The story is a rather straightforward telling of gang murders and Batman solving the crimes. Some violence, but little complexity. I apologize for the mediocre rating -- it reflects my personal tastes but doesn't lessen the fact that I'd recommend this to Batman fans and fans of the medium. Grant Morrison writes a tight plot here, but there's really nothing new. As for the art, Klaus Janson has a jerky, rough style, but I really admire his composition if not his rendering. I had him as an instructor for graphic storytelling, and this guy really has depth to his storytelling -- every pane is a thoughtful and complex solution to a communication problem. Also - an inside scoop - in one of the panes, Batman appears with 6 fingers!

I personally consider the earlier stories in the "Legends of the Dark Knight" ongoing series the better ones, and this one (which collects #6-10) is no exception. Bruce Wayne is being plagued by a lot of nightmares about when he was a young boy lately. Each night he wakes up from a nightmare about his father to which he can relate no meaning. Meanwhile a man who calls himself 'Mr.Whisper', a man with no shadow, is rapidly killing off underworld members in brutal ways. The crime-leaders are heavily frightened and ask Batman for help, trying to make a deal. Batman refuses and tells them they're getting what they deserve. Back home he puts some things together for himself and realizes there may be a connection between Mr.Whisper and his nightmares. Because of that he decides to do some detective work after all to find out who this Mr.Whisper is. From there on a highly paranormal (which is quite extraordinary for a Batman book, but quite a trademark of Grant Morisson) story unfolds which leads Batman through memories of his days in private school and even to an eerie Austrian monastry, which he learns is the subject of an occult Austrian legend.

People who are into listening to scary 'true' stories by the campfire will probably like this a lot. It's like one of those stories you heard of which you just KNEW they weren't real, but gave you the chills anyway. That's also the case here. You go through the story asking yourself if what's going on is the legend being forfilled or if there's a more down-to-earth thing going on. Grant Morisson does what he does best, he's giving clues without giving it away, keeping the reader on his toes. Klaus Jansons art is suitable for the story and especially the way he draws the architectural backgrounds deserve some credit. I don't think many people who are into Batman comics will feel disappointed after reading this.

I'm a huge fan of all of Grant Morrison's work, from Zenith to the Invisibles. His work will make you think in a way that you never have before. If you're a fan of his work like I am, you should check out Brian Caldwell's novel, We All Fall Down. It's the Biblical Apocalypse done right- full of sex and violence and an angry young man who smokes and swears too much. I mention all of this here because the Antichrist in the novel has the peculiar name of Richard Grant Morrison, and when he begins talking about how humanity has to realize that they are five demensional creatures growing in the soil of space/time, you'll realize that that name isn't a coincedence. Check it out after you've read all of Grant's stuff.

As an Amazon.com reviewer, I can see that I am going to be in the decided minority in my opinion on this book. Hopefully I can adequately point out my perceived problems with Mr. Rowland's work, and yet maintain the positives other reviewers have posted.

I have long been fascinated with George B. McClellan as not only a Civil War general, but as a Civil War personality as well. Here we have a man who should have been the one, single, Union military success - a man who had it all: brains, looks, youth, education, and family. And yet, there is no single Union general who managed to accomplish so little in over a year's time, with so much.

I hoped that Thomas J. Rowland's "George B. McClellan & Civil War History: In the Shadow of Grant and Sherman" would provide some insight into McClellan's flawed character that did not come forth from modern biographers such as Stephen Sears. Yet within Rowland's work, I was sorely disappointed.

Rowland sets forth to disprove Little Mac's critics by doing the one thing in Civil War writing that I abhor - rather than building up his subject, and letting McClellan's story stand on its own - he sets out to drag everyone else down. For some strange reason, there appears to be more and more of this going on in Civil War historiography of late, much to the detriment of our understanding of history.

Rowland sets out to outline the perceived problems with McClellan's personality and generalship, and rather than refute the contentions directly, often sets out to discredit others such as Grant, Sherman, and Edwin Stanton. If Rowland's guy cannot stand tall, then no one else will, as well. For example, we have on page 67 a typical statement of Rowland's: "The notion that McClellan was the butt of more embarrassing incidents than anyone else is greatly diminished by any extended review of the war's comical and tragic mistakes." And from there, rather than review Little Mac, Rowland sets out to review other participants on history's stage.

Rowland attempts to minimize McClellan's flaws by qualifying his admittance of such flaws throughout the book. Thus, we see Rowland admit, cautiously, that McClellan could be petty, vain, and vindictive "on occasion." In other places, his review of other historian's work is tinged with statements like "Unfortunately, that is not entirely true." The reader is left to try to ponder which portions are partially true, and partially not.

This book is not a comprehensive analysis of the life and times of General George B. McClellan, but a selected bibliography of truth and half-truth that uses only what the author wants the public to see about McClellan - and more importantly, anyone else held in higher esteem than the Young Napoleon that can be drawn down to the perceived level that history holds McClellan.

All in all, this was a very disappointing work. If you want to come to grips with the enigma that was McClellan, this book will leave you very short of your expectations.

The author, Thomas J. Rowland, develops his thesis that General George McClellan has been unfairly characterized by both contemporaries and historians. The first half of the book discusses the common criticisms of McClellan. In Chapter 2 the so called psychological profile on McClellan is reviewed stating that "Of all the reasons why McClellan may have been a gravely flawed commander, the exploitation of the psychological model is the most flawed itself...." He notes that both Grant and Sherman "....trailed a significant baggage of personality deficiencies into the Civil War" observing that "If anyone came close to experiencing a psychic episode during the Civil War it was Sherman in Kentucky."

In the chapter discussing McClellan's lesser faults, the author notes that both Grant and Sherman had similar faults, but they weren't judged by these faults nor should McClellan's strategic abilities be evaluated by his peccadilloes. Acknowledging that McClellan played a major role in his poor working relations with Lincoln, the author notes that "....the president was not frank about how military goals were to be shaped by the political dimensions of the rebellion." In addition, Stanton's dislike of McClellan did not help in the commander's poor relationship with the president. However, the author does not imply that McClellan was faultless noting "....his failure to delegate authority and his obstinate secrecy" Another fault was his unwillingness to take risks. The greatest question is whether he made the best use of the Army of the Potomac. Rowland concludes that "In any comparison with other Civil War commanders, particularly those to whom he is unfavorably compared, McClellan's personal shortcomings were not that remarkable."

Chapter 4's discussion of the early months of war provides valuable insight into the ultimate conduct of the war. The widely held Northern belief that most Southerners were not committed secessionists initially led to a limited war strategy. After the First Manassas McClellan recommended that to restore the Union in the shortest time, the North had to "crust the rebellion at one blow...." Rowland notes "McClellan's was....a well reasoned strategic proposal. His conservative views.... reflected....widespread appeal throughout the North at that time...." In support of this strategy, he launched the Peninsula Campaign which was undermined by Washington politics and lack of support. The book states

"....the half defeat on the Peninsula.... spelled the end of the conciliatory" strategy. For this campaign to succeed, joint operations were mandatory; and the author observes that in the early stages of the war, the inability of Federal armies to cooperate in joint operations contrasted sharply with the military situation Grant inherited in 1864.

The review of civilian leaders alarm regarding Washington's safety is noteworthy. Extraordinary concerns for the capital's safety contrasted with months of endless nagging McClellan to assume the offensive. However the troops needed for an offensive had to come from those providing the capital's defense. Both McClellan and Grant faced the problem of Washington's safety with McClellan trying to comply and Grant often giving only limited support. The book concludes "McClellan's Peninsula campaign, the first major Federal offensive in East, experienced problems uniquely its own, not the least....was the administration's failure to sustain plans they had.... agreed to support." During the first two war years, many Northerners believed the Confederates would be quickly defeated perhaps in one major campaign. When McClellan assumed command in 1861, he inherited an untrained and disorganized army. The author notes that McClellan implemented schools of instruction and all volunteers were given basic training directed by an experienced officer. In addition, he recognized the deficit in trained officers (several were political hacks) and arranged effective training. The book frequently notes, that the training and organizing of the army was a major contribution. Considering, the sheer folly of his predecessor's taking an unprepared army to defeat at the First Bull Run, McClellan's unwillingness to assume the offensive in 1861 with an untrained army was prudent and not excessive caution. Unfortunately, in 1862, politics and lack of support doomed his Peninsula campaign.

Rowland writes "....little attention is paid to the context in which McClellan dealt with the difficulties that faced the Federal army in the first fifteen months of the war. ....his early tenure deprived him of the advantage of leading mature and seasoned civilian soldiers, adapted to the demands of a new age of warfare...." As one historian noted, McClellan "suffered the frictions and frustrations of being first." The text notes that Sherman observed that Napoleon took three years to build an army and "....here it is expected in ninety days..." The author notes the irony that McClellan was relieved of command when "He had effectively divided Lee's army into widely separated halves, intending to drive between them. The celerity of those moves alarmed Lee...." This could have been a critical blow.

The text continues that McClellan might have been forgiven a multiple of failures had he kept his eye on the military objective, the destruction of the Army of Northern Virginia. However, McClellan's strategy to capture Richmond was not without merit as Richmond was a critical manufacturing, transportation and financial center. The Tredegar Iron Works alone justified the capture of Richmond. Richmond's fall during the first two war years would have been devastating to the Confederacy. Regarding Antietam, Rowland correctly notes that regardless of McClellan's shortcomings, Antietam was a Union victory. McClellan had stopped Lee from delivering a demoralizing blow on northern soil.

The book concludes, "McClellan's strategy, though reflective of the unrealistic war aims of the years 1861-62,was cogent, reasoned, and consistent with conventional military wisdom.... McClellan can scarcely be elevated to the ranks of the great captains of war, but he was hardly the worst that the conflict dragged into the center stage."

The book is somewhat repetitious and devotes too much space to comparing McClellan's faults with similar faults of Grant and Sherman. However, the book is worth reading for its discussion of Union military and political strategy during the first two years of the Civil War.

Thomas J. Rowland set out to prove that, although George McClellan was not a great general, neither was he as bad as so many Civil War historians and writers have depicted him. I believe that he has succeeded. Having read Stephen Sears' classic biography on "Mac", I was certain that the definitive McClellan verdict was a fait accompli. How wrong I was! Historians T. Harry Williams, Kenneth P. Williams, and Bruce Catton were also cited for a less than even-handed assessment of McClellan. Still, one must add that Rowland did not maliciously criticize the intent of these historians. He merely pointed out that they needlessly made Lincoln, Grant, and Sherman--men who remain giants without anyone's help--larger than they should be, at McClellan's expense. After examining their records during the first two years of the war, each of these men showed less than a superlative level of performance, contrary to popular assumption. I think that Rowland's book is one of best buys I have ever made. A more superbly-written, well-argued, and illuminating book on George McClellan and his impact on the Civil War and its interpretation would be hard to find. It's great. Buy it!

I've been reading the graphic novels in order, and this is the best so far. Following the awful "JLA: Rock of Ages", "JLA: Srength in Numbers" is comprised of a number of shorter stories; each of which is filled with adventure and soul. Yes, these stories have a soul, or a spirit. One of which even brought tears to my eyes. I can't say any other comic in recent memory has had that effect on me. Zauriel is a great addition to the JLA team. Wonder Woman is under used. But as a whole, these stories worked to entertain and inspire. What else can you ask for?

Let me first preface this review with saying that I am probably the only one who hated Keith Giffen, et al's former version of the JLA. To me the JLA was never a joke and it was more than just a comic. They were, and continue to be, the World's Greatest Super Heroes. Strength in numbers impressed me enough to return to the world of comics after a 10 year absence and am I glad I came back! Three truly great writers--Waid, Morrison and the extremely underrated Christopher Priest (his work in conjunction with Sal Velluto on Black Panther is nothing short of sublime) have put the word SUPER back into superhero. Even the much maligned Aquaman seems to be embellished with a majesty that until now had not been before seen.

My one problem: the insertion of Barda and Orion into the team. Kirby was a god, but only he really knew how to handle them. Their membership makes the team too top heavy and make other more thoughtful characters like J'onn J'onzz, Zauriel and Aquaman seem as though they're out of place and awkward. But still an enjoyable read and a fine comicbook. Five stars for reinvigorating what thought to be a dying franchise--the super hero team book.

Teh JLA needs more tan the big seven to handle world threatening Threats which the threats just keep getting bigger and bigger. My only complaint. The Prometheus storyline(1st storyline) Where Prometheus figures a way to kill every one of the Jla Members except Superman(just read it!)This book is excellent, and people are saying that with the addititons of Plastic Man, Big Barda,Huntress,Orion,Steel,and oracle, Grant didn't put them there to take out Superman for steel, just to enhance the book to be more of an uncontrollable team which, most of the time aren't all together, because they go their separate ways, so why are you complaining, it puts the team into more of a powerful team that only assemble when extreme odds come against them (I.E) The Maggedon storyline from #34,36-41 which I thought was truly excellent(I won't get into it's awesomeness for now.) As of Ish 43 the team is cut down to 8 (The big seven and Plastic Man) just read this book and decide if more than twice in there were they fully united. NO.I seem arrogant don't I? (That's a rhetorcal question) In the Maggedon storyline every single super hero in the DC universe comes out and fights Maggedon with a few deaths( I won't tell you who.)

Like the magazine, this anthology of artist profiles is full of insights and fraught with distractions. I suppose I should start by coming out with my confession that I have always had, well, some slight **problems** with "No Depression"... To wit, I (and a few other people) have long regarded the magazine as more of a booster society for twangcore than as a vehicle for critical commentary... the reviews are generally non-critical and often adulatory of even the most marginally talented of bands. Such boosterism is all very well and fine -- it's a matter of preference, and in some ways is a refreshing change of pace from the snarkiness of say, "SPIN" or various indie-rock zines. But at the same time, there is something to be said for offering sincere criticism: if no one will point out the flaws in an artform, how can it be expected to grow? In a similar vein, the editorial slant at ND seems to encourage loose, personalized, expressive writing from its dozens of freelance contributors. Writers regularly interject themselves into their stories, or go out of their way to use quirky -- even show-offy -- phraseology and other purposefully-amatuerish techniques that come out of the 'zine ethos. At times this is rewarding to the reader. More often than not, though, I find it distracting and difficult to get around: if you're writing about Hank Williams, then tell me about Hank Williams; don't try to write a Homeric ode in his praise. The editorial hand seems light at "No Depression" -- perhaps they're just unwilling to offend contributors by offering actual guidance -- but they also seem to overvalue dense or lengthy prose as a way to persuade the reader of the gravity of what is being discussed. Ironically, in this regard "No Depression" has little to worry about -- it is clearly the leader of the pack in the current twang craze, so as music historians of the future look back at today's country-roots revival, ND will doubtless take on the authoritative stature that it tries so hard to project in the present day. For those of us in the here and now, we can amuse ourselves with the many insights into the artists we've come to know and love... For example, Allison Stewart's wry presentation of just what a pompous dweeb Will Oldham (of Palace/Brothers/Songs) actually is, or editor Grant Alden's hopelessly florid, but wonderfully informative, profile of alt-country legend Chip Taylor. For the very best of this beloved magazine, this is the book for you.

"No Depression" the book is a collection of highlights from the first three years of "No Depression" magazine (roughly 1995-1997), which is the bible of the so-called "Alternative Country" music movement. Personally, I am a big fan of the music and own CDs by roughly half of the three dozen or so featured artists. The articles include written snapshots of such alt. country luminaries as Son Volt, Wilco, Blue Mountain, Steve Earle, Bottle Rockets and Whiskeytown. The articles are reprinted verbatum from the magazine and there are no updates for features written several years before the book was published. Unlike the magazine, there are unfortunately no photographs.

Overall, the writing and reporting are of high quality. "No Depression" allows you to get to know artists who the mainstream music press have largely ignored. That said, it is rather limited in its scope. I would also have enjoyed a CD review section, but all you get instead is a list of the best 101 alt. country CDs of all time as picked by the editors of the magazine. While the book isn't perfect, it is still a good read for those of us who love the music.

In 1995, longtime music journalists Peter Blackstock and Grant Alden stumbled their way into running a magazine. Actually, it started off as a 32 page cut and paste newsletter, but when first-issue sales surprisingly topped the entire print-run of 3,000 copies, the partners found themselves leading a legion of dedicated music fans, all itching to read about this new alt-country phenomenon. No Depression is about serving their community, and embracing the as yet uninitiated, or unaware, into the gentle fold of post-modern twang-rock.

After three years as No Depression magazine's editing team, Blackstock and Alden carefully selected thirty-eight artist interview and profiles, some offering more depth than others, to serve as this book-length introduction for would-be fans. Blackstock and Alden have sewn a patchwork of insightful vignettes together, hoping to indulge the reader in the warmth and snuggle of a culturally rich alt-country scene between matte paperback covers.

Interviews and profiles run the gamut from legends Waylon Jennings and Jason & the Scorchers up through the 1990s revival and rock-country infusions of artists like Whiskeytown, Wilco, Son Volt, and Iris Dement. As the only definitive volume on the genre, the collection provides a much-needed history lesson for the under-informed, yet enthusiastic twenty-something alt-country enthusiasts.

And what exactly is alt-country? Speckled with occasional lofty intellectualisms and metaphorical definitions, if nothing else, a close read might yield a college English major's understanding of post-modern, deconstructionist tendencies in contemporary music (occasionally it gives the impression of thesis work.) Through it all though, a tangible definition speaks through a friendly, barstool, next-door conversational style. In his profile of Austin bluegrass-punkers the Bad Livers, Grant Alden offers a resonant clutch-line of insight: "Straight lines rarely happen in nature, and it's the colliding arcs that are responsible for most of what's worth listening to." In fact, Blackstock and Alden hesitate to define alt-country at all, instead preferring to elevate original, informed musicians from the sticky mess of bubblegum top 40 bands so pervasive on the airwaves of corporate radio. The volume's parenthetical subtitle bears more significance than any definition might convey. Whatever alt-country is, original perspectives are something we can all appreciate.

This book is trying to give an overview of each of the twelve Roman Caesars. Overall I was looking for more of an exciting telling of the story with some action, suspense, and maybe a little decadence thrown in for good measure. What I got was a textbook best suited for a college campus. The writing was so labored I wondered why the author chose this line of work, recipes have more punch and creativeness in the writing. I truly struggled to get to the half way point of the book before I gave up. Now let me add that this is not a main interest topic for me so maybe my review is not reflective of a person that is really into the Roman's.

I don't think this book is out of print anymore because I recently bought the hardcover edition (new) at a big chain store. You can get it used as well. Anyway, I finally finished this thing. It took awhile to read because I found myself cross referencing a few of the chapters with Grant's recommended reading list and I ended up reading three other books while I was reading this one. Overall a very good volume and an easy one to read if you are a novice in classical history. Grant has always done a great job with somehow making a complex topic easy to read for the masses. He covers the first twelve emperors adequately, but to get more out of each one you really need to purchase a separate book on each of the emperors. I liked this book because it gave a good overview of each of them and I was intrigued enough about the lives of a few of them to go out and buy an additional book. If you want a good overview of the emperors without much detail then this is a great book, but it lacks depth into the time period for obvious reasons. You could not cover everything in a volume this size. It is a good book to get you started and to find out what aspect of ancient Rome you are interested in.

Conspiracy, suspicion, power, corruption, poison, conquests, marauders, murders and more murders. Such is the history of Roman Empire. Then again there are copious examples from every nation's history of such dastardly acts to grab power, from Egyptians pharos, to Bourbons, to Indian Moguls, to British royalty. Human nature has changed very little in two thousand years. Now instead of murdering opponents, we vilify them to such an extent that populace loathes and discards them in the garbage bin. Grant discounts Lord Acton's polemical quote "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Later Lord Acton had modified in saying that too much responsibility coupled with intense fear of life corrupts absolutely. It is very hard to imagine for us, normal souls, with two thousand years separation, what would we do if we were given absolute power over everybody and every thing. But would we resort to killing our own mother like Nero, or have sexual relationships with sisters, like Caligula. It is quite possible if Nixon were the Roman Empire and Watergate exploded on the stage, he would not have hesitated in having few senators, congressmen dispatched in due haste. If there are any good emperors, the vote should go to Augustus, starting from nothing, except, Julius Caesar's adopted nephew, to emerge as victor, after defeating all his rivals, one by one including Mark Anthony and his beloved Cleopatra. Vespatian can also be called a hero to come up the ranks from an ordinary family to start a dynasty and consolidate Rome after bitter civil war.

Aggripina the younger stands out among all the women ,( if one can discount Livia, Augustus wife in Graves incomparable "I, Claudius", where he portrays Livia as villai) who is married to aging Claudius, the fourth emperor. She runs the kingdom in his name and manages to bypass Claudius own son and places her son, Nero on the throne. How does Nero reward her? He lets her go out on a faulty boat to drown. What are sons for?

Few emperors, imperators were tyrants, megalomanias and sadists and most of them were murdered by conspiracy. Why any body wanted to be one is puzzling as no doubt they all knew the history so well. So Lord Acton is right. It is human nature to lust for Absolute power.

The Roman history is fascinating read of human nature, ambition, treachery, power and above all its glory.

As I initially thumbed through this book, I had the normal range of emotions that one would expect: dismay, shock, paranoia, dread, confusion, and bewilderment. As you may have guessed, I am a recent graduate from university, and those emotions are central to any recent grad who is attempting to cope with the reality of... reality. Dr. Mohamadi has provided me with a method to deal with my full range of emotions, and he has done so in fewer pages than the bible. Yes, I said the Bible. It is also a better read.

Though Dr. Mohamadi does seem to digress occasionally by discussing countries like Yemen, overall this is a solid first effort. If possible, I would have awarded this book with 6 stars.

This upstart author has seen his stock swell since his most recent book was released. Despite a poor Amazon.com sales ranking, Kaplan has decided to push Guide to Fellowships and Grants 1999 into a second round of publishing! Indeed, this text is pithy and pregnant with detailed information regarding fellowships and grants ranging in emphasis from Caribbean medican fellowships to research grants dealing with alternative lifestyle studies (a personal favorite!) I just can't get enough of Mr. Mohamadi, and I eagerly await his next thrust into the literary "back-door" of study AIDS. Cheers!

A thorough, methodical and painstaking look into the world of fellowiships. Any good library must contain this authoritative masterpiece. I look forward to future works by Mr. Mohamadi.

Without going into detail criticing the book, let me just say this: It is easy for people to take relatively ambiguous statements out of the Bible ("there will be wars and rumors of wars" is rather vague for one) and present them in a manner to prove your personal point. It is extremely easy for certain authors, such as these, to gather up a bunch of scary facts (like this is the only time the world has been a scary place), try to match them to the Bible, and then conclude the end of the world is near. I would argue that the reader should take into account what these authors say, but not take them seriously until they've found good reason. (For one, the notion of a one-world government the anti-christ will impose upon the world and use to attack Christians is always a favorite.... but not entirely founded in Scriptural reading either). If one remembers just one thing when reading this book, it should be that a good and truthful book does not have to use their evidence with the obvious intention of scaring you into their idea.

This book makes it frighteningly clear that the end of time is fast approaching. This book covers every insight ranging from the technological aspect (e.g.- TV, the Internet, etc.) to the Middle East struggles that continue as we speak. Without a doubt I recommend this book for anyone into studying prophecy. This book does get rather in depth, but is well-suited for those who have studied Revelation before. I fully recommend it.

This is an amazing book. It made me realzie that the end of the world is, in fact, upon us. I was not so wise two years ago, and I missed my ride on the spaceship with my fellow San Diegans, but this book has made me realize that I must now repent and save my soul before the world pays for its sins.

Based on a true story about Eastern's Flight 401 that crashed in the Everglades in 1972. The book covers not only technical aspects of an airplane disaster, but also covers the human side. Sightings of the pilot, Captain Bob Loft, and the flight engineer, Don Repo, on planes with recycled parts of the doomed, 401 flight are reported by respected airline crew members as well as passengers. Eastern, of course, denied all. But the author was able to speak with many individuals in the airline industry and came to believe what he was hearing. Whether you believe in the after-life or not, this book raised many questions that there's not always an answer too.

Very good book. I read it because I was supposed to be on this flight but for some unexplainable reason my mother (I was 3) decided to leave a day earlier.

This real-life supernatural incidint book is about an Eastern Airlines L-1011 crash in the Everglades in the early 70's. All cockpit crew was killed. Leter, two pilots from the crash start showing up on the plane. They often give info on a problem that may occur on the plane, and tells one of the flight crew. Information was gathered about many incidents happening on the Eastern planes. Eventually, enough informatin was gathered to ground the L-1011 Jumbo Jet

This, like Arkham Asylum, is not Morrisson's best. It still is good though, though it is not very clear what happened, why the murder. Mabye inferring and guessing are parts of his intentions but that is simply nothing for me. The story has fantastic high points... and parts impossible to understand. I know people tend to get all excited about not understanding, thinking that the writer is very clever and that that is the reason we do not underdstand, but no I don't think that is an ablity I think it is very easy to write something no one can understand and give it an aura of mistery. Some people, like with Arkham Asylum, are blown away by the art, which is fantastic. But great art does not make a great story, never has and never will. Still, the characters are well created and the atmosphere and dialogues some times are very good.

Not one of Morrison's best, but still a good story.

Incredible watercolor artwork by Muth... 'nuff said

I'm a huge fan of all of Grant Morrison's work, from Zenith to the Invisibles. His work will make you think in a way that you never have before. If you're a fan of his work like I am, you should check out Brian Caldwell's novel, We All Fall Down. It's the Biblical Apocalypse done right- full of sex and violence and an angry young man who smokes and swears too much. I mention all of this here because the Antichrist in the novel has the peculiar name of Richard Grant Morrison, and when he begins talking about how humanity has to realize that they are five demensional creatures growing in the soil of space/time, you'll realize that that name isn't a coincedence. Check it out after you've read all of Grant's stuff.

Monthly it seems I run into someone telling me, "You know, if we could only find someone to write a grant for us..." Grant writing is hard work. It demands some expertise in communication, relationship building and technical writing. When you are not sure where to start, this is the book for you. We have used this to develop several grant proposals.

It is not a guide for starting small businesses, it is for the organization or non-profit that needs an infusion of cash to make their dreams happen. The truth is, funds are out there waiting for someone that can present their case lucidly, with creativity and intelligence.

This volume includes sections such as: proposal ideas, selecting a funding source, writing the proposal (with each section outlined). It additionally includes a large number of helpful forms, checklists and evaluation materials.

As mentioned by other reviewers, the greatest need is now for a new edition. The Internet does offer a whole new world of funding opportunities and methods. Still, with this book and some simple search engine tools, you would be able to utilize the latest technologies with the basics of this book to develop your funding proposals.

I have been a K-12 education grantwriter for ten years, and have read a number of books on the subject of writing grants. In fact, I used to write reviews for a column in a national fundraising magazine. Mary Hall's book is by far and away THE BEST I have ever come across. I use it as my personal bible, and recommend it to anyone who wants to write a solid proposal.

This book is a must for anyone involved in writing grant proposals. It is very popular at our library, and the copies we own are in almost constant use. I would like to see an updated edition released with web information included, but until then, this book is one of the best on the market.