Has there ever been a more perfect marriage between character and actor? As ever, discussing any of the Morse books is impossible without discussing the actor who portrays him. The two are linked (in my mind, at least) forever. In this title, Morse is his quintessential self and calls to mind Jonathan Thaw. As usual, the mystery is good, Morse's ego is exquisite, and the writing is engaging. Here is one series where watching the videos does not detract from the source material. In fact, knowing John Thaw's Morse serves to heighten enjoyment of reading the books.

The history of the mystery is replete with examples of detectives who tread a fine line between the amusingly eccentric and the downright boorish (Sherlock Holmes being the archetype; Poirot, Nero Wolfe, and others following in his footsteps). Colin Dexter's Inspector Morse fits squarely and delightfully in this tradition. If you've never seen the TV series on PBS and A&E, or better yet read one of the books, you're really missing out on something special.

Morse, whose first name wasn't revealed for years, is an Oxford-educated, beer-drinking, Opera-loving, vintage Jaguar-driving, Crossword puzzle maven and also one of the biggest curmudgeons in all of literature. He does not suffer fools gladly, other than his much put upon but continually bemused partner Lewis. His superiors are forced to tolerate his idiosyncrasies and his bibliousness because he also has a uniquely intuitive mind and a knack for solving the most puzzling crimes. In an interesting symbiosis, John Thaw's television portrayal of Morse bled over into the novels and took some of the harsher edges off of the character and Kevin Whatley's Lewis helped to make the character less of a dolt and more of a naïf in the books too.

In this Gold Dagger winning installment in the series, Morse is on an unwelcome holiday when he gets drawn into the case of a year old disappearance of a Swedish girl who is assumed to have been murdered and ditched in the local woods. The largely moribund investigation is reinvigorated when The Times receives a cryptic letter with tantalizing but ambiguous literary clues to the dead girl's whereabouts. As the story unfolds Morse finds himself in the midst of a murder investigation that includes everything from pornography to ornithology. As always, the book offers both a satisfying mystery and the great pleasure of watching Morse and Lewis interact with one another and with suspects, superiors and the various ladies who inevitably tweak Morse's heartstrings.

After a highly successful run of 13 novels, Dexter killed Morse off earlier this year in The Remorseful Day. On the one hand, it's nice to see an author finish a series while he still has his fastball, but Morse and Lewis will be missed. Try one of the books and keep an eye peeled for the show, both are outstanding.

GRADE: A+

A very well crafted book. Superb plotting as one would expect from this author. This book continues the Morse mystique (he is still able to attract women half his age) but gives Lewis a little more assertiveness. Quite unputdownable.

There are many things to like about this book, most of which are described well by the other reviewers. What really struck me about this book (perhaps because I listened to the unabridged tape) was how so much of the plot turned on what happens when a writer is less than precise with language. Mortimer does a masterful job of creating Felix, a writer who doesn't even realize that his misstatements are misstatements or the trouble those statements cause.

Overall, it took me a while to warm up to the book but by the end I was rooting hard for the truth to emerge. The actual ending was a little corny but ok. It's a book filled with a fun assortment of characters. More than a few humorous jabs are made at the modern publishing world and modern society in general. Not a laugh out loud book but one that made me chuckle to myself.

A New York Times notable mystery in 1997 - for those who are fond of books with credentials.

A hapless middle-aged midlist author gets embroiled in the British legal system when he is accused of fathering a child and not paying support. You may need a certain amount of anglophilia and interest in the literary scene to fully appreciate it. The only fault I could find was that it's too short. I hate finishing books in one night before I fall asleep.

John Mortimer is the writer of many charming and wonderful books, although he is no doubt best known for his stories of Horace Rumpole, the irascible British barrister. In Felix in the Underworld, Mortimer showcases his comic and satirical talents most admirably.

Mortimer reminds me a little of bestselling Japanese novelist, Haruki Murakami, in that his characters in this book are quite ordinary people who live quite ordinary lives but have the absurdly bad fortune of simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The protagonist of Felix in the Underworld, Felix Morsom, is a moderately successful, quiet, sensitive novelist at Llama Books who manages to become involved, much against his will, with a man named Gavin Piercey.

Soon after meeting Piercey, Felix notices the man everywhere in his life: at book signings, during radio talk shows and, most especially, at one fateful meeting where Piercey introduces Felix to a woman named Miriam. This meeting will have serious, but hilarious, repercussions on Felix's life.

From the moment Felix meets Miriam, his life becomes one of turmoil and wild, unbelievable events. He receives a letter from an agency calling itself PROD; he is accused of a brutal murder; he becomes involved with London's homeless population.

Mortimer's handling of the plot is superb, his writing as smooth as silk and the characters, although slightly cliched, are still polished and hilarious. One of the funniest is the lawyer, Septimus Roache, the man Felix turns to in desperation when he attempts to prove his innocence in the murder. Roache is an obtuse and self-satisfied man who has little to no interest in his clients and really doesn't listen to a word Felix is telling him.

Mortimer, who himself was a successful barrister before becoming a writer, knows how to create a rollicking good murder mystery and this is part of why Felix in the Underworld works as well as it does. Another large part is Felix, himself, an engaging character we can't help but like; a man who maintains his dignity and poise even in the face of adversity of the highest, and most unexpected, order.

Mortimer calls himself a "Champagne socialist," and is a champion of the poor and the downtrodden. In this book he manages to take us on a trip through contemporary British society, especially homeless society. The book is fun, though, above all, and never sounds like polemic. We can credit Mortimer's superb writing skills for that.

The snobbish character of Simon Tubal-Smith, Felix's boss at Llama Books is contrasted wonderfully with Esmond, a homeless man who was, at one time, a manager in a supermarket. Esmond left his job and home for a life in the streets when tragedy struck. Felix, himself, spends some time as a member of London's homeless population and is reminiscent of George Orwell's Down and Out in Paris and London.

The dialogue is pure Mortimer and always fun. When Felix is temporarily residing in jail, his cellmate is a man named Dumbarton who allegedly beat another man to death. "You killed him?" Felix asks. "Thoroughly," Dumbarton replies, quite satisfied with what he did.

Felix is both self-effacing and hilarious as he attempts to cope with unhelpful lawyers who do just as much to convict as help him, as he tries to sort out the mystery behind PROD, as well as develop his budding relationship with Brenda Bodkin, his publisher's publicity agent.

Although this book is a little formulaic at times, the formula works and works well. Maybe that is because Mortimer is a master who never lets us down. Felix in the Underworld is a first-rate murder mystery, a comedy of errors and a satire of the British class system. It is always delightful and filled with surprises up until the very last page.

This is a book accessible to any Shakespeare reader - not just the theater or academic professional. The writing is direct & dynamic, Pennington discusses each scene & character individually, and his footnoted personal comments add even more to one's understanding. I particularly enjoyed his footnote about advice he received from an 11 year old regarding how to play Claudius and the Ghost. Something you will find here and rarely elsewhere: more than a passing mention of Rosencrantz & Guildenstern's roles, although I take exception to Pennington's view of them as essentionally innocent characters. I'd rate this 5 stars if he had written a better analysis of the character of Horatio. Pennington balances his odd defense of R&G by down-playing Horatio's integrity. His analysis of the Play Within the Play Scene comes to an astonishing & wise conclusion about the real victim. I've seen it nowhere else; no - I won't tell you here; read the book. Educators: this is an A+ supplement to a class study of Hamlet whether at the high school or college level.

Michael Pennington, a Royal Shakespeare Company actor who has played Hamlet many times himself, writes this brilliant book to help both the actor attempting to play a role, and the confused reader who is starting out on their first play. It goes through the play scene by scene and makes frequent references both to other criticisms of Hamlet and other works of Shakespeare. Unlike many works of criticisms on Hamlet, this book does not focus only on the protagonist, but on all characters. Making frequent reference to past performances of Hamlet and the methods used, Pennington illuminates the script through discussing performance techniques. One instance where this is most helpful is the discussion of the ghost. One of the most difficult scenes to stage for any director, Hamlet: A User's Guide discusses the meanings that different stagings bring to the play. Hamlet: A User's Guide is an excellent companion when reading Hamlet and a good way to shed light on the motivations of some of the main characters.

This is a delightful book that brings you into Hamlet as an actor. To see the play this way is to see it as a series of technical problems in the way of bringing off something elusive and difficult-that is, a fine and moving performance. Now Art, like Science, uses technique, but (like Science!) uses technique in the service of wonder. Bringing a great play to life should be a labor of love for the actors; in a great story it can bring them alive as well.

I am not an actor, and had not, before reading this book, been terribly interested in the craft. I am a playgoer, though, and had long appreciated that stage acting requires an impressive array of physical and mental skills, and to do Shakespeare well is perhaps as tasking as anything, given the requirements of diction and action, and the expectations of the audience, many of whom have seen the play many times, and tend to be hypercritical of performances of the sacred texts.

Pennington has much experience in classical theater, and knows Hamlet particularly well. After a refreshingly plain-spoken introduction he launches into a blow-by-blow for the five days of the play, trying to make the sequences of action and the lapses of time cohere into an intelligible and consistent narrative (a bit of challenge, actually). The running commentary here speculates on character and motivation, with rich asides on the way they did it at the Globe, or how it played in the West End recently, and alludes to other of the Bard's plays and characters without breaking stride. All of this is fun, but is also a necessary preparation. This is a story, after all, and every scene, every speech, every gesture, must contribute to the telling of it. But first, the action must make sense to the actors, or else gesture becomes grimace, and what should fizz goes flat. Reading this book will, I think, cure one of the notion that acting is simply about learning your part. Be that as it may, reading this is also a delightful way to prepare to watch the play.

Next, the author takes us through each character, giving us strong opinions, options, and a sense of the possibilities. In one sense, after four hundred years no one is going to have a strikingly original pose for Ophelia, or Hamlet, or Claudius. But the fact is, each generation begins anew, and as the actor forms a past and a personality for his character, he is doing it in a new world; he can't help but be original.

The conclusion, of the state of the Play and of the Theatre in general, widens the scope, but keeps the intimate sense of a conversation. Professionals will enjoy this book and profit from it I would think, but any playgoer will find his sense of this play-and all plays-enriched by Pennington's reflections.

The great aspect about Davies' triogies is that each component is a stand alone novel. I read Leaven of Malice and simply enjoyed it! Davies being an editor and publisher, writes with material from experience in the editing buisness. Davies stays true to a Canadian based setting and Canadian characters. He also suggests a dignified proper tone to the book through his diction. It is amusing how these proper characters can act so immature (in their dignified way) and provide so much entertainment to the reader. Davies has the art down of conveying believable characters who do and say outrageous things, and at the same time creates characters that are used in the form of satire. This book is #2 on my list after Fifth Business...this one is a definite read. You will get a lot out of it.

Book 2 of the Salterton Trilogy. Following up on loose ends from Tempest-Tost, and immediately beginning to unravel even more. A rich plot with Dickensian characters and twists (Davies was a great Dickens scholar so no surprise here). A bit deeper than Tempest-Tost, but still obviously an early effort although showing the deft touch with dialogue and character that came to distinguish Davies as a leading novelist.

A Mixture of Frailties tells two complete but entwined stories: one of Sully and his young wife who are burdened by the 'dead hand' of Sully's mother (they must produce a male heir or forfeit a fortune to 'little Miss Nobody, studying Japanese flower-arranging' under the terms of her malevolent will); another of a provincial Canadian girl, Monica, who benefits from the absurd trust established by the will, and makes her way to Europe to learn if she has any talent as an opera singer. Monica has talent, though she often confounds herself in her struggles between filial loyalty to her coarse parents and her innappropriate love for a composer of brilliance but no kindness. In the world of Robertson Davies there are always happy endings. Monica will find her heart, and her future as a singer; Sully and his wife will find a fortune and an heir; a multitude of the sort of people who ought to exist, but somehow never do, will pop up along the way. But the best thing of all? Though Robertson Davies died recently, he left three and two-thirds trilogies which merit reading and re-reading. The man whom The New York Times called "The Canadian Trollope" has left a vastly entertaining and richly humorous collection of novels, essays, and miscellany.

The Moonstone is a slow-paced detective novel written in the 19th century in London, England. The Moonstone was first obtained by Colonel Herncastle who bequeaths it to his niece Miss Rachel on her sixteenth birthday. She is thrilled with her gift and sets the gem in her bedside table that night. When she awakens the next morning, the moonstone is nowhere to be found. The loss of the moonstone is told by Mr. Betteredge, a servant in Miss Rachel's house. Mr. Betteredge offers an outside opinion, as he is not directly involved in the mystery, but sees all that goes on. The rest of the book is split up into different narratives from various characters of the book. Each character's narrative is able to give the reader more pieces to the puzzle. Wilkie Collins wrote this book so well that the characters stand on their own during their narratives. Their personalities surface and are not supported by one another. This was very helpful in keeping the characters straight due to the detail and character that Collins gave them. I really liked this part of the book because all the clues to the mystery weren't given to the reader on a silver platter. Every character in the book had a separate identity. They had more purpose than just happening to be involved in the mystery.
The Moonstone is also unpredictable. Collins will lead the reader to believe and act on other facts before turning the evidence completely around and ending up with a conclusion that throws the reader for a loop. I appreciated this because it kept me reading. I found out who stole the moonstone along with the characters. It was refreshing not to know the answer and having to wait for the other characters to figure it out. I also found the little subplots that were created during the story. They showed the interactions of the characters and helped to explain the personalities of the characters even more. The only problem that I found with The Moonstone is that Collins has a lot of patience. He is content to examine every detail before moving on with the next piece to the puzzle. He also encourages his characters to wait with the solving of the mystery. It is almost exasperating to be so close in solving the mystery that only one character must be interviewed. Almost always, the character will be indisposed or out-of-town. It was a little frustrating to have to wait for the characters to return and having to read about what they had for dinner in the meantime. On a positive note, reading The Moonstone was like watching a movie. However, instead of watching the characters eat, the reader reads about it. This still only adds to the detail of the book and makes you appreciate Collins work on making sure that every element of the story is attended to. All in all, The Moonstone was a great novel, and I would recommend it to anyone who likes a good puzzle to solve.

The Moonstone is a cleverly contrived tale of a stolen Indian dimond which becomes the dangerous inheritance of Rachel Vendier. When the incredible dimond is stolen, for the second time, the seemimly simple case becomes a masterpiece of mystery and suspense. The novel entangles us in every page. We become lost in the emotions of the 19th century characters. When the mystery begins to unfold, we delieghtedly press on, only to find that Collins has outwitted us again. Collins has an amazing talent for assuming a variety of narrative voices, which keep the reader envolved with the individual characters. Each new clue elicits thousands of questions, arousing in the reader, a desire to read on and on. The Moonstone is the most outstanding cassic detective mystery novel ever written.

Whatever I say would not be enough to make you understand how I loose myself when reading this detective story.Actually this was my first try at a book written in that manner. But more or less I know Holmes' way of presenting crime and mysterious events. Moonstone goes far beyond the limit of these cliche detective scope and reaches to your hearts with its seven different characters;all narrating their own side of the story centering on an oriental myth of a sacred gem. There is the historical background, the emotional diologues, and finally the inevitable conciseness in language while dictating the action, just like in all detective stories. Wilkie Collins' touch can be seized when you go deep into characters such as Ezra Jennings. There is lot of things to be explored and make fun of! Don't be afraid of the length and page number:). When you follow the moonstone in its journey to home, you WILL DISCOVER OTHER THINGS SUCH AS LOVE, HUMAN SUFFERING other than the war given for the priceless Indian DiamOnd.
Best Wishes On Your Journey Whoever You Are Wherever You ARE!

(Warning: contains major plot spoilers)

I have to admit, this story disappointed me. It's OK, but just not as good as I've come to expect from Neil Gaiman. In 'Sandman' and 'Death: The High Cost Of Living' he managed to create a character who was at once very likeable and yet utterly convincing. She loves _everybody_, no matter who they are, and when their time is up she comes for them - that's who and what she is. The Endless may look and even act human now and then, but they're not. She's not 'Death Girl'; she _is_ death.

But in 'The Time Of Your Life', Gaiman tries to make her more human. When Alvin dies, she takes pity on Hazel and gives him a few more months of life; later, she allows someone else to die in his place. This is not how death works in the real world, and up until now it's not how Death has worked in Gaiman's world either. It's not true to the character we know, and the change just isn't convincing. Gaiman has engineered a 'happy ending' of sorts, but the credibility of his character has suffered.

While "Death: The High Cost of Living" had a more intriguing storyline, I still loved "Death: The Time of Your Life." The story features Foxglove, a minor character in the first Death graphic novel, and her lover, Hazel. Their trials and tribulations--including Foxglove's sudden rise to fame and the dynamic of having a son, Alvie--are illustrated (no pun intended.)

While the story isn't fleshed out as much as it could be, it was still a very enjoyable, engrossing read. The illustrations are beautiful and the emotions were dead-on and lacking in cliche, usually a given in Gaiman & co's work.

Foxglove must have been modeled on Ani DiFranco (another reason to love her!) but we don't really learn enough about Hazel. And as mentioned in other reviews, Death is far from the main character here. However, as I've stated, there is a lot to like here, and I do believe this qualifies as a must-have for Death--and Sandman/Gaiman--enthusiasts.

(Also an excellent introduction for those not familiar with Gaiman's world, or the world of comics at large.)

In the hands of most ordinary writers, this book would be a disaster. It juggles a myriad of complex issues, such as sexuality, the fleeting nature of fame, the multiple meanings of love, desire, and committment, and the value of friendship and life. Each of these concepts would be enough for a book on its own...
Aren't we lucky that Neil Gaiman is definitely no ordinary writer? And his character of Death is extraordinary too; she cares.
Foxglove is struggling personally even as her fame shoots through the roof - she wonders whether she should stay in the closet, and whether she should stay with Hazel and their son Alvie or go it alone. Hazel is struggling too; she wants to know the value of her relationship, and to save her son's life, most of all. Death listens. Understandingly. Patiently. And because of her, Hazel and Foxglove realize what matters most to them.
Though it lacks the immediacy and emotional power of Death: The High Cost Of Living, this is still a captivating companion piece. It carries through the same message as D:THCOL - the most important thing in life is to remember to live.

I have read four of Hardy's novels and loved them but I didn't like this one and didn't even finish it. For one it is not an engaging novel. Usually I can't put Hardy's novels down but I was reluctant to pick this one up. Second Hardy seems to blame "society" for everything that goes wrong in Jude's life. This is a huge departure for Hardy who normally writes about flawed characters that create their own misery and troubles. Blaming social pressure not Jude's personal acts is a departure from his other books such as The Mayor of Casterbridge.

I personally had no sympathy for Jude or the other characters in the book. I also found the anti-marriage theme troubling. Jude chose to enter a relationship with Arabella who was completely wrong for him. People who knowingly enter relationships and then marriages with inappropriate people are completely responsible for the misery that results. Saying that social conformity is a bad thing because it asks men to take responsibility for the offspring they produce is troubling. Yes Arabella tricked him into marriage with a false pregnancy but he chose to become intimate with someone knowing pregnancy was a possibility. Hardy's theme of victimization is so annoying I don't plan to read anymore of his books.

Jude the Obscure, written by Thomas Hardy, is the story of Jude Fawley and Sue Bridehead. It follows the development of their love for each other and then their demise as lovers. I did not enjoy this book. I found its characters to be feeble and its theme twisted.
Jude Fawley is a penniless orphan raised by his aunt in a small English village. He is inspired by his schoolmaster Mr. Phillotson to pursue a goal of attending one of the great universities in the town of Christminster. His dream is crushed when the universities reject him because he was not properly educated, and more importantly because he is not of the upper class. While in Christminster Jude falls in love with his cousin Sue Bridehead who is a rogue in society. Sue is well read and opinionated. Before becoming acquainted with Jude, She had lived with a young scholar that loved her. The two were never married because Sue desired to live as comrades and not sweethearts because she did not love him. The entire novel follows the love affair of these two outcasts of society.
I found that I could not become emotionally attached to these characters. Jude and Sue constantly assumed the role of victim. For example, Sue promises to marry Jude's old school master Mr. Phillotson. She tells Jude that it is Mr. Phillotson's plan that Sue will complete a teacher training school, and then the two, as a married couple, will take a position at a double school (a school for both boys and girls). Sue acts like the victim of Mr. Phillotson's planning; she does not even consider that she could reject the plan just like she rejected the young scholar of her early days. After several of these incidents, I became desensitized to the suffering of the characters. Hardy lost his ability to manipulate my emotions by creating weak characters that never reacted to their surroundings, but were only acted upon by society.
Thomas Hardy must be given credit for building consistent characters. Both Jude and Sue remain predictable throughout the novel. This quality leant credibility to the characters, because everything they did fit with their personality. I could believe that the characters were truly spineless human beings. They never surprised me by doing anything bold or courageous.
I also found this novel to be distasteful due to the fact that I was left in a quandary as to the theme of the book after I had completed my reading. It appears Hardy was writing a criticism of the institution of marriage, but that can be debated. For example, Hardy pens the following statement by Sue as she and Jude attempt to marry in the Superintendent Registrar's office: "Jude-I don't like it here! I wish we hadn't come! The place gives me the horrors: it seems so unnatural as the climax of our love! I wish it had been at church, if it had to be at all. It is not so vulgar there!" (284) From this statement I would assume that Hardy is against marriage. But at the point in the novel that this statement is made, Jude and Sue had been living together for some time. It can thus be argued that this sentiment arose from not performing the marriage ceremony at the proper time. The theme of the novel would then be that marriage is necessary and must be done properly. I must confess that Hardy forces the reader to think and ponder in order to derive the themes from the novel. But I prefer a theme that is not so debatable.
I rate this novel as deserving two stars. Thomas Hardy creates consistent and credible characters. He also provokes the mind of the reader to ponder his novel. But his characters were cowardly and his theme unresolved, which is unsuited to my taste in literature.

Prior to reading Jude the Obscure, I had a smattering of knowledge about the religious uproar it caused upon publication, which led Hardy to abandon novels and focus merely on poetry. His work being denounced and burned by the churches, Hardy felt that if that was to be the treatment of his work, he would no longer produce the work.

Now that I have read the novel, and having attempted to place myself in the mindset of the later 19th century morals and ideals, I can begin to understand why such an uproar was raised.

First, the story...Jude Fawley, of poor and meager birth, aspires to academic greatness. When it is recommended to him that he stay on the 'blue collar' course he has begun, and not wish for more, he decides to educate himself, one day hoping that it will position him for greater things.

Jude enters into a hasty marriage, which by later standards would be described as a 'shotgun' wedding, which he eventually comes to regret, and ends. Enter his cousin Sue, who becomes the love of his life. Sue also ends an unsatisfactory first marriage, freeing herself to be with Jude, whom she loves as well.

What follows is a descent into tragedy and despair, with numerous twists and turns along the way. Not wanting to spoil them, I will not divulge.

However, the remainder of the novel touches upon many, many themes that amounted to raising of the ire of the church in response. Divorce; childbirth out of wedlock; loss of faith in God; questioning religious ideals and teachings; all these and more are present in the latter half of the novel, and so much more.

Upon finishing the book, I was left to question were these really Hardy's own feelings illustrated in his work, or simply a realization of a course of events for the characters, and not a reflection on the author's beliefs. That, however, bears further reading on the life of Thomas Hardy.

Where I find fault with the novel is in the characters, and it is merely a distaste with their actions. Sue, the heroine, spends far too much time vacillating about her love for Jude and her desire to marry him. When Jude tries to do the right thing by Sue, and respect her wishes, she claims he has 'given up too easily, and doesn't seem at all disappointed'. Jude's first wife, Arabella, displays an utterly selfish, self-absorbed personality, and was, for me, unlikeble, and unsympathetic. Jude, a character capable of learning Latin and Greek and engaging in other scholarly pursuits, seems completely naive in the ways of the world, and further seems blinded by a sense of duty over a sense of the rights and wrongs of others. His actions make him appear to have no regard for himself, until the very end.

Perhaps this is exactly as Hardy meant the characters to be seen, perhaps not. I did enjoy the book more than I expected to, and apparently more than others who have said to me "What on earth are you reading THAT for???". Hardy is not a comedy writer, and one should not expect a glamorous, cheerful, tidy ending, it does not exist here.

While not the greatest of classic novels I have read, I can certainly see why this one has been discussed for over 100 years. While Dickens peppered his stories with levity to break up the gloom, Hardy continues on a downward spiral, leaving his characters in despair within and without. I recommend it to readers who enjoy a good characterization of later 19th century life in England. But if you are looking for something to put a smile on your face, Hardy might not be for you.

When the trunk of a dismembered body is fished out of the canal, Inspector Morse is almost certain that it is Oxford don Browne-Smith, who has recently dropped out of sight. But then a letter, purportedly written by that don, indicates that perhaps the body is that of a different don. But then perhaps the letter is deliberately misleading, and the remains may be Browne-Smith after all. This is one of the most perplexing of the Morse mysteries. The apparent motive is supplied in a World War 2 flashback at the beginning of the novel, when Browne-Smith's cowardice prevents the saving of a soldier who could be the younger brother of a set of twins in the same tank unit, who are now seeking revenge after all these years. But as the novel progresses, the possible identity of the headless, handless, legless corpse keeps changing, and as soon as a new candidate appears, his readily identifiable body pops up elsewhere, until all the probabilities seem to be exhausted. Don't bother trying to guess the outcome of this novel. Just try to keep up with the sudden changes. Morse is at his best here, unraveling the bewildering texture of this complex mystery thread by thread. The characterizations are excellent, and although the overall plot is a bit incredible, it is handled in Dexter's usual smooth style. This is one of the best of the Morse series.

It's certainly a crime of the most perplexing sort--so perplexing (and convoluted) that it
would take an Inspector Morse to separate the "facts" from "fiction"! In Colin Dexter's
Morse novel, one of a long series, the erswhile policeman finds himself "drowning" in a sea of clues,
lies, innuendos, red herrings.

A dismembered body is fished out of the Oxford Canal--only the torso remains and
Morse and Sergeant Lewis are up to the challenge. As if often the case, Oxford

University is involved. A don has disappeared, leaving about a plethora of clues. It's the
long and winding road down the halls of academe for the Thames Valley police and the
trail bounces back and forth to London and some of its seedier spots.

The scenario seems set with an opening scene out of World War II, when the
Gilbert brothers (local boys from the Oxford area) face the horrors of the battle of El
Alamein, the youngest of the three dieing. The company commander, a Lt. Browne-Smith
just happens now to be a don in question at Oxford.

Dexter pulls on punches as he permits Morse and Lewis to take on this
bizarre--certainly macabre--case. With his usual erudite style, the author's clever, at times
witty and ascerbic, plot and character development takes the reader for a great ride (and
read). Written in 1983, long before, one presumes, Dexter had envisioned Morse's demise
("The Remorseful Day"), "The Riddle of the Third Mile" is carefully orchestrated, with
the climactic results rushing in with a top crescendo! (The reader must be a bit careful as
the facts and events come almost as an onslaught!) The tone of this episode, despite its
shocking crime scenario, is one of greater levity than some of his later books ("The Wench
Is Dead," for instance),but it was written some 15 years before "Remorseful Day," and the
tone and atmosphere are naturally different. This one gives additional insight into Morse's
earlier (younger) days, of his stepping down from Oxford and of the first love of his life
(Morse is ever the eternal optimist when it comes to beautiful women!). Dexter also fills
this one with his usual literary allusions, clever references, and an incredible vocabulary
(probably only equated by Dame P.D. James or William Buckley, themselves!).

I found this one probably to be the most delightful and intriguing of the Morse series,
perhaps because of the levity he chooses to exhibit. Regardless, readers of the Morse code
will find this episode in fine keeping with the others. A good read!

It's certainly a crime of the most perplexing sort--so perplexing (and convoluted) that it
would take an Inspector Morse to separate the "facts" from "fiction"! In Colin Dexter's
Morse novel, one of a long series, the erswhile policeman finds himself "drowning" in a sea of clues,
lies, innuendos, red herrings.

A dismembered body is fished out of the Oxford Canal--only the torso remains and
Morse and Sergeant Lewis are up to the challenge. As if often the case, Oxford
University is involved. A don has disappeared, leaving about a plethora of clues. It's the
long and winding road down the halls of academe for the Thames Valley police and the
trail bounces back and forth to London and some of its seedier spots.

The scenario seems set with an opening scene out of World War II, when the
Gilbert brothers (local boys from the Oxford area) face the horrors of the battle of El
Alamein, the youngest of the three dieing. The company commander, a Lt. Browne-Smith
just happens now to be a don in question at Oxford.

Dexter pulls on punches as he permits Morse and Lewis to take on this
bizarre--certainly macabre--case. With his usual erudite style, the author's clever, at times
witty and ascerbic, plot and character development takes the reader for a great ride (and
read). Written in 1983, long before, one presumes, Dexter had envisioned Morse's demise
("The Remorseful Day"), "The Riddle of the Third Mile" is carefully orchestrated, with
the climactic results rushing in with a top crescendo! (The reader must be a bit careful as
the facts and events come almost as an onslaught!) The tone of this episode, despite its
shocking crime scenario, is one of greater levity than some of his later books ("The Wench
Is Dead," for instance),but it was written some 15 years before "Remorseful Day," and the
tone and atmosphere are naturally different. This one gives additional insight into Morse's
earlier (younger) days, of his stepping down from Oxford and of the first love of his life
(Morse is ever the eternal optimist when it comes to beautiful women!). Dexter also fills
this one with his usual literary allusions, clever references, and an incredible vocabulary
(probably only equated by Dame P.D. James or William Buckley, themselves!).

I found this one probably to be the most delightful and intriguing of the Morse series,
perhaps because of the levity he chooses to exhibit. Regardless, readers of the Morse code
will find this episode in fine keeping with the others. A good read! ...

I suppose this is another example of why the people who actually write a piece of software shouldn't handle its documentation. This is a somewhat haphazard reference to GTK+; it doesn't have nearly enough information to act as a tutorial, even to an experienced C programmer, and yet it's not complete enough to act as a reference guide either. Like most hacker's documentation, this is far from clear and complete; it seems geared towards people who are willing to fill in the blanks in the text themselves through reading source code or online docs. Of course, if you need to do that, why bother purchasing the book in the first place? Just read the online docs. I wish I could suggest this book, as it is an "open source" manual, but there's better material out there.

I bought this book hoping it would dilute the muck about linux GUI programming... Unfortunately, I found this to be very topical with a lot of the base of GTK. I can see this as more of a desktop reference rather than a intro/guide. I don't suggest buying this book if you don't already know a lot of GTK basics.

Fair warning: I was one of the technical reviewers of this book.

This is currently the definitive book on Gtk+ and Gnome programming. Such a book is most definitely needed, as there isn't a lot of good documentation for Gnome programming right now.

One of the great strengths of this book is that it's based on real-life experience with Gnome. Havoc is one of the core Gnome developers, and author of the Guppi chart package among other things. Most of the technical reviewers are people that actually implemented major pieces of Gnome.

Thus, you're likely to find not just a rehash of the API reference (which actually would be useful in itself, given the state of Gnome documents), but a clear explanation of various design decisions you're likely to face, pitfalls to avoid, and recipes for solving problems. My guess is that this will quickly become a well-thumbed book on the shelf of any serious Gnome programmer.

I guess my biggest gripe with the book is its limited scope with regard to some of the more advanced areas in Gnome. For example, there's very little coverage of CORBA or Bonobo, the Gnome component framework. Given that these parts are still somewhat in flux, your best bet is to read the source. This book is a good guide to have along as you explore the Gnome development environment.

I have no doubt that Basil Pennington is a very loving and well-meaning man,and an expert on his subject. But he is also very maddening.If you want to know about the background to centering prayer then probably this is as good an introduction to that aspect of the subject as any. But if , like me, you actually want to know how to do centering prayer, then don't bother with this book. It tells you just about everything you could wish to know about the history, benifits, and application of centering prayer (it even tells you how to structure centering prayer retreats and seminars). But unbelievably, within its 254 pages Pennington devotes little more than one page on how to actually do it, and what he does say is vague and interspersed with latin phrases. I have the impression that Pennington has written something more explicit somewhere, but this book is definitely not it.

Centering Prayer is a method to experience direct connection with the Divine. This book explains the terminology, psychology, and processes around this updated and modernized form of contemplative prayer. It is a shame to me that the Church does not emphasize the contemplative dimension of the Gospels more. But luckily we have authors like Basil, Pennington, Keating, and Merton to help us along.

The words that the Catholic Church uses to describe God's divine plan and the methods lay and religeous alike can use to attain Divine Union are frought with confusion and ambiguity. Terms like "economy" and "meditation" are used commonly today but have subtle differences when talking about the spirit and the soul as seen by the Church.

This books explains these anomolies, talks about the commonality and differences with other forms of contemplative prayer from other traditions, and truly opens the door for a Divine relationship with the Trinity.

The concept of centering prayer is one that can be alienating to many people raised in the traditional American tradition. Most of us have been raised to be "doers," "analyzers," "achievers," etc. To many of us in that category, prayer is something to pursue actively whether it be at Mass, communal prayer, Liturgy of the Hours, etc. The author presents centering prayer as something different, perhaps even beyond our traditional understanding of prayer. "Centering Prayer", by M. Basil Pennington, presents a concept well-suited, yet often challenging for our hectic times. The book, written a number of years ago, presents the method of prayer in a new light, combing eastern Christian spiritual exercises with the context of western spirituality, offering practical guidelines for integrating the "way of prayer" into our daily lives.

The author presents the concept of centering prayer in a simple format, clearly outlining and explaining the history, status and principles of this ancient, but recently revitalized tradition. We are reminded continuously that faith is a gift from God; our ability to pray depends upon our willingness to "rest in the Lord." We are called to empty ourselves and allow God to enter our hearts and our souls. Drawing on a number of sources, including Thomas Merton, Thomas Keating, Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross as well as the anonymous author of "The Cloud of Unknowing," Father Pennington offers a simple, cogent discussion of the various aspects of prayer.

Even beyond the text, this book is an invitation. It is an invitation to open oneself to God and the gift of grace. It's neatly arranged chapters offer the reader the opportunity to reflect upon the nature of prayer and reference it frequently as needed. As one progresses in the way of centering prayer, this book is a simple, yet invaluable resource.