Queen Lucia is the first in the series of novels that invite us in to Riseholm and the lives of it's residents. Lucia is the snobbish self appointed but undisputed Queen of everything cultural in this small rural english village. However she finds herself challenged unintentionally by Olga Bracely a famous opera singer who takes up residence in the village. As she fights for her throne the reader is witness to the malice, manipulation and backstabbing that is just under the surface in village life. As in all good stories Lucia is all but dethrowned and then regains the upper hand once again. The book is witty, full of interesting if somewhat strange characters and entertaining. After first reading Queen Lucia I felt a little disapointed having heard Bentley described as being on a par with Wilde, Wodehouse and Coward. I do not find this claimed level of wit and word smithing in Queen Lucia myself, however once I got past this disappointment I found myself both entertained by and fond of this novel.

And the other 2 are also by Benson ... well, tied with Toole's "Confedearcy of Dunces" and Keenan's "Blue Heaven."

There's a slow start with the first chapter--Benson's humour is entirely character-based, so you needs must meet the character before the jokes can begin--but once they begin, they don't let up.

Luckily (because you'll want more, more more after this book) there are others in the series. This first book sets the pattern: wealthy, intellectually-pretentious, English housewife Lucia wants to be thought of as the exemplar of good/interesting taste, and will stop at nothing to achieve her goal. The characters are all frightfully interested in the most trivial things, and it's screamingly funny.

If you like Benson, try Beverley Nichols (oh, and do read the other two funniest novels ever written, mentioned above--you owe it to yourself.)

Note: a 3 star ranking from me is actually pretty good; I reserve 4 stars for tremendously good works, and 5 only for the rare few that are or ought to be classic; unfortunately most books published are 2 or less.

If you can imagine TV's Aaron Spelling writing his brand of witty and campy fun in an English town in the 1920s & 30s, then you can imagine Benson's Lucia series. I'd often heard how great the series was, and finally got around to reading the first book. What a delight! It's been ages since I've read a book that simply glided off the page. Lucia is the center of Riseholme's cultural life, and without her, life just couldn't be the same, right? With her husband Peppino, and her sidekick Georgie (so repressed he's nearly an origami flamingo), Lucia controls the fads and fashions of Riseholme. When a diva opera singer moves into town, Lucia finds herself knocked off her throne, and all but declares war on the upstart. Full of devious gossip and fascinating characters, this story is wonderfully enjoyable, as well as incredibly intelligent in its rendering of small town life. I can hardly wait to read the entire series, or see the "Mapp and Lucia" miniseries.

'Wives and Daughters' was this month's choice for our book club. We all commented that it took us a long time to read but everyone appreciated the fine writing and skilful characterisation. We found Molly a delight and Hyacinth one of the most delicious 'love to hate' characters. The men in our group thought this was a 'woman's book', well written but too slow and without enough action to interest them. We wanted to know why we call the author 'Mrs Gaskell', when we don't refer to 'Miss Austen', or 'Miss Bronte' We would recommend this as a good read.

In her last novel, Gaskell avoided her usual urban milieu to concentrate instead on the wonderful parochial doings of a country village in the mid-Victorian period. Although she left the novel without its very last chapter before she died, this should not dissuade you from reading the novel: you'll know by the end exactly where Gaskell was going to finish the book and what would've happened to all the characters.

WIVES AND DAUGHTERS is frequently compared to Austen, but it is very different; the comedy and social observation is marvelous, but there's a greater sense of despair here more akin to MIDDLEMARCH. Hyacinth is without question the single most complex and engrossing character Gaskell ever created, and despite her menadacity and her manipulativeness you can't help but feel fond of her in spite of her less attractive qualities. Her daughter Cynthia is nearly as fine a character, and the others are also topnotch. A delightful read.

I received this book for Christmas, along with two Jane Austen novels. I read Austen's novels first and I liked them. I have just finished Elizabeth Gaskell's, Wives and Daughters and I loved it! This book portrays the lives of Molly Gibson and her step-sister, Cynthia Kirkpatrick as they grow up in the town of Hollingford. I thouroughly enjoyed this marvelous book and I would recommend it to anyone, especially Jane Austen lovers, for I think they will enjoy Wives and Daughters more then any of Austen's books, as I have done.

This book is a wonderful, magical read. I got it because I watched the BBC adaptation as a child, and loved it. It's a story of magic, childhood and friendship, but more than it it captures the magic of the unknown - the statues that come alive, and the sense of adventure and mystery that every child knows. The story of the Ugli-Wuglies is truly creepy, but necessary - theres too much tendency these days to protect children from anything that might scare them - its good for them to be scared occasionally, they'll come to learn that the real world is far more frightening place. When you read it later as an adult, there's the theme of love, and the pain of love lost and the fact the that nothing is free, everything has to be paid for ultimately. The only reason I deducted a star is that, enchanting though it is, it lacks the depth or richness of, say, Phillipa Pearce's "Tom's Midnight Garden". All the same, still a children's classic, and every child should have the opportunity to read it.

Although written around a century ago, this still remains one of the great classics of Children's literature. I have not read Harry Potter yet, but I would suspect this book is at least comparable. The plot is actually fairly complex -- there's humor, drama, romance, and magic. It can be read by both children and adults and both will enjoy it.

The story deals with a number of children who find a magic ring that can make your wishes come true. But this only gives a small idea of the wonders that lie within.

Other great Nesbit works -- Five Children and It, The Phoenix and the Carpet.

My children and I have been reading this as our bedtime book. My son, age 8, was going to read it himself, but we soon found his sister, age 6, wanted me to read it instead (so I could do the "voices") so it has been turned into the nightly story. The characters: Gerald, Kathleen, and Jimmy are each drawn clearly and individually. My children are fascinated with Gerald's way of speaking as though he were telling a story. And they love Kathleen's way of alternating between being practical and yet longing for all things "magical". Jimmy is funny and endearing, as he is at that age of Not believing and yet eager for adventure. Their friend Mabel is full of mystery and make-believe and soon pulls them into a grand escapade. The author is able to vividly paint each person and each scene. It is with great reluctance we put the book down after a couple of chapters each night, wanting to finish all at once, but wanting the magic to last a little longer. When we finished, we all decided it was one of our favorites. Extremely well written. I did not find even the beginning dull or slow. From start to finish, this is one of the best children's books I've found. And we've read very many.

The lengthy title for the 1598 printing was "The History of Henrie the Fourth, With the Battell at Shrewsburie, between the King and Lord Henry Percy, surnamed Henrie Hotspur of the North, with the humorous conceits of Sir John Falstaffe".

Surprisingly, Hal, Prince of Wales, (later Henry V) was not even mentioned in this verbose title although many would consider him to be the central character. This play is clearly the dramatization of a struggle for a kingdom, but it is equally the story of Hal's wild and reckless youthful adventures with Falstaff and other disreputable companions.

Shakespeare did not write his plays about English kings in chronological order, but these plays do have a historical unity. It is helpful (but not essential) to read the tetralogy Richard II, Henry IV Part 1 and 2, and Henry V in chronological order. Whatever route you take, I highly recommend buying a companion copy of Peter Saccio's "Shakespeare's English Kings", an engaging look at how Shakespeare revised history to achieve dramatic effect.

A wide selection of Henry IV editions are available, including older editions in used bookstores. I am familiar with a few and have personal favorites:

The New Folger Library Shakespeare is my first choice among the inexpensive editions of Henry IV. "New" replaces the prior version in use for 35 years. It uses "facing page" format with scene summaries, explanations for rare and archaic words and expressions, and Elizabethan drawings located on the left page; the Henry IV text is on the right. I particularly liked the section on "Reading Shakespeare's Language in Henry IV" and Alexander Legget's literary analysis (save this until you have read the play). The fascinating article "Historical Background: Sir John Falstaff and Sir John Oldcastle" adds a religious dimension to the play that I had not previously noted.

The Bedford Shakespeare Series provides an excellent study text (edited by Barbara Hodgdon) titled "The First Part of King Henry the Fourth". It is a little more expensive, is about 400 pages, and provides a broad range of source and context documentation. It would be excellent for an upper level course in Shakespeare. The context documentation is fascinating and informative; it ranges from the Holinshed Chronicles to Elizabethan writing on Civic Order to detailed cultural studies of London's diverse populous. Other chapters address the OldCastle controversy and the "Education of a Prince".

I also like the Norton Critical edition (edited by James Sanderson), "Henry the Fourth, Part 1", particularly for its extensive collection of literary criticism. The essays are divided into two parts: 1) the theme, characters, structure, and style of the play and 2) a wide variety of interpretation directed toward that roguish character, Sir John Falstaff.

Having just completed Henry IV Part I, I must say that I came away delighted and impressed with Shakespeare's genius once again. Shakespeare's ability to intertwine the arduous dichotomy of the impcomparable comedy of Falstaff and the meaningful history of Henry IV, Prince Hal, & Hotspur is impressive to say the least. It comes as no surprise that this was one of Shakespeare's most popularly staged plays during his day and enjoyed an unusually long stage run.

Falstaff is undoubtedly the most infamously famous literary comic character in the history of English literature. The scenes of him being robbed by Prince Hal, feigning his death, stabbing the already deceased Hotspur in the leg while claiming victory, and his employment of beggars as his foot soldiers galvanize the comic aspect of the play and make for a hilarious & farcical sublot. Interestingly, in the bar in Eastcheap, Prince Hal alludes to his future persecution of Falstaff when he is crowned king.

I strongly recommend Henry IV Part I to all Shakespeare aficionados seeing as I deem it in the top five of all Shakespeare's works along with Hamlet, Julius Caesar, Macbeth, & Henry V. Now on to Part II. Adieu.

"The better part of valor is discretion." - Falstaff

henry iv is misnamed since the play isn't really about king henry but about his son, prince hal, and his enemies, especially henry percy (aka 'hotspur') who is a rival to hal. hotspur is one of the leaders of the rebellion against the king and, at a tender age, is already an accomplished soldier. his story provides the drama of the play. hal, on the other hand, has fallen out of favor with the king, and is whiling away his days in the company of dissolute company, led by sir john falstaff, one of shakespeare's great characters. his adventures with sir john provide the comic relief. fortunately for the king, hal sheds his prodigal ways in time to save his father and his crown in the battle at shrewsbury, where, coincidentally, hal meets and slays his rival, hotspur.

this is one of shakespeare's best plays. the story of the rebellion is intriguing, and the adventures of hal and falstaff are laugh-out-loud hilarious. the culmination of the two stories in the final battle scene is wonderful. this is a fitting sequel to richard ii.

note that there are some historical inaccuracies and even outright inventions in this play. foremost is the character of falstaff who is pure invention (and genius). the story of hal's adventures stems from his reputation, enhanced by legend, as a playboy. falstaff was the perfect foil for a carousing prince. the biggest inaccuracy is hotspur's age. he was actually of the generation of henry iv, and not as young as he's depicted in the play. shakespeare made him younger to enhance, maybe even create, the rivalry with hal. there are other inaccuracies here, but better for the reader to consult 'shakespeare's kings', an excellent book by saccio that explains the history of the period and the discrepancies in the play.

I really enjoy Ms. Nesbit's written works. It is quite a shame that she can't write anymore. Although I liked this one a lot, I was a little disappointed by it because it lacked the charming fairy tale sort of feel that many of her children's books have. However, the story was quite wonderful, and I particularly loved the realistic scene of the children that the reader is given. I highly recommend this book to Edith Nesbit's fans, as well as people that enjoy a touch of mystery, mixed with a child's view of life.

I like the Railway Children a lot,especially how the author told the story. I liked Bobbie because there is something different about her,she was helpful and sweet at the same time. I am wondering where the dog James went? Other than that, the story was great!

I remember in The Railway Children that Bobbie, Peter and Phylls had a dog named James. I was wondering, what ever happened to James? In the book Phyllis is the best person to me because she is accident prone. In the story the kids lives change a lot from the city to the country. They make new friends on the railway.It was a great book. I still wonder..."What happened to James...."

Like _House of Mirth, Edith Wharton's 1917 short novel _Summer _ shows a relatively aware young woman being ground up by social convention. Wharton is so linked with Henry James that no one seems to have noticed the extent to which she was a late naturalist, chronicled inexorable destruction. An argument could be made that Charity is rescued from her hereditary fate up in the mountains (the Berkshires) and that the prime upholder of convention takes pity on her plight, but _Summer_ is close to _Ethan Frome_ in more than a New England location. More pragmatic than some of those confronted with destruction in other Wharton works, Charity makes the best of her very limited options, but happiness is more fleeting than a New England summer is.

The lack of female solidarity in _Summer_ is especially striking. Lily Bart had one devoted female friend. Charity has none, and the professional woman she turns to is far and away the most vicious character in the book.

Most of the book is about the blooming of a love crossing social boundaries that I find tedious. Others, including, I think Wharton herself, enjoyed chronicling Charity's first experience of love with an out-of-towner whose life and commitments are elsewhere, but for me it is the portrait of small-town busybodies and the eventual narrow corner into which Charity paints herself (with the help of social hypocrisy and her lack of education or any marketable skills ) that are interesting.

Susan Minot's introduction is helpful in placing the book within the course of Edith Wharton's life. A particularly important continuity across Wharton's work Minot observes is that "Wharton's heroines are not hapless victims; they understand their helplessness." I am not convinced that this enables them to keep their dignity, but the awareness of their plight and the unreasonability of social judgments heightens the tragedies (in contrast to Stephen Crane's _Maggie_ to take one example).

Leaving behind the world of New York high society that is the subject of many of her greatest novels (The House of Mirth , The Age of Innocence), Edith Wharton focuses her attention on an entirely different scene: a tiny, isolated New England village in early 20th century America. Her heroine, Charity Royall, is young, working class, ill-educated, rough-mannered - in short, about as different from Wharton herself as a character can be. And yet Wharton renders her and her world with remarkable sympathy.

As always, Wharton vividly delineates the painfully constricted circumstances of her heroine's world. And make no mistake: the community that Charity lives in is almost unimaginably narrow and isolated, in a way that no community with access to the internet, TV, etc. could possibly be now, in 21st century America.

Part of what makes this novel so acutely moving is Wharton's depiction of how Charity's whole world opens up as love and passion enter her life. It's touching to see Charity's underlying sensitivity and sensuality - and her curiosity about the world - blossom as her relationship with Harney progresses, and at the same time heartbreaking to realize that, beneath her bravado, she is utterly dependent on him - because her gender, and her lack of money, education, etc., leave her with so few options.

The pleasures of this novel are many; I will limit myself to mentioning a few. Among the features of this novel which makes it so powerful and evocative are the beautifully rendered descriptions of the seasons and the natural environment. The lush portrayals of the plants, flowers, and the natural landscape highlight the erotic tensions inherent in the story.

I also admired the wonderful way each of the places in the novel - the village of North Dormer, the town of Nettleton, the mysterious "Mountain" - take on a distinctive character, and how all of them, taken together, become a microcosm of the world. This symbolism adds a resonance that gives this seemingly "small" novel grandeur and heft. Best of all, the symbolism seems like a totally natural and organic part of the story, not at all forced or strained.

The 4th of July episode is a dazzling setpiece that not only gives the reader some delightful social history about what such celebrations were like in early 20th century America, but also serves to underscore the themes of desire (those sexually charged fireworks, and all those enticing, yet unavailable items in the store windows!) and of Charity's journey from village to the world, from innocence to experience.

This novel also contains some of Wharton's most accomplished characterizations. The complex, morally ambiguous Lawyer Royall is, I think, a masterpiece. (Though I'll admit I was less satisfied with the portrayal of Harney - I think Wharton lets him off the hook).

Finally, this is a book about female sexual desire, and as such it probably broke new ground in the Anglo-American novel (Kate Chopin's The Awakening is the only earlier novel I know that handles this theme with comparable frankness). What Wharton is really great at is dramatizing the paradoxes of desire: the way desire feeds itself and leaves you forever wanting more, and also how desire - the sighing, dreaming, longing - can become an exquisitely painful/deliciously pleasurable end in itself.

Ultimately, like so many of Wharton's novels, Summer is about women's choices, and it presents a remarkably clear-eyed view of a strong-willed young woman's pragmatic yet painful reckoning, as she struggles to make the best of the raw deal society has foist upon her. Charity's fate has the semi-tragic inevitability of so many other Wharton heroines, yet here the writing is suffused with a tenderness that rarely, if ever, appears in Wharton's other works. Long after I put this book down, it continued to haunt me.

I cannot deny that the ending of this book gave me quite an unwelcome shock as it suddenly verred away from the popular love story formula. However, when I actually thought about the ending I could understand why it was important for Wharton to ensure that this book had the same degree of social realism as her other books and therefore Charity and Lucius could not end up happily ever after. Although some reviewers found the ending unsatisfying I think found it more satisfying because it was realistic and therefore believable rather than being idealistic and fantastic. Also it therefore does not undermine Wharton's constant criticism of small town mentality, snobbery and narrow mindedness or Charity's independance and instinctive sense of propriety by having the good fairy come and sort out an impossible situation. If the ending had been predestined to be happy for Charity I do not think there would have been such an intense sense of suspense maintained throughout the book.

If you haven't read any Edith Wharton, read Age of Innocence first, then Ethan Fromme, then House of Mirth. By then you will love her, and then it will be time for Buccaneers. This is not her very best book. It contains some of the same themes that she has covered before. There is one key difference, that makes Buccaneers unique from her earlier works and that is...something I won't give away!

Most of us know Edith Wharton either through
reading Ethan Frome in high school, or having
seen The Age of Innocence at the movie
theater. While she is best know for these works
they are dim in tone and portray the oppressive
nature of society.

In The Buccaneers, Wharton presents us with a group
of young women who have been rejected by
late 19th Century NY society, and journey to
England in search of husbands. Each of the
characters in fully drawn, and while Wharton
maintains her description of society as oppressive, she
counters this with the idealism and hope
of her brave young women and societal rules that with time are changing.
These women for the most part strive
to attain happiness, and unlike Wharton's
other principal characters, do acheive it.
This is probably the only Wharton novel
to end on a note of happiness and hope.
Combined with the richly drawn backdrop of 19th
century English & American society, it makes
for an enchanting and provocative read.

I was skeptical about reading this book, since it was not complete by Edith Wharton. However, I was pleasantly surprised. Marion Mainwaring did a wonderful job of completing the novel. I was unable to tell where Edith's writing stopped and Marion's began. (The afterword describes exactly what Marion added.) -very fun book to read. I finished it in just a few days.

After reading "Wuthering Heights" (by Emily), "Jane Eyre" (by Charlotte), and "The Tenant of Wildfell Hall" (by Anne), I found myself slightly disappointed by the lack of passion and romanticism in Anne Bronte's "Agnes Grey". This novel truly is simple, unpretentious, and down-to-earth--and, therefore, far too easy to underestimate and undervalue.

The title character is the younger daughter of a poor family, who seeks employment as a governess in order to help her parents make ends meet. This noble act of maturity on her part earns her nothing but disillusion, humiliation and hardship in the hands of the tyrannical children and over-indulgent parents of Wellwood House (Note the intriguing initials W.H., which stand for Wuthering Heights and Wildfell Hall in other Bronte books) and, later, Horton Lodge. For several chapters, Anne Bronte does not do much but--dare I say it?--complain about the lot of the Victorian governess. Though her portraits of the children and their parents were obviously drawn from reality, which certainly won sympathy from me, I wanted to tell her to "Get on with the story" many times.

The plot does pick up after the artful and exasperating Rosalie Murray has her "coming out" ball. Thoughtless rather than tyrannical, Rosalie has the most well-drawn character of all of Agnes' charges, which makes her such a great foil for Agnes. Rosalie delights in thinking that she could have any man she wishes and enjoys nothing more than toying with men's hearts. When she finds out that Agnes might be in love with the curate, Edward Weston, she makes every attempt to make Mr. Weston fall in love with _her_, thinking that it would be a grand joke to make Agnes miserable. Yet it is impossible to hate her, somehow. She steals every scene she is in; half the story is truly hers.

I am happy to say that both Rosalie and Agnes get what they deserve, which is, fittingly, what each explicitly asked and worked for. (Read that any way you wish--or better yet, read the book.) "Agnes Grey" has left me believing that we truly do sow what we reap and receive what we ask for.

I've read both the books of Anne Bronte- Agnes Grey & The Tenant of Wildfell Hall. I must say, she did a better job while writing 'The tenant of wildfell hall.' 'Agnes Grey' is a story of a young girl, who driven by poverty seeks a job as a governess. Being the youngest of a children of two, she has always been protected & sheltered. But when her family loses all their money, she decides to take a post as agoverness. Though ridiculed by her family, she is determined to get a job & at last her family is forced to give in. Unfortunately for her, her employers aren't what she expected them to be. They're rude & unfriendly & the children treat her worse than a servant. But she, being of a strong character, doesn't want to give up & stays on, doing her best, until she is dismissed. After a few happy months with her family, she takes on a post with another family. Though they're no better. It is here that she finds true love,(Mr Weston) but the hero isn't anything like what we read about in books these days. Though her charges try their utmost to prevent Mr Weston from falling in love with her, he does. To cut a long story short, he somehow finds where she lives & proposes to her & they live happily ever after. Somehow, I think this review hasn't come out as planned. The problem is it's too long. Oh, well.

Agnes Grey is probably the simplest Bronte novel, but in my opinion the best, because it is a sincere story. It is always looked upon as inferior to "Jane Eyre" and "Wuthering Heights", but if reviewed as a story of a governess in the Victorian Era, it is suddenly far more interesting. "Wuthering Heights" and "Jane Eyre do not give a realistic view of the times the Brontes lived in, but "Agnes Grey" does and she does not spare us the details.

I myself believe that Anne was in love with William Weightman, her fathers curate and seeing that she lets het own heroine Agnes win Mr. Weston, makes me feel that she tries to show us her dream, if she could have had it. It is simple, but happy. And that is exactly what this book is about. It is not to say that love is a never ending passion and all hardships end when one finds THE ONE, but simply to state that joy and wisdom can be found in a happy union.

And now, after I have read it many times, I still cry when Agnes tells Mr. Weston that she loves him. That one word "Yes" says it all.

'As you like it' is one of those Shakespearean plays that is considered 'great' by critics, but never really found true popular acclaim, perhaps due to the absence of charismatic characters (the romantic hero is particularly wet) or compelling dilemmas.

It shares many features with the great comedies - the notion of the forest as a magic or transformative space away from tyrannical society ('A Midsummer night's dream'); the theme of unrequited love and gender switching from 'Twelfth night'; the exiled Duke and his playful daughter from 'The Tempest'. But these comparisons only point to 'AYLI''s comparative failure (as a reading experience anyway) - it lacks the magical sense of play of the first; the yearning melancholy of the second; or the elegiac complexity of the third.

It starts off brilliantly with a first act dominated by tyrants: an heir who neglects his younger brother, and a Duke who resents the popularity of his exiled brother's daughter (Rosalind). there is an eccentric wrestling sequence in which a callow youth (Orlando) overthrows a giant. Then the good characters are exiled to Arden searching for relatives and loved ones.

Theoretically, this should be good fun, and you can see why post-modernist critics enjoy it, with its courtiers arriving to civilise the forest in the language of contemporary explorers, and the gender fluidity and role-play; but, in truth, plot is minimal, with tiresomely pedantic 'wit' to the fore, especially when the melancholy scholar-courtier Jacques and Fool Touchstone are around, with the latter's travesties of classical learning presumably hilarious if you're an expert on Theocritus and the like.

As an English pastoral, 'AYLI' doesn't approach Sidney's 'Arcadia' - maybe it soars on stage. (Latham's Arden edition is as frustrating as ever, with scholarly cavilling creating a stumbling read, and an introduction which characteristically neuters everything that makes Shakespeare so exciting and challenging)

Anyone with a working knowledge of Shakespeare's plays knows that As You Like It is a light, airy comedy. It is clearly not one of Shakespeare's greatest plays. As You Like It is more obscure than famous. Even amongst the comedies it comes nowhere close to the popularity of plays such as A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Tempest, or Twelfth Night. That said, it is a treasure in its own right. This is so, if for nothing else, because it contains one of the greatest pictures of a woman to be found in Shakespeare's works, excluding the Sonnets.

Ah, sweet Rosalind. In her are encapsulated so many ideas about the nature of woman. She is first pictured in a rather faux-Petrarchan manner. This quickly fades as an intelligent woman comes to the fore. While the intelligence remains, she is also torn by the savage winds of romantic love. Rosalind, in all her complexity and self-contradiction, is a truly modern female character.

Most of the women in Shakespeare's tragedies and historical plays are either window dressing (as in Julius Caesar) or woefully one-sided (Ophelia, Lady Macbeth). This is not the case with Rosalind. Rather than being marginalized, she is the focus of a good chunk of the play. Instead of being static and [standard], she is a complex evolving character.

When Rosalind first appears, she outwardly looks much like any other lady of the court. She is a stunning beauty. She is much praised for her virtue. Both of these elements factor in the Duke's decision to banish or [do away with] her.

Rosalind falls in love immediately upon seeing Orlando. In this way she at first seems to back up a typically courtly idea of "love at first sight." Also, she initially seems quite unattainable to Orlando. These are echoes of Petrarchan notions that proclaim love to be a painful thing. This dynamic is stood on its head following her banishment.

Rosalind begins to question the certainty of Orlando's affection. She criticizes his doggerel when she finds it nailed to a tree. Rather than wilting like some medieval flower, she puts into effect a plan. She seeks to test the validity of her pretty-boy's love. In the guise of a boy herself, she questions the deceived Orlando about his love.

Yet Rosalind is not always so assured. Her steadfastness is not cut and dried. Composed in his presence, Rosalind melts the second Orlando goes away. She starts spouting romantic drivel worthy of Judith Krantz. Even her best friend Celia seems to tire of her love talk. This hesitating, yet consuming passion is thrown into stark relief with her crystal clear dealings with the unwanted advances of the shepherdess Phebe.

Rosalind contradicts herself in taking the side of Silvius in his pursuit of Phebe. She seeks to help Silvius win the love of Phebe because of his endearing constancy. Yet the whole reason she tests Orlando is the supposed inconstancy of men's affections.

This idea of Male inconstancy has made its way down to the present day. Men are seen, in many circles, as basically incapable of fidelity. Though a contradiction to her treatment of Silvius' cause, Rosalind's knowing subscription to pessimistic views on the constancy of a man's love places her on the same playing field as many modern women.

Rosalind takes charge of her own fate. Until and even during Shakespeare's own time women largely were at the mercy of the men around them. This is satirized in Rosalind's assuming the appearance of a man. Yet she had taken charge of her life even before taking on the dress and likeness of a man. She gives her token to Orlando. She decides to go to the Forest. She makes the choice of appearing like a man to ensure her safety and the safety of Celia.

Rosalind finally finds balance and happiness when she comes to love not as a test or game, but as an equal partnership. Shakespeare is clearly critiquing the contemporary notions of love in his day. His play also condemns society's underestimation and marginalization of women. However, the Bard's main point is more profound.

As You Like It makes it clear that the world is never picture perfect, even when there are fairy-tale endings. Men and women both fail. Love is the most important thing. With love all things are possible.

"As You Like It" is bar none, one of Shakespeare's VERY best works. It is probably the most poetic of the comedies and contains perhaps as many famous quotations as any other of his plays. Rosalind is perhaps his greatest female character and this work, along with the equally (or even more) brilliant "Midsummer Night's Dream," is the best example of Shakespeare's theme of the "dream world" vs. the "real" world. This play, especially the scenes in the forest, is a celebration of language and the power of the freedom of the imagination. It consequently can be read as a criticism of the "real world," here represented by Duke Ferdinand's court. Like many of the other comedies, Shakespeare is mocking the "ideal" which many in his society would have praised. Though this play deals with some pretty dark themes (which of his plays doesn't?) it is a light-hearted and fully enjoyable read!

With its information on the earliest history of the breed to the famous German Shepherds today, this is *the* book to add to your library! It contains a wealth of information and beautiful pictures of famous German Shepherds both in Germany and abroad.

I can find only two downsides to this book. First, the section on selecting a puppy, though informative, is more geared to the potential breeder than to the pet owner. Second, I wish that the section on Schutzhund trials would have included a description of the tests that the dogs must pass.

Overall, I highly recommend this book. If you want to purchase only one book on the breed, you can't go wrong with this one. Clearly, it was written by people who absolutely love and respect the breed.

I recommend this book to any GSD owner or interested person. It is a great reference book. I have been into German Shepherds 30 years and I still enjoy reading it. It has a wealth of information on German and American lines. It takes you from feeding and socializing a young pup to the caring for your old friend. Learn to read a pedigree, treat your dog for illness, teach him good manners. It's a "everything you wanted to know about shepherds but didn't know where to look all in one book". On the negative side, there are numerous pictures but unfortunatly none in color. I would love to see the different coat colors, ie: sables, black/reds, bi-colored, blacks, whites, and greys. I would also like to see more info on shepherds used for other than conformation or obedience but as service dogs, agility, personal protection, Schutzhund, working, herding, search and rescue, to name a few, as well as how are they used in other countries with accompaning pictures. When all is said and done, this is still a great book, full of information and pictures you won't find elsewhere. Keep it close at hand, you'll be referring to it again and again.

I have learned more about all aspects of German Shepherd Dogs from this book than from any other. Anyone wanting to know about this marvelous breed would not be disappointed in the least at buying this book. Whether you own a pet or a champion, this book is filled with facts, training tips, and wonderful photographs of both American-bred and German-bred champions. Winifred Stickland and James Moses have done a great justice to the breed with this book. It is well written and an easy read for both the novice and the expert shepherd owner. The photographs are good, yet I agree with the other review that the thing that would make this book one step better would be to use color photo's instead of black and white where possible. A highly recommended book--you can't go wrong with this one.