Sherman Books

Whether you will like Mr. Foster's work or not depends on the style of historical writing you enjoy. If you like writing in the style of Stephen Sears you will enjoy this book. If you like writing in the style of Joseph Marsh you probably will not. It all hinges on how much opinion you are willing to tolerate in and the degree of historicity you demand out of works of history.

The book presents a little known campaign and shows the importance of western campaign experience in developing the "Hard War" doctrine that destroyed the Southern will to fight. The book captured my interest but was not the easiest book to read consisting of a long narrative of a campaign that had little action other than the destruction of Southern property. Units were mentioned and their movements described but it would have been nice to have an order of battle to know who served in which unit. Fortunately the there were a lot of maps. The narrative would have been very hard to follow or understand without them. The maps served to show the roads and towns mentioned, but little information on troop movements were shown, only the location of Sherman's main force. A good account of an under appreciated campaign that was overshadowed by events before and after to the east and west. I would recommend this book to serious students of the western campaign or Sherman's generalship. The average reader would probably find it too boring to hold their interest.

Sherman's Mississippi Campaign by Buck T. Foster, 2006, 215 pages, maps.

Overall opinion: Very good work. Lots of referenced data, with a great collection of the details of Sherman's winter march through Mississippi. The names and places of what Sherman's army destroyed during this campaign is the most I've seen in any work. Detailed stories of what the Union soldiers saw and what they did is a very refreshing plus to this book's coverage. The style keeps you on the edge of your seat as you follow Sherman's men march deeper and deeper into Confederate held territory not knowing where his lost cavalry column was or what happened to it (even when I knew the answer).

Negitive Criticism: The writer is irritatingly repetative in his opinions. I disagree with some of his assertions about General Sherman character. Sherman did not control his men and many civilians suffered due to his inability to do so. The act of creating orders with threats of harsh punishment -not to harm private property- occured mainly after the destruction, not before. The months after this raid the Union forces continued to burn and destroy private property in Mississippi. Sherman did not change Mississippi back into a Unionist state by this tactic of 'Hard War'. The reports of cavalry columns that traveled through this same area from April-March 1865 showed a open hostility towards the Union troops, more so than earlier reports through this same region.

Corrections: The soldier identified as member of 16th Mississippi was from the 43rd Mississippi (a typo).

The Civil War was more than Vicksburg, Gettysburg, Atlanta and the Overland Campaign. The war was a number of smaller campaigns, none of which should be dismissed as unimportant. Each of these campaigns contributed something to the development of the war and can tell us something about the history of the war. This campaign is an important step in the evolution of Sherman's thinking on how to fight the war and how to support his army in the field.

The idea that became the March to the Sea was not an overnight development but started in 1861 and progressed with the war. Buck Foster spends considerable time on the development of the "hard war", the reasons for the change and how each step logically caused the next step in the process. The second major development was the understanding that an army could "live off the land". By dropping lines of supply and communication, an army becomes all teeth with no tail to attack. The enemy would look for these lines trying to slow or stop the advancing army. Again, the author gives us a good review of this critical development, starting with Grant's 1862 Vicksburg Campaign.

In early 1863, Sherman was determined to advance from Vicksburg into Mississippi and attack the CSA infrastructure. Meridan, with a complex of factories, railroad intersections and supply depots became his objective. Sherman would carry only what could not be secured from the farms and towns on his line of march, the army would destroy the infrastructure as they moved. This is not a campaign to secure territory but to prove how powerless the CSA is.

Polk in charge of the defense of Mississippi and Alabama, is unable to determine Sherman's objective, gives contradictory orders and causes a number of other problems. S.D. Lee and Nathan Bedford Forrest have a much better idea of the situation but are hampered by Polk's indecision and lack of resources. Sherman is hampered with leadership problems too. These problems result in preventing him from achieving his secondary objectives.

Most of all, this book highlights the importance of leadership and the cost of not having good leaders in critical positions. Additionally, this book shows how resource poor the South was by 1863. Men and materials are not available to meet the challenges. Lack of resources and poor Southern leadership teach Sherman that what becomes the March to the Sea is possible. This is an easy to read book with enough maps to keep up with the campaign. It covers a little known area of the war while providing a good history of the development of Hard War.

All througout the trilogy the sorry tale of the people who eventually became the Remans and the Watraii was well chronicled. It led me to believe that eventually...there would be great resolution to their plight and sufferrings at the end. Unfortunately, while most of the trilogy and this last book in particular was pretty good...I am really let down by such a weak ending. Unless they are planning more sequels...the ending is really quite weak.

Firstly...we never find out how the Romulans eventually subdued or controlled the mutants on Remus that eventually became the modern-day Remans...intitially it seems they had lots of trouble even finding the hidden lairs of these telepathically advanced mutants.

Secondly...I don't like how Spock portrayed the Watraii and the Romulans as somehow both equally right and equally wrong during his speech to the Federation Council. It sounds too much like a convenient political solution instead of actual recognition of the sorry plight of the Watraii because of the callous betrayal of their fellow exiles from Vulcan.

Thirdly...the last chapter tells us...rather vaguely and with few details...that the Remans revolted and somehow this caused a war between the Federation, the Klingons, and the Romulans...and Remus ending as a Klingon protectorate. What's missing in all this is what of the Watraii? Did they join the war? Aid the Federation in helping the Remans? The Watraii after all have an ancient vow to help free their former fellow slaves on Remus when they were "strong enough". But we are not told what the Watraii did during this Reman Revolt. Nor are we told what the current fate of the Watraii are. All we know is a Vulcan healer was sent to their homeworld...and after that...we don't know what else becomes of them, or their claim to Romulus.

And very confusingly...Charvanek vows to aid Spock in going to Remus and doing what she can to "right" Romulus' ancient wrong (after the Reman Revolt / War is over). But she gives conflicting thoughts on the Watraii. It says she is convinced of the truth of their claims based on the information from the Coronet about Sarissa and the people who left Remus with her. Yet at the very last page, Charvanek thoughts seem to indicate she wanted "more proof" regarding the Watraii's grievances and their claims. And that if she got this so-called proof she will do her best to aid them, as she is going to aid the Remans, including taking the throne of Romulus itself (if she could) as honor would demand.

This is one of the most confusing endings I have ever read. It provides no clear resolution to the plight of the Watraii, the people and decendants of the betrayed family of Vulcan exiles who we got to know so well during this entire trilogy. I hope there will be a sequel that eventually addresses what this book does not.

I enjoyed all three books of the "Vulcan's Soul" trilogy, although I found the first book a little slow. The last book, "Epiphany," was the best of the three. I highly recommend this collection for anyone who wants to understand how the Romulan branch of the Vulcan evolutionary tree ended up on Romulus.

This book was a great read & finished giving the background to the Vulcan/Romulan split & the Romulus/Regus split plus the explanation of the Watraii origin. I enjoyed it immensely but I love all things Vulcan!

I have probably read over 100 Star Trek books over the past 15 years. This book is by far the worst one I have ever read. It jumps all over the place randomly, never connecting the 3 stories going on together. I cannot tell you how much I hate this book. DON't DON'T DON'T waste your money on this one. I will never buy another book written by these two authors.

A well-assembled, passionate, generalist overview of venomous snakes. But the pictures! Over 200 pages of glossy photographs that convey a ton of information and a lot of drama.

I bought this book to add to my reptile library and to use a reference. Before my trip to the jungles of Costa Rica, I thought I'd read up on some of the more onery snakes that I might encounter, such as the bushmaster and fer-de-lance. Not only were there no pictures or information on the bushmaster, it wasn't even listed in the index! As for the fer-de-lance, there was a single picture but no information. I have since read the entire book, and have found it to be extremely lacking in useful species-specific information. The chapter titled "A Few Interesting Species" is very short (about 30 pages), not to mention it excludes some fairly important species! For the beginning enthusiast who just wants a general overview, this would be a good place to start, but don't let your education stop here! The book's only redeeming qualities for me were some nice glossy photos and the anecdotes written by herpetologists with snake bite or near miss experiences.

This was a good introductory book but did not go into enough detail for my taste.I did like the anecdotes and the pictures were great.

This book provides a basic general overview that is good, but is geared towards the inexperienced snake enthusiast and does not get into depth on any subject. Ironically, the subject that is covered in most depth is mouse breeding. That space could have given room to more thorough species descriptions covering most genera. Also, too many photos that have been seen elsewhere in TFH Books.

EVERYTHING that Archimedes is supposed to have "discovered" already existed in Africa, thousands of years before "WHITE" Greeks existed. The Ancient Egyptians "THE MASTER BUILDERS" had already discovered "ALL" of the Arts & Sciences. The Greeks & Romans were students of the Ancient Black Egyptians, before they destroyed the Egyptian Civilization by raping the women, killing the Priests, forbidding the speaking of the language & burning the Library of Alexandria. Ask yourself this question, if the Greeks were such Great Mathematicians why did they go all the way to Africa to set up this Library, and where are their Pyramids? Huh?

Africa & Africans were the fountainhead of knowledge, at a time when the Whites had recently emerged from the Caves of & Hillsides of Europe, where they were walking on all fours and eating their meat raw, not having the knowledge of fire. Go back and read the ancient historical accounts by Herodotus, where he describes not only the Scientific Wonders of the Ancient Egyptians, but also describes their race as being of "Burnt Skin & Woolly Hair, & that they describe themselves as "THE" Most Ancient of Peoples.

WHY ARE THERE NO ANCIENT RUINS IN WHITE CIVILIZATIONS BUILT BY WHITE PEOPLES? (Stonehenge and other monuments in Europe were built by Blacks who peopled what is called Europe millions of years before the first Whites arrived. Google "Grimaldi Negro", the first inhabitants of Europe. Also see "The Making of the White Man" by Paul Guthrie & "Black Spark, White Fire".

THIS IS THE SAME TYPE OF RACIST LOGIC THAT POSITS THAT CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS DISCOVERED AMERICA, WHEN EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT BOTH INDIANS & BLACKS WERE HERE FIRST, BUILDING PYRAMID CIVILIZATIONS.

For further edification read: "The African Origin of Civilization" by Cheik Anta Diop (Renowned Senegalese Physicist & Linguist), "Stolen Legacy" by George M. James (Greek Scholar) & "Black Athena" by Martin Bernal (which shows that Early Greece was peopled by two successive waves of African colonization who laid the foundation of both Minoan & Greek Civilization. Take a close look at the Minoans, they are of African stock, as were the early Greeks prior to the invasions of the Barbaric White Dorians, who brought no Civilizing influence to Greece.

Racist White historical analysis cannot replace cold hard facts such as the Pyramid Civilizations appearing only in Black Civilizations such as Egypt, Mexico etc. The Pyramid culture in the Americas begins with the Thick Lipped, Broad Nosed, Wooly Haired Olmec Civilization, "THE MOTHER CIVILIZATION" of the Americas.

FURTHERMORE, WHOSE TO SAY THAT ARCHIMEDES WAS WHITE, AS GREEK CIVILIZATION AT THAT TIME, HAD BLACKS AS WELL AS WHITES.

Truth crushed to Earth will Rise Again!!!

The thought of a man running naked through the streets shouting with joy over a physical and mathematical discovery is one to warm the hearts of all who value knowledge. When Archimedes experienced this flash of joy, little did he know that his actions would become the genesis of a legend that would last for thousands of years. However, he should be remembered for so much more than that and several of his significant mathematical contributions are explored in this book.
It is really amazing to realize how close he was to inventing calculus 22 centuries ago, which was 18 before Newton and Leibniz. With notation that was minimally expressive, he was able to solve problems using a technique that demonstrates at least a rudimentary understanding of the concept of a limit. While many different problems can be solved using calculus, it only takes one breakthrough solution to demonstrate how it can be applied to so many of the others. It can be plausibly argued that algebraic and decimal notations would have been the tools that would have allowed him to overcome those last barriers. One can only speculate on how that would have changed history.
The book is not exhaustive and no attempt is made to make it that. Ten of his most significant discoveries are presented and the solutions are those of Archimedes, although modern notation is used. While the proofs are generally easy to follow, one is often left in awe as to how he thought of how to approach some of these solutions. The explanations are succinct, yet thorough, which is the signature of a solid storyteller.
Given the answers to the question posed in the title of this book, one can pose another that logically follows. Was Archimedes the greatest mind of all time? If the legends are correct, then the answer is probably yes. However, even if the unconfirmed stories are false, the mathematical and mechanical discoveries should make him a legend for more than one short stint of becoming a 'natural man.'

Published in Journal of Recreational Mathematics, reprinted with permission.

The author's aim is to make what he views "as Archimedes' most mathematically significant discoveries accessible to the busy people of the mathematical community." In this he succeeds admirably. The book is not only understandable by anyone who "recognizes the equation of a parabola," but is also very well written in a style that brings out the beauty of the mathematical ideas discussed, as well as the power of Archimesdes' creativity. As the author points out, the book treats most of Archimedes' mathematical discoveries. The presentation cleverly integrates Archimedes' own writing with the author's modern explanation of the ancient discoveries. Frequently, before a main idea is introduced, a quotation from Archimedes' own writing is presented in which the master reveals his thinking about what he had accomplished in that particular topic.

In addition to providing the scientific community with a detailed account of Archimedes' main mathematical discoveries and an insight into the ancient master's thinking, this book, I believe, can be useful in the classroom in a variety of ways. The most obvious use, of course, would be in designating it as a textbook or a reference in courses on the history of calculus or, more generally, on the history of mathematics. But it would also make an excellent textbook for a course on axiomatic mathematics: the book starts with a few axioms from which Archimedes had developed the theory of center of gravity and used it throughout a good part of the material covered in the book, including the development of the volumes of a paraboloid and a sphere and the theory of floating bodies.

In sum, this is an excellent book that should be within reach of any person interested in mathematics or science.

This is the third book in a series about the Free Bards. It takes place after book two, "The Robin & the Kestrel." It is desirable to read the earlier books first in order to understand the setting. Contrary to the advice of an earlier reviewer, you should not skip this book as it sets the stage for the following book. The king has outlawed street busking, causing the Free Bards and other street musicians to become creative in finding places to perform. By chance, Duke Arden of Kingsford is forming his own theatre company which presents an opportunity for Raven, Magpie, and their friends. However, an unknown enemy is trying to use sorcery to destroy the theatrical production. Various heroes and villains emerge as the story progresses. Lady Ardis, Justiciary Mage from book one ("The Lark and the Wren"), is reintroduced (she also appears later in "Four and Twenty Blackbirds"). The story reaches a blazing climax as various people are brought together by tragedy.

I did not expect to like this book, and though I wasn't as drawn to it as I was the Valdemar books, I was soon trapped in a world of Bardic Choices. A great book full of magick, and the knowledge of what is allowed to happen when any one force tries to be in complete control.

This book wasn't actively BAD, which is why I didn't give it one star, but it wasn't that great either. Most of Lackey's other stuff is much better. (Haven't read much Sherman, so I can't judge whether this is low-quality for her or not.) If you want to read about the world and conflicts of Alanda, I'd recommend skipping this book and reading the first 3 books of the Bardic Voices trilogy (skip Four And Twenty Blackbirds, it's a very flat last book.) If you really want good Mercedes Lackey, read the Valdemar series, especially the Last Herald-Mage trilogy. A Cast Of Corbies does have some good parts, and it's nice to know what happens to Raven, who was a minor character in the Bardic Voices books. Unfortunately, though, it seemed like the authors weren't really trying with this one; the villains don't have a real motivation, and the good guys seem to mostly stumble around, except for Raven and occasionally Magpie. It's interesting to watch the dynamics between them, but the end is kind of predictable, and most of the book just seems really flat. Not what I'd expected from this series and this author. I'd skip it unless you want a nice, quick, somewhat shallow YA read.

Lovely illustrations! This book is a work of art, done is truly a unique style.

The author has done a fine job of portraying the Jewish story of the Prophet Abraham as well as the Islamic rendition. Each are given equal attention.

It is important to give tribute to these ancient, shared stories for Abraham is said to be the father of both the Hebrew and the Arab peoples. This book helps with the needed reconcilation, and is another book to add to the growing collection of voices for peace and healing.

Sharon G. Mijares, Ph.D. Author of The Root of All Evil: An exposition of prejudice, fundamentalism and gender imbalance, co-authored with Aliaa Rafea, Rachel Falik and Jenny Eda Schipper.

Unfortunately, the story presented in this book is not a "shared story," of Judeo-Christian tradtion and Islam, as the previous reviewer understandably assumed. The reconciliation tale of the 2 sons of Abraham/Ibrahim is a biblical story, found in Genesis, but is nowhere to be found in Muslim texts. Would that it were so, however.
The author or publisher suggests that since this tale is in the Bible, Muslims "accept," it; This is untrue, as Muslims see Jewish and Christian Scriptures as "tahrif" -- corrupted and falsified by the communities which received them; The biblical characters are seen as having received Islam, and hence the revelation to Prophet Muhammaed was needed as a corrective to Jewish and Christian teachings.
Unfortunately, the Koran has verses about Jews and Christians that promote hostility, not reconciliation. We may as well face up to this, and not pretend that there is a "shared story" where there isn't one.

First of all, this book is vastly over-priced. This would be acceptible if it were worthwhile. It isn't. Part of the blame lies with me, because I didn't take the title literally. What I was hoping for was an exhaustive guide to horror-related TV films from 1964-present. Most of the films would've hopefully been culled from the '70s time period, because that was the golden era for made-for-TV horror/suspense. Let me be clear about this: The author completely ignores the many great TV suspense films of the '70s (Now that would be a review book worth buying). Instead what we get is a book filled with mostly irrelevant recent films, mainly of the sci-fi/fantasy genre (little horror). For those whose interest this piques, go for it.
Another substandard aspect is the "reviews" themselves: Voluminous plot descriptions, followed by very brief, uninspired critical comments.
The only positive thing I can say about this book is that the layout is very attractive and uncluttered. Good job there.
I reiterate: for anyone considering this book, the title says all; cyborgs and such things is about all you're going to get.

I ordered this book sight unseen (often a big mistake) with great anticipation, since there simply are no other review books covering TV films, but my copy of CYBORGS, SANTA CLAUS, AND SATAN is going straight to the local used book store; forthwith. It can sit there gathering dust rather than on my bookshelf.

When you are ready to see a movie on television, this is an indispensable guide. In a clear, brisk manner you can determine what the movie is about, with ruining the story for viewing. Even though the author's opinions are clear, they do not overwhelm the facts presented.

This is an encyclopedia that is actually fun to read from the first page to the last appendix as well as supplying information for everyone from trivia buffs to serious movie scholars. Most cinema encyclopedias give scant information about TV genre movies but Sherman gives us a wealth of details in this compilation of everything fantastic.

Do you need to know how many versions of Dicken's Christmas Carol have been produced? Or, maybe you are looking for the name of the writer who adapted Bradbury's Martian Chronicles? Or, maybe you just want to read the entry for Jack Palance's Dracula? These are just a few of the tidbits that can be gleaned from these packed pages. The cast and credits for all movies as well as synopses and commentary are easily accessed. The book iss indexed and complete including highlighting unknown actors who later became famous in hit series or movies. From cover to cover, it is packed with a wealth of information. (Did you know The Omen IV was a

made for TV movie that tried to continue the franchise on the small screen?)

Sherman's book fills a void for every serious TV and movie buff. An encyclopedia like this has never been offered before that covers this time period and subject and is done as well. The last similar book was published in the mid-seventies and consequently leaves many wonderful movies like the Babylon 5 specials out. Sherman is a fan of science fiction, fantasy, and horror and it shows in his attention to the details that every fan wants to know. I used it just today to look up something about Trilogy of Terror! Sherman's book is well worth the money.

The author cannot be serious. Films and documentaries are the stuff of elite (eg, Fellini) and popular culture (eg, Spielberg). Folklore, on the other hand, is something that certainly can be documented and even the folklore performance can be captured (perhaps) with hidden cameras and directors unseen. But isn't folklore the stuff of tradition that is generally untainted by the majority culture? So why even try to apply the folklore science "analysis" to the world of films and videos in the first place. I don't get it. Do other readers get it?

Sharon Sherman's book is a very useful primer for visual anthropology courses which include production as a main component. This book provides readers a nice history of the genre as well as lessons in the politics and poetics of documentary film production. Most unique, maybe, is her structure based on analysing the work of great documentary filmmakers such as the amazing director Les Blank (if you don't know his movies, check out his website for sure).

The only shortcoming of this book is that since Sherman views anthropological filmmaking from the paradigm of her field, Folklore, her analysis demands that the docs she look at be Folklore Documentaries - a perspective that can be as limiting as the idea of "reading" movies as "texts." Movies should be watched as just what they are, moving pictures, and I much prefer the holistic label of anthropological films to encompass most docs and many fictional films. Folklore docs just doesn't have the theoretical range to fully study the anthropological aspects of the cinematic medium and documentary genre.

Still, well worth reading.

A folklore film or video is a documentary about folklore. Because folklore consists of the traditional expressive culture of various communities, a folklore documentary is designed to represent how people within various social groups express themselves. Sherman provides an excellent history of ethnographic documentaries that relate to folklife studies, and she demonstrates how unique contributions by folklorists have advanced the techniques and styles of filmmaking in general. This fine book is useful for learning about filmmaking and thus is a good resource for anyone who wants to make or understand media representations of culture.

I ordered this book and read most of it in the hope that I would learn something about Familiars . In the interval between ordering and receiving my sixth sense made me begin to have doubts about Ms Little . Had she flown about the battlements of an old castle in the form of an Owl? Had she entertained A Hyrax or a Feral Cat as a house guest ? Had she ever had a pet Bat living behind a picture in the living room ? Was she acquainted with the properties of Henbane and twylight sleep and did she number Hecate among her close friends? The kindest thing , I thought was to suggest that Ms Little Knew as much about Familiars as I know about Conveyancing or Futures Trading , and let it go at that !

Braunbeck, Gary A.: "Modoc Rising" The narrator's friendship with his 27-year-old nephew Carson is cemented by a shared love of comics. But Carson lately has turned up with _MODOC: Land of the First Beast_, which seems to be giving him messages from elsewhere. Then as mass die-offs of many animal species strike worldwide, the Down's-syndrome-afflicted Carson goes missing...

Elrod, P.N.: "Dog Spelled Backward" Sasha (who with Megan, her sister, is a terrier/miniature-Doberman cross) knew she'd inherit Mighty Mite's pack leader role when the elderly Pomeranian abandoned her arthritic body. But none of the 3 realized how much their human "mom" would grieve, being unable to perceive the Mite's spirit. The *dogs* have the out-of-body experiences and so on, not the human; they protect her from Otherside vampiric things that would feed on her misery - things that take squirrel-shape. :)

Gilman, Laura Anne: The unnamed narrator gives a "Catseye" view of the abuser married to a lady with a healer's touch. 'He thought she was alone. That was his worst mistake.'

Helfers, John: Sevronai and his apprentice have had hard times, as the aging Sevronai's control over his spellcasting has deteriorated (rain spells that won't stop, for instance). When "Thieves in the Night" - a pack of little forstchen - steal the last of the travellers' food, Sevronai gives chase only to be caught by their master, a hedge-wizard who tired of his role as wildlife-protector.

Jocks, Von: (The title of "This Dog Watched" is taken from an Elizabeth Barrett Browning poem about her dog.) The narrator consults a psychic about his English Lit problems - who says 'no WAY' as soon as she consults her crystal ball. Madame Eglantine says he has issues from a life as a *dog* - but there are technical problems with past-life regression to something that can't talk.

McCay, Bill: "Alliance" Setting: Egypt (but not that of McCay's StarGate novels; see also _A Constellation of Cats_). Tanit, village healer, finds it odd that only young children are afflicted with fever, and that the new deity establishing a cult in the area should declare cats anathema. Narrative alternates between Tanit and Bast, a stray whose feline senses give her a different perspective on the problem.

Norton, Andre: "The Familiar" From Fossi the familiar's point of view, who has been passing as a child's toy handed down from mother to daughter for generations - and who considers the current human charge, Jeseca [sic] to be the familiar. Fossi, unfortunately, has lazily waiting for Jeseca to grow up a little before trying to educate her; now they may both pay, as they flee enemy soldiers invading their native city.

Nye, Jody Lynn: "And So, Ad Infinitum" Mira is a weekend witch: a middle-aged mom whose 'pet' cat Zoomer doubles as her familiar. Zoomer seems pretty normal - obsessed with his favourite food, testing mattresses, acquiring fleas. However, he's good at his job, and she wouldn't dream of trying to contact great-aunt Violet on the other side to complete her family history without him.

Rabe, Jean: "On the Scent of the Witch" John Bradstreet is the only *real* witch in Massachusetts, let alone Salem. Against the modern trend of witches in fiction, he's actually guilty of many of the evils Cotton Mather attributes to witches - playing with others' lives for fun and profit, using his elderly dog to manipulate children with an eye to future immortality. Good characterization; he doesn't see himself as evil, but isn't about to put his neck on the line to save those falsely accused of his crimes.

Resnick, Laura: "First Familiars" - a series of memos between Socks the Cat and his infernal masters; he just can't make headway with the Clintons. Then Socks receives a *dog* as backup. (Socks complains to his union rep.) He even tangles with the IRS ("your threat to send me back to the Fifth Circle for my failure to file a tax return while I was *there* for 180 years is so depraved that even the Dark Powers are impressed.")

Rusch, Kristine Kathryn: Winston, a timid, underpowered wizard, is "Searching for the Familiar" after his cat falls victim to a rash of familiar-kidnappings. His advantage is that one of his friends is a cop, who needs no magic to investigate kidnappings.

Sherman, Josepha: "Swordplay" Marko, as his father's second - and second-best - son, has been nicknamed 'Luckless' so long he believes it, but he's determined to tackle the dragon who crippled his father and killed his older brother. In a fit of self-pitying sarcasm, he 'conjures' a spirit into his sword - Stacie, a Valley-girl who simultaneously cast her own 'spell'. She'll cooperate, but has her own opinions to contribute.

Sizemore, Susan: "Goodness Had Nothing to Do with It" Told in an unusual style: all dialogue, without even 'he said/she said', and only 4 characters: Marcie and Kim opening their new phone-psychic business, an undercover cop seeking a missing person, and Mae - who hadn't known until she first saw a mirror that this time she'd reincarnated as a ratlike Chihuahua rather than a white Persian. :)

Stuckart, Diane A.S.: "Business as Usual" Jane Riverspoon is no magician, even as a saleswoman, having inherited a corner office from the late unlamented Tiffany Glass only under a lottery system. Nevertheless, a rat shows up to act as her mentor: the reincarnated Tiffany, required to compensate for not having helped others in life. (Tiffany, far from being remorseful, resents the situation, and Jane's phobic about rats.)

West, Michelle: "Legacy" occupies a full quarter of the book. Callie unexpectedly gains a familiar during a weird glitch in a online role-playing game in this near-future: a tiny dragon, apparently the same helper program that once served as familiar to one of the system's founders. ('Legacy' here has several senses, including the computer sense, as the game progresses on many levels.)

Based on the most unscientific survey, most readers within a mean plus or minus three standard deviations will state unequivocally that a familiar is a magical cat that is a companion to a witch. Obviously tales like Bell, Book, and Candle conjure up felines as companions to the Kim Novaks of the world. However, the fifteen contributors to this anthology demonstrate a wider girth of sidekicks to include the expected cats (including former White House resident Socks), dogs (feels at first like heresy, but it works), people (not just husbands), and insects (don't ask). Each tale as far as this reviewer understands is new, but what this reader knows is that each contribution is well written, remains within the theme, and provides fans with a powerful witch's brew anthology. Now let me take a closer look at my menagerie (dogs and cats not my spouse silly) who obviously have bewitched me as they can do no wrong (that's how one perceives exclusion of the husband).

Harriet Klausner

Gideon Welles once said that the Porters were all liars and braggarts. This massive volume by David Dixon Porter goes far to proving it. As history, it is lousy, heavily biased, and one-sided. However, for the serious historian, there is a great amount of administrative detail that cannot be found elsewhere. A good source, if its limitations are properly recognized.

Porters perspective of the navel operations gives the reader a rare view of history. written some years after the war to set the record of other navel histories of the day, straight. I find the detailed reports by participants and commentary by porter to be both informative and entertaining. Bias? Yes... but he gives his opinion in a straight forward manor and gives credit (both good and bad) where credit is due.

First of all, I haven't fact-checked Porter's narratives and orders of battle. However, much like Churchill's WW2 histories, a politically biased account by an actor in the history can be an invaluable resource. And, like Churchill, Porter's writing style has that high style that makes for a refreshing change (in small doses) from today's more pedestrian prose.

Most books on the ACW afloat are narratives, this has a lot more 'meat' due to Porter's participation in a number of the actions and his insights behind the scenes in the USN. I recommend this book, but not as an unimpeachable source.