text. Author's name is misspelled on the cover. How could that happen? Text looks like a computer copy with spacing problems. Choose a different edition or publisher.

At 64 pages from cover-to-cover, "Acres of Diamonds" is probably the shortest book I've read in a long time. Written by Baptist minister and founder of Temple University, Russell H. Conwell, this book originated as one of his sermons, which was so popular that it was published as a book.

"Acres of Diamonds" is based on a parable told to Conwell by an Arab guide during a trip to the Middle East. The parable tells the story of a man who sells his farm to search the world for diamonds. The man dies in poverty and wretchedness far from his home, not knowing that his farm sat on the richest diamond mine in the world.

It is easy to think that great things are only accomplished by other people in faraway places. Conwell argues that we can all accomplish great things wherever we are. He gives many examples of regular people who accomplished great things. After all, he says, even a great man like Abraham Lincoln was just "Abe" to his neighbors.

I believe this book was first published in the early 1900s, so the writing style is kind of old-fashioned and Conwell refers to people and products that were prominent during his time, but have less meaning to people today. There are no chapters or other structure to the book (of course it's only 64 pages long).

Despite these minor complaints, the book has a great message. You can accomplish great things where you are right now. You don't have to move to New York, Los Angeles, or Paris. Whether you're in Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Portland or Shreveport, there are "acres of diamonds" below your feet.

----------------------------------------
Michael Mihalik is the author of Debt is Slavery: and 9 Other Things I Wish My Dad Had Taught Me About Money. Learn how to gain control of your finances, pay off your debt, and create financial security!

My class of 3rd graders thoroughly enjoyed this book. It fit right in with the teaching of the writing trait "conventions."

This was a great book. It really shows how important punctuation is when writing. Punctuation takes a break from its work in a classroom and soon the students find that their world is a little more crazy without the marks to make it mind. The story line was well thought out and the list at the end of the book is a great teaching tool. The illustrations are wonderful. I also enjoyed the personality traits given to the individual marks of punctuation.

Good book to emphasize that punctuation is important. It didn't easily lend itself to punctuation activities for the classroom, which is what I was hoping for...

I like to use literature whenever I can to teach lessons. This book is a fun way to show the importance of punctuation. It is a cute book but not exactly what I expected. I thought the main focus would be what would happen if punctuation took a vacation and have more examples of what confusion it could start. Instead it was based on a class borrowing the punctuation from the class next door...

Pictures great! Fun idea.

I must come to the aid of poor Sheila who has been unfairly attacked for having an unpopular opinion (and for her spelling--now, that's just rude!).

I bought this book based on the many positive reviews and actually assumed that the perceived racism was probably blown out of proportion. But, as a middle school teacher, when I got to the page where Mr. Rongo appeared, I was a bit taken aback. Yes, Mr. Rongo is African-American while Mr. Wright is Caucasion, and yes he is called Mr. RONGo. That is probably bad enough, but his outfit is also somewhat clownish, and the poor guy really seems to have no control over his class (or at least over his punctuation). I'm white, and it bothered me. I actually checked the copyright date and thought there was some mistake!

No, the color of the two teachers' skin is not the focus of this book. But, if I read it to my sixth-graders, I would feel compelled to discuss this issue with them. I certainly don't want to propagate a stereotype, especially in a school system that is already quite "diversity challenged."

That said, I enjoyed the book, especially the postcards from the punctuation marks. It could be fun to have the kids figure out which ones sent which postcards. Of course, we would have to take time out to give colons some respect. Timekeepers? Honestly! If I were a colon, I'd be insulted.

I'm just finished reading the Railway Children to my 10-year-old, and it is such a great read!

I loved it as a child, and this is my second time reading it aloud. I can't recommend it enough.

It's just a nice story. Set at the turn of the century, three children are forced to leave their comfortable life in London and go live in a smaller house near a railway when their father is mysteriously taken away from them. They don't know why; we don't find out until the end of the book. In the meantime, their mother is very brave, earning money by writing, and they try not to bother her by getting to know the railway and getting involved in everybody's lives all around them.

The children are very sweet, and there's a thread of definite morality throughout the book.

Don't miss it with your kids!

If you liked Railway Children, you may also want to try Little Women (Unabridged Classics) or Island of the Blue Dolphins. My children loved those ones as well!

This is not simply a children's book. It is an extremely touching story of three children whose father is suddenly taken away from them and how they cope with the changed circumstances, how they adjust to "play at being poor" as their mother says. It is a book that is bound to enthrall you.

Utterly delightful. Loved it, ate it up. Need more Nesbit, soon as poss.

Three kids are taken to live in the English countryside when their father, well, disappears. While their mother suffers silently, and sells short fiction to help pay the bills (those were the days!), the children make a fantasy land out of their little village, especially the local railroad depot with all its fascinations. Imagine being fascinated with the steam train when it was cutting edge technology, not nostalgia! Communicating with the passengers via signs, befriending engineers, porters and station masters, even preventing a nasty rail accident, the kids end up both having fun and relieving the hardships of poor, careworn mother.

Beautiful book both remembers what its like to be a child and peeks into a childhood none of us ever knew. If you love the world of late Victorian/Edwardian Britain, read it. If you love the early parts of the Narnia books, before the kids enter the wardrobe, read it. It's precious.

I think it is kind of cool how the kids think of how to stop someone from wrecking a train. Also how they got someone un-fainted from when they were fainted. It was also pretty funny how their mother made a mistake when one of the kids said they revived a hound with a red shirt, but it was really a person.

I didn't give it 5 stars because there isn't very much action. But I still liked it a lot.

The Railway Children was originally published in 1906. It's different from many of Edith Nesbit's books, in that it doesn't feature any magic. The Railway Children is the story of three children, Roberta, Peter, and Phyllis. At the start of the story, the children live with their loving parents in a nice, modern house in London. Their lives change drastically, however, when their Father is called away unexpectedly and mysteriously. Their Mother takes them to live in an older house in the country, with only a single part-time servant, where they quickly realize that they are now poor. Mother spends all her time writing stories and poems, to submit them for publication, instead of playing games with them and teaching them, as she had done previously. The children are left largely to their own devices, with no lessons to distract them.

The house that they live in, Three Chimney's, is located near to a railway line and a small railway station. The railway quickly becomes a source of friends. The Stationmaster and the Porter (most especially the Porter, Perks) become major figures in the children's lives, as does a friendly "Old Gentleman" who waves to them every morning from the 9:15 train.

And the adventures begin. Through bravery and ingenuity (and through the coincidence of always being in the right place at the right time), the children avert not one, not two, but three separate disasters. They also get into trouble through their innocent attempts to help their Mother, and through their own sibling rivalries, and eventually help a Russian stranger newly escaped to England. Through it all, they miss their Father, and wonder what's happened to him, and why their Mother is so sad.

The constant adventures in this book make it a lot of fun. It does feel a little bit dated in places. There's a scene in which the local doctor tells Peter to be kinder to his sisters, for example, because they are "so much softer and weaker" than he is. But overall, I think that Edith Nesbit did a wonderful job of making the girls strong characters, too.

This book has lots of messages about bravery and right and wrong, and what makes up charity vs. friendship. And how to be good without being priggish. Some modern-day children might find it a little bit preachy in this area, though it is generally lightened with humor. But hopefully the adventures, and the realistic imperfections of the children, will win new readers over anyway. I know that I love this book (despite having a slight problem with the number of coincidences) and that the end brings tears to my eyes. If you haven't read it, The Railway Children is well worth checking out.

This review was originally published on my blog, Jen Robinson's Book Page, on April 30, 2006.

Tempus Fugit is a delightful book in conception and partly in execution, but is vastly annoying in its manifold errors. It could have been a four-star book if the author had hired a good proofreader to examine the manuscript, and a five-star one with some attention to historical detail.

The personalities of the founders were enjoyable, but not completely accurate. I doubt that Washington would engage in the easy first-name camaraderie and repartee we see in the book. I believe that it was Alexander Hamilton in real life who once called him "George" and was made to know that this informal address was out of line. Speaking of Hamilton, he accused Jefferson of breeding mulatto children, selling them on the auction block, and making a profit of his own debauchery. Indeed Jefferson was not "enlightened" regarding slavery and equality of whites and blacks, and yet, I have never found that he used the "N-word" to the exclusion of all others in referring to the Negro race. Likewise, Franklin is known to have done more than admire the feminine figure, and yet his every waking thought was not focused upon sexual conquest, as we see in Tempus Fugit.

I jotted down dozens of historical and grammatical errors as I read the book, and I allowed many errors to pass unjotted, simply because I grew weary of reaching for my pencil. On page 183 there was even an error in our national anthem, for heaven's sake!

I hasten to say that Rowe engaged in an enormous amount of historical research and did do many things right in casting the founders' interpretation of modern marvels into their historical perspective. Yet he made many errors. Washington refers to his wife as "Martha," yet no one ever called her by that name. From an infant she was known as "Patsy." All her family and friends called her "Patsy." In later life some called her "Mrs. Washington" or "Lady Washington," but never "Martha." Rowe thinks that three presidents were impeached, when only two were. He suggests that Christians have changed the Bible, when the Qumran scrolls and other ancient documents prove that the Bible has been accurately transmitted. Rowe thinks that Jefferson founded the Republican Party, when in fact history credits him with founding the Democratic Party. He thinks that FDR was elected to three terms, not four. He thinks Washington actually had wooden false teeth.

There are many linguistic anachronisms also. "Hopefully" is used adverbially as Jefferson would not have used it. Washington uses "contact" as a verb, a usage not invented until early in the 20th century and still not universally accepted. I do not believe that 18th century men referred to all women as "wenches" nor to all paper as "parchment." "Mug" was not used in the sense of attacking to rob until 1865 or thereabouts.

Possibly the most distressing errors are the grammatical ones. These fall into two categories, those made by the founders and those made by the narrator. We know that Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin were skilled writers and speakers who would not have made innumerable grammatical errors. Nowadays many people approve the use of split infinitives. Rowe is one of them. However, as Rowe portrays the founders, they can hardly open their mouths without splitting infinitives, something they would never have done in real life. Each time I hear or read a split infinitive it jars on me. Normally when I read a book I can say that it contained three split infinitives, or whatever. Tempus Fugit uses them so wantonly and profusely that I soon lost count. When Rowe and the founders used multiple split infinitives on one page, my mind reeled. Even worse is the way the founders use the nominative case again and again when they should have used the objective. Franklin says "a historian," when he actually would have said "an historian." Washington says "between" when he means "among." Something tells me that the founders did not use contractions as copiously in real life as they do in this book.

I could go on and on and on, but you get the idea. Rowe plans a sequel. I beg and plead with him that he hires a proofreader and historian to examine his manuscript. Even with the innumerable errors, I found the book lively and entertaining. I easily got three stars worth of enjoyment from it, while at the same time lamenting HOW GOOD IT COULD HAVE BEEN.

A great read, held me from start to finish. A little hard to swallow the dialog, but still it's believeable considering the time which the founders came from. Can't wait for the next in the series.

...because not only does "time fly" for its protagonists, it also flies for the reader who turns its pages.

The premise on which Tempus Fugit begins is that three of our Founding Fathers--George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin--are duplicated out of time by some unknown agency, a year or two before their respective deaths, and deposited together in the modern-day United States at the Mount Rushmore monument with $100,000 in seed money. The story follows their adventures as they learn to cope with and try to blend into this brave new world and find answers to the primary question on their minds: what sort of nation has their fledgling Republic grown up to be? They also wonder about the identity of the strange agency that brought them to this new time, and what its purpose might have been, though answers to that question are less forthcoming.

Tempus Fugit is quite well-written, structurally and dramatically. The prose is neither amateurish nor impenetrable. Even the 18th-century-idiomatic dialogue of the Founding Fathers is surprisingly readable; where context does not suffice to illuminate meaning, the author provides convenient footnotes to explain obsolescent usages or historical contexts. In fact, there is so much historical information that the book sometimes seems like 2/3 novel and 1/3 political history textbook. However, it manages to present the history very naturalistically, only resorting to footnotes when character dialogue does not cover it completely.

Reading the book, one has the sense that Rowe put a great deal of research into its writing, learning our Founding Fathers inside and out. He does not pull any punches, either; the threesome are presented as human beings with feet of clay, rather than the idols whose faces we carve into mountains and put on currency. Washington is a man of more action than thought, who can act impetuously and without mercy when necessary. Franklin is a genius, but a very lecherous and bawdy one who is prone to earthy humor and whose occasionally scathing wit can cause even his best friends to cringe. And Jefferson is a childish, hypocritical racist who can't change his thinking no matter how hard he tries--and his attitudes get both him and the others into trouble more than once. The trio of Founding Fathers do not get along perfectly; they sometimes bicker over group decisions, and an old grievance causes tension between Washington and Jefferson despite Jefferson's attempts at reconciliation.

It should be noted that the book doesn't pull punches where obscenity is concerned, either. The F-word is used from time to time, as well as a certain N-word that was in common usage in a neutral sense in the Founders' day but has since come to be considered a racial epithet. (Coming to terms with this is one of the adjustments the Founders have to make in getting accustomed to the present-day.) There is also some graphically-described violence, as the threesome are accosted by a pair of thugs who discover the hard way that it's not wise to mug even a 65-year-old George Washington. And at times the book's humor becomes a touch earthy, especially on the part of Franklin.

But despite these unpulled punches, the book is great fun. The Founding Fathers come across as real people, with their little foibles and idiosyncrasies. It's amusing to watch them make guesses based on incomplete information and get some things wrong, but a lot of things remarkably right. Rowe doesn't present them as some kind of backwoods bumpkins; he reminds us that Franklin and Jefferson were among the brightest intellects of their time, classically educated and keen thinkers--and if Washington wasn't as brilliant, he was at least blessed with abundant common sense. Placed into this strange new situation, their reactions are clear-minded and rational as they set out to learn as much as they possibly can. And some of the situations they get into along the way are absolutely hilarious--for example, the Founding Fathers' reactions to daytime television are not to be missed.

If the narrative has any serious flaws, they are only that from time to time incidental characters spout off dialogue that sounds incredibly artificial, almost like they were giving a prepared speech. People don't talk like that in real life, but it is necessary that the points they make be overheard by the Founders so that they can discuss what people think of them, or of events that happened after them. Also, the book is obviously the first in a series, so it does not so much end as come to a stopping point.

All in all, Tempus Fugit is a great work of historical speculative fiction, and much the sort of thing I would have expected to come out of a political SF house like Baen, rather than being self-published. I'll be looking forward to the sequel, which is apparently due sometime in spring, 2007.

I couldn't put this book down and it lingered in my mind for weeks after reading it.

It's clear from the details in Rowe's elegant prose that he conducted extensive research. And he didn't shirk from writing sometimes less-than-flattering portraits of these iconic men based on what he learned about them. The book is all the better for this "warts and all" approach. In the glossy, Disney-fied culture that is America today, revisionist history that gives us a more realistic view of our roots is welcome -- especially when it's as well written as this.

I've always been facinated with historical fiction, more so than the encyclopedic versions. Reading these types of novels spurs me to research and learn about the people and their lives where I wouldn't otherwise.

I admit that the portrayal of Jefferson is unnerving, but I think the author was showing his own bravery on this point. Instead of massaging Jefferson into a Disneyesque ex-President, simply get into his character with what you know of him from your research and write him as you think he was. I think the author has succeeded in that I can view Jefferson in a roundabout fashion, not really adhering exactly to the manner in which he is depicted. But having shown his intellect, his racist, and "spoiled child" attitudes, it gives the reader a sense of who the man probably was.

I have always thought a motion picture of George Washington would be like Superman in real life. His physical nature seems so daunting that I can't imagine such a movie, if done well, being less than an Acadamy award sweep. Washington was an extraordinary human and to see him come to life in this book was wonderful.

The book portrays Franklin as a genius beyond compare and that is as it should be. Of course I didn't know he was a rogue and I'll happily look for more history of the man. I think I like him quite a bit more than I ever gave thought and want to research him as much as I can.

The book is wonderful, if you like this sort of thing. I think it's easy to take advantage of history when writing fiction, but Rowe seems to have done an enormous amount of research to back his writing. And the writing itself is consistent and well done. I never once felt uncomfortable with the prose. The story is light at times and dark at others, but overall, I loved it...and hope Rowe writes a sequel to compare.

This poor little elephant gets spanked by each parent, and all relatives, even different species for asking questions. I haven't had to spank my children yet and I certainly wouldn't do it so often, especially not for questioning things.

Geoffry Patterson's beautifully illustrations combine with the easy to read rhythm of this Rudyard Kippling tale. A captivating book. A treasure.

I used to read this story to my son, now 29; and it was always a favorite of his and of mine. I just bought this copy to read to his 3-year-old daughter, who also loves it. I got the "again!" plea from her, which is always a good sign. This is a fun story to read out loud.

Right after "The Cat who Walked by Himself" This has always been my favorite "Just So Story." It is good to see it in an individual book, as it is a little unwieldy as part of a group. This is the story of a curious elephant and how the elephant go its trunk. I can not say much more as the reader needs to experience the story as it unfolds. The pictures add a dimension and do not distract from the words.

Rudyard Kipling is a master at this telling. "In the High and Far-Off Times the Elephant, O Best Beloved, had no trunk."

Just So Stories (Books of Wonder)

One of the most original tales in the English language, "The Elephant's Child" by Rudyard Kipling is published again, this time with pictures by Lorinda Bryan Cauley. The book has been around since 1983, and still holds its own in style.

From time to time, during visits to the zoo, have you wondered why an animal has a certain feature? Giraffes have long necks. Why? Monkeys have feet that are a lot like hands. Why? And, elephants have extraordinarily long noses. What good is that?

Kipling knew why and took time to tell us. With the refrain explaining where it all happened, by "the banks of the great-green, greasy Limpopo River, all set about with fever-trees," Kipling shows us what fun alliteration can be.

While in pursuit of an array of questions, especially what crocodiles eat, a young elephant -- an Elephant's Child, goes on a journey to the Limpopo to find out. His quick to spank him relatives don't encourage him to go so much as force him to, fully geared with little red bananas.

Loaded with naivete and his next meal, he heads out. He meets a bi-colored-python-rock-snake and the crocodile who not-so-politely gives him the answer, and the Elephant's Child returns to explain on his own terms what he learned.

A generous mix of black and white, and color pen and ink drawings frame the story. As imaginative as Kipling's words, Cauley's pictures will tease readers to wonder about the animals and exotic jungle and river.

Versions of "The Elephant's Child" abound, as the original tale is part of public domain. Be sure to get an unedited, uncorrected version, as modern editors lack the brilliance Kipling was blessed with.

I fully recommend "The Elephant's Child" by Rudyard Kipling, and this version is worthy of the story and your shelf.

Anthony Trendl
editor, HungarianBookstore.com