I wanted to read this book because I knew that the author is actually two people - the British journalists Nicci Gerrard and Sean French. At first I was sceptical. How can two people write a novel that hangs together, I thought. Well, they succeed and only a couple of chapters in I had completely given up trying to guess who wrote what (an impossibility) and was entirely engrossed in the plot. There is just the right mixture of foreboding and surprise to keep readers turning the pages and burning the midnight oil. I stayed up till one in the morning to finish this, and the last half hour had my heart beating at twice its normal rate. Perhaps if you read a lot of thrillers the effect wears off a bit, but whether or not you read a lot of thrillers you should certainly read this one. A novel dealing with sexual violence could easily become either colluding or 'preachy', but Killing Me Softly avoids both these traps. The only qualm I have is about Adam's visit to Tara and Adele's parents. Why exactly?

I got this book for Christmas, and let me tell you, it was different from any other book I've ever read. I read a section of it in a past issue of Cosmopolitan magazine; that's how I heard about it. The article in the magazine left me wondering and wanting to read more. So, I bought it. It is very well written, but quite disturbing. The main female character (sorry, I don't remember the characters' names!) has an affair with a man she has a chance meeting with. They pass on the street one day, and without hardly any words, they go to his apartment for an afternoon of mind-altering, life-changing sex. The man gets so deep into her mind and thoughts; just the thought of him is with her every waking moment of the day. Things take a bad turn, however...--I'm not going to give it away, though! You have to read it to find out! It became difficult to tell who was obsessed with whom toward the end: Adam (the mysterious man she met on the street-I remembered his name!) must have her by his side every waking moment. But, she is also constantly thinking of him. (The third side of the obsession question is the reader. Is it called a novel of obsession because the reader gets so into the story that he or she can not force themselves to put the book down? Hmmmm...) There are some very disturbing parts in this book--for example, some descriptions of domestic violence--that I did not find enjoyable, to be honest. Other than those few choice parts, this was a very good book. I could hardly put it down, once I picked it up! Is this a tale of true love, lust, or just a passionate affair with a total stranger? You'll have to be the judge of that. Enjoy!

My mother recommended this book to me and my first thought was that this would be a "woman's book," since the author is female and the story is told in the first person by the female lead character. I picked it up anyway, and within a couple of pages I was thoroughly reeled in by French's writing. This is as good a psychological thriller as I have ever read, right up there with Thomas Harris's "Red Dragon," which is my all-time favorite. The plotting makes you want to read it in a breeze, yet every sentence has purpose, so you want to savor it at the same time. I finished this one in three sittings over three days, where the last sitting I was laying down on the couch reading for the first two hours, and I was so excited for the last half hour that I had to sit straight up. I was sympathizing with the thoughts of Alice, despite others here saying her actions were far-fetched, and could absolutely understand why she did what she did. The rough sex was disturbing, but essential to the story. This book gets my highest mark based on the enjoyment I got from it.

When people think of President Franklin Roosevelt, espionage and spies are probably not the first things that come to mind. However, during World War II, Roosevelt became very proficient at the spying game. This book delves into Roosevelt's spying. We are also introduced to some of the men who made their living as spies, including "Wild Bill" Donovan and J. Edgar Hoover. I learned a lot about FDR and spying that I didn't know before I read this book. I would recommend it to anyone who is interested in WWII and the espionage aspect of the war.

Joe Persico has discovered what many of us World War Two historians never knew: Franklin Delano Roosevelt PERSONALLY ran the war against Hitler and his state sponsored terrorism! Many of the details in this book I was aware of, but what I did not know was FDR's intense and intellectual direction of the war and all of its participants to include Churchill.
The only error I found here was Persico's declaration that the US breaking of the JN 25 Japanese Naval codes was never discovered. Fact is that when the German Raider Thor intercepted the Australian cargo/passenger ship the SS Nakin, the Germans captured several mail sacks with secret documents reveling the fact the we had broken the Japanese codes on 10 May 1942. The Germans did not tell the Japanese until 29 August of that year, which allowed us to win the Battle of Midway. However, the Japanese changed their codes and we did not re-break them until 5 May 1943. Because of this fact we sustained serious naval losses during the naval battles off Guadalcanal.
For those of you who are not students of intelligence matters concerning the WW-II, I suggest you buy "Encyclopedia of the Second World War" by Bryan Perrett & Ian Hogg as a reference when you are reading Persico's book! Another work I recommend is: "The Encyclopedia of Espionage" by Norman Polmar and Thomas B. Allen (which contains a number of details of George Washington's intelligence network that won the Revolutionary War!
There has only been one other person in American history that did what FDR did: George Washington, whose statue is in the entrance of the Headquarters of the CIA. I think they might consider putting FDR's Statue there as well: AFTER ALL HE DID SAVE WESTERN CIVILIZATION. This book is a MUST READ for all Americans!

What a read! This book has it all over even the most well crafted spy thriller. Intrigue, Spy rings, Spy masters, Intelligence blunders and break throughs. Nonfiction should always be this fun to read.
In "Roosevelts Secret War", we are given insight into a crucial time in American history. Mr. Persico has shown all angles of a diverse and complicated situation. The country is strongly isolationist, the Nazi regime is slowly crushing Europe under its boot heel, and Britain is tied up in skulldugery, decreasing moral and a war that is looking more bleak by the day.
This is the maelstrom FDR is thrust into. The States lag behind The U.K. in terms of intelligence capabilities and world view. Churchill informs FDR of the realities of the war, and thus the U.S. has its die cast. Mr.Persico sends us on a journey of burgeoning intelligence offices, agency squabbling, jealous department heads, code breaking, conspirices and much more.
During this ride the author debunks long bandied rumors, such as the supposed prior knowledge FDR had of the Pearl Harbor tragedy. The answer is surprisingly complicated. Hindsight offers a pretty clear view of a pending attack, yet all the intel that pointed towards that travesty was divested in so many small nuggets, bungled through many channels and ciphers, that not even a room of Nobel winners in physics could have pieced together an obvious plot.
FDR is shown as a very shrewd, intelligent and devious man. Though generally moral, he will bend rules, cast aides against one another and down right lie if the greater good will be advanced by his many prevarications. Churchill is of a similar character, and the two spark up a healthy working partnership. The book is peppered with so many gold nuggets, that a list of all its finds would be to long to list here.
Rich, complex and very well crafted, this may be the best work of Nonfiction published this year.

This is the story of one of America's smartest men. Written in a seemingly desultory manner, Franklin tells about his life from his beginnings in Boston to his contributions to science and the enlightenment. I was a little disappointed though because there was no writing about the American revolutionary war or the drafting of the American Constitution-two things that Franklin is known for. In addition we don't get a detailed account of his discoveries in electricity (at least in the Dover edition, other editions might include other writings by Franklin). However, this book does shed light on the American spirit. He talks about how he came one day to Philadelphia with only enough money to buy some bread, and ended up years later as one of Philadelphia's most respected man.

This books is colored with enjoyable stories and anecdotes from Franklin's life. Every page is full of little aphorisms and maxims in witty tales about events in Franklin's life. I'd recommend this book for the quality of Franklin's wisdom. Even if he wasn't so important to the birth of the United States, this book would still be cherished by the American people.

The prevailing conception of the American character found its apotheosis in the persona of Benjamin Franklin. In early American culture Franklin was considered the typical American whose life philosophy exemplified American attitudes towards life, wealth, and happiness. The proof of this philosophy was found in Franklin's life and both are interwoven in his autobiography.

Certainly Franklin became omnipresent in American history (the greatest president who was never president, as I recall) partly because of his own efforts at self-promotion, of which "The Autobiography" is a prime example along with the constant reprinting of "Poor Richard's Almanac" (see the preface to the last edition in 1758 entitled "The Way to Wealth," which presages the autobiography). Franklin was first and foremost a moralist concerned with the personal, social, and civic improvement of his fellow citizens. The book opens with a letter, written to his son William in 1771. Of course, William, the Royal Governor of New Jersey, is forty years old, so the advice being offered is not to his literal (illegitimate) son but rather to any and all "youth." The book is intended as an exemplar for moral action and virtues.

Part I has Franklin describing his ancestry and lineage, covering his precocious childhood where he learned the virtues and morals that would serve him in good stead as an adult. Indeed, the story of Franklin becoming a successful businessman and important citizen in Philadelphia is a series of anecdotes in which he uses his intelligence and wit to solve any and all challenges. As autobiography we know this account to be flawed, for Franklin recreates his life to suit his purpose, but as rhetorical exemplar it is impressive. Part II reinforces this point by beginning with a pair of letters from Abel James and Benjamin Vaughn, who praise Part I for having celebrated the frugality, industry, and temperance necessary for a man's character to develop as a prelude to success. This section was written ten years after the first, when Franklin was in France. Here Franklin discusses moral perfection and the importance of industry and frugality in achieving success. Part III was written when Franklin returns home to Philadelphia in August of 1788, and continues the detailing his long career of public service, from publisher "Poor Richard's Almanac" to becoming Postmaster of the United States. Part IV is something of a fragment devoted to an episode in London in 1747 when Franklin became an early proponent of American rights. Ironically, this section, which would have contained the autobiographical information we would most want to hear with regards to the fight for Independence, is the briefest.

Ultimately, what becomes most important about "The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin" is that it serves as the genesis of the aristocracy of merit in the United States. Franklin's life is the model for the stories of Horatio Alger a century later and instantiates the idea that America is the land of opportunity where it is by merit that we can earn success. That idea has been expressed in countless ways since this book was first published in all its myriad forms, but the life of Franklin is the font from which it all springs.

This "Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin" does not contain the type of finished material one has come to expect in a finished coherent autobiographical writing covering the whole life span of the individual written by single author over a continuous period of time. This is really source material partially written over distinctly separate periods of time wherein the author, Benjamin Franklin, wrote on two different continents without access to the other parts of his text. With that said, I still think that this book is a wonderful and enlightening piece of work. It should, in my opinion, be considered for placement in every high school and college library, and it should perhaps be wise to consider it for required reading in those institutions. The book tells of the life and times in which Mr. Franklin lived, the attitudes of the colonists and of the British and the ways that things were accomplished in colonial America. It is truly amazing to me to hear first hand how a single individual with only two years of formal education can educate himself as this man did and to rise to make such truly great contributions to society, science, engineering, and politics. I highly recommend this book.

This is the best book I've ever read on the subject of structure and craft. I read it several years ago and am still using ideas I gained from it. I don't really think that anybody can learn to write from reading a book on writing, but I do believe that those, like me, who write for a living day after day need the wisdom and inspiration of really fine writers like Jon Franklin. The annotated text for his feature story on brain surgery is worth a college course.

Franklin does what may be the best job anywhere of inviting a reader to "get inside a writer's mind." And if you're going to get so intimate with the mental gyrations of an author, why not a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner? Here you will find both award-winning stories, in their "natural state" as well as heavily annotated versions as appendices. But you will also find page after page of sound advice on how to structure, pace, and otherwise "craft" a piece of non-fiction so it has dramatic appeal. While it may seem a bit of a formulaic approach, Franklin offers persuasive rationale for every writing step he outlines. I would highly recommend this book for fiction writers as well as those who are interested in journalistic challenges. While the "inspiration" books, such as Goldberg's "Writing Down the Bones" and Lamotte's "Bird by Bird" are certainly vital for fueling imagination and motivation, Franklin's "Writing for Story" is the necessary complimentary work for putting all those creative forces into an effective structure. Should be a standard reference book for every aspiring (and experienced) author!

How to Write books are irresistible to the novice writer: 'Read me and I'll tell you what you need to know to be famous, or at least published.' At first the reader is thrilled when he or she recognizes a kindred spirit in the author, then the reader tries to apply what he or she learned. More often than not the lessons of the book are little more than a collection of the author's war stories. The novice writer suspects that writing is an art form, not subject to the laws of physics. Jon Franklin says: 'No, good short stories have form, structure and behavior patterns that can be analyzed.'

The workaday world of journalism, not academia, honed Franklin's skills. He served his apprenticeship under a quintessential irascible old editor, G. Vern Blasdell. The young Franklin learned his craft by squirming in his seat while awaiting the old man's verdict. Now it's his turn to teach but he's at a disadvantage Blasdell never faced. The reader doesn't work for him and won't oblige by twitching so much as one butt muscle. Franklin must win the reader's attention by the pure utility of his method.

Unlike most writers, Franklin has something in common with good mathematicians. He realizes that a formula can be memorized but if one doesn't understand the assumptions on which the formula is derived, one can never apply the formula successfully. This is as true in writing as it is in mathematics.

Franklin builds his case for formula carefully. He demonstrates the nature of each assumption-a complication must be significant to the human condition; if you can't see the complication, look for the action and work your way back to the motivation, etc. Once the reader understands the assumptions, the formula becomes a useful tool in the hand of the writer, not some abstract theory laid to rust in a forgotten corner of the mind.

Once the reader is hooked, Franklin introduces the outline. More than a butt muscle twitches here; the reader squirms as visions of that Roman numerated nemesis of junior high come to mind. But this is not what Franklin has in mind. Franklin talks of a simple three-word, five-sentence form called the conflict-resolution outline. Character-action verb-direct object, what could be simpler? Diving in and writing first and thinking later, but this would be less productive in the long run.

The conflict-resolution outline forces the writer to think though the elements of good story first and make sure these elements are present before the writing begins. This method means survival for a journalist faced with a deadline. This method insures a more satisfying and successful writing experience for any writer.

Franklin teaches the 'work smarter, not harder' principles of current business practice. The importance of this to writers can not be understated. Ultimately, all writing is business if one wants to be a successful writer. The writer must produce a good product that sells itself to the editor and in turn, the reader; otherwise the writer will be unpaid. In this book, Franklin earned his pay.

The genres of science fiction, socialist polemics, utopian and anti-utopian novels, and love stories all intersect in Jack London's "The Iron Heel". In the beginning of the story, we meet Eugene Everhard, proponent of classic 20th century socialism. I am not aware of any more easily read statement of the principles of socialism than the first half of this book. It makes clear the theory of surplus profits causing economic collapse. While the theory is fallacious (accumulating inventories would lead to reduced prices and gradually reduced production), the matter has historical interest. We feel the excitement of the socialists in their fervent struggle to build a new and better world. The electorate in California sends Eugene to Congress, but the capitalist Oligarchy becomes alarmed and sends its Mercenaries to arrest and imprison the socialist members of Congress. The socialists go underground. We follow Eugene's wife Avis to a rural hideout. Spies of the Oligarchy are everywhere, yet the socialists have infiltrated their ranks as well. Brave socialists spring Eugene from prison. After a short visit with Avis, he is off to the East Coast to inspire the comrades there. Avis, disguised as an agent of the Oligarchy secret service, arrives in Chicago just as three local Mercenary regiments mutiny. They in turn come under attack from forces loyal to the Oligarchy and are destroyed. The Mercenaries then attack the mutineers' support structure, the workers of Chicago and the impoverished slave underclass. The description of the battle and the destruction of the city rivals the vividness of Chanson de Roland and we are awed. The footnotes convey to us the thoughts of an educated person of the 27th century, hence making a utopian fiction subplot. You will remember the imagery of "The Iron Heel". -- Daniel Brockman, Feb 5 1997

I have consistently believed that Jack London's social writings are even better than his fictional works. The Iron Heel actually gives a realistic though (on a time scale) exaggerated view of the oppression of individual rights under a government based on a symbiosis between business and the state. London predicted the rise of European fascism with chilling accuracy. London was brilliant to have seen the evils of an all powerful state, but he errs in believing the working class is the only hope against totalitarianism. This work will appeal to social thinkers, historians, literary junkies, science fiction addicts, the dispossessed, as well as people of mass wealth. It would be worth reading once, but it gets better with each subsequent reading.

With "The Iron Heel," Jack London does a much better job of predicting today's world than George Orwell's book "1984." London depicts a world where government serves the business community, not the people, and there has been an incredible concentration in the ownership of the means of communication and the media. Speak out against this and the iron heel crushes you.

This book is an exciting, political adventure romance that you can't put down -- as long as you get through the first 40 pages of downright boring socialist polemics. If you want to really understand where we are headed, read "The Iron Heel" it today. Hard to believe it was written in 1906.

This is a tale of a boat trip up the Congo, although nowhere in the book is the actual name of that river or the Belgian colony that emerged on its banks ever used. The writer, Joseph Conrad, was probably more interesting than any of his characters. Although writing about stiff-upper-lip types and managing to be more English than the English, he was actually born in a country that was undergoing its own form of colonization in those days, that is Poland. Going to sea, Conrad experienced many adventures around the globe, providing him with the rich stock of stories that were to win him acceptance from the English reading public.

Most people now come across this book as part of some college course condemning colonialism. At least that's how I came across it. Others might know it as the prototype for Francis Ford Coppola's amazing movie "Apocalypse Now."

Although an enthralling read, it is also a strangely vacuous book and, as a consequence, extremely well-named, as Kurtz, the central character, remains a dark enigma at the heart of the story to the end. We never really get to know who he is. Sent by the Belgian colonial authorities upriver, Kurtz has 'gone native' and our narrator is sent after him to investigate.

This format allows the narrator to drop-feed us information about Kurtz during the long river voyage, giving us pieces of a jigsaw that is never completed. As we read we are nevertheless tantalized by the prospect of meeting the man who has scrawled "Exterminate all the brutes" on his report for the "International Society for the Suppression of Savage Customs," participated in "unspeakable rites," and established his authority among the natives through the uncivilized practice of impaling heads on poles.

Is this a true picture of colonialism? During his life as a sailor, the writer visited the Belgian Congo so the details ring true. Also the objective, descriptive, and rather emotionally detached style of the narrator proves convincing. Nevertheless there is something rather mechanical about this picture. Conrad presents economic exploitation or vicious greed as the dominant if not the only force in this view of colonialism. Perhaps in the case of the Belgian Congo, a particularly brutal colonial system, this is justified, but those college students being fed this novel as representative of colonialism in general should be more wary.

To our modern materialistic sensibilities, it makes perfect sense that colonialism should be so greed-driven, but there were also more altruistic motives at work such as the desire to 'save,' 'educate,' and 'civilize' the natives. Conrad treats these with a healthy dose of cynicism. The philanthropic motives, sincerely believed by many in the home country, such as Marlow's Aunt, become in the face of the ruthless greed and brutality existing in the Congo no more than empty jargon, ironically spoked to justify the terrible cruelties inflicted on the natives for the benefit of the Company. But quite often these motives were actually sincere and brought great improvements to the natives, in many cases actually giving them the tools with which they later won their independence.

Although condemning their exploiters, Conrad has little real understanding of the natives who always remain mysterious and unfathomable:

"The prehistoric man was cursing us, praying to us, welcoming us - who could tell? We glided past like phantoms, wondering and secretly appalled, as sane men would be before an enthusiastic outbreak in a madhouse."

In this there is a lack of true sympathy, which however reassures us that he is not exaggerating or sentimentalizing the plight of the Africans. Colonialism was certainly not a blessing; maybe it wasn't a mixed blessing, but it might have been a mixed curse. Anyway, however you choose to view it, it undoubtedly had a profound impact on the economy, environment, culture, and identity of native peoples. We get little of this from Conrad and his "unfathomable savages."

I'm not sure how to feel about this book. While reading it, I really could not become absorbed by Conrad's dense prose, though, while occasionaly eloquent, is very thick, and, well, British. But now that I am finished with it, I can not get the images the novella invokes out of my head. The conquest of Africa by the Imperialist on the surface, and the corruption of man's very morality underneath. The story is deceptively simple, merely a man working for an Ivory trading company, ominously called "The Company", going up the Congo river to meet up with Kurtz, the archetype of Western Imperialism. During this trip, we are shown the inner workings of man and his heart of darkness. The novella is not perfect though. Conrad's condemnation of Imperialism is uneven. Yes, the only discernable cause of Kurtz's descent into evil and madness is the imperialist ethic of master-slave, and it is fairly clear that Marlowe (conrad) is condemning that ethic, but at the same time, he doesn't work very hard to elevate the view of the African natives any higher in the esteem of his western readers. Anyway, as the novella is only about 100 pages, it is something that can be read in a day. Invest an afternoon in it, and decide for yourself.

Heart of Darkness is a novella that really needs to be read more than just once to fully appreciate Conrad's style of writing. The story is an account of one man's simultaneous journey into the darkness of a river as well as into the shadows of a madman's mind. There is a very brilliant flow of foreshadowing that Conrad brings to his writing that provides the reader with accounts of the time period and the horrible events to come. Through Conrad's illuminating writing style we slowly see how the narrator begins to understand the madness or darkness that surrounds him.

I recommend this particular version of the novella because it contains a variety of essays, which discusses some of the main issues in the reading and historical information. Issues like racism and colonialism are discussed throughout many essays. It also contains essays on the movie inspired by the book Apocalypse Now, which is set against the background of the Vietnam War. I recommend reading Heart of Darkness and then viewing Apocalypse Now, especially in DVD format which contains an interesting directors commentary.

A nice debut by yet another blue collar southern bard. It reminds one of Harry Crews or Larry Brown. God help me for saying this, but Franklin portrays a kind of pastoral weirdness and brutality with an unflinching eye. At some point, readers are going to have to ask how much unflinching they can take.

Some of the early stories in the book are not as realized as they might be, but the payoff is the tour de force that is the title story at the end. "Poachers" is a memorable little novella that will leave readers looking forward to Franklin's novel.

Franklin has written a very impressive collection of short stories here, which I thought culminated in the excellent novella Poachers that gives the volume its name. He explores the backwoods of Alabama with a native's knowledge of the hunters and fishermen who live in the state's rural areas, and at the same time he possesses considerable skill in storytelling. I've never visited the area he writes so convincingly about, but those who live there seem to indicate he nailed the characters dead on.

The story "Poachers" involves a group of three amoral and uncontrollable brothers who wreak havoc in Alabama until a mysterious, legendary and mostly unseen game warden is dispatched to start picking them off. The suspense is tremendous as the hunters become the hunted in a cool, calculated, unhurried style. The story reminded me a little of the eerie movie Southern Comfort, where a bunch of National Guardsmen where systematically hunted down and killed in a rural Louisiana swamp by unseen Cajuns.

Other stories in this volume, while not as powerful as the title piece, were uniformly above average and sometimes very good. Frankin is always entertaining, and seems always to know what he is writing about. The author has been critized here at Amazon by one or two reviewers for inconsistent plot development, but I thought the plot of "Poachers" was as fully developed as that of most full length novels, and some of the shorter stories were meant to be experimental and a little abrupt. Short stories are seldom wrapped in conventional packages. Overall, I give the volume 4 stars, maybe 4 1/2 if you concentrate mostly on the title novella, and I enthusiastically look forward to reading Franklin's debut novel.

Tom Franklin is a terrific writer. His prose is sparse yet descriptive. Some might believe he's a slooshee made out of Ernest Hemingway, Larry Brown, and Raymond Carver. These stories will please fans of what the scowling (and snooty) independent bookseller with the "Give Peace a Chance" t-shirt called 'Oh, Southern GritLit fan are ya' when I dropped it at the cash register. These are stories about losers, dreamers, boozers, troublemakers, who carry on in the midst of self-imposed turmoil. I should warn the catlovers of the world (note: I gave a lovingly inscribed copy to Bessie for her birthday and bookmarked the Duane Juarez chapter) that there's a story in which cats (and kittens) get treated in an unkind manner. Of course, a lot of humans get treated poorly as well.

In any case, the writing is fabulous and the title novella is a bit of a chiller. Great beer-drinking reading and some of the finest writing I've seen in contemporary fiction. Oh, and a lot of these stories have a hint of humor to them, even in the midst of disaster. Good stuff and Heavy Hop Dop approves mightily.

Sayre's book really was excellent, and, if read carefully enough, seems quite balanced and fair, although of course Sayre has a distinct preference, being a friend of Franklin's. "Blah" from Connecticut, another reviewer here, makes his or her critical credetials quite clear when he/she says the book was scientific and therefore "jibberish." Ah, the intellectual acuity of American conservatives. You see, "Blah," the book was about science; it's going to have "science things" in it; if you can't understand them, that's a reflection on you, not the author. I'm a white male from Way-Back-Woodsville, Alaska, and I found the book quite readable, informative, and insightful. It's obvious that Franklin was never given her due credit until Sayre's book came out some 20 years after Watson and Crick's "discovery"...which they NEVER could have made without Franklin's work. Watson claims he was racing against Linus Pauling, but it's obvious he was actually racing against Franklin. Even Crick, in Sayre's book, admits she was only a few weeks away from DNA's structure. If Watson hadn't robbed her, she would have trumped Watson, Crick, AND Pauling and would have won the Nobel all by herself. So, "Blah," if you appreciate thievery and self-aggrandizement, Watson's definitely your cup of Rush Limbaugh. Me, I'll stick with the real hero...ine: Rosalind Franklin

I read James Watson's "The Double Helix" a number of years ago and assumed that it fairly described the events leading to the discovery of the structure of DNA. I especially remember the very negative impression I formed of Rosalind Franklin from Watson's description of her in that book.
Recently, while browsing in a local bookstore, I came across Sayre's book "Rosalind Franklin and DNA." It caught my attention because I enjoy reading about scientists, their lives, and their work. The book claimed to "set the record straight" concerning the story of Rosalind Franklin which also piqued my interest.
After reading this book, I must admit that I am quite baffled by the September 10, 2001 review from Baltimore below. I can assure anyone thinking about reading this book that it is exceptionally well written and very entertaining (not to mention extremely enlightening).
It is a well structured and convincing argument against Watson's very negative depiction of Franklin as a person and his condescending assessment of her abilities and accomplishments as a scientist. Although it is obvious that Sayre is arguing with the emotional zeal of one defending the reputation of a dear friend, she is very professional and methodical in her approach. She presents an overwhelming amount of testimony from the many people who know Rosalind Franklin intimately, (which Watson did not) and a very thorough and professional review of the pertinent scientific literature (which contradicts almost every opinion Watson gave of Franklin's work and abilities as a scientist). I gained a much better understanding and appreciation for who Rosalind Franklin was and what she really contributed to the pioneering work surrounding DNA. I regret that I so long maintained the distorted opinion gained from Watson's book.
I've always admired and respected James Watson as a scientist, but if Sayre's book paints a true picture then I am quite disappointed in him as a person. If you are a Watson-worshipper, you definitely will not like this book. But if you have an open mind and possess a sense of fairness you'll appreciate hearing Rosalind's side of the story as told through her friend Anne Sayre.

Sayre's book is a biography with an agenda. It is also one of the rare instances where an author is sufficiently thoughtful and objective to keep the agenda from ruining the piece.

Rosalind Franklin was a chemist doing x-ray crystallography on DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) in Maurice Wilkins' laboratory at King's College, London. Concurrently, James Watson and Francis Crick were trying to puzzle out DNA's molecular structure in the Cavendish Laboratory at Cambridge. Technically the two institutions were not competitors, because the English scientific establishment had "ceded" the DNA problem to King's. The world knows that Watson and Crick were first to publish the correct structure of the substance which encodes and controls every detail of the configuration, development, maintenance and reproduction of living things.

Watson and Crick were the kind of bad boys we generally admire. From positions very low on the Cavendish totem pole, they tunneled under, around and through the decorous conventions of incremental science to snatch a Nobel-caliber breakthrough from the very hands of the people who were supposed (eventually) to produce it. They even had a plausible excuse for ethical shortcuts, because the American superstar-chemist Linus Pauling, unconstrained by British decorum, was known to be working on the DNA structure.

In 1968, Watson published "The Double Helix", an entertaining and irreverent personal account of the triumph he and Crick had achieved in 1953. On the positive side, the book gave many people (including myself) their first look at the fascinating scientific and human details of a brilliant achievement in the relatively new field of molecular biology. On the negative side, Watson's version of the story did not please everyone who had prior knowledge of the people and events involved. Among the least pleased, to put it mildly, were the family and friends of Rosalind Franklin (Ms. Franklin herself did not live to see the cruelly caricatured "Rosy" that Watson sketched for his largely naive and trusting audience.)

One of the friends, Anne Sayre, took on the task of providing a comprehensive portrait of Franklin, interwoven with a retelling of the DNA story centered on the tragic consequences flowing from the simple inability of two intelligent people (Franklin and Wilkins) to get along. But the book is much more than a psychological study. Sayre documents some unambiguous facts that establish what Franklin knew about DNA and when she knew it. Also revealed are the instances in which her work was used without her knowledge and, even more unfortunately, the degree to which misunderstanding of Franklin's conclusions about the B-form of DNA slowed everyone's progress and robbed her of due credit.

I found Sayre to be unfailingly perceptive and balanced while following a course of strong, even indignant, advocacy. This is no mean feat, and follows in part from her extensive interviews with all the principals, as well as fruitful discussions with her scientist husband. I highly recommend the book to anyone interested in gaining perspective on the DNA story, and on science itself.

Thomas Fleming's work of conservative historical revisionism is valuable and at the same time disturbing. FDR was a highly flawed preson but a great man. It is good to have some conservative balance to the Roosevelt myth. Roosevelt's flaws are documented in this book such as the manipulation a president can do to get America into a war. But that is one the reasons it is disturbing. If FDR can do such manipulation, conservative revisionists should ask can other -more recent (Republican ) presidents do the same type of manipulation ? Roosevelt can be faulted for interment camps and as Fleming does very well documents the presence of Soviet agents such as Hiss in his administration. This reviewer wished there was more liberal (too many right wing attacks without the other side being presented) balance for this book can be used by isolationists for their own ends. If the author's thesis was that WW2 was not a noble cause then that is disturbing. Many antisemites and Hitler apologists make similiar claims. If the author thinks we should have fought Hitler then some balance should be included how Roosevelt 's actions were necessary. The book is well documented but needs more of an objective look in order to claim the mantle of scholarship.Fleming's claims that unconditional surrender caused the war to be extended is not proveable.Also attacking Roosevelt for not disclosing the Holocaust and doing more about it is somewhat fallacious. People on the right (Lindberg) would probably prefer that we didn't fight in WW2 ,so if we listened to the right wing back then the Holocaust would have continued unabated. FDR deserves the crefit for recognizing the evils of naziism .As said previously more objectivety is needed or this book starts to become right wing propaganda.

This book is what we Roosevelt haters have longed for for half a century. No hater of "that man in the White House" and his awful wife could have thought in fantasy half as much as Thomas Fleming demonstrates in fact. This book should be required reading for all liberals, Democrats, and leftists, and for all Jews I would recommend mandatory reading or a period of mandatory community service if they refused! Jews in America think FDR saved them from Hitler. In fact he prolonged Hitler's reign long enough to allow him to finish off the Jews he had not yet begun to kill in massive numbers. Without FDR, as without Woodrow Wilson, the 20th Century would have been less violent and less disastrous.

The underlying conventional belief is that the United States entered WWII as a direct result of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Thomas Fleming's book "The New Dealers' War" makes a credible argument for the case that the attack on Pearl Harbor was carefully orchestrated by FDR and his interventionist administration to get America into the war. Fleming bases his argument on a number of key points that he painstakingly documents throughout his book. The cornerstone of his argument is based upon the revelation of a document known as Rainbow Five. The document revealed that FDR had plans to create a 10 million man army for the purpose of invading Europe in 1943 and defeating the Nazi war machine. Fleming maintains that the existence of Rainbow Five was deliberately revealed by FDR himself with the intention of having Germany declare war on the United States. At that time, Americans had strong pro-Eruopean sentiments and favored aid to the allies but they stopped short of supporting direct US involvement in the escalating war. The book maintains that FDR lacked the political strength to sway public opinion in support of the war so he masterminded a series of events and policies that resulted in the attack on Pearl Harbor and the eventual declaration of war against the United States by Germany.

Whether or not Roosevelt intentionally manipulated people and events to achieve such a result remains unproven but this book does and exceptional job of examining the political climate of the time. Roosevelt's leadership during the depression is shown to be particularly magnificent. His mentality that traditional government mechanisms were inadequate led to the creation of a series of alphabet soup federal agencies that were designed to intervene in the economic crises. The "New Deal" itself was a balanced mixture of both pragmatism and Idealism. Having the ideology is one thing but implementing these ideas into practical programs required the skills of a master politician such as FDR. The shortcomings of Roosevelt's foreign policy program are magnified and examined in close detail but one comes away with a strong appreciation of the complex circumstances which he faced on the world stage. "The New Dealers' War" certainly provides numerable thought provoking questions that inspire conjecture but it comes across as an excellent work of narrative history.

I read the first edition, fell in love and got my first contract. This book is another grand slam! I recommend it to all my students. It is not for advanced Flashers. It is the best choice for beginners and is a great reference book. The CD-ROM only is worth every stars. I challenge every beginners to pick up this title and tell me they couldn't create and troubleshoot a Flash site! This book will leave you thirsty for more. You will then be frustrated to realize that there isn't yet a great advanced Flash5 book out there that will match and follow up the quality of this book. If you dont know Flash... buy this one!

This book is even better than the previous version, and I loved the previous version. I am amazed at the advancement I've made when using Flash 5 since getting this book. ActionScript coverage is easy to understand a very thorough. The video tutorials on the CD are excellent. I HIGHLY recommend this book.

This book would be very appropriate as a text for a class teaching Flash 5. It is VERY complete in its coverage and very easy to read. It is unusual for me to be able to read a technical book without stopping several times but this book was the exception. It was hard to put down.