Wang Books

A friend of mine had this book, and it looked so darling, I just had to hunt down a copy! It's a cute story, and even one that you don't mind reading repeatedly, and my 10 month old daughter even loves to turn to pages and feel the little cookies! This is one book I am looking forward to reading with her for a long time, as she learns to understand the story and count the cookies!

My daughter, 20 months, picked this book out herself at the bookstore. She loves counting the cookies (well, she loves when I count the cookies). She also loves saying the names of the different animals who "stole the cookie". The illustrations are easy for her to follow and on the last page, when everyone has to share the cookie, she loves pointing at each of the animals and saying who they are. We read this book first thing in the morning, last thing at night and sometimes multiple times in the middle. It's been 3 weeks of this and I'm not even tired of it yet.

This is not the mini version of the book, the reviewer before me has their review on the wrong book. This is the full version of the book.
great rhyming, counting, sturdy book for young children and children up to the age of 5 or 6. My 5 year old is learning to read and likes to point out words he knows in this book. The raised up rubbery cookies go form 10 down to 1, and the great surprise is dad took all the cookies and at the end shares a great big cookie with the whole family and some animals that also get involved in the mystery.

This is so mini edition, that they should have written the word 'mini' in smaller print. I can't even read the print. I'm very disappointed.
I thought this would only have fewer pages but not mini in size.
I wish the description explained that it was mini in dimensions length x width, and not leaving for one to possibly assume that it was only with less pages, but in the regular dimenstions a book would be.
Too much money for what I received.

This book is loved by our whole family. The illustrations are clever and delightful, while the repeating rhyme is catchy, yet not annoying. My six year old enjoys reading the book to us and my 18 month old loves looking at the pictures and pressing the "cookies" as though they are buttons. Most importantly, the book ends on a high note about sharing.

Very helpful guide---other guides I've seen have been older, with the full etymology of the words/characters, but they were of little help because they hadn't been updated to Simplified Characters. This one is the best because it cuts across two or three different ways of helping you with Mandarin: 1) it's arranged by Pinyin, alphabetically---not by stroke order; 2) it has a full index in the VERY FRONT containing every character listed by Stroke Order and what page to find it on, if you don't know the pinyin for any given character; and 3) for each character, it gives you the printed (in books---the boxy-looking) version, the written (hand-writing it) version, the radical(s) involved and the stroke order, in a visual sequence. Also, for each entry, it gives similar words/phrases using that word/character. This is also a good guide because it has the most-used 2000 characters. The books with 100, 200 or even 500 are not enough. It's a small, paperback size, too, so it fits easily in your hand and it's easy to flip pages around, which happens a lot when you're looking for a Mandarin character!!

book was in excellent condition-very helpful for beginners in learning the language

I bought this book on the recomendation of my Mandarin instructor. Most of the characters we are covering in our class are in this book and it's the best resource I have found for figuring out how to write the characters correctly. If you are looking for a way to look up characters using pinyin and find out their stroke order, you should find this book helpful.

On the whole, this is a very good character dictionary. The characters are given in both Kai and Song typeface. Each character is also placed (in red) on a grid so the correct proportions can be seen. Separately, the stroke order is clearly delineated via a series of strokes until the complete character is drawn. The corresponding Pinyin word is given, usually accompanied by two or three compound words and their English meanings. My major complaint is that the Pinyin word corresponding to the character is not always defined. For instance, the entry for ke(4) does not tell you that it means class, lesson, or course. However, three compounds and their definitions are given: keben (textbook), kewai (extra-curricular/after class), and gongke (schoolwork/homework). Giving the basic definition of the character would seem to be important, and wouldn't be much trouble. In fact, some of the entries give the basic definition, but not all of them. This oversight prevents me from rating the dictionary at 5 stars. Otherwise, for the small size of the book, it packs quite a bit of information.

I have been using this book for several years and find it to be an invaluable reference source for 1) characters that I have forgotten how to write, 2) new characters and 3) stroke order. What this book does not offer is a means to lookup words in English but this is not its intent, although a simple indexing of English words in alphabetical order with corresponding page numbers would be nice. However, since this is a "character" dictionary and not an "English to Chinese" dictionary this feature is understandably not part of the scope of this work. But, as a character dictionary of the most common simplified characters, this work excels! I strongly recommend it to any student of Chinese and I hope that Cheng and Tsui are able to follow-up on this excellent work with a traditional character version. It is estimated that a knowledge of the most frequently used 700 simplified characters enables an understanding of as much as 82% of the written language but that the ability to recognize and use the most common 2,000 characters bumps this percentage up to 97%. As an essential reference, Cheng and Tsui's "Chinese Character Dictionary" makes learning written Chinese that much easier.

"Fixing Climate" is an eloquently written story of how a number of practical dedicated earth scientists painstakingly analyzed data which have confirmed the reality and urgency of our global warming problem. This is a startling wake-up call from knowledgeable pragmatic people--a "must read" for political decision-makers.

Before I talk a bit about why I really liked this book, let me first mention that the title is a bit misleading. The book does indeed cover CO2, but only gets around to ideas about fixing climate in the last few chapters, and even talks mostly about how difficult it would be while only offering a couple of solutions that would require huge and expensive projects.

As I was reading this book it struck me that this is yet again another book by, or in this case in cooperation with, a well-known and respected name in the field of climate science, or a related field that adds to the big picture on global warming. I fail to see how anyone who has read recent books by or about Peter Ward, James Hansen, Dennis Alley, and now Wallace Broecker can seriously dispute the basics about global warming. This is yet another book that gives comprehensive coverage to the honest, decades-long research that a respected scientist has been involved in. After reading this book, and many like it, it seems absolutely silly when the global warming skeptics claim that these men are only doing this for grant money, or to claim that the numbers do not bear out the theory of global warming. Men like Broecker have been compiling long and convincing lists of evidence for decades now, and it's pretty much unassailable. Of course, that being said, this is an honest book that admits to mistakes that have been made along the way as well as areas that are still unresolved.

This book, while being relatively short, seems like about three or four books rolled into one. It has a lot of biographical annecdotes about Broecker and other scientists. It has a lot of evidence gleaned from decades of research all around the globe. It also has more general coverage of the CO2 problem and what we might do about it. I have read many books on the topic of global warming over the past few years, and even though I'm well acquainted with the basic tennents of the theory as well as the evidence, I never tire of reading books like this because they always show the human side of the people involved, and introduce the lay reader to interesting locales and ways of investigating them.

This book is both optimistic and pessimistic. It is pessimistic in the sense that like many other books by experts on the topic, it basically concludes that it will probably be impossible to stop the growth of CO2 in the atmosphere under the current economic and political situation. However, it is optimistic in the sense that there are some rays of hope. Be it wealthy donors who are embracing the cause, or national efforts like the one in Iceland described at the end of this book, some powerful entities are starting to get on board. The basic conclusion this book leaves the reader with is that there is indisputable evidence that we are at risk for climate change, that we probably won't be able to stop the growth of CO2 emissions, and that our best hope is to pursue large projects to capture and sequester CO2.

If you are interested in global warming, you will probably want to read other books in addition to this one, but this is a very interesting book by a scientist who is often referred to, especially when it comes to things like ice cores, past climate, and ocean conveyors.

Excellent book. A historical summary of what climate has done to the earth over thousands of years. Technical details presented in a very readable way. How we got to where we are today. Options as to what we can do to reverse the situation. We need to work fast !

This book is a biography. It says very little about fixing climate or about "what past climate changes reveal about the current threat--and how to counter it." If you are interested in the details of how this particular climate scientist grew up, then read this book. If you are, as I was, looking for a book about "fixing climate," as this is inappropriately titled, then look elsewhere. I am very disappointed in the publisher for such a misleading tactic.

This good-hearted book does a decent job in considering the wishes and likes of actual people when presenting its case for climate change and actions recommended. Too many similar works rantishly view humans as Earth's destructive vermin, and "Fixing Climate" takes great pains in stating that people count, that their beliefs and opinions ultimately determine what will be done with our climate. Early on the author concedes that global warming is not humanity's worst problem, rather that human misery is much worse. If only he had used the more specific word "poverty" instead of the mushier "misery."

This well-arranged book presents its information in distinctly defined chapters, covering major areas currently discussed these days. The reader will find the information not only objectively given, but also roughly in agreement with other sources. The conclusions reached in "Fixing Climate," though, often differ even based on the same numbers. This, of course, is the basis of differing points of view.

Unfortunately, most of this book makes conclusions toward the pessimistic. As the end of the book nears, one senses that "Oh, what can we do, what can we do," direction rolling especially through the last chapter. Having said many things, many times about the goodness of science, the risks and hard work persons of science take all the time, and how much science has pulled us all through, one wonders why the author does not extend this same point of view much into the future in "Fixing Climate"? It is as if the scientists of his day were the only ones capable of creative thought. For example, the author spends much time on the topic of carbon sequestration, a technology which may or may not work, but the point is that there are a "semi-infinite" number of other new possible directions to be explored. Let the creative, hard-working technologists loose, and we will almost certainly pull through this situation too. But buy the book; it is well done, and refreshing to read.

Kolchin offers his book as a concise, readable synthesis of the movements in the historiography of slavery in the United States. Influenced by the movement toward social and cultural history, he devotes considerable attention to slave life in the antebellum south and the effects of the particular situation of slavery in the United States in shaping slave culture. Kolchin also situates slavery in the U.S. in the context of the world wide institution with comparisons to the Caribbean, Brazil, and to the Russian serfs which both highlights the unique situation of American Slaves and emphasizes that the institution of slavery did not exist in a vacuum.

The book progresses chronologically from the 1619 arrival of slaves in Jamestown to a brief discussion of the end of slavery and the problems of reconstruction, with thematic treatments of slave life, white control and paternalism in antebellum slavery as well as white society, economy, and ideology in the American south.

In producing such a smooth synthesis, Kolchin admittedly sacrifices a certain amount of detail and nuance for the sake of flow and clarity. Disconcerting, at times is his lack of documentation, another victim of simplicity in Kolchin's approach. While accomplishing his goal of remaining clear and readable, the reader sometimes wishes for some assistance in discerning the origin or fuller development of a particular position or point. To his credit, Kolchin works references to the historiography into his text well, and he provides an exceedingly thorough bibliographical essay at the end, which is probably the strongest segment of the work. Still, the lack of documentation sometimes proves frustrating and thus counters the goal of smooth flow in the text.

In the final analysis, however, Kolchin produces an excellent, readable volume that accomplishes his goal of a balanced narrative that shows how slavery evolved over time in the United States. So too has it accomplished its purpose in enlightening beginners and enkindling much scholarly discussion.

Over the past 50 years, the study of slavery has been one of the most dynamic and contentious areas in American History. A large volume of first-rate scholarship now exists on many aspects of North American slavery. This excellent book is a successful effort to synthesize the large volume of information on North American slavery. The book is organized chronologically, beginning with the Colonial period and progressing through the Revolution and the Antebellum period. Kolchin does an excellent job of describing the historical evolution of slavery in the USA. Another meritorious aspect is that Kolchin is an expert on the comparative history of slavery and provides useful comparative perspectives by comparing North American slavery with the features of other unfree societies. Kolchin is a clear writer and the book is very well organized. There is an excellent annotated bibliography which is a fine guide for readers interested in more specialized works on this topic. This is a must read for anyone interested in American History.

This book succeeds as an overview of American Slavery. It portrays the progression of our "peculiar institution" from earliest colonial times up through Reconstruction. The Author focuses on the changing nature of the relationship between slave and master, the role of religion as both a tool and dilemma for the slave system (and as a primary cultural marker for slaves) and the evolving debate undergirding the defense of slavery and the unique nature of the Antibellum South.

The book also delves, sparringly, into slave life and experiences.

It is a little dry in places and the writing style at times reads like an academic journal. I would have preferred more anacdotes to buttress some of the claims made by the author, if nothing else to make the book more interesting. However, in many places he does make use of statistics to reinforce his conclusions, which adds weight to the arguments presented in the book.

Overall, a good overview and introduction to slavery as it existed in the United States

This is my third Kolchin book his expertise on Slavery is without question. My issues relate to his central theme that Slavery in the Americas relate only to Black and White individuals. Native Americans had slavery in the Americas long before the first white person appeared on the horizon. Currently many black youths are "slaves" to gangs and the culture of blame and government dependence.

Kolchin has come to the realization that slavery is only towards blacks and to be blamed on white people United States. His focus on Racism is also suspect because of his inability to focus on racism within the Black community that is prevalent not only towards whites but all other races including black.

This issue is not black and white. Kolchin needs to focus on ways to learn from the racism and slavery history so that people from all races can unite and have common goals instead of race-baiting by using history to justify racism towards whites and all Americans.

This is a perfect intro for the beginner and for teachers looking for a way to get a hold of what has become a vast subject. Makes a nice book to assign to undergrads as well.

This book contained a lot of informative statistics, but I felt that the implied thesis was that expansionism, imperialism and other forms of colonization are always bad and that nobody asked the countries conquered if they wanted to be conquered. The selection of quotes seemed bias and out of context (especially the quotes drawn from Mark Twain).

As an historian who teaches about the Progressive Era, i've been waiting for a book like this for years. It's simply the best book written on America's peculiar fascination with race and the obsession with defining a hierarchy of races in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. There has certainly been enough attention paid to Spencer et al and the progression of thought on how intellectuals confronted the problem of race in the late 19th century, but no book has ever treated the subject with such acumen. Jacobson joins David Roediger as the preeminent writers on America's struggle to reconcile it's claim to being the world's melting pot with the reality of it's ongoing propensity to relegate "savages" and lesser races/ethnicities to the margins of society.

Barbarian Virtues is in many ways a brilliant text; it offers a strikingly complete, coherent, and well-written history of U.S. imperialism during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Regrettably, this fascinating treatment of American nationalism leaves questions of race only partially examined. Although Jacobson's work highlights the role that the racialization of those bodies making up export and labor markets played in constructions of Americanness, he fails to show how this racialization may have depended on a racial paradigm centered around the devaluation of blackness that already existed by the post-Reconstruction era. Barbarian Virtues covers a period of time in which stereotypes of black savageness formed the basis for white supremacist terrorism, the failure of Reconstruction, and the disenfranchisement of blacks. Can turn-of-the-century elite and popular ideas about immigrants, evolutionary development, and civilization can be read outside of a racial paradigm in which whiteness (and indeed Americanness) came to define itself in opposition to black identity? Can a discussion of racial ideology and U.S. imperialism be complete without any reference to the nation's history of both actual and methaphoric (i.e. political, rhetorical) violence against its African-descended population, especially given that hundreds of thousands of blacks immigrated to the U.S. during the years that Jacobson writes about? If Jacobson succeeds in his goal "to redress two striking failures in our national memory-one regarding immigration; the other, imperialism," he also succeeds in reinforcing a third failure of American collective memory (263). This failure is the inability to conceive of the complex ways in which race--specifically, constructions of black identity--has been central to American imperialist ideology in particular and Western imperial reason in general.

"At its core 'civilization' was an economic concept" (p. 50). So shows Jacobson, in his wonderful book, _Barbarian Virtues_.
Vile racial hatreds define these hegemonic notions of "civilization." Jacobson's extensive research shows persistent and everyday racism operating in the daily discourse of American power. Presidents McKinley and (Teddy) Roosevelt, as well as major newspapers and magazines, spew a stream of racism, and show it as a basic part of elite common sense at the time.

I want to second the reviewer from Durham, who found this book short on Blackness. (Jacobson's excellent _Whiteness of a Different Color_ helps somewhat.) One might add that this book only skims over the important experience of the violent conquest of the West and the Indians, in shaping "civilization" and "savage" during these years. (Drinnon's _Facing West: The Metaphysics of Indian-Hating and Empire Building is a larger and longer contribution in this regard.)

The book could be faulted for lingering on the Tarzan novels, for example, when more pressing political issues ruled the day. And I was hungry for a more sustained discussion of the colonization of the Philippines.

But Jacobson is in pursuit of "civilized" ideas in everyday American thought--that's his safari here and, as such, he pursues his subject with great talent. _Barbarian Virtues_ is a fast and gripping read. And it exposes what school textbooks and the mass media forget so well: America has a long and viscious history of racial hatred. When our politicians today speak of "civilization," we ought to remember its deep, poisonous roots, and its longstanding use to justify the most brutal exertions of capitalist greed.

I'm proud to be an American. Over the last month and a half, these six words have echoed through our radios and televisions more times than the latest Brittney Spear's sexy single. Stores are selling out of stars and stripes and CNN's ratings have gone through the roof. The United States was attacked and its' people can do nothing but wave the flag and propagate blame on foreign people.
American citizens have been taught to recognize their culture, their government, and their people as the epitome of what an advanced society can achieve. The ethnocentrism found in America overwhelms its' people and creates the drive to dominate what they perceive to be foreign. The attempt towards domination has been a societal precedent since the beginning of time. As America industrialized around the beginning of the 19th century, the U.S. fought this battle for power with imperialistic vision, expanding global markets and immigration labor. Their power was achieved through the profits of capitalism, at the expense of global human equality.
The strength of the U.S. is rarely questioned by its' citizens. The American people try to ignore the selfish actions that U.S. government and businesses have used to gain and maintain themselves as the world's super power. It's hard to find material that looks deeply into this matter, searching for truth under layers of patriotic dust. Matthew Frye Jacobson disregards the notion of America's rightful warrant of power and exposes the truth that lays beneath the blanket of American ideals in his book Barbarian Virtues: The United States encounters foreign peoples at home and abroad 1876-1917.
Jacobson recognizes this time period as an important era of the establishment of American foreign policy and the domestic thoughts surrounding these events. America's intense industrialization during these years created the need to open the doors of commerce to people around the world, and to open our domestic doors with invitations of immigration. The opportunity for immigrant advancement and the betterment of foreign societies because of U.S. involvement, are the notions that have been written down as facts in American children's history books. The story that Jacobson tells holds harsh truths that have been conveniently overlooked in the writing, or rewriting, of American history. He explores "foreign peoples as imported workers for American factories and as overseas consumers of American products" (4) and recognizes the illiberal nature of American actions.
America was forced to turn to foreign participation in their industrialized world of commerce because "this "nation of customers" did not have the spending power to support its shopkeepers"(16). The shift towards foreign markets and workers created a "deep American dependence upon these foreign peoples (which)seems to have fueled the animus against them"(13).
Foreigners were met with fear when they got off the boats and were manipulated in their own homelands to support the American economy. Their cultures were thought of as inferior and barbaric in comparison to the society of the United States. Immigrants would be bettered as they adapted to the American way of life and foreigners would be aided in their advancement towards civilization by having American goods available.
Exporters reduced the history and cultures of foreign peoples to "a series of wants whose particulars were as easily discerned by the Western eye as they were fulfilled by the Western industry" (26). The government slyly "aided" counties in ways that would establish markets for American goods. All actions were motivated by profit; human exploitation was a common cost and of little concern. Americans convinced themselves that these foreign people were inferior as a mechanism to avoid the guilt that would ensue from their actions in these lands. The inferiority of foreign cultures "provided justification for whatever action or intervention the United States deemed necessary to exert its will outside its own borders"(49).
The United States not only used foreigners as explanations for their ill actions in world activity, they used them to explain the economic state of people within the U.S. American economists of the time made claims to "immigration intensifying the fatal cycle of "booms" and "depressions"" and declared it the responsible factor for the lowering "standard of living for all American workers" (74). Foreign workers and their homeland markets were completely being taken advantage of, while the American need for them was being ignored. Jacobson recognizes the extreme hypocrisy with which America dealt with foreigners and acknowledges the mistakes that were made and the lasting impact that these mistakes hold.
The exploration of the "white man" developed ways in which the people of the U.S. thought about other parts of the world.
"Entire continents were defined by their presumed emptiness, cultures by their lacks and absences, and peoples by their exemption from the flow of history". The Other, found in these barren spaces, was often sexualized and given an "erotic charge". The "feminized natives" were depicted as naturally and eagerly awaiting the "masculine West's" possession (112). Juxtaposing the idea of a feminine nature against a masculine culture further demonstrates the American tendency to look at these foreign people as uncivilized and barbaric. These erotic images of "otherness" were not too deeply developed by Jacobson and background knowledge of orientalism (Edward Said) would help to further digest these ideas.
I am impressed with Matthew Frye Jacobson's attempt to look past the instilled idea of American History to recognize America's place in world history. Americans must be informed of the past; they must be proud of the accomplishments and made aware of the mistakes. During the years between 1876 and 1917, America's intentions were to "reform a population to suit U.S. needs" (38). They did this in the name of world advancement, but the results were no doubt profitable to the United States and harmful to many foreign people. There is no doubt that both accomplishments and mistakes were made during this era and after reflecting upon Jacobson's revisions to Americas place in history, it's a bit harder to say I'm proud to be an American.

First of all, it should be mentioned that there is no theatre untouched by Bertolt Brecht's theories and practices on theatre. In the 21st century, the way we look at theatre has its roots in Brecht's Aesthetic.

Now, this book is like the Brecht Bible essentially. Packed with all his views and opinions on the theatre, society and culture around theatre, acting, etc. Its big, dense and the type set is small enough to make you cry sometimes because he just never seems to stop.

I had a hard time following and understanding it, but that is no fault of this edition, but more so the long winded thoughts of Brecht. The core of his ideas and points are there, they just need to be searched for. Sometimes he makes it very clear what point he is trying to make, but sometimes you have to wade through his thoughts until he nails it for you. I think for having never read it before, I wasn't sure what was the most important part of some of the arguments he was making, but overall I know this is a valuable book to own. I think it requires guidance from someone who has studied Brecht a lot, which I fortunately had. There is a Brecht for Beginners I think out there that is a GOOD COMPANION to this book.

This is a huge selection of essays written over many years. This not necessarily something you may want to just sit down and read straight through. If you do, you will find many contradictions over the years. At any rate, it is a very formative collection of Brecht's work, and certainly a must have for anyone who studies theatre or the arts in general.

Classic Text. Feel free to jump around chapters as you read this. It's a compilation of Brecht's ideas andis best read in random order.

Brecht's theater is a blast, a genuine attempt to do something unique and productive with the heretofore conservative and corporate medium of the stage. It represents the first wave of revolution in European theater since the English stage was closed in the mid-17th century. Brecht successfully constructs an antifascist, anti-exploitative theater without being didactic or heavyhanded about it. (As I mentioned, it's actually a blast.) Much of his success came from surrounding himself with brilliant and dedicated people, and much of the success of this collection of Brecht's writings comes from Brecht's polishing his ideas in the tumbler of real practice with those people. For me, Brecht's passing comments on Aristotle and Shakespeare are worth the price of admission.

There is only one way to describe this book: Paperback gold. I am currently studying A-Level theatre studies and I couldn't ask for a better resource on Brecht than this. However, I don't think it is necessary to be a drama student to read this book. Obviously some background knowledge of Brecht is helpful when tackling some of the essays that he has written but if you have any kind of interest in the theatre then have a go with this, it's very well edited and above all it's really quite an easy read.

Readers interested in Hubble's promise and achievements will be fascinated to learn more about telescope searches in CHASING HUBBLE'S SHADOWS: THE SEARCH FOR GALAXIES AT THE EDGE OF TIME. History and science blend in a lively dialogue that is a perfect pick for collections catering to lay readers already interested in basic astronomy and Hubble achievements in particular.

This book is very readable, and makes no mathematical demands, but does tend to assume readers have a rough idea of some concepts used in cosmology, such as red shift, arcsecond, etc. But even if you don't, the dramatic impact is not lost as you are confronted by the amazing insights that astronomers have been able to gain about the universe, in particular as a result of the data collected by the Hubble telescope.

If your humility needs a refresher course, this is a good book to read! One human being is a mighty small part of the whole shebang.

I found this book to be a very good report on the current state of the fields of astronomy and cosmology, particularly as to how they are concerned with investigations into the early development of the universe. It is very well balanced for a wide potential audience, neither too technical (with the danger of tuning out those with inadequate scientific knowledge), nor written so simply as to fail to add to our education as we read. I also thought the length of the book was about right, so that I never felt that the book dragged at any point. Highly recommended to anyone interested in the "universe around us", quite literally.

I enjoyed this book because it moves beyond the usual arm-waving of many cosmology books. Kanipe is a journalist, not a scientist, and it helps the book immensely. He explains concepts such as redshift and reionization in clear and understandable terms, and seasons his prose with amusing observations (one cosmologist is described as Keith Richards with a killer Powerpoint presentation).

Chasing Hubble's Shadows is also mainly about the frontiers of cosmology - discoveries that are being made now, not rehashes of old science as so many astronomy books can be. I felt as if I were traveling along with the researchers as they pushed the boundaries of knowledge ever-farther.

Highly recommended for anyone who wonders how the universe came to be - and isn't that everyone?

I am going to have to dissent with some of the previous reviews. I think there is a definite audience for this book, but I cannot wholeheartedly recommend it to just anyone interested in popular books on astronomy. The book is best suited for someone who is already familiar with the basic concepts of galactic astronomy and cosmology, and who is interested in hearing about what type of research is currently on-going in these areas.

The book is not technical, so it is easy to assume, (mistakenly), that the book is suitable for anyone interested in the subject. The problem is that even though the writing is non-technical, Kanipe explains very few concepts. For example, Kanipe talks a lot about redshift and reionization in a non-technical way, but he never really provides a clear introductory explanation of them. You don't need a degree in astronomy to read this book, but you should be familiar with the basic concepts if you want to get the most from it.

Interestingly Kanipe does explain a few basic concepts, but this is sporadic at best. I had to wonder who Kanipe's intended audience was. For example, within the first few pages Kanipe talks about astronomers looking for galaxies with redshifts in the range of 3 to 5 without ever explaining what it means for a galaxy to have such a redshift. Okay, no problem with that. Perhaps Kanipe is writing for an audience he expects would know what a redshift of 5 means, yet only a few pages later Kanipe seems to assume his audience will not know what a spectrum is as he explains how the purpose of a certain telescope is to "separate the light of a very faint galaxy into its component colors, or wavelengths, the result being a narrow band of bright and dark lines called a spectrum." Huh? What audience does not need an explanation high redshift galaxies, but does need an explanation of a spectrum? I expect that Kanipe was trying to make the book accessible to as wide an audience as possible, but unfortunately he only provided a few gratuitous explanations of basic concepts. My concern is that if you scan through the book and see something like the above quote, it is easy to mistakenly assume the book is accessible to anyone, when in truth the basic concepts explained are too random and too few to effectively make the book accessible and enjoyable to those not already reasonably familiar with the subject.

Another aspect of Kanipe's writing to be aware of is his choice of words. It reminded me of reading "Lord of the Flies". Here are a few examples of what I mean:

"the protean objects stippling deep surveys"
"dark matter, the chimeric material"
"when expansion was clearly more allegro"
"the very skin of this alluvial structure"
"the microwave photons broke free from an effluvium of electrons and protons"
"perhaps dark energy and dark matter are hermaphroditic in nature"
"a feathery swirl of diaphanous light wrapped like a watch spring around a bright central sprocket"
"the beautiful cochlear appearance of many normal spiral galaxies"
"perhaps halos are a kind of palimpsest of galactic evolutionary history"
"some of the pithy remnants of these tidally stripped dwarf galaxies"
"it's worth providing some record, however mercurial, of the impressive gains"
"in the study of this empyrean armature we call the universe"

Some people will enjoy Kanipe's choice of descriptive words, but for me he went overboard. Just be aware of this style because I don't think it is for everyone.

As I said, I believe this book will appeal most to those who are already reasonably familiar with the subject, and who are interested in hearing about on-going research. I certainly did walk away with a feeling of having glimpsed into the lives and work of galactic observational astronomers. In this Kanipe succeeds quite well. He passionately describes numerous observational projects and provides extensive quotes from the astronomers doing the research. He also indirectly, though not so subtly, argues for the continued funding of the Hubble Space Telescope and other projects. Certainly I would have no argument with him there.

In the end I gave the book three stars. This was not my kind of book, but I believe it has an audience. It is not a technically difficult book by any means, and it does give a pretty nice review of ongoing research, but to really enjoy the book, it will be helpful if you are reasonably familiar with basic concepts in galactic astronomy and cosmology. For such a person, and especially someone who enjoys descriptive, almost poetic language, this could be a very enjoyable read. Kanipe obviously put a lot into the book, and he does give a feel for the work astronomers are doing. It has its place, but in the end it didn't make my list of favorites.

John Webster will probably never be as popular as William Shakespeare, Charles Dickens, or even Cliff Marlowe. Nevertheless, his writing is quite impressive. His plays came out about the time Shakespeare was putting out his final plays. As the play begins, we meet Bosola. While he is a murderer, he offers several intersting passages, and he is not quite a 2d villain. Bosola expresses his dislike for Duke Ferdinand and his brother the Cardinal. This opinion is shared by the Duchess's eventual husband Antonio. This allows Webster to prepare the villains of this story. The wicked Ferdinand expresses his wish for his sister (the Duchess) not to marry. Eventually, we will learn that he wants control over her estates. (How unheard of! Especially today!) He asks Bosola to spy on the Duchess. Bosola is a bit hesitant, but he proceeds. Well, the Duchess against her wicked brother's request marries Antonio secretly. Some time passes, and Bosola suspects that the Duchess is pregnant. While Antonio suspects the foul play of Bosola, he is basically a loving, but not so able man. Ferdinand of course finds out that his request has been disregarded. Interestingly, the cardinal comes off a little better when his cautious side contrasts with Ferdinand's rages. Onto Act 3. The Duchess and Antonio now have children. While Ferdinand knows the Duchess has married, he does NOT know Antonio is the husband. The poor Duchess makes the mistake of appealing to Bosola for help, and of course all is found out. Antonio is banished to Ancona. The parting between Antonio and the Duchess is quite sad. But all is not lost. Antonio flees to Milan and they may still be together. Sadly, hope disappears as the Duchess is arrested. Ferdinand orders Bosola to murder her, and while Bosola does hesitate, he performs the cruel murder of the Duchess. It is interesting that Bosola's evil deeds are often accompanied by hesitation and regret, as well as some interesting passages on the harsh truths of the human condition. But Webster does not stop here. Ferdinand's cruelty gives way to insanity and he taunts Bosola for carrying out his orders. Onto the final act. Poor Antonio (not knowing his wife is dead) has heard of Ferdinand's insanity. He thinks perhaps he can reconcile with the Cardinal. Soon we see that the cardinal is not quite an accomplished psychopath. With Ferdinand gone, he sinks further and further into panic trying to cover the bloody mess. In a well done scene, fragments of Antonio's echo foreshadow his downfall. Bosola accidentally kills Antonio and is filled with regret. The final scene begins with the cardinal giving a passage on fear of damnation. In a brutal massacre, Bosola, Ferdinand, and the Cardinal all die. The play ends with a restoration to order by the son of Antonio and the Duchess, but like Shakespeare's "King Lear," it doesn't take away the sadness of the play. Overall, it's a good play that combines an interesting variety of villains, romance, tragedy, suspense, horror, and dark comedy.

John Webster's play "The Duchess of Malfi" is a violent play that presents a dark, disturbing portrait of the human condition. According to the introductory note in the Dover edition, the play was first presented in 1613 or 1614.

The title character is a widow with two brothers: Ferdinand and the Cardinal. In the play's opening act, the brothers try to persuade their sister not to seek a new husband. Her resistance to their wishes sets in motion a chain of secrecy, plotting, and violence.

The relationship between Ferdinand and the Duchess is probably one of the most unsettling brother-sister relationships in literature. The play is full of both onstage killings and great lines. The title character is one of stage history's intriguing female characters; she is a woman whose desires lead her to defy familial pressure. Another fascinating and complex character is Bosola, who early in the play is enlisted to act as a spy. Overall, a compelling and well-written tragedy.

This is a review of the New Mermaids edition of The Duchess of Malfi by John Webster. Elisabeth M. Brennan edits this edition (ISBN: 0393900665.) I mention this incase it is cross-posted under some other editor's edition.

I bought this after reading snippets of it in other books. I do not recall having to learn this in school. Only now do I intend to read "The White Devil" in anticipation of it being encountered in other works.

Well what do you know? This animal is based on a true story of the Duchess of Amalfi. Evidentially there were several books written on this and he picked one for the outline of the play.

This edition is almost as good as taking a class in its self. The introduction gives you a back ground and the basic story that the play was based on. You get some information on John Webster and some of his other plays. There is even a further Reading List. There are even notes on the text and how to read the notes for the different versions of the play its self. By the time you get to the play you are well prepared to read it.

The play its self has stanzas, line numbers and notes to help you through the difficulty of understanding what the words mean in context. It is almost like reading a bible. You soon pickup speed and then actually get intrigued in the writing and story.

Now I desperately want some local theater to present "The duchess of Malfi"

I do not feel Webster's "Duchess of Malfi" quite matches his "The White Devil." Nevertheless, it is still an excellent play. Only Webster could combine this much violence and beauty so well! Webster starts the play well when Antonio and Delio make comments on questionable characters. (Bosola and the Cardinal) Bosola is drawn well as the hired hand reluctant to join the demonic Ferdinand. 2.5 is captivating when Ferdinand explodes with fury upon discovering that the Duchess has married. The cardinal shows an interesting foil to Ferdinand when he tries to encourage caution. The fury exchanged between Ferdinand and the Duchess in 3.2 is memorable. Bosola offers a striking passage on politicians in 3.2. The tragic ceremony in 3.4 is sorrowful and yet beautiful. The parting of Antonio and the Duchess in 3.5 is very lamentable. 4.1 allows us to see that Ferdinand is not only evil, but demented as well. This paves the way for his final insanity. Bosola's hesitation to carry out the murder is well constructed. Ferdinand's final torture of the Duchess reminds us that he is not simply cruel, but psychotic as well. The Duchess is memorable when she faces her death with dignity. Webster DOES NOT stop here! Ferdinand actually taunts the hired killer and this paves the way for the final act. 5.3 is a scene that not even Marlowe or Shakespeare ever used. Fragments of Antonio's own echo foreshadow his death. Bosola's accidental murder of Antonio and his remorse pave the way for the final massacre! Even here, Webster keeps his efforts up. The cardinal's passage on fear of damnation keeps us in chills. Bosola's death and passage of remorse is a fitting end for this excellent work. My only complaint about this play is that the Cardinal could have been more complex.

Of the "popular" editions of this play that by John Russell Brown (Revels Student Editions) and Elizabeth Brennan (New Mermaids) are both useful, though it must be said that no edition as yet does adequate justice to Webster's compexity - notably his presentation of Ferdinand. The play is both a tour de force and profoundly searching. It is perhaps the first major feminist play in England, with the Duchess presented as an outstandingly noble even if fallible character, the victim of her two evil "partriarchal" brothers. Of these, her twin brother Ferdinand is among the most intelligently conceived characters to appear on the Jacobean stage. Unknowingly (i.e. in his "unconscious") he is incestuously in love with his sister. Unable to cope with this "taboo" feeling, he tries to "repress" it unsuccessfully, and finally his ... "libido" comes to express itself in a violent wish to destroy her if he cannot ... own her, and he ends up believing himself to be a wolf, attempting to dig up her grave after he has had her killed. Obviously, then, this is a very Freudian work - anticipating Freud's insights brilliantly by some four centuries, and without lapsing into Freud's extravagantly improbable claims about such matters as the Oedipus complex. It is the working of the unconcious, as a reservoir of what we do not understand and cannot control, which is quite central in this play, and Ferdinand's ... confusion is potently contrasted with his sister's openminded, acknowledged and generous ... health. An outstanding play, recommended as among the best of its time (comparable in quality and interest to e.g. *Othello* or *The Changeling*). - Joost Daalder, Professor of English, Flinders University, South Australia

Melvyn has written a completely readable history of the Cold War. Very even handed in his treatment of all presidents beginning with Truman and ending with George Bush Sr. It is easy today to look back on this era and think that it was a waste of a great amount of resources. In a way it was, however it's important to never forget the sole ambition of the USSR was world domination; Marx, Lenin and the dialectic predicted this, or so they thought. The Soviets worked very hard to bring it about. In the end, capitalism won, as it will always win.

Professor Leffler explodes the myths of how America defeated the Soviet Union in the cold war. It is always good to be reminded of how political actors get pushed by the forces compelling them forward or are blinded by their own presuppositions. While Truman and Stalin, and Khrushchev and Kennedy were able to stumble through to a realpolitik their successors saw things less clearly, could less resist their own reactionaries or were overwhelmed by events they could not control. Leffler portrays the Cold War as a sequence of swings from a kind of tested balance following World War II to the nadir of American influence in the seventies as the third world liberated itself invoking socialist rhetoric and the Soviets profited from high oil prices to the '80s when entrepreneurship spread in Asia, third world countries floundered, and the Soviet Union's economy weakened. What is interesting in books about the cold war is that the American military juggernaut does not stop. The US constantly overrates Soviet ability because it suits so many interests to do so and thereby fails engage in the real kinds of disarmament the Soviets offer.
Leffler's book offers us heroes and villains. Among the latter Brzezinski stands out. Although Carter's could not see real national interest through the veil of his unrealistic commitment to human rights, nonetheless his secretary of state undermined what could have been an even greater additions to détente. Of course he was abetted by such Democratic hawks as the Senator from Boeing. The great hero is Gorbachev. Although Reagan because of his unquestioned conservative principles made a good co-conversant for Gorbachev, Leffler, as others, puts to bed the lie that Reagan's military spending brought the Soviet's to their knees and destroyed the "evil empire." Gorbachev knew that the Soviets didn't have to match the US in order to survive: their strike ability was just too great. They could not be bullied. Gorbachev, as almost all of the post Stalin leaders, knew that the Soviet union had to get its economic house in order and that the military drained that. He had the mistaken hope that this could be achieved retaining a socialist dream. Although not explored by Leffler, the Soviet command economy had too many flaws, so when loosed it produced mafia like mechanisms to keep production going. And worse, unlike China, the Soviet Union was rife with ethnic conflicts dating back way before the Revolution and exacerbated by Stalinist repression. These broke out in uncontrollable ways so that even if Gorby wanted to unleash, "it is good to be rich," while maintaining political control as in China, he couldn't. No question, Gorbachev is the greatest hero of the 20th century. Reagan was his accomplice but he could have pulled it off without Reagan. The sad part is that the transition might have been much earlier and maybe smoother if political and economic forces within the US hadn't profited from the Cold War. As Leffler pointed out in the Reagan/Gorbachev negotiations the US got their way 85% of the time. With Bush the lesser and Co. we are seeing the fruits of that imbalance in the harm the US has done in the Middle East and the erosion of US dominance which bodes so strongly in the future as it now appears.
Charlie Fisher author of Dismantling Discontent: Buddha's Way Through Darwin's World

This was one of those books that "pulled it all together." I lived thorough these times, this is my history. However, Leffler was able to tell the story so it had meaning and clarity. He did a great job of showing both sides of the story.

"For the Soul of Mankind", by Melvyn Leffler, is a major study of the Cold War's political diplomacy. As the name would lead one to think, the focus is strongly on the ideological aspects of the political decision-making, but Leffler is fairly pragmatic and pays plenty of attention to issues of military strength, strategic interventions, Third World movements, and so on. There is also a lot of concentration on the personal characteristics of the countries' respective leaders, which sometimes leads it deplorably into "Great Men" historiography.

A lot can be said against this book. Not just the above-mentioned excessively biographical approach, but for example it does not actually cover all of the Cold War; Leffler describes it as covering five pivotal "episodes" in it, but in practice this means it is an all-out political history of US-Soviet relations during the Cold War, but with the odd aspect of (relatively) excluding Nixon and Ford. It seems that if one is writing about every other postwar president and leader anyway, one could as well add those too. But that aside, there is the fact that Leffler talks a lot about the economies of the respective countries, but without ever describing these and their development in concrete details. He also pays no attention to cultural and social developments, giving the book a very narrow international relations focus. One would also have liked to read more about the role of European leaders, both East and West, in the diplomatic and ideological struggle, but perhaps that is too much to include in one book.

However, this book is nonetheless a clear advance over the Cold War and neo-Cold War style of history writing, as opposed to the likes of Gaddis. Although Leffler excessively demonizes and fulminates against Stalin in the beginning, he treats the Soviet leaders remarkably sanely and accurately for an American historian of the Cold War, at no point falling for "evil empire" style propaganda. He clearly and concisely discusses not just the restraints and problems the American Presidents were facing during negotiations, but also those of the Soviet leadership. Commendable is the way in which he acknowledges the role of important leaders that were not the head of government, like Molotov, Mikoyan, Gromyko, etc. His description of Khrushchov in particular is very good, and in my view quite correctly re-establishes his intelligence, competence, and advanced insight into the problems of the USSR. He has been much maligned because of Stalinists hating him and anti-Communists also hating him, but this is quite undeserved. Some might say that Leffler overestimates Brezhnev's competence perhaps, whom he seems to hold in relatively high regard, but he does not diminish his weaknesses.

Leffler is very well informed about the substance of the major negotiation rounds between the US and the USSR, as well as the main points of contention and the periods of major crisis in the Cold War. He dispells some still common myths yet again, such as the idea that Reagan and the SDI program 'defeated communism', that Stalin wanted to attack Western Europe, that the Soviet leadership had wanted to invade Afghanistan, and that the USSR at any time wanted nuclear war. Leffler is rightly critical of both sides, and brings important things to the fore that are often underestimated as aspects of the ideological struggle: the enormous impact of the WWII experience on the USSR, the role of religion in motivating US Presidents, the complicated relationships of Soviet leaders to Stalin even long after his death, and the way the reformist Soviet leaders like Khrushchov and Gorbachov often felt betrayed by American belligerence. That the US misunderstood the situation in the USSR as often as the USSR did in the US is clear from this work, as is the fact that both sides were equally willing to be aggressor and interventionist when they felt threatened. In the end, as Leffler points out, it was Gorbachov's visionary leadership that inadvertently ended the USSR, which is both a blessing and a curse for the future of socialism.

This very good book is a largely successful effort to produce a portrait of the Cold War that is both accurate and accessible to a broad audience. Leffler accomplishes his objective by some smart decisions in limiting the content of the book. He focuses primarily on US-Soviet relations; he limits his discussion largely to the highest levels of diplomacy, particularly the decisions of our Presidents and the Soviet leadership at key moments; and he picks out five key sequences of the Cold War. The five key sequences are the initiation of the Cold War under Truman/Stalin, the end of the Cold War under Gorbachev/Reagan, and 3 periods when there were unsuccessful efforts to end/moderate the Cold War; Malenkov/Eisenhower after the death of Stalin, Kennedy-Johnson/Khruschev after the Cuban Missile Crisis, Brezhnev/Carter and the end of detente. The latter three are discussed as examples of how hard it was to escape the dynamic of the Cold War and explorations of the forces that sustained the Cold War.

The title of the book reflects Leffler's conclusion about perhaps the most important element of initiating and sustaining the Cold War - ideology. Leffler argues well that the competing ideologies of liberal capitalism and communism really drove the way the leaderships of the USA and the Soviet Union perceived each other and influenced decisions. Leffler also shows how important the experience of WWII was, particularly the trauma of invasion, for the Soviets. Well into the 1970s, the fear of being confronted by a hostile, aggressive, powerful German (and encircled by a powerful Japanese state) was a major concern of the Soviet leadership. In a good example of how Soviet concerns were often mirrored in the USA, worries about German democratization were a feature of American policy making into at least the 1960s. Leffler sees the Cold War as inevitable. Both the USA and the Soviets required a pacified Europe and Japan to attain security but their conflicting visions of what such security would require resulted in inevitable conflict. While Leffler uses relatively neutral language in describing this fact, it has to be said that the American vision of a democratic alliance was and is considerably more noble than what Stalin had in mind. Leffler is careful to point out that Stalin was initially pragmatic and interested in some form of accomodation.

Once initiated, the Cold War proved remarkably difficult to moderate or end. The next 3 episodes discussed by Leffler all show how ideology, the mutual fears inherent in this type of strategic rivalry, entrenched special interests such as interservice rivalries and a powerful defense establishment in the Soviet Union, and the powerful domestic political forces set in train by the Cold War all contributed to sustaining the Cold War. Leffler is generally even handed in dealing with the major actors. All the principal actors, American presidents and major Soviet leaders after Stalin, are shown to have been concerned with the dangers of the nuclear rivalry and concerned with reducing the risk of mutual annihiliation. Some of the portraits are a bit surprising. Leonid Brezhnev, usually presented only as the apostole of stagnation and a return to aspects of the Stalinist past, receives a relatively sympathetic analysis. Jimmy Carter is portrayed as a relatively resolute and unlucky individual who tried hard to make sensible decisions in the face of unfavorable public pressure.

Like a number of other historians, Leffler concludes that Gorbachev was really the key figure in the end of Cold War. While virtually all of the major Soviet leaders were concerned about the exhausting effect the Cold War was having on the Soviet Union, Gorbachev and his supporters were really the first to be willing to make radical departures in Soviet policy to break the deadlock. Its notable that while Gorbachev lived through WWII and the German occupation, he was a small child and his formative years coincided with the Khruschev era efforts to reform the Soviet state. Leffler's treatment of Reagan is particularly interesting. Leffler politely dismisses the conservative-Republican triumphalist version of Reagan bludgeoning the Soviet Union into submission. While he assigns Reagan a secondary role, he gives Reagan considerable credit for being able to recognize that real progress was possible and being able to overcome the barriers faced by prior Presidents.

While generally successful, Leffler's choices about the structure of the book have drawbacks. The concentration on the USA-Soviet relationship is probably unavoidable, but it obscures the important role of many others in important aspects of the Cold War. For example, the role of European statesmen in the formation of NATO or the role of Kim Il Sung in the genesis of the Korean war. A major feature of the Cold War was the remarkably destructive effects of US-Soviet rivalry in the developing world. There is little here about that feature. Leffler's concentration on the actions of the principal leaders of the USA and Soviet Union tend to obscure the role that domestic political factors, often with little relationship to international strategic realities, had in driving US and probably Soviet policy. Finally, a fair amount of Leffler's analysis emerges implicitly, rather than explicitly. That said, the summary section that concludes the book contains a well considered and concise assessment of American policy in the Cold War.

I didn't receive it yet

If you want to get to know IP/MPLS QoS, this book will get you there very quickly. Although less than 250 pages, this book surprisingly covers almost all of the important topics in IP/MPLS QoS. Also an excellent reference book to have on your bookshelf.

I recently bought quite a few books on QoS and I would highly recommend this book to you if you are looking for one.

This book covers the four topics Diff-Serv, RSVP, MPLS, TE and their interaction in a very nice way. It also has a lot of detailed examples. For instance, it gives a detailed example to show hashing may be used in identifying traffic flows, or performing loadsharing.

I would disagree with one of the previous reviewer; I think this book has much more technical depth than any books on the topic. But it is written mostly for engineers and technical professionals rather than a text book.

The author has boiled down the concept of QOS-quality an abstract term into Performance optimization and resource allocation.The book provides a very good insight into traffic engineering and MPLS.Its the best book for QOS i have come across.The fish problem in traffic engineering is probably the best example i have come across.Overall its an excellent text.

I feel that this book provides excellent coverage of all of the important, implementable, models for providing service differentiation in the Internet. While it doesn't precisely tell me how to implement QoS, it does provide excellent reference points against which to measure effectiveness of an implementation in providing useful QoS. I find that I am using this book a lot in my work and expect that this will continue to be the case for a while.