Roma Books

Saylor has definately become a master of his art. Each of the characters are so vivid, it is obvious that Saylor treats each with respect and critical thought has been put into view point analysis. The images Saylor uses to bring Rome alive are personal and palpable. Its as if Saylor travelled in time and really hung out with these people.

The story line really didnt draw me in to the novel that much. But if anyone can make a story about a bunch of bickering old ladies facsinating, you better believe that it is Saylor who will do it.

Although the story line didnt excite me, the realness of the characters that did. I mean, I almost feel like I was down their by the river with Gordianus and Clodia.

Well, Gordianus continues to be entirely implausible as far as actual Late Republican Rome was concerned. But then this novel manages to obtain an eerie athmosphere, as Gordianus enters old age in earnest in a setting of civil war, chaos and impending doom, the telling of the story revolves around a savvy counterpoint structure, and the mystery is actually satisfactory and not a pretext for displaying historical erudition. I look foward to reading the next novel - something "Last seem in Massilia" didn't quite manage to do.

Mist of Prophecies is a tale of trouble. In this story Gordianus encounters many problems. Caesar and Pompey are fighting a war for control of the republic. Rome is in desperate economic times as inflation rages. Most people have difficulties paying rent and buying food. Merchants seldom stock their shelves. Gordianus, himself, borrows money to pay expenses and falls deeply in debt to a selfish banker named Volumnius. Bethesdia, his wife, suffers from a strange ailment which saps her energy and affects her mood. Diana, his daughter, pushes him to get work and suggests that she and her husband Davus take over the family business. Gordianus begins to feel old and useless.

Then, in addition to his wife and daughter, eight more women challenge Gordianus' sanity: Cassandra, a seeress with a reputation of being mad; Culpernia, Caesars wife; Clodia, a manipulative temptress he has encountered before; Faustia, daughter of former dictator Sulla and wife of the banished politician Milo; Fulvia, Clodius' widow who married Caesar's lieutenant Curio; Terentia, the pious and proper wife of Cicero; Antonia, Mark Antony's wife and cousin; Cytheris, an actress and former slave who is Mark Antony's lover. Gordianus is convinced that one of the women is responsible for the death of Cassandra.

Action begins after Cassandra's death. Gordianus, who had some secret relationship with Cassandra, arranges for and finances her funeral. The story unfolds through flashbacks and encounters and interviews with the ten women. Gordianus decides that Cassandra was poisoned. At first Gordianus avoids inquiring into the situation. After being nagged by Diana, he begins his investigation, wanting only peace of mind.

Mist of Prophecies presents fascinating characters through Gordianus' interviews. The characters are encountered in their own element and most reveal themselves through their words and behavior. Gordianus, being a man, doesn't always completely understand what he sees.

This is a fun book written by an excellent historian. I may read it again.

While Caesar and Pompey are in Greece preparing for the ultimate showdown of their civil war, Rome is in dire straits under its Caesar-appointed custodians. Food is in short supply and the economy has all but collapsed with soaring inflation and a population deeply in debt (including Gordianus). Utter chaos could ensue at any moment as several opportunists exploit Rome's weakness to gain power for themselves. As if things weren't bad enough, Gordianus' wife Bethesda has fallen under a mysterious ailment that threatens to be fatal. Gordianus and his family are in the Forum seeking food (and hopefully a cure for Bethesda) when the beautiful but obviously deranged woman called "Cassandra" (for her alleged gift of prophecy), runs to Gordianus and collapses in his arms telling him before she dies that she has been poisoned by another woman. It turns out that Cassandra and Gordianus were not strangers. They were, in fact, secret lovers. (Yes, at his age!) Since Cassandra was a beggar with no relatives, Gordianus gives her a funeral. To his surprise, seven of the richest, most powerful women in Rome (including the wives and mistresses of Caesar, Cicero and Mark Antony) come to watch her body burn. Gordianus is sure that one of them is the murderer. Keeping his grief secret, Gordianus tries to identify the killer, as he is drawn deeper and deeper into Cassandra's complex world. Who exactly WAS Cassandra? Where did she come from? Why was she there? Was she a genuine seeress? A clever actress? A spy? Or all of the above? If she was a spy, who was she working for and why?

A MIST OF PROPHECIES is a more conventionally "Agatha Christie" structured mystery than the previous volumes: a murder is committed, the suspects identified and then interviewed to discover the killer's identity. I was sure I had correctly guessed the murderess and her motivation at the end of Chapter 13, but I was wrong! Once again, what really makes the novel worthwhile are the colorful details of daily life in the Roman Empire. This book doesn't have the depth that some of the previous volumes have (e.g., THE VENUS THROW), but it's one of the faster-paced entries in this series and a lot of fun. At this point, there is only one more volume in this series after this book. I really don't want it to end! But A MIST OF PROPHECIES hints at the intriguing prospect of Gordianus' daughter Diana and her husband Davus entering the family business as a team. So maybe it won't be over!

This is Steven Saylor's 9th Sub Rosa mystery featuring Gordianus the Finder and his family. While reading the mysteries in order does enable the reader to better understand the backstory, the novels can be read and enjoyed out of order.

In this novel, Gordianus is investigating the death of Cassandra, a beautiful and enigmatic seer. It seems likely that one of Rome's most powerful women is involved, but which one, and why? And what is Gordianus's own involvement with Cassandra?

Set in the Roman Republic of 48BCE amidst the turmoil of the civil war between Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great, the politics of Rome enhance the novel without overwhelming the story.

A highly enjoyable novel. Recommended to lovers of mysteries in historical settings.

Jennifer Cameron-Smith

One of the classics, what else can I say? Sure, a bit melodramatic, but this is Shakespear after all.

This is a tragic play of a man who has the skill and the determination to rule the world, but instead he brings himself to ruin through capitulation to desires of the flesh. Antony's love for Cleopatra is so self-destructive that he in the end has to turn to suicide to escape his downward spiral. It's not an easy play to read, but it is an important one.

Not one of Shakespeare's more memorable works, there are some pluses to this play and relatively few minuses, but neither the pluses nor the minuses are anything that stands out. It is nice to have yet another play told in Shakespeare's beautiful language, and enjoyable to see a love story that centers on people old enough to no longer be in the first blush of youth, even if they ARE still young enough to be beautiful and virile. On the other hand, I'd have liked to see these more mature lovers BEHAVING somewhat more maturely, instead of being just as frivolous, headstrong, and foolish as the kids in "Romeo And Juliet", and there really aren't any lines from this play that come immediately to mind as having entered the "Quotes Hall Of Fame", as so many lines from Shakespeare's plays have. Nothing on the order of "A horse! My Kingdom for a horse!" or "Alas, poor Yorick; I knew him well." or "To be or not to be, that is the question", or so many others.

If you enjoy Shakespearean plays, you'll probably enjoy this one. But there's no real reason for anyone but a completist to read this.

A great deal of argument has been in the air during the last couple of decades over Shakespeare's rendering of the famous history of Cleopatra , the once upon a time queen of Egypt and her so- called wanton nature and habits that brought her in relation with two Roman military leaders namely ,Mark Antony and Julius Caesar .
From a purely feminist perspective, Cleopatra has been the butt of male-oriented chauvinistic attack and criticism that deemed her a `sexual glutton and `as old as sin itself `. In a male-dominated world like the one we live, woman's beauty is her scourge. No body blames the customer of the prostitute; people are always after the prostitute ,because she is a woman but the male her customer goes unpunished, he has the privilege to enjoy every thing without the least censure. Cleopatra as a matter of fact, is more sinned against than sinning; she was the victim of male-oriented criticism which saw in her an apt image of the `Other `, so why not projecting centuries-long and long-nursed grudge on her as a symbol of women ,of course not as a mother, a sister or even a wife but as a mistress who takes delight in wrecking peaceful house-holds and disrupting the coziness of family life. She is an Amazon woman or a man-eater with lewd insatiable passion that does not stop at any thing to satisfy her sexual urge
Shakespeare seems to subscribe to the above-mentioned misconceptions about Cleopatra; his is a woman , ready to do any and everything cost what it may to live in the mood of love. She shuns the business of the state and neglects her duties as a queen of a strategic country. According to Shakespeare's distorted image of history, Cleopatra's bent for sex and desire makes her interweave a web to enmesh even her arch enemies. Shakespeare does not seem to believe that true faithful love knows no boundaries. Cleopatra's love for Antony and Julius Caesar could have been true love that could have bridged gaps of difference and enmity between Egypt and Rome if not looked upon from the wrong end of perspective.
Further more, if this kind of love has been, in the eyes of those of us -the hapless romantically inclined lovers- who believe only in platonic love, sensual and momentary, the child of momentary sexual infatuation, why do we always blame the woman? - Cleopatra in this case - why do we not fix an equal share of the blame on Caesar and Antony? . In our eyes, male as they are, Cleopatra is "the belly dancer sans merci" whose magical web can not be helped and works with even the most powerful of men in the world. In the eyes of male-hegemony, woman is an object to be loved but never capable of love

I recently re-read ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA prior to attending The Colorado Shakespeare Festival's performance of the ambitious play under the summer stars here in Boulder. Drawn from Sir Thomas North's 1579 English version of Plutarch's Lives, William Shakespeare (1564-1616) produced this romantic tragedy late in his career, around 1607, and published it in the First Folio in 1623. It tells the story of a doomed romance between two charismatic lovers, Roman military leader, Marc Antony, and the captivating Queen of Egypt (and former mistress of Julius Caesar), Cleopatra. When his wife, Fulvia unexpectedly dies, Antony is summoned from Egypt to Rome to mend a political rift with Octavius by marrying his recently widowed sister, Octavia. Of course, this news enrages passionate Cleopatra. She vents her anger on the messenger, but is quick to realize that Octavia is no real rival to her when it comes to beauty. However, Antony soon follows his heart back to Cleopatra's arms, abandoning his new wife in Athens. This leads to war, when Octavius declares war on Egypt. After Octavius eventually defeats Antony at Alexandria, Cleopatra sends a false report of her suicide, which prompts Antony to wound himself mortally. Antony dies in his lover's arms, and rather than submit to Roman rule under the new Caesar (Octavius), the heart-broken Cleopatra asks to have a poisonous snake delivered to her in a basket of figs. In the end, ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA is as much about new sparks re-igniting the flames of love as new political forces supplanting old political regimes. It is a play that reminds me that it is perhaps better to re-read and understand Shakespeare than to devour one bestseller after the next.

G. Merritt

Othello by William Shakespeare

"Othello" is a magnificent piece of literary work. The emotion Shakespeare can bring out of you is truly amazing. The plot has many moments of uniqueness and suspense. Kindle edition is my favorite.

As an audio experience, this production is largely dull; the only thing worth mentioning (briefly) is Ewan McGregor's Iago. Young, cheerful, well-spoken and winning, McGregor is the most charming Iago I have encountered in any medium. For awhile, that is nearly enough. One understands why people like and trust this man; one also understands why no one takes him seriously as lieutenant material. But as the play progresses and Iago's cruelty deepens, McGregor's unvarying amiability seems incongruous. A strange countertextual interpretation emerges, reminiscent of Auden's trickster theory but with a striking twist of its own. In brief, Iago tries to play a harmless joke on Othello, only to see the results spiral giddily out of control. The poor man is forced to improvise desperately as he struggles to resolve the mess he unwittingly created. Iago as the Boy who Cried Adulteress, a feckless but innocent victim of events: now there's a novel take on the play, and I'm indebted to McGregor for suggesting it.

The reading is very monotonous as the reader says the names of each part before the part is read. It drives my students as well as myself crazy. We get through the reading faster by just reading the parts ourselves. I was very disappointed with the purchase.

This is a thoroughly edited and explained version of Othello. The introduction and other additional writings are well-researched and well-written, and provide valuable background on the play and the way it has been performed and interpreted over the years. For the scholar, the notes are incredibly thorough, describing the way the poetry is scanned as well as the differing texts in the Quartos and Folios. More information than the casual reader would need, perhaps, but a definitive text for someone who wants research along with their reading.

This Othello is unbelievably beautiful. Disconnecting oneself from The Operative and Obi-Wan Kenobi, and concentrating only on the voices of the fabulous Chiwetel Ejiofor and Ewan MacGregor, one gets a truly immersive experience into the world of jealousy, racism, betrayal, and true love that Shakespeare must originally have intended. I have to not-so-respectfully disagree with the previous reviewer; this recording is layered, clear, and absolutely pulsating with passion and tension.

It's worth every penny, and I say that as a fan of audiobooks in general and Shakespeare in particular. I'll be listening to this for years; Kenneth Branagh and Lawrence Fishburne--eat your hearts out!

This is a pretty decent political tragedy. The book has a great inroduction that helped lay out the themes of the play. While this was a good work, it wasn't my favorite by Shakespeare.

This inexpensive volume is a fine edition with very readable text, good notes, and a nice introduction. Coriolanus is not one of Shakespeare's most popular plays, though it has its partisans. As with several of Shakespeare's best plays, it is an attempt to combine an investigation of the nature of power with a psychological portrait. The nature of power or kingship was one of Shakespeare's great themes, featured in some of the great tragedies like MacBeth or Lear, and this theme runs through many of his history plays. In Coriolanus, however, this theme is handled less well. It is interesting to speculate why Shakespeare, who dealt with this theme so well in many plays, doesn't do such a good job in Coriolanus. The action in Coriolanus is set in a republic, not a monarchy. The structure of republican politics is not one Shakespeare would have known well and the problems of politics and authority in a republican are different than those of a monarchy. Particularly for modern audiences, whose intrinsic understanding of republican politics is much greater than Shakespeare's, the clumsy handling of the tension between the aristocratic Coriolanus and the plebes rings false. In addition, the psychological portrait of Coriolanus is not nearly as rich as Shakespeare's analysis of quite a few of his other protagonists. Much of the language in Coriolanus is powerful but it lacks the dramatic movement and insight of his best work.

I had an overpriced Arden Shakespeare copy of the play. The spine broke. I have known Oxford was as good for lower price and prefer the notes. The Arden text is more authoritative but the physical (Oxford) book is better.

Coriolanus seems to have the critical imprimatur as one of Shakespeare's greatest tragedies. Yet, this must be a misprint. Latest? Certainly. Greatest? Hardly.

For one thing, anyone with any familiarity with Shakespeare's plays must immediately note the protagonist's lack of humanity. Coriolanus' heartlessness is his chief characteristic. All the things that make him so compelling on the battlefield only serve to dull his appeal as a civilian. Since Coriolanus spends the majority of the play as a civilian, this is bad news for the audience.

There may well be tragic events in Coriolanus. However, Coriolanus falls short of great Shakespearean tragedy. The lead is not exceptional (as are the rest of Shakespeare's tragic heroes). At best, Coriolanus is a dolt who becomes a savant on the battlefield. Shakespeare telegraphs, rather than foreshadows, the tragic events of Coriolanus. This, compounded with Coriolanus' inability to carry the play, makes for a rather frenzied mush of a drama.

I recommend Coriolanus only to the Shakespearean completist. It is not one of his better works.

+++++

This play, written circa 1608, is the last of William Shakespeare's (1564 to 1616) eleven (some say ten) known tragedies. Even though it is known as a "Roman" or "political" play, serious readers will discover that it so much more. I found that it stayed with me long after I read it.

This play is set in ancient Rome. It is essentially the story of warrior Caius Marcius (later known as "Coriolanus") whose honor, pride, and sense of social rank dominates his life and interferes with his ability to function effectively when he's not on the battlefield.

One of the great attributes of this play is that it does not have many characters and thus is easy to follow. The major characters are as follows:

(1) Coriolanus (originally Caius Marcius): a valiant warrior and patrician (nobleman) with a non-overbearing wife. "A soldier to Cato's wish" and a modest hero who "hath deserved worthily of his country" but who lacks tact and refuses to placate "the mutable, rank-scented many."
(2) Volumnia: his overbearing mother. "In anger, Juno-like."
(3) Menenius Agrippa: "a humorous patrician" and an old and true friend of Coriolanus who is trusted by the plebeians (lower class)
(4) Titus Lartius and Cominius: fellow generals with Coriolanus.
(5) Sicinius and Brutus: tribunes (representatives of the plebeians) of the common people and Coriolanus' political enemies. "A pair of strange ones."
(6) Tullus Aufidius: general of Rome's enemies and rival in glory to Coriolanus.

This "Shakespeare PELican" book (published by Penguin in 1999) has some interesting material before the play proper. I found the introduction to the play especially informative.

I would recommend, in order to get the full impact of this play, to either see it on film (the BBC production is excellent) or to see it on the stage.

Finally, I cannot understand why this play has been overlooked as one of Shakespeare's great works. (It was, in fact, written during Shakespeare's greatest period, 1599 to 1608.) The story itself is interesting with many subtle themes. The only thing I can think of is that there are some terms that you must know to properly understand the play (such as patrician, plebeian, tribune, etc.). These terms can be easily looked up in a good dictionary.

In conclusion, this play, in my opinion, is an overlooked gem. This book published by Penguin is an excellent resource for students, teachers, theatre professionals, and anyone interested in discovering this great play!!

+++++

I recently returned from a trip to Warsaw, Poland. At a holocaust memorial there were quotes from this book and so it piqued my interest. The book is beautifully written and you can feel the pain and frustration of the author. I highly recommend this book.

I almost finished this book in one sitting. It's a different way of looking at those years than what I've read before. I think we forget that even though - or especially though - when a child is so young - the impact it has. The horrible things that for Roma were ordainary. I'm not surprised by her struggles later in life, to the contrary I think it's amazing she came through as well as she did. So very different to see the Holocaust through a child's eyes. Bravo Roma! Congratulations on your book and your survival

This is a great book about the Holocaust and for anyone who had read many books on the topic I reccomend you add this one to your list. Roma gives a detailed look inside her childhood and although her life may not have turned out as bright as other surviors her struggle is great and inspiring.

Ligocka writes an unusal Holocaust memoir. She writes about her entire life and how the Holocaust affected her. The most intriquing and exciting part of the book deals with Ligocka's childhood. Many people helped Roma and her mother survive by hiding them and providing shelter for them during the war. Roma recalls childhood friends and relatives (including Roman Polanski).
Roma's adult life was not perfect.She mad some bad choices and lived with the consequences. A very interesting life, indeed.

I have read hundreds of books about those who survived the holocaust but this is one book I cannot recommend. Although you get a glimpse of what life during the holocaust may have been like, you unfortunately get too many glimpses of a woman who thrives on vanity. Throughout the book, Roma time and time again stresses how pretty she was and how many men wanted to marry her. Roma is a woman who you cannot come to care about as she cares so much about herself but not in the way of her survival but instead her looks.

Offensive to Jews and historically off-base, this novel will be enjoyed by Christians, for whom it has a "happy ending".

"For the Temple" is so far my favorite of the G.A. Henty novels. Before I read this I knew almost nothing about the destruction of the Temple. Now I understand it clearly. The politics and different factions of the time period are described very well. You come away with a very good understanding of how all the events unfolded. Plus, the dialogue is not quite as lengthy as some of the other Henty novels. Worth reading.

Combining accounts from Josphus and the Old and New Testament, Henty weaves a tale of bravery set in the time between Christ's crucifiction and the destruction of the Temple. As with all Henty books, his hero is brave, honest, kind, and resourceful, modelling the best aspects of behavior. Highly recommended.

"Clash! Bang! Ka-ching!" The valley echoes with the sound of iron upon iron. Tight-lipped the two solitary foes circle each other, thrusting, slashing, striking, and warding off the blows of the other. Suddenly, the younger man, dressed in Jewish garb, and armed only with a sword and buckler, dashes under the heavily armed Roman's sword. The sudden impact throws the Roman to the ground, though the Hebrew is stuck hard on the head. Brushing aside the blood that pours down his forehead the Jew siezes his knife and and raises it, to end the life of his prostrate fiend. "Strike, Jew! I am Titus!" the Roman boldly states. Who are these two combatants? What do they have against each other? The Hebrew is 19-year-old John of Gamala, a hero to the Jews and a scourge to the Roman army. Titus is General of the Roman army invading Israel, whose people are fresh from throwing off the Roman government. How will this deadly duel play out? Never mind. This excellently written novel is much better than Super Glue ever dreamed of being. "For The Temple", if anything can, will glue you to your seat so that it will take a bulldozer to dislodge you. {note: we don't recomend the use of this book for repairing broken toys, however.} "For The Temple" chronicles the life of a Galilean teenager at the time of the fall of Jerusalem. From the storm on Lake Tibereas, to the siege at Jotatpata, you will grow to love and admire John, son of Simon, as he grows, wars, and has adventures of all kinds defending Josephus, Gamala, his betrothed wife, and finally the Temple in Jerusalem. Will he survive that monumentous occasion? More importantly, who will win the afforementioned duel? READ THE BOOK AND FIND OUT! (no, Amazon did not hire me to sell their book, I did this originally as a school assignment) I highly recommend this historically accurate book to people who like history, adventure, or just plain good books. Also to people who HATE history, as a good way to gag it down.

This book does a wonderful job of explaining many different factors contributing to the fall of Jerusalem. Eventually, the characters do come alive. It gets redundant at times, which is not helped by the over-use of dramatic emphasis throughout the reading--the listener has to group and weigh information in spite of the reader's inflection rather than being helped by it. Overall, worth the time, but I would rather have read it out loud myself than fight the recording. Recording does not indicate listening time or publication date of the original work.

The three star rating is rating this book as compared to other Shakespearean plays; if rated against the general run of material out there, it would doubtless rate at least four stars. This is reputed to be one of his earliest works, and it shows. It's still quite good, of course; it's Shakespeare. But compared to his other plays, the language isn't quite as lovely as a fan of Shakespeare tends to expect. Also, the plot is rather trivial and silly (which isn't necessarily unreasonable, given that it's a comedy, but in his later works, even his comedies have more meat to them than this). One thing that this play DOES have going for it is that in the end, love does not automatically conquer all, as it usually does in Shakespearean comedies. It is forced to prove itself, rather than being taken at face value, a novel and much preferred concept to what became his usual take on the matter.

This merry play is a delight for its language. It has more a situation than a plot. The King has sworn himself and three attendants to three years of fasting, abstinence from women, study, and little sleep. Immediately a princess arrives with her attendants that cause the men to regret their oaths. Letters are written, delivered incorrectly, and a huge final scene with disguises, masks, and a wonderfully strange presentation of some of the nine worthies. All of this provides a structure for a rich play of language that is full of wit and bawdy.

This edition has a lengthy introductory essay that helps understand the issues of the text, the historical context, and performance practice issues. The notes are wonderfully helpful in understanding the text and what choices the editors had to make in presenting it. After the play is an essay just on the text of the play, appendix 2 has additional lines that this edition leaves out of the play, appendix 3 discusses Moth's name.

The issue around Moth is that in Elizabethan times Moth would likely have been pronounced more like Mott than our soft th. And the word mote and moth were roughly interchangeable. The name of the insect and the word for a small particle meant roughly the same thing. It is a nice issue to be aware of and the essay is helpful.

Appendix 4 lists words that are rhymed in this play - often a revelation to the way words were pronounced 400 years ago. Appendix 5 lists the compound words, many of them minted in this play.

All in all, this edition is a happy experience of a very fun play.

this is witty play about four guys who vow to sequester themselves for three years in serious study, but who are forced to forswear their vows when four attractive women show up and upset their plans. the humor is mainly in the form of wordplay, as only shakespeare can do, and the verbal jousting between berowne and his lady is especially entertaining, and anticipates the tete-a-tetes between petruchio and katherina in "taming of a shrew" and benedick and beatrice in "much ado about nothing". definitely worth a read, and if you can get it, the bbc television production of LLL is also worth seeing. last of all, i disagree with the other poster who complained of the ending. i thought it was pretty clear that the couples would get together in a year's time. so the ending was implicitly happy. only someone who is accustomed to instant gratification could find fault with it.

Like most of Shakespeare's comidies, LLL involved a couple of very independent women falling in love with a couple of guys who were in love with them too. It also brought mistaken identities into play and, like A Midsummer Night's Dream, it had a play within the play. The humor was mostly in the form of puns, most of which were hard to understand the first time through. The ending was really bad, though, because the girls didn't get together with the guys like they should have if Shakespeare had planned a happy ending. All-in-all, I would only recommend this play for really serious Shakespearean scholars, as it is almost too dense for us laypeople

Love's Labors Lost is one of my absolute favorite Shakespeare plays. It's completely hilarious, but still has Shakespeare's amazing way with words. In Love's Labors Lost, the Bard has created a highly amusing tale of men and their problems keeping oaths--especially when women get on the scene.

Four men, the King Navarre, Berowne, Dumaine, and Longaville, take an oath to study in solitude for three years--which means that any of them caught associating with a woman will be guilty of treason. But there's a slight problem with this oath--the Princess of France and her three ladies, Rosaline, Katherine, and Maria, are coming to Navarre's kingdom. Instead of letting them come into the palace, Navarre hosts the Princess in tents outside his walls. When the four men reconvene, they find that they are all in love with one of the four ladies, and, breaking the oath, set out to win the women's hearts.

A great story with a surprising end--not your typical love story. Quite funny, with a few strange twists and turns in the plot, and leaving you to your own devices with the abrupt ending--what does happen next? Completely great all around.

I spent several weeks in 2004 traveling through India using only this guide. The hotel listings were very helpful and even a relative that accompanied me on my travels (who is a cosmopolitan native) was impressed at the hotels we found for very reasonable rates and convenient locations. I always asked to view the room before checking in because my standards vary from their standards, but this book gave me a great headstart on which hotels to visit. If I didn't agree with their recommendation, I always found a similar hotel. It is a bit thin on the history and culture, for which I suggest a Fodor's.

I spent two months backpacking through India in the summer of 2003, and the Footprint guide was tremendous. I also brought the Rough Guide to India, but Footprint was much more useful (though both blew away Lonely Planet!).

There is great coverage of smaller towns in all regions of the country, something that is invaluable if you're spending an extended period of time in the country. Almost every time I'd be overnighting in some obscure town as part of a bus journey, I'd at least find a paragraph or two, which saved the day more than once.

The maps are great. The most readable I've seen in any guidebook. The detailed maps of the whole country in the back were extremely useful.

The background section was also the most in-depth I've seen among India guidebooks. Very good.

All in all, this is definitely the best guidebook to use for India. One of the biggest benefits of it though, is that it isn't very popular. If Lonely Planet says a place is cheap, you can guarantee they've quadrupled their price since then. Footprint India really helps you stay off the beaten tourist path... I rarely had encounters with other travellers... almost all of my time was spent with locals, and the Footprint guide is definitely geared towards that. Most of the hotels reviewed aren't backpacker-focused (though those are there), but are mostly used by locals travelling for various reasons.

Highly recommended!

Great introduction to the regions and their attractions? Check. Detailed descriptions of even the smallest places of interest? Check. Quick but practical hotel and restaurant ratings? Check. In-depth information on history, politics, geology and landscape, vegetation, including crops, wildlife, religion, culture, festivals, economy? Check! Extensive information on getting around, routes from A to B (and many alternatives), trekking, air and train travel, cycling etc? Check.

This guide really has everything you need, practical and educational - and in a very practical little package to boot (hard cover, small size, paper-thin pages to avoid too much bulk). The authors' biographies are revealing: one of them is a bona fide expert, a professor of South Asian Geography at the School of Oriental and African Studies. It's that kind of company you need to get a grip on a country like India. And you usually don't get it - most guidebooks are written by people who are simply more experienced in travel than your average joe, but have no in-depth knowledge of the country.

What it lacks, compared to Lonely Planet/Rough Guides is a chummy, get-a-load-of-this tone. Unadorned information me seem dry to some, but to others it is a relief compared to guides whose authors assume you share their prejudices. For instance, hotel listings are terse. A typical entry reads: "Category E, 130 rooms, some A/C (better rm on upper floor),restaurant (Indian veg.) rec; reasonably clean but gets crowded and noisy"

It's worth looking through other guidebooks if you want restaurant and hotel listings fleshed out for you. But if you only carry one guidebook to India, let it be this one.

i am in india right now and am so thankful that i have also the rough guide and do wish i had a lonely planet, not footprint. this book is lacking: not enough hotel listings with prices, restaurants with prices, cost of transportation, misses details of "before you go"/"things a traveller must know", nor does it give enough information about the locations it covers - better to buy lonely planet and the rough guide.

If you are studying the text for a paper or getting it up on it's feet for a play, I highly recommend this publisher. Lines notes and Folio version notes, the only text like it on the market.

My only complaint is that it makes it difficult to use in rehearsals and on stage. I use the Penguin for working on my feet because they give you all notes at the end.

But for all the prep work needed to really flush out a character, you can't beat this copy.

I loved this book so much. This story is just so magical with mischevious Puck and glimmering Titania. I enjoyed this book from cover to cover!

I can't believe how you nice little English people can actually edit such terrible and unbelievable books! I hope you'll never ever get another book published!

This play by Shakespeare has had a tremendous influence. First it was trasnformed into an opera by Purcell under the title of The Fairy Queen. Second it was widely known in Germany at the time of Goethe, but under the title of The Walpurgis Night. Goethe himself alludes to it in Faust and composes his Walpurgis Night at the end of the Faust as the prolongation of the end of Shakespeare's play. What is interesting in this play is the fact that the world of spirits, the night in the forest are used as elements to create a marvellous and light comedy. No witchcraft in all this. An entertaining though slightly grotesque tale. The Queen and King of the fairies use their powers to make fun of simple men, even providing Bottoms with the head of an ass (an old practice from the Middle Ages when the bishop of the pope were shown as being asses in the Masses of Fools or of Asses, some « carnival » rites authorised by the Church). But what is most important in this play is the fact that the fairies, with all their antics, make three marriages possible, and that is the end of the play. Three marriages, two times three people, three men and three women, the sacred number of Salomon. This ending is a christian ending. And when we add to these three marriages the couple of the Queen and King of Fairies, we come to the number of four couples, which is the sign of perfect equilibrium in Shakespeare. We find such a umber (four marriages) in As you Like It. Finally the whole play, or nearly it all, takes place in the night, the realm of Selene, the goddess of the night and the moon, who is only one of the three facets of Diana, the goddess of forests, animal life and hunting, whose third facet is Hecate, the goddess of death. This threeforld nature of Diana is constantly present in the play. It is the very symbol of the fairies. We must understand that for Shakespeare three is the number of disruption, chaos and the fairies bring chaos, though, in the end perfect equilibrium is achieved. The last element concerns the style of Shakespeare. He adapts his style to every character, moving from the highest and most perfect poetry with the King and Queen of fairies or with Theseus and Hippolyta, to a very simple language with the six (six again) craftsmen who prepare a play for Theseus and Hippolyta's wedding. In other words it is a light comedy that carries Shakespeare's whole art in its lines. A perfect introduction to this art, and with a lot of fun, thanks to the pranks fo Puck, a light-headed fairy of his own.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

I thought this would be worth adding to my collection of American commonplace photobooks but it turns out to be a very mediocre set of photos. I'm sure any Brooklyn residence would say it looks just like the place though anybody could have taken the photos for that reaction.

There are just too few images that made me stop and study what was on the page. For instance on page nineteen there is a really wonderful shot looking down a street with a tree almost central in the image with its branches segmenting buildings and sky, the sidewalk disappears into the distance. The whole photo is really rich in detail but unfortunately that is about the only one that works for me.

Another problem with the book is the total absence of any information about the forty-four photos, apart from the date they were taken. Roma spend many years taking these scenes and frequently I just wondered what was happening in this or that photo. It seems just too easy to see something visually interesting, photograph it and that's it, fine if it's an abstract image of shapes or texture where the photo is really no more than a pattern but photos of people and locations mostly need some sort of explanation for them to really work for the viewer.

I think it is worth adding that this is the second book I've bought recently of Roma's work, both have been new copies and cost very little and in the case of the Brooklyn book it was less than the mailing cost.

***FOR AN INSIDE LOOK click 'customer images' under the cover.

In "Found In Brooklyn," Thomas Roma focuses his camera on this borough of New York that has been his home for most of his life. Shooting in a tradition that is most noticeably reminiscent of Lee Friedlander's work from the 60s, Roma has an individual style all his own. Taken over a sixteen-year span beginning in 1974, Roma's photographs alternate between odd juxtapositions of street life, and eccentric and eclectic architecture and environments. Another thing Roma has found in Brooklyn is a wonderful, warm light that makes you feel like you're across the Mediterranean and not across the East River. While Roma has now dedicated four recent books to a variety of subjects on Brooklyn life, none of them is as comprehensive and all-encompassing as this title.

Starting in 1974 photographer Thomas Roma began capturing a diverse range of images for 16 years from architecture to daily life on the streets of Brooklyn. "Found in Brooklyn" was my introduction to Roma's keen eye for detail and superb usage of light, rendering Brooklyn in a warm white glow that reminded me most of the deep-blue skies of the Southwestern United States (Though I would agree with another reviewer that his usage of light has Brooklyn depicted as though it was located somewhere along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea.). It still remains one of my two favorite photography books from his work, and the one which shows the substantial breadth and depth of his subjects. Stylistically, Roma's work in black and white reminds me most of Stephen Shore's contemporaneous color landscapes, with regards to his usage of both the frame and placement of subjects; surprisingly there isn't much here that more closely resembles Lee Friedlander's work (It is a surprise only since his father-in-law is Friedlander.).