Martinez' story of Evita is riveting. This book is one whirlwind of internal questioning. What's true and what causes the book to be labeled fiction? Are the events in Evita's life documentable? Does the author love or hate her? Do I love or hate her? I finally surrendered to the narrative force of the story, believing it, yet not being able to recount the fantastic and inspirational stories to others as fact. Which I wish I could, since it is such a good story. No dry biography of Evita will touch her essence as much as this courageous ex-patriate's. Evita proves that one will can impact millions. A definite read for all Latin American fiction fans, world-perspective lovers, and people with big plans.

Where does reality end and fiction begins? I don't know, and after I've read this book, I really don't care. I've read quite a few things about Evita's life and her death, but this is by far the best I've ever read. The author does a wonderful job weaving the stories about Evita, her virtues and shortcomings, the people who loved her and hated her passionately. Personally, I have mixed feelings about Evita: I admire her deeply for her courage and ambition; she had been insignificant, her chances to become what she became practically nil, and yet she is considered a mother, a manipulator, a despot, a saint, decades after her death. From that point of view, I can almost overlook her ruthlessness, her bitterness, and the way she twisted things to suit her. Personal feelings aside, if the facts about her life aren't enough to get you hooked on this book, the circumstances surrounding the fate of her embalmed corpse are more then enough to draw you into the story. Be careful, though, because even after you put the book down, you still will feel Evita's magnetism pulling at you.

While claiming to be a novel, much of what is written in this macabre book is documentable as fact. The lines between fact and fiction are hazy at best; but this enhances the fascination with the story of a novelist obsessed with Eva Peron as he researches her profound effect on her people, and as he searches out the trail her body took in the 17 years after her death. With accidental murder and possible necrophilia involved, this is not a light tale, but it's engrossing; for poetry fans, there seems to be a deliberate parallel drawn between the cult of Evita and the cult of Sylvia Plath. Truly a fascinating and frightening story

In children's literature, the main character usually is the cover subject and title such as "Charlotte's Web," "Froggy Plays Soccer," and even "Harry Potter," because the targeted audience is assumed not to be sophisticated enough to interpret indirect meanings.

Then there is the trio of Jon, Lane and Molly, who, like Maurice Sendak, love to thumb their noses at convention. "Squids Will Be Squids," (a play on "it is what it is," perhaps?) is not about the ocean life of squids - it is a collection of wacky stories with morals. Apparently young readers were sophisticated enough to figure that out using the cover art and cheeky tone as their guide.

The five and nine-year old I read this book with laughed with abandon even if they didn't always get the inside jokes behind the stories or the morals. Bathroom humor like "He who smelt it dealt it," was a big hit as was "It takes one to know one." I wasn't crazy about this work but I did love the title, and its exhuberant, devil-may-care attitude and the numerous double entendres. The layout and design are extraordinary. There's plenty in here to entertain little and big readers.

This is not a read alone book, though. The power in this work comes in sharing the experience. Otherwise I think it will fall flat. The moral to this review of "Squids will be Squids: Fresh Morals Beastly Fables" is "Never judge a book by its cover."

I got this book for my son who is 9...over the 4-8 age reccommendation for this book. I knew it would be funny and he would enjoy it...and boy did he! The book has "boy appeal"... and general "ha-ha-ho-ho's" abound. We read it the first time for laughs...we will read it again and I will encourage him to see if there is anything "deeper" in the stories.... He really enjoyed the pictures alot. He is at the age when at school he is only allowed to read "chapter" books so this was a wonderful break and fun return back to picture books. Although some of the stories did have meaning to them...Some were just fun and all the pictures were wonderful. I enjoy allowing my son to read some things for the pure pleasure and pure fun of reading...this is a perfect choice for that.

I'm writing this on behalf of my granddaughters ages 6, 8, 10, and 12. I'm no expert on children's books, but rather read what parents, grandparents, and teachers report about the various books, and try to make purchases based on this information. I especially like the feedback from Amazon.com readers and wanted to pay back all the kind advice I've read.

My grandaughters report they love this book. When the Amazon.com box containing "Squids Will Be Squids..." arrived, I am told the girls squabbled over whose book it would be (I like to let them choose from oldest to youngest). My 10-year old grand-daughter Amelia has a wry sense of humor, and she especially appreciated the 'Fresh Morals' and recommends them.

I recently began a web database project and had to self-teach myself PHP and MySQL, therefore I bought several books from Amazon looking to cover the bases. I disagree with some other reviews posted here, the text IS AN INTRODUCTION but this is not obvious from the title or the editorial reviews on Amazon. The review referring to editing errors I COULD NOT AGREE WITH, I did not find "errors" or typos, maybe I'm not very observant or don't know the subject well enough yet.

Anyway ... the text does a good job at presenting the PHP language and how to operate on MySQL database back-ends, that is the purpose of the book. The sections on PHP are introductory, but well done. Comprehensive descriptions of string and reg-exp functions are provided. A good section for beginners is titled "Common Mistakes" that describe why you get a blank browser screen or what those darned header messages are about. The MySQL section is well done, providing ample samples of the different query types and advanced joins and keys. I also liked the portion that describes using PHP with other RDMS systems via ODBC and to Oracle. Linking PHP and MySQL is well handled and sections on authentication and session management are practical and real-world. The text ONLY includes one overall application system, a psuedo online winestore that includes a shopping cart and purchasing concept. The appendix include a really good treatise on HTTP and describing how Requests and Responses are handled and the status codes.

I had great expectations for this O'Reilly text as many of their critter-adorned texts are in my library. I expected the text to be more advanced than it is. The lack of other sample applications is a weakness, for the price you can get other texts with more comprehensive samples. Afterall, many of us buy these books to try and help us quickly solve "Our Immediate Problem", more samples would have helped this effort better.

I have just started learning some PHP & MySQL development using "PHP & MySQL Web Development" published by Sams and "Web Database Applications with PHP & MySQL" from O'Reilly. Prospective readers might be wondering the difference between the two in deciding which one to buy, so I hope to shed some light on the issue.

Sams: The Welling and Thomson book is more "hands-on" in that it takes the reader step-by-step in developing an e-commerce website. The chapters are organized in a goal-oriented manner: PHP, MySQL, the basics of e-commerce, security, and design of the site.

O'Reilly: The Williams and Lane book is structured in a similar way by showing readers PHP and then MySQL. Examples to reinforce concepts are also provided. While the O'Reilly book also tries to take the reader in developing an e-commerce site, it is a bit more theoretical. Also, there are some differences in focus: the O'Reilly book has a section on using JavaScript while the Sams book has a final chapter on creating PDF files using PHP.

If I had to choose just one book, I would go with the Sams book due to its more gentle learning curve. However, I believe that the O'Reilly book is no slouch, and I will probably come to appreciate it more once I gain more experience in PHP and MySQL development.

One last word about my programming background: I knew a bit of Perl, Java, HTML, and JavaScript before tackling PHP and MySQL. I consider myself to be an "advanced beginner" (an oxymoron, of course). To get the most out of these two books, you should know HTML well enough to read it (you should at least recognize some tags) and it would definitely be helpful if you have some programming experience. You could very well make PHP your first programming language, but I would advise against it. Start with something like Perl (whose syntax is very similar to PHP's).

I highly recommend both books to prospective PHP and MySQL developers who are willing to spend some time and effort.

I've been entrenched with JSP heavily for the last couple of years, so I haven't familiarised myself with PHP yet. I needed a book that would show me a larger picture than I got in a web developer's job, and showed me how to put it together with more modern techniques.
This book is a perfect example of why I choose O'Reilly whenever in doubt. Chapter 1 is an overview of how web applications are put together. Chapter 2 goes through all the basic PHP syntax (stuff that would take other books several fluffy dry chapters to process). Chapter 3 gets you through all the mySQL and sql basics so you feel comfortable with that, too.
There's no 4 page tutotial entitled: "Using a text editor: Wordpad" There's also no kitch "Employee Database" example cop-out. Instead, Hugh and Dave give a realistic and usable storefront application. This book alone is probably enough for the independent web developer to get a functional site up for her/himself or a client.

This is an adult version of the Arabian Nights tales that most kids grow up with. By adult I do not mean that it contains a lot of sexual material, however there is some, so this book is probably not appropriate for children. Stories like "Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves" and "Aladdin and the Magic Lamp" are included in here, along with some more obscure stories like "The Hunchback's Tale". If you're interested in learning about stories from the middle east, this is the book for you.

I read an abridged version as a youngster many, many years ago, before I discovered and became passionate about Sir Richard F. Burton and his exploits, and have continued to reread the book throughout my life. Because I move around so much, and always give the book to good friends as a present, I find myself having to buy it again and again. Of course I don't mind at all! The tales always take me back to that first time I read them, and bring me forward as I read them into my own life. It's like a story within the story. I am looking forward to giving this book to my children as a present. It will be fantastic! I'll introduce them to Burton and let the book's magic capture their imaginations, just like it did me.

I have been searching for an Arabian Nights book for months. The only books I found were rewrites for children. Then I came across this masterpiece. While it was alittle hard to read at first (because of the old english used), I was soon drawn into the enchanting stories held within. This has all the classic "Nights" tales that we grew up with (Alladin, Ali Babba, Sinbad) plus many, many more! They will undoubtably grab you and draw you in. I highly recommend this to anyone! You won't be dissapointed!

Jim Hawkins, a young man living in rural England with his parents, helps run an inn with his parents. His life changes forever when a mysterious dying pirate takes residence at the inn. The shadowy pirate is often on the lookout for strangers who begin to show up in search of the pirate. Rum finally takes its toll on the pirate and he dies, leaving behind a mysterious chest that the strangers are interested in. Upon examination, Jim discovers a treasure map.

With the help of Jim's adult friends, a crew is formed to go in search of the pirate's buried treasure on a remote tropical island. The journey is uneventful until, Jim saves the day when he realizes that their crew consists mainly of pirates who hope to cause mutiny upon reaching the island. Ultimately, a raging battle takes place on the island where Jim and his friends must outwit the pirates who are led by the one-legged Long John Silver.

For a children's book, this book had a lot of inappropriate material - drinking and violence. I also had a tough time with the old-English writing style and the nautical terms. This book was ahead of its time, though, in terms of the adventure it described, but I was hoping for more. Fans of H. Rider Haggard (ala King Solomon's Mines) will enjoy this book but I was sort of happy to be done with it as some parts were engaging and others were muddled.

"Treasure Island" is the classic adventure novel by Robert Louis Stevenson. Set on the high seas amid treasures and pirates, it is the story of a young boy's adventure. "Treasure Island" has been done by everyone from Disney to the Muppets. It's been imitated many times and influenced countless books and movies.

A mysterious pirate shows up at an inn owned by Jim Hawkin's mother. The pirate is killed by a gang of rogues, but Jim finds a treasure map belonging to the pirate. Jim then embarks on a journey to far away island to find the treasure. Of course, nobody can be trusted - especially the cook, Long John Silver. With his peg leg and parrot, Silver is the stereotypical pirate. Once the island is reached, sides are chosen - the mutinous pirates against the ship's crew. Jim goes on a journey within a journey on the island, going from one side to another, as the treasure is hunted for.

Everyone should read this book at some point. It's especially good for young boys, due to the fact that the main character (Jim) is a young boy. It's well crafted, and easy to read. And it's hard to put down once you get going. What else can you ask for?

I never did read this book as I was growing up and have now read it for the first time as an adult. I always thought that this book would not be very good but I was wrong.

I write this review for those students who may hesitate to read Treasure Island. This book is a story of high adventure. In it is the tale of a young boy who comes to possess a treasure map and goes off on a whirlwind adventure filled with sea voyages, pirates, island adventure and treasure. Stevenson wonderfully portrays the characters of young Jim Hawkins, the hero of the book, the fabled Long John Silver, Billy Bones and Ben Gunn. Each adds their own sense of mystery and suspense to the story. The settings of the story from the Admiral Benbow Inn to the Hispaniola, their sailing vessel, to the island itself are very vivid and make you feel as if you are really there. The adventure to and finally on Treasure Island is filled with secret meetings, battle scenes and a quest to find a long since buried fortune in gold. The novel is truly great and is a very entertaining and interesting read.

For those adults who have never read this novel definitely read it and for those who have already read it, read it again it is well worth it. The swashbuckling adventures of Long John Silver and his men, along with Jim Hawkins, are truly timeless. If you have children of age, share the story with them. It is truly a family classic worth sharing with generations to come.

Philosopher William Lane Craig has spilled a lot of ink over the topic of the (alleged) resurrection of Jesus. Craig argues that the best explanation for the apparent resurrection of Jesus is that God actually did raise Jesus from the dead. More recently, Craig has taken to defending his ideas in debate with liberal theologians who doubt that Jesus really was resurrected from the dead. This is the second book Paul Copan edits that records such a debate. In the first, *Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up?*, Craig's sparring partner is John Dominic Crossan. While the first is a dud (Craig and Crossan largely talk past each other, and Craig repeatedly questions Crossan's rationality), but this second installment is much better. In *Jesus' Resurrection*, Craig and Gerd Ludeman do more to confront each others' positions directly.
Craig bases his belief in the resurrection on what he sees as four incontrovertible facts: (1) Jesus was buried, (2) Jesus' tomb was discovered empty, (3) Some people report having seen Jesus after his death, and (4) Jesus' followers preached the resurrection when they had every reason not to. Craig argues that the best explanation for these facts is that God did indeed raise Jesus from the dead. Ludeman argues instead that Jesus' followers had visions of the risen Jesus for psychological reasons.
Craig certainly comes off better in the debate. Craig is a brilliant debater (even though he tends to blithely appeal to scholarly consensus, and is by no means above declaring his opponents irrational or prejudiced against him), and Ludeman is not. Not surprising--one would expect a philosopher to be a better debater than a historian. Because of this, many will conclude that Craig comes away the victor, as having demonstrated his case.
However, when one gets to the responses to the debate by four excellent scholars that one gets to see the gaps in Craig's arguments. (Craig himself does an excellent job of making the gaps in Ludeman's arguments apparent.) In particular, Michael Goulder's piece develops an idea similar to Ludeman's in a way that is far more sophisticated than Ludeman's view.
In the end, as with most debates, the issue ends unresolved. Craig is surely right that Ludeman's theory does not explain (or explain away) facts (1) and (2), and does not do especially well at explaining facts (3) and (4). But Ludeman's hypothesis is not the only, and I doubt even the most plausible, naturalist alternative. And Craig never really considers the possibility that (1)-(4) are not well-established facts at all. Only for Jesus' crucifixion do we have any references from non-interested sources. In his debate with Crossan, who denies that (1) and (2) are facts at all, Craig's only response is to claim that Crossan's position is not that of most Bible scholars, as if mere consensus determined truth. It is too bad that Crossan did not take Craig to task when he had the chance.
In short, while Craig does a good job of confounding Ludeman's arguments, he does not do so admirably when his own views are called into question, generally responding with blatant appeals to consensus and personal attacks. (As an aside, I take especial offense at the claim he makes in nearly all his apologetic works that his opponents deny his view because their philosophical commitments prejudice their evaluation of the evidence, while refusing to acknowledge the possibility that his belief in miracles has prejudiced HIS reading of the evidence. Sometimes I feel that Criag doth protest too much.) Yet for all that, Craig is undoubtedly a brilliant thinker who takes his task seriously and approaches it accordingly. His arguments cannot be ignored. And neither can the arguments of his opponents, which in their own writings (not in the context of a debate) are presented with much more force.
*Jesus' Resurrection* will not resolve the issues, but it does an excellent job of showing what the issues are. This is certainly not the place to finish an examination into the (alleged) resurrection, but it is a great place to start. With patience and care, one can get a lot out of this book, whatever one's religious persuasion happens to be.

Established Fact #5: On the day this book was published, the Resurrection theories of Gerd Ludemann, Michael Goulder, and Roy Hoover were laid to rest by William Lane Craig.

Ludemann, Goulder and Hoover tried their best to attack Dr. Craig's argument, but they failed miserably. Dr. CRAIG ANSWERED EVERY SINGLE CRITICISM THAT THEY HAD. After reading Dr. Craig's final response, there is no question who had the better theory.

This was an excellent debate. Read it. (All of it!)

What better way to write a book on the resurrection than to use a debate format? Only 36 of the 206 pages in this book contain the transcript of a debate which took place between Gerd Ludemann (anti-resurrection) and William Lane Craig (pro-resurrection) at Boston College in 1997 regarding whether the resurrection of Jesus is truth or fiction. This oral debate is merely a framework for the book at large. After the transcription of the debate, articles were written in response to the debate by Robert Gundry and Stephen Davis (pro resurrection); and also by Roy Hoover and Michael Goulder (anti-resurrection). Following the critiques by these four scholars, Ludemann and Craig are allowed to write a final article in response to the critiques and to make a final case for their arguments.

The basic issue at dispute in this debate is whether or not miracles are possible, and all of the participants seem to recognize this. Craig, Gundry, and Davis actually make a few arguments in favor of the possibility of miracles, while their opponents seem to simply assert their view as dogmatic truth without so much as an argument citing some evidence in support of their claim that miracles are impossible and that god does not exist.

The argument over the resurrection itself centers around Craig's claim of four well established historical facts: the burial of Jesus in a tomb, the discovery of the tomb as being empty, post-mortem appearances of Jesus to some of his followers, and the origin of the disciples belief that Jesus had been physically raised from the dead. Much to my surprise, Ludemann concedes the burial of Jesus as being probably true (p. 52) and he also strongly believes that the followers of Jesus experienced "visions" of Jesus after his death, yet he says these visions were only in the minds of the followers and not actual cases of seeing an external object. However, Ludemann does not believe the tomb of Jesus was ever found empty (the body decayed), and he's a little unclear about exactly what he thinks the disciples thought their visions meant. Hoover and Goulder seem to recognize that Ludemann has dramatically weakened his case by agreeing that Jesus was buried in a tomb. They know that once this point is conceded it becomes extremely difficult to say that nobody ever bothered to check the tomb for a body while the disciples in Jerusalem were claiming Jesus had risen.

As a Christian, its obvious which side of the debate I'm on, but speaking as objectively as possible, I honestly believe William Lane Craig was the clear winner of this debate. His arguments were much more thorough and he directly addressed the points raised by all three of his opponents. Meanwhile, Ludemann shied away from addressing some of the main critiques of his opponents. This was especially true regarding some of Gundry's critiques. Of the four respondents, I found Gundry's to be the most helpful both in addressing Ludemann and in fine-tuning Craig's argument.

Who should read this book? Agnostics wondering whether or not there is a god. Ex-Christians who think Christianity is for the weak-minded and gullible. Christians doubting the truthfulness of their faith. Christians wanting the perfect resource on the issue of the resurrection. Anyone else who has ever wondered what all of the hype over this "Jesus of Nazareth" character is about.

No matter what your background is, you will learn something beneficial from this book. Read it with an open mind and you might learn even more than you'd imagined. This is definitely the best book on the resurrection that I've ever read. Buy it !!

The book is helpful with good information but it could have been better organized for easier reading and finding of information. For example, using headers to block out specific areas. Also it could use more lodging and eating information. It would be nice if there was more information on side trips off the covered routes to major destinations.

But, there is no other book like this that I am aware of, and I think it is a good buy if you are planning a cross country road trip and want to stay off the interstates. However I recommend supplementing it with a good comprehensive USA guidebook since there are a lot of attractions you will probably want to see that are not covered in this book.

This is an excellent, excellent book for anyone who wants to take a road trip as a vacation and see the country like you've never seen it before. I used this book to see so many funky pieces of Americana: everything from a miniature Stonehenge in Missouri to the world's largest ketchup bottle in Illinois. I traveled Rte. 66 and stayed at a great little motel in Missouri (Munger Moss) recommended by this book. That motel is a must for any Rte. 66 fans: its gift shop is filled with Rte. 66 memorabilia. And it's cheap!! $25 a night with clean rooms. The whole idea of this book is to get people to see that America isn't all the same, though it seems that way when you stay on the highways. It's filled with great road trips to take wherever you are in the country, north or south, east or west. It's really an amazing country we live in and you'll find out that you can have a great vacation traveling endless roads that provide new discoveries.

You'll get a whole new perspective on areas you may have visited. And the author offers suggestions on places to go to get a local flavor. So instead of eating at a McDonald's or Denny's for breakfast, you can try a diner in Memphis that Elvis used to frequent.

A couple of my Chicago-based colleagues were very impressed when I told them I ate at Berghoff's and Lou Mitchell's in downtown Chicago. They said nobody from out-of-town would have gone there.

It's like having a knowledgeable traveling companion with you wherever you go. I enjoyed every town and city I visited on a two-week trip thanks to this book.

I've looked at other travel guides and they don't compare to this book. High praise to Jamie Jensen for creating such an informative book, packed full of useful nuggets. This book was never far from my fingertips on that trip.

I'm planning a motorcycle road trip in the near future and will definitely have this book along. I only wish I had more time to take more of these road trips.

Enjoy and happy motoring.

When we drove across country last summer, we searched for a book that could lead us on an off-the-beaten-path American adventure. Jamie Jensen's Road Trip USA gave us more than we could have hoped for. Road Trip USA is filled with credible and detailed information regarding sites, hotels and restaurants. The book provides vivid history and current information, so you can get a real sense of the places you go. We ate crabs with the local beachhounds on the Outer Banks, had BBQ with the 9-to-5'ers in Montgomery, ate pizza with LSU fans in Baton Rouge, and drank the best beer we'd ever tasted in a tiny town off the California coast. The detailed, quirky tidbits the book includes are invaluable. What other book tells you about the B'Hai radio station that you can listen to as you drive through Myrtle Beach, SC? If you want to see the USA- not just check out the tourist sites, but see where and how other folks in the USA really live - this is the book for you.

I would give Anthem 3 out of 5 stars. It was a very interesting and powerful book. The main character's name is Equality 7-2521. He is a very intelligent street sweeper wanting to be a scholar in an intellectually repressed society. This book most likely takes place in the future after a worldwide disaster. This man enjoys experimenting (illegally) with lightbulbs which haven't been "invented" yet. After showing the "light box" to the council of scholars, he is heavily repremanded. Equality 7-2521 then escapes into the uncharted forest where he discovers many things with his companion Liberty 5-3000. Their most important discovery is the discovery of the forbidden word ego. This book's theme is human individualality. People in this society do not have any individualality. They are assigned strange names, do not have any family, and are not allowed to talk to the opposite sex. Probably the most strange and confusing part of the book Anthem is its use of the word we. For a large portion of the book we is used instead of I becausre of the society's beliefs. 3 out of 5 stars.

Narrated by Equality 7-2521, Ayn Rand's pithy Anthem contains enough egali-TERROR to ignite an abundance of thoughts in any cognizant reader, despite its repetition (scarcely permissible by its brevity) of many of the same ideas. Certainly, one can compare its communal society with Soviet Russia, Democratic Kampuchea, People's Republic of China, and so forth, but it is also shockingly easy to find relevance to modern America. As you read, beware; this is what the liberal elite is planning for us! One cannot read Anthem's description of education (pronounce "indoctrination") system and not consider America's public schools--dominated by such asinine "reforms" as OBE, School-to-Work, dumb-down-the-curriculum-to-raise-up-self-esteem, and, of course, cooperative learning. (Oh yeah, just for the record--in case any of pythia's teachers see this--not *all* educators are evil. . .)

As is characteristic of any dystopia, Anthem relates the struggle of an individual against the juggernaut called society and exposes the dehumanizing effect of egalitarianism. Of all I've read, Ayn Rand's depiction of the future is nearest an ideal utopia, with total abolition of private property and with perfect equality in the absence of class distinctions or authoritative figures. True, occupational statuses differ, but, as in Ira Levin's This Perfect Day (I strongly recommend this novel as well; why is it out of print?), all are equal. When I read Anthem, it gave me the sense that its society, in the latest evolutionary stage of egalitarianism, has existed for a longer time than those of similar novels. Of course, they're all just fictional. . .right?! When compared to most of its genre, Anthem's most salient difference is its technological primitivity. I find this depiction of the future a fascinating and refreshing diversion from typical portrayals--as well as being, according to my own vaticination (keep in mind that I do call myself "pythia"), much more accurate. To maintain its stability, the communal society requires its members to abide with minimal comfort while engaging in continuous drudgery. Additionally, once the society has been established, its members are utterly incapable of producing technological advancement, perhaps even incapable of realizing the need. (On a similar note, check out Kurt Vonnegut's story "Harrison Bergeron," also revealing the stifling consequences of equality.) Tempting as it is to continue elaborate upon this topic, I dare not write more lest I reveal too much--that is, more than the too much I've already written. (Mea culpa for partially spoiling the analysis your own mind ought to initiate.) I'll conclude this segment with three words: House of Scholars!

Anthem's only major shortcoming is its ending. After the story's resolution (which is by no means the most emphatic), there follows two chapters (a relatively large chunk of this short work) didactically exalting the Objectivist philosophy of egotism. . .er, I guess that's egoism. . .oops. Because everything stated therein is a clear conclusion clear from the preceding chapters, these chapters are superfluous, serving only to lessen the impact of what the reader would otherwise cogitate himself. (Hypocritical pythia. . .you're one to talk.)

In part because of the former, I do not rank Anthem at the top of its genre in strictly literary terms. Moreover, character and plot development are minimal and vague, as a direct result of the work's brevity, and the rhetorical style is simplistic. However, this cannot be held against the novella; rather, it is integral to the protagonist's character. As unadorned as the writing is, Rand actually took artistic liberties with Equality's rhetoric; a novel truly commensurate with what his education level must have been would be illegibly poor! Furthermore, the terse, simple sentences render the theme as powerfully and emphatically as complex, adorned language could have, probably more so.

You have nothing to lose by reading Anthem. Although you can finish the novella in one evening, you will keep it in your thoughts long afterwards. . .but pray that in thoughts alone will it remain a reality. . .

Alexis de Tocqueville once said that if even people were to attain equality, inequality of minds would still remain. Equality 7-2521 proves this point. Try as they might, no one can completely steal the mind--thus, is it not cruel and inhumane to force it into a state of conformity and mediocrity?! Listen, never believe anyone who tells you that equality is a good thing. Do you want to live in Anthem-land?? Egad! Long live Capitalism!! Long live freedom!! Long live inequality!!!

~pythia~

This little tome is not typical of Ayn Rand, who wrote long novels. "Anthem" can be read in a single afternoon. It is a political fairy tale, in the same genre as "Animal Farm" and "1984," i.e., enjoyable fiction about some nightmare world where individuals strive for freedom against a suffocating tyranny.

The protagonist is a young man who lives in a fictional future where a highly regimented society is organized by a central committee, where careers are assigned by the state, where independent thought is repressed and even punished. But our hero begins to feel independent thoughts and ideas arising in his brain, which are accelerated by his discovery of a long-buried subway tunnel, a remnant from the ancient times before the glorious reformation of society.

Our protagonist, who has no name, only a number, works secretly and on his own to recreate the lost science of electricity, only to find his discovery rejected in horror by the central science committee. Anything not discovered by committee or group-think, surely cannot exist. Facing severe punishment, our hero departs to the forbidden zone, the lands outside of the central committee's control, where people once lived in ancient times. He becomes a rebel, a revolutionary, against the entrenched power of the state.

The theme of this fictional story is oversimplified, but it does express well the two major competing theories of government i.e., centralization versus decentralization, the argument over where the state ends and the individual begins. How much government is enough for an ordered and civilized society? How much government is too much, i.e., when does government become oppressive rather than protective?

In that respect, it should be must-reading for school children, because it contains the heart of the debate in easily comprehensible form. It is also an enjoyable read, an adventure story that makes you think even while having fun. I highly recommend it.

This book contains a transcript of the debate between William Lane Craig (conservative Christian) and John Dominic Crossan (liberal Christian) on the topic of Jesus and the resurrection. The book also includes responses to the debate from two conservative and two liberal scholars. This part of the book was the most interesting because the participants actually interacted with the arguments of Craig and Crossan.

As for the debate itself, Crossan often seemed to give the impression that he didn't really want to be there. He rarely made any attempt to refute any of Craig's arguments. Meanwhile, Craig tried to coax some fight out of Crossan by repeatedly focusing on his primary arguments for his belief in the resurrection of Jesus. Unfortunately, Crossan never steps up to the plate to even try to "win" this debate. Any debate judge would have to give this one to Craig on the sole basis of Crossan's lack of effort. Crossan could have made this much more beneficial to members of both sides of the debate if he only would have "argued" a little.

Craig and Crossan both provide opening addresses, and rebuttals before the two debaters participate in open dialog with Buckley as moderator. Craig presents four lines of evidence which provide "adequate inductive grounds for inferring Jesus' resurrection." He defends all four (Jesus' burial, empty tomb, post-mortem appearances, and the disciples' belief in Jesus' bodily resurrection) by appealing to confirmatory evidence and the acknowledgement by the consensus of critical New Testament scholarship that these are all established historical facts. As amazing as it may sound, at no point does Crossan, or any of the four respondents (Robert Miller, Craig Blomberg, Marcus Borg, & Ben Witherington) even challenge the historicity of these facts. Nor do they challenge that these facts are accepted by the consensus of scholarship, nor that they provide sufficient grounds to infer the resurrection, nor do they suggest any alternate explanations for even one of these facts. I wish that the scholars who deny the resurrection would address these problems rather than avoid them; it's difficult to get excited about a debate when one side refuses to argue.

This is the famous debate in print form between Craig and Crossan. I've already reviewed the content of the original debate on the audiotapes sold by Amazon. The 5 stars are for the interesting interaction between conservative and liberal New Testament scholars. Included in the book are responses from two noted scholars from the Jesus Seminar (Marcus Borg and Robert Miller) and two noted evangelical scholars (Ben Witherington and Craig Blomberg). At the end of the debate are final thoughts from Crossan and Craig.

Borg's section champions a form of fideism in that he sees no problem between the belief in Jesus as Christ and the possible fact of an occupied tomb the first Easter Sunday. Borg argues that one can still go on believing in Jesus because of people's post-crucifixion experiences of him. I agree with Craig here that this position is totally irrational. To believe in Christ even if his body was still in the grave is the desperation that modern liberal theology wants the man in the pew to believe in. A more intellectually honest answer would be that a person should not believe in Jesus as Christ if Jesus was still in the tomb.

Robert Miller's section is mainly an airing of his pet peeves on why apologetics does not work for non-believers. He outlines an Islamic apologetic to bring forth these points. He then points out what he takes as contradictions within the Resurrection narratives. Craig totally devastates his case though in the final section. Craig even shows that Miller made a textbook case of an informal fallacy known as hasty generalization.

Ben Witherington and Craig Blomberg add more background and scholarly expertise and corrections to Craig's argument. But Craig clearly takes these issues up in his final section.

Crossan's final section deals with some biographical issues on the debate and issues a challenge to conservative scholars like Witherington and Blomberg to list things that they find historically doubtful about the gospels. Apparently, if Witherington and Blomberg do not produce such a list then they are not being intellectually honest scholars.

Finally, Craig's section perfectly summarizes the various sections and shows that none of the scholars who oppose his position has done anything to rebut his arguments.

I first read Moby Dick; or The Whale over thirty years ago and I didn't understand it. I thought I was reading a sea adventure, like Westward Ho! or Poe's Arthur Gordon Pym. In fact, it did start out like an adventure story but after twenty chapters or so, things began to get strange. I knew I was in deep water. It was rough, it seemed disjointed, there were lengthy passages that seemed like interruptions to the story, the language was odd and difficult, and often it was just downright bizarre. I plodded through it, some of it I liked, but I believe I was glad when it ended. I knew I was missing something and I understood that it was in me! It wasn't the book; it was manifestly a great book, but I hadn't the knowledge of literature or experience to understand it.

I read it again a few years later. I don't remember what I thought of it. The third time I read it, it was hilarious; parts of it made me laugh out loud! I was amazed at all the puns Melville used, and the crazy characters, and quirky dialog. The fourth or fifth reading, it was finally that adventure story I wanted in the first place. I've read Moby Dick more times than I've counted, more often than any other book. At some point I began to get the symbolism. Somewhere along the line I could see the structure. It's been funny, awesome, exciting, weird, religious, overwhelming and inspiring. It's made my hair stand on end...

Now, when I get near the end I slow down. I go back and reread the chapters about killing the whale, and cutting him up, and boiling him down. Or about the right whale's head versus the sperm whale's. I want to get to The Chase but I want to put it off. I draw Queequeg with his tattoos in the oval of a dollar bill. I take a flask with Starbuck and a Decanter with Flask. Listen to The Symphony and smell The Try-Works. Stubb's Supper on The Cabin Table is a noble dish, but what is a Gam? Heads or Tails, it's a Leg and Arm. I get my Bible and read about Rachel and Jonah. Ahab would Delight in that; he's a wonderful old man. For a Doubloon he'd play King Lear! What if Shakespeare wrote The Tragedy of The Whale? Would Fedallah blind Ishmael with a harpoon, or would The Pequod weave flowers in The Virgin's hair?

Now I know. To say you understand Moby Dick is a lie. It is not a plain thing, but one of the knottiest of all. No one understands it. The best you can hope to do is come to terms with it. Grapple with it. Read it and read it and study the literature around it. Melville didn't understand it. He set out to write another didactic adventure/travelogue with some satire thrown in. He needed another success like Typee or Omoo. He needed some money. He wrote for five or six months and had it nearly finished. And then things began to get strange. A fire deep inside fret his mind like some cosmic boil and came to a head bursting words on the page like splashes of burning metal. He worked with the point of red-hot harpoon and spent a year forging his curious adventure into a bloody ride to hell and back. "...what in the world is equal to it?"

Moby Dick is a masterpiece of literature, the great American novel. Nothing else Melville wrote is even in the water with it, but Steinbeck can't touch it, and no giant's shoulders would let Faulkner wade near it. Melville, The pale Usher, warned the timid: "...don't you read it, ...it is by no means the sort of book for you. ...It is... of the horrible texture of a fabric that should be woven of ships' cables and hausers. A Polar wind blows through it, & birds of prey hover over it. Warn all gentle fastidious people from so much as peeping into the book..." But I say if you've never read it, read it now. If you've read it before, read it again. Think Dostoevsky, Shakespeare, Goethe, and The Bible. If you understand it, think again.

It's always dangerous to label a book as a "masterpiece": that word seems to scare away most readers and distances everyone from the substance of the book itself. Still, I'm going to say that this is the Greatest American Novel because I really think that it is--after having read it myself.

Honestly, Moby Dick IS long and looping, shooting off in random digressions as Ishmael waxes philosophical or explains a whale's anatomy or gives the ingredients for Nantucket clam chowder--and that's exactly what I love about it. This is not a neat novel: Melville refused to conform to anyone else's conventions. There is so much in Moby Dick that you can enjoy it on so many completely different levels: you can read it as a Biblical-Shakespearean-level epic tragedy, as a canonical part of 19th Century philosophy, as a gothic whaling adventure story, or almost anything else. Look at all the lowbrow humor. And I'm sorry, but Ishmael is simply one of the most likable and engaging narrators of all time.

A lot of academics love Moby Dick because academics tend to have good taste in literature. But the book itself takes you about as far from academia as any book written--as Ishmael himself says, "A whale-ship was my Yale College and my Harvard." Take that advice and forget what others say about it, and just experience Moby Dick for yourself.

Most readers of Moby Dick seem to praise it for the wrong reasons and some miss the boat completely.

Criticize all you want of Melville's scientific inaccuracy, wandering themes, or even his improper punctuation. The guy wrote this thing in a year - not enough time to refine it, and it was a book he knew would not sell.

Underneath a mess of useless whaling information and Ishmael's rambling are ideas and questions that most people don't dare think about. Unlike Charles Darwin, Galileo or the fearless Ahab, Melville hid safely behind his metaphors and guided the careful readers to draw their own conclusions without completely leading the way.

Let me explain.

While to Ishmael, Moby Dick is nature's wonder and to Starbuck is just a whale, to Ahab Moby Dick is God, with his infinite power.

There are some disturbing things in the universe begging for an explaination, such as why one person is rewarded with happyness while another punished in suffering. There are feel-good answers, like the idea that the score will be evened in the afterlife and there are humble answers, like the book of Job, which suggests that man has no right to complain or question God. Melville's Ahab takes this to another level when he asks why man needs to be God's puppets. Ahab is insulted by God's creation of man, letting man live in suffering, "with half a heart and half a lung".

The bewildered God-fearing masses will not comprehend the depth Melville trys to take them. This most important theme was written for the pursuit of truth, not happyness. This book is not for everyone, and a lot of chapters are better off skipped, but those with enough empathy for Melville will find an emotional and intellectual adventure.