I found this book to be rather harsh and unenlightened. I certainly would not recommend this to anyone who loves and cares for their fellow human beings. However, if you're interested in reaffirming your decision that homosexuality is wrong, and you'd like to learn how you can feel spiritually superior enough to accept those deviant homosexuals then this book is for you! enjoy.

This book is written for two distinct audiences--orthodox Christians and practicing homosexuals. Both sides will find it somewhat uncomfortable reading, but "Unwanted Harvest" is a book that is long overdue. What the authors make so clear is the Christian's need to compassionately embrace, even seek out, their gay brothers and sisters but to never stray from the Biblical precepts that homosexual activity is wrong. While so much of popular culture stereotypes practicing Christians as gay-bashing hypocrites, this book illustrates a far more real problem that is rampant in many churches. An unease or more accuately an unaware or uneducated attitude afflicts many sincere church-goers. The book rightly suggests that many Christains do not reach out to homosexuals, and many others would not know how to accurately respond to them. Practical guidance is offered, and several uplifting cases are documented. Every pastor in America should read "Unwanted Harvest" and suggest their congregations do the same. Apart from its contents the book succeeds by cleverly employing a harvest analogy throughout. Repeated metaphors involving crops and agriculture at all the appropriate moments make this compelling work all the more enjoyable.

I could describe this book in many words, but they would all be adjectives of stupid and meaningless, so I won't even try. This book made a mockery of the Old West and it made a mockery of romance. Even the love scenes are boring. Once you've read one, you've read them all. Variation is the key, Ms. Authoress! Spare us haywire plots about time-travel

For those of us who DO like the time-travel genre, I find this book charming and sexy. I find the Old West a fascinating backdrop for a wonderful love story. They don't make men like this one, anymore!

This book was kinda hard to read by the 2nd chapter i couldnt tell if we were in the present or the past ....through out the book at times it would go back and you would get lost ....but on the summary: Sheri is engaged to Jack but she is having second thoughts about the wedding and after being in a close accident she really begins to reevaluate her relationship with him .....especially after finding out from the fine, sexy officer Peter that she may have been the intended target of the accident. After finding out her boyfirend had been involved in some shady dealings she knows then that she made the right decision by calling off the wedding. Jack doenst want to let her go and after his business partner is found dead he starts to see that everything wasnt as it seemed and he is in way over his head unknowingly with the MOB ...he thinks by marrying Sheri that maybe her rich dad will bail him out of his problem...WRONG!! meanwhile Sheri begins to date Peter and is later kidnapped for a rasnom she is later reacaptured and Jack sells his business to pay off his debt and the Mob is eventutally broken down...this book was not really good there wasnt enough story about the blossoming romance and the way the story backtracks may loose you for a while .....

This book was a disappointment as title is a misnomer. It should read "The History of BRITISH Children's China". No other countries are represented here. Author has organized alphabetically by mfr. rather than design type or years made. Only 8 pages of color photographs. Plentiful B&W. Good background info. on makers listed. No price values. It's a decent enough reference for English children's china, but not especially helpful to collectors wanting to know which pieces are more desirable, etc. At this price, book should have mainly color photos!

I recommend every person to get into the depth and roots of the Indian culture. This is the most educating culture to the western man, this book deals with the speciality of the cultur in general and shows the importance of the remain Indians. The cruelty that has been customed toward the indians showing its ugly head everywhere, in and between the lines, with that we can ask the important questions, as the book does and replies with a mystical beautiful helpful answers. This book is about all of our minds and all of our spirits.

On Eugenia Riley's webpage, she has tips for suggestions on writing a time travel romance. I believe she should have listened to her own suggestions when developing a Tryst in Time.

Over all, the book was very good. The development of the characters was very good, and very believable. Even the descriptions Ms. Riley did of the houses in both eras were very good, I could almost feel myself there.

The novel begins when Sarah Jennings loses her brother during the Vietnam War. After a nervous breakdown, she inherits Belle Fontaine, a civil-war plantation, from an elderly family member she has never met. While meditating in the old crumbling manor house, she hears and sees a man from the past, Damien Fontaine.

She gets transported back in time to shortly after the death of Damien's brother, Vincy, who was also killed in a war -- The Civil War. Still reeling from the death of his beloved brother, Damien has sheltered himself away from the world, trying to deal with his grief.

The story is very interesting (I read this book in one day). The progression of Sarah and Damien's relationship is very fast, but very HOT. The love scenes leave you squirming in your seat, and the dynamic relationship between the two characters is very touching and most times leave you wishing you could travel back in time to meet Damien yourself.

The complaint I DO have about A Tryst in Time is the believability of the time travel itself. Traveling in time once is one thing. Maybe even traveling back once, getting thrown forward and maybe finding your way back is another. But in this book, Sarah travels back forth so often you must think there is some kind of spiritual revolving door. One of the aspects of time travel romances that most people love is that this is a freaky thing that doesn't happen every day, for some of Eugenia's characters, it is as normal as brushing your teeth. If you have read Eugenia Riley's Phantom in Time, the constant time traveling back in forth is just about the same in A Tryst in Time. That is the most distracting thing about this novel. Just when you're getting into the groove of Sarah and Damien, she jumps back to the future for a few days, then jumps back in the past. *grrr*

If you can get past the annoying revolving time travel part in the book, you will greatly enjoy yourself reading this novel. If you love a classic love story about true love lasting forever, this book is definitely worth a read. ...

I have opted to use this book in a course on newswriting for various distribution channels but I am not as pleased with it as I anticipated. One of the first disappointments is that the accompanying classroom material promoted in the text is simply not available, and the publisher is not willing to say if it ever will be. The material included a video of some of the footage discussed in the text, and a promised web site, which was to keep current examples of good and bad writing available, with other goodies hinted at. Both promised to be great classroom tools to enhance understanding, but now I find myself having to try to explain why referenced examples in the text do not exist. The book, however, does a very solid job of providing an overview of several valuable concepts - most notably the idea that good writing is still at the core of communications, with delivery systems helping aim at specific audiences with specific interests and needs. The emphasis on content and accuracy, regardless of delivery, is strong throughout the book. The authors use two major news stories as illustrations across the chapters, which is nice to follow, but also a little confusing, since we don't have the video clips to support the discussions. The material is not damaged, though, and the principles are still communicated. It's not very detailed and I would like to have seen more specific advice given involving the distinctions between the writing styles themselves. The material is touched on, but not heavily addressed. That, however, would have lengthened the 225-page book and made it more intimitating that it needs to be. Perhaps in this era of exploring this issue of writing across the media, this brevity is the right approach. I know I'll have more success getting students to make it through this book than I do requiring them to wade through some other heftier texts I've tried. In all, it's a great first step. Now it's time for more detail and analysis. Who's game?

I bought this book in order to get more basic information on the care of my mixed bag of antiques than is given by Judith Miller's work on the subject. This I got, and in an alphabetical order that makes reference easier. But -- and it's a really big but -- there are three sections to this A-Z, and only one of them (much the largest, it's true) is much use to US users. For, as I only discovered when the package arrived, this is a British publication, unmodified for American use. The products recommended are British products, many of which even this formerly British reviewer didn't know. And the experts and specialist sources listed are also British. The result, for US collectors, is a book firing on only half its cylinders. When you're told to use only this or that specially formulated product to do a particular job, it's pretty frustrating to be unable to buy it except, with luck, at import prices

As a former homeschooled student myself, I found this an interesting but not representative account of what homeschooling truly is. While it was indeed interesting to read about Dan Riley's customized curriculum for his daughter and how the experience improved their relationship, I was disappointed with his failure to use a homeschooling parent's best and most-used resource--other homeschooling families. Unlike most of these families, he failed to seek out other homeschoolers for Gillian to know and failed to take advantage of the hundreds of extracurricular activities developed specifically for homeschoolers. Gillian's experience was more isolated than any other homeschooled student I've known(and I've been in contact with over a hundred for the past ten years). Academically, she may have flourished but socially she missed out on the well-developed network that has been in place among homeschoolers for a decade. This book must be read for what it is: a highly individualized account of one experience in home education, not as a guidebook or source of representative research on home education in America.

I found this book to be a quick and easy read. Riley's sense of humor make the book enjoyable to read, yet it is not lightweight material. Perhaps the best part of Riley's book is the honest re-telling of what happens when you homeschool. Many homeschooling books paint homeschooling in such a glorious light, that the real life nuts and bolts of homeschooling gets swept under the rug. Homeschooling can be difficult and exhausting. Is it worth it? For some people, yes. Dan Riley captures the gritty, one on one nature that makes homeschooling a viable alternative for some families.

This is a poorly researched book. Here's an example - the author seems to be under the impression that George Harrison played the (excellent) guitar solos on 'Taxman' and 'Good Morning Good Morning', unfortunately in both cases it was Paul. This is such a well known fact I can't believe he got it wrong.

If you want a book like this going through all the songs then pick up Ian McDonald's superb 'Revolution In The Head'.

If you don't view this as some sort of last and final word and just read it as a fellow Beatle fan's thoughts on songs you yourself have heard over and over again, it is a good book, filled with an intelligent point of view of someone you realize is qualified to give his version for it.

It's interesting and a good read, and it's not an unobjective as it first appeared. In the beginning, so much praise was heaped on Lennon, I thought this might be a book by a Lennon sycophant, but the praise stopped flowing as it did and went over to McCartney for awhile and then back again. That's when i knew the author did not really prefer one over the other. Actually, as a Lennon fan, I was bit irked over for what I thought was harsh words for "I am the Walrus" and proclaiming "Penny Lane" a masterpiece while reserving a lesser status for "Strawberry Fields," at one point saying it rode "Penny Lane's" coat-tails! But that's my own bias, and I realized it's certainly not the author's fault that he doesn't completely agree with me. In fact, he shouldn't, and I think alot of low scores for the book on this board are prompted by just that factor; people angry he doesn't agree with them!

As for Harrison, he does seem harsh, but I'll tell you, I agree with him there. "Only a Northern Song," "I need you," and some others from George are BAD songs and it's time someone starting SAYING THAT. He's not supposed to be untouchable.

Having said that, there seems to be alot of mistakes in this book that I noticed; and I should not be more informed about Beatle songs than someone who says they have done all this research writing a book on it. The author does not seem to realize that Paul wrote "Every Little Thing" becaue he says it is a Lennon psychodrama- no, it is a Paul psychodrama- Paul wrote it, John sings it- he also says Lennon wrote "Eight Days a Week," which was not true because it is a basically co-written song, with maybe even Paul writing most of it- but at the very least, it was 50/50. I also didn't like him stating Paul wrote the complete tune for "In My life," something Lennon always denied.

On page 312, talking about Come together, "The album's opening moments sinks a muffled "Shook!" into the first downbeat...
Lennon is actually singing "Shoot me!" so just how close is he listening to these songs?

But even taking all this in mind, it's a good book to read just to hear another fan's thoughts- look at it that way.

Though he does occasionally adopt a snippy tone that's off-putting, this is actually a good book. Riley basically wanted to write a book that placed an emphasis on musical analysis, often on a technical level. That's what he tries for, and for the most part, he delivers. It can be very dry if you're musically iliterate, but otherwise, it's a refreshing change of pace from other Beatles books.

In response to some of the inconsistent criticism below (one says there's too much analysis in the meaning of the songs, another says there isn't any outside of the instrumentation), there is a good dose of analysis that isn't strictly on a technical level, but I would hardly call it laughable; it certainly isn't as outrageous as the "Paul Is Dead" analysis that's still floating around, even though it's no longer taken seriously. I don't agree with some of it, but while many rock critics agree on what's a masterpiece, they often don't agree on what the same masterpiece may mean. Take Riley's opinion on what a song may mean as an honest opinion, not as a definitive statement.

Also, the audiophile here has some good comments. Most of you out there may not understand what he's talking about, but his assessment of the MFSL sources Riley listened to are accurate. HOWEVER, Riley does acknowledge that a variety of mixes exist (he gets some of the details wrong, but he gets the big picture right), and in the intro the implied preference to the stereo mixes is that it makes it easier to point out or talk about certain elements of the song because of the added instrumental separation. It would be great to go over the different mixes of a song and the impact it has on that recording, but that's something that would have to come from a record collector or a diehard audiophile as well as someone with an educational background in music.

And to the reviewer from California, first, a lot has changed in the last 30 years. Most rock fans would call Revolver the best album, not Sgt. Pepper, and the fact that Revolver has topped so many "100 Greatest Albums" fans' and critics' polls in the past year is solid proof of that. Second, "Blue Jay Way" is rarely considered a great example of Harrison's work, though it has its fans. Third, Riley is too harsh on Harrison in general, but some remarks are pretty good observations. As great as "Norwegian Wood" is, strictly on a technical level, the sitar playing is not 'good.' Harrison and Ravi Shankar have both stated this is many interviews. Harrison wasn't very familiar with the instrument yet (compare his playing on "Norwegian Wood" with the expert playing on "Inner Light," which isn't a better song but has better playing), but it was still used for the exotic texture it brings to the recording. Harrison's other accomplishments are still praised, like the 12-string on A Hard Day's Night and his massive growth as a songwriter. Sometimes too critical, but he often does give Harrison his due.

To the earlier reviewer, he does find flaws in later work like the White Album and Sgt. Pepper, but it's hardly a dismissal; Riley still thinks they're good, if flawed, works. The praise heavily outweighs the negative comments.

I agree that this isn't worth buying if you have the first edition. The second just adds another chapter that isn't worth reading. As for the analysis of the solo recordings, I agree he's too harsh on George's solo career. However, he doesn't dismiss all of Paul's work. His assessment of Paul's career (that it was very inconsistent and the best stuff often came on singles, not albums), is very consistent with most (except for McCartney fans, who are more forgiving). Even his argument that "Band on the Run" and "Tug of War," Macca's best post-Beatles albums, were overrated is a reflection of the backlash both albums have had over the years. I think "Band on the Run" is a little better than he gives it credit being, but he still makes a lot of valid points.

Overall, this book is still worth reading. It's not nearly as good as Peter Guralnick's Elvis books or Greil Marcus's "Mystery Train," and a real, definitive critical history of the Beatles is still missing, but in the meantime, this book makes for a good, if flawed read.