I thought it a very difficult book to read. The sentences are long and complicated; they jump about from dates and times; and it is sometimes unclear who is what(partly because the names change their peerages titles).

850 pages of rather dull and uninformative prose; does an adequate job of critiquing the novels but give short shrift to the poetry. Unrelenting harangue against the second Mrs. Hardy.

I have read some terrible books, but this is by far the worst history textbook. It is filled with Eurocentric notions of culture and civilization. The uses of "barbaric people" and "civilized people" don't make much sense. For example, he considers the Native people barbaric. The Native people are not the only ones whom he considers barbaric people. He also suggests that Hinduism is based on the Indus cult. I am not a Hundu follower, but I find that offensive. He could have written that there was a connection between Hinduism and the ancient relgion of the Indus region. I am seriously questioning his understanding of history because it looks like that he is not familiar with cultural relativism or any other sociological theories. Yes, he does discuss the world history. The scope of this book is too big for him to handle. As a result, the book is often misleading and inaccurate. I think he made no attempt to correct this because this is his fifth edition.

After receiving a mysterious message from their father, Frank and Joe go to Washington, D.C. and become the target of terrorists. The book has a good mystery, but, unforfunately, VERY little of the details about it are revealed until late in the book, which made the book rather boring and hard to enjoy. There was little action in the story; chapter endings were often something that could happen(Frank and Joe wondering what was happening to Chet or hoping that Chet and a friend were there to help them in case of trouble) or the endings were just plain boring and nothing that made you want to read the next chapter right away.

This is apainful review for me to write, as I admire many of Berlins writings. However, this book does little more than to reveal Berlins inability to comprehend Christian mysticism or religous belief. Hamann scholars(and one of my best friends is a Hamann scholar) are almost unanimous in dismissing Berlins book. Hamann was not "stupid" ( such well known intellectual lightweights as Goethe,Kant, Kierkegaard and Hegel regarded him as a genius.)nor was he an 'irrationalist', unless it is "rational' to worship "reason". Yes, Hamann questioned many of the shibboleths of progressive, enlightened "humanism"..they could stand some criticism. To suggest some sort of genealogical linkage between Hamann and the Third Reich is, to say the least,absurd. At least one could hope that some reader might turn from reading Berlins little essay and turn to Hamanns writings, in all their wonderful strangeness, or at even better to hunt down Ronald Gregor Smith fascinating, out of print book, J.G. Hamann,Philosopher of christian Existence, or Gwen Griffith Dickson scholarly, but frightfully expensive, Hamanns Meta-Critique of Reason. Let me just say in closing that Michael Oakeshott had a point when he called Isaiah Berlin "A veritable Pagannini of Ideas."

it was one of the most stupid book that i have read

This is an excellent book. You will find all the important reviewes published at the time of publishing each books of Thomas Hardy.The book also contains the writings of the eminent writers of his times about each book of Thomas Hardy.

I started reading Hardy Boys books in 1978, and had never read a CaseFile until last month. And 1 is enough for me. Witness to Murder is poorly written with just your basic "guns in the boys faces" routine. The only reason to read this is to see the Hardys involved in murder scenes, get closer to women, etc.

My advice for Hardy Boys readers, stick to the Grosset and Dunlap hardcover books and the early (1979-85) S&S paperbacks.