Memorials Books

This book is simply a gem about one of the great icons of America-Mt Rushmore.

Part history,part travel, part personal, the author Jesse Larner writes on a monument that typifies the American spirit and history-bold,different,expansionary,courageous, tragic, controversial.

The creator of Mt Rushmore, Gutzon Borglum, believed in the Great Man principle of history, hence the monument to four presidents who all believed in manifest destiny and the greatness of America.

The tragedy of the Sioux, however, is not neglected and Larner details their loss of the Black Hills, broken treaties etc. Undertandably, America's shrine to democracy invokes some less than patriotic responses from Native Americans.

However, although Larner is not afraid to challenge the legend and myths of American history he is no historical vandal either. The facts and complexities between Red and White are fascinating enough without some dogmatist attempting to channel the readers views.

As an overseas visitor to this great monument on my second full day in America (8 October 2001)- I thought Mt Rushmore symbolised the granite strength of a super power -as indeed the patriotic signs and flags in the homes and businesses of Rapid City,(that I had witnessed the day before), had forcefully impressed on me that this was a nation proud of its heritage and well able to meet future challenges,including threats from terrorists.

For those who like a challenging read Larner's "Mount Rushmore" will, like a visit to the great monument, be a rewarding experience.

I wasn't expecting more than a dry history! What a surprise!
It's a book filled with wonderful stories, all both fascinating and relevant to the world we are in today. And very well written. A good combination of objectively told and well-researched history with a personal touch. Top-rating. I hated to have it end.

I tried to read the book from cover to cover, but along the last eighth or so of the book I realized, it was more trouble than it was worth. A shame, because Larner has a great story to tell and initially at least, he tells it well. I had never realized the extent to which Gutzon Borglum patronized the Ku Klux Klan and the way he conceptualized the carving of Mount Rushmore as a defiant cry of fraternity for the white brotherhood, who had conquered the Indian tribes to claim all of the land in North America for themselves.

I will never look at our beloved landmark in the same way again, not even when I watch Hitchcock's thriller NORTH BY NORTHWEST in which the iconography of Rushmore is also played with in an ironic way.

However the writing of the book is all over the place, and Larner can't make up his mind whether he is writing a psychobiography (on the Erik Erikson model) of Borglum, or an expose of Parks Services politics, or an insiders account of the American Indian Movement. Certainly one could combine these accounts successfully, but Larner fails to do so.

I did not know that the Lakota tribe actually said, "Hau" to greet a stranger, giving rise to the Hollywood Zane Grey "How" to stereotype an Indian's stoic passivity. In this way, and in many others, the book is worth reading, but be warned, you will be skipping like a schoolgirl through the endless saga of pages.

Larner's lively history lesson isn't about the rock. It is about the world and visions that shaped it. He takes us through the history of the Black Hills examining the migrations, treaties and personal agendas reflected in the eyes of the faces on Mount Rushmore. While he challenges the superficial messages of the work, he is no reactionary liberal out to bash the government. Larner no more romanticizes the conflicts between the Indians that preceded the westward expansion than he does the visions of those who came after it. And why would he? The complexities of these relationships are far more interesting from an in depth even handed view.
Larner's extensive research breathes with a genuine fascination of his subjects. His personal passion is further evinced by his apparent extended stay in the Rapid City area. By weaving between research oriented historical chapters and his personal adventures, he develops a style that brings history to life for the rest of us. More books like this in history class and I might have changed my major.

This is a very American book, on an archetypically American topic, written from a classic American stance: smart, perceptive, original and funny. And very serious.

Long ago, when I was growing up in New York City, Mt. Rushmore was right up there with I Am An American Day celebrations: an all-American symbol with just the slightest edge of vulgarity to it. But no one - ever - told me that Mt. Rushmore was built on stolen Indian land, by a promoter whose muscular White America
rhetoric went a fair bit beyond the 19th century norm.

One of the book's most interesting aspects is the linkage it develops between Mt. Rushmore's history and present-day Indian/white relationships - both interpersonal and political. The mountain, in effect, becomes a canvas on which the entire history of `development' across America's West is displayed.

For most people, this book will present material they have thought of as `familiar' in a new and much more meaningful context. Moreover, Larner's mix of historical research and perceptive reports of personal encounters makes for a very readable text. The book is written in a unique and warm voice; and that voice asks questions that haven't been raised previously.

Thank goodness for participant submissions. They seemed to go over the same stories but they were more interesting that Brock's version.

A very detailed book about the greatest race that ever was. If you are into this type of interest, then it does make you want to be there, or wish you were. Very satisfying read.

I though the book was better than the movie, because it told a lot about what happened during the race even from more points of view then the author.

I've got a pretty soft spot for the original Cannonballs, AKA "The Erwin G. "Cannon Ball" Baker Sea-To-Shining Sea Memorial Trophy Dash," held in 1971, 1972, 1975 and 1979. After all, local (to me) Hemmings Motor News publisher emeritus Terry Erich and then-editor Dave Brownell, together with Dave Justus, campaigned a 1936 Ford panel truck they called the Red Eye Express (a vehicle that today sits quite innocently just down the street from me in the Hemmings collection) in the final Cannonball. Finishing in 61 hours, 51 minutes, they have the distinction of not only finishing in almost twice the time of the winning Jaguar, but running what I believe is the oldest vehicle ever entered in the original race. That 61+ hours was also the third slowest time ever recorded.

Raised on the Roger Moore/Dom DeLuise movie, I was expecting some sort of madcap retelling of the race, full of Yates' famous rants, "quarantined crazies" and so forth. A sort of Hunter S. Thompson-meets-Vanishing Point, maybe. Alas, what I got was a lot more like a 25th college reunion: A bunch of guys who have, at best, hazy memories of two or three days in their lives a quarter-century ago. Yates assembled as many of the original participants as he could, and each wrote up a couple of pages. The whole thing was then slapped together as a book. It's not that it's bad, but it commits a far greater sin: It's dull. Some of the contributing writers are pretty good, but you usually only get a couple of pages of them before someone interested in gas mileage and average speed comes on. The craziness is there, but it's buried under many years of haze and caution. It should have been written in 1979, when the hum of the interstate and the flash of a smokies lights was still imprinted in their disco-addled brains.

One of my favorite memories from many years ago was the day the annual issue of Car & Driver came that covered the infamous Cannonball race. Car & Driver was always my favorite magazine, it started me going in this hobby. I also soon became a subscriber of AutoWeek (in the original "newspaper" format). Motor Trend was pretty much the same mixed bag back then as it is now, and Road & Track was something I hadn't yet fully learned to appreciate.
I wasn't even driving when the Cannonball races started... but they were definitely a bad influence on me later. When I did finally get my license, I took up TSD rallying.. and once I learned to drive them to proper speed and not to a replay of the Cannonball, I did fairly well.

All true automotive enthusiasts know a little something about this legendary race. When friends gather to talk about the greatest things in the car hobby, this is inevitably one of the topics.

If you've never heard of the Cannonball, you've got some reading to do. The Cannonball was a flat-out wide-open road race on public roads - from New York City to Los Angeles. There were no rules, except that you couldn't board a plane! You, and whomever else could fit into the vehicle, had to drive coast-to-coast with only gas and (perhaps, as there are methods to bypass the need for) pit stops! Top competitors completed the drive in 30+ hours in specially prepared cars - cars that had a high top end or where specially prepared in some other way (enormous gas tanks, painted to resemble cop cars, even an ambulance). This was serious stuff, and it was totally illegal.

Brock tells us that the race was originally conceived to make a point against raising government levels of interference, specifically on the highways. But, when the race was first run, as Brock points out in the book, traffic radar was experimental, the insurance companies hadn't yet figured out how to screw you over for infractions outside of your home state, and the highways themselves were fundamentally more isolated and wide open than they are today. Those were the days!

Sadly, as Brock reminds us, there is no possible way you could do something like this today, indeed even the last one was run in 1979 it was entirely clear that an era was over forever. And that's the way I look back at a lot of stuff from the 50s, 60s, and early 70s. Much of it predated me, nearly all of it predated my involvement in this hobby (other than waiting for that great day every month when Car & Driver would arrive in the mail - as I still do). That was a special and unique time, there will never be anything like that again. There won't ever again be an idea as original as a Shelby Cobra, as the original Mustang, or as the Cannonball.

The book itself is an absolute requirement for the library of all automotive enthusiasts. It's a bit rambling at times, but it's also filled with reprints from the best of the Car & Driver articles of that time, along with commentary and stories by Brock that have never been told before. Just as good are the stories of some of the most famous drivers of these events - such as Dan Gurney. Dan tells his story in his own words - and he is as much a classic of that era (one never to be duplicated) as is the race itself. Dan and Brock were co-drivers of a Ferrari Daytona, arguably the most famous of all the cars that competed.

One of the later drivers was Hal Needham, and that was the beginning of the end. If traffic laws and enormously increased police presence didn't kill this era, then Hal Needham's Cannonball Run movies certainly did. This was the end of the road for these events, satirizing them and making them out to be something that was little more than a clown event. To his credit, Hal did co-drive with Brock - in the infamous ambulance with Brock's wife Pam playing the "victim".

If ever there was a reasonably honest depiction of the Cannonball races in film, it was "The Gumball Rally". It's one of my favorite movies. Unfortunately, Brock was on a (thankfully temporary) downhill slide back then and his response to that film was to look into suing it's makers. In the end, he has refused to see it - ever.

The 15 minutes of fame of Brock's movies are long over, but the race itself will always be here. And, this excellent book is the insider story of it.

While books about political intrigue have become common place in our time, the lack of means of rapid printing and distribution, freedom of the press and the well reasoned fear of retribution, inter alia, hindered their appearance in 1728 in China. That has been remedied by Professor Spence in Treason by the Book. It rivals The Best and the Brightest in the description of the interior workings of government and All the Kings Men in describing the motives and intrigue of the people doing the work. Treason was constantly on the mind of the Manchu emperor of China in the early eighteenth century. He was regarded as a foreigner, a barbarian, his dynasty having come to rule China by the force of arms. His concern was understandable, as conquering emperors and kings often have not expired of natural causes.

The Qing emperor, Yongzheng, had a brief and stormy reign from 1723 to 1735. He succeeded his father emperor Kangxi, who had ruled from 1662 to 1722 and had consolidated the Qing Empire. In turn he was succeeded by his fourth son, Emperor Qianlong, who ruled from 1736 to 1799, the longest in the history of China. The means by which Yongzheng ruled is summarized by Professor Spence: "He gives enormous power to his favorite officials, both Chinese and Manchu, but watches them with endless care and infiltrates their staffs with spies who report back to him on his favorites' words and conduct. He strikes them down mercilessly if he feels they are wavering in their loyalty." ... "He feels the morals of the nation are lax and must be corrected with a mixture of Confucian teachings and legal restraints."

One caveat, this is a historical narrative. What Spence has constructed comes from historical sources. Indeed, the Chinese appear to have saved everything, at least in the Qing. Evidence of the emperor's thoughts can be seen as notations on the memorials that have been sent to him by high officials. They are insightful and instructive in conveying the concerns of Yongzheng and are indicative of his defensiveness. However, the downside of being true to the written record is that the characters in this story are flat. To the extent that emotions are displayed, they are cursory and summary, especially with regard to subordinate government officials. We may be impressed with the patience and consideration of the emperor, but he is portrayed as a two dimensional figure. That was perhaps unavoidable. This book only has the historical record as its source. Contemporary investigative reporting, which this book clearly resembles, is a Western invention and has not been practiced to any great extent in China.

The incident that Spence has researched extensively, and as to which there appears to be a considerable amount of extant recorded detail, is an abortive, sophomoric Chinese conspiracy to start an uprising against the Manchu emperor. Zhang Xi, a peripatetic student, in a naïve effort to garner support, casts a letter at General Yue Zhongqi, the accomplished governor-general of two provinces. Yue is riding in his chair in Xian at the time. In the letter the conspirators proposed that Yue join with a group to overthrow the Manchu emperor Yongzheng and return China to the rule of a Chinese. The general, although a Chinese, is loyal to the Manchu emperor. He immediately informs the emperor of the possible treasonous activities of some of his subjects as disclosed in the letter. The emperor thereafter orders the identification and arrest of all the conspirators, including Zeng Jing, the leader and master of Zhang Xi. The minor players turn out not to be conspirators at all. They are mostly just acquaintances, although some are elderly students, an occupation evidently supported by the government for years on end. Their involvement with the prime conspirators seems to be serendipitous.

The putative traitor, Zeng Jing, who is Chinese, had set forth in the letter to General Yue his numerous complaints about the emperor's character, rule and Manchu barbarism. The emperor, in what is a remarkable example of compulsive defensiveness, personally writes an 83 page rebuttal document, and has it read aloud to his senior officials. It is rather impressive in that, given his extensive arbitrary power and the customs of the time, he takes the time to justify his actions. Indeed, he is generally persuasive. Moreover, he displays great political intuition in knowing that since he has had Zeng's letter copied, its contents will undoubtedly leak out to the court and probably beyond. Therefore his rebuttal is both timely and, in the emperor's view, necessary.

As a result of interrogations of the arrested conspirators it is determined, that all of the complaints about the emperor are second hand or more. Indeed, many are rumors that Zeng Jing has heard about the emperor having killed his brothers to obtain and keep the throne. The emperor decides that the source of the rumors should be found. As must be true of all political rumors, the sources of many were close to the court and the emperor's brothers. Once stated a rumor has a life of its own, being embellished and elaborated upon with each telling. An emperor who, it is said, complains about the wine becomes an alcoholic with the endless repeating of the complaint. Such is the nature of rumors, especially political ones. While the emperor may have believed himself to be falsely accused, some of the accusations of Zeng were founded upon the writings of Lü Liuliang and his followers. Lü, a scholar, was born in 1629 and died in 1683, long before Yongzheng came to power. He believed the Ming were ordained by heaven and wrote letters and poems with scorn for the Manchus. He revered the old Ming emperor and mocked the customs and administration of the barbarians. The emperor not only requested that he be given Lü's writings and those of his disciple, Yan Hongkui, it appears he read them in their entirety.

Once the conspirators and their families and associates had been brought to Beijing and, in some cases released, the paranoia in the countryside had subsided. The emperor began a dialogue with Zeng Jing, the acknowledged traitor. He let Zeng read the various memorials and his endorsed comments which are associated with matters related to Zeng's accusations. At the emperor's request Zeng prepared responsive comments, mostly recognizing his own errors of thought. The emperor, in turn read those comments. In time, Zeng drafted a sincere confession praising the emperor and expressing regret for repeating the rumors and basing his treasonous thoughts upon them. As a result of Zeng's contrition, he is pardoned by the emperor, as are others. Remarkably however, Yongzheng directed that his writings, along with Zeng's accusations be assembled and published in a 509 page book entitled A Record of How True Virtue Led to an Awakening from Delusion. He further directed that it be distributed to officials and read to the people. Copies still exist and inspired Spence's research.

However, in 1735, when Qianlong succeeds his father, Yongzheng, Zeng and Zhang are rearrested, brought to Beijing, in secrecy, and sentenced to death by slicing along with some members of their families. Qianlong and some of his advisors took an entirely different view of transparency in governance. The publication of Yongzheng's writings and Zeng's accusations, was suppressed, collected and to a great extent destroyed.

Spence can be compared to Bob Woodward in his investigative reporting, digging out the facts and constructing the narrative. He follows the various individuals involved and their fates. He examines the rumors and how the emperor dealt with them. He also gives some insight into Yongzheng's views on governance. This may be an obscure and inconsequential tale, but it should be a lesson for all societies. The Yongzheng emperor opted for transparency, exposure and examination. Would that every political leader found the will to emulate him. The Qianlong emperor, in this instance, represented a resurgence of paranoia.

What does this mean for us? Has Jonathan Spence written this in order to convey a lesson? He says no. He asserts that "...it can be said that both emperors got it wrong." Yongzheng thought exposing the rumors and explaining them was wise. But the people just remembered the rumors. Qianlong thought that by burning the book he could hide the rumors. But the people believed it was to hide the truth. Therefore, perhaps Professor Spence intended to let the reader decide. However, the correctness of one decision is clear. Western countries with a free press have exposed the internal confidential discussions of government as a matter of course. Once he had written his 83 page response, Yongzheng's decision to expose Zeng's letter and his writing appears to have been prescient.

This book is that it personalizes history without fictionalizing it. All too often when you read history books, particularly histories of China written by Western authors, all you are given are endless dates and names and a step-by-step progression of events. Because one never gets to hear the actual stories of the Emperors and rulers involved or stories about the common man, it is hard to imagine what the times were like and why people made the choices that they did.

This book is different.

While it reads like a detective story, it is also a history of Yongzheng's reign. It shines light on the Qing Dynasty and the remarkable hold that they managed to maintain over China for almost 3 centuries. Part of the reason why is described in this book -- the establishment of a functional bureaucracy and the fostering of the peoples' belief that the emperor ruled China by mandate of heaven.

I give the book 4 our of 5 stars because I think there was some extra redundancy and repetition in this book that was unneccesary. Some better editing could have shortend this book by a good 50 pages or so. The book is a short book to begin with and I think that the author was pressured into "padding" his writing a little to make the book reach the required number pages by the publisher. I don't know that for sure of course, but that's kinda the way I felt towards the end of the book. It seemed that everything had been said already, but the end was just postponed for an extra 30 pages of summary.

In my opinion, it is a very well written novel. I say this because the setting and the plot seems to be extremely difficult in nature. The novel offers lot of facts yet it clings on to your attention. Novel explores and indulges into Chinese cultural puzzles, which were significantly hard to grasp. I was confused to categorize the nature of the novel. The novel is a pendulum between a thriller and a historical narrative on Chinese political thought.

The historical public administrative analysis offered in the novel fascinated me. I was surprised to know how advance and well-organized Chinese bureaucracy was centuries ago. Emperor's orders and communication reached the local municipalities in the far most corners of China with flawless accuracy.

In all fairness, I liked the novel with some reservations. On one hand, I enjoy reading obscure subject matters yet on the other hand at times the novel felt like a heave. I would only recommend this novel to some one who is ardently interested on Chinese culture or history.

_Treason by the book_
jonathan spence

This book once again cements my feeling that J.Spence is the best English speaker on the History of China. The book is truely amazing.
Part of the amazement is that the topic can be worded so narrowly that you wonder how to write an essay on it, rather than a whole and interesting book.

For from the outset the book is about a note, passed from the hand of one-Zhang Xi to General Yue Zhongqi , in the city of Xi 'an, late October 1728 (western calendar of course). The emperor is Yongzheng, of the Qing dynasty, which has been in power since 1644. It is what Spence does with this event, how he unfolds and adds systematically to our knowledge of China, to our appreciation of the intricacies of Chinese society and its governance by the Manchurians, having replaced the Ming who were native Chinese, that makes this a great book. It reads like a detective novel, slowly introducing new facts as we need them, leading us by the hand to his deep and sympathic understanding of Chinese history, all the time using words and phrases that beguile and intertwine us with the unfolding events as they become real from the distant past. Spence found his calling by crossing from academic writing in his strict histories back and forth to this genre which is more accurate than historical novels yet shares in the attractiveness and readability of them. The qualities of respect for historical accuracy and a good storyteller are not commonly found inside one person's head and i am gratefully for their collusion in J.Spence for his writing makes us all much more aware and involved in the history of the Chinese.

From the last page:
"Thus it can be said that both emperors got it wrong. One emperor thought that by airing all the negative facts against himself, he could purge the record of the noxious rumors, and because of his honesty posterity would revere his name. But his people remembered the rumors and forgot the disclaimers. The second emperor thought that by destroying the book he world lay his father's ghosts to rest. But his people thought that the reason he wanted to destroy the book was because so much of what it contained was true. " pg 247

It is a good book, one of those pieces of history that in the writing and our reading of it, transcend the particular and cast light on the general condition of being human. Certainly there is much in this book particular to being Chinese in the early 1700's, much that is culture bound and as a result something i can read about but can never experience. But in sharing those particulars, Spence has shown, and often made us feel, what it means to live as human beings, striving to understand while trying to get enough to eat. Striving to honor parents, governmental authorities, Heaven itself, while exercising freedom of thought, and pushing the limits of acceptability to the greater classes to which they belong.

I put the book down with a greater respect for Confucian classics and the way they held China together for 2500 years, for the respect that the Chinese have for book knowledge, for calligraphy, for writing, for scholarship. I am left with a much better understanding of the problems of bureaucracy and governing a population of tens of millions before electronic means of communication and the instantaneousness we have come to demand and expect. All big ideas that Spence could have written a dry scholarly textbook on, say _the means of governance of China via Confucian classics and the literary bureaucracy_. but i know this imaginary book could have none of the emotional appeal and humanity that _Treason by the book_ does. Form does matter, some things do communicate better, more forcefully and easier, this book is one. So, if you have any interest in China, again J.Spence has my highest recommendation and grateful thanks.

The story of a treason investigation in eighteenth century China might have limited reader appeal until one learns the author. Yale history professor Jonathan Spence (Mao Zedong, 1999) has rivals for the title of world's leading Chinese scholar but none for the excellence of his writing in that field.

Everyone hates paperwork except historians, and the massive archives of Imperial China contain treasures that scholars are still mining. Spence's odd but fascinating story begins in 1728 when a provincial governor receives a letter insulting the emperor. The paranoia of Stalin's Russia was nothing compared 18th century China. For a government official to accept such a treasonous message might be fatal. The frightened bureaucrat seized the messenger and quickly learned the names of those involved in composing the letter. Eagerly he poured a stream of reports to the emperor, a stream which quickly became a two way flood. More people were interrogated, more names were named. The efficient Chinese bureaucracy sent orders to every province to arrest and interrogate everyone named along with (this being China) their families. Ironically, to our eyes, none of the accused planned to harm anyone. Their offense was to spread rumors, grumble in private, or write poetry that might be interpreted as critical of the current dynasty. Imperial China was positively Orwellian in its efforts at thought control. Hundreds were arrested. Many spent years in prison including many of the suspects' bewildered wives, uncles, sons, and cousins. Careers were ruined (the provincial governor's among them). A few executions took place. Much poetry was burned. Eventually the government turned to other matters, and the investigation petered out. Only the paperwork remained.

In movies, people from the past are identical to us except for the funny clothes. In reality, their minds worked differently; they believed strange things and behaved in ways we find incomprehensible. Yet they are recognizably human. This book, like all good history, brings it all to life.

Bright Earth gives a detailed history of the development of colour as used in art (painting primarily). It is well written and easy to read but perhaps tends a little towards being a pedantic. Nevertheless it is very helpful in understanding colour and its use in art through the ages.

excellent service book is very deep and scientific, but i waded through it.

Colour is easy to take as grant. However, the great painters of the history worked often with a very limited palettes, as good pigments simply weren't invented. The best blues and reds were very valuable, which defined the ways they were used in medieval painting. There's plenty of detail in the history of art that can be explained by the economics and chemistry of paint.

Philip Ball is a chemist and painters will learn a lot of chemistry from this book. Chemists will learn about art and painting and curious reader will learn both. The book is clearly written, entertaining and educational: an excellent example of good popular science. There are plenty of interesting details, as Ball goes through the history of art and pigments from the stone age cave paintings to modern art. (Review based on the Finnish translation.)

If you have a deep interest in color and how pigments and materials have been developed or discovered this is a book to read. There are only a few illustrations and lots of text, it is not a light book to read cover to cover. It is not a handbook and not a book of facts, its more like a history book.

I value the effort put in the book, but it wasn't exactly what I expected and I won't read it twice.

In Bright Earth, science writer Philip Ball presents a fine guide that examines the practical side of art throughout history. From its gains from technological advancements to cultural influences on art directions, Bright Earth surveys how color is invented, reinvented, and presented. A literary, absorbing work.

John Bell Hood, perhaps one of south's finest brigade and division commanders, perhaps one of south's worst army commanders, his life is one of great irony. A classical example of a man who was promoted into total incompetency, Hood's memoirs reflects his thoughts and his views on his military career. He spent much of his writing defending himself and his tactics and strategies. His book may be considered to be one of your classical Civil War memoirs which was written not for history's sakes but for reputation's sake. In doing so, his failures wasn't his' but those of others. As one previous reviewers wrote, Hood retreated from the truth to make his case.

Nevertheless, the book remains quite readable, somewhat interesting and informative if only to see what Hood was trying to do and hope to do in retrospect. He could have been suffering from post tramatic stress syndrome as his actions seem to be more erratic as his wounds continued with the war.

Although this book is very useful if you're wanting to learn more about Gen. John Bell Hood, the fact remains that it is a very bitter memoir lashing out against his enemies (especially Joseph Johnston) while fiercely defending his outdated, suicidal tactics that he used as an officer throughout his military career.

Even in his youth there were clear signs that Hood was not cut out to be a military genius. At West Point he "earned" 196 demerits and came close to being expelled. He lost 25% of his command (2nd Cavalry) fighting Comanche warriors on Devil's River, Texas, in 1856. At the Battle of Second Bull Run, his Texas brigade suffered a staggering 42% in casualties. At the Battle of Antietam, his division was virtually wiped out, with only 318 surviving. And then came his bloody frontal assaults he ordered against Gen. Sherman's army during the Atlanta campaign.

As if Hood's record wasn't bad enough, his Fall, 1864 invasion of Tennessee ended in total destruction of the once proud Army of Tennessee. First, there's the dismal failure to defeat Schofield's army at Spring Hill. Then there was the brutal slaughter of nearly 1,700 Confederate soldiers at Franklin. There are many puzzling questions about Hood's leadership at Franklin. Why did he attack with only two corps, instead of waiting for Gen. Stephen D. Lee and his 8,000 troops? Why didn't he wait for all his artillery to arrive before ordering the attack? Why didn't he order an attack on Schofield's weak flanks instead of his heavily defended center?

Gen. Hood wrote that the reason he didn't wait for the artillery was because he didn't want to risk shelling innocent civilians that lived in Franklin. This is ridiculous, however, because the two batteries that were available (only one for each of Hood's attacking corps!) for the attack were heavily used during the battle. This is only one of many times that Hood avoided the truth in his memoirs.

After butchering his command at Franklin, Hood led his army into complete disaster at the Battle of Nashville. Finally, Hood offered his resignation (it was easily accepted) following this failiure, but the damage to the Army of Tennessee had been done.

Gen. Hood is indeed a tragic figure of the Civil War, representing the badly outdated infantry tactics of the era as well as the careless bravery that so many officers possessed. Some diehard supporters of Hood stand by his actions and point to his unquestionable courage. But in my opinion, what's the point of being a brave officer if you place no value on the lives of your men? Overall, I recommend this book merely for the purpose of better understanding Gen. Hood's character.

John Bell Hood has been called everything from a gallant hero to a drug-addicted fool. The truth lies somewhere in between. MANY false truths have been all too easily accepted as fact by historians and Civil War enthusiaths alike, and I personally think he doesn't deserve such a negative stigma.
Most all would agree that hood was a better Brigade and Division commander than he was a commander of the Army of Tennessee (his stint as a Corps commander during the early stages of the Atlanta campaign do not show him to be one way or the other, due to the fact that any General can direct his men to fall back, erect Breastworks, and fall back again). However, part of this is due to the fact that as Hood rose in rank, time passed, and the hopes of a Confederate victory waned. Even Robert E. Lee himself would have been hard pressed to turn the 1864 Tennessee campaign into a sucess.
Hood loved his troops. It is an absolute lie to say that he did not care about his men's lives. After nearly every battle in which he fought, Franklin included, he was seen to be weeping uncontrollably, grieving over the loss of his men. The men of his famed Texas "Brigade" held a special place in his heart.
The book is not a straightforeward telling of John Bell Hood's career; the book is written from a point of view. Therefore, it tends to lean towards that point of view. What do you expect a man to say, "I was a horrible commander"? It is still a good read, worth any Civil War buff's time and money. It is especially usefull if you are looking to better understand the thought process of John Bell Hood.
To me, John Bell Hood is a unique Civil War soldier. He gave body and soul (especially body) for his cause, and whether you agree with the cause, or his descisions as a soldier, you have to respect him for that.

After his decisive defeat on the third day at Gettysburg, General Robert E. Lee, as he rode among his men, was widely quoted as saying, "It's all my fault. It is I that have lost this fight, and you must help me out of it the best way you can. All good men must rally." If only John Bell Hood had emulated his hero General Lee and accepted responsibility for the defeats at Franklin and Nashville, history would have been more sympathetic. Hood's defensive memoir, titled Advance and Retreat, is remarkable in what is not said.

My copy of Advance and Retreat is a 1985 publication of The Blue and Grey Press. The first 68 pages provide a record of John Bell Hood's experiences up to the day that he reported for duty in the Army of Tennessee. The next 92 pages are Hood's detailed reply to General Johnston's criticism of Hood himself. The remaining chapters - Siege of Atlanta, Atlanta Untenable, Correspondence with Sherman on the Rules of War, Campaign to the Alabama Line, and Tennessee Campaign - are Hood's account of the disastrous period July through December, 1864.

The final chapter titled Rashness - Johnston - Fabius - Scipio are Hood's reply to Sherman's pointed criticism: "I did not suppose that General Hood, though rash, would venture to attack fortified places like Allatoona, Resaca, Decatur, and Nashville; but he did so, and in so doing, played into our hands perfectly."

John Hood was an ambitious man of great courage and valor that was promoted beyond his capability. The Confederacy was desperately searching for leaders in that summer of 1864 that could resist the inexorable Union tide. But how could any leader, even another Stonewall Jackson, have avoided defeat? Hood's tragedy was that he received what he coveted: leadership of the Army of Tennessee.

John Hood's surprisingly well-written memoir, Advance and Retreat, is mandatory reading for anyone that studies the Civil War. I strongly suggest, however, that you first read John Bell Hood and the War for Southern Independence, an exceptional biography by Richard M. McMurry published by The University Press of Kentucky (1982). McMurry is sympathetic, but his in depth analysis provides valuable context setting for John Bell Hood's memoirs.

For those who enjoy Civil War historical fiction, I also recommend the short novel, Nashville 1864, by Madison Jones.

A good narrative from JB Hood but lets face it..There was no excuses for the Hood ordered frontal suicide attack at Franklin! Most of his subordinate commanders including the great Patrick Cleburne himself advised against it. As the previous reviewer pointed out, most of Hood's book is in answer to post war charges from Joe Johnston in his own book. Hood himself stated that he felt the AOT was weak in the fact that they had become accustomed to the defense of breastworks. Take a look at the losses to the AOT in Atlanta as Hood orders them out of their own defensive breast works to attack Sherman's forces. Atlanta fell. It just got worse in Tennessee. Hood's glory days were in the east in the ANV as a brigade commander. It's a good a read and I recommend. Howevere don't assume because Hood was there, this book the final word.

To say that this book CAN be an influential source is a huge understatement. This is a dangerous book. It contains many truths, but it also contains errors and potentially very harmful instruction. Will you go to hell from reading it or following its instructions? No. But you will pay a heavy price for the knowledge it contains, especially if you are a persistent seeker. These types of answers don't come without a price and this is why his foundation closed and his followers dispersed. They stated that it was his very spirit who implored them to do so and I believe them. Why? Because actively seeking communication with the spirit world brought nothing but sorrow. Initially, things will be fine and you will feel as though you have discovered the greatest source of truth that you could hope to find. You will feel deeepend spiritually. Continue past that point, however, and you will then affect not only your life but that of many others around you. Nothing is free, folks. Perhaps THAT is why the scriptures warned against this type of communication. Not because it is evil, but because the price for humans is simply too great. You will be playing with fire.

The Johnannes Greber Foundation, which was based in New Jersey and was run by those who had known Pastor Greber, closed voluntarily, but ONLY after taking steps to have the original plates destroyed. They were also attempting to stop any future printing or disbursement of his book. It was soon to be out of their protection due to the copyright expiring. They had much money to lose by closing and disbanding, but they were adamant that this was what he wanted and that their own personal experiences had been the same.

Europeans have loved the book for decades and I am greatly surprised, and concerned, to discover it on the internet. Readers need to be aware that (1) Johannes Greber died an unhappy, broken, disillusioned man, leaving behind a shattered much younger wife and two very troubled sons. (2) Nothing good came to any of his inner circle or family. Only more questions shattered relationships, and deep sorrow in trying to integrate their experiences.

I should know. I came across an original print, handsigned copy many years ago. I was told that that was a very rare find. It sat in my closet for a few years. I often wish that I'd never read the book. You don't need Pastor Greber's story or his experiences in order to find the Truth. Take his word for it.

Please do not allow yourself to be deceived! Johannes Greber and his wife consulted the spirit world (a/k/a Satan's demons) for help with understanding and rewording the HOLY scriptures. NEVER should we consult mediums or divine spirits as warned in the Bible. (Leviticus 20:27 and 1 Timothy 4:1 - KJV)
The Holy Spirit is the only spirit who can teach us the truths within the Bible. (John 14:26 - KJV)
(If the KJV of the Bible seems difficult to read then try the New King James version. Read it over and over & listen to the Bible on CD's as often as possible. The TRUTH will set you free!)
Readers, BEWARE the contents of this book!

This book is a very important work in the history of Spiritualism. The author, once a Catholic priest in the early 1900's in Germany received many important spirit messages from young mediums in his parish which caused him to look at all the cases of mediumship and communication with spirit recorded in the Old and New Testaments. With the help of spirit advisors Greber corrected many of the mistakes, mistranslations and additions which over time had crept into the original Biblical texts. He also published his own edition of the New Testament. In "Communication with the Spirit World of God" Greber also looks at many other cases of mediumship through the ages, mentioning some other French and German priests who were themselves mediums in the 18th and 19th century, and others in the 20th century such as Mirabelli and Kluski. He shows how the spiritual gifts of prophesy, healing and clairvoyance have continued since Biblical times down to the present day, not so much in the priesthood, which has lost touch with its true living spiritual source, but in the lay psychics and public mediums within or outside the Spiritualist and New Age movements. Just look at the present-day mediums appearing on television, such as John Edward, James Van Praagh, Sylvia Browne, George Anderson and Colin Fry, to name a few. Greber resigned his priesthood and came to live in the United States, where this translation of his original text was published, running into six editions between 1932 and 1979. It is time for another reprint, but meantime, any available copy is a collectible item and is well worth the outlay to any prospective purchaser.

If it weren't for this book, I probably would no longer consider myself a Christian. This book showed me that I could believe in God without having to believe the doctrines of the churches. It offered a plausible explanation for the problems of life. I wish this book were still in print and available for everyone to read.

This book is basically the reason I enrolled in a doctoral program in Biblical Studies at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. Even though the professors here teach their version of the truth, I am seeking my own confirmation of the Greber text here, THE truth. The book presents spiritual principles in a very logical way that is easy to consume and muse upon. If taken seriously enough the book can change one's life for the better. Christianity does not have to be the stumbling block that man has unfortunately fashioned it as. The Christianity in the Greber book is liberating while keeping Christ and God clearly in the picture. Of all the books on spiritism that can go on and on about who/what/why/how God is, generating nothing but a headache for the reader, the Greber book remarkably presents only a few pages on God without wacky occult/New Age views...Greber was a sincere and hardworking Cathohlic priest who after 25 years in the priesthood was approached by a parisioner on the subject of spiritism...Greber's book is a fascinating accound of his response to that parisioner....read it and find out.

This book starts out with Amanda Kent in the battle of the Alamo. After the battle she is taken prisoner by a Mexican soldier, named Cordoba, who treats her well. Cordoba dies in a battle and Amanda is freed. She stays in Texas long enough to have Cordoba's son, Louis Kent. She then moves to California to try and make money so that she can head back to Boston. After about thirteen years she has aquired enough money from the gold rush to head beack east so that she can buy back her grandfather's publishing company, Kent & Son's.

Once out east Amanda finds out the her grandfather was a founder in a company that has slowly been accumulating money that she now owns. She is now able to make her mark in New York and Boston. Amanda finally restores Kent & Son's to the Kent family after she kills Stovall, the owner, and buys it from them. She dies only seventeen days after Stovall dies.
This book is full of historical figures and events. It also shows the courageous and determined Amanda get around the obstacles in her life.

The fourth in the Kent family cronicles is so far the worst in the series. I found the 3rd book to be the best so far so ic ould not wait to read the Furies and waht a dissapoinment. The book is so boring and it drags on and on. It's not like the other book's with the war's and the great stories this book is boring. I found the charactors really boring and have no life in this book. I hope the next one is good.

So far in the Kent Family series, Amanda is my favorite character. She has more guts than most of the men in her family do and she's inspirational. I also like how Jakes ties in different people from the historical stand-point with her story.

This novel opens with Amanda trapped inside the Alamo with the Texans during that fateful battle with the Mexicans. Captured as a Mexican war-of-prisoner, Amanda finds love and comfort with the man who rescued her from a certain death. When he died, she was eventually free to go back to Texas. And this is just the beginning of a long adventure. After Amanda gives birth to a son, Louis, she travels to California. And throughout her years, Amanda's main obssession was how to regain the control of Kent and Sons from Hamilton Stovall.

This is a fast-paced novel ~~ perhaps more so than the others ~~ and somehow it feels like it's seeped in more historical details than the others. Jake covers the Alamo, the Gold Rush, the expanding business in the Northeast of the USA, Texas becoming a state, slavery and abolition. Also in this novel, Amanda becomes reunited with Jared, her cousin, for a very brief time. This is also an introduction of Jared's son, Jephtha Kent, who is a minister in Virgina, also uneasy with the Slavery question. He soon becomes ostracized by his family and friends for his beliefs.

If you're expecting a historical novel with details on our ancestors' lifestyle back in the 1800s, this novel is definitely one of the better ones! Pick this one up too ~~ you won't regret it!

1-10-05

The line of the Kent famiy is followed through with Amanda Kent as the main player. Amanda, daughter of Gilbert Kent was kidnapped and held as a wife by an Indian brave until his death when she was released.She then married a fur trapper who also died,leaving her to m ake her living as a bar keeper until she was caught up in the Battle of the Alamo and again taken prisoner as the woman of a Mexican Officer.She was treated well by him and gave birth to his son,Louis. By chance, she met,very briefly, with her cousin Jared who had been searching for her for years and inherited, on behalf of his son Jephtha,the control of his share of a gold mine. Determined to restore the printing firm of Kent and Sons in Boston to the family control, she and Louis set up house in Boston where she battles for ownership of the firm from the evil Hamilton Stovall,the man who swindled her family of their fortune and business.

Arguably the best of the Kent Family Chronicles, having as its heroine the strong-willed Amanda Kent, whose personality and strength of character reverberate off every page. How she makes it from the Alamo to the California gold rush to the throes of abolitionist New York strains belief, but ultimately the wild ride is worth the trip. Compelling characters help the journey: Bart McGill, Isaiah Hope, Jephtha Kent, Michael Boyle, Luiz Cordoba. And there is the usual liberal sprinkling of historical figures like Santa Ana. Not necessarily a page-turner, but a strong depiction of key events in American history, very indicative of the hardship and conflicts of the time. Better than "The Bastard."

Ditto on the book keeping one up at night and thinking about it all day. I was an awe at the wordsmithing, even with stuff that had little or no provence to me. They usually found some sort of mental allocation with me, in the end, which is half the fun of it. The pills Chess and other's were dropping were all unknown to me bar one or two, which had the effect on me of making them more toxic. So I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that glossaries be made by the author for his books, but it might add to the chase.

Big question for me is what the hell was really segueing in the end? I Truly experienced the sight of the guardian columns protecting no-thingness.

Peculiar about this book is that it is dream from end to end without a single snap-to, while still maintaining a healthy professional writer's edge. The sort of concentration necessary for that is something I dip my hat to. Most of all though I sense something older than civilisation here that lends the language/intent the ability to envision the future very precisely and unbiasedly, which is something of great value right now, and the reason why this book is as morninghorrifying as it is crepuscularly joyous. K Gibran said, 'We live only to discover beauty, all else is a form of waiting'.

I also enjoyed the love story part of it - very lightly eluded to (by the author and the characters)- with Marj and Ray, very sweet.

Bruce Wagner is a truly original novelist, capable of gargantuan humor, horror and pity all on the same page. His voice is unique and as the critics have noted, Memorial evidences a growing sense of compassion towards his tortured characters.That said, this novel needed a lot of editing! It could have been cut by a third.

I am a big fan of Bruce Wagner's work. I have read all his previous novels so I eagerly awaited his latest. I was not disappointed. This novel is witty, tragic, beautiful, gritty and somewhat horrifying. Like life, right? Wagner's characters are so three-dimensional, they are so fully alive. You get into their heads and understand their motivations. His references to pop culture and arcane matters keep your head reeling. He writes with such passion and humor. If you are searching for a book that will keep you up all night and thinking about it all day, I suggest "Memorial."

In the inside of the dust jacket it says: "In his most profound and accomplished book to date, acclaimed author Bruce Wagner breaks from Hollywood culture with a novel of exceptional literary dimension and searing emotional depth."

That's sounds pretty good doesn't it? It sounds like something I would really like to read. I read all 507 pages of Memorial and I still wouldn't mind reading the book described above. This sure isn't it.

I was sold on the book by hearing an interview with Mr. Wagner on WBAI radio. (One can find the interview by Googling "Cat Radio Cafe". It's somewhere on that site, or at least it was a couple of weeks ago.) It's an interesting interview. Mr. Wagner is an interesting talker. I wish I could say the same for his writing.

Maybe it was over my head. Maybe I'm not deep enough to grasp the "exceptional literary dimension". Maybe I'm too shallow or cowardly to plunge into the "searing emotional depth". Or maybe the novel is just as disappointing and depressing as I think it is.

So what is it? What did I read and get from it? This is a story of a family divided and yet still connected although through most of the novel they don't know it and one of them never does. We are presented with four interlocking stories. Once upon a time many years ago Ray and Marjorie were married. They had two lovely children Joan and Chester. Ray blew some sort of business deal, felt bad about himself, and quite the family, took off one day unannounced. As we enter the story the two kids are about 40 and the parents are old. There has been no contact with the absent father all that time. So that's the setup and then we get to go with them all through the personal hell or torment of Job. This is a novel where all the bad things you hear about on the news happens to happen to these people and those around them. All this is highly unpleasant and, well, sometimes feels exceptionally sadistic. That might not be so bad if there was a point to it all and since I lack the ability to grasp the exceptional literary dimension of it all, I guess I missed whatever that point or literary pay-off might have been. What I got was a sad, mean, ugly, and cruel story told with a whole lot, way too much, up-to-the-minute mass media hipness. Mr. Wagner sure knows his TV shows and personalities, and his LA gurus. Well, I know about this crap too and I didn't need him to point them out to me. But I don't waste my time actually watching the TV shows he insists on writing about, I just know about them and that's enough. I think Wagner should spend more time reading other novels than watching TV. It might help his writing or dictating or however this mess was produced. I didn't need him to tell me how horrible and sad modern life has become. I didn't need him to rub my nose in it. Everything he says about this country, the economies system, LA, is obvious to me. And he adds nothing on top of that. He just wasted my time with lists.

But then again I may well have missed the point. I tend to like most things I read and hate to have to be so negative, yet this is how I feels about this one.

"Memorial" is definitely a very West Coast, Californian, specifically L.A.-kind of book. That's not to detract from the writing style, which is actually fairly original and deeply personal. Wagner writes in the third person, but really brings out his characters' flaws and strengths. The characters in this book are not one-dimensional, the relationships are complicated and multi-faceted and change over the course of the plot, as in any good novel they should.

However, in some ways, the characters are almost cliches of the West Coast stereotype. "Memorial" is one of those books in which you're not really sure if the cliches, the parodies, the factual innaccuracies, the shallow commercialism (the constant references to pop culture and celebrities) are supposed to be critical, supportive or simply illusrative of American culture at the beginning of the 21st century. I should be more specific: greater Los Angeles culture at the beginning of the 21st century. I don't know anybody with a name like Laksmi who had a Jewish father who idealized the Hindu God Ganesh and work as an actress on a pseudo-reality TV show. That's very L.A. and I often had trouble identifing with these characters (with the exception of Ray). Wagner's greatest strength is that he makes these people accessible and relatively believeable.

It definitely has that feel of "Magnolia" or "Crash" or those other L.A. movies in which the plots and characters lives overlap with each other. But not a similar film genre like "Syriana", the underlying theme being social and political, and not personal and cultural. Also, it lacks the edge of a story like that - the trials and tribulations of a family dog shot by police doesn't exactly stack up against international terrorism.

Again, after reading the book, I'm not sure if Wagner was trying to condemn this mindset (all this tragedy in the world and all we care about is Nip/Tuck! We're lawsuit crazy! We're obsessed with memorializing our own dead, and don't care about the rest of the world!), or simply illustrate it (this is the way we are). I tend to favor the latter, only because I feel like he draws more from real events than by this alternate-universe L.A. that he created on his own.

If you really want to read a book that has something to say about loss, and is personal, cultural, spiritual, social and political, I would recommend Johnathan Safran Foer's "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close."

But again, not a bad book, and a pretty bold attempt, it just rings a little hollow. (But is it supposed to...?)

I personally really enjoyed this book, but agree that it is not so much for the casual pet owner as it is for someone familiar/interested in the veterinary field. Gives you a glimpse into the lives of a few of the main characters at Angell Memorial Animal Hospital. A must read for anyone considering becoming a veterinarian.

I love animal stories, so I bought this book. But, it was so much more. The stories of the people who dedicate their lives to saving, or at least trying to save, pets were very moving. The book was well written and made for a fun read. I would recommend it to anyone who has ever had a pet.

To much information about the vets at the hospital and not enough stories regarding the animals that were taken care of.

This book is full of insightfull information on whats going on behind the closed doors of the Animal Hospitals. It has stories on the patients, the owners, and the DVMs. I give it 4 stars for it's thoughtful writing and stories. A must read on my list!

I was so disappointed in this book. It had all of the criteria to be an excellent look into one of the most important animal hospitals in the nation but the writer doesn't have any insight into the relationships between animals/ humans. I took it back to the book store where I bought it and told her not to recommend it.

Von Neumann was one of the most celebrated and prolific mathematicians of the 20'th century; his contributions were legion, and always bore unmistakable creativity and elegance. "The Computer and the Brain" is a record of a lecture series that von Neumann delivered at Yale University in 1957. In these lectures, von Neumann set out to explore connections between computing hardware and their biological counterparts; brains. Von Neumann compared neurons with physical computing elements in terms of size, speed, heat dissipation, capacity, etc., in an attempt to discover what, if anything, could be said to unite them or to set them apart. He drew from what had been learned in designing computer instructions and memories in an attempt to glean some insight into what the brain might be doing. Ever the consummate mathematician, von Neumann was guarded in his statements, never over-reaching or confusing speculation with fact.

The ideas contained in these lectures will come as no great surprise to most scientists today; indeed, I would expect most to simply nod in agreement at most of von Neumann's observations. For example, von Neumann notes that neurons are essentially digital in that they have an all-or-nothing activation energy. However, it is interesting to see how seriously he pursues the idea that the brain may rely upon a mixture of analog and digital encodings; he took absolutely nothing for granted, and may well have been vastly ahead of his time.

Although von Neumann's many references to vacuum tubes and differential analyzers may seem archaic today, his central points remain essentially intact. I'm certain that von Neumann would have felt somewhat vindicated by the explosive advances in semiconductor devices (in both digital and analog incarnations), as well as in machine learning and neurobiology. One can perhaps view von Neumann's lectures as the first glimmerings of what would eventually become fruitful exchanges between computer science and various biological disciplines.

If you are looking for a discussion that will give you some insight into artificial intelligence, neural networks, or brain physiology, then I'm afraid you will likely be disappointed with this book. While many of von Neumann's observations may have been controversial at the time, they have for the most part moved quietly into the collective consciousness of scientists. However, if you have interest in either the historical development of these ideas, or in seeing how one of the preeminent minds of the 20'th century approached this vexing new problem, then it will be worth your time.

What I most enjoyed about this book is von Neumann's methodical and exceedingly cautious approach, coupled with his occasional willingness to speculate. As the vast majority of von Neumann's writings are accessible only to a very small audience, such as his enormously influential treatises on quantum mechanics, geometry, and game theory, and his pioneering work in areas such as functional analysis and operator theory, this little book is perhaps unique in that it lets you in on the ground floor.

Perhaps the most famous and often quoted line in this remarkable book appears on page 39, where von Neumann declares that "The most immediate observation regarding the nervous system is that its functioning is prima facie digital."

The "prima facie" modifier is commonly taken to mean von Neumann saw the brain as "obviously digital," or "patently digital," and that it therefore must resemble a digital computer. But as you read the rest of the book, you quickly discover that this is not what John von Neumann intended. Von Neumann uses words cautiously and precisely, and to him, "Prima facie" means exactly what it says: "on its face."

In 1956, the brain appeared digital. But von Neumann thought this impression might be superficial. He thought that deeper biological investigation might well demonstrate that the nervous system is not, in fact, digital, or not completely digital. He believed it might work in some more sophisticated way, and suggests that perhaps some intermediate signaling mechanism, a hybrid between analog and digital, might be at work in the brain. For this and other reasons he actively resisted labeling the brain as a digital computer.

In the mid 90s, evidence began to appear that von Neumann was probably right to reserve his judgment. These curious new results show that a single nerve impulse is somehow able to convey information to the brain. This signal seems distinctly un-digital. A number of theories have popped up, some attempting to explain this whopping new mystery, others attempting to explain it away. But its impact on neurophysiology, and on conventional computer models of the brain, is pretty shocking. Not to say, devastating. (See Spikes, by Rieke et al, for a readable account of this story.) When the smoke clears, it would not be surprising if people go all the way back to John von Neumann, looking for traction, fresh starting points, and for von Neumann's wonderfully broad sense of what is possible in neurobiology - a sense we have evidently lost to progress in the years since he wrote this splendid essay.

Von Neumann did not include in this book his interesting views on the nervous system of the eye. He was an early adopter of visual memory systems in digital computers, and he was evidently intrigued by the way the retinal cells of the eye are arranged to look backward, that is, toward the screen of the back wall of the eye. Possibly he thought the retinal cells saw back there a thin film diffraction pattern. You can find his interest in the nervous system of the eye remarked in his brother Nicholas Vonneumann's book, John von Neumann as seen by his Brother, and this reminiscence is also paraphrased in Poundstone's Prisoner's Dilemma. Finally, some of the worldly story of von Neumann, his digital computers, and their role in the creation of the hydrogen bomb can be found in MaCrae's biography.

Perhaps the most famous and often quoted line in this remarkable book appears at the beginning of Part II, where von Neumann declares that "The most immediate observation regarding the nervous system is that its functioning is prima facie digital."

The "prima facie" modifier is commonly taken to mean von Neumann saw the brain as "obviously digital," or "patently digital," and that it therefore must resemble a digital computer. But as you read the rest of the book, you quickly discover that this is not what John von Neumann intended. Von Neumann uses words cautiously and precisely, and to him, "Prima facie" means exactly what it says: "on its face."

In 1956, the brain appeared digital. But von Neumann thought this impression might be superficial. He thought that deeper biological investigation might well demonstrate that the nervous system is not, in fact, digital, or not completely digital. He believed it might work in some more sophisticated way, and suggests that perhaps some intermediate signaling mechanism, a hybrid between analog and digital, might be at work in the brain. For this and other reasons he actively resisted labeling the brain as a digital computer.

In the mid 90s, evidence began to appear that von Neumann was probably right to reserve his judgment. These curious new results show that a single nerve impulse is somehow able to convey information to the brain. This is distinctly un-digital. A number of theories have popped up, some attempting to explain this whopping new mystery, others attempting to explain it away. But its impact on neurophysiology, and on conventional computer models of the brain, is pretty shocking. Not to say, devastating. (See Spikes, by Rieke et al, for a readable account of this story.) When the smoke clears, it would not be surprising if people go all the way back to John von Neumann, looking for traction, fresh starting points, and for von Neumann's wonderfully broad sense of what is possible in neurobiology - a sense of possibilities we have evidently lost in the years since he wrote this splendid essay. He is eloquent on the problem of selecting a memory "organ," and evidently thought the worst choice would be a neuron.

Von Neumann did not include in this book his interesting views on the nervous system of the eye. He was an early adopter of visual memory systems in digital computers, and he was evidently intrigued by the way the retinal cells of the eye are arranged to look backward, that is, toward the screen of the back wall of the eye. Possibly he thought the retinal cells saw back there a thin film diffraction pattern. You can find his interest in the nervous system of the eye remarked in his brother Nicholas Vonneumann's book, John von Neumann as seen by his Brother, and this reminiscence is also paraphrased in Poundstone's Prisoner's Dilemma. Finally, some of the worldly story of von Neumann, his digital computers, and their role in the creation of the hydrogen bomb can be found in MaCrae's biography.

A book for a limited audience. You have got to be interested in some really seminal, currently unresolved issues of how the great invention of the ALU (arithmetic logic unit) still employed in every computer built to the present day, was a compromise effort by this genius. His thought was to model the human brain, and the ALU succeeded in modeling just a small part, but he was totally frustrated and unsatisfied by the result--for good reason. He points out that the very language of the human brain has not yet been discovered--the orders of magnitude by which its process and results exceed the merely digital high speed comparator we call a computer (my apologies to Bill Gates!) clearly demonstrate the existence of a logic and a mathematics, the simplest rules of which as yet defy all our efforts to understand its workings, while we experience its results every time we think. Depth of logical levels, and depth of arithmetic levels necessary to achieve the requisite results we obtain from our Crays and our PCs are scorned by the human brain in a radical simplicity as yet undiscovered (not in that it does it, but in how it does it: therefore he postulates the existence of a radically, essentially different math and logic inherent in its workings). He lays out the discoveries of Turing, McCullough and Weiner in a brilliant tour de force of known (1955)neurological and cybernetic discoveries, and how they charted his course in creating the ALU. He compares analog and digital and mixed models of computing but (in my opinion) oversimplifies the digital aspect of thinking and memory, deeming them to be the route used by the human brain in performing its unruffled magic. He closes by posing two questions that express the wonderment faced by a high level intelligence when accosted by the facts he was unable to wrap mental arms around: 1)"what essential inferences about the arithmetical and logical structure of the computing machine that the nervous system represents can be drawn from these ...conflicting observations? and 2)what are the logics and mathematics in the central nervous system [that must be]structurally *essentially* different from those languages to which our common experience refers? His fellow researcher, Warren McCullough similarly closed out his life and research by repeating a question that plagued him all his life: What is a number, that a man can know it, and a man that he can know a number?

This is a great book that pushed the limits of his time; his swan song, to be delivered as the Yale Silliman lecture, but never was, due to Von Neumann's tragic untimely death in his early fifties.

After the quick read that it was this morning I am left uncertain as to exactly how I feel about this book. On the positive side even though one does get the feeling that The Computer and the Brain is slightly dated (1958) it has held up remarkably well despite the extreme rate of technological development. On the negative side though it is a bad sign when the most enjoyable part of a book is the foreword.

The cover of the book basically tells the whole story, apples and oranges- for while as von Neumann recognizes that "the most immediate observation regarding the nervous system is that its functioning is prima facie digital" the connection between them is not as strong as a first glance might suggest.

There doesn't seem to be too much that a study of one can teach us about the other but maybe finding out that lack of an underling connection is just as useful as finding such a connection. While this book is a fairly good recitation of the facts (at least as they were known in 1958) I can't say there is really much here to recommend it to the casual reader- think that only as a reference work can this book gain high praise.