Junot Diaz is an especially talented craftsmen. In his collection of stories, "Drown," he has written a series of professional literary short stories that teem with detail about the Dominican experience and contain a plethora of ambiguous, life-like characters.

Somehow, though, Diaz' stories are too professional. They're sure to please any committee made of MFA graduates and writing school instructors, and it's no surprise that Diaz had landed in "The New Yorker." As such, the style and plotting are too familiar to be called original or even noteworthy, if it weren't for the detail about the Dominican Republic. And right now, that's the only difference between Diaz and hundreds of Iowa graduates.

I recently heard Diaz read in Berkeley from his novel in progress, and it sounds much better than the stories contained in "Drown." He's an intelligent writer with a fierce eye and ruthless character evaluation. And a distinct voice. "Drown" is a first book, rough in places, a bit cliché in composition, but written with a brilliant mind.

Junot Diaz writes fiction without flourish. His words are stark, edgy, direct - and his stories cut through stereotype right to the quick of the truth. DROWN pulses with the rhythms of Spanish and New Jersey accents as it explores lives in both The Dominican Republic and Jersey City. Mostly adolescents and young adults, the characters struggle against a dimming or obscured future, and tend to live for the moment, even as they hope for something better. The most compelling stories are "Ysrael," "Aurora," "Edison, New Jersey," and "How to Date a Browngirl, Blackgirl, Whitegirl, or Halfie." This is a brief book, only ten stories and a few over 200 pages long, but it packs power with its brevity.

I highly recommend this book for those with an interest in Latino and/or multicultural fiction, and for those who enjoy short story collections.

When this book first came out I approached it with apprehension because it had been received with such fanfare by the literati and laymen alike. Indeed, so great was the hype that I honestly believed that regardless of the quality of the book, It would fail to live up to the praise bestowed upon it. Thus, you may imagine how pleasantly surprised I was when I realized that, in fact, Junot Diaz is an incredibly talented writer. I've read collections of short stories that showcase the skills of some of the most gifted writers of the 20th century, and, honestly, Diaz has written some stories that surpass anything I had read before. True, some of Diaz's stories are not as effective as the majority, yet that is because most of the stories in Drown are bona fide gems. I know I'm getting too effusive here, so I'll stop. Still, If you like to read good literature, this is a book that you definitely should consider. I look forward to reading Diaz's first novel.

Kundera puts some of his favorite themes to work in a playful way, as suggested by the title. Throughout the seven short stories in Laughable Loves Kundera highlights the role that mutual misunderstandings play in the creation of seemingly profound, heroic, self-congratulatory experiences, especially where love is concerned. Several tales are heavily ironic: wonderful contradictions emerge when people who cannot take themselves seriously try desperately hard to do so in order to please the straightfaced world in which they find themselves stuck. Similarly, the plasticity of personality, the wispy, fleeting character of existence and the partnership between sadism and sexual desire permeate his plots. Kundera blurs the distinction between charade and authenticity creating the suspicion that human identities may be centerless webs of charades - yet this lack of depth need not be bleak or tragic: it can be liberating and beautiful.

These stories are a joy to read if you're in the mood for ambiguous endings and ironic humor. Although they lack the gravity of his full-length novels I think the short stories in Laughable Loves succeed: irony, not sublimity, is the goal. I gave it four stars because it didn't grip me the way some of Kundera's stuff has in the past while at the same time it was certainly fun (and often psychologically insightful) reading.

I can not stop wondering how Milan Kundera takes penetrating glimpses at love's triumphs and tragedies that we so often pass by without any acknowledgement. In the love stories of ordinary people he brings up the desperate longing for closeness and warmth of having a partner by one's side; a partner in love or friendship to find a shelter from everything else. The eroticism of the book is not just a sexual instinct of a male. It envelopes the reader in a sad and sweet embrace of the mundane events drenched with it; the events that we fail to recognize as turning points of our lives. Milan Kundera seems to be saying every time, "Look around! You do not have to watch movies to experince strong passions because they are around you every single minute."

"We pass through the present with our eyes blindfolded." says Kundera. Most of the characters in this collection of seven great stories are blind in one way or another. If they happen to be wise, they turn out, after all, to be unbearably light, chasing after women, embracing men, for no purpose whatsoever other than that is what they seem destined to do. Their perspectives on themselves are often pitifully unrealistic, hence the stories tend to center around misunderstandings. The men can't break the habit of "continuing conquest". The women seem remarkably prone to give in. Even when the men are happily married, the chase still beckons. With great humor and wit, with a lot of philosophical depth, Kundera traces the mentality of various Czechs in different walks of life in the 1960s through the medium of their sometimes tawdry love life. Tales of would-be conquests turn out to be critiques of society, questions about the meaning of life, or witty perspectives on the old theme of youth vs. age. Great Romeos turn out to be duds, burnt-out old flames can be lit again. Eroticism is not what it is cracked up to be, but sometimes it's more than we expect. Great stuff.

Maybe it's a special Czech style of writing about love, maybe it's that wry, ironic humor found in Hasek and Skvorecky that I've always liked, but Kundera's characters lack the aggression, material concerns, or passion for commitment found in American novels as well as lacking the love of style found in the French. They are simply average people with limitless libido. So are they average ? That one is up to you. In a story about how desire for a girl makes a young man invent a religious fervor, then defend it to the local Party committee, winding up in bed with his boss, who is supposed to purge him of religion, Kundera turns away from the plot to write...."it seemed to Eduard that [the girl's religious] ideas were in fact only a veneer on her destiny, and her destiny only a veneer on her body; he saw her as an accidental conjunction of a body, ideas, and a life's course, an inorganic structure, arbitrary and unstable. ....He saw her as an ink line, spreading on a blotter: without contours, without shape." The skill of a man who can stick lines like this into a story which STILL manages to entertain has to be seen to be believed. Each story provides its own stock of surprises. This is the first book by Kundera I've ever read. It certainly won't be the last.

I enjoyed Yo! more than I did How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accent. Julia Alvarez does such a great job of developing each point of view on Yolanda Garcia, that by the end of the novel you feel as if you personally know this character. She brings to life her central character through the stories of those who were a part of her life and she does this so skilfully, with each character given its own writing style and voice, so it is as if each person was telling you a story about Yolanda and informing you about their involvement in her life. And no you do not need to read How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accent to read this. Julia Alavrez fills the reader in on everything, although nothing much is missed. But, if you have read the Garcia Girls, you'll find yourself saying, "Oh I remember that!" and such. If you haven't read it, read it and you will see how each is inter-related. But, you do not need to read Garcia Girls to get this book, it stands alone. Definitely recommend all her books!

I read a book called !Yo! by the Hispanic author Julia Alvarez. Each chapter of the book is about an author named Yolanda Garcia, told by a different person in her life. The people in Yo's life do not always enjoy her stories that she writes, but they learn to accept her for who she is and love her in the end. I enjoyed this book and would like to share a summary of it.

Yolanda Garcia is from the Dominican Republic and her family moves to the United States when she is a young girl. She is one of four daughters. Her sisters were Sandi, Fifi, and Carla. Their parents, Carlos and Laura Garcia, decided to flee from the Dominican Republic to get away from the terrible island that they had called home. Many terrible things occurred on the island; homes raided, people taken from their homes, torture chambers, electric prods, attacks by dogs, and more. They wanted to gain freedom and raise their daughters without terror.

There are several chapters in this book, each is from a different character's view point. Throughout the changing view points, the story of Yo's life is told. Yo wants to be a writer when she grows older, but her family does not appreciate her story telling. Yo has several boyfriends throughout her life before finding the right man, which was her third and final husband, Douglas Manley. She spent every summer at a relative's mountain home in the Dominican Republic, where she was friends with the caretakers and gave a job to a poor farmer as the night watchman. She taught a young man how to use his writing skills to create interesting stories while she was a college professor. Yo helped her landlady to realize that the only way of saving her family from her abusive husband was to force him to move out of the house. She also was able to make her father understand that writing and telling stories was her destiny.

I enjoyed this book and am glad that I was exposed to a different style of writing. I have never read a book with more than one view point and I believe that it is an interesting way to tell a story. This book was humorous, yet sad, and turned out to be an excellent reading experience. I would recommend this book to other people. It contained information about culture, although not a detailed description and it helped me to understand what immigrants experience when they move to the United States.

In conclusion, I believe that this assignment was better than I had ever expected. I agree with the Chicago Tribune that this book was "Exhilarating". I think that others would agree with me that this was a great book. So if you are looking for a good book, I suggest !Yo! By Julia Alvarez. You will not be disappointed.

Julia Alvarez' writing is characterized by her impeccable ability to create convincing characters whose travails and disappointments, joys and triumphs, the reader inevitably experiences as though he were an integral part of the book. In this, the sequel to How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents, Alvarez once again has taken us in a wild ride that reverberates with the sound of truth. Amazingly, we re-acquaint ourselves with the Garcia sisters, and especially with Yolanda (Yo), while at the same time we meet a whole new procession of characters who--at one time or another--have had an impact in Yo's life. This novel works so well because even though each chapter is told from a different point of view (so that at the end we're looking at a composite picture of Yolanda as seen by these narrators), Alvarez has successfully endowed each narrator with a distinctive, entirely credible voice. As usual, the stories are alternately poignant and hilarious, ponderous and lighthearted, yet regardless of the tone, Alvarez masterfully compels the reader to look at life in a different light, because love, death, failures, triumphs, and dreams is what human existence is all about. In short, a triumph!

The only reason I am giving this book 4 stars instead of 5 is that it is not an "easy" read. A good read for sure, just time consuming. Author Bird talks about Iran like it is a benign, peace loving place you should not be concerned about. I personally don't hold those views, but it is most interesting to read why the author does. In fact the reader is impressed of how the Iranians (most of 'em) love the Americans.

You get a lot of interesting history and how the Iranian citizen live their daily lives. Family is truly the heart of the nation and large numbers of people participate in social events within broad family members. People help each other in many different areas and they more or less ignore the government in many ways. One weird thing is that the whole country hires "dress police" where fines and arrests occur if you do not dress properly (particularly the women)according to the government. Citizens rarely rat on each other due to the wonderful social graces of the population.

I picked this up off the shelf because I am fascinated by Iran and I was looking for something beyond the traditional travel guide. What a worthy investment! Like Elaine Sciolino's Persian Mirrors, this book really illustrates the complexity of contemporary Iranian culture and makes us appreciate the beauty of its people and landscape. Ms. Bird also does an excellent job of explaining some of the history and cultural mores that many people do not understand about Iran. Even if you're not interested in Iranian society so much, pick this up as a lover of travelogues, and you won't be sorry!

In some ways this might be described as a middle class travel guide to Iran. I say this because of the obvious differance between this book and one endorsed on the review page earlier called Honeymoon in Purdah (please see my review of that book) which to me was a more informal expedition/book. I feel in some ways Ms. Bird got a more realistic impression of Iran and Iranians, though I can't really fault either author. These are a very complex people whom I felt after 3 1/2 years of intimate association with them that I knew a LITTLE bit about, so am impressed that these two women learned so much about them in so little time. This book is very well researched and written and is a good source to learn about Iranian history, culture and it's people. I was very gratified to learn that Amrikayeh is not a univeral swear word in Iran, reading these books makes me want to go back.

The Borderland is a compelling work of historical fiction which works well because of its plotting, richly drawn characters and historical accuracy. Its 400+ pages move briskly along, following several interrelated story-lines which lead to an ultimate showdown. The story has a cliff-hanger feel to it, setting up a confrontation in chapter 1, which does not come to a head until several chapters later and recurs throughout the book.

The characters are richly drawn both from the conventional myth of Texas and truly unique characters. Texas ranger Matthew Caldwell exemplifies the strong, silent Texan of myth. He has the courage to assert the "Ranger's perogative" to defer arresting a wrongly accused man in defiance of orders from the President of the Republic of Texas as well as the ruthlessness to leave his enemies to their death. There is also a pack of Texas scoundrels, such as Henry Longfellow, a psychotic land speculator and hanger-on to President Mirabeau Lamar and lawyer Ridgewood Bone, whose name takes on an irony after an encounter with the Commanches. Lawrence Kerr is a more likeable, but still conventional character, as the foppish New Yorker who goes native and returns home with tales to tell. However, the story draws much of its depth from its unconventional and unlikely characters. Central to the plot are Doc Swift and his sister Cullasaja. They are the product of a marriage between a Cherokee woman and a Scottish ship captain, living their lives in both worlds. Doc Swift is a medical doctor educated at the University of Edinburg whose command of the English language is far superior to that of the American colonists he encounters. He uses both his European and native American medical training to save countless lives and earn the respect of many who would otherwise reject him. His sister Cullasaja is a similarly educated and erudite young woman who seeks a native American version of the American dream--to live in peace with her people in the land promised to them by former President Sam Houston. Hannah Dahlman is another central character. She is a German mail order bride who comes to Texas seeking to escape the political repression of her native land and bring her family with her. There is just one catch--she is Jewish, a detail which matters only to the Catholic church. The wooing of Hannah Dahl between Ranger Caldwell and Doc Swift forms one of the central conflicts of the book. The portraits of the Commanche warriors and mystics are compelling as well. Edwin Shrake creates them to be worthy adversaries rather than two dimensional villains to be gunned down by the heroic Texians.

The attention to historical detail is refreshing as well. Shrake captures the feel of frontier Austin, established San Antonio and swampy Houston with great accuracy. This is neither an uncritical telling of the Texas myth nor a PC screed against the evil Anglos. Instead, the story tells the grim dance of death between the Anglos, the Mexicans and the Commanches. Each takes a turn as executioner of the others and each receives a dose of death as well. None of the parties escapes being a giver and recipient of bloodlust, although it is often the innocent within each group who suffer. The violence is contrasted with the ordinary day to day lives of the Texans and the Commanches. The violence and grittiness of much of the story is contrasted with the ending, which is a counterpoint to Edwin Shrake's earlier novel, Blessed McGill, which was pretty darn depressing.

This is one great novel; the very best from the underappreciated author of two other classic works of fiction: "Blessed McGill" (the story of the first Saint of North America) and "Strange Peaches" (the first Kennedy conspiracy theory book). Shrake has reached his peak with the Borderland which gets at the real heart of the founding of the nation of Texas, the period after the Alamo and before admission to the Union during which Sam Houston moved the Capitol west to the middle of a Comanche paradise (oh, how we wish Austin was still a paradise), setting off a 40 year war with the Comanches and ethnic cleansing of the Cherokees. Imagine Austin with a Capitol Building surrounded by a stockade fence and a moat and protected by cannons against attack. It's bigger than life because these people were bigger than life. The climax of the book comes with the biggest Comanche raid in history which ended with the Texas Rangers triumph and slaughter of the Indians at Plum Creek south of Austin. I could give you a dozen other great scenes, but skip to the chase and simply read this book; it's a winner!

this superb book is so big that it entices one to match its size in praising it. There are dozens of literally, fabulous, characters. texas rangers, europeans, actresses, generals, and, of course, native americans. i can't imagine that these warriors, sages, half-breeds, captives, politicians and womenfolk have ever been better drawn.the scenes of their meetings read like shrake was taking minutes as do the pow wows of the white invaders. in short, it is the entire mix that created the republic of texas from president lamar down to the boatman who takes them across their stygian river. this book has a heart as big as the state of texas and as much wisdom as i have ever encoutered on the page. and the story is told with vigour and humour , laced with a fair amount of blood, sweat and lust.it could easily be called "jacobean." and probably will be. certainly its last line will be quoted for a long, long time.

This is an excellant book for those seeking detailed accounts of the war between the USSR and Germany. Mr. Erickson does a masterful job of detailing the Soviet failures at the beginning of the war through their successful defense of Moscow to the fall of the Crimea setting the stage for Germany's catastrophic defeat at Stalingrad. This account is largely from the Soviet perspective, but I do not believe that detracts from its value. The author displays little bias, he rather lets the facts speak for themselves. This has one weakness: as others have said, it has no maps. The lack of maps make it somewhat difficult to follow unless one has some idea of the geography of the USSR; even then, it is still difficult to follow at times. However, overall this is an excellent work for anyone seeking more detail about the Great Patriotic War.

If you're studying Stalingrad or building up a credible military library, you really need this book, which stands alongside Antony Beevor's best-selling "Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege" and Joel Hayward's definitive "Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitlers Defeat in the East 1942 - 1943". Make sure you have all three.

Erickson's book explains Soviet grand strategy, operational art, and tactics, and does so during a narrative that is gripping and informative. Yes, it is true that you need maps to help you locate the place names but check out the good maps in Hayward's book while you are reading Erickson's.

Erickson cut a trail with his meticulous use of Soviet russian-language archival documents. This gives the book real strenth and reliabilty.

Soviet sacrifices were as great as Soviet suffering. I would like to shake the hand of every Soviet commander Erickson mentions. Thank God for them is all I can say. THEY won World War II.

The books I mention in this book review are so far ahead of the rest that I would give them all six stars. You must get them. Erickson's companion volume, by the way, is about the period from Stalingrad to Berlin. It is also magnificent.

By the way, I once met Professor Erickson and I can affirm that he is a thoroughly nice gentleman. He signed his book for me and happily answered my dumb questions. Isn't it nice that at least some of our paramount scholars aren't ivory-tower types?

Not in print for perhaps 10 years, this study has, since it's initial release in the seventies, been the quintisential work on the subject of the Russo-German war as viewed from the Russian side. Erickson is still the formost scholar in the world on the red army and it's war with Germany.

However, this is not a book for those not already familiar with the subject. It was written for scholars of Barbarossa, and so Erickson assumes the reader to posses considerable knowledge of the subject. It contains no maps or battle plans, and references are made in passing to events and topics which it is assumed the reader has knowledge. If you have the background, this is THE study on the topic.

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.)

although i liked the setting - and the plot & characters were good, they writing style made it difficult for me to get through this book. it seemed to general where more detail was needed, too much detail where i wasn't interested and in general i put the book down after every few pages, chapters - where is this going, why is he telling me this...it was just difficult to get through. on the whole the story is good, but it wasn't fun to read.

Bennett's novel was a fascinating read immediately following Barbara Kingsolver's Poisonwood Bible--the same setting, a completely different perspective, two excellent novels (read both). Bennett's casting of the end of a relationship, amid the destruction of a nation is a compelling story. The story of the protagonist's sorrow over the loss of his lover, and the story of the equally short and catastrophic independence of the Congo are superbly blended. The prose sings in this novel and although Bennett contends that, ...there is no such thing as a change in people... this is exactly contradicted by the story here. One wants to read this book and then talk about it--it is emotionally charged and goes to the heart of the issue of whether we ever really do connect with other people as the author portends his main character never had until middle aged and under extreme duress. One who found Cold Mountain intriguing, will also be captivated by The Catastrophist.

I read this book over two years ago, and I still think of it often. The story is spellbinding, and I was introduced to Africa and the Congo. It may be my personal favorite.

I bought this book to get away from the normal stuff that I read. Good choice, as it is both historical gives one a glimpse of the days of German-occupied city of Prague during the twilight of World War II. The story opens with the gruesome murder of Baroness of Pomerania, the widow of a German Wehrmacht general, by a serial killer. The coroner's report determines that the victim did not resist and was not raped. Mysteriously, her heart was removed and vanished with the killer.

The mismatched pair of Jan Morava, a Czech detective, and Erwin Buback, a Gestapo agent who is questioning his loyalty to the Nazis, set out to track down the killer before he can strike again. But as Morava and Buback follow the killer's bloody trail through Prague, it becomes clear that he is not a political radical or a wartime dissident but a tormented psychopath.

In the final days of the Third Reich, as the war proceeds to its gruesome end, the narrative sinuously shifts perspectives, taking us deep into the emotional maelstrom of each of the characters: young Morava, struggling to find love and approval in a war-torn city; the disillusioned Buback, haunted by the ghosts of his beloved wife and daughter; and the tormented killer, sent on a bloody rampage to please "her whom he obeys."

As the story comes to the end, it grips you yearning the know what will happen next. A gripping tale of human struggle under a thrilling murder, Pavel Kohout creation of a memorable work of fiction, as one of the last important novels from one the war's direct eyewitnesses.

Highly recommeded, text refers to hardcover edition.

Kohout's novel works on two levels. First, it's an excellent, gripping, historical murder mystery. The characters are well-rounded and interesting, the killer mysterious and frigtening, and the plot taught and fast-moving. Second, it's a thoughtful examination of issues of loyalty and personal morality, revolving primarily around the efforts of a Gestapo officer and a local, partisan Czech police detective to cooperate in capturing a sociopath while balancing their respective commitments to their own consciences, and their loyalties to their own countries, as the Reich falls around them.
A very good read.

Combining historical accuracy and vivid storytelling through the eyes of three disparate characters, THE WIDOW KILLER is an extraordinary read. Set during the final months of the Nazi occupation of Prague, THE WIDOW KILLER follows a naive Czech detective who must partner with an experienced Gestapo agent. Together, they track a serial killer as he butchers widows throughout the city. But as the Nazi regime crumbles and the Prague uprising begins in May 1945, the power hierarchy crumbles and both men are forced to carefully examine their own patriotism and courage ... and, in the case of the Gestapo agent, his willingness to accept moral responsibility for the actions of his fatherland, and for the Nazi Reich to which he once proudly pledged allegiance. Author Pavel Kohout has written a suspenseful mystery, an intriguing exploration of wartime morality, and a compelling historical account of Prague during the last months of the Second World War. Both main characters are flawed and complicated; they suffer not only for their own decisions but for the larger historical context in which they find themselves. The story's elements of nationalism, sexual passion, accountability and professional ambition remain universal and important. The translation, despite a clumsy word choice here and there, serves the story well; I was moved by Kohout's obvious passion for this era in Czechoslovakia's history, and by his skill in evoking both its widely-known events and the nuanced conflicts of the occupiers and the occupied. Highly recommended.

"Caesar" was actually the first of McCullough's 'Masters of Rome' books I read, and at first, I was breathless. I had simply never before had the pleasure of reading a historical novel with such accuracy, excellent writing style, yet at the same time not 'wooden' in any way. With these books, you do not get the impression that McCullough is retelling an old story, but rather, it is completly fresh ad wonderful. Famous moments in history, such as Caesar crossing the Rubicon and Clodius' murder on the Appian Way are simply brilliant. The writing style, descriptions, research, even her potraits of various leading Romans are faultless! So what was it that prevented me from giving the book 5 stars? Firstly, as soon as I had finished with "Caesar" I went to "The First Man in Rome" and worked my way back. I then saw that McCullough had lost a great deal of her earlier brilliance. In her first two novels escpecially, McCullough did not have an awful lot to go off from ancient sources, and had to therefore rely upon her own imagination to carry her through. Due to arriving in a period in history which is exceptionally well-recorded (curse Cicero!) she does not introduce many twists and turns. This means that large parts of the novel recount Caesar's adventures in Gaul, or Roman politics, and not much emphasis upon Roman family life or indded the personal life of anybody - except, of course, Caesar. And this is my second problem with the novel. Caesar is simply too perfect. So calm, so brave, so handsome, so clever as to become rather dull. Added to which, so much emphasis was placed upon Caesar that other characters cannot develop properly. A hint of McCullough's old genius for character development is seen in Clodius, but his death comes practically as soon as he is re-introduced to the reader (a full Clodius-study was done in "Caesar's Women) Cicero was barely mentioned considering his importance at this point in time, and whatever happened to Marcus Antonius? When I was doing Ancient History at advanced level, Antony was always my favorite character, yet McCullough simply did not give him enough time or effort to develop properly! It did occur to me that McCullough could have had a great deal of fun with interactions between very different characters - the exchanges between cool, clear Caesar and merry, happy-go-lucky Antony are alwys amusing and Antony's Forum scenes are hilarious! Yet again, McCullough does not let them develop.

Despite this, the book is definetly on my must-read collection and should be leapt upon by anyone with an interest in history or a taste for great writing.

Colleen McCullough's latest book, Caesar, is not from my viewpoint the best of the series ("Masters of Rome"). They are all fabulous. I've always been a student of history, but never have I had it handed to me and such a wonderful platter.

McCullough not only tells you what happened, but gives you the reasons why it happened. You are treated to the jealousies and intrigues among Rome's ruling elite as the "Boni" go after Caesar and his "populars."

But this novel is primarily about the rivalry of two giants in Roman history, Pompieus Magnus (Pompey the great) and Gaius Julius Caesar. Allied in the first triumverent we see the death of Julia, Caesar's only daughter and Pompey's wife as the beginning of the end of a very successful political alliance.

As Caesar's success mounts in Gaul, his fortunes at home start to decline. There really was a great right wing conspiracy against Caesar as the Senate jockeys to get Caesar back to Rome without imperium so that they could prosecute and persecute him. Pompey becomes a pawn for the anti-Caesar Senate faction and the political moves and countermoves are fascinating to watch.

Finally, with his back against the wall, Caesar crosses the Rubicon and "lets the die fly high." McCullough's is meticulous in her scholarship. The few times she departs from actual history she will tell you. Or if there is more than one interpretation she tells you not only what the other one is, but why she chose hers. There are two interpretations of the Latin with the subtitle of the book. The first is the one I had heard of "The die is cast." McCullough rejects this, feeling that Caesar was more optimistic than that and a bit of a gambler. When he crossed the Rubicon with his troops, he had abandoned the law and was going for it all. McCullough felt that he would see this as throwing the die in a gambling game and was full of hope rather than resignation.

You get a great view of Roman life, politics, religion, the legal system, etc. from the entire series. This book can stand alone, but is much more meaningful if you read the series in order.

Would I recommend this book? I've given copies of this and others in the series to friends of mine and I've read them all twice.

I've enjoyed the previous four books in this series immensely, and this entry does not disappoint. "Caesar" maintains the high level of dedication to historical detail of the others. But, it moves at a very fast clip. The last page was upon me before I knew it. A familiarity with what has gone before in the series is also necessary. Although there are many battle scenes and discussions of strategy, this is mainly about politics, and there are quite a few players on the scorecard. A few of the characters seem to grow or change, mainly Caesar and Mark Antony; but many come, play their part, and leave. All in all, I enjoyed this book as much as any of "The Masters of Rome" series, which is a lot, and I'm looking forward to the next one. I only hope it comes before the millenium.