Columbia Books

Difference and Repetition is the most brilliant work of philosophy I have read. However the book does rely on a huge amount of background knowledge which took my over a year and a half to compile. My advice for any reader attempting to read D&R is to read Manuel DeLanda's Intensive Science and Virtual Philosophy. All of the obscure references to mathematical and scientific concepts are throuroughly explicated in DeLandas book. I can honestly say that if it were not for Intensice Philsosophy and Virtual Science I would not have been able to comprehend the key philosophical concepts deployed in D&R such as singlarities as pre-individual attractors and the nature of the virtual.

D&R is a work which may require intense effort from the reader, as none of the concepts are adequately explained by deleuze himself. But the challenge is most rewarding as the book gives you the concepts to think about a world without pre established identities and stabilities. Only now is science beginning to comprehend the universe as inherently random and dynamical which gives rise to complex self organizing systems.

A classic of modern philosophy and a brilliant achievement by an author who thought outside all contemporary philosophical trends to overthrow the 'father' of philosophy: Plato.

Much worth the effort, if a 19 year old Undergraduate can make sense of this book then anyone with enough time, patience and conceptualisation should be able to master this brilliant work.

It took me reading Deleuze's books on Kant, Bergson, Nietzsche, Foucault and his collaborations with Guattari in Thousand Plateaus and Anti-Oedipus to finally get through this book . Difference and Repetion explains all the others, but is incredibly dense and in no way an introduction to his thinking. If you're familiar with his project, however, then this brings the rest of his readings into focus.
It's in this book that Deleuze gets as close as he ever comes to replying to Hegel, and in that sense it's here that he contends with the master and the dialectic--a battle or contest characteristic of his French compatriots (see Vincent Descombes' fantastic book: Modern French Philosophy; and Michael Hardt's summary of the early Deleuzian projects: Gilles Deleuze: An Apprenticeship in Philosophy). Difference and repetition are such an alternative to the dialectic that they're difficult to grasp without a serious grounding in metaphysics (see his books on Kant and Hume especially), Spinoza, and Bergson.
Deleuze wants to show that there is a materiality of expression that is also a movement within time, an unfolding that is also a becoming ( and in this sense in contrast to Being). This movement image (which founds his analysis in the Cinema books) grounds for Deleuze a transcendental empiricism, which is to say a non-conceptual and material, positive and affirmative idea of thought. Read his books on Kant and Hume first for an overview of his critique of representation.
I think this book is stunning, and i hope to read it over and over. The first three chapters are incredible, and amount to nothing short of a complete undoing of representational thought, or what he characterizes as a logic of the same.

This is (arguably) the most important work written by Deleuze for a reason that seems to me is often obscured or merely forgotten: it is (maybe) the only work that seeks to lay the foundation for a systematic treatment of `difference' and by ex-tension (or in-tension) `repetition'. It does not seek to derive `difference' and `repetition' (simply) from identity and the in-dividual. It seeks to think of `difference' and `repetition' in themselves. And this is what is important here: thinking (and not some petty play of figures and words in the frontal attacks or soul mating with particular thinkers) in its rhizomatic form rather than its arborescent one.

What is therefore central in this work is `idea', and (therefore) `perception'. In simple terms, Deleuze has managed to provide us with some foundational links with the philosophies of mind, language and time (and moreover besides). He has given to the philosophy of difference a central and unifying role (across such and other disciplines) to play.

In this sense `difference' and `repetition' are not only (simply) linked between them (in the sense that one leads to the other), but also linked with other important notions usually discussed and developed in other (philosophical) disciplines. Let me provide some brief indications.

Chapter 1 is concerned with `difference', not as mere `diversity', `otherness' or `negation', bur rather as `general' or `specific' difference, where the latter refers to the moment when difference is reconciled with the concept in general. In this manner, Deleuze sees `difference' as a concept of reflection in relation to `representation' that involves `movement'. He further discusses the notion of `eternal return' and questions the adoption of a `meta-viewpoint' for thinking about `difference' and `repetition' - the latter being the relation between originals and simulacra.

In chapter 2, Deleuze lays out the relation between (the dualities) `repetition' and `sensing', `habit', and `difference', under the guise that "difference inhabits repetition", in that it "lies between two repetitions" (p.76). He also makes the distinction between `natural' and `artificial' signs, hence the distinction between two types of `difference', one being the expression of the other. In parallel, he distinguishes `active' from `passive' synthesis (relative to time) in that "the activity of thought applies to a receptive being, to a passive subject" (p.86). Finally drawing on Bergson, he distinguishes the `real' centre from where emanates a series of `perception-images' from a `virtual' centre from where emanates a series of `memory-images'.

Chapter 3 is for Deleuze the most important (sic) because the thinking of `difference' and `repetition' is based on a dogmatic image of thought characterised by eight postulates, each with a dual form, the artificial and the natural.

In Chapter 4, this duality underlies the development of the notion of `idea' in that it is problematic, hence dialectical, an "n-dimensional, continuous, defined multiplicity" (p.182) in a `perplication' as the distinctive and coexistent state of ideas. Each `idea' is thus linked with `difference' and `representation' in that "the representation of difference refers to the identity of the concept as its principle" (p.178). In this manner he makes the claim for the superiority of problematic-questioning approach over the (traditional) hypothetico-apodictic approach because questions are imperatives.

Chapter 5 starts with the claim that "difference is not diversity. Diversity is given, but difference is that by which the given is given, that by which the given is given as diverse" (p.222). Difference is therefore (a given) `intensity' expressed as `extensity'. There is `depth' that unites intensity and extensity. Therefore, `depth' is the intensity of being from where emerge at once extensity and the qualities of being. In this manner Deleuze accepts a dual condition of difference: one natural and one artificial.

In the concluding chapter Deleuze argues that 'representation' is a site of transcendental illusion which comes in four interrelated forms relative to `thought', `sensibility', `idea' and `being'. Hence the problematic of 'grounding' representation and his argument (or Idea) for 'groundlessness', and the justification of the use of (systems of) 'simulacra' as sites for the actualisation of ideas. Hence that of `difference' and `repetition' where the former is not only located between the levels and degrees of the latter, but also has two faces, namely, habit and memory.

Overall, despite the difficulty of the text itself as it takes for granted knowledge of the philosophies of some other thinkers (e.g. Bergson), it is a central text in the philosophy of difference and for just this reason, a text one must have read!

Difference and repetition struck me as nothing I've ever read before has struck me. The fun thing about "reading" it, is that, when you think about it, the act of reading itself makes understanding parts of this work more clear. Reading this becomes a "machinic" activity as it were: immediate, affective, with its own unpredictability, with many gaps, moments of insight, despair, and so on. It seems contradictory, because I think it is the most rigorous and analytic of all of Deleuzes works. But it is immensely dense, as other reviewers also say.
It is certainly the crucial work in his oeuvre. Really if you have tried it a few times, you will notice that many ideas of his later work are based on the crucial notions of this grand exploration. Anti-Oedipe is such a delight to read and easy to understand after this one.

And I think it is good for those who want to approach Deleuze's thought, to start with the Anti-Oedipus and Mille Plateaux, then read some of the smaller and intensive works (What is philosophy, Leibniz et le Baroque). Then try this book. You will get many references and want to read all others once again.

It is clearly in this work that you will find the first monstrous and frontal attack against Hegel's dialectic. The fun thing is that this is a complete "anti-work". Every conceivable concept of modern philosophy (from the concept of "common sense", "history", or "being") gets an "anti", with which Deleuze consistently builds his grand idea of the immediate, the pre- or non-representational and the virtual--against any metaphysics. It is moreover his first, and I think also his last work where he builds his philosophy in a consistent manner.
After this one, I think he started exploring fragments of his thought more deeply, in his other works, which are derivatives so to speak. This is his goodbye to classic French philosphy (strong tradition of exploring the "history of philosophy") and his entrée into his own experimentation with the concepts he just developed.
To conclude, just some practical notes. The problem with the book is that, unlike his other works, you have to read all of it (because it is so consistent). This makes it a project for months, or even years. Good luck.

Many people consider this to be the cornerstone of Deleuze's body of work, and in many ways it is. In many ways it is also invaluable, and perhaps the most significant piece of philosophy to emerge in the last half-century (though I don't think so, but I also don't think we're ready for this book yet, so I await Deleuze's Kojeve eagerly). Difference and Repetition is a front to back masterpiece, and on every page Deleuze's colossal creative genius is on full display. But, that doesn't mean you'll like it--in fact, I bet you (in your heart of hearts) won't. And I'm not challenging anyone--I don't even like it. Even stronger: I can't really fathom how it is POSSIBLE to like it. Let me tell you why, if you haven't already tried the beast a few times (in which case you know already).
D&R runs at a pace and a level of sophistication that perhaps no one in the world besides Deleuze himself could completely follow. It is assumed that not only are you familiar with the ins and outs of some of the most obscure aspects of people like Kant, Leibniz, and Bergson--but that you also be familiar with Deleuze's take on those aspects (which I just dont see how you could grasp in any way but superficially from this book). It's also assumed that you have experience in differential calculus and its theoretical underpinnings (granted mostly from Leibniz and Structuralism, but come on, who can really explain what a "singular point" is without it?). And to top all of that off, it is, very apparently (I won't say really) unwieldy and circulates between all of the above mentioned and more and much more in the snap of a finger. No doubt part of the book's affect and greatness, but, no doubt, more than part of the reason why no one can (under)stand it.
I'm not kidding when I say this: D&R is indisputably the most difficult piece of philosophy I've ever read. It will run off 15-20 dense pages at a time that are not just prolix and turgid, but sometimes senselessly so. Yeah, you wrestle with it about three or four times, you have your moments of lucidity, little chunks here and there that are admittedly shining examples of what sort of a writer Deleuze was and would become. But I repeat: you think Kant, Heidegger, Whitehead, Derrida, Jameson, and Hegel are difficult? I swear before everything holy and unholy this book that you might buy today is infinitely more difficult than anything any of them ever wrote.
But don't take my word for it. Try it, and be honest with yourself. Don't just get it so you can say "oh, come on, it's not that bad." Try and explain it, try and give accounts for your explanations, try and tie it all together, or not. Until I see a lucid exposition of this book (like Holland's for AO), I refuse to believe that anyone really likes it or understands its SPIRIT (not of course the letter, which anyone can get, and parrot). Yet--undoubtedly worth every minute of your time. Such is the enigma of Deleuze...

This book is a powerfil critique of reductionist and/or simulation (modeling) approach to mind/body problem, and "what is life" question. Rosen builds his case against Church Thesis, arguing that contemporary mathematical and, more generally, scientific rigor, which bans impredicative loops from scientific discource, would not allow us to build what he calls "new science", which is needed to account for life and consciousness.

More than once he mentiones Goedel Theorem, as well as various paradoxes, encountered by science over the centuries, emphasizing the fact, that they all are directly related to the impossibility to draw definite border between an observer and her object (not just in quantum physics).

Although the book was very interesting for me, i felt that some essays essentially repeated the material, already covered in other parts of the same book. Also, this "new science", which Rosen thought is needed to deal with open systems, is never really described in any way, so we are left with critique only.

I am not sure i fully agree with Rosen's view of the Turing Test, which he only sees as a simulation approach to the mind (intelligence) problem. My understanding is that Turing Test should be rather understood in the "observer/object" context, meaning that the participant makes a judgement, being, at the same time, fully incorporated into the system.

In one of the essays Rosen says: "If somebody wants to call this 'vitalism' - then ... so be it." With no constructive theory in site it's a bit like this, to my understanding.

This collection of essays, along with Rosen's other book _Life Itself_, are mandatory reading for any scientist or any astute layperson interested in biology, physics or philosophy of science.

Rosen was a very insightful and technically capable theoretical biologist. His work - first as a student of physicist and theoretical biologist Nicholas Rashevsky, and later as professor emeritus at Dalhousie - is unquestionably of the level of importance of Einstein's Special/General Theory of Relativity, or Godel's Incompleteness Theorems. This is a grand claim to make, but once you read Rosen's work, you will see for yourself.

These are not the easiest books to read, despite Rosen's excellent writing skills. The difficulty is two-fold. First and foremost, the new concepts and paradigms presented are of such breadth and profundity that it can take several readings to begin to fully grasp them adequately. Secondly, Rosen is mathematically (and otherwise) quite astute. The reader will encounter to some degree: category theory, topology, catastrophe theory (Rosen dedicates a chapter on genericity in _Essays_ to Rene Thom), differential equations, dynamical systems, Godel, Church-Turing, as well as philosophical topics of epistemology, ontology, and foundations of biology, mathematics and physics.

This should not, however, deter even the non-professional. Particularly in _Life Itself_, Rosen progresses carefully and patiently, even including a short intro to Category Theory. One can gloss over some of the math and still garner most of the insights from the text alone. _Essays_ utilizes a wider range of math skills, since that book covers a broader range of topics, but it is still quite accessible to the careful and astute reader.

In _Life Itself_, Rosen was investigating the question posed by Erwin Shrodinger originally in his 1943 lecture "What is Life?". Rosen's search led him to peel back in careful detail the foundations of Newtonian mechanics and reveal the underlying tacit assumptions of a state/phase-based physics and the repercussions for science in general, and biology in particular.

By setting aside state/phase-based physics, Rosen then proceeded to layout the groundwork for an atemporal relational biology based on functional organization and to methodically investigate the theoretical limits of mechanistic systems, including along the way: simulation, Turing machines, and the epistemology and ontology of such systems. The distinction eventually becomes clear that any such algorithmic mechanisms cannot embody the kinds of impredicative complexity that are characteristic of an organism. Because the syntax of Newtonian physics can express no such closed loops of entailment, "life" cannot even be described in that model of physics, much less modeled in any complete way. Thus it is that biological organisms are not a mere subset of current physics, but are representative of complexities that require physics to be enlarged.

In _Essays on Life Itself_, Rosen uses his considerable abilities across a broad spectrum of topics to continue the ideas from _Life Itself_. It is difficult to describe how topics as diverse as the assumptions of Pythagoras, the Turing test, universal unfoldings, morphogenesis, mind-brain problem, and more can be in the same book. Mostly, they all in one way or another accomplish one task: to look beyond the limits of how a problem is currently being viewed, and to see it from a larger perspective. Often, these perspectives take Rosen into terrain others would avoid, since they sometimes lead into the non-algorithmic / noncomputable, or the breakdown of the presumed subject-object division, or other kinds of "messy" scenarios.

Often they lead into "complex systems", where Rosen uses the word "complex" to define a certain class of systems - those systems have symptoms of being: impredicative, non-algorithmic, context-dependent, semantic, nonformalizable. This classification is not a desire for obfuscation or ineffability, but is as rigorous as the nonformalizability of Number Theory or the unsolvability in closed form of the n-body problem. It is a complexity akin to the size of a transfinite number: it is not simply a matter of merely being hugely complicated, it is rather an entirely different order of system structure.

However, guided by Rosen, one does not feel uneasy following his path. Rather one feels enriched both in knowledge and in paradigm. Distinguishing the broader generic case from the degenerate or special is a characteristic theme in Rosen. The unfamiliar terrain he argues to is thus not some void, but a grander scale that subsumes the orthodox view.

In that grander view, it may become more clear that some problems are based on incorrect assumptions, while some are more difficult or complex than in the more limited original view. However, it is apparent that Rosen is uninterested in making problems appear simpler by ignoring those difficulties - he is interested in where the science leads. It is an immensely richer, complex view of the physical world that one comes away with. As such, it presents some difficult challanges, but it also opens up vast opportunities - opportunities not visible in the neat and tidy fantasy model of science that generally prevails where it is assumed that with enough effort everything can be reduced or calculated.

Rosen writes deliberately and with precision, and is both a critical and a profound thinker. I hope that he one day receives the recognition and admiration he rightfully deserves.

Dr. Rosen was a great man and this collection of essays follows on a number of foundational and classic works. The essays expand on, and clarify, a number of key issues that are present throughout Rosen's work. These include the Church-Pythagoras thesis, the mind-body problem, reductionism, syntatics and semantics, and biology and technology.

My main contribution to what has already been said in other reviews is to note that this work might be best viewed as a complement to Rosen's earlier work, Life Itself. Or, said differently, it might be best to read Life Itself first (if you haven't already). These are very complex topics that are explained from the standpoint of biology and mathematics and those without a previous foundation in Rosen's work--as I was when I bought this book--may find they have to establish that foundation first.

This collection of papers and presentations, published posthumously, is a companion to Rosen's earlier books "Life Itself" and "Anticipatory Systems: Philosophical, Mathematical and Methodological Foundations". This is probably the most accessible of his work to those without a fairly solid mathematical background. Not that this should prevent people from reading the earlier work since there are many sections that will be quite clear; I just feel that unfortuntely the crucial points of "Life Itself" might be lost due to the seeming technical nature of the explanation.

This is truly paradigm-shifting, moreso than anything else you are likely to read about in science. The Sante Fe crowd such as Stuart Kauffman obviously did not even grasp what Rosen was talking about when they met back in 1994 and that is even more tragic. So much time has been wasted with such money-wasters like the genome mapping fiasco when it could have been going into exploring new axioms for science.

For you see, this is what Rosen so eloquently points out in his work: the present axioms of science are much too limiting to explain anything we really would like to know about the universe. It is very interesting to see that Rosen grasped the implications of what also caught Einstein and Schrodinger's attention: the problem of inertial and gravitational mass. Rosen also points out the myriad of other areas where science has been busy putting band-aid after band-aid on the present set of theories to try to make them predict real phenomena.

For this is the problem with the present-day paradigms: they are only useful for predicting the N+1 state for some dead (and therefore uninteresting) mechanistic universe. The evidence has been staring us in the face for quite a while and I am not sure why Rosen should have been the first to analyze where the problems lie; it is even more surprising why his work appears to be so little known.

I also like the fact that this book is much more polished than his previous work. The index is mostly complete and there is also a list of references. I didn't note very many editorial erros and the language is quite friendly. This is a very high-quality science book and I suspect the first editions will be going for large prices in about 20 years when the "establishment" finally figures out where they went wrong.

Buy this and read it. And read it again. Then wonder why we are rushing pell-mell to "engineer" the world when we don't understand it at all.

Robert Rosen died in December of 1998 after a long bout with diabetes and its complications. He left a significant quantity of unpublished notes and had this book in the publication process. His last "writings" were hand done on paper with great effort due to extensive peripheral neuropathy. It was a mixed blessing to be among the first to read his last works both this manuscript and the next, unfinished one. I am saddened by our loss even as I feel his presence through his writings.

Bob was an eloquent speaker and reading this set of essays is almost as good as hearing him in person. The essays were written to be published in a number of places, usually as invited talks, yet they may as well have been set down to be a book from the start. There is a thread of continuity that makes this the case. In addition, even though I had read many of the essays as they appeared earlier, their juxtaposition in this volume proves that "the whole is more than the sum of its parts"!

His stated purpose of this collection is to, in a sense, "flesh out" arguments in Life Itself (LI) that had to be short or even omitted for what might be called "logistic" reasons. In my opinion the essays do that at least. In LI he began with a caveat with which I am totally sympathetic. He warned the reader that he was weaving a very intricate cloth with a single linear thread and therefore much was being laid upon the reader's shoulders. My own experience is that it took numerous readings to begin to see how the weave was manifest. Once there, things fell into place more and more quickly, yet still a lot more was required because the design is so highly interconnected and rich in levels of meaning. I hope this book of essays will spare others that struggle. It will never be my place to evaluate that possibility since I can never go back.

The first part deals with the relationship of biology and physics within science, which can sound like an innocent enough topic until one understands that it is a revolutionary view.

Underlying it all is the common notion that physics is the source of all scientific laws and that chemistry and biology somehow must utilize physics to be scientific. Rosen rejects this notion and thereby opens a Pandora's Box. He uses the now more than fifty year old essay by Schrödinger, What is Life? as a springboard to the revealing argument about biology's more generic character in comparison to physics. As he does this he develops his notion of complexity as a description of this more generic view promoted by biology in contrast to the kind of "simple systems" which are the subject matter of physics. None of this should sound new to anyone who has read his earlier work, especially Life Itself, except for the new connections and new depths to which the arguments are taken. The result is a more solid whole than ever before

His introduction to this part of the book is worth having here to get a flavor for where he is going: "I claim that Gödelian noncomputability results are a symptom, arising within mathematics itself, indicating that we are trying to solve problems in too limited a universe of discourse." This is a nice capsule version of Rosen's message. If nothing else comes from his writings, this alone should change everyone who understands the message.

The book develops this theme along with the idea that science has limited itself unnecessarily. It created a surrogate world and then insisted that any observations about the real world not compatible with this model were "unscientific". The consequences are many and he explores them systematically. Whether you agree or disagree, an honest reading will require you to re-examine your beliefs.

I found this copy last week at Waterstone in London . It made me feel the plane ride was very short! I should have bought a couple. This is a great book for a refresher in analytical philosophy: pleasant, clear. Great training for people who tend to forget elementary relationships.
I did not know that JAP was a logician. Go buy this book!
The only competition is "Think" by Blackburn (rather boring).

IN John Allen Paulos's book 'I think therefore I laugh: An alternative approach to Philosophy', he is inspired by Ludwig Wittgenstein's statement that one can write a comprehensive Philosophy book consisting of jokes alone. If you get the joke, you get the philosophical point. After reading this book, I tend to agree. If we really think about it, it's surprising how many jokes we crack everyday; mundane, sophisticated, derogatory, or otherwise, mostly at the expense of others. Many of these jokes are downright stupid, and we are aware of that. Now in this book, Paulos explains why they illustrate important points of philosophy. And in doing so, he sure gives us a rollicking, rib-tickling time. Paulos weaves an extremely entertaining web of anectodes, humor, and language puzzles, each time demonstrating a central philosophical point. In doing so, he also pays due homage to more or less most famous classic and contemporary philosophers including Russell, Wittgenstein, Hempel, Dewey, Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, Hume, Descartes, Kant, Quine and Popper, among others. He uses examples from daily life, indicating the paradoxes we unknowingly indulge in during our everyday hustle- bustle. He inspires us to look about for such examples, and most importantly have a good laugh about them.

Case in point. Today, I started to read the manual of a computer program named SYBYL which I am supposed to learn. All of you will know how mind numbingly unforgiving a manual reading session can be. However, my spirits were immediately uplifted when, on the first page of the manual, I saw the following typed statement:
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK
I got the joke; I got the paradox. I laughed- thanks to Paulos.

Highlights of the book include a hilarious dialogue between two most unlikely men: Bertrand Russell and Groucho Marx, trapped in an elevator on a 'virtual' level in the Empire State Building. Their conversation is completely nonsensical, each talking from his unique point of view. But just like Lewis Carroll's nonsense, it makes perfect sense. All through the book, Paulos uses two proverbial scapegoats, George and Martha, to illustrate the finer points of philosophical thought through seemingly idiotic, bizzare and generally hilarious conversations. In doing so, he touches upon reductionism, syllogism, sylligism, opportunism, and most of the other famous "isms". A few examples:

Everybody loves a lover
George does not love himself
Hence George does not love Martha

Illogical as the above argument looks, by the rules of logic, Paulos explains that it makes perfect sense. Or consider this "Proof that God exists"

1. God exists
2. Both these statements are false.

Welcome to the world of paradoxes! Some thorny thinking convinces us that irrespective of whether the second statement is true or false, the first statement HAS to be true. In fact, you can substitute any statement in place of the first one (For example, 'George Bush was in love with Elizabeth Taylor'). The second one will guarantee that it's true.
How about this one. Its a chilly winter night and Martha meets George in front of his house.

Martha: George, what are you doing?
George: Oh, I am looking for my car keys. I lost them near that bush there.
Martha: So why aren't you looking for them there?
George: Because its brighter here and I can see better.

Some of the examples are outright stupid, great examples of PJs that all of us crack sometime or the other.

Martha: That's the last straw! I have had enough of this. I wash my hands of the whole business.
George: A good idea. You can wash your neck too.

Paulos says that this dialogue actually demonstrates an important philosophical principle.

The title of the third section is: "The Titl of This Section Contains Three Erors"
Can you spot them? If yes, you would have unearthed a very important philosophical 'classification of classes or sets', having deep implications for math and logic.

Another examples of this 'classification of classes':
'Robert Benchley once remarked, "There may be said to be two classes of people in the world; those who constantly divide the people of the world into two classes, and those who do not." He should have added paradoxically that he belongs to the latter class.

I could go on and on! But I don't want to give away the wonder of the book. It is a truly refreshing read, for the sheer reason that it shows us how we can constantly laugh at others, life, and most importantly ourselves, and have an educational experience doing it. I think it would be a fascinating experience for us to glance around everyday, and have a look at the idiosynchracies that we indulge in, the jokes that we crack, and the criticisms that we dispense, and endure, knowingly and unknowingly demonstrating philosophical insights. Paulos tried to convince us that there is more to daily life than we think, and that philosophy need not be a separate 'subject' to be studied. It is a part of our everyday where-withal and exemplified in all its glory in all our relationships. I had a ball of a time reading this book, and I think that you will too.

This is a wonderful joining of laughter (which nearly everyone does) and mathematics/logic (which not as many do well as they should be able to - me included). I would hesitate to use it as a supporting text in a mathematics, logic or philosophy class but many of the examples given would be great teacher's aids. (The book is sometimes too technical for students and its technical details may alienate some of them - in my estimation anyway.) But I have written elsewhere (see 'Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea') that I believe mathematics education will be greatly assisted by humanising it, putting people back into it (who could not be fascinated by Ramanujan, Erdos, Gauss and company?). The writings of Paulos would be a great tool in this direction and I wouldn't hesitate in prescribing 'Innumeracy', for example, as a required text. This book, however, would be a great source of ideas for a teacher or an interested reader like myself. And there are some very good laughs too!

It takes a rare writer to synthesize Descartes, Russell and Marx - Groucho, that is. Somehow John Paulos manages to write a treatise on analytical philosophy (logic, self-referential statements, language recognitition) using examples from humor. Yet perhaps that is the story - that humor comes from logical contradiction.

Written for the non-philosopher, this concise book is packed with great learning and quite a few laughs as well. Definitely a worthwhile read.

Paulos is entertaining, awesome, etc. My first book by him I couldn't put down. I was so intrigued with Innumeracy that I even had a hard time finding time to do my math homework. Ironically, Innumeracy was "advertised" in the math book that I was working in. Really, any books by this genius is worth your time and money. "I Think" reminds me a little of Lewis Carroll, word and math games. Paulos does what all of these math wizards out there claim they can do: make math more palatable and interesting. I tried, "Laugh With Math." What? I wasn't laughing! Paulos, I believe, doesn't even have to try.

this is the best book i've ever read. amazing primer on the movie business. BUY IT!

I just finished this book, and Cliff Robertson is actually a very minor character. In fact, the subject of him being "blackballed" is barely mentioned. (It receives one paragraph in the Epilogue.) Robertson was the first person to suspect something was amiss at Columbia, but the book is actually about the power struggle between the President of Columbia, Alan Hirschfield, and the controlling interests of the shareholders, led primarily by Herbert Allen Jr. This is a long book, but it was so riveting that I found it difficult to put down. It is really well written, even if it does not paint any of the characters in a terribly sympathetic light. I can't help but think that if Hirschfield had shown more backbone in the beginning and stuck by his decision to fire the check-forger Begelman instead of caving in to Allen's demands, none of this epic battle would have happened.

This is not really a tale of embezzlement and disgrace - it is the store of power struggles between the Board of Directors for Columbia Studios, who were clearly had personal loyalty in their underlings as their top priority, and the CEO, Alan Hirschfield, trying to do what he needed to do to save the studio.

I don't have access to people at this level, so I appreciate the peeping-Tom aspect of viewing the thought processes and actions of people who normally hide behind lawyers, secretaries, and call-screeners.

The author obviously interviewed many many people to put this book together, and I appreciate how he reported on the media coverage, as well. I never really thought of how people manipulate the news as part of the story, but course it is.

The book is like a newspaper story in that it is filled with information, but the narrative reads like a novel - very easy to read. The author does a good job of developing story-lines, so we have a sense of completeness, and a sense of an overview, while also sprinkling the famous names and the glamour that makes Hollywood so compelling to people.

I've never understood why Hollywood turns out bad movies month after month, year after year, when it is so easy to tell from the beginning that a movie is going to be awful. Why make awful movies?

This book doesn't directly address that issue, but it shows how irresponsible and irrational the leading powers that control Hollywood on both coasts are, and how corrupt the whole system is. It's obvious that normal things like making a good product become irrelevent to their attention span.

I guess it's not really corruption, if everyone knows it's happening, and it's just a way of getting things done.

My only complaint is that I wish I had more of a reality on the Board Directors. Their actions seem so irrational, but I'm sure it's because they were not forthcoming in their interviews, and did not take the opportunity to express their points of view. People at that level are notorious for avoiding the press, so it is not surprising.

I bought this book when it first came out and have reread it every year or so. Tends to be a bit long and sometimes slow, but it's great. Buy a used copy, or check at the library.

Being from the Washington D.C. area I kept constantly asking why someone didn't leak this to the press and blow the whole compiristy.

The only comparable book is "The Great Salad Oil Swindle"

David Begelman, powerful head of a studio thinks he is above the law, until an actor by the name of Cliff Robertson exposes him. This book is a well written tale of immorality in a town known for it's lack of scruples. Hollywood insiders should not be surprised at this tale, but I was. The check Begelman forged was for a small amount. The man made more than that in a month. The book exposes the reasons why a man who had it all, would choose to commit such a crime and fall from grace. I was quite disappointed by Robertson's treatment by Hollywood's hierarchy when he was the victim, not Begelman. But it proves just how far studios will go to protect the bottom line. I read this book when it was first published years ago and I'm reading it again. The list of books I will read more than once is a short one. I highly recommend it.

Very interesting and orginal book. It's arrived very fast. Thank you.
Alessandro Mussini - Genova

Rawls has finally brought his powerful project of sociological and political philosophy to a conclusion with insights he may not have expected when he first published Political Liberalism in 1993.
The inclusion of his 'Reply to Habermas', after having also read Habermas' critique, helped him and specially me to understand the issues raised in that exchange and to enjoy following them. The inclusion also of 'The Idea of Public Reason Revisited' is very worthwhile, as it maps out the amendments he had started to make to Political Liberalism that had been cut short by his death.

Imagine that the U.S.A. has decided to re-found itself, and you have been elected by a large geographical constituency as one of the founding fathers who must negotiate the principles for a new Constitution; further imagine that you are similarly elected to the Constitutional Convention to draft the new constitution under these principles, the Legislature which translates this constitution into law, and the Supreme Court which interprets this law in the light of experience.

You must do your duty by the people who have elected you and the generations to follow, but your electorate has no specific social character and your only mandate is to found a just constitution which will provide stable conditions for social cooperation and a well-ordered society.

How will you conduct yourself in negotiations with your fellow nation-founders? What kind of reasoning can you rely upon? You have your beliefs, but the others hold to different beliefs. And you are going to have to justify your actions to your constituency which is made up of all kinds of people, with all kinds of beliefs and all kinds of interests. You are going to have to explain yourself in a way which will seem reasonable to people who may not share your beliefs and be acceptable to those who do share your beliefs.

This is the thought experiment which John Rawls invites his readers to conduct. Rawls argues that ever since Catholicism and Protestantism fought each other to a standstill in Renaissance Europe, and the separation of Church and State was accepted as unavoidable, "reasonable pluralism" has become a fact of life for modern societies, and a fact which should be welcomed. He argues that if you conduct such a thought experiment, then you would have to come up with a conception of political liberalism something like that which he develops in his own thought experiment written up as Theory of Justice (1971) and more recently, Political Liberalism (1995).

Whether to endorse slavery, free market capitalism, democratic socialism or recreate a landed aristocracy, it is up to the "parties" to decide in due course, on the basis of the founding principles they decide, but given that the constitution must be defensible in terms which will be counted reasonable by the populace at large, Rawls is confident that such a thought experiment would come up with some kind of political liberalism. Rawls regards the relations of production as a secondary question which can be sorted out in due course, once the institutions of representative democracy and the judiciary have been settled and the citizens can legislate the social system.

In Rawls' books this thought experiment is called the "original position" though Rawls describes it in slightly different terms. Rather than supposing one is elected from large geographical electorates, Rawls proposes a hypothetical "veil of ignorance" so that the delegates do not know the social status of those that they represent nor what social position they may occupy in the state to be founded. Otherwise, his thought experiment pretty much matches the current US Constitution, barring political lobbyists, big business control of election campaigns and the naked play of self-interest within the institutions of really existing democracy.

Thus Rawls does much the same as Kant when he re-invented the Revealed Religion of the 18th century Lutheran Church by means of Reason, and Hegel when he set out to discover what was rational in the reality of early 19th century Prussia, but, it has to be said, in a way which is commensurate with a democratic republic of the 20th century, as a "self-standing" conception, limited to that which could be justified from the standpoint of any comprehensive metaphysical, moral or religious doctrine.

Like Kant and Hegel, Rawls does not validate everything that exists in the present-day U.S.A. as rational; he holds that the high cost of US election campaigns which ensures the restriction of nomination of candidates to the very rich, and the lack of an adequate health service and social safety net which ensures that a substantial proportion of the population cannot pursue the good life, are contrary to the requirements of justice. Nevertheless, for Rawls it is the constitution which decides the distribution of wealth and power, not the other way around.

The "original position" which Rawls characterises as a "representation device," is used to argue for "justice as fairness" as a candidate for an "overlapping consensus" "for the right reasons," which can withstand the test of "public reason" by "rational" and "reasonable" citizens who count one another as "free and equal," as a "self-standing" "political" conception, as opposed to a "comprehensive doctrine," and thus create the basis for a society as a "well-ordered system of social cooperation".

Where is the foreword by Martha Nussbaum?
I can not find in the hardcover expanded edition.

"A Theory of Justice" presented a conception of justice (justice as fairness) in the social contract tradition of Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau and Kant. In "Political Liberalism" Rawls corrects an oversight in Justice as Fairness; he attempts to apply the idea of toleration to political philosophy by recognizing the fact of reasonable pluralism. Caution: Meant only for those who wish to understand political philosophy.

It's clearly written, very informative, and enjoyable to read besides. I learned a lot from this book. I learned there are many more things to see and do in Washington than I knew. It's an invaluable planning aid, since I now know which sites will bore our son and which he will enjoy. The book also gives ideas on how children can have educational fun in our capital, tips on getting around, and more.

This book makes seeing Washington so easy and painless. The sights are grouped according to location, so you know what you can see together in a short amount of time. I discovered gems in Washington that I never knew existed! And just when the kids are getting cranky and hungry, there is a list of good places to eat. The directions by metro are very helpful and well done. I highly recommend this book to natives and visitors alike!

Washington, D.C. is the most unique city in the world. Whether you are visiting the area or live there, one cannot possibly know the wealth of information found in Washington, D.C. with Kids. I grew up in the area, but I have lived away for more than twenty years. Without this guide, I would have difficutly finding the places I want to see when I am back. I wish there had been such a book when my kids were younger. It's always such a challenge finding entertaining and worthwhile activities when on family trips. Imagine showing up in a city and having a resource that gives you a map, a subway map, addresses of places, times of operation, and even suggestions for meals! This book even indicates which venues are appropriate for various age groups. All of that and more is found in this superb volume. It's a "must have" for anyone planning a visit to Washington, D.C.

This is the only EDUCATIONAL guide to Washington, DC with kids -- and is now available in its 2nd Edition, published by Fodor's.
The second edition completely updates the sites and the restaurants and the recommendations -- based on input from readers as well as extensive research by the authors.
Washington, D.C. with Kids, 2nd Edition (Fodor's) is available on the Web and through all major bookstores!
HIGHLY recommended by its readers!

I found this book easy to read, full of useful and fun information. I have recommended to friends that do not have children and are planning a trip to the nation's capitol.
The information is interesting and concise. The book is well-written and includes many interesting and little known bits of information, as well as the more typical tourist spots.

I moved to Oregon 6 years ago without any backpacking experience. Sullivan's were a perfect resource for me as a backpacker in need. This series has all the info you need and nothing you don't. I have particularly enjoyed photos(included with every single hike), 3d maps, well written directions and even background geologic/plant/wildlife info. Very useful and one of the best purchases I've made.

A word of advice: heed EVERYTHING he says. If it says its bug filled in May, or a small car shouldn't drive a certain road, BELIEVE IT! As someone who's taken 30+ backpacking trips based on Sullivan's books, I can tell you that you will not be disappointed by these recommendations. It's like a good friend who gave you his personal recommendations.

I bought this book two years ago to add to the many guide books in my library. After two years of hiking many weekends in northwestern OR and southwestern WA, it's become clear that this is the book that get's used the most. Most of the trails are suitable for the whole family. We've hiked into the crater of Mount St. Helens, eaten wild huckle berries in Indian Heaven Wilderness, hiked every slope of Mt. Hood, visited water falls in the Columbia river Gorge that we didn't know existed and more.

Many of the trails are suitable for the occasional dry weekend in the winter months as well. Sullivan provides many low elevation trails which extend the hiking season year round.

If you live in southwestern Washington or northwestern Oregon, you should own this book.

I bought this book prior to a trip to Oregon in hopes of finding some beautiful hikes. This book was a valuable tool in my search. Every hike was accurately described from details on finding the trailhead to distances traveled including the level of difficulty and points of interest along the way.

Over the last several years, I've hiked most of the trails described in "100 Hikes in Northwest Oregon." Sullivan's diving directions, trail descriptions and maps have always been perfect and immensely helpful.

The trail descriptions are both concise and crystal clear. Sullivan does not meticulously describe each detail, which leaves much to discover on your own and allows for a more personal hiking experience. He writes eloquently, and often includes great tidbits of scientific and historical information that add context to your hike. For example, he might briefly describe how a specific area was geologically formed, and point out some evidence that you'll find along trail.

Sullivan's practical advice is invaluable. If he tells you that a trail passes poison oak, you better wear long pants! If he tells you that a trail is open from July to October, don't show up without snowshoes in March! Clearly, he knows these trails well. Readers should not overlook the preface, where he provides an equipment checklist, low impact camping guidelines, contacts for trail conditions, and other useful information.

The one downside of this guide is that so many people use it. If a hike is within an hour of Portland, and is featured in this book, you can count on a crowded trailhead on a nice weekend. Plenty of the featured hikes are off the beaten path, and still consistently provide solitude. Just plan on driving for awhile.

Anybody who hikes in Oregon should consult "100 Hikes in Northwest Oregon," or one of Sullivan's other books. I also frequently use his Oregon Coast and Central Oregon guides, and they too are first rate.

Just a quick additional note: When you do hike, always leave no trace! If you see trash, pick it up! Always be respectful of our Earth, and all of its creatures.

This book is a superb guide to a wide variety of hikes in Northwest Oregon. The first edition was my bible for hikes in this area---it's tattered and torn from all the use! This edition is better than ever--with accurate updates. Every hiker in Oregon should own it!

Excellent book concentrating on the character and careers of three members of the American theatrical dynasty, the Booths: Father Junius, Succcessful Brother Edwin,(who seems to have had the greatest coping skills for dealing with his life's many tragedies) and, of course, Assassin John Wilkes. All had their flaws, but each had some pretty memorable gifts as well.

Yes, it is a tragic tale about the Booth family, but the author manages to make it a fascinating portrait on a broader canvas, detailing the far reaching dimensions of this event on the lives of each of the individuals, from the couple who accompanied the Lincolns that fateful night to the strange little man who shot Booth, all of whose lives were touched by a confused young man's attempt to...what? Avenge the defeated South? Live out his life as though he were a lead character in a Shakespearean play? Make the world aware of his existence in a tortured attempt to prove his legitimacy, (His father, noted Shakespearean actor Junius Booth was already married and a father when he decided to emigrate to America with the woman who became the mother of Edwin and John Wilkes Booth?)

The father was, it seems, sometimes sweetly demented, and occasionally and violently off his rocker, thanks, in many instances to John Barleycorn. The elder Booths was also capable of unforgettable performances of Shakespeare that were remembered vividly by audience members fifty years after attendance.

The author's portrait of the period and the people involved in the death of Lincoln is painted on a broad canvas, but doesn't try to spoon feed the reader easy answers regarding anyone's private thoughts or motivations. For example, we get a vivid portrait of John Wilkes Booth as a highly successful young man. He was only in his mid-20s at the time of the assassination and he was already in demand for theatrical engagements throughout the U.S. He was commonly referred to as "the handsomest man" ever seen by numerous men and women. He was secretly engaged to a Northern Senator's daughter in April 1865 and he had numerous other women that he was involved with at the time. He was able to make between $25k-40k annually at that time, (an enormous sum in the 1860s). Unlike most assassins, he was, on the surface, a winner. The enormous "Why?" of his life can never really be answered explicitly, but I would recommend this to anyone who also enjoys the questions surrounding the Lincoln assassination. I think that anyone who enjoyed the excellent "Manhunt" by James L. Swanson would also find this book a fine complement to that story.

In AMERICAN GOTHIC Gene Smith offers the best depiction of 19th Century America I've ever read as he traces the fortunes of America's first theatrical dynasty from the London birth of Junius Brutus Booth in 1796 until the death of his son Edwin Booth in New York in 1893. But the real center of the book is the heartbreaking story of Edwin's brother John Wilkes Booth, who would bring ignominy to the illustrious family when he assassinated Abraham Lincoln.

Smith has chosen the perfect title for his book. The America he presents is a feisty new country in which most people believed in omens and dreams. Lincoln himself believed in dreams and pondered a dream he had about his own death. As he reasoned, a great deal of the Bible was taken up with the interpretation of dreams, so it must have validity. One of the first things Mrs. Lincoln screamed when she realized that her husband had been slain was "His dream was prophetic!" Edwin Booth was born with a cowl (a portion of the placenta that stays on the top of the baby's head), which was said to portend greatness. Mary Ann Booth was holding her infant son John Wilkes when she saw the flames in the fireplace rise up and spell the letters "C-O-U-N-T-R-Y." Throughout his life she and her son John had a psychic connection. She always knew when things were not well with him even at distances of hundreds of miles. The America of this book is also a violent county embroiled in its history's bloodiest war. About half the dramatis personae of this book die violently or in a madhouse. Among those who died mad were Mrs. Lincoln and Henry Rathbone (who shared the Presidential box with the Lincolns on that fateful night at Ford's Theatre and was stabbed by John Wilkes Booth), and Edwin Booth's second wife. Lincoln's son Robert, who did not attend the theatre the night his father was assassinated (and forever blamed himself, thinking that he could perhaps have defended his father had he been there), was ironically to be present at the assassinations of both Presidents Garfield and McKinley. Boston Corbett, who fired the fatal bullet into John Wilkes Booth was a diminutive evangelical religious fanatic who had castrated himself rather than be lured into the temptations of the flesh. But perhaps maddest of all was John Wilkes Booth, who had been blessed by nature. Born into a prominent theatrical family, he possessed a keen intelligence, an athletic derring-do and an awe-inspiring physical beauty. Many regarded him as the most handsome man in the world. Some thought him a superior actor to Edwin and the only one of Junius Brutus Booth's sons to match his father's ability to thrill an audience. He did everything in a dramatic way. Ultimately, he assassinated the President of the United States in a theatre before an audience. Upon performing the act, he made a daring leap to the stage brandishing a knife, declaiming "Sic Semper Tyrannis! The South is avenged!" before escaping from the theatre. Breaking his ankle when his spur caught on the presidential bunting draped on the box as he leapt, Booth ended up a wounded fugitive on the lam in the war-ravaged countryside, rather than the acclaimed hero that he thought he would become. His story culminates in a burning barn surrounded by armed soldiers. His flight, his capture and the aftermath take up most of the book. Smith is a masterful writer and this part of the book reads like a thriller. But Smith also lets us in on things like how the hundred thousand dollar reward money for Booth's capture was divided and the horrifying treatment the conspirators in the plot to assassinate Lincoln received as prisoners.

This is great history writing-authoritative, detailed, and insightful, as well as dramatic and, at times, extremely moving. This is a book that grabs the intellect and the emotions. Five stars.

Truly spellbinding, nicely paced, and perfect length. After you read this book you will be amazed at what is left out of the history classroom. Don't miss a chance to read it.

All I'd ever heard about was Booth the assassin of Lincoln. I had no idea he came from such a fascinating and talented family! So many details are given of his life and the lives of those surrounding this one event in history and yet his life is generally summarized in a few sentences. This book (and audio tape which I highly recommend) should be filmed and shown in schools, it's that interesting. Hearing it read brings up images as from the days of radio programs, only more rich in color and depth. I like this book so much I'm trying to find a copy. It must be better the second time around.

Gene Smith is a well-known historian who sticks to the facts. Yet his writing keeps his readers intrigued every step of the way. Of course, he is working with a family of thespians and a thick plot to begin with, which always helps. But Smith refuses to include any heresay or rumor - his writing is respectable AND creative. Smith remains unbiased, which is unusual with such a heated set of events. I have read dozens of books on the Booth family, and this is by far the best!

It has to be courageous to attempt translating the celebrated works of one of the most revered ancient Chinese master philosophers, Chuang Tzu (Zhuangzi), 370-319 B.C., whose teachings espouse freedom and spontaneity and who can forget his "Butterfly Dream" - the dream like nature of reality - which is to some extent explored in Mircea Eliade's novella and Francis Ford Coppola's latest and most defining film "Youth Without Youth".

Of course, there's nothing like reading the poetic and beautifully written original Chinese text which is inevitably lost in translation. But if you don't read Chinese, this is the next best thing of the complete thirty-three books inclusive of the inner and outer chapters in the one volume. Professor Burton Watson's translation is thoughtful and readable. Highly recommended.

I have read many different translations of Chuang Tzu. I find many of them either too awkward, wordy, biased or incomprehensible. Admittedly, it is not possible to learn Taoist philosophy without a teacher's explanation. Unfortunately, books do not always answer questions. However, given that limitation, this translation is the clearest I have ever encountered.

Excellent work! I have read on numerous occasions and from numerous sources that Burton Watson's Chuang Tzu is the best one out there and this book is no disappointment! The text is clear and holds well to the original, he includes helpful footnotes at the bottom of the page instead of at the end in a huge appendix. The footnotes themselves are even extraordinary, they include notes on why he translated as he did for those who can read chinese, and can be very helpful with some of the more esoteric passages. His footnotes can even be humerous, making you feel a little better about being totally lost in some of the latter chapters! A wonderful book that I recommend to everyone!

THE COMPLETE WORKS OF CHUANG TZU. Translated by Burton Watson. 397 pp. New York and London: Columbia University Press, 1968 and reprinted.

Anyone who may be coming to Chuang Tzu for the first time is in for a treat. Although Chuang Tzu is sometimes described as the most brilliant of all Chinese philosophers, what we find in him isn't what we normally understand by 'Philosophy' and isn't technical at all.

His appeal is not so much to the intellect as to the imagination, and he chose as a vehicle for his philosophical insights, not tedious and lengthy abstract treatises, but brief and witty anecdotes and dialogues and tales. His humor, sophistication, literary genius, and philosophical insights found their perfect expression in his brilliant fragments, and once having read them you never forget them.

Not much is known about Chuang Tzu, other than that he seems to have lived around the time of King Hui of Liang (370-319 B.C.). The received text of his book, which is sometimes referred to as 'the Chuang Tzu' (CT), is made up of thirty-three Chapters. Most scholars seem to feel that the CT is a composite text, and that only the first seven - the Inner Chapters - plus a few bits from the others are Chuang Tzu's own work, the remainder being by his followers.

Among the better known of his translators, all of them excellent, are Arthur Waley, Lin Yutang, A. C. Graham, and Burton Watson, though only the latter two translated the complete text. An abridged version of Watson's complete translation was later made available for those who only want to read the Inner Chapters.

The present book, 'The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu,' was first published in 1968. After an interesting 28-page Introduction, which includes bibliographical information, Burton Watson's very fine translations follow, all of which have been set out as prose and lightly annotated. The book is rounded out with an Index.

Watson has always struck me as an eminently civilized scholar and as a brilliant translator. His many translations from Ancient Chinese Literature are of uniformly high quality, and are well worth collecting as they are books one often returns to. Enthusiasts will certainly want to add the present gem to their collection.

The Chuang Tzu (rendered Zhuangzi in pinyin, which is becoming the standard transliteration these days) is second only to Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching in its popularity and veneration in the Taoist world. If you've not heard of or read this book before, you're in for a real treat! The first time I read the Inner Chapters of the Chuang Tzu was like a revelation--the thoughts and ideas expressed in these passages still resonate today for their acuity, humor, satire, stabbing profundity, and life-changing potential. Indeed, after better understanding the thought this book expresses, I felt like so many loose ideas and insights I'd gleaned from other philosophy, literature, music, and poetry had been tied up together and formulated into a concise and elegant package that is urgently relevant to every day life--pretty amazing for a text that is well over 2000 years old!

I recently completed reading the last of three complete translations of the Chuang Tzu, and I decided to wait until I read all of them before reviewing any of the three. Since this text is written in ancient Chinese, a language that was reserved for the intellectual and cultural elite two thousand years ago and has been considered effectively "dead" (like Latin) for quite a while, even understanding what the author(s) were trying to say is difficult, let alone translating the words from Chinese to English. So I figured reading a few different translations is probably the best way to get a broad and deep understanding of the text, and the cumulative effect would make up for each translation's weaknesses. This proved a good strategy--the other translations I chose were Victor Mair's Wandering on the Way: Early Taoist Tales and Parables of Chuang Tzu and A.C. Graham's The Inner Chapters. All three were rewarding and worthwhile reads (I mean, it IS the Chuang Tzu!), but I still come back to Burton Watson's Complete Works as my favorite. For the rest of this review, I'll try and explain why, and try to be helpful in pointing different types of readers to a translation that suits their individual needs. I won't go into depth about what the Chuang Tzu says, since the writing in the text is so eloquent and vivid that any description won't do it justice, and because I would probably ramble on forever about either the academic issues and questions regarding the text's authorship, historicity, and philosophy, or about how mind-blowingly intellectually stimulating it is!

In a nutshell (I'll be writing complete reviews for both), A.C. Graham's translation of the Chuang Tzu is the most philosophically rigorous translation and commentary of the Chuang Tzu I've read, but more often than not the actual text of the translation is very awkward and difficult to read. Victor Mair's goal in translating was to create the most philologically accurate translation possible (i.e. directly from Chinese to English, with as few alterations or ornamentations as possible), but it occasionally reads a bit flat and can be confusing because it contains no footnotes whatsoever regarding the philosophical nuances of the text. In my opinion, Burton Watson best captures the spirit and feel of Chuang Tzu's thought and character in the actual text of the translation. His translations seem to bring more laughs out of the humorous passages, and more oomph into the hard-hitting and breathtaking wisdom of the most philosophical sections. The predominate attitude of the most famous and moving passages in this text is a mystical one--the author's goal is to attempt to convey the powerful, ineffable feeling of contemplating and experiencing the Tao (that is, the way existence--the universe, life, and the patterns and very fabric of their being--works). Watson doesn't attempt to gut the effortless beauty of the Chuang Tzu by picking apart the ideas piece by piece or getting overtechnical with the terminology. His translation exudes the type of intuitive easy flow that Chuang Tzu is always arguing for in the anecdotes the text relays. Although he doesn't spell it out explicitly, Watson's wording has it all--when you contemplate the ideas to the point that they click, you'll find out just how good of a job Watson did.

Of course, the Chuang Tzu is what it is--a very uneven text composed by different authors and including very different philosophy in some places. Watson offers some helpful footnotes in the Outer and Miscellaneous chapters, which are generally not as sparkling as the Inner chapters, though there are always flashes of brilliance. If you're brand new to the Chuang Tzu, I highly recommend you start with Chuang Tzu: Basic Writings, translated by Burton Watson and including all of the Inner chapters and highlights from the rest of the book. It's the same translations you find here, but packs a more direct punch without the confusion and diluted quality of some of the other chapters. If you're already very familiar with the Chuang Tzu and haven't read it, go for A.C. Graham's translation--his introduction and chapter prefaces are some of the most illuminating commentaries I've read on this text (if only I could get Watson's translation with Graham's commentaries!). I'd only really recommend Mair's translation if you're interested in getting a slightly different perspective on the text and have read it numerous times. By the way, this book is a hearty hardcover with a gorgeous binding (it's more maroon than Amazon's picture lets on). They're selling it for cheaper now than when I bought it, and a good hardcover version of this text is an investment that will last a lifetime--I'm sure I'll still be awed by it for decades to come.

This is fantastic book. The threats to the Great Bear Rainforest are increasing in 2007 and support is vitally needed. To see what is happening, go to the Raincoast Conservation Society web page and see what major threats to the Great Bear are coming in 2007.

For years, I had always heard snippets here and there about the Great Bear Rainforest of Northwestern British Columbia, supposedly even more beautiful, wild, untamed, and much larger than other gorgeous temperate rainforest locales like Olympic National Park in Washington. But I didn't really know much about it. Where exactly was it? What does it look like? Is any of it protected in province or federal park land? And many more questions.

Then, years later, I stumbled upon this book. WOW. That about sums it up. This is an amazing book about a place of transcendent, almost ethereal beauty. This book is an enchanting mix of imminently readable and interesting text and absolutely stunning photographs. It almost makes you feel like you are there, immersed in this incredible rain drenched emerald cathedral of trees.

The Great Bear Rainforest is located on the British Columbia coast. It starts a few miles north of Lund and extends all the way north in Canada to the BC's northernmost limit, around Port Rupert, and extends only a few miles inland. It is home to the largest remaining contiguous temperate rain forest anywhere in the world. You probably already know this, but a temperate rain forest is much different than a tropical rain forest because of climate. Temperate rain forests are cool and moist, whereas tropical ones are hot and moist. Anyway, enough of the obvious.

What I really like about this book is that it isn't a condescending piece of fluff, and it gave me *exactly* what I wanted from it. Even though it's no easily readable, it is no fluff piece that waxes prettily poetic but doesn't really tell you anything. It takes you on an incredibly detailed tour of nearly every major rain forest valley in the Great Bear Rainforest. And it doesn't just name-drop valleys that have no meaning to you, it provides you with maps that show exactly where it is that they are talking about. I think this is the greatest feature of the book, I've read too many books about geographical places that tell you the names of certain interesting areas, but you don't quite know where they are. Not so with this book.

Not only that, the book covers a wide range of topics concerning The Great Bear Rainforest. Ecology, economic pressures, animal and plant life, geography, even a lot of interesting history and contemporary issues concerning the First Nation (who we in the U.S. refer to as Native American) tribes who traditionally lived (and still live) in and around the Great Bear Rainforest. I found the parts about the Haida tribe to be particularly edifying. All of these facts and themes are woven into the narrative of the authors' journey through the Great Bear Rainforest (which spans many years) incredibly seamlessly - you might think it's difficult to talk about the flora and fauna of the area while giving a history lesson on the Tlinglit people, but like I said, this point interweaves all points flawlessly. It also does social justice by presenting an unflinching look at the environmental horrors that await the Great Bear Rainforest through resource extraction and recreation at the hands of an apathetic public if current trends remain unchecked.

And then there are the photos. Gorgeous. Vast stands of huge, majestic trees, so much green it's almost blinding; a spirit bear chowing down on salmon in an unbelievable action shot; stunning shots of a coastline where fjord and mountain come together; and of course, the grand British Columbia ocean itself.

This book is a real gem. It's crime more people haven't had a chance to go through it. Read it. Take your time, don't just skim through it and goggle over the pictures. Trust me, the time will be worth it, you'll be glad you did. A must-have for anyone who considers themselves an environmentalist, a nature lover, and especially for people who have stood in awe in a temperate rain forest and said "I need to know more."

A powerful book on this special place. But, now she's discovered

This book is written as a journal of a sailing voyage. Although the authors had previously visited the remarkable areas they photograph and describe six times before, the seventh visit is chronicled in these pages. Thus there is a great depth of knowledge and experience inherent to this work which transforms a simple if elegant journal into a powerful, somewhat doleful, environmental monograph.

This is a beautifully done book with many fascinating photographs of rainforest topography and the diverse life forms which abide therein. The accompanying text is well-written and consistently informative and interesting. But the overarching theme here is that pristine environments which are critical to the survival of untold species of flora and fauna are in jeopardy. Grave jeopardy. Moreover, the McAllisters take great pains to point out that the small islands of preserved and protected ecosystem created in compromise between commercial interests and environmentalists are insufficent to protect wildlife (bears, for example) that depend upon an interlinked vastness of unspoiled terrain in which to flourish.

So this book is as much an alarm and a plea for action as it is a wondrous presentation of its picturesque subject matter. As such, it is urgent reading for those of us concerned about the ravages unleashed when a society values short-term economic advantage (as when untouched river valleys are clear-cut by logging companies) over the work nature takes eons to complete.

This is a wonderful book for both nature and bear lovers alike. It is packed with beautiful color photos. Many interesting facts about the wildlife & plants of the area are detailed in the captions.

The landscape photos feature vibrant wildflowers, ancient forests, & mountains. There are also many remarkable pictures of several bear types. I loved the close-up shot of a bear eating a fish & another of a sprit bear on a log.

Stunning photos of some other animals include a puffin close-up, a bald eagle mother with baby, & an elephant seal gathering. If you can tear yourself away from the pictures, the text is equally impressive.

The authors tell of their experiences while exploring the rainforest. They also discusses the environmental concerns of the area. Journal entries from the trip are scatted throughout the book.