Written as a play, this book debunks the popular at the time theory that all workers should own all the businesses and that everyone should receive the same pay(from the profits). The story begins with Andrew Gibson, owner of a piano manufacturing company whose successful product is the "Gibson Upright". He is in turmoil with his on-the-verge-of-striking workers. The workers insist on even more benefits than what they currently have (they have now what resembles our modern day work schedule). The workers spout their socialistic beliefs in an attempt to get more out of Gibson, claiming he can afford it with all of his riches.

Gibson, not wishing to concede to their demands, decides to fulfill their wishes. In a comical way, he simply hands over the rights to the factory -- letting the leaders of the strikers run it as they see fit. The workers unite and are excited over this prospect. However, this new routine quickly becomes their undoing as the factory's accountants leave and the workers become even more lazy. Of course, as Tarkington can only do, there is a love story here where Gibson and one of the striking workers have a "bond."

This story was incredibly simple and pointed out some of the fallacies of the Socialist movement. While on some levels, the story works, yet on others it was a bit too contrived. All in all, though, the book/play was fun to read, despite the somewhat sappy plot and ending.

The title of this book should actually be, "Carving the Camel." The book does an excellent job of walking you through the steps of carving a camel. It does not, however, give you step by step instructions on any of the other animals of the nativity. There is a gallery of photos showing finished donkeys and sheep, but the actual patterns are side profiles only--not front or rear profiles . . . something essential for most beginners. Over all, the book is great for what instructions it provides, but fails to live up to its title.

I am writing a final paper on this book at the moment. Chestnutt is an important writer, but not one of the best of the period. I don't think he ever got the chance to fully mature as a writer. This book leaves me with a lot of what-ifs and whys. For example, he introduces a nephew to the heroine who appears as though he will be important, but simply drops out of the picture. The book leaves me wondering what he meant to do, and didn't have time for. It is a good read, but rather frustrating.

If you only have time to read one African American classic, I would turn you instead to Zora Neale Hurston's "Their Eyes Are Watching God" which is truly amazing!

"Italian Backgrounds" by Edith Wharton is a somewhat charming travel book (a quick read) about her time in Italy as its veteran traveler. The piece is not written in a narrative, but is rather more thematically arranged. Wharton doesn't write about the Doges Palace or the Duomo, her milieu is the deeper background of the dedicated traveler.

The title comes from her theme derived from an analogy that traveling in Italy involves various areas of a painting. Italian paintings, she writes, have fore- middle- and backgrounds. The two-or three-day tourist in Venice spends all his or her time in the foreground, traipsing the well-established routes and keeping to the guidebooks. If one has more time, one can go farther into the "painting" by discovering more, and, of course, finally, as Wharton herself has done, one can dwell in the backgrounds, knowing the country well, understanding all its eras and its different brands of beauty.

Wharton is a harsh art critic, and much of the book deals with her assessments of lesser known (to me as the foreground tourist of Italy) artists and their works. My favorite chapter retold the story of her identifying some mislabeled statuary in Tuscany as belonging to a different artist and era altogether.

It was pleasant to read. For me, I am a fan of Wharton, so enjoyed this look into her experiences and the life of her mind.

This is a difficult review to write because of the wide range of emotion I experienced while reading John Gibson's commentary on "Job." It was like reading a book that was actually Dr. Jeckyl AND Mr. Hyde, switching between a feeling of great admiration for the author and becoming violently angry at him.

I'll begin with the good: Putting the conversations of Job and his three friends (who try to comfort him and do a terrible job) into perspective. I've read the Bible's "Job" a number of times and the poetry-style narration made my eyes glaze over as I read. I understood the meaning of the sentences, but didn't understand the raw emotions being displayed. Gibson points out that very emotion! He points out when Job is dancing on the brink of blasphomy--he yells at God asking, "so what if I've sinned against you? How does that harm you?" He taunts God and accuses Him of acting like a bully towards Job. But Job isn't the only person in this book that made me shake my head in disbelief. Job's three "friends" repeatedly try to convince a violently sick man on his deathbead (Job himself) that God's letting him have this horrible disease because Job is a rotten, no-good, dirty sinner. With friends like them, who needs enemies? Gibson does a fantastic job of pointing these exchanges out, giving me new respect for the Book of Job.

Now, to where I get angry with Gibson. Our differences are theological, the worst kind of difference. First, we disagree concerning when the story of Job actually took place. I say somewhere between the times of Noah and Jacob; Gibson says after the Israelites left Egypt. No big deal there. Where we seem to have our big differences is our trust in the Holy Scripture as God's infallable word. Gibson insults the beginning chapters of the book by calling the story of Job's downfall a "folk tale," implying that it was a silly, happy prologue to the meat of the story: the debates. He has a habit of pointing out the author's "mistakes" (the author is the Holy Spirit. He don't make mistakes) and even goes so far as to REMOVE chapters of the book (because they don't really belong in the Bible) and make them an appendix! The Holy Spirit doesn't need an editor!

I believe that the Holy Bible (the entire thing) is the inspired word of God; that the dot over every "i" and the cross of every "T" is supposed to be there. God would not let his message to us be corrupted, either by the addition of verses that "aren't supposed to be there" or by the removal of stuff that God wants us to read. God is more powerful than us. He'll keep out the stuff that's not supposed to be there and doesn't need Dr. Gibson to help him out. Furthermore, Dr. Gibson sets a serious precedent for theologians: when mere, sinful people start trying to decide on their own what parts of the Bible are Holy and what parts are not Holy, it reduces the Good Book to yet another "what's right for me isn't necesarilly right for you" idea. As for me, I'll let God decide and just view the entire book as Holy as it is--even the parts I don't like.

In sum, the parts that Dr. Gibson has respect for and treats seriously are excellent and emotion enducing. It's just too bad such a gifted commentator doesn't have respect for the entire book of Job.

The tile of the book is misleading. This book is actually a blank scripture journal. This is a hardcover book with a quotation cited from the bible on each page. The cover has a floral print on both front and back. On the back cover are the words "INSPIRATIONS" and "a scripted journal." This is a lovely book for a gift or for oneself to use as a journal, but the association to the "language of flowers" escapes me. No place on the book are the words "Language of Flowers." In fact, "A friend loves at all times, Proverbs 17:17" is written across both the front and back covers. As I said, it is a handsome blank journal for a gift or other usage. If someone is purchasing this book to learn the meaning of flowers, they will be disappointed; I was.

This is helpful and informative, but is not a scholarly work. there are other more scholarly books available. i recommend this for bible study students, but not for theology students. more indepth books are available.

Appearing anonymously as "By the Author of Nina Balatka", "Linda Tressel" was the second and last installment in Anthony Trollope's attempt to establish an alternative literary persona that could deviate from the Trollopian staples (not that the deviation was very startling; maidens urged to marry men whom they don't love are not exactly an unknown subject to our author).

Like the earlier book, "Linda" takes place in a foreign city that the author had recently visited, in this case Nuremberg, and deals with the effect of religious bigotry on love and marriage. This time, instead of violently opposing a union, the bigoted aunt is trying to promote one, and the heroine struggles to escape into either spinsterhood or the arms of a more acceptable lover than the middle-aged boor who has been picked out for her.

The personae of "Linda Tressel" - all odd ducks except for Linda herself - belong to comedy, and a work in that vein might have succeeded. Trollope chose, however, to write a tale that becomes progressively grimmer, eventually toppling the lightweight characters. The book was not a total failure. It drew praise from Henry James (who guessed the author's identity from stylistic clues) and has both lively and pathetic moments. On the whole, though, one does not, after putting it down, feel deep regret that the "alternative Trollope" had no further literary career.

This book is not really erotica at all, though I suspect that some readers who are interested in Victorian style femdom might fine it more physically stimulated than I did. No, instead it is a journey of one man whom after a long life finally writes down his fantasies along with accompanying drawings. The drawings are well done though I bit difficult to see -- the nature of the media I suspect. The book itself is not a novel in the sense that it is actually a story of a particular length but instead more like a short story or a draft of what could have developed into an intriguing world. As it is, the development of the characters is too quick, too short, and thus I never empathized with anyone nor truly cared what happened to them. I found that I was more interested in the man that created this book, why these fantasies, why these images, why did it take so long for him to express himself and did he ever get that fantasy even briefly in real life.

Robinson's book is truly a memoir, and I find this to be both a strength and a weakness. It gives the book strength because it is a complete personal account. Every piece of information is direct from not only a first hand observer, but moreover a participant. However it weakens the book because at points too much information was detailed. Especially information about already well documented events.