Judy is a surprisingly modern heroine in this epistolary novel, an orphan rescued by a mysterious benefactor and sent to college at the turn of the last century. She's entertaining, has a sense of humor that the hardships of her past has not diminished, is a talented writer, and aspires to be a "useful citizen." This is a perfect girls' fantasy with a storybook ending, and has held up over time remarkably well. I've only seen the Fred Astaire version of the movie adaptation, which I cannot recommend...read the book instead, it's truly charming.

One of my favourite, or shall I say, my ALL TIME favourite books about an aspiring authoress, and woman who wants to be considered, [in pre-World War I days when women didn't have voting rights!], at least "a useful citizen".

The protagonist, Jerusha (Judy) Abbot, an orphan whose name is picked off a tombstone and surname from the telephone directory,...remains one of the most believable and beautiful character portrayals in literature. Her sense of humour in the face of all odds, (a product of Webster's brilliant imagination and adept pen) kept me coming back to this book a countless number of times.

The superb narrative style, the book being a compilation of letters from a cheeky, unique woman growing up in the early part of this century to her benefactor who never replies, is stunning in it's currency to this day. It is hard to believe that a book, written almost over 90 years ago should still find an adoring audience. It deals with issues like women's independence, happiness, indentity and that old demon, 'love'! It is most definitely a "Classic". Rather like old wine it seems to have aged perfectly! I could go on forever, but will end by saying this is a MUST for every library and anyone who knows how good it is to be alive.

My sister made me read this book during my recent vacation. Since I am not a fan of books that consist of a series of letters, I was very skeptical about this one. But I must say that it is an excellent book. The author has beautifully portrayed the character of the orphan girl who gets a chance to go to college due to the generosity of a mysterious orphanage trustee. The letters highlight the girl's emotional highs and lows brilliantly, as she adjusts to (and then thrives in) this new environment that is so very different from where she grew up.

I am surprised that some people found a "twist" at the end of the book, I could guess the ending pretty early on. Anyway, its not the ending, but the individual letters that are the true gems in the book. I highly recommend this book for people that like character portrayals.

This is a difficult book to read because the evil that slavery entails. The oppression of anyone is an evil that must be overcome. Frederick Douglass displayed a remarkable courage in learning to read and write to finally overcome the horror of slavery. I appreciate his observation on the religious hypocrisy of the South. It was telling that religious slave owners were always the worst. Of course since religion helped breed slavery in America this really should not come as any surprise. I have great admiration for the founders of this country but I also feel that the evil and hypocrisy of slavery should be exposed. It is an ugly passage in American history that must be addressed. This book should be read by high school kids in every high school in America--make that every American period. Frederick Douglass deserves to be recognized as a great American and this book is essential reading for any American.

Slavery was known as a "peculiar institution". By broadcasting such labels for slavery, the southern slave owners were able to downplay the severity of the subjugation of slaves in this "peculiar institution". However, in 1845 a runaway slave by the name of Frederick Douglass was published his narrative which showed the extent of the cruelty within of the oppressive the institution of American slavery. Douglass gives a powerful portrayal of his personal struggle against the tyranny of himself and his fellow slaves. By depicting his personal story regarding the horrors of slavery, Douglass testified to the injustices of the slave institution and conveyed an urgent message of the time for prompt abolition.
Douglass leaves out no detail as he portrays the brutal means in which slaves were forced into subjugation. In order to maintain order and to achieve maximum efficiency and productivity from his slave, an owner used the fear of the ever-present whip against his slaves. Over, and over again throughout the Narrative, Douglass gives account of severe beatings, cruel tortures, and unjust murders of slaves. The message is evident. Slavery dehumanized African Americans.
From the introduction of his early experience, Douglass portrays the burdens of slavery. The reader is forced to cope with the fact that he has no tangible background. Slavery has robbed him of the precious moments of his childhood. He was raised in the same manner as one would raise an animal. In his early years he had no knowledge of time-he did not even know when he was born. He is also forced to scrounge for food in the same fashion as a pig digs for slop. The saddest insight is the alienation of Douglass from his family. He has no connection with his parents and when his mother dies he was untouched. On hearing of her death he states, "I received the tidings of her death with much the same emotions I should have probably felt at the death of a stranger" (19). The bond between mother and child is the strongest bulwark for children and to be robbed of this and to not care demonstrates just how severe slavery was to Douglass and countless others who faced the same fate. In the entire slave experience, the only escape from the repression was through sorrowful singing. As Douglass states, "every tone was a testimony against slavery..." and "slaves sing the most when they are unhappy" (29). Only through music could slaves find comfort in dealing with their anguish.
Douglass's first witness of brutality is the telling of his Aunt Hester's beating. The narration is powerfully effective through terrible detail. The cursing of the overseer, the shrieks of his aunt, and the horrible effects the whip upon her flesh is almost as agonizing the reader of the Narrative as it was to his unfortunate aunt. The fact that this terrible instance is a common occurrence makes it a heavier burden upon the reader's soul.
As if the beatings were not enough, slaves were also murdered on a whim. Douglass tells of Gore, a meticulously cold taskmaster who blew out the brains of a poor slave by the name of Demby. The chilliness of Gore's is terrible due the fact that he kills with the sympathy of a butcher.
Upon hearing about this, one would speculate that the authorities would deal with such barbaric acts justly. However, as Douglass recounts in the story Mrs. Hicks, the murderess that killed a slave girl for not moving fast enough, the law officials were hesitant to enforce the rights of the slave and would intentionally overlook such matters. This is primarily due to the fact that a slave owning society could not allow the rights of the slave to be upheld to the same level as a white man. To do such a thing would threaten the stability of their superiority. This is further illustrated in Douglass's struggle against the shipyard workers, when he fled to his master and told him of the attack his master stated that he could not hold up Douglass or even a thousand blacks testimony. The lack of protection under the law and the unwillingness of the whites to give the slaves a voice allowed the whites to completely dominate the slaves without the fear of accountability for their actions.
The worst aspect of slavery is found in the religious nature of the subjugation of slaves. The cruelty found in slavery was even more intense when placed under the pretense of the slaveholding religion of Christianity. Through Douglass's deconstruction of Christianity, he learns that the white oppressive version of Christianity is much different from his own beliefs of Christianity. The incident that shaped Douglass's understanding of the mentality of religious slaveholders was when he was placed under the authority of Mr. Freeland. In this situation, he was able to see the difference between the so-called "religious slave-holders" and "non-religious slave-holders." Douglass felt that the "non-religious slave-holders" were less brutal because they did not reprimand their slaves based on a Divine command. Instead they were more concerned about reprimanding the slaves when the slaves did wrong as opposed to whenever they felt that the Lord professed a beating.
The Narrative and Selected Writings is a powerful testimony to the struggles American slaves faced. Through the writings of men such as Frederick Douglass, abolitionists were given fuel to the bonfire of the Abolition Movement. Douglass honest testimony helped to bring out the truth about slavery. Abolitionists now had evidence to back their claim that the "peculiar institution" was in fact an institution of evil.

Perhaps more so than any other account, Douglass gives us a look into the life of a slave. I enjoy this book on many level. Douglass writes honestly and in a factual tone. He does mince his words when he describes the brutality of slavery. Douglass demonstrates that he is an intelligent man despite his lack of education. He taight himself to read. To our youth, this demonstrates the value of education. Douglass also show Americans manipulated the work of God even in his time. Yet, Douglass found strength in that God. I think the quality I enjoyed most about this book is the fact that Douglass does not see himself as a hero, but as an average slave. This is not a typical characteristic of an autobiography. I read this book for the second time coming and going on 3 hour flights. The book is a short read, but well worth your time to read of atriumph of the human spirit.

The late great Princeton philosopher Walter Kaufmann does yet another fine job of translating and defending Nietzsche to a 20th (and 21st?) century audience. Kaufmann deserves a great deal of credit for bringing Nietzsche out of the ranks of taboo books for the (unfortunate) association with Hitler after World War II.

This association is ironic when one considers how Nietzsche extols the Jewish race on pages 187 & 188, describing them as

...beyond any doubt the strongest, toughest, and purest race now living in Europe; they know how to prevail even under the worst conditions...by means of virtues that today one would like to mark as vices - thanks above all to a resolute faith that need not be ashamed before "modern ideas"....

Can anyone seriously contend that Hitler was inspired to commit genocide upon the Jewish people because of Nietzsche with passages such as this in mind?

If I have one bone to pick with this book, it is Nietzsche's unwarranted misogynistic tirades in the chapter called "Our Virtues." These attacks on woman's intellectual acumen are not only wrong, but completely unnecessary and contribute nothing to Nietzsche's overall philosophical thread of thought. His dictum of the "eternally boring in woman" (a verbal joust to Goethe's "eternal feminine") is nothing more than an adolescent, shallow cheap shot. Personally, I think his hatred of women has much more to due with his psychology (the fact that he was such a very lonely man + the inaccessiblity of Cosima Wagner) than any serious intellectual analysis that he devoted to the issue. In any case, given the accomplishments of women in the 20th century (as well as the "hidden" triumphs of historical women from before this century) any educated person today would be compelled to dismiss the idea of men being mentally superior to women as hogwash.

With the exception of the anti-woman chapter, the rest of this book is quite good. It is in many ways a re-writing of his "Also Sprach Zarathustra" via a non-poetic medium. Most of Nietzsche's more important ideas are incorporated into the book at some point or other. Also, Kaufmann furnishes the reader with helpful footnotes which elucidate the allusions that Nietzsche is making. A profound book. To give you a taste of why this book is worth reading, I will leave you with one of my very favorite passages of Nietzsche. It appears on page 153:

"Measure" is alien to us; let us own it; our thrill is the thrill of the infinite, the unmeasured. Like a rider on a steed that flies forward, we drop the reins before the infinite, we modern men, like semi-barbarians - and reach "our" bliss only where we are most - in danger.

While I don't worship Nietzsche as I did when I was young, I think this is a very challenging and worthwhile book. Even people who don't accept Nietzsche's basic approach to life can learn much from it, if they read it with an open (but skeptical) mind. All of Nietzsche's key ideas are here and are presented more lucidly than in Zarathustra and more sanely than in his last works. Even better than the big ideas are the seemingly random insights that can illuminate a whole new area of thought. There are also, it's true, some really stupid passages, such as the comments on women, but overall the gold far outweighs the dross.

I'm a newbie to Nietzsche's works, though I'd come to Beyond Good and Evil through the proverbial back door. After having read prominent 20th century texts from Camus to Derrida, I figured it was time to read something by Nietzsche, perhaps the most famous first figure to doubt what was "knowable." Nietzsche, anticipating the cynicism and angst that would become the hallmark of existential texts, was equally scornful of religion AND science (both, which he argued, were reductionist and misleading). The ultimate skeptic, Nietzsche warned readers about believing to deeply in "certain truths" often framed within the dichotomy of binary opposites (good vs. evil, black vs. white, heaven vs. hell; in short, everything the Western world bases its moral framework on).

I've given Beyond Good and Evil five stars, but there are some problems with the book that the unintiated may want to know. First, although this is the most straight-forward and accessible of Nietzsche's works, it's still a difficult read. Second, although Nietzsche's writing style is full of verve and gusto (or, to use N's own word, "brio") and although this style makes for delightful anti-philosophic reading, his points do become burdensome after a while. After reading the introduction and the first 30 pages or so, I found myself saying, "Okay, okay, I got it." Nietzsche's misogyny, his failure to provide concrete examples (occassionally) and his belief in a human two-level caste system ("...life itself in its essence means appropriating, injuring, overpowering those who are foreign and weaker" (152-153)) may challenge (or turn off) some readers. Neverhtheless, at 180 slim pages, Beyond Good and Evil accomplishes its task before it becomes tiresome.

This book is one of a number of Professor Challenger adventures of Sir A. C. Doyle. A noted zoologist (Challenger) has come across evidence that there is a plateau in South America that can be reached from deep in the Amazon rain forest in which prehistoric animals still exist. An expedition of four (Challenger, a sceptical zoologist named Summerlee, a noted hunter (Lord John Roxton), and Edward Malone, a journalist) sets out to verify this report. The arguing and interactions between the academics is interesting in that little seems to have changed in the last 87 years! It should be noted that Doyle isolates the plateau so that there is minimal interaction with the rest of the rain forest (thus, the dinosaurs can't escape). But, why couldn't the ptereodactyls spread out? This story was one of the earliest "Lost World" tales and has been made into a film a number of times. Other stories in this sub-genre owe much to Doyle and Challenger.

Professor Challenger, a protagonist as unique and eccentric as Sherlock Holmes, "challenges" the London Zoological Society to send a team of impartial judges to verify his claims that dinosaurs live on a plateau in the Brazilian rain forest. Professor Summerlee, a staunch foe of Challenger, accepts the challenge. Lord John Roxton, a soldier and big game hunter, agrees to go along, and Edward Malone, a star rugby player and journalist, goes as their scribe.

The world they find is every bit as captivating as Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park, and the danger is every bit as exhilarating. The characters are more engaging, and the story contains a good deal of humor as the four strong personalities clash a number of times on a number of levels.

There are no velociraptors to menace the adventurers, who have become hopelessly marooned, but a tribe of ape men serves quite well to provide the danger. It is a pleasure to have the English language used so well in describing the adventures of the four.

"The Lost World" is obviously the inspiration for Crichton's "Jurassic Park." Crichton may have modernized the story, but he certainly didn't improve it. Unfortunately, "The Lost World" reflects the ethnic insensitivity and "classism" of the Victorian Era, but if you can overlook that flaw, you will thoroughly enjoy the story.

Professor George E. Challenger, noted scientist, says dinosaurs are still alive, and he knows where to find them. The scientific community says he's a madman or a fraud, or both. Challenger's only evidence is a bunch of blurry photographs. Fellow scientists say the photos are obviously doctored and the newspapers call it a fantasy. Boiling with rage, Challenger goes into seclusion. Anyone foolish enough to bring up the tender subject around him is liable to end up in the gutter outside his house, with a few extra lumps for the gutter press.

The only reporter brave, or stupid, enough to face the professor's wrath and get the story is Edward Malone, young, intrepid journalist for the Daily Gazette. At a boisterous scientific meeting, Professor Summerlee, a rival scientist, calls Challenger's bluff. Summerlee will return to South America and prove Challenger wrong. The young journalist volunteers to go along. Lord John Roxton, the famous hunter, can't miss an opportunity to return to the jungle and adds his name to expedition. Professor Challenger is happy they are taking him seriously, even if they don't all believe him. But what will they find in South America? A strange, living time capsule from the Jurassic period filled with pterodactyls and stegosaurs? Or will they only find vast tracks of endless jungles and Challenger's daydreams? Either way there will be danger and adventure for all.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote "The Lost World" in 1912 for the Strand magazine, the same magazine that published his Sherlock Holmes stories. It's a great Edwardian science-fiction adventure, although some may not like the British Imperialism and Darwinian racism. Still, in "The Lost World" Conan Doyle lets his hair down a little. Changing narrators from the earnest Doctor John Watson to the rash reporter Edward Malone makes for a big change. There is a good deal more humor. The students in the scientific meetings are forever yelling out jokes at the expense of nutty Professor Challenger. Affairs of the heart play a big role in Malone's life. He matures from a young swain out to impress his girlfriend to more of a wistful man-of-the-world by the end. It is a very different Conan Doyle than some are used to reading. Different, but just as good, maybe, dare I say it, even better.

Plato's Republic is unquestionably the origin of philosophical lines of thought which are still undoubtedly relevant today. Written in dialogue form (i.e. like a discussion between many characters), the main exponent of the argument is Socrates, Plato's friend and mentor who was executed by the Athenian government - an event which led Plato to effectively denounce democracy as an impractical system. The Republic is the result of this denouncement: beginning with the philosophical question 'What is justice?', it proceeds to lay out the nature of the ideal state. Along the way, we are given Plato's legandary Theory of Forms, including the fantastically simple Simile of the Cave - a brilliant philosophical exposition of the difference between this world and the 'proper', 'real' world of which Earth is only a shadow. Desmond Lee's translation makes the very best of a particularly tricky task, and compromises on several key passages with effective authority. The main problem for the modern layman is in getting used to the Socratic form of argument in textual form - seeing Glaucon and Adeimantus answering with "Yes", "I agree" and "That's quite right" for 350-odd pages will drive anybody a little crazy after a while! That (very minor) nitpick aside, there are two excellent appendices regarding the philosophical passages in the text, plus a detailed bibliography for those who wish to follow up on the book. And it's worth it, believe you me.

Plato's The Republic, is not only a classic work of the fourth century B.C., but a masterpiece of utopian literature as a whole. Mr. Lee's translation brings into light the political and poetical wisdom of Plato into English from the original Greek. In The Republic, Plato raises questions that are still at the heart of many modern conflicts and heated debates. What is justice? What is goodness? What is the right political authority? Plato examines these questions as aspects of a single theme. He offers a portrait of an ideal state in which power is entrusted to the philosopher king(s), and other men and women accept the authority of the wise and the good. If no one has read The Republic, then he or she has not read anything!

Plato's Republic is the fount from which nearly all Western thought flows. Pretty much everything written in that tradition either borrows from Plato or refutes him, and the Republic articulates his philosophies more fully than any of his other works(although the Timaeus is more mature and the Symposium is an amazing discussion on a single point). I must disagree with both of the main camps on this site; it is neither just a work of political philosophy NOR just a work of moral psychology(how to order your mind). Plato thought that all things should reflect the ultimate good, so that the ideal society would be ordered in the exact same way that the ideal human being would be. Thus, every part of one's psyche would correspond to a part of society(it's a microcosm!), and the "higher" parts of one's mind would be mirrored in the Guardians, the "higher" parts of society.

With that said, it is easy to see that the Republic proposes many things that disgust most modern human beings: censorship for political stability, ostracism of those with "weak" (read: human, sensitive, or some equivalent) emotions, killing young children, government regulation of sexual activity, and such. Even when Plato tries to give women equal rights, an _extremely_ radical idea in Ancient Greece, his ancient prejudices show up when he calls them "equal but weaker in all ways(morally, intellectually, and physically)".

Despite all of its shortcomings, the Republic was the work that singlehandedly separated the real from the ideal in Western civilization, and it also defined the kinds of questions that Western philosophers would try to answer until the 20th century. Pick up a book of Western philosophy at random, and I guarantee you that some issue introduced in the Republic will hit you within the first five pages. Even the Communist Manifesto rips off his discourse on women and his notion of work defining human beings. The Republic was the first work of real philosophy in the conversation of ideals that continues to this very day in fields as diverse as politics, philosophy, psychology, anthropology, and religion. (PS: If you think Plato's an idealistic fool, read Aristotle. So did he.)

It is difficult to write about a book that holds one's interest throughout but which so thoroughly disappoints in the end. THE MAN WHO WAS THURSDAY begins like a mystery, but it increasingly becomes apocalyptic as its religious message comes to the forefront, and I believe will appeal to few modern readers. As the religious symbolism begins to dominate, the mystery that drew the reader in begins to fade, and one continues reading simply to see how Chesterton is going to manage to finish the thing. And this is where it is most disappointing. There is no ending which follows from its premise AS A MYSTERY. By that time, most of what happened in the beginning is no longer relevant.

Chesterton subtitled the book A NIGHTMARE, and this is more revealing than it appears at first. In one sense, this book can fit into a long tradition of the religious vision genre, which is more common in Medieval and Renaissance literature. This is not something that evokes much for a modern reader, though, so what we really get here is an inexcusable case of "And then he woke up." At least the writers of the Middle Ages had the guts to tell you upfront at the beginning that the character had fallen asleep.

By the time I got to the end of the book I felt that I had been cheated. I had been given a fascinating story, one in which Chesterton seemed to be setting up for himself insurmountable difficulties and obstacles in terms of plot, but it felt as if all that had been a device to get my attention, to get me to listen to his religious message, which, it turned out in the end, was not that interesting anyway.

This book seems to defy description. Some say metaphysical thriller, others say philosophy lightly diguised as a spy novel. Chesterton himself said it was best called a nightmare; as in the ones we wake up from. I can only call it a parable.
The first ten chapters certainly feel like a spy novel; you spend them wondering how the hero, Gabriel Syme, will prevent himself from being unmasked amongst an anarchist conspiracy while in turn unmasking the conspirators themselves. But after Syme finds himself chasing one of the conspirators,(don't worry, I'm not giving anything away)the book quickly becomes very philosophical and you begin to feel that every single character in it represents something or someone in real life. One also sees paralels to the book of Job in the last chapter.
So what is it? I really can't say. One thing is apparent, however; Chesterton is telling us something very important in the form of a story like every other parable or fable. Most certainly one of Chesterton's greatest books.

I have just finished this book and have to say, I concur with Kingsley Amis (writer of the introduction) who said that it was the "most thrilling book he has ever read." Chesterton weaves together a combination detective story, wierd dream ("Nightmare" as he says on his cover page), and social commentary. It's certainly not an apologetic book (as C.S. Lewis said, one can't always be defending the faith, sometimes one has to encourage those already converted), but elements of Christianity do come through (especially Chesterton's sensible view that your faith should affect every area of your life and outlook to the world).

The hero, Symes (who is called Thursday) is a detective and a Christian who provokes an anarchist and infiltrates a world-wide underground anarchist society. From there, I won't spoil the story but there are many adventures, twists, and turns. This part I thought very well written. Every new discovery Symes makes literally had me on the edge of my seat. Things become more and more bizarre (right in line with Chesterton's own description of his book as a "Nightmare") until a very bizarre ending that I confess I have still not fully absorbed.

There is a great deal of symbolism and allegory in the book, which is not clear until at least a third of the way through the book. In this way, the book is similar to C.S. Lewis's book "That Hideous Strength" (the third book in his space trilogy that includes "Perelandra"). Like Lewis's book, "Thursday" starts off very realistic (although with some hints of the bizarre twists to come) and gets more and more strange as the book goes on.

Two things that will be helpful to understanding much of the symbolism:

(1) Read the afterword at the end of the book by Chesterton. Unlike Amis's introduction, I wouldn't read it before you start reading the book. I'd recommend reading it after about a third of the book, perhaps right around the time the Pole is "unmasked" (that is, around chapter 6).

(2) Also helpful is Martin Gardner's commentary on the book. There is another edition of the book that has Gardner's comments, but the most important parts of his commentary are available on the Internet (just search ye shall find them). This lays out the symbolism in more detail than the former, so if you want to figure it out for yourself don't read this until the end of the book.

Finally, after you read through the book once, think about it and read comments such as Gardner's, then go back and read it again. As Amis says in his introduction, you can read this book many times and get new things out of it every time.

Winesburg, Ohio is a story based on real characters in the early 1900's in a small northern Ohio town. If you enjoy in depth detail on characters you would enjoy this story. Every chapter is based on a new person which can get boring and confusing for some people seeking adventure. I read this book because I live close to where the story took place and thought it would be interesting to learn more about my area's history. I could relate with some of the places described in the story, which made me more interested and kept me reading. The characters described in the story are easy to relate people of my own acquaintance with; each character has their own unique story. The way that Sherwood Anderson writes makes you almost get inside of the characters' head to make you think like that character had thought. It took me a while to get the drift of the story but it seems most people will eventually get hooked on a certain character. I would not recommend this story for a person interested in reading more about action and adventure. Winesburg, Ohio is a great story for someone that would like to know how people in history had thought and that would like to experience Ohio in the early 1900's.

A book of stories that give glimpses into the secret lives of men and women in small town Ohio. The characters in this book could be characters anyplace in the world though. Each has a story, each has secrets, each has passions, disappointments, desires, longing. I personally think that each of the characters in Winesburg are reaching out for connection to other people. They long to have even a moment of understanding, sympathy, companionship in the midst of a life that is big and unclear, a universe that expands above them nightly to remind them of their infinite smallness. This book is as meaningful today as it was when it was written--maybe even more so. As our world becomes more and more faceless with telephones and emails and air-conditioning, wouldn't it be nice to connect to a person instead of a remote computer? Wouldn't it be nice to know that there are others with thwarted desires, stinging disappointments, undying hope, just like us? Take a read through Winesburg and meet some of them.

Sherwood Anderson published this collection of short stories in 1919 all set in fictional town of Winesburg, Ohio. Even though it's written in the third person, it's told through the narrative voice of George Willard, the town reporter, who shows up in most of the stories, sometimes taking an active role and at other times just telling a story.

It is obvious that the writer loves these people, and is frustrated at the isolation and unhappiness of their lives, even though he makes it clear that they hold within themselves everything needed to make them happy. The character in the first story is a dying old writer who is attempting to write about all the people he has known as a "book of grotesques". What follows is the collection of stories, which each character fulfilling that expectation.

There are the young lovers who don't quite connect; there is a old man so obsessed with religious fervor that he attempts to sacrifice his grandson; there is a married man who regrets it all and tries to warn a younger man of future unhappiness; there's a doctor and a sick woman who try to connect. The book is full of people who toil all their lives and never achieve happiness. As I made my way through the book I kept hoping that even one of the characters would rise above the morass. It didn't happen.

The writer has a wonderful sense of place and the town of Winesburg in the early part of the 20th Century is very real. These people were not poor or disadvantaged in the usual sense of the word; they didn't suffer fire, floods or famine. Instead, they trapped themselves in their own psychological webs that made it impossible for them to lead anything but sad unfulfilled lives. This is a fine book and stands alone as a clear voice of its time.

I read this book for a class 30 years ago, forgot about it, and then saw it on a list of the top 100 novels of the 20th Century. This is a wonderfully constructed, thoughtfully written, and facinating story. Independent of the story and the issues of change and transformation thematically dominating the book; the style and prose are intriquing and creative. An easy read well worth the time to revisit or discover new.

It's like hearing a story from someone still workin' out the details, ya know? Something happened and so-and-so said or did what and all of the sudden . . . wait, let me think about this . . . okay--No! It went like this!--this is the start of this marvelous, tragic novel, certainly more elegent in language, but the innovative narrative style gives a similar emphasis on someone figuring out the past through relfection. It tells a consistantly mournful story, the doom not so much shadowing the action as we are given the details of the outcomes pretty early on. But the narrator's efforts at understanding interfere with a course of events and sometimes forces him to rearrange them to capture the ideas he's sudden had.

This book has just about everything that I like: a unique perspective, a dark sense of humor, extraordinarily well-developed characters and an inescapable misery percolating the text throughout, keeping emotions on edge and perception fragile. It is a glorous masterpiece . . .

I was in a bookstore and picked a copy of this novel up, and from the second I read what I later learned was a famous first sentence (and justifiably so)--"This is the saddest story I have ever heard"--I knew I had to read it. What is truly sad about the book is that the narrator has no conception of where the tragedy in the book lies. While he is articulate and seemingly insightful in his analysis of others, he remains blissfully unaware of his own enormously failings, both in morals and in character. It is indeed a very sad story, but the narrator leaves out the fact that he is quite possibly one of the most pathetic characters in all fiction.

If one prefers one's narrators and ostensible heroes to be truly heroic and sympathetic, then this novel will not please. If one, however, can imagine enjoying a novel written with J. Alfred Prufrock as the narrator and central character, then one is in a position to appreciate THE GOOD SOLDIER.

The novel is not a page-turner. If you read this novel quickly, you have read it wrongly. The beauty of the book is the exquisite prose, and should be read slowly, savoring each sentence and each sentiment. There is a dreamlike (one could say nightmarish) quality to the book, and one will most enjoy it by allowing oneself to become entranced by the atmospheres summoned up.

If you are willing to take the novel on its own terms, with its unheroic and unadmirable characters, with its pathetic elements and situations, and its subtle psychological observations, then there will be few reading experiences that will match THE GOOD SOLDIER. One of the most remarkable novels of the past century. But if you only like novels where there is a definite hero and admirable characters, you probably wouldn't enjoy this very much.

In Mrs. Croft's statement "we women don't want to be in calm waters all our lives" Jane Austen and her heroine, Anne Elliott, move beyond the domestic, from the bracing sea air of Lyme, to glimpses into the seafaring adventures of the Navy brethren. This to me is the predominate appeal of Persuasion - Anne, in her approaching maturity, is reunited with her former suitor in what we may expect is a deeper, more heartfelt love, having endured separation for so many years and she has the prospect of joining him at sea. My heart leaps to see her escaping domesticity and the dull social duties as exemplified by Sir Walter and her sister Elizabeth. Of course, Austen's use of language is perfect. My favourite Austen novel. The film adaptation with Amanda Root and Ciaran Hinds exquisitely captures the mood and characters of this book.

This book is one of my favorites of all time. Many people dislike it or don't like it as much when compared to Pride and Prejudice or Emma, but there are many reasons why Persuasion should not be compared to Austen's other novels. This novel was the last one that Austen wrote before she died. It is a more mature novel, dealing with many issues not found in Austen's previous novels. One reason why people find faults with the book is that Anne Elliot, the heroine, is not as spunky or witty as an Elizabeth Bennett or an Emma Woodhouse. There is not so much wit flowing in the dialogue between characters, or even dialogue in general. But these differences between the novels make this one so unique.

It is a novel of second chances. Anne Elliot, no longer in the bloom of youth, is a grown woman of 27 or 28 years. Eight years ago she had been happily in love with a handsome man named Frederick Wentworth. But, unfortunately, due to his financial status, and Anne under the influence of her family and close friend, was forced to reject his marriage proposal and they parted ways. But now, he is within her closest circle once again. Circumstances led to Anne staying with her married sister, Mrs. Muskgrove, while her own house was being let to Wentworth's sister and husband. Wentworth visits his sister and on calling on the Muskgroves finds Anne among them. Anne finds Wentworth, not only looking as good as he ever did, but is now Captain Wentworth, who has made his fortune. Wentworth, still angry with Anne over being rejected, causes him to treat Anne very cooly. But over many weeks of contact here and there, you catch on that Captain Wentworth isn't all that oblivious to Anne anymore, because of all the little 'glimpses' he throws at Anne. The tension between the two is amazing. You can sense a connection between the two, even though they are on opposite ends of the room. In Bath, the tension builds and builds until it culminates into one of the most moving and romantic reunions ever. The letter that Wentworth writes to Anne declaring his love is bound to bring a tear to your eye and a pang in your heart. Happily, all ends well, but throughout the novel you can easily sympathize with Anne. No longer youthful and no longer as pretty as she used to be, she is full of self-consciousness and confusion. She still loves him after all those years, but she cannot act upon her desires.

Austen, yet again, excels in portraying her characters. Anne and Captain Wentworth are full and delightful characters that one must love. Her descriptions of Anne's vain father and snobbish older sister, Elizabeth, hit the mark on satirizing the members of society during that time. She wittingly describes how everyone tolerates Mrs. Muskgrove's hypochondriatic self and how everyone deals with her in their own way. There is not so much dialogue between characters in this book, compared to Austen's other novels. Most of the book is in observation of Anne's character and feelings, which makes it so much easier to relate to everything that Anne feels and you understand her situation all the more. This is a wonderful novel, with many qualities, differing from those of Austen's previous novels, to enjoy and admire.

Having read all of Jane Austen's books, I've been very impressed with her style. Reading Persuasion, I immediately noticed the difference between shy Anne Elliot and Jane Austen's other characters: Emma, Elinor and Marianne, Elizabeth Bennet, Fannie Price, and Catherine Morland. Anne is not the most beautiful, the cleverest, or the most-spirited. She is shy, quiet, thoughtful, somewhat plain, and honest. She reacts to emergency situations calmly and clearly, proving that she does have a backbone. I think the fact that she is older and more mature than Austen's other characters shows a maturity in Austen's writing. I highly recommend this book to those who love Jane Austen and can understand being shy and strong.

This is Verne's classic story of the trip of Phileas Fogg (who is obsessed with time), Passeportout, Aouda, and Detective Fix around the world on a wager. The book is filled with beautiful time and space imagery throughout (I would bet that one could write an entire thesis on all the time and space references in the novel). Thirty-three years after its publication, the world first learns of the space/time continuum (although I'm certain Verne was not anticipating Einstein). Fogg bets his fellow club members that he can circumnavigate the globe in a mere eighty days. He leaves immediately with his valet Passeportout and is pursued by Detective Fix, who thinks he is a bank robber. Through many adventures, including the rescue of Aouda from immolation, they all return to London. Interestingly, a few years later, after a number of improvements had been made in railways and roads, a U.S. journalist named Nellie Bly (the pseudonym of Elizabeth Cochrane) decided to attempt to break Fogg's "record." Leaving New York on November 14, 1889, she was able to circumnavigate the globe in 72 days, 6 hours, 11 minutes, and 14 seconds. But, she didn't rescue a Hindu princess! It should be noted, however, that one has to be very careful concerning the translations of this novel. There are some terrible ones being sold. Perhaps that's the reason for the few poor comments by earlier reviewers. There is an excellent translation by William Butcher that appeared in 1995.

Before there was any kind of high-speed travel an English gentleman named Phileas Fogg betted 20,000 pounds that he can travel around the world in 80 or less days. He starts his journey in London. On his way he meets a beautiful Indian Princess. Fogg also gets mistaken for a criminal. During his whole journey he has a detective following him trying to arrest him when the warrant arrives. In the book you follow Fogg's adventures through four continents when he is racing against time. The book is fast-paced, action-packed adventure with both romance and danger.

The characters in the story were introduced very well, especially Phileas Fogg. In the beginning of the book you get to know that Fogg is a very private gentleman. He never goes to any social places except the Reform Club. A remarkable thing about Fogg is that his life is centered around the clock. He is very precise and always on time. Every day he follows the exact same schedule. Phileas Fogg does not have a wife or any kids.

The setting of the book was very jumpy. Since Fogg travels through many continents and countries the setting changes all the time. You still feel you know a little bit about every place that he comes to, even if he only stays there for a couple of hours.

When I started reading the book I thought it would be a really good book and it really did meet my standards. I would recommend it to any one who likes adventure and action. Since it is written in so many different versions a person almost any age can read it.

I think this book is a superior book because it is full of action. This book is about a man named Mr. Phileas Fogg, and his faithful servant, Passepartout, that wager a bet that They can travel the whole world in eighty days stopping at Suez via Mont Cenis and Brindisi, then to Bombay, then Calcutta, Hong Kong, Japan (Yokohama), San Francisco, New York, back to London, all within eighty days, and by steamboats, and trains. However, a nosy detective, Detective Fix, tracks them down, and tries to arrest Mr. Fogg because he believes that Fogg stole fifty-five thousand pounds. As one may guess, this greatly detains Mr. Fogg, and it seems like he may not make the trip around the world after all. However, the Fix never seems to catch up with Fogg, and Fogg triumphs over most of the obstacles that come his way, like missing boats, missing trains, missing people, and Fogg even meets and rescues a beautiful Indian Princess called Aouda. However, Fix finally catches up to the detective, and everything seems lost for Fogg until Fix discovers that Fogg was not the robber, and Fogg is released. Even so, Fogg is one day late, and in doing so, misses the train that would have taken him to London precisely to win the bet. He ordered a special train, but even in doing so, still misses the bet...or so he thinks. The ending of the book is a very unexpected one. Read this book and find out!