This doctor is so concieted he thinks he is the only one who knows any thing about backs. Backs are made up of more than just the spine. Other problems can be present but he doesn't believe this. I would not recomend this book to anyone.

What I remember liking the most, are his various explanations of back pain, how most of us get it, what we can do to get rid of fit, and most important - how to avoid it.
He also puts plain words on all the Chiro/etc techno-talk and what it all boils down to.
I read it over 5 years ago - haven't seen a chiro since. Have I been without any pain - no. But the bouts are few & far between + I know what to do - and it's never so bad I must stay in bed or sitting all day long.
I had been going to chiros for over 20 years and they had never been able to resolve it. (The last one was actually very nice - and did give me some decent guidlines - which all others before had failed to do).
I don't remember if he says it these words, but modern back pain is a combo of several things : mainly inactivity, weight problems and bad sitting habits. Our backs are precious - we should take better care of them.
Mr. Hall

I've had two episodes where I was flat on my back with a herniated disc for an entire month. This book explains how your back works and how to take care of it. It's easy reading. It's clear, concise and useful. I've given copies to family and friends and would recommend it to anyone.

A solid science fiction effort. Certainly no classic, but generally well written and interesting. The story unfolds nicely as the residents of a small city try to find out why the world around them has changed so much (and why they are still alive!) after a nuclear bomb hits their town. City at World's End is 1950's science fiction and not for all taste. It will probably be enjoyed most by those who enjoy Ray Bradbury or the original Star Trek TV series.

This book's strong opening chapter confronts scientists with the unthinkable: a superatomic bomb has fallen on Middletown, a small American city hiding a secret antiatomic laboratory, servering it from its surroundings; the sun is now red and drawn out, the moon is unrecognizable, the temperature is low. Various hypotheses are considered to explain all of this, and the most unlikely might well be the one closest to the truth. After the initial event has occurred, transmission of knowledge proceeds in a myriad of interesting ways: between scientific and non-scientific Middletownians at first, but then between strangers from the future - some apparently human, some not - and scientific Middletownians (who take on the role of their non-scientific peers because of their relative ignorance). Even though they generally remain on the good side, the 20th century humans' role is decently complex and shows a nuanced way of approaching the space opera subgenre of science-fiction: they frequently reverse roles with 'the other' and even become an historical curiosity under the eye of an historian from the future. This novel's structure is careful, every step being taken with a studied internal cohesion and sense of pace. Its position on science remains ultimately optimistic, but it does acknowledge some of the dangers it could cause and offers an original kind of civilization shock.

With a bizarre premise, this novel explores a possible future of mankind and how people from today (1957) would handle the situation.

This book probably deserves 2-3 stars for the quantity of information it contains, but the quality is quite another matter. Throwing warrior peoples in with fighting groups, e.g. the Green Berets or the Long Range Desert Group from World War Two, simply lumps together units which have little or no connection (beyond merely being warriors) except possibly in the mind of the authors. The result is a work which has no conceptual coherence apart from whatever interest the authors may stimulate in their audience.

Even taking this work on its own terms, there are many omissions among "warrior peoples;" only the best-known are included, such as Gurkhas in the Indian or British Army, or Zulus from South Africa. Others who have ben labeled in this fashion, such as the Ila of Zambia or the Ngoni of Malawi and Mozambique, simply aren't here. But the Sikhs are included, despite their assigned role in British India as police, not soldiers. So it is conceived in vague, even misleading terms.

The grossest flaw, however, is that "warrior peoples" simply do not exist, except in the colonial mindset that pigeonholed and then drafted/enlisted them. The term is presumably updated from "warrior races," which is archaic to say the least. But no peoples are naturally more suited to be warriors than others; their history or circumstances may impel them or compel them to combat, but not heredity. People may resemble a warrior race if one looks only at the warriors, but this slights the full range of human endeavor pursued by all human groups.

There are also some factual errors which tend to limit the book's value for reference, and the deceptively long bibliography omits key works which might aid readers (and the authors) in critically analyzing their preconceptions. Cf. Cynthia Enloe's book "Ethnic Soldiers," and Anthony Kirk-Greene's article "Damnosa Hereditas," in Ethnic and Racial Studies.

Though this book has been recommended by reviewers for high-school students and other readers, it may actually interfere with their understanding by encouraging them to think in terms of ethnic and racial stereotypes. For those willing to think critically, rather than stereotypically, about warfare's relation to forms of group identity, this book is simply not satisfactory.

This book is fantastic! I learned more in two days with this book than an entire semester in a college classroom. I love the writing. Some of the pieces read like novels. I do wish there were more illustrations, but one can't have everything. And I agree with the review by Clint from Texas that the guy from Turtle Island or where ever definitely has an agenda. ... Whoever reads this, listen to me, "this book belongs in your collection." I just hope there is a volume two in the works.

After reading the first review from Turtle Island, I wonder if he is reading the same book that I am. After some reflection, it occurs to me that the reviewer has much more of an issue with his own limited perceptions than with this book. I found WARRIOR PEOPLES to be informative, educational, VERY useful as a research tool, and amazingly well-written. It would be interesting to see what actual credentials the Turtle Island reviewer possesses; he certainly cites no concrete examples, but instead engages in unfounded and obviously biased criticisms. I give WARRIOR PEOPLES five stars; any military historian or history buff would do well to have this book in their libraries.

Unfortunately, although Hamilton has aquired Harvic's interesting character Miss Seeton, he has lost a good deal of the former's charm. Carvic's books had an amazing way of having logical actions result in illogicaland humorous consequences. I find Hamilton starting from illogical actions AND situations. I much prefer the original work by Carvic.

This book is a must for Miss Seeton fans. I have copies of all the Seeton books and have enjoyed every one. All of the Crane versions are well written and have stayed true to Carvic's depiction of the characters, but this one comes closest to the humor in the original Carvic versions.

FOR YOUR EYES ONLY: When Miss Seeton's Finest Hour came out, it was not as well done as earlier books, and I got the impression perhaps Crane is tiring of the character; that this might be the last Seeton book she plans to undertake. I hope I am wrong. If not, I hope the Carvic estate can find another good writer to continue the character.

Ms. Seeton adventures are the best reads that I have come across. I am a thirty something that loves these types of British sleuthing novels. I re-read these novels several times a year, I have them all. My favorite used bookstore in Los Angeles had the entire series out of out-of-print ones, so I stocked up on all of them at once. They were over with too quickly. .... Maybe I should have waited and only gotten one book a month!!

They are truly one of a kind. I love the time period and the many scrapes that she seems to fall into. They're truly hilarious, while the novels maintain the suspense. I love Britain and try to get to London and environs once every couple of years or so.

I bought this after reading Dalrymple's Age of Kali. Sadly, as excellent as that book is, this one is a total mess. First of all, there is way way too much extra info on things unconnected to Polo's trek along the Silk Road. You basically need a degree in the History of the Middle Ages to figure out the obscure references. I got the idea Dalrymple was showing off. Considering he supposedly knows all this arcane stuff, how come this obvious well-educated guy spends much of his trip searching for people who speak English to help him? Did he not use his vastly developed cranium to think of buying a few pharsebooks before heading out?

Add to this he is, for want of a better word and no hate mail please, pussywhipped by the two females he travels with. One is so much of in a hurry to blitz across to the Indian subcontinent it's annoying beyond belief.

With much better editing, this could have been as brilliant as Age of Kali. It is still a decent read but Dalrymple would be wise to read "Chasing Che" to see how to put together a follow-in-the-footsteps-of-the-greats travel book.

Erudite,funny, exciting, and amazing in its author's breadth of knowledge - especially considering his youth. Much enhanced by the attitudes of his female co-adventurers.

Like all of Dalrymple's books to date, this early one is rich in scholarship, which is spoon fed to the reader in the author's inimitable style. Buy it!

Before reading this work, I looked upon it as very promising. Read, in contrast the vast majority of other historians of the era, proposes to analyze and contrast the political philosophies of four major early Americans by examining their views on the relationship between power and liberty. Thus, the author is also in effect transcending the trite republicanism/liberalism dichotomy that has domincated scholarship for decades by returning to the methodology used by the great Bernard Bailyn. Unfortunately, the author ultimately fails to execute.

Madison is the first thinker that he discusses, and along with the chapter on Wilson, this is the highlight of the book. He effectively argues that Madison was a much more consistent thinker than past scholars have made him out to be. While Madison's transformation from an ally to Hamilton during the Constitutional Convention to a strong opponent several years later has long puzzled historians, Read demonstrates the consistenty that he maintained in both positions as related through his interpretation of the Constitution and the public's understanding and perception of it. In addition to this, he also undertakes the strangely neglected task of comparing Madison with Hamilton. This however, leads the first major downfall of the study, viz. his unsound analysis of Hamilton.

To begin with, even the subtitle of this chapter is enough to arouse one's suspicions. Hamilton is characterized as a "Libertarian and nationalist." The later appelation is certainly undisputable, but the former is clearly absurd to anyone who has any idea what libertarianism actually entails. Throughout the chaper, Hamilton's supposed commitment to liberty and other traditional Whig or republican principles is given far too much emphasis with far too little substantive evidence. Along with this, Hamilton's views on Constitional and economic policy are given a shallow, sympathetic treatment, while other aspects of his life and thought are either ignored or merely glossed over. This of course, largely serves to vitiate the very promising contrast of Hamilton with Madison that he conducts.

Nevertheless, the chapter on James Wilson is quite valuable, especially since he, unlike the other 3 figures dealt with, has been prodominantly ignored by modern scholars. He shows that while Wilson was as committed to the concept of popular sovreignty as Thomas Jefferson, he believed that the proper manner to systemize this was primarily through the Federal government. Hence, Wilson, like Hamilton, was a proponent of "energetic government," because he viewed it as the proper systemization of the "energy" of the sovereign people.

Although the chaper on Hamilton was bad, that dealing with Jefferson is worse. Read, quite correctly, recognizes throughout the work that Jefferson, (unlike Madison, Hamilton, and Wilson) viewed power and liberty as polar opposites, with every increase of power entailing a proportionate decrease in liberty. T Surprisingly , however, his actual analysis of his thought is among the worst that I have ever read. He seems to make a concerted effort to make his political philosophy as nebulous and contradictory as possible. Moreover, while he cites David N. Mayer's invaluable work on Jefferson's Constitutional thought, and even states that fellow scholar Michael Zuckert helped him with the work; he utilizes the flawed and inaccurate work of Lance Banning and Richard Matthews. As a result of this, he takes up the absurd contention that Jefferson was an agrarian who opposed capitalism, and thus Hamilton and his radical vision for a new economic order.

This view, in addition to being completely unfounded, also highlights the paucity of Read's sources. Such important works as Joyce Appleby's "Capitalism & A New Social Order" and Garret Sheldon's "The Political Philosophy of Thomas Jefferson" are completely ignored.

While the analysis of Jefferson's thought is dramatically poor, perhaps the worst aspect of the work is the author's translation of views of each thinker to the politcal landscape of the late 20th century. For the first three thinkers, he manages to claim that their theories may actually be able to fit modern day circumstances. Jefferson, however, is excluded from this, given his radical views on power. In each case, he uses the common statist platitude that convictions formulated two centuries ago cannot apply to issues out of their temporal context. In the case of all of these men, even Hamilton, this argument is patently absurd, as their adherence to the principals of natural rights and liberty certainly make clear. As Jefferson once said, Nothing...is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man." Consideration of this, among other Founding principles, has led even as staunch a Hamiltonian as Forrest McDonald to conclude the Founding Fathers would look upon the current government as tyrannical. As should be obvious, I view this work as very deeply flawed. Nevertheless, given the proper author utilizing the same methodology, this could have been a truly fascinating and valuable piece of scholarship.

Recent scholarship has revealed a much more consistent 'Madison' than some historians have granted 'The Father of the Constitution'.Scholars Rosen, Banning, and Rakove have lead the way in this regard. Reads contribution although brief is as Rakove pointed out a deft work.By highlighting the concerns Madison held about the excresent powers of the Continental Congress, amidst the environment where the Congress was frustrated from performing the assigned tasks, revitalizes and reinforces the devotion Madison held for Constituional integrity reconciling the thoughts and actions of Madison in the 1780s, to the 1790s. It is only wished this essay could be expanded, and that the author could apply a more expanded study on Madison's contributions.

Dr. James Read was a recent guest on National Public Radio. His scholarship is evident, but what he has written here is a very "user-friendly" exploration of the early American debate on the role of government, which is as pertinent today as it was in 1776.
Dr. James Read has given us a highly readable, as well as well researched, look at a question which all Americans ponder: "Is big government antagonistic to individual rights and liberties?" The discussion is framed in the context of those early American thinkers who initially set up the American system of government with an especial emphasis on Jefferson and Hamilton.
This is a very readable book that is written in straightforward prose. It presents a nice, concise history of America's early philosophical public policy issues, its greatest thinkers, and the debate in the 18th century about what form the American government would take. It is fascinating to read about the debates taking place in the hammering out of the United States' Constitution.
The book is organized into:
Power and Liberty (James Madison);
Libertarianism and nationalism (Alexander Hamilton);
Popular Sovereighty (James Wilson);
Liberty and States Rights (Thomas Jefferson).

I reviewed this book hoping to find a decent introductory overview of the history and basics of music. At the start, this text looked promising. It featured an accompanying interactive CD set with samples of the music overviewed in the text and appeared to cover a wide range of music.

What I found was thoroughly dissappointing - not necessarily the material itself, but the way the book was written. A reoccurring theme of political correctness made me want to gag at times, and at others it prompted only dissapointment at important parts of the history of music that were neglected in the place of politically correct anecdotes about multi-culturalism and entire chapters devoted to obscure composers who are included solely because they happened to be female.

The politically correct themes of this 500 page book ranged from the casual use of extreme PC terminology such as "Before the Common Era" (BCE) instead of the now politically incorrect "Before Christ" (BC) to more bizarre ventures into the realm of modern artistic "Electronic Music." At times the attention paid to modern eccentricism is an embarrassing reflection upon the author in my mind. He names and gives brief biographies of more obscure post modernists, figures in "electronic" music, and neo-romanticist composers than he does for the ENTIRE BAROQUE AND CLASSICAL PERIODS OF MUSIC COMBINED.

The detriment of doing this does not go unnoticed. The author completely neglected any mention whatsoever of the contributions of significant composers including Georg Philip Telemann, Dimitri Kabelevsky, Arthur Sullivan (of Gilbert and Sullivan), William Byrd, and Gustav Holst. Similarly the contributions of Correlli, Johann Strauss, Elgar, Couperin, Gluck, CPE Bach, Orff, Borodin, and countless others recieve only brief mentions of a line or two.

Amazingly, after having left out so many significant composers, the author finds room to devote the better part of an entire chapter to the obscure Baroque era harpsichordist Elisabeth-Claude Jaquet De La Guerre and even features a composition of hers, even though she was known more as a musician than a composer and even though her musical contribution was far less than any of the above mentioned composers who were neglected by the author. Jaquet De La Guerre, at best, is an obscure footnote in the history of music, especially compared to giants like Johann Strauss (who was largely neglected) and composers of some of the most significant works of music in history, such as Holst (the Planets), Orff (Carmina Burana), and Corelli (father of the concerto grosso, an important musical form itself that was also discussed in only a sentence or two by the author).

Almost laughably, the author, in light of all his omissions, takes time out to mention modern "ska" music, Curt Cobain, the Mighty Mighty Bosstones, "Ice Cube," Michael Jackson, and the Jefferson Airplane. At least the reader can rest assured that the Jefferson Airplane got paid more attention by the author than one of the most prolific composers in history (Telemann)!

There is a newer version - eighth edition

I had read this book when I was a music student, and thought, at the time, it was one of the most interesting books ever assigned by any teacher. I am now a music teacher and have been recommending this book to the students who came to me asking for a good music appreciation book. To say everyone is happy with the book is to understate the fact. The book, indeed, speaks for itself!

I really wanted to like this book because I love mysteries and have always been fascinated with Mexico and its history (and the research of the book seems flawless, at least to this non-expert). And the writing is swift, clean, almost humorous sometimes. In fact, I'd call it 3/4 of a good (not great) book. But it nosedives into implausibility and oversimplification. A quick "readable" disappointment.

I grabbed this book because I'm fascinated with Mayan history.I was sorry I spent the time on it. Although the historical information was quite good, the mystery was awful: cardboard characters, an obvious villian, unbelievable dialog, overuse of the same adjectives over and over. The author even interrupts the climax to explain the theme to us poor, brain-dead readers.

This book only deserves two stars (rather than one) for its excellent historical research, which is well presented. As a mystery, it's horrid. I play to say far away from Lyn Hamilton in the future. However, if anyone would like to read a good Mayan-history based book, Pat Murphy's "The Falling Woman" (Tor) is a fantastic book. It's not a mystery, rather a fantasy or magical-realism book, but it's quite wonderful and has all the element that this book lacks.

Well done Ms. Hamilton! A great plot ! You must have done a lot of historical research ! Great idea to combine a murder, with all the suspense related to, with a real scenario and some history behind. I read this book just coming back from my holiday in Yucatan, and believe me you call just have the Maya-Yucatan feeling by reading this book !

Lara Mc Clintoch owner of an antiquary shop in Toronto receives a phone call from Mr. Castillo, betting to join him in Merida, Yucatan. He will explain here then, but when she arrives he disappears. Curious, she wants to discover why the professor called her so misteriously.

From now Lara gets deeper and deeper in a mistery that is connected with the Mayan history and she needs all here knowledge in that to understand what happens, and why enemies look like friends and friends look like enemies.

Carmichael has been discredited. To the extent that "Black Power" induced Afro-Americans to step up the pace and scope of black advancement in our society, it was a positive and welcome influence. To the extent that BP was the precursor to current-day notions of mindless multiculturalism and "institutional racism" it did us all, black and white, a grave insult. For an example of what oppression REALLY looks like, see Cuba.

After reading this book I began to think of many different things about myself. At first the book seemed kind of dull but give it a chapter or so and you won't want to put it down. This book gives references of the once again if you've read any other of my reviews by the people for the people. This book deals with big politics and community politics. It offers approaches as a person to realize the problems of the inner city but not so much but how blacks are being taken advantage of. This book is an insight into how businesses in the black community should under contracts be forced to spend at least ten to twenty percent of their earnings in the black community on schlorships, helping businesses,helping the homeless,etc. It gives case studies of different black comunities and how they confronted the powers that be. This book is a must read for all blacks, going into the next political change for us to understand where this system of government between Gore and Bush will leave minorities for the next term. This will also give non-minorities a chance to see what are the struggles that us as so called minorities go through that some quite can't understand. Everyone reading this review stay peaceful in your endeavers and life and stay focused, Assalaamu Alaykium

I first read this book in 1993, after reading this book again it gives a not only a revealing truth of the american black experience, but a foundation for these beliefs and clear logical thought which makes this book a MUST READ and not just angry rhetoric printed on paper.

The writing is pallid. The illustrations are numbingly bad. This is an excellent example of what a children's book should not be -condescending, smarmy, hollow and hokey. If it weren't for Julie Andrews Edwards' name on the cover, this book would be a hard sell at a vanity press. Julie, Julie, Julie! This regrettable foray is to children's literature what your topless scene in "Victor, Victoria!" was to drama. Only the topless scene made more sense.
Please, spare the lives of future trees and brain cells. Let Dumpy be pulped.
(...)

Dumpy the dumptruck lives on a farm with a family. His particular favorite family member is Charlie, a little boy. It's Christmas Eve, and Charlie can't get to sleep. He hears a noise and realizes Santa Claus has crashed his sleigh. Christmas will be ruined if Santa can't deliver the toys to the children of the world, so volunteers get Dumpy to help. It's now up to Dumpy to save Christmas for everyone.

This is a very creative book, and a must read this Christmas.

Dumpy Saves Christmas should be nominated for the Caldecott metal for outstanding illustrated juvenile books. I am pleased that Julie Andrews, her daughter, and her ex-husband are able to collaborate in writing such an imaginative series of Dumpy the Dump truck books. This book has an unusual twist from the traditional Santa Claus and reindeer story. This book is an excellent addition to any child's Christmas library. I am buying several copies of this book for Christmas gifts as well as keeping a copy for myself.