Healing is a tradition passed down in my family from mother to daughter. I'm a fanatic for books that regard healing techniques and theories. Some books out there are either light on the info or written so as to put even the most enthusiastic reader to sleep. Not so with this book! It is well written and full of useful information. A great addition to any Healer's bookshelf.

being wiccan one thing i study, and pratice a lot is healing here ted andrews gives anybody not just wiccans a guide to color therapy. it's easy to read and practice, and won't pinch that wallet (believe me the cost of some new age books make the wallet go ouch) well probably one of the best things written on color therapy ever

How To Heal With Color is a highly beneficial and helpful book. Easy to understand. Easy to apply. Educational and informative. I learned and applied the techniques and received positive, effective, and successful results. I also own two other books by Ted Andrews that I find beneficial. I just added Ted Andrews to my favorite author list. Ted Andrews books are abundantly rich with wisdom and insight. I am an author on Amazon.com (Diana Montgomery.) I highly recommend books by Ted Andrews, especially this one "How To Heal With Color."

Dr. Phyllis Mindell begins her work with an opening that outlines the benefits you will gain as a reader, and advice for making the most of the book. Among Dr. Mindell's long list of promises are some very audacious ones, such as "influence policy decisions at the top" "improve your career" and "lead and manage successfully". Upon reading this intro, I was intrigued but highly skeptical. After all, Phyllis didn't know my particular situation, the politics in my company, or the people with whom I am dealing. How then, I wondered, could she guarantee me such dramatic results? After reading the book and seeing immediate improvement in my professional life, I understand that that is the point indeed--the issues faced by women in all professions and at all levels have common roots! Dr. Mindell has discovered the true cause of women's relative lack of success in the workplace when compared to men: a failure to appreciate and utilize the power of language. Unfortunately, we are often guilty of self-sabotage in which we undermine our own effectiveness with weak language or an attempt to imitate the "strong" language of men.Fortunately, Dr. Mindell has developed a language style for women and she teaches it in a practical, actionable way with lots of examples and tools to show the reader "how to transform your life by transforming your language". She also discusses style and dressing for success, as well as power reading, both important issues related to that of language. The book's effect on me was immediate, as I was reading it on a plane on the way to Brazil: I had to write a presentation to give in Sao Paulo and was "cheating" by using my time to read instead. However, when I got to the chapter on organizing and writing effective presentations, I simply followed the outline and got mine done in half the time. I also received many compliments for my apparent "off the cuff" speech the next day at the Energy conference. Little did they know that I had the help of an "expert"! I loved the whole book and read it in a couple of sittings although it is not a "light read" by any means. I am now recommending "How to Say it For Women" to all my women colleagues and friends. The book is a good investment and a steal at that price.

How to Say It For Women delivers an action plan to convey confidence in today's business environment. Whether it is in speech, writing or behavior, the guidelines outlined provide a common sense approach to successful business communication.

How to Say It for Women is the only guide to communication I'll ever need. It not only gives great tips on reading, writing, speaking, listening, style, and body language, but it even gives "crib sheets" that suggest exact words to say in hard situations (job interviews, conflicts, performance appraisals). To top it off, the checklist on leadership skills show a clear way to perfect my skills. And the idea of using Charlotte the spider as the role model is so much fun and brings me back to my own childhood.

Authors have exposed the diabolical nature of British leader Neville Chamberlin.Firstly authors say [correctly]that appeasment was a myth.As early as 1934 British leaders of conservative party had adopted a policy of giving Germany a free hand in eastern Europe.In Nov1937 Lord Halifax had met Hitler ,told Britain would not oppose if Germany carried out expansionist polices in eastern Europe.Later British ambassador in Berlin Neville Henderson gave similiar assurances to this effect.When Hitler commenced threatning Czchecoslovakia ,under the cover of demanding self- determination for Sudenten Germans ,Chamberlin refused to take action.But refusal was contingent on Germany not attacking the West.In other words Germany was free to expand towards easern Europe and Britain would ensure Czeckoslovakia does not stand on the way. Shockingly this was the secret deal Chamberlin made with Hitler at Godesberg prior to Munich talks.One is now forced to endorse Soviet leader Stalin's view that West tried to embroil Germany and Soviet Union in a war.

On March 15 1939 Nazi Germany swallowed remaining rump of Czeckoslovakia .On March27 1939 in a speech to House of Commons Chamberlin gave a guarantee to Poland.Later it was told Western democracies by this time realised their folly went to war to stop further German depredations.Authors have shown guarantee to Poland was a sham ,only served as an instrument to deter Germany from attacking the West. By this time it came to be known ,according to British intelligence ,that Hitler was making secret preparations to attack the West.Western democracies ,however,communicated through secret channels that it was prepared to foresake Poland provided Hitler confine his ambitions to eastern Europe.Hostile public opinion forced democracies to start staff talks with Soviet Union .The purpose was to form a collective front to stop Hitler's march to war.But talks dragged on with West showing no willingness to bring it to succeessful a conclusion.

What Soviets wanted from the West was ironclad guarantee.Russians were prepared to commit 100 divisions for defence of Poland.Since Moscow did not share common border with Germany it wanted right of passage for its troops.This obstinate Poles refused to give.Here it must be said Russians were trying 1934 onwards to forge collective security pact with West .Such a pact would have stopped Hitler's Germany on its tracks .Presumably Hitler's regime would have been ousted in a coup or would have resigned. Then course of history would have been different.But British leadership's moral blindness ,hatred for Communism such a splendid opportunity was botched.

Getting back to the point,Moscow talks served in my opinion to put pressure on Germany How? I refer to secret confabulations between Horace Wilson and Goering's representive Karl Wohltat in London.Germany was told to come to terms, renounce its aggressive designs on western Europe .If not ,Berlin would be assailed on both flanks wih Russia's help.This precisely had been Hitler's nightmare. Unfortunately authors have missed this crucial point.Ultimately Moscow talks failed because West wanted Soviet Union to vouch for Poland's security without giving any reciprocal guarantees to the soviets.This made Soviets suspicious about real motives of Western leaders .The double-dealing led soviets to sign non-aggression pact with Germany.The Western democracies went to war against Germany because it committed apostasy by courting the Soviet devil.But secret channels remained open.Behind public gaze British leaders stll hoped to resurrect their secret deal this time with moderate Nazis by ousting Hitler from power.

Chamberlin policy boomeranged.Hitler reposed no faith Chamberlin ability to deliver.Nazi leader chose to free his rear before attacking Soviet Union.Appeasment policy now lay in tatters.Appendix section of the book I find it very interesting.Here authors have evaluated ,critically analysed works of other historians on Chamberlin's appeasment policy.Historians-Alan Bullock,AJP Taylor,Donald C. Watt Simon Newman ,Paul Kennedy-have exonerated the British leader of any wrong deeds by projecting him to be apostle of peace. All evidence to the contrary either fudged or ignored Why?They were reluctant to admit that leader of a Western democracy could collaborate with a dictator who was hell-bent on going to war to realise his ambitions.Such distortion of facts tantamount to pulling wool over the eyes of the public.This book has presented British politicians in the true light.These men instead of stopping Hitler shamelessly connived,collaborated ,co operated with the Nazi leader.Hyocrites,they were parially responsible for the outbreak of World War II and Holocaust that ensued.

The book represents a complete reappraisal of events leading to World War II.For me the facts contained in the book were nothing new.Having read the books of Soviet historians of war [Vladimir Trukhanovsky, Oleg Rzhevsky]I am aware of it.However this may be first time that few people in the West have come to acknowledge this unpalatable truth which for a long time dubbed communist propaganda.

A look at the book "In Our Time: The Chamberlain-Hitler Collusion" provides an important investigation of what actually was behind the Munich agreement, the so-called "appeasement" of Hitler and related topics. The authors show that British and French leaders were not naïve [weaklings] trying to "appease" Hitler in the interests of world peace. They were his collaborators in attempting to stem the virus of human rights ("bolshevism") from further threatening ruling class privilege in Europe. The "appeasement" concept, the conventional wisdom about how WWII started, the authors note in their conclusion, has been used to try to silence critics of subsequent U.S. military interventions.

The main driving force the authors outline behind this policy of collaboration is anti-communism. The bolshevik virus was said to be behind every effort of workers in Western countries to get more human rights from the ruling classes.

The authors quote from Neville Chamberlain's correpsondence with King Geore VI that his goal during his meetings with Hitler in September 1938 was to reach an "understanding" with Hitler. This understanding hopefully would bring about the "prospect of Germany and England as the two pillars of European peace and buttresses against communism."

The authors quote from the meetings of Hitler and Chamberlain, the notes of the German translator Paul Schmidt. Hitler stated that there should be no conflict between Britain and Germany and that Germany would not stand in the way of British activities outside of Europe and that Britain should not stand in the way of German activities in Central and South-East Europe. The main theme stressed by British officials in the documents quoted by the authors is that it would be allright if the Nazis expanded towards Central and Eastern Europe so long as they did not attack Western Europe and interfere with Britain's sphere of influence. They hoped that the Nazis would eventually make war on the Soviet Union.

What appears to have turned British leaders gradually away from their "appeasement" policy was not Nazi occupation of the rest of Czechoslovakia on March 15 1939, for Chamberlain immediately offered excuses for it, but the German cession of the Czech province of Ruthenia to Hungary on March 17. It was expected that the Nazis would merge the Ukranian speaking Ruthenia with Ukranian areas of Poland and create it as a ram with which to attack the Soviet Union and merge them with the Ukraine, the Soviet Union's economically powerful republic. The granting of Ruthenia to Hungary suggested that intelligence reports that Hitler first planned to attack Great Britain and France were accurate. The way was paved for the empowerment of politicians like Churchill, who had long seen Hitler as a threat to the British imperialism. Hitler did not believe that his allies in Britain and France could withstand electoral defeats from Nazi opponents like Churchill and so he felt he had to make his Western flank secure before he went East.

The Chamberlain government continued to have contacts with the Nazis trying to revive the "understanding" that Chamberlain thought he had agreed with Hitler in September 1938. Shortly after Germany gave Ruthenia away, the British and the French offered a unilateral guarantee to Poland, until recently an ally of the Nazis. The authors show that this guarantee was not so much a promise to defend Poland as an effort to enlist the Poles militarily on Hitler's East Flank should he attack Britain and France

The authors quote a meeting during which Chamberlain asked foreign minister George Bonnet wheather France would come to the aid of Russia as called for in its 1935 defense pact with the latter if the Germans went forward with their plan to start a guerilla uprising to in the Ukraine to detach it from Russia. Bonnet reasoned that since such an action by Germany would not be a direct military attack on Russia, France did not have to intervene. Chamberlain was pleased.

The author's focus on the Soviet war on Finland is particularly interesting. Russia attacked Finland on November 30 1939 after Russia, fearing Nazi expansion, offered Finland an exchange of territory which would have given it twice as much as it had given up. Western leaders professed a great deal of horror at Russia's aggression. While Poland was being horribly mauled, France sent a hundred bombers and 50,000 "volunteers" while the British sent 50 bombers to Finland. The authors note that Finland was much admired by Western rightists for it was dominated by its military ruling under a democratic facade. It had a strong fascist movement that was able to get the country's communist party outlawed.

As France was months away from being engulfed by the Nazi darkness, it was making plans with the British to attack the Caucuses and the Ukraine. They justified this on the ground that the Soviets had allied with Germany with their Non-aggression pact of August 1939 and were providing them with economic resources though the authors show that Russia actually provided little economic resources to Germany.

MUNICH. APPEASEMENT. Powerful symbols. Invoked to justify questionable military adventures. What actually happened at Munich?

'In Our Time:The Chamberlain-Hitler Collusion'--based on government documents, correspondence, diaries, etc.--shatters the conventional judgment.

There is no doubt that when Hitler first violated a treaty by entering the Rhineland, a firm response would have defeated him. The French were prepared to take action but the British government wouldn't. The Tory government, anxious to eradicate communism, was willing to accommodate Hitler's aggressive appetite in eastern Europe hoping that this would lead to war with the Soviet Union.

Many books I previously read described Hitler as a genius who continually overrode the warnings of his generals. The generals were properly cautious, assuming they would meet opposition. But Hitler was aware that his anti-communism had the approval of the British establishment and that his adventures would be successful.

German opposition forces tried to convince the British, that if they and the French took a firm stance, the German military would overthrow Hitler. Chamberlain rejected their pleas.

Hitler's demands against Czechoslovakia threatened to cause a major war since France had a mutual assistance treaty with the Czechs. To defuse the crisis, Chamberlain traveled to Germany and held three meetings with Hitler. The last one, with France and Italy, produced the Munich Agreement--which sold out a reluctant but consenting Czechoslovakia.

During those meetings, Chamberlain felt he had forged a separate agreement with Hitler-which granted Hitler a "green light" for aggression in central and eastern Europe.

But public opinion in Britain was a major problem that Chamberlain defused by issuing gas masks and calling for the digging of trenches. Hitler was advised to ignore any harsh criticisms; they were made to appease the public.

Munich's lesson (the convention one) is a fraud. Chamberlain knew he was not bringing 'Peace in Our Time'. His performance was a charade to deceive an unsuspecting public. What is the real lesson. Beware of the duplicity of our leaders. Those magical PR icons--Munich, Appeasement, and the newer ones, Humanitarian Intervention, Ethnic Cleansing--should alert us that they are used to get public support for dubious activities.

For history buffs and particularly those interested in World War II, this book is an absolute MUST read.

I learned more from this book then I did in all the classes I was required to obtain my political science degree. The main premise of the book is that the Republican and Democratic party leaders collude to keep power, often by not contesting elections that could easily be won with any money or effort expended. A quick example from 25 years after the book's publication should suffice to verify Karp's thesis.In the state of Florida in 1998, half of the congressional seats were not even contested (several other "contests" simply have write-in candidates with zero chance of winning). This was despite the fact that both parties knew winning an extra seat or two might well determine who controlled the next Congress. Unfortunately, this fact is overlooked by not only the public, but all of the so-called experts on TV. Right now, the public perception still is that the parties fight like dogs to win elections at all possible costs. Karp sees what the pundits oftoday can't; namely, the goal of party leaders is to maintain control of their organizations,not to win elections. One quote from former Democratic speaker Sam Rayburn demonstrates this principle;when faced with a coming landslide for his party and a gain of many seats for his party,he ruefully says :"I'd just as soon not have that many Democrats, they'll be difficult to control." This is the shocking but real story of how politics in America really works. A truly indispensable work.

....

Karp not only pulls back the curtain on the evils of partisan politics, but goes on to propose a Jeffersonian style of self-government. Some of my favorite analysis from this book includes the following:

* Party oligarchs and their Cold War statism highlights his "principle of waste."

* A State inherently tends toward collusion and monopoly-granting, and therefore expansion, and this necessarily leads to war.

* Special privilege is in direct odds with liberty and self-rule, and only serves to further entrench a ruling political elite. And this he says, is a result of the "Hamiltonian tradition."

* Political ideology necessarily takes the form of the ruling bureaucracy.

*Decentralization [and hence, secession] is the key to breaking the back of the Hamiltonian system.

Karp, a revisionist historian, takes on such sacred cows as FDR, Wilson, Johnson, McKinley, Hamilton, and trade unions (gasp!). It's one of the best books ever on raw political machinations.

For me, the major impression left by this book was it's massive originality. Every page was the equivalent of opening your lunchbox in expectation of the usual bologna sandwich, and finding instead a skyscraper, the Hope diamond, or Elvis' twitching torso. Karp looks at the theories of American politics and attempts to overturn every accepted explanation, always suggesting complex, subtle and powerful alternatives. Whether he succeeds or not you can judge for yourself, but he somehow manages to be always unique on ground previously trodden by so many feet. Yet, he isn't merely a contrarian. His intricate theory retains remarkable consistensy throughout this book and his other three books on politics.

The previous reviewer sums up one of the books main ideas very well. Another argument of the book is that power in America is almost totally monopolized by the two parties -- contrary to most opinion today which seeks to blame anyone and everyone for our problems except the most obvious suspects, the politicians who pass laws and frustrate reform. Since so many pundits blame either the "liberal media elite" or monopolistic corporations for our woes, Karp details the ways in which both groups are under the complete domination of the two parties (his analysis of the media is part of a separate book _Buried Alive_). As Karp points out, the idea isn't new. Madison, Jefferson, Washington, et. al. shouted until they were hoarse about the necessity of zealously watching politicians and rulers. They had little if any concern about journalists, manufacturers and bankers, except insofar as they might become willing tools for would-be despots and oligarchs. But no one except Karp has thoroughly explored the implications of this founding belief in the modern political context.

I thoroughly enjoyed immersing myself in the adventures of Bonnie and Michael who overcame myriad fears (How will our families and work survive without us? Can we really afford to take this time off? Are we crazy for doing this?) and acted upon their once-in-a-lifetime dream of taking a year's sabbatical to travel around the world.

Entertaining as well as informative, I quickly got the picture of what it must have been like for them to live outside their comfort zone on a moment-to-moment basis. What is especially appealing about this book are the useful planning tips and resource lists for anyone who may be considering a journey of this nature for themselves. Just don't leave home before reading this book.

This book has inspired me to think practically about living in and visiting places I only thought I'd get to see in my retirement! As a young mother, I am ready to pack up my family and experience the world. I enjoyed the personal accounts of the authors' adventures, as well as the practical advice for really making the journey work.

This is one of those "WOW" books. It took me to places I'll probably never experience otherwise and it took me inside the authors' minds and hearts. I actually felt I was right there on the journey with them. I especially appreciated the honesty with which it was written. The thoughtful, helpful hints at the end would prove invaluable to anyone contemplating a lengthy trip or even one for a month.

This is an excellent book. I am a recreational skater, who plays the occasional pick-up/old folks hockey. I learned skating skills and techniques from some of the chapters, that I could not learn from my friends. My skating has improved since I read Laura Stamm's Power Skating. The author really knows how to express herself and teach. Techiques are described with clarity and appropriate drills are detailed. This should be beneficial to all skaters, from novice to expert. If you are only buying one hockey skating book, it should be this one.

Although I play roller hockey instead of ice hockey, this book is still an excellent resource. Very thorough explanations, illustrated with many clear photographs.

I think it is most appropriate for beginning to intermediate skaters. However, if you are an advanced skater and want to check that your mechanics or sound, or want to squeeze the last bit of performance from your technique, you should consider this book.

I can't recomend this book highly enough. In the first week after getting it, I was able to skate faster than many of the other people in my hockey class who had blown me away the previous week.

This is a great prep book before starting hockey clinics. She gives you lots of subtle position and balance tips that really change the feel of your feet on ice and help you move faster with more assurance. She's got practice exercises as well.

Do we really need another book about "Der Fuhrer"? Surprisingly, if the book is this one, the answer is yes. Because this book looks at Hitler from a different angle- one that is pretty much unknown to the layperson: this book is about the "sensitive," "artistic," and "cultivated" Hitler. As you might expect when using such words in connection with Hitler, contradictions abound. The man who could weep while listening to the music of Wagner is the same man who, the moment he came to power, fired or drove into exile musicians and artists he didn't approve of: Jews, Bolsheviks, Modernists, etc. On the other hand, if he liked you personally and thought you were talented, he would sometimes look the other way- he supported, or at least didn't harass, several people who were Jewish or who disagreed with him politically. Some of you may have winced when I used the word "cultivated" in connection with Hitler. But, consider the following: he was very well read (and had a tremendous, possibly photographic, memory); he was a competent, though unimaginative, artist- he could draw and paint as well as your average art school student (and he was completely self-taught); he knew a tremendous amount about the operas of Wagner, and was a good judge of opera singers; he was knowledgeable about architecture, could make architectural sketches, and could intelligently discuss technical aspects of the craft, etc. Having said that, we must remember the flip-side- Hitler was very narrowminded. His love of art was pretty much limited to 19th century German Romantics and some of the painters of the Italian Renaissance. He thought all modern art- which for him started with the Impressionists- was trash, and decadent to boot. He loved opera, but only Wagner and Puccini. He didn't much care for other music- he wasn't really enthusiastic about Beethoven, Mozart, etc. He couldn't stand Brahms, although he eventually did develop a taste for Bruckner. He thought modern music, with its dissonances and atonality, was horrible. In architecture, he admired the Greeks and Romans- but in his building plans for the Third Reich everything had to be magnified to colossal size to awe people. Glass and steel structures left him cold, although he grudgingly realized he'd have to agree to build skyscrapers if only to show that National Socialist Germany could outdo America. Surprisingly, Hitler generally liked his culture "neat." He didn't want political messages- he wanted high-quality, beautiful, soul-elevating art/music/sculpture. Of course, he would tell you what qualified as high-quality, beautiful, and soul-elevating. It may seem odd, but Hitler was embarrassed by the crudity of his Nazi cronies. The vast majority of them had no interest in art, music and sculpture. They'd be dragged, although only silently kicking and screaming, to Bayreuth for the yearly dose of Wagner. They'd fall asleep and start to snore. No wonder the Little Corporal preferred the company of artists, musicians and sculptors. Perhaps the ultimate irony is that the man who wanted "art" with no political content- "art" that elevated people and helped them to get away from the problems, big and small, of everyday life, succeeded in politicizing culture to an unprecedented degree. This book is a brilliant achievement by Mr. Spotts. It forces us to look at Hitler not as a ranting, foaming-at-the-mouth, caricature, but as a fellow human being with, dare I say it, some positive qualities. Yes, the devil is given his due.....but Mr. Spotts never forgets who or what he is dealing with. Why did I give this review the title I did? Mr. Spotts mentions that it was agreed that, when the end of the "Thousand Year Reich" was at hand, the Berlin Philharmonic would add Bruckner's Fourth Symphony to the programme. On the night of April 13th, 1945, the symphony was finally played. As people filed out of the concert hall afterwards, Hitler Youth were in the lobby, hawking cyanide capsules to interested takers. Poor Bruckner probably turned over in his grave.

When I lived in Germany 45 years ago I simply could not understand how those decent and civilized people had allowed themselves to be taken in by Hitler. And amazingly in our many conversations they freely admitted that they still believed, up to a point, that Hitler had been "good" for Germany!

Since then I have turned over a whole library trying to find an answer to that question. Three books go a long way toward explaining the phenomenon of Adolf Hitler: Ian Kershaw's two-volume biography; "Hitler's Table Talk" edited by John Toland; and now Frederic Spotts' "Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics."

"Who is afraid of Adolf Hitler?" Frederic Spotts asks at the end of this extraordinarily revealing book. "Just about everyone," is his rhetorical response. Another question this book asks, tangentially, is "Who doesn't loathe Adolf Hitler?" Well, Hitler was personally responsible for the murder of millions of people and a war that destroyed Europe. All of this within living memory -- many of us were nurtured on the events of WWII. So how could any decent person admit to a shred of sympathy or even understanding for a monster like this Hitler? One would rather admit to sympathy for the Devil.

If you wish for any insight into a person's psychology, start with the music he likes and his taste in art. In this book Mr. Spotts makes the case that that these things were essential and central in Hitler's life and career and he does this convincingly. He also proves, to my satisfaction at least, that Adolf Hitler actually had some talent as a painter and an architect, not first-class by any means, but enough that he knew good stuff from trash and that he knew full well the "socialist" art produced during the Third Reich was trash. But one of the most revealing aspects of "Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics" is what it reveals about us, the readers. If we are honest with ourselves, we have to admit that much of the art and music and architecture Hitler liked, we like it too, and the stuff he didn't like, that turns us off also. Mr. Spotts concludes that Hitler's personality had many facets and the value of this book is that it forces us to look closely at them and open our eyes to the tiny glimmers of ourselves in there.

This is a thoroughly researched, and horribly fascinating, guide through the cultural interests and pretensions, and later the cultural policies, of Adolph Hitler. Spotts takes us through Hitler's mix of boundless ambition and lack of talent in the visual arts, through his interest in music, and his fascination with architecture. He outlines Hitler's attempt, once he'd gained power, to create a compliant community of artists in his nightmarish Reich, his efforts to get artists to produce what he wanted: the carefully controlled art-in-the-service-of-the-state, populist and uplifting, that Plato stipulated was the only kind of art that could be admitted into his Republic. (Was Plato a precursor of Nazism? Absolutely. An influence? Probably not.)

Though, as with any murderous tyrant, it pleased Hitler to grant indulgences. He allowed some artists in the Third Reich to get away with defiance that would have had anyone else killed. But these indulgences, Spotts observes, were not enough to inspire many of the artists who remained in Germany with anything approximating courage. Musicians like Richard Strauss and Wilhelm Furtwängler made huge accommodations and moral compromises with the Reich, relying on pathetically miniscule gestures to salve their consciences.

No-one who has not been in the same circumstances has the right to condemn them too easily, but at a time when extraordinary courage was called for they showed only human weakness. Though Strauss composed _A Hero's Life_ and Furtwängler conducted it, neither lived it. If we are tempted to believe that artists have special claims to virtue, or that interest in art is likely to lead a person towards virtue, then Spotts' book is an antidote for that sad illusion. Spotts is rightly hard on those artists who, like Karajan in particular, helped put a civilised gloss on Nazi barbarism.

It has been objected that to focus on the arts in the Third Reich instead of, say, the war in Russia or the Holocaust, is to trivialise the evil of Nazism. That view is mistaken. To focus on one part of a catastrophe where the horrors are more subtle is not to trivialise other, still more atrocious, aspects. Instead it is to show how its distinctive and chilling lack of humanity pervaded every aspect of Nazism. In focussing belated attention on the Third Reich's cultural politics, Spotts does not diminish our appreciation of the horror of fascism but enhances it.

Some information in Spotts' book may provide unwelcome news for vested intellectual interests. For example, Spotts exposes the rose-coloured portrait of Hitler in August Kubizek's _Adolf Hitler: Mein Judengfreund_ ("The Young Hitler I Knew"), showing it to be as fraudulent as the "Hitler" of Hermann Rauschning's imaginary dialogues. Hitler apologists have long clung onto "Kubizek's book", with - from their point of view - good reason given Kubizek's romanticisation of the young Hitler, but Spotts makes it clear that "Kubizek's" book was merely a ghostwritten hoax.

Another myth that is dying hard (though dying) is the one promoted by Köhler, Rose, Zelinsky et alia, claiming Hitler formed his political views and dreams out of composer Richard Wagner's operas and prose. Spotts shows that Hitler was indeed impressed at a young age by Wagner's opera _Rienzi_. But Hitler failed to note that in this early Wagnerian opera (Wagner himself dismissed _Rienzi_ as a "pecadillo of my youth") the Roman Tribune Rienzi becomes puffed up by the pride of his early successes, and is brought down by that unheeding arrogance. Rienzi fails to show compassion for those killed on either side, including his own, in Rome's brief civil war, preferring to spend his time and money on grand costumes and ceremonies, and he fails (eventually) to show mercy for those who fought against him. As a direct result of these failings he is overthrown by the Roman people: Wagner's actual message was obvious. It was Wagner's ill-luck that an evil lunatic, active a century after Wagner's opera was written, liked the sound his music made but failed to take note of his operas' meanings and messages.

But Hitler did eventually get Wagner's message, Spotts reveals, finding Wagner unpalatable after the defeat at Stalingrad brought home the lesson taught in Wagner's _Ring_ cycle: that pursuit of power destroys love and leads to moral degradation and downfall. From then Hitler could no longer bear to listen to Wagner, and in his last years turned instead to the schmaltzy operettas of Franz Lehar. There was no such person as "Wagner's Hitler", Spotts concludes; to Hitler, Wagner was only an opera composer. As an aside, Spotts noted that, Hitler excepted, the Nazi Party as a whole preferred Beethoven.

It would have been good to see more on the Reich's use of radio and film. Spotts hardly touches on Leni Riefenstahl's films, nor on films by other Nazi directors with similar amounts of artistic ambition, or pretension, but none of Riefenstahl's regrettable talent. The theatre under the Third Reich is also only barely covered. But in its central fields - music, painting and sculpture, and architecture including the abstract art of the autobahns - Spotts is comprehensive and authoritative.

Finally, it's important to note that Spotts is not being quite as ambitious as the book's blurb might suggest. Spotts does not "explain" Hitler, still less explain him away, by showing the extent of his artistic interests, and of his artistic disappointment. He writes only about one aspect of the great "catastrophe" (as Spotts called Hitler), but an aspect that contains considerable illumination on the whole.

Spotts provides a great deal of valuable information and insight on the arts in Hitler's Germany, with much that is (so far as I can tell) new and - mirabile dictu! - authoritative and reliable.

Cheers!

Laon

Keith's true stories of spiritual adventure and blessings are easily the most fascinating I've ever read. These are stories you will tell your friends and pass on to others in need of inspiration and healing. Their greatest beauty, beyond the author's exquisite writing, is their uplifting luminosity and undeniable truth, which comes across in the author's open-hearted honesty and in his ability to teach by example what he, himself, has learned through direct experience. You will believe the stories that Keith so generously shares in this book not only because he is a kind and gentle person, but also because he's a discerning journalist devoted to the relentless pursuit of truth. These are beautiful truths, so you are likely to place this book on your topmost shelf of favorites, as I have. Like a beacon, it will call you into new and exciting adventures with the Divine in it, in you and in everything else.

--Judith Pennington, author of The Voice of the Soul: A Journey into Wisdom and the Physics of God

Inner Coach: Outer Power by Keith Varnum is a self-help book about connecting with one's inner self, and the memories of childhood, to find one's path and better embrace, experience, and enjoy the present day. Popular culture icons such as the "E.T." movie, Indiana Jones, and Mr. Rogers are offered as metaphors and reference points to guide the reader down the path to self-acceptance, self-improvement and higher fulfillment. Inner Coach: Outer Power is recommended for inclusion into any self-help, self-improvement reading list and reference collection as an insightful, accessible, meaningful guide.

These 48 true short stories highlight the author's encounters with miracles. Refreshingly candid and honest, Keith reveals intimate details of what lead him to experience spontaneous healings, angels, levitation, talking plants and a lot more. Yet, that's not the book's main purpose. The author skillfully sprinkles the wisdom of what he learned throughout his adventures providing the reader with the keys for opening their own doors to miracles.

As our reluctant hero sails forth on the river of life, he soon discovers that all is not what it appears to be. Indeed, the author goes blind, and, after meeting his "inner coach," he heals himself and learns to see life in a profound new way. This book takes on epic proportions as Keith jumps into the turbulent waters of spiritual mysteries to discover the hidden power that all people possess. We are hooked from the first page and quickly begin to care about a young man disenchanted with the promises of his world as he transforms himself into a compassionate teacher of human potential.

Throughout Keith's amazing journey, we are treated to an intimate view of his struggles, surprises and successes. His warmth, authenticity and humor are infectious. From his early days working as an intern on Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood TV show he affectionately shares, "Fred Rogers taught me how to communicate in the most profound and affecting way-heart to heart, soul to soul." While striving to comprehend an act of levitation, he reveals, "My mind's orderly framework of reality was being severely challenged by Michio's airborne body." And after learning the truth about the "archetypal grandmother" who saved him from freezing to death, he jokes, "I'd have to declare myself crazy right then and there! I wasn't willing to believe I'd lost my mind. Not yet, anyway!"

Besides providing riveting escapades, Inner Coach: Outer Power gives readers an informal course in "Miracles 101." While savoring the book, I remembered long-forgotten "impossible" events that happened to me. Soon I began seeing new opportunities and options through my own self-imposed "blindness." And since reading the book, I have "created" my own miracles. This mind-blowing, life-enriching book is exciting, fun and easy to read. I give this book the highest rating because it is entertaining, well-written, full of heart, and loaded with practical tips that help people be happier and healthier.

It's too bad that this book is out of print and
(to judge by the few reviews) apparently not widely-read.
It provides what are perhaps the first and only
published guidelines for working toward economic and
political parity in marriages where there is a
part-time or full-time stay-at-home mom. Buy this
book first, before you read all the other books
on transitioning fronm workplace to home.

This book is an excellent combination of empirical research, helpful anecdotes, and forward thinking. I wish that I had read this book at the start of my career. Perhaps I would have made the same decisions, which were largely based on emotions and "good faith." But reading this book would have provided a healthy dose of rationality as well as helpful warning signs to watch out for when facing the challenges of balancing career and family life.

This is a stellar book and will especially resonate with women who have studied economics, law or negotiation. Mahony uses common frameworks (for instance, BATNA - best alternative to no agreement) to analyze the day to day choices parents make. She comes up with some powerful suggestions for change. Don't "marry up" if you want a career, marry someone who will not make as many professional demands on your family life -- maybe someone who makes less money. There's a radical idea for most professional women. Buy this for your feminist MBA friends.

If your intention is to acquire good and reliable information about Kundalini, then this is a very good book. It answers questions like these very well: "Is Kundalini real or is it simply folklore from India?" "What is possible in the full Kundalini experience?" "What are the actual dangers of this phenomenon?" "What are some safe appproaches I could take that will lead me in the direction of Kundalini?"

This text was not written as an instructional book. It is just the transcription of a coherent, but short set of lectures delivered by Sri Chinmoy. It is extremely well organized, clear, and concise. The author speaks with the solid clarity and mature good sense that usually arises only from a direct, complete, and deep personal experience. My own guess or intuition is that Sri Chinmoy has a total experience and complete personal command of this entire phenomenon, beginning to end. It seems to me probable that the author is "the real deal" even though I don't know him. In that sense, I regard this book as much better and clearer information than I could get from another source.

My own preferences are not purely informational. I don't like to read a book and say, "Well, that's interesting" and set it down. I like to practice its techniques and get somewhere. While there are some good and useful exercises that a reader can do from this book, the whole subject does not really lend itself to the active or avid amateur reader. The author explains in all detail that an actual teacher is required in this area. We can pick up a tennis racquet and make a try without having any coach or teacher. My hope would be more or less the same with Kundalini. As it happens, Kundalini doesn't work that way. So, if you, too, are a true avid amateur you might be somewhat disappointed with the book (unless, of course, you can find a teacher).

The concentration exercise alone will take the practitioner back through time...and if time travel is not an occult experience then I don't know what is. This book replaces Goraksha's book, the same yogi who brought us Hatha Yoga. Goraksha's writings were destroyed, and this book brings the occult topics back to light here in the west. The book emphasizes the path of the heart. I have tried the kundalini path, which I found to be too dangerous. Since the soul resides in the heart, the heart path places the soul in command. The soul can open a center, such as the third eye to peer into the future, or to open another chakra to help you with what you may be doing. This you'll find to be of Supreme importance if you want inner direction in your life.

This book ,like all of Shree Chinmoys books, explains with great clarity the mystery of Kundalini. Since he himself is a accomplished Yogi, his words are authentic and his description of the Chakras crystal clear and easy to understand. His words are poetic and goes directly into the heart.

This is a great book for anyone who really wants to understand the Kundalini and its mystries.