This is a much needed and appreciated book on clear and consice communication for students writing on their design projects, design statements for themselves about their portfolios, cover letters for employment purposes, not to mention all the aspects of proposals, business communication, applications, brochures, etc. As an educator in the design arts for over 25 years, I am especially happy to have this resource to share with design students and also find much useful information included for myself. Thanks for a great addition to my design library!

To be fair, I should mention up front that I did some of the proofreading on this book. Dr. Hardy was my professor for General Psych and we have kept in touch over the years. That being said, I believe I can still give a review that is as impartial as any other.

I have read a number of books on Zen and other eastern subjects. This one is up there with Watts' "The Way of Zen". It's a very user friendly introduction to Zen. Hardy spends a brief amount of time talking about the history and philosophy of Zen. He doesn't belabor this material but instead gives just enough to provide some context.

The book spends more time talking about the actual practice of meditating. Hardy gives instructions on how to begin and some of the pitfalls and milestones you may find along the way.

Hardy speaks from his own experience. He doesn't push any agenda or any specific way of viewing Zen. He leaves it up to the reader to find his or her own path. That is the essence of Zen.

A well-written book which chronicle the last days of an aging revolutionary, Rubashov. The whole novel was set around a prison in which Rubashov was being detained. His crime - the most heinous possible - the betrayal of the revolution. It is obvious, that he was falsely accused (intimations of the history of the Soviet Union under Stalin).

In this place, Rubashov began to reminiscene about his past, the betrayals of individuals for the higher cause of the Revolution and the party. In between, we witness his interrogation, first under Ivanov and then under Gletkin. Throughout the interrogation, Rubashov was reminded of the logic of the revolution where the ends justify the means and truth is whatever that is useful at the moment. And in his own particular case, he must be sacrificed for the good of the party and the Revolution. Using the presuasion of this logic, first under the more urbane Ivanov and latter under the more brutal Gletkin, Rubashov who has been wavering in his faith of the party was convinced and hence was "sacrificed" in a kangaroo court.

This book examines the totalitarian regime of Stalin with its philosophy of convenience and its consequences. At a more personal level, I found this book a chilling tale of morality when such a philosophy of conveniece is adopted and our humanity is thrown away in the consideration of politics. It is a must-read book to understand the dangers of totalitarian regimes be they of the right or left.

This book is a literary masterpiece. Koestler not only writes well, but his novels explore ideas and makes complex life experiences accessible.

Rubashov's experience is the experience of hundreds of millions of people in communist countries. Those of us who have not witnessed a communist revolution in our own countries have a hard time understanding their experience. Darkness at Noon helps us to do that. We cannot say we understand communism without having read this book.

Koestler writes in layers. He doesn't waste his words. The story may appear simple, but there is a purpose to the sequence of events and in each of Rubashov's action. Each conversation has a message.

This is much more than the story of a man wrongly condemned. We can find that simple plot in Arthur Miller's the Crucible. This story explains how it is possible that people like Rubashov, intelligent and idealistic people, could have lent themselves, heart and soul, to a totalitarian ideology. We learn that communism is a wolf in sheep's clothing. A peddler of impossible dreams. Nearly everyone, including many of its once loyal followers, end up disillusioned. People are betrayed, terrorized, imprisoned, and killed by the system they once supported and helped bring to power.

Koestler leaves the reader with the understanding that communism is deadly and evil precisely because it appeals to our idealism and love for others. That it continues to survive through deception, lies, fear, and by creating suspicion, distrust, and paranoia in people.

Arthur Koestler was a former communist. This novel is a work of fiction only in its editing and the charachters' names. Rubashov most likely represents Koestler and all the blind idealists who once believed in communism until there was communism.

Between Koestler and Soltzhenitsyn, they've left only fools believing in communism.

'Darkness at Noon' not only stands as one of the most incisive political novels of its time, it is also peerless in its bleak portrayal of incarceration. Rawly compelling from the outset, the novel is set in the oppressive Soviet Union of the 1930's. Its hero is the reactionary Rubashov, imprisoned by his own party for crimes he has not committed yet forced, through rigorously severe interrogation, to confess and thus face certain execution. The despair inherent in Rubashov's position, and the gradual abrasion of his own moral and intellectual authority, make this a direct primogenitor to George Orwell's 1984. Koestler (beautifully translated by Daphne Hardy) exposes the cruel hypocrisy of a totalitarian regime which masquerades as a liberal, forward thinking movement. The party's views are expressed unequivocally by the prison interrogator, Gletkin, in the phrase 'truth is what is useful to humanity, falsehood what is harmful.' This statement, along with scores of others, conveys the suppression of free will at the core of Stalinist communism, and remains salient even when viewed in a modern political context. 'Darkness' examines the dilemma of a man who helped to establish his party yet can no longer condone its actions, and who as a consequence is ignominiously rejected by it. Rubashov's bravery in the face of oppression is heroic, yet his earlier treatment of secretary Arlova and his muddy consciousness towards this prevents him from appearing remotely altruistic: Rubashov is selfish and driven, although his aloof flippancy is grimly endearing. Like the Party, he will employ whatever means necessary to achieve his goal, human beings are a mere pawn in the game, ready to be sacrificed if to do so gains a strategic advantage. Koestler's portrayal of the hierarchical nature of oppressive rule, and the indurate self-interest it creates, is chillingly lucid. As Rubashov discards Arlova and young Richard, so the subordinate Gletkin, it is inferred, betrays Ivanov, shot for being 'a cynic', while both interrogators are ultimately controlled by the feared No.1. Implied throughout is the sense of degradation from an intellectual ideal; Gletkin is a 'Neanderthal', a 'barbaric relapse of history', and yet supersedes the thoughtful, intelligent Ivanov. Rubashov's interrogation by Gletkin is a farrago: both parties know there will only be one outcome, Rubashov, for pride's sake, denying endless charges until impelled by Gletkin's warped logic and the very human desire for sleep to acquiesce, exposing the fatuity of a dictatorial system averse to natural justice. The novel's muted end, the 'shrug of eternity' as Rubashov is killed, suggests serene release from a grimly arduous existence, an ambivalently Lethean suggestion of happiness to end this claustrophobically taut, intellectually and emotionally enthralling novel.

In each field of science there are many unsung heroes whose stories are all but forgotten. Nevertheless some of these stories are astonishing and in the hands of a good author makes fscinating reading. One such story is that of Ramanujan, who was to Math what Mozart was to music. His genius was almost mystical. This book deals with his life, how came to the attention of Hardy, went to England and became one of the well known mathematicians of his time. But this book also deals with the "mystical" aspects of his genius. Strange, almost unbelievable anecdotes of how from the esoteric shadows of the east came an almost uneducated man who, isolated from the scientific world, rediscovered many of the great mathematical theorems that had been dsicovered over centuries in Europe. The book is written in a superb style. I really enjoyed reading it, and I urge everyone to read it for its sheer entertainment value

Im not too fond of biographies, but I would give this book an exception.

The life of Ramanujan is amazing and one is pushed to only awe the limits of mind. Being an Indian, I can see Robert Kanigel has given a comprehensive treatment to all facets of the life of Ramanujan - his boyhood days in small town of Kumbakonam, his obsession with Maths, his seperation from Mother and his wife, his relationship with Hardy and others, his stay in London, and his final days. Kanigel has really done a wonderful job in depicting the Brahmin house-hold of the early 1900s. One could really imagine Ramanujan with a tuft and a religious symbol on forehead, but his mind calculating 10,000 th decimal of pi.

His purely professional relations with Hardy has also been very deftly depicted. How hard the days must have been! Being a Ramanujan's biography its hard to avoid mathematical formulas - and the author justifiably includes them when necessary. But even if you do not understand them - you can just wonder at the string of symbols joined together to purport some meaning.

The narration is truly captivating. It sends an horripulating feeling to the mind, when Hardy describes the first letter of formulas as "These must be true. If they are not, nobody would have the audacity to invent it."

The final days of Ramanujan are indeed sad and emotional and also beautifuly captured in the book. Typical is the life of geniuses - the world has hard time understanding them. This book is really worth in my library.

An Inspirational account of the life of a Mathematical genius

Srinivasa Ramanujan is rightly a member of the Mathematicians' Hall of Fame. From humble beginnings in the small town of Kumbhakaon in Tamil Nadu to the hallowed cloisters of Trinity College, Cambridge, this magnificent book narrates the story of Ramanujan's trails, tribulations and triumphs.

Central to the story are the powerful influences of Ramanujan's mother and the great English Mathematician, Godfrey Harold Hardy. If his mother, Komala shaped the first part of Ramanujan's life, then surely Hardy must take full credit for bringing Ramanujan's prodigious talents to the attention of the world Mathematical community. Other prominent characters also figure in the story - notably Ramanujan's many friends, Narayana Aiyer, Gopalachari, leading lights in the Indian Mathematical establishment, members of the ruling British classes, Sir Francis Spring, the Governor of Madras Presidency, and Cambridge Mathematicians, Neville and Littlewood.

The book presents a touching portrait of Ramanujan the man: an orthodox Vaishav Bhraman, steeped in Hindu culture with all the attendant characteristics of a deeply spiritual outlook, a calm self-assurance about his abilities, and most of all, an obsession with Mathematics. Hardy, his mentor, is also biographed as the passionately atheist, Winchester educated son of a middle class schoolmaster who went up to Cambridge, and at the turn of the 20th century, almost single handed masterminded the rise of English Pure Mathematics.

William Makepeace Thackeray subtitled "Vanity Fair", his masterful comic novel, "A Novel Without a Hero". But while this big, baggy eight-hundred page monstrosity of comic characters and situations may lack a hero, it has two of the most memorable characters in English literature: Amelia Sedley and Becky Sharp. The contrapuntal, shifting fortunes of these two women drive the narrative of this big book, painting, along the way, a brilliant satirical portrait of English and European society at the time of the Napoleonic wars. We first meet Amelia and Becky in the opening pages of the novel, leaving Miss Pinkerton's School for the wider world of fortune, love and marriage. Amelia Sedley, the naive, sheltered daughter of a rich London merchant whose fortunes will dramatically change over the course of her life, "was a dear little creature; and a great mercy it is, both in life and in novels, which (the latter especially) abound in villains of the most sombre sort, that we are to have for a constant companion so guileless and good-natured a person." In contrast, Becky Sharp, the impoverished orphan of an artist and a French opera singer of dubious repute, was a calculating, amoral social climber. "Miss Rebecca was not, then, in the least kind or placable . . . but she had the dismal precocity of poverty." From the opening pages, Thackeray captures the reader's interest in these two characters and carries the reader through marriages, births, deaths, poverty, misfortune, social climbing . . . even the Battle of Waterloo! While Amelia and Becky wind like a long, contrasting thread from the beginning to the end of this story, there are also plots and subplots, intrigues and authorial asides, and one character after another, all of this literary invention keeping the reader incessantly preoccupied and enthralled. Reading "Vanity Fair" is the furthest thing from "killing time" (as the dusty, misguided literary critic F. R. Leavis once said); it is, rather, the epitome of the nineteenth century English comic novel, a masterpiece in every sense of the word.

William Makepeace Thackeray subtitled "Vanity Fair", his masterful comic novel, "A Novel Without a Hero". But while this big, baggy eight-hundred page monstrosity of comic characters and situations may lack a hero, it has two of the most memorable characters in English literature: Amelia Sedley and Becky Sharp. The contrapuntal, shifting fortunes of these two women drive the narrative of this big book, painting, along the way, a brilliant satirical portrait of English and European society at the time of the Napoleonic wars.

We first meet Amelia and Becky in the opening pages of the novel, leaving Miss Pinkerton's School for the wider world of fortune, love and marriage. Amelia Sedley, the naive, sheltered daughter of a rich London merchant whose fortunes will dramatically change over the course of her life, "was a dear little creature; and a great mercy it is, both in life and in novels, which (the latter especially) abound in villains of the most sombre sort, that we are to have for a constant companion so guileless and good-natured a person." In contrast, Becky Sharp, the impoverished orphan of an artist and a French opera singer of dubious repute, was a calculating, amoral social climber. "Miss Rebecca was not, then, in the least kind or placable . . . but she had the dismal precocity of poverty."

From the opening pages, Thackeray captures the reader's interest in these two characters and carries the reader through marriages, births, deaths, poverty, misfortune, social climbing . . . even the Battle of Waterloo! While Amelia and Becky wind like a long, contrasting thread from the beginning to the end of this story, there are also plots and subplots, intrigues and authorial asides, and one character after another, all of this literary invention keeping the reader incessantly preoccupied and enthralled. Reading "Vanity Fair" is the furthest thing from "killing time" (as the dusty, misguided literary critic F. R. Leavis once said); it is, rather, the epitome of the nineteenth century English comic novel, a masterpiece in every sense of the word.

I once read that "Vanity Fair" had been classified as one of the "most boring classics" by a group of English professors, who hopefully have all been fired, as they can NOT have had any appreciation for the incisive use of the English language, the witty skewering of Victorian society, the rollicking plot, or the unforgettable characters. Becky Sharpe isn't likeable -- but in the end, you have to admire her insatiability and efficiency. Amelia and Dobbin live out the stereotypical storybook romance -- but Thackeray dares to show how the story usually ends. This is one of the few books that had me consistently laughing aloud; virtually every page has a stinging comment or revealing moment that catches the attention. Although it's a "classic" (think leather-bound dusty volumes with edifying quotes from the latin), this is as vital, insightful, and "modern" a novel as you could hope to read. (And for the record, I think comparing Thackeray and Austen is like comparing Stephen King and Alice Walker -- they're writing at the same time, but the similarities end there!)

I initially approached this book with a great deal of trepidation. I had never read Dostoyevsky, and was concerned that I would get bogged down in some lengthy, mind-numbingly boring, nineteenth-century treatise on the bestial nature of man or something. I am happy to report this is not the case. Instead, and to my delight, it is a smoothly flowing and fascinating story of a young man who succumbs to the most base desire, and the impact this has both psychologically and otherwise on himself and those around him.

To be sure, the book seems wordy in places, but I suspect this has to do with the translation. And what translator in his right mind would be bold enough to edit the great Dostoyevsky? But this is a very minor problem.

What we get with Dostoyevsky is dramatic tension, detailed and believable human characters, and brilliant insight into human nature. Early in the novel our hero meets and has a lengthy conversation with Marmeladov, a drunkard. This conversation is never uninteresting and ultimately becomes pathetic and heartbreaking, but I kept wondering why so much time was spent on it. As I got deeper into the book, I understood why this conversation was so important, and realized that I was in the hands of a master storyteller. This is also indicative of the way in which the story reveals itself. Nothing is hurried. These people speak the way we actually speak to one another in real life, and more importantly, Dostoyevsky is able to flesh out his characters into whole, three-dimensional human beings.

And what a diverse group of characters! Each is fleshed out, each is marvelously complex. Razujmikhin, the talkative, gregarious, good-hearted, insecure and destitute student; Sonia, the tragic child-prostitute, with a sense of rightness in the world; Petrovich, the self-important, self-made man, completely out of touch with his own humanity; Dunia, the honorable, wronged sister: we feel like we know these people because we've met people like them. They fit within our understanding of the way human beings are.

Dostoyevsky also displays great insight into human nature. Svidrigailov, for example, talks of his wife as liking to be offended. "We all like to be offended," he says, "but she in particular loved to be offended." It suddenly struck me how true this is. It gives us a chance to act indignantly, to lash out at our enemies, to gain favor with our allies. I don't believe I've ever seen this thought expressed in literature before. In fact, it never occurred to me in real life! Petrovich, Dunia's suitor, not only expects to be loved, but because of his money, and her destitution, he expects to be adored! To be worshipped! He intentionally sought out a woman from whome he expected to get this, and is comletely flummoxed when she rejects him. His is an unusual character, but completely realized.

There is so much more to talk about: the character of Raskolnikov, which is meticulously and carefully revealed; the sense of isolation which descends on him after committing his crime; the cat and mouse game played on him by the police detective. I could go on and on. I haven't even mentioned the historical and social context in which this takes place. Suffice to say this is a very rich book.

Do not expect it to be a rip-roaring page turner. Sit down, relax, take your time, and savor it. It will be a very rewarding experience. And thank you SL, for recommending it.

Like many writers of his era, Dostoyevsky uses a lot of prose and little dialogue, which makes reading the book a bit of a plodding chore.

However, the story is anything but boring: Raskilnov, a poor student, comes up with the philosophy that killing an old female pawnbroker will actually be good for the world because she cheats people and is otherwise useless. It's premeditated --- he even counts exactly how many steps it takes from his place to her door.

The book also recounts the following few days when Raskilnov's mother and sister come to visit and he has to play his 'family role' i.e. "I'm a good son and brother when I'm not killing old women." In addition, he is involved with a family consisting of a dying mother, a father, 3 young sons and an 18-year-old daughter who must go into prostitution to support them.

So what happens to all of these characters in pre-Revolutionary Russia? What will be Raskilnov's punishment? Does he actually think he was right to kill? The answers unfold as you read this gem from the world of Russian literature -- so renown you feel like you really achieved something when you read it!

This novel stands out as one of the finest pieces of actual literature I have read. Top 5 at least.

First, let me pay tribute to "Everyman's Library Series". They make very handsome novels, complete with soft cream pages, and a built in fabric book mark. They all come in moroon, and add a certain pinache to any book collection. Best of all, they are well priced.

As for Crime and Punishment. I was very impressed. More often than not, I read the classics, and wonder how it is they have become classics. For Dostoevsky, there can be no doubt. And Crime and Punishment is his best known effort. Not his best though. C&P is the exploration of the world that it's hero/villain Raskolnikov occupies. He takes it apon himself to murder a particularly vile pawnbroker(thus making him a villain) under the guise of the highest moral resposibility. Well, no plan is perfect, and most of the book is an involved psycological examination of it's main character, the ways he tries to justify his crime to himself, and the people around him who have no idea what the hell is going on. Dostoevsky creates living breathing people that you care about in this tale. It's simple premise gives way to an incredibly complex story. The dialogues bewtween Raskolnikov, and Porfiry( the ever suspicious investigator) are wonderful. And then theres the clever and sneaky Svidrigailov, whom I found rather amusing at times. To me the book was very suspenseful. never knowing if or when young Raskolnikov would confess, or continue to hide in uncertainty due to the circumstancial evidence that linked him to the crime. SO many times I wanted to read to the end to find out. But I didn't, and neither should you. There's just so much depth to this book, I have no doubt it will recieve a return read. Perhaps in another 10 years I will read it, and get even more out of it. That's how all great books are. Highest recommendation.

I choose Tower Treasure because my teacher recommended it because I told her I was interested in mystery books,and it was a good choice.
This book is about two young teenage boys who want to be detectives like their father.They are out to solve a mystery of stolen jewels.This is a mystery they want to solve quick to clear a friend's father who is innocent.During their journey they find many clues,but to find out the amazing ending you'll have to read it.
I would recommend this book for readers who enjoy mystery books.It is exciting as you near the end,but you have to give it a chance in the beginning.I'm sure you'll enjoy this mystery book.

This was a fairly good Hardy Boys book. Can't say it is the best though because other books have more suspense, mystery. However, this book was the first and therefore did not need to be the best. Frank and Joe Hardy are the sons of celebrated detective Fenton Hardy. Apparently even though it does not go into details, they just helped them on a case. They hear that the Tower Mansion, one of the bigges houses in town has been robbed. They find out that the suspected is one of their best friend's dad Henry Robinson. Using a lot of brainwork because of a deficit of details they figure out the solution of the mystery. To find out what it is, read it.

I first read this book when I was twelve years and it was one of the first of many Hardy Boys I read. Unfortunately, in my youth I read the 1960's version, but this version, written in the 1920's, is much much better (I'm 39 now and read it to my son).

I think the most interesting thing about this book is that a lot of the problems that today's parents/teachers/politicians complain about are the main topic in this story. Without giving away the storyline, it has car jacking, crime, violence, false judgments of youths, neglected children and murder. I guess it just goes to show that the good old days weren't always what they seem to be.

Briefly the storyline is as follows. A rich person house is broken into and jewelry, money, and bonds are stolen. The Hardy boys investigate and find out that this burglary is related other things going on in town. Eventually, the boys with the help of their father solve the mystery.

A nice bonus for this book is that for those of you who always wanted to know about Franklin W. Dixon, a very brief biography is presented.

This was one of the best thriller novels I've ever read, and I've read too many to count. The plot centers around a brilliant retired police detecitve whose mind is trapped inside of a body that is paralyzed, save one finger. The detectives name: Lincoln Rhyme, and this book begins a series of novels written by Deaver with Rhyme as a central character. Amelia Sachs also appears as his beautiful, but self-doubting Watson to his Holmes. This book moves very quickly and the clues are sprinkled throughout the book in such a way that your mind never stops pondering "Who is the Bone Collector and who is his next victim?" This book gets good early and keeps you hooked. There is very little "down-time, except perhaps, the sub-plot of Rhyme's planned suicide, but even that adds to the story in the end. This is the kind of book you stay up late trying to finish because you just can't go to sleep not knowing how it will end. A VERY good book.

In The Bone Collector, the first in a series featuring Lincoln Rhymes, we are introduced to probably one of the best criminalist minds that have ever been written about. Perhaps it's because the main character, Lincoln Rhymes, does not have the day to day trivialities that cloud up one's mind on a daily basis. Rhymes is a quadriplegic and can only move one finger. He is a former NYPD criminalogist whose spine was severely injured while working a crime scene. Now he is confined to his townhouse apartment in Manhattan where, with the help of some state of the art electronics and equipment, he is still able to help the NYPD solve some gruesome crimes.

Enter Amelia Sachs, a beautiful policewoman, who becomes Lincoln's protege, possible love interest and eyes and ears on upcoming crime scenes. I read this book after the movie trailers were out so it was easy to picture Denzel Washington as Rhymes and Angelina Jolie as Sachs. Deaver is a master at explaining and detailing police procedure and is so adept at analyzing a crime scene that by the time I was finished, I felt as if I could "walk the grid" and "bag the evidence". The homicidal maniac in this book is as evil as they come but Lincoln is able to stay one step ahead of him. If there is a book that can honestly be termed a "page-turner", this is it. Upon its completion, however, I don't know if I'll ever be able to ride in a NYC cab and, if I do have to and I see some little toy hanging from the rear view mirror, "I'm outta here".

Jeffery Deaver is one the great writers of today -his thrillers are wonderfully twisted, intelligent and fast paced.

This was recently made into a movie which did not do the book justice. Lincoln Rhyme, the NYPD's best and considered to be the world's foremost criminalist - is paralyzed in an accident and seeks solace in silence yet the police desperately need him.

Walking the beat, Amelia Sachs discovers a body buried beneath an overpass (all but his ring finger) and she seals the area off in hopes of salvaging what clues might be left. This action brings her to the attention of Lincoln. The NYPD teams them up to hunt down what might be the cities most deranged killer.

This book was fabulous - but it had a major flaw -it ended! I fell in love with Lincoln Rhyme and Amelia Sachs and I couldn't put the book down. It was thriller through and through - and as a bonus it was well written and the characters were so real that you almost felt like you were there with them.

I can't wait to see where Jeffery Deaver takes us next

Although I am not a sailor nor am I very knowledgeable about the navy, I do get a charge out of historical naval fiction. I read the Hornblower series by C.S. Forester with gusto, and was rather disappointed when I finished, because I thought that I had read the best books and there was nowhere to go but down.

Soon after, I saw a review of a Patrick O'Brian book and though he looked promising. I bought "Master and Commander" and started on it. I quickly realized that this was no Hornblower book. I slowly struggled 3/4 of the way through it and decided it wasn't worth the effort. I just couldn't adjust to O'Brian's style: where Forester was straightforward and simple, O'Brian's writing style gets very involved, and sometimes his sentences take half a page. I dropped the book and forgot about it for several months, but for some reason I decided to give O'Brian another try. I started on a later book in the series, and found myself caught up in the story and enjoying the complicated prose. O'Brian's fascinating character development, not to mention the intense battle scenes and occasional bursts of subtle (or not) humor, was captivating. When I re-read "Master and Commander" I couldn't believe that I had been so obtuse on my first perusal; I LOVE this book now, and I know the book didn't change!

I know why a lot of people never really got into O'Brian (I was almost one of them), and I don't blame them. He is not easy to read, at least not at first. But when I got into the groove, so to speak, I found that I wouldn't rather have it any other way. I like the way O'Brian makes the reader work a little, and in the long run I think the payoffs are greater than in the Hornblower series. I know, a lot of people won't believe me, but I cannot tell a lie. O'Brian is better.

This is the first in an excellent, utterly addicting and always compelling series that chronicles the exploits of Captain Jack Aubrey and ship's doctor Stephen Maturin, taking us on a lively tour of their lives, loves and adventures over the course of many years. When my sister first suggested that I read this book I was skeptical -- isn't it a "guy book"? But I was coming off a Jane Austen fix and one of Patrick O'Brian's favorite writers was Austen...so I gave it a try. I read the entire series, back to back, while pregnant with my son.

O'Brian fills his books with such incredible period detail and wonderful Austen-esq characterizations that I was immediately and incurably hooked. You will be astounded how much you learn about the post-Regency Period and life at sea because you will be so busy being deeply engrossed and throughly entertained.

Having grown up with Horatio Hornblower, Teddy Roosvelt's classic "Naval History of the War of 1812," and Fletcher pratt's "Empire and the Sea," among others, I don't impress easily. I am impressed by this book, and have three more in the series awaiting my reading pleasure. What helps to make the book so enjoyable, above and beyond a snapping good story, is the superb detail and authenticity of the telling. Mr. O'Brien, recently deceased, is a master of his genre, the period, and of the writer's craft. The story draws you in; the prose is so vivid, that there are passages that leave you unaware of your surroundings as you drink them in. The turns of fortune, set against the backdrop of the Napoleonic Wars, nener let the reader guess at the conclusion, even though the history is well-known. The principal charachers, Jack Aubrey, Dr. Stephen Maturin, and Lt. Dillon, are well-sketched, and quirky in ways that make them seem authentic to their time. Their speech, and even the turns of phrase used by the author in telling the tale have an 18th-century sound to them. The language is reminicent of Gibbon in terms of the seriousness of the tone of speech. After reading this book, two things are formost in my mind: is the rest of the series up to this level, and why, if they are, didn't he ever get the Nobel Prize? -Lloyd A. Conway

I have trouble reading classic literature. I am an avid reader and I want to enjoy the classics, but just find it difficult to understand the meaning in some of the writing.

This, however, was a pleasant surprise. Although written in the early 1700s, the story itself was fairly easy to follow. Even towards the end, I began to see the underlying theme of the satire that Swift has been praised for in this work.

Being someone who reads primarily science fiction and fantasy novels, I thought this might be an opportunity to culture myself while also enjoying a good story. I was correct in my thinking. Even if you can't pick up on the satire, there is still a good classic fantasy story.

Essentially, the book details the travels of Lemuel Gulliver, who by several misfortunes, visits remote and unheard of lands. In each, Gulliver spends enough time to understand the language and culture of each of these land's inhabitants. He also details the difference in culture of his native England to the highest rulers of the visted nations. In his writing of these differences, he is able to show his dislike with the system of government of England. He does this by simply stating how things are in England and then uses the reaction of the strangers as outsiders looking in, showing their lack of respect for what Gulliver describes.

I found it very interesting to see that even as early as the 1700s there was a general dislike of government as well as lawyers.

I would recommend this book to anyone who reads the fantasy genre. Obviously, it's not an epic saga like so many most fantasy readers enjoy, but it's a nice break. I would also recommend this to high school students who are asked to pick a classic piece for a book report. It reads relatively quick and isn't as difficult to read as some of the others that I've tried to read.

Lemuel Gulliver is a surgeon/ship¨ˆs captain who embarks on several intriguing adventures. His first endeavor takes him to Lilliput, where all inhabitants are six inches tall, but resemble normal humans in every other respect. His next voyage lands him on Brobdingnag, where a grown man is sixty feet tall, and even the shortest dwarf stands thirty feet tall. On his third trip, he travels to several locations, including a floating island. During Gulliver¨ˆs final voyage, he is abandoned by his mutinous crew on the island of the Houyhnhnms, which are extremely intelligent horses. No evil or concept of lying exists among these creatures. The island is also inhabited by Yahoos, savage, irrational human-like creatures who are kept as pets by the Houyhnhnms. Gulliver wishes to spend the rest of his life on this peaceful island, but he is banished and forced to return to England.
I really enjoyed this book, and I would recommend it to people 14 or older. Since the novel was written in the 1700¡¯s, the words, grammar and usage are a little confusing. The reader also must have prior knowledge of 18th-century politics to get a full image of what Swift is trying to convey. At some points, the author goes into detail about nautical terms and happenings, and that tends to drag. Overall, the book is well-written, slightly humorous, if not a little confusing.

It's amazing how our perspective changes as we age. What we thought was important as children may now seem completely insignificant, replaced by entirely new priorities, priorities children wouldn't even understand. At the same time, things we used to take for granted, like having dinner on the table, being taken care of when we're ill, or getting toys fixed when they are broken, have become items on adult worry lists.

Your perspective on literature can change, too. Reading a story for a second time can give you a completely different view of it. "Huckleberry Finn" by Mark Twain, which I enjoyed as a sort of an adventure story when I was a kid, now reads as a harsh criticism of society in general and the institution of slavery in particular.

The same thing is true of "Gulliver's Travels" by Jonathan Swift. The first thing I realized upon opening the cover of this book as a college student was that I probably had never really read it before.

I knew the basic plot of Lemuel Gulliver's first two voyages to Lilliput and Brobdingnag, home of the tiny and giant people, respectively, but he had two other voyages of which I was not even aware: to a land of philosophers who are so lost in thought they can't see the simplest practical details, Laputa, and to a land ruled by wise and gentle horses or Houyhnhnms and peopled by wild, beastly human-like creatures called Yahoos.

While this book has become famous and even beloved by children, Jonathan Swift was certainly not trying to write a children's book.

Swift was well known for his sharp, biting wit, and his bitter criticism of 18th century England and all her ills. This is the man who, to point out how ridiculous English prejudices had become, wrote "A Modest Proposal" which suggested that the Irish raise their children as cattle, to be eaten as meat, and thereby solve the problems of poverty and starvation faced in that country. As horrible as that proposal is, it was only an extension of the kinds of solutions being proposed at the time.

So, although "Gulliver's Travels" is entertaining, entertainment was not Swift's primary purpose. Swift used this tale of a guillable traveler exploring strange lands to point out some of the inane and ridiculous elements of his own society.

For example, in describing the government of Lilliput, Swift explains that officials are selected based on how well they can play two games, Rope-Dancing and Leaping and Creeping. These two games required great skill in balance, entertained the watching public, and placed the politicians in rather ridiculous positions, perhaps not so differently from elections of leaders in the 18th century and even in modern times.

Give this book a look again, or for the first time. Even in cases in which the exact object of Swift's satire has been forgotten, his sweeping social commentary still rings true. Sometimes it really does seem that we are all a bunch of Yahoos.