Wang Books

In Playing for Thrills, Wang Shuo weaves a complex, compelling, and utterly confusing web in which the reader is quickly trapped. The book is neither noir nor surreal, as it is often labelled, but filtered through the hazy lens of alientation and indifference, the reader quickly becomes as defracted as the characters.

I hated this book, but found it totally addictive. Wang Shuo is a master storyteller, and like a good film director, cleverly manipulates his audience, and we are always exactly where he wants us to be.

The plot is pretty petty and pointless, but the rambling narrative presents the best literary portrait there is of Beijing in the 1980s. It is especially amusing in its scathing portrait of the new semi-rich wheeler-dealer class, in all their tastelessness and self-importance.

Wang Shuo is arguably the most critically and commercially successful writer in modern China, and is also an acclaimed screen writer. This book may not provide a sense of his importance, but it will introduce readers to his expertly maneuvered prose.

I read some of the hype about this book and picked it up at the library-wish I hadn't. It resulted in possibly the most annoying few hours I've ever spent reading. Make no mistake, I enjoy good surrealism (Gogol for one) and noir (Chandler, et al), and I am reasonably well steeped in Asian pop culture, but this was a total disappointment. It starts confusingly, but I figured things would gradually clear up as I read along, however by the end I was no further along in understanding the book. The aimless plot clearly is meant as a portrait and critique of modern urban Chinese society, with it's attendant cynical wheeler-dealer underworld figures, but that's about it. Stephen King bafflingly blurbed it as "the most brilliantly entertaining hardboiled novel of the 90s." It might actually work better as film, perhaps in the hands of a master of atmosphere and mood like Wong Kar Wai.

Wang Shuo is known as a non-orthodox writer. But he acutually started writing in a very orthodox way. His early writings are in proper language and with upright spirit. But soon after he changed his style to the so-called pizi wenxue (hooligan literature), which gave him more freedom. But as he talked about his own writings recently, he fell into another fluffy trap, "as if he is the delegate of the god to announce truth to the ignorant general public." Later he looked down on this kind of people himself. His late works are very closely related to screenplays and became mature. "Playing for Thrills are one of his midterm works, which he regarded as formism himself and was not happy with it.

Wang Shuo is one of the most controversial writer in China at present. He is extremely famous for criticize and challenge of a lot of well-recognized scholars. He has a large number of both followers and criticizers, which forms a extradonary literacy phenomenon in China.

Playing for thrills is a book known for his sarcastic, spoken language style. It is real fun to read this book. But the author seems to show off his writing skills as he admitted later. I am personally a follower of Wang Shuo, but will not hesitate to point out the weakness in his ideology. I hope more of his works will be translated into foreign languages.

In the editiorial review, Mr. Alder states that wang shuo's works are banned in China,("so unfit for public consumption that his work is officially banned (although widely popular). "), which is untrue I am afraid. Non of Wang Shuo's works has ever been offically banned in China. Recently Wang Shuo's collection has been published (4 volumes), which include almost all Wang Shuo's novels dating back to 1970's. Another two of his books that comment on some of the status of Chinese literature and reveal of his personal views have just been published in last two years.

I personally just can't help clearifying that there are not so many banned books in China as some of the westen readers might expect. No harm is meant here.

I first read this book in chinese when I was 14. Like most 14 year-old, I read it only as a book that my parents wouldn't allow me to read. (By the way, it is never really banned in China, only criticized heavily by the authorities.) At that time, I found the book to be quite humorous, but nothing special. It wasn't the funniest book from Wang Shuo by all means. Twelve years later, I came across its english translation accidentally on a dusty library shelf. I was curious, picked it up, and started reading. Goldblatt's translation is very impressive, in fact, it doesn't have any of the awkard moments or sentences most of the translated works have here and there. He may have missed a few very subtle innuendos, but overall, the translation gave the book an even dreamier environment, and curiously, more fluent language than the original. I had to get the chinese edition and read it all over again, and after that, I have to admit for the first time that a translated work is actually better than the original. As for Wang Shuo's novel itself, this is probably the most structually complex one, and he did show off his enormous writing skills. But as the plot and character development goes, it's not the top of his work. It's about a generation (if you divide each generation by 10 years) that has robbed of its older ideology, the one they've been brought up with, so they become cynical; and yet, they could not adopt to the newer money-oriented philosophy of the younger generation, so they are still sincere and innocent in their own mind. To have spent their childhood and youth in the Culture Revolution, this is a story about a generation that's alienated from the society that has become, and yet desperately wants to join in the fun that they definitely know they won't enjoy. I actually liked his later works better. His latest work (also on Fang Yan and Gao Yang and the entire gang) is interestly set in kindergarden, and is the two thirds of the book that "Playing for thrills" had implied at the very end.

I'm an IT engineer and was wanting to get stronger in scripting and code writing and heard this book was pretty good. Many other Microsoft or other company books are extremely dry reading where this was great. Whether you're a computer person or not, it's easy to follow, well structured, and has some amusing jokes. Learning VB.Net was much easier than I thought.

This is the worst book I have ever read. It' s like reading a book on how to use a light switch over and over again even though you've already done it 1000 times. Does that make sense? Either way, I'm drunk and this book sucked and I still can't program. What a waste. Good lord.

I took a job without knowing any VB or Basic computer programming skills and this book helped me to understand and understand the programing language at a beginner level and propell me forward. Within four days I was creating my own VB program and had a good understanding as to how to get around the application and all it's power. I highly recommend this book!

Highly recommended for us old school programmers stuck in time still developing for the COMMAND shell. Easy reading that quickly made it apparent to me that the transition to Windows application development wasn't going to be nearly as traumatic as I first thought. In my humble opinion this book is a valuable starting point to an inevitable journey for us dinosaurs.

If you have never programmed in VB than this is a great introduction to the VB and .NET. If you are a programmer, this is probably not the book you want. It is VERY VERY basic. There is no real life code examples.
Good for it's humor but not technical enough for a seasoned programmer.

I had to read this for a class and, halfway through, opted to just make up answers on any further tests.

This is the first novel by Ellen Glasgow that I've ever read, and I was amazed at how good it was. This is the way novels should be written although, I'm afraid many readers will find her style antique, superfluous, and, perhaps tedious. On the contrary. I submit that the problem is that few writers have the ability these days to write this well
Glasgow's prose is flawless and a pleasure to read. I must admit that sometimes it's almost too good, and may lapse into melodrama. There must be some reason that she is not as famous as she should be, and it may be that her prose is just too damn enjoyable; almost vacuous at times, and like eating chocolate you want to eat more and more but its a quickly extinguished pleasure. I'm afraid that ultimately the reason that she is not a great writer, but a very fine one indeed, is that reading her is just too delicious, so it couldn't be good for you; and something is lacking although I can't quite put my finger on it.
Her descriptions are lush, detailed, paint a beautiful picture and complete as you could want them to be--do I contradict myself--so what!
Another strength, and possible weakness, is again, the interesting, but almost embarassing phiolosophical commentary on life that is almost on every page. I admire her for the guts to say some very hard things about life and love, but I almost wish she hadn't said them, at least, so much, because telling the story--which she does brilliantly-- may be enough; let the reader fill in the blanks. She had a tendency to preach too much, but I've got to admit that I like a good sermon, and she's full of those.
When I picked up the book at the library; I had seen Harry Golden refer to it, and felt the heft of a five hundred page novel;I wondered if I could get into it. But it captured me, and I took it in small doses like some wonderful treat that I didn't want to finish.
When I finished it,I ordered a used copy to use as a reference for a quality of writing that I would like to emulate, but perhaps in not so much abundance.
Glasgow has a place among the highest ranks of novelists world wide, and I would have no trouble awarding her a Nobel Prize for her intelligence alone. The fact that she never got one tells me that maybe the learned judges also smelt something fishy about her writing, something that they couldn't define either, but that put them off from awarding her the highest honor in literature that she may well deserve?

Excellent. One of her best novels. The prevalent element of naturalism strongly reinforces the theme and setting of the story, giving the reader a good taste of southern literature. The growth of Dorinda's character can be measured by the symbolism of each of the three parts of the novel (broomsedge, pine, and life-everlasting). A wonderful addition to women's literature as well as southern literature.

Ellen Glasgow is largely forgotten now and this is a pity because she was a talented writer. "Barren Ground" and "Vein of Iron" are her best known works and in their time, the first half of the last century, they were highly regarded

"Barren Ground" is sometimes taken by feminists as a tract for their side. They are wrong. It is true that the protagonist, Dorinda, successfully makes her way in the man's world of the turn of the last century. Having been viciously jilted by her lover the twenty-year old Dorinda flees her impoverished Virginia homestead only to return two years later and gradually transform it into a showplace farm. In the process she is amply revenged on her faithless lover and becomes a wealthy and moderately powerful woman of admired character. So far, so good.

But, the title "Barren Ground" says it all. The Virginia farmland Dorinda inherits, worn out from years of tobacco culture, is indeed nearly barren. A pernicious weed, the bloomsedge, has invaded the sterile landscape and it must be plowed under if anything of value is to bloom. Thus far the obvious metaphor for Dorinda and her need to transform herself into something vital and valuable after her tragic young adulthood.

But, the title of the book is ironic. The land is, indeed, reclaimed by Dorinda and made fruitful again. It is Dorinda who remains barren -- both literally and figuratively -- to the last page.

It must occur to any careful reader that Dorinda is, in fact, psychologically unbalanced. Her 'jilt" at the age of twenty becomes the determining factor in her life. For most people, it is an episode. In page after page of over-wrought prose Ms. Glasgow takes us through Dorinda's ridiculously over-wrought reaction to being dumped. Whole chapters describe her inner turmoil and bitterness and after only a few pages the message becomes clear: Dorinda is mildly psychotic.

The second half of the book extends Dorinda's story from about 1893, when she is dumped, to 1923. During that time Dorinda uses the excuse of her musty, long-ago love affair, as an rationale for her utter lack of empathy toward others and her total self-involvement. She feels no grief when her loving father dies -- a man she mentally compares with a horse -- and has not even a trace of sympathy for a brother who fears for his life after having killed a man. When she finally does marry it is solely for reasons of gain and she is dismissive of her husband -- a man so intelligent and saintly that after his death the impoverished community erects a monument to his memory!

Dorinda is the classic ice-queen. Time and again the author tells us, and Dorinda reiterates, that she is repulsed by physical sex. She cannot,in fact, bear to be touched. There is not a single hint in the book, though, that she is attracted to women. While she maintains her surface decency Dorinda becomes one of those against whom Hawthorne warned us -- one who has lost hold of the magnetic chain of humanity.

Dorinda bears no child ("Barren Ground") and lives primarily for revenge. She is incapable of love. She sits in judgement on others. Offered, time and again, sacrificial love by her husband, and a few others, she dismisses the offer with contempt. Her only admirable quality is that she "endures" -- a thing done as well by cold stone.

There is no reclamation of Dorinda as there is of the land. She is a feminist "hero" only insofar as she has a tidy bank account. In all other ways she is a selfish, repulsive character and it is hard to believe that Glasgow used the adjective "barren" casually.

"Barren Ground" is not a tale of redemption. It is a tale, instead, of youthful psychosis hardening itself into a lifetime of uncaring. It is a cautionary tale. It belongs with Hawthorne's novels and short stories as a case study of a perverted personality warping itself into a moral sink.

This book is very depressing. The girl at the beginning is full of hope and she is a little naive. Then the world begins to crash down upon her. Almost everything bad that can happen does.
I almost had a nervous breakdown reading this. It makes you lose faith in the world and in man.

This book was a gift to me. Coincidentally I happened to pick up on my own a copy of "Six Frigates" by Ian W. Toll. While I cannot comment on the other books that Amazon offers up I can definitely recommend Toll's book. I found Lambert's book to be somewhat off putting in its attitude. I cannot say that Lambert's book is inaccurate, although I did notice one clear factual error. Lambert at one point refers to the Hapsburg court governing Spain at the time. The Hapsburg line of Spanish kings died off without heirs earlier in the 18th century giving rise to the War of the Spanish Succession. At the time of the incidents covered by Lambert's book a Bourbon king ruled Spain. This is a minor error but it raises concerns about the accuracy of other parts of Lambert's book. If you really want to learn about this era in US history, read Toll's book.

Lambert is a well known scholar who has written very good scholarly monographs on religion in colonial America and politics in the Revolution. Recently, he has been producing well written and well grounded books on historical topics of current relevance aimed at a wider readership. He wrote a very good book on religion in the Colonial, Revolutionary, and early Republican periods. He has now produced a solid book on the Barbary Wars. These episodes from the early history of our Republic have been the subject of some recent books and journalism because of our abrupt and somewhat involuntary close involvement with the Muslim world. Lambert points out that most of these publications suffer from anachronistic perspectives, saying more about the present than the past. I've read one of the books he references, Joseph Wheelan's misleading Jefferson's War, and I agree with his polite but negative assessment of this recent literature.
Lambert provides a well written and documented analysis of the background of the Barbary Wars. He provides a good overview of the nature of piracy in the Barbary States, its role in the international system of the time, and the nature of the particular challenge it presented to the young USA. Lambert does equally well in covering the relevant political and cultural history of American responses to the Barbary States, including a good view of the relevant party politics. There is a good discussion of the major American actors, like Jefferson, and a nice concise narrative of the wars themselves. For Lambert, the Barbary Wars were partly wars of economic necessity for the fledgling USA and partly driven by ideology. The nature of the ideological conflict was not religous, however, but instead driven by the American republican ideology that emphasized free trade and American independence.

The setting of this book is the United States of America has recently become a sovereign nation. However, unlike the major colonialist powers of Europe (e.g., Britain, France, Spain, etc.), the U.S. lacks a formidable navy and a respected presence in the high seas. At this time, the Mediterranean sea is overrun by ruthless pirates whose activities are endorsed, if not outright ordered by the quasi-independent ruling heads of Morocco, Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli, which are collectively known as the Barbary states. As a result, U.S. merchant ships are plundered, U.S. gun ships are commandeered, the U.S. itself is extorted to paying an annual tribute and U.S. citizens are routinely either held for ransom or sold into slavery.

If you want an informative, engaging and concise book on the U.S.' wars with the Barbary pirates, look no further than this. In this book, you will learn about:

* All of the major tariff laws which led up to the Declaration of Independence (i.e., Navigation Acts, Revenue (Sugar) Act, Stamp Act, Townshed Duties and the Tea Act).

* The two major wars with the Barbary states. The first, which is known as the Tripolitian War (1801-1805) and the second, which is known as the Algerine War (1815).

* The Tripolitan capture of the U.S. 36 gun frigate, a top-of-the-line gunship that would have been devastating under pirate control. To counter this deadly advantage, Lieutenant Stephen Decatur lead a daring and successful incursion into the Tripolitan harbor to burn the the USS Philadelphia, so that it can never be used by the pirates against the U.S. In particularly, you will learn about how Decatur surreptitiously disguised his vessel as a distressed, anchorless merchant ship that needs to be docked on shore.

* William Eaton's courageous 500-mile march through Libyan desert to launch a surprise attack on Derne, a coastal fortress which was not prepared for a land attack. This was the decisive victory in the Tripolitan War.

* The overt contrast between the treaty of the Tripolitan war and the Algerine War. The first treaty was the result of negotiation (with the soon-to-be-infamous Tobias Lear representing the U.S.). For example, it declared that the Tripolitans reduce the amount of the tribute that they demanded by 90% (Thus, conceding that forcing the U.S. to pay tribute, in principle, was still acceptable.) Even though Jefferson evidently approved of such limited terms, this was an outrage to the U.S. domestically as well as to the war heroes such as Eaton and Decatur.

In contrast, the terms of second treaty were dictated by the U.S. In particular, Decatur demanded that the pirates:
- disavow all demands of tribute and ransom.
- return all American prisoners and property captured through piracy.
- allow all ships with a U.S. flag pass unmolested in the Mediterranean.

Interestingly enough, the Dey of Algiers wanted to deliberate on the treaty overnight. Decatur famously replied that he would allow "not a minute; if your squadron appears in sight before the treaty is actually signed [...] ours will capture them." The terms that Decatur obtained in the treaties were unimaginable before the war, considering the decades of harassment that the U.S. faced at the hand of the Barbary pirates.

This is an amazing book.

This book looked more promising than it turned out to be. The first issue I have with it is that is not a smooth, enjoyable read. It does not flow well and fails to produce any desire to keep going. to put is bluntly, I had no problem putting it down. The second issue I have with it is that it is filled with statements describing the motives of people and nations with very, very little, to no references to back up those conclusions. The footnotes are quite thin and often refer to short, rather uninteresting and inconsequential quotes.

I was afraid of this when I read the first few pages of the intro where the author lets us know what his agenda seems to be. It seems he had an 'opinion' that he wanted to express and thought that 'his' historical perspective should simply be accepted as fact without reference.

Full of important historical information and interesting tidbits of trivia, The Barbary Wars provides an excellent overview of the foreign policy challenges faced by a young and idealistic United States in exporting its revolutionary (and necessary) economic ideas. It also explores the often difficult job of making good foreign policy decisions in the face of seemingly unrelated, but nonetheless complicating, domestic politics. Lambert offers a work that should be viewed as important by historians and contemporary political scientists.

Ms. Wroe has come upon a seeming wealth of untouched historical data in the form of Rodez's archives. Unfortunately, she stresses the story of a pot of gold at the beginning of the book but never sticks to that main stream. She uses the "story" to bring in all sorts of fascinating information about business and social life in this French town, but these tangents don't bring us any closer to resolving her main story-line.

As earlier reviewers have stated, perhaps she should have stepped over that line into historical fiction where she could use the business and social history of the town, as well as the main idea concerning the pot of gold and constructed a fine fictional tale that would have been more pleasing, as well as having better flow.

A useful book for the information on business, law, and society in this unique town, but don't buy it expecting to find the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

Ms. Wroe has done readers a great service in bringing to life the partitioned town of Rodez during the 1300s. This is the type of historical writing that actually permits you to experience the daily life of a city beleagured by the "English," who behaved more like roving gangs than soldiers of the Crown, an image difficult to infer from the conventional textbooks that focus on macro-level, sweeping events. I much prefer this to the historical novel. While such novels always have a grain of truth; it is much more difficult to ascertain where fiction ends and nonfiction begins. Wroe uses her imagination, to be sure, but she is following archival material and, as a result, we are given allowed the opportunity to see part of an era and its people that might well have escaped our view.

Ann Wroe announces in her introduction that, "We are dealing in fact, not fiction," and that she will permit herself only the smallest liberties when going beyond the known facts. If, for instance, "we know the path a man travelled to go home (as in one case we do), and what lay along it, it seems no offense to historical truth to retrace his steps."

Fair enough. But these are not the kind of remarks that we normally see at the start of a history book, and they serve as a warning that Wroe is going to be writing something that might be mistaken for a novel. The warning is well taken: "A Fool and His Money" does indeed come across as a poor novel filled with fascinating facts. One major problem is that virtually everything Wroe truly knows about her characters is related to their legal woes. They're continually in trouble with various civil and ecclesiastical courts, and if they get a few days of breathing space, they use it to litigate against their own friends, neighbors, and family members. A second problem is that her main story line has no resolution and dwindles away at the end of the book; the facts just aren't there.

I'm glad I read the book. I learned some worthwhile things about everyday life in Fourteenth-Century France. But the experience was more of a chore than a pleasure, and I wish Wroe had written either an historical novel or a non-novelistic historical text. Come to think of it, she could use her material a second time to write a novel. If she does, I'll read it.

Why has no one made a movie of this book? A magnificent hill town in central France in the century of the Hundred Years War, a prolonged courtroom drama with gold at stake and with the whole community embroiled, a befuddled miser as the central character, his sly in-laws as the antagonists, the clergy and the bourgeousie in subtle conflict. Of course, a lot of the historical data and analysis would have to be omitted - that stuff about markets and trade, civic government, the effects of war on the economy, the efforts of people to avoid onerous taxes - and then a heady dose of imagination applied to achieve a satisfying denouement... but think of it, with Louis Malle directing and Gerard Depardieu as the judge!

I've read all six previous reviews of this book, all six complaining that too much historical information is included to distract the reader from the exciting tale of greed, all suggesting that Ann Wroe should have written anovel instead. Well, pardon me, friends, but you've missed the point. Yes, Ann Wroe writes very well and no doubt could have invented a proper novelistic ending for her narrative, but entertaining you was not her chief purpose. What she's written here is an insightful account of the life of ordinary people in an ordinary town, the sort of people who are seldom observed in history. Here's what she says about her own work:

**The story of [Peyre] Marques was preserved quite accidentally. We know about him only because a pitcher of gold was found buried in the floor of his shop. His son-in-law took it away, and ownership of the money was disputed in court. The result was a full-scale inquiry -- detailed character references, anecdotes, gossip -- about a man who was perfectly ordinary... For that reason alone, this case is precious. History keeps memorials of the great, the saintly or the vicious, but we may pine for the chance to hear about men and women more like ourselves: common folk.

Wroe's chief source for her narrative is the preserved court transcript from a trail in Rodez, France, in 1370. But Wroe also draws from other sources, principally her huge horde of general knowledge about the Middle Ages, the Hundred Years War, the history of the clergy in France, etc. In other words, the trial is only a framework for an attempt to describe the activities and values of a historical community, as little fictionalized as possible. I've studied a bit of this history also, and I've never read a book that captured an image of life in the Middle Ages more vividly yet reliably.

Like one of those reviewers who wanted a novel instead of a history, I enjoyed this book so much that I hoped for a sequel. The divided city of Rodez - the upper town dominated by the Church, the lower town by merchants - seemed so picturesque in the book that I actually drove half way across France to visit modern Rodez. Sadly, Rodez is perhaps the least well-preserved city in all the Massif Central, and much as I would like to follow the descendents of Peyre Marquez, like characters in Zola, on their journey toward the present, there can be no sequel to "A Fool and His Money" for the simple reason that no other such archival source is likely to be found. That the transcript of this trial has survived is a miracle in itself, which Ann Wroe has exploited brilliantly. With history this good, only a fool would ask for fiction.

I have to agree with the reviewer below and ask why this book was not written as a historical novel. Anne Wroe is a terrific writer but she limited herself far too much in this little book. It could have been great. Should have been great. My wife and I visited Rodez on a recent trip from Switzerland to Andorra and I must say, Wroe was factually correct and Rodez, although not conventionally "pretty" was certainly a fascinating place! Please, Ms. Wroe, write another book. Set it in France and make it historical fiction. You'll find yourself on the bestseller lists, I'm sure and you'll deserve to be there!

First I must disagree with the reviewer who calls a noun followed by an apostrophe and an "s" a possessive noun. There is room for legitimate argument here, and I prefer to call such a word a possessive adjective. To me it is far more adjective than noun and so the noun part of it can't be an antecedent for a later pronoun. Therefore, I agree with what the reviser of Follett's book says rather than with what he does. Another man, who was once an English professor at Ohio State (Corbett, I think), and for all I know may be there still, also frowns heavily on the use of a possessive noun or possessive adjective as an antecedent. One must simply find a way to reconstruct passages that tempt one to break this commandment.

I once read Follett's book from cover to cover. The man (not he) was an elegant writer. Nowadays I dip into it to refresh my memory and to find passages to use as arguments in pointing out the writing faults of others.

Description is a fine thing, but I'm a member of the prescriptive school and so am perfectly happy with Follett's edicts. When several people are working together to produce a single book or series of books, they must all be following the same path.

My only objection to Follett's book is the lack of an index. His section titles are not always straightforward or descriptive, so some things are hard to find.

Wensberg's revision of Follett's Modern English Usage is one of those "Do as I say, not as I do" usage books. Careful readers of this book will have no trouble finding examples of Wensberg violating his own proscriptions. One example should be enough for this forum. On page 29 Wensberg writes "Perhaps the possessive noun is the part of speech most often mistaken for an antecedent. `On the Vice President's arrival at Kennedy Airport, he explained to reporters that...' The pronoun `he' could represent `the Vice President' (no 's), because both are in the nominative case. But the possessive `Vice President's' is no `he;' it serves as an adjective." Yet in his introduction on page viii he writes "I have gained both space and speed by trimming prolixities from Follett's prose and by making some explanations a bit simpler than he left them." So much for a possessive noun not being an antecedent to a pronoun.

The idea that a noun is the genitive case is an improper antecedent to a pronoun is erroneous. A noun in the genitive case is noun, not an adjective. In fact for as long as there has been an English language the case of antecedent noun has been irrelevent to a pronoun.

And that's all you need to know.

As one who thinks it necessary to own every major English usage manual from Fowler on, I here state the firm opinion that Follett is the best of the reasonably contemporary examples and second only to Fowler. Follett is more erudite, more complete (not more comprehensive, I grant), and more analytical than the rest. (Yes, Bryan, this means you). For example, compare his treatment of the indefensible "in terms of" to any other.
Someone speaks here of "disagreeing" with Follett's remarks on prescriptivism. Well, if you're not a prescriptivist then you oughtn't be reading usage manuals, and if you are one yet still disagree, you'd better find arguments more persuasive than his.
Another critic says Follett isn't terribly useful as a quick
how-to guide. Well, true, but the genuine articles never are.

A poor, incomplete and unwieldy reference. "Modern American Usage" fails to deal with many of the everyday issues people struggle with in their writing -- the list of omissions is long and varied -- and those that are included are sometimes addressed with a lack of thoroughness or clarity. Too often, and too irritatingly, entries merely redirect users to other headings, when the issue could easily have been resolved under the original entry-heading. Those involved in creating this edition seem not to appreciate that a little duplication goes a long way in making what is, first and foremost, a craftsperson's tool user-friendly.

This is a very handy book. Some will have different views of the guidance this book provides, but for the general writer this book can be very helpful. There is an essay in the back: "On Usage, Pedantry, Grammar, and the Orderly Mind". The more you agree with this essay the more you will like this book. And the more you find yourself disagreeing with the essay you will find yourself disliking this book.

It is organized in a way that looks like a dictionary, but you may or may not be using the same word or phrase as the book to find a specific topic. So, there is an Inventory of Main Entries in the front of the book you can quickly scan to find what you are looking for and then turn to that term in the main part of the book.

There is a lot of personal preference in deciding whether you like Fowler or Follett and which edition of either of them you choose. But I think any of them is better than struggling on your own. Even if you disagree with the book's recommendations you will have made a more informed choice. You will find your writing more confident and more clear. Isn't that enough?

This book starts out with the mention of "King Manuel I of Portugal presenting Pope Leo X with a white elephant from India". I know that Professor Zemon Davis (ZD) didn't intent this as irony but it is. Most of this book, a white elephant in itself, is based on heresy, guesses and flights of fantasy. The only parts of the book that she is truly able to document are the nine years that 'Leo Africanus: Giovanni Leone" spent in Europe, with seven of those being in Italy.

While in Italy he is purported to have written "Description of Africa" which was considered one of the few books written in Europe in the sixteenth century to document the Geography and sociology of North Africa. The book was written in Italian by the slave "Yuhanna al-Asad" who was born in Granada (Spain), brought up in Fez (Morocco) and captured by Christian pirates and given as a gift to Pope Leo X. This is the extent of what is known about our hero.

ZD spends over two hundred and seventy pages telling us this story that could be contained in a paragraph. The rest of the book are her musing on the Roman Catholic Church and the machinasation of the church curia over how to counter Martin Luther and to recapture North Africa and the Holy Land from the Moslems.

If your interested in this book read the Intro and the Chapters on Italy and the Comparison between Islam and Christianity, and skip the rest. As an example of the 'wistfulness' of this book, ZD spends sixteen pages on his 'return' after telling us that nothing is known about what happened to him after he left Italy.

To read a really excellent book about Leo The African, I recommend the far superior "Leo Africanus" by Amin Maalouf, a winner of several literary awards and an amazing book.

This book isn't really history or biography for that matter. Its an in-between kind of book that wants to imagine a past into existance based on speculation rather than evidence or fact. The factual details of the life of Leo Africanus would make a chapter. And even the facts we do have about his life are colored by a particular point of view which has to be questioned.

Natalie Davis does her best based on all sorts of other material to imagine a public and private life for the man. As speculative fiction, it works. The only problem being that ignorant readers will begin to take this book as if were fact rather than a created story. The fault I find is that the book doesn't draw enough distinction about what is being imagined versus the actual facts of his life.

The book is very good, but its not history or biography and should not be read as history or biography.

One star, there being no zero. While the wish to explore the subject is understandable, the outcome is confusing and boring. Read it if you want to find out how an interesting subject can become dull.

TRICKSTER TRAVELS: A SIXTEENTH-CENTURY MUSLIM BETWEEN WORLDS could also have been featured in our 'travel' section for its fascinating travelogue entries; but is reviewed here for its value to any studying 1500s history. Al-Wazzan trveled widely as an ambassador and merchant throughout Africa in the early 1500s, was captured by Spanish pirates and presented to Pope Leo X, where he converted to Christianity while explaining Islam to his puzzled audience. The charged politics and turmoil of his life and times brings history to life, with history professor Davis using manuscripts of the times - including some previously unknown - to explore fully al-Wazzan's image and importance. Unfamiliar with his name? Try 'Leo Africanus', author of the first geography of Africa.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

A reviewer from Bangalore hit the nail on the head when they said this book was meant to be an introduction into understanding China. This book is very easy to read and does an excellent job providing the reader a very general overview on China. If one is more interested in China's economy, something written by Nicholas Lardy or other economists with works on China would be appropriate; Minxin Pei is well known for his work on rural unrest in China, and so on and so forth. Bottom line, there are well known individuals for their work on China that can provide more details for certain areas. Mr. Starr leaves the reader to go out and deepen their knowledge.

The book tried to cover a lot of areas, which I think, has done quite superficially. And it seems to me that the author wrote the book to prove his points, and not exactly as the title suggested, to help understand China.

He gave a comparison of data between China and USA (which is good for american readers), however, as soon as the comparison does not support his point anymore, he would happily omit the data on the US and jump to his "conclusion" on China. As an example, to show his point that China's "huge" defense budget might be a concern for the stability of the region, he omitted the US defense budget to prove his point, as opposed to explain why/why not China needs such as budget. One has to look at the geographical size, and complexities of borders of China to see why China's defense budget is not that huge after all, as compared to the US's.

And there are a lot of areas like this in the book, or presented in a way that made Chinese people look like aliens, or made the country looks like it's FUBAR.

It is true that China has its fair share of problems. However, objective presentation is still in rigueur, especially for academic research.

It is disappointing, as you consider Starr's background, and the institution he is associated with. I'm not saying that he does not understand China, but he does not portray China in a way that help readers to understand China. Instead, it will just perpertuate the stereotyping.

This is a typical book, written by a "westerner", to prove a point. Readers who have very little knowledge of China should take it with a big grain of salt.

This book is a very neat compilation of facts and figures about China. It is also important to note what this book is not, which is a comprehensive dossier on China as it is today. The book's scope is introductory & to that end, it succeeds to a great extent.

The readership gets a lot of factual data about all that defines a country - its history, geography, politics, biggest issues, the military, environmental concerns & foreign policy. Although, I never suspected the author to back an established propaganda - the book is essentially erudite - I still do not discount a possibility that certain analysis & conclusions might, at times, seem coloured. I maintain, however, that if such is the case, it is probably more of a mistake than deliberate misleading.

Also, this densely information packed nature of the book can sometimes seem a positive handicap. Certain times, there is more information than is required to form an idea of the topic under discourse; & it is possible that a reader - who is not really concerned with research type material on China - might be actually burdened with this information overload. Chapter summaries or key points would have been great, given the depth of detailed data in this book.


I also maintain that China, or any country, is a trifle to complex to be "understood" by reading a book, but if it is an introduction that you're looking for, this book is a very good read.

S!

A political science professor of mine lent this book to me when I was batting around ideas for a term paper. I enjoyed this book for what it is and it doesn't claim to be the comprehensive body of knowledge on China's culture, history, politics and contemporary society. If you want that, spend your entire life in college studying it, but don't expect it from a book of this size.

This book is a wonderful tool for those who have a "beginner's interest" in China. This book inspired me to not only conduct my own research but to also read both broader and deeper into China's politics and history.

What is fascinating about this book is how much the author is able to cover. It's a very dense book full of information. If you're looking for insight and analysis, you might find it scattered between the paragraphs that have been well-researched.

One could easily know the necessary facts of Chinese culture and history after reading this book. It is also an accessible and well-organized book. I've used in research and it has helped to direct me to other bodies of research based on its content.

You will be satisfied with how adequate and resourceful this book is. If you're interested in just reading about China, or you're a student doing research, or a professor looking to brush up on China essentials, or even if you're just curious about some of the events in China's history, this is the book I'd recommend first and foremost.

This book accomplishes what it promises. It's a permanent member of my library and I have lent it to three people in the last two months, one of whom was another professor, who found it critical for her teaching of comparative Chinese politics.

Mr. Starr seems know a lot about China, but I don't think he understand China based on what he wrote in his book. His conclusion that "an abrupt collapse of the Party-state" is unlikely to happen. Just like those who predict Hong Kong will be a chaos after return to China's rule, Mr Starr failed to realize the fundermental change in China these days which will lead to a more stable China.

How often do we hear - or utter - the frequent complaint: "Why is life so complex?" However, as any evolutionary biologist would be pleased to remind you, this hasn't always been the case. Wallace Arthur takes up that fact forcefully in this book. Life began very simply and stayed that way for a very long time. Earth's population remained simple bacterial forms, some DNA stashed away in a protective enclosure, he reminds us, for over two billion years. Diversity, the foundation of the evolutionary process, seemed non-existent, yet this remains the core of biological teaching today. Arthur endeavours to set this record straight, doing so with an almost conversational delivery.

Keeping with the theme of simplicity, Arthur urges us to shed unnecessary philosophical thinking, opening with a chapter titled "Hand luggage only". The phrase recognises that most of us have preconceived notions of how life works. The core of that notion is that humans, just because they are complex creatures, sit somehow at the top of the evolutionary "ladder". The ability to think about life, which seems to be unique in our species, doesn't convey superiority. We are, after all, far outnumbered by the descendents of those simple organisms of long ago. Our species did emerge, and Arthur wants us to understand how. Instead of ladders, he uses the analogy of a lawn, level and with few disruptions.

Explaining life, to Arthur, is an exercise in pragmatism, not ideology. Using the cell as a starting point, his tour takes us to the embryo [he's a zoologist, hence the emphasis on animals instead of plants]. The embryo is a key feature in his theme, since it is here that cell duplication and diversification are best demonstrated. How does a fertilised egg know how to build a finished body from so elemental a beginning? The author explains how genes express proteins to guide the formation of organs and structure. Once it was thought that genes only expressed on one direction, but developmental studies now show that genes interact, even between distant cell hosts. Almost more importantly, he shows how, within limits, embryos bear evidence of their evolutionary roots. Complexity, arising from simple beginnings is a traceable process. Arthur shows how modern evidence allows tracking that path for such organs as nervous systems, hearts and circulation and other features.

In many ways, this is an admirable work. Arthur's chatty presentation makes one wish for a trip to Galway where he teaches to hear him discourse on this topic over a pint. He makes wonderful imagery in showing how our concept of "life" might need some re-thinking. What would a Martian arriving on a beach to discover a sand-castle think of such a regular structure? He returns to this idea in building his vision of complexity. Regrettably, he does this in a rather patchy manner, skipping about to address his topics. The novice reader will find this book something of a chore as a result. The book cries out for illustration - how many of his readers have seen graphics of the process of "gastrulation" which creates your insides? Why are trilobites important body forms? Although he provides a Glossary of terms, his "Further Reading List" is almost a joke.

Finally, almost lamentably, Arthur falls into the trap of trying to reconcile his studies with the notion of "creationism". Although he dislikes "creationists" as dishonest and abrasive, he concedes their numbers, particularly in the US. Instead, his final chapter is a declaration of his "agnosticism". He has already taken a swipe at Richard Dawkins over how "gradual" natural selection works. Here, he delivers what he clearly thinks is a telling blow, linking Dawkins' non-theism with a form of "faith". Declaring there's "no evidence either way", Arthur turns to John Maynard-Smith's observation that some fish with tails spotted like stellar constellations might be suggestive of a divine being. Since that sort of evidence hasn't appeared, the author thinks he can let the matter rest. It's a very insubstantial way to conclude what is otherwise a generally delightful read. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Arthur Wallace's book is an informal account of how biological complexity has arisen in the evolutionary history of life. The book is written in a conversational style and the individual chapters are short, giving the reader the satisfying feeling that he is `getting somewhere'. It is clear that Wallace, a professor of zoology, knows his subject well. While I agree with the author's thesis that the evolution of complexity can be largely explained through Darwinian evolution by natural selection (that is, without invoking additional mechanisms or anything supernatural or mysterious like an `intelligent designer'), I found the book generally disappointing in its lack of detail concerning the evidence supporting the account he proposes (which I feel could have been encapsulated in a brief essay instead of a full-length book). Wallace notes that a basic strategy for creating novelty and for building biological complexity can be expressed in just a few words: Duplication, Diversification, and Co-option- old genetic tools and morphological elements doing new tricks. Co-option (or `exaptation') is the process by which a structure or system with an original function adds or changes to a new function, a process which is enabled by redundancy and duplication. These ideas are not new, having been discussed in greater depth by a number of other evolutionary biologists and geneticists. While it is good to see them summarized succinctly in this book, there is a frustrating paucity of detail concerning specific examples of this evolutionary process. Wallace stresses the important role of alterations in developmental pathways as engines of evolutionary novelty, an idea which is also not new and embodied in the field of "Evo-Devo" (the study of evolution from a developmental perspective). However, discussion of Evo-Devo in the book is frustratingly limited (for readers seeking greater depth, I recommend Sean Carroll's book, Endless Forms Most Beautiful).

Wallace concludes that evolutionary history, at least in its broad strokes, is probably more predictable than has been acknowledged by other scientists stressing evolutionary contingency and divergence (e.g., S.J. Gould). Replaying the tape of life on Earth or on other Earth-like planets would probably yield similar (though certainly not identical) biological designs and would likely display similar evolutionary trajectories, at least on a coarse-grained scale. The fact of evolutionary convergence is often cited as evidence in support of this prediction (see Simon Conway-Morris's work for a rich account of evolutionary convergence). While I generally agree with Wallace's assessment, I found Wallace's case for evolutionary repeatability to be unsatisfying (for readers seeking a more persuasive and detailed argument for the repeatability and predictability of biological evolution see David Darling's book, Life Everywhere).

The author rightly dismisses so-called intelligent design (ID) as an explanation for life, biological complexity, and adaptation, claiming that the processes of divergence, duplication, and co-option occurring within a framework of Darwinian natural selection are sufficient to account for the evolution of biological complexity. While this may very well be the case (and I tend to agree), Wallace devotes little attention to how specific biological structures claimed by ID supporters to be "irreducibly complex" could have evolved via the strategies he mentions. Instead, he simply dismisses ID as "crass nonsense", without detailing precisely why it is so. In my opinion, it behooves the author to provide a much deeper critique of ID than he offers (for some excellent critiques of ID, see Young and Edis's Why Intelligent Design Fails, Perakh's Unintelligent Design, and Shanks' God, the Devil and Darwin: A Critique of Intelligent Design Theory).

Finally, Wallace describes himself as "a committed agnostic" with regard to God's existence and asserts that "committed atheism" is just as much of a faith position as is "committed theism". He cites Richard Dawkins as an example of a "convinced atheist". Dawkins may be "convinced", but he is not "committed", however. At least according to his most recent book, The God Delusion, Dawkins admits that he would give up his atheism if there were powerful evidence in support of theism. But Dawkins's atheism is hardly a dogmatic position- rather it is an intellectually honest and sensible one, which derives from following reason and evidence wherever they may lead. Wallace suggests that there is no evidence either for or against God's existence and that therefore the appropriate position is that of agnosticism. However, there is indeed evidence, both direct and background, which counts against the God hypothesis, thereby rendering the existence of God more improbable than not (for instance, one piece of evidence against the God hypothesis is that minds and intelligence are the derivative result of biological evolution- not primary- and that thought requires a physical substrate, e.g., a physical brain, in order to occur). How Wallace's "committed agnosticism" is not itself an example of "faith-based" dogmatism is beyond this reviewer's capacity to comprehend. Is there no evidence that in principle could sway him either way on the question of God's existence? Is Wallace a "committed agnostic" concerning the existence of fairies, ghosts, goblins, a host of pagan gods, and the "Flying Spaghetti Monster"? Does Wallace truly evaluate the probability that these extraordinary entities exist to be at 50 percent? If not, then what is the warrant for Wallace's "committed agnosticism" concerning the existence of God?

Wallace also blames Stalinist atrocities on the "faith of atheism". Overlooking Wallace's mistaken view that atheism (at least that which is the outcome of careful reasoning and an honest consideration of evidence) is "faith-based", Wallace's suggestion that Stalin's acts were done in the name of atheism is uncritical at best and misleading at worst. Arguably, the massacres of Stalin's reign were committed in the name of Socialist ideology, not atheism. His atheism (if indeed he was an atheist) appeared to be largely incidental, and not an essential motivation for his barbarous acts. At least Wallace's condemnation of atheism as the cause of Stalin's atrocities deserves a far more critical analysis than is offered in his book. And even if atheism was the primary motivation behind Stalin's acts (which is debatable), this does not thereby make theism or agnosticism any more intellectually defensible.

I was excited to read this book. I believe that we are "creatures of accident". The author failed at his goal to "demonstrate... that the rise of complex creatures can be explained with ease".

Evolution has a few simple concepts:
- Natural selection
- Survival of the fittest which allows inheritance of acquired characteristics. (Genes)
- Mutations, divergence of species (bad genes)

I am not a scientist, but I've been interested in creationism and evolution since 7th grade. I am now 43, and othen read literature on both subjects. This book failed because the author did not maintain his point of view. His thoughts turned into a litany of digressions; that made it difficult to get a concise understanding of evolution.

The first chapter titled "Hand Luggage Only" directed the reader to leave bias and preconceived notions behind and to read the book with an open mind. I'm not sure he made a point in the first chapter that set the course of the book or gave good reason to have an open mind. He continues the discussion with an explanation of life's lawn and life's ladder that became so confusing I considered whether it was worth reading more.

I found the last chapter on "Big Questions" most interesting. It showed that the author has his own baggage and failed to check it before attempting to explain a concept as intriguing and enlightening as evolution.

I do not agree with this author that atheism constitutes a system of faith. He seems angry at religion and seems to have a biased view of any opinion not his own. This is what constitutes a belief system; the notion that your understanding is correct and that everyone should/must agree with you. It is such dogmatic views that allow others to murder and slaughter their fellow human brothers and sister.

This book did not add to my understanding or appreciation of evolution, it revealed nothing.

Creatures of Accident: The Rise of the Animal Kingdom comes from a renowned professor of zoology in Ireland who delves into the weighty-sounding science of 'evolutionary developmental biology' - and while it may seem like this book is for college-level holdings, it will appeal equally well to general public library collections with its easy introduction to evolutionary theory. From analyses of the structure of life forms and the complex methods of evolution which are neither predictable nor straightforward to conflicts between creationism and evolutionary theory, this book provides both general reader and science readers with an easily-understood set of explanations, making it a top pick for both public and school holdings.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

I read a lot of magazine and Internet articles about science and written in plain English for general readers. The science is usually vague and often inaccurate. Wallace Arthur manages to get across real science while avoiding jargon. For example, the old biology cliché "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" is rendered as "development repeats evolution". This is followed by a few paragraphs of explanation. And he covers a number of topics which are important for understanding evolution that aren't generally included id beginners' books.

The most important of these is gene duplication. The machinery that manages our DNA sometimes makes extra copies of one or more genes. The duplicate copies may then undergo mutation and take on new functions while the old ones remain unchanged. A LOT of evolution involves gene duplication. Arthur doesn't say how gene duplication happens - that requires biochemistry - but it is important to know that it happens.

Another topic is development, from egg to adult. This is critical for understanding the evolution of complexity. Some genes involved in development, such as the Hox genes that Arthur mentions, are important in evolution. Copying of Hox genes is a major factor in the increasing complexity of animals; some more advanced books have charts showing the parallel between Hox gene duplication and increasing complexity. The interaction of genes and proteins is another important topic. And there are other topics, too much for me to cover in a short review.

Arthur frequently pauses to relate a current topic to what came earlier in the book, or to suggest what is to come. People who read a lot of science books are used to doing this for themselves and might be annoyed by Arthur's doing it. But for true beginners, this will probably be helpful.

Creatures of Accident provides only a beginning look at the natural processes that give rise to complexity. A number of other books - all more advanced - go into the subject in more depth. I have reviewed several of these and I recommend them. Click above on "See all my reviews" for more. There is also a brief summary in my Listmania list "Natural Processes That Promote Evolution". To find it, click on my name, above, and scroll down my profile page to that title. I will mention here that Sean B. Carroll's The Making of the Fittest is an excellent next book for someone who has read Creatures of Accident; a reader who has had a decent HS biology course might want to start with that book. Carroll's Endless Forms Most Beautiful would be suitable for a college course, but is suitable for readers who are not bio students. Darwin in the Genome by Lynn Caporale looks at the evolution of those natural processes themselves. There are a number of very good books ranging from elementary to some suitable for graduate bio majors.

Creatures of Accident won't convince anybody that the ID claim is false; there's not enough detail for that. But it will give beginners a start to learning what evolution is really about. And that means the prospect of a lot of exciting reading ahead.

It wearies to hear once more that Barthes' "The Empire of Signs" is an example of hypocritical cultural imperialism. It's been said too many times, and further it's an inaccurate assessment of the actual text to begin with. I don't see the need to apologize for this book before recommending it - simply a need to introduce it in terms of what it actually pretends to accomplish as well as what it never imagined it could do. In a word, it's hardly as though Barthes was a Heidegger.

As the reviewer mentions, Barthes' shows his hand from the very beginning and does not attempt in the least to produce an objective or scholarly account of Japan. Who could imagine that Barthes, no stranger to genuine historical and anthropological analysis (though he wrote none of his own) would ever have imagined to himself that, here, he could have produced, spontaneously, a passable work of scholarship in a slim volume containing no documentation or critical notes whatsoever?

If Barthes is working within any genre at all here, it's not that of scholarship but rather of the essay as first established by Michel de Montaigne. Montaigne's writings on indigenous Brazilians were in no way expected to provide an objective picture, much less construction, of life amongst the cannibals. Montaigne rather finds in the accounts he has heard of the Caribbeans an occasion to reflect on the concerns of his own culture, in particular epistemology, history and the value of the values of civilization. Montaigne was well aware of what he was about, as was Barthes.

There is clearly no need to question the merit of thorough anthropological and historical research. However, those disciplines do not exhaust the possibilities of writing on other cultures. That we possess the methods necessary for the production of objective accounts of cultures, does not mean we no longer have a need for more subjective (or perhaps more non- or pre-objective) forms of investigation. Reason and the understanding cannot take from the imagination what is its proper due.

It strikes me that the kind of phenomenological reverie evinced in Barthes' encounter with Japan (his "love affair" with chopsticks, which is openly fetishistic and evokes a dual, maternal phallus which is not-one, which does not slice but rather unswaddles or snuggles a dumpling) is highly indebted not only to Montaigne's writings but also to Bachelard's later critiques of objective science. This sort of literary entry into a "paradis artificiel" does not come without a price. And certainly the cost of entry to, or residence in, this world of maternal jouissance was one which not only Baudelaire himself, but also numerous other writers, as antique as Augustine or as recent as Barthes himself, were perfectly willing to admit, and indeed make the problematical focus of entire books and careers.

Barthes' "The Empire of Signs" is not only a welcome complement to more conventional scholarly writing, but is in fact conditioned and called for by it - as Barthes says elsewhere, the only proper response to writing is more writing. If Barthes had not written this book, someone else would have had to write it instead.

Barthes tells us about Japan but I would recommend his exploration into another culture as a pattern to follow in your next travelling. Signs and meanings behind the surface.

Barthes talks of an emptiness of language necessary to reach enlightenment, but occasionally emptiness is just emptiness. Exhibit A: "Empire of Signs."

That might be a little harsh. It might be better to say that Empire of Signs is an example of art for art's sake. Barthes claims to be attempting to isolate a number of features, treat them as signs, and create a system called Japan. Barthes does indeed make good on his promise (or is it a threat?) and paints a very vivid, creative system he calls Japan. He admits that he has little knowledge of Japan to begin with, and so his observations are primarily reflections of his own imagination and not the country that actually is called Japan.

At this point red lights should be flashing and loud alarms should be going off in the reader's head: what Barthes admits to doing is exactly what he claims to abhor--Orientalism. Empire of Signs is a beautifully written, intelligent book (which is why I give it two stars instead of one), but by no means is it anything more than an essay on Japan According To Roland Barthes. Furthermore, although Barthes claims to have an indifferent opinion toward Japan, it become clear right away that he is in love with Japan when he starts his odes to pachinko and his love poems for the chopstick. The good news is that Barthes doesn't seem to be taking himself too seriously: the tone of the book is light, almost stream-of-consciousness in style. I just can't help but shudder to think that there are people out there who are trying to think of Japan and the Japanese in terms of