Kipling's JUST SO STORIES certainly rank in English-speaking children's literature right along with A. A. Milne's WINNIE THE POOH and Kenneth Grahame's WIND IN THE WILLOWS. They are fun to read to children 4-8, and even MORE fun for them to read for themselves at ages 7-11 (they're marvelous vocabulary builders --"the mariner of infinite resource and sagacity" ). My English-raised mother heard the stories when they were new and read them to me when I was a child, I read them to my own children, they read them to theirs, and I believe that same cycle has been repeated among millions of families since the stories appeared at the beginning of the 20th century.

It is my impression that today the JUST SO STORIES do not enjoy the popularity with children (and parents) that they once had. That may be because they are occasionally "politically incorrect" in their depiction of historical attitudes regarding race and culture. Joel Chandler Harris's UNCLE REMUS stories and even Mark Twain's HUCKLEBERRY FINN are sometimes removed from local library shelves on the same basis. In this reviewer's view, inattention to the works of Kipling and Harris and Twain deprives English-speaking children of some appreciation of the culture and civilization in which they live today. Worse yet, it deprives them of the fun of reading FOR fun.

Rudyard Kipling, referred to by one reviewer here as "not a very good writer" was the first English writer to win the Nobel Prize (not the Pulitzer) for literature, in 1907. He was staunchly pro-Empire in an era in which Great Britain not only ruled the waves, but a third of the globe -- the sun never set, it was said, on the British Empire, of which he sang in hundreds of poems and short stories and novels which also deserve reading today.

But imperial/colonialist notes are hard to hear in the JUST SO STORIES, which Kipling wrote for the amusement of a young niece. The stories are meant for FUN, and all children deserve to have some. Get this book; read it yourself if you haven't already -- and then read it to the youngsters for whom Kipling intended it.

This book is the most valued in my family history. Now my children are asking after it to read to their children because of all of the beloved memories it brings back. The language is a delight. The way Kipling draws the reader and listener in to feel they are part of the story, it is story telling magic at its very best. I can't believe anyone who has this book in their home, once read, will ever be without it. As long as children and that child in all adults long for the gifted story teller's magic, this book is special.

I love this book, and loved it as a child, for the writing, the stories, and for the pictures which I could pore over again and again, looking for new details I missed previously. I have remembered and talked about many of the stories throughout my life, particularly The Cat Who Walks by Himself, and The Elephant's Child. I also like . . . oh, well, there are just too many to talk about. Read them for youself, and to your kids.

The stories are complex and mysterious and, though I can't say much for Kipling's politics, I find them delightful. I think most children will, too. As an adult, I couldn't get my mother to part with my childhood copy so I went out and bought one of my own.

A classic!

Sex, war, peace, the ingredients to a great play. Lysistrata is about women who are tired of losing their sons in battle. The women band together to bring peace by forming a pact, they refuse sexual intercourse with their husbands unless the war is brought to an end. However, that is only the beginning of the bag of tricks she has up her sleeve.
The play is an absolute riot. I've seen this play performed live and while there were some good moments, I liked the book better. The book has a lot more witty humor and a sense of building frustration that the play lacked. The sexual innuendos are nothing too rash as to be insulting or offensive but rather appropriate, something college students can well appreciate. The "love scene" between Myrrhine and her husband Kinesias will leave you rolling on the floor. The use of props such as the "phalli" and towels are brilliant in accompanying the humor. It's funny to read (and picture) how the women "man-handle" their husbands to try to bring peace to the land. As a college student I've read and studied this book and found many interesting values covered that are appropriate for a Rhetoric or gender studies course. The theme of women suffrage, rising up against the men in a time when women need to be heard, is dominant in the play. Women banding together to fight for a common cause is something I have not read before and was pleasantly surprised of. For a Greek play, the women are portrayed as being very human, rather than being serial killers and jealous lovers and the sort. The women are characterized as being very sleek and sexy, something always to look forward to! The men aren't desensitized either; rather the men are just as human as the women.
I recommend this book for any college rhetoric course or even an Interpretation of Literature course. It's the best of both worlds in terms of being very entertaining and having a fair share of educational value.

Lysistrata is perhaps my favorite of the Greek plays-it's never pompous or overbearing, and it never overwhelms itself with flowery prose. In addition, it's one of the few Greek plays I've read that portrays women as genuine human beings rather than murderers, decorations, or idiots. They're smart, sexy, and socially aware, especially in a time when they were very seriously repressed.

Lysistrata is an intelligent Athenian woman who is sick and tired of the Greek city-states warring against each other. She calls all the women she can round up and comes up with a strategy to end the wars: Keep away from their husbands' beds, and the men will make peace with other cities to make peace with their wives. After a great deal of whining, the women agree to deprive their husbands of sex until peace is achieved. But that's only the beginning of what Lysistrata has planned...

Too many feminist tales end up being heavy-handed-though women are on the side of peace and right in this, it doesn't bang you over the head. The men are human as well. The comedy is sly and witty (though full of mild sex talk--nothing too raunchy) and the scene where one young woman unmercifully teases her love-hungry husband will have you rolling.

I can see someone making this into a movie-in modern or ancient settings, the dialogue can still be deciphered without a translation program *wink*. It's a story about the power that women can wield and the lengths that they can go to.

Read, laugh, guffaw! You won't regret it!

This is probably the most entertaining play I've ever read, and it was written more than 2,000 years ago! Aristophanes brilliantly critiques the rigid gender roles of ancient Greek society in several dozen hilarious pages.

Aristophanes writes of a group of Greek women who, in protest of war, refuse to have sex with their husbands, and the plot is a glorious success. Aristophanes depicts men begging their wives for sex, and paints a picture of Greek women not very dissimilar to the women of contemporary Western society.

"Lysistrata" is a crucial reading for anyone interested in Greek history, feminism, or anyone who just wants to read a devastatingly funny comedy about sex.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!

Pipes has written this account for one sole reason - certainly not to present a review or interpretation of the historry of the Bolshevik party and the Russian Revolution, but rather as an attempt to destroy Lenin and Bolshevism. While this one-sided attempt may be fine for some, it certainly does not help those readers who would actually like to make up their minds for themselves. But then again, can one possibly expect a right-wing historian who worked under the Reagan administration to give a fair account of the Russian Revolution? With that being said, Pipes is really no different then many leftist historians who attempt to glorify the USSR and the Revolution (Communist writers of the 30's and 40's come to mind). In my experience I have found that the book that carries the least biased account (of course, complete objectivity is impossible) of the Russian Revolution is E.H. Carr's History of the Bolshevik Revolution. If you are interested in the facts of the Revolution and not merely a book-long effort to demonize Lenin et al., then I suggest you pick up Carr's book.

This book works as both an engrossing beginning to a serious study of Russia from around 1905 to the death of Lenin, or as a one-off read for those with a passing interest. A finely written history book, it manages to cram in a topical description of every major happening (and some not so major) during the aforementioned time frame as well as provide a solid foundation upon which to delve deeper into the subject matter. Pipes, a Harvard professor as well as an ex-National Security Advisor for Reagan on Soviet and Eastern European affairs (but don't let this fact dissuade you from reading the book) writes thought-provoking and informative prose with a well-tuned eye for context. The only turn-off is his constant reminders of just how awful the Bolsheviks were, finishing the book with a short diatribe supporting subjective reporting of history (which might be better wrestled with in a different book entirely). Regardless, a fine book, written by one of the world's top authorities of the subject matter

I'm a history student in my fourth year honours(with my major in Russia) and this book was the text book for my fourth year honours class. It is a great book because Pipes gives a summary of his previous 3 books "Russia Under the Old Regime", "The Russian Revolution" and "Russia Under the Bolshevik Regime". It is the equivalent to buy 3 books in one. The novelty of the book is that if the reader is interested in reading a relative short book about Russian history, this is the best book for that. However if one is interested in further details, I recommend people to read any of the 3 books summarized here in details. Pipes proves with enough arguments the gangster character of Lenin and his ambition for power. As Pipes argues, 'power' was the only ideology of the Bolshevik Party. The first part of the book provides a good background of the origins of 'autocracy' in the Old Regime. The last chapter gives the reader details about other aspects of the Bolsheviks after they achieved power, including among others 'the chapter on culture'. The chapters 'The October Coup' (here Pipes proves with details that in October 1917 a coup d'état took place and not a revolution), 'The Red Terror' (proves that it was through killing nearly a million people that Bolsheviks stayed in power) and the chapter on Lenin are of course the worst nightmare for communists around the world. I one word I have to say that Pipes' books are the 'bible' of Russian history. My deepest admiration to Dr Pipes.

Mr. Kristoff and Ms. WuDunn have written a very interesting and engaging book about one of the most important areas of the world. The strength and weakness of the book derives from the authors' close contact with average people in the areas the write about. This puts a wonderfully human face on an area that for too many Americans becomes a faceless mass of statistics. But sometimes I think the authors are too quick to jump from anecdote to larger societal truth.

I found some of the early history of the region especially fascinating having never been exposed to that before. Like the authors, I spent time afterward thinking about what might have been had China not destroyed its 15th century navy. It is a useful counterpoint to the common argument that the triumph of the West over the past several centuries was inevitable.

The book also provides many good insights into Asia's potential for the future. I was also impressed that the authors seemed very cognizant of the limits of their predictive powers and often pointed the wide variety of things that could happen to change their overall outlook. I would recommend this book for all but the most serious scholars of Asia.

This is the main message of the book. I just have two comments and a reflection. There are surprising examples of how Japan is willing to spend huge amounts of money to keep services in sparsely populated rural areas. The emphasis seems to be more on how soft-hearted the Japanese are to do this than on how creating employment and contracts benefits various political constituencies. The authors predict that China will eventually grant independence to Tibet, but I don't see why the government would agree, especially if they can bring in enough Han Chinese. I haven't read their earlier book, _China Wakes_, but there isn't enough information in _Thunder_ to support their opinion.

If present trends persist, Asia will have the majority of the world's economic activity in a few decades, in addition to the majority of its population. The discussion of these trends in the first chapter made me think that the United States has a responsibility to encourage economic growth in Latin America so that there can be economically vibrant multiracial societies throughout the Americas to offer the world an alternative to the nationalism that might develop in the more homogeneous East Asian countries.

The title of this book is very apt; this is definitly a portrait, painted w/ very broad strokes. The stories are intriguing, especially since this book was researched after the Asian Economic Crisis. It is encouraging to read stories of people's resiliance in times of catastrophe. My one complaint is the justification for some of the human suffering mentioned in this book. No, I am not overly optimistic & I am aware that life is hard, but, it seems impossible for me to justify in any circumstance, for example, selling your daughter to a brothel.
I learned from this book & enjoyed it. If you want a big picture of Asia, this is a good read. Kristoff & WuDunn are well traveled in Asia & the book seems well researched. The difficulty lies in trying to describe 2.5 billion people in 300 pages; there are some generalizations. Overall, a worthwhile read that should whet your appetite for more.

Will this book help make you a more popular person? I suppose the basic flaw of any self-help book is that the reader can readily adopt the program of a book and find the on-ramp to the Highway of Success. The first two sections of this book amount to little more than common sense in dealing with other people. The final section, however, gives some fascinating insight into establishing rapport using Neuro-Linguistic Programming. Boothman writes persuasively enough, but gives almost nothing in the way of solid scientific evidence for his program (At one point, he actually says, "In my opinion, and it has no scientific basis other than my close enough acquaintanceships with more than 35 couples . . ."). He also offers the surprising revelation that couples with successful relationships share not the primary sensory preference but the secondary one, yet gives little in the way of how to determine this secondary preference in others. One might also wonder how to deal with seriously difficult people, skilled manipulators, or more than one individual at a time. Perhaps in a sequel. Still, this is better than most of what passes for self-help advice.

Whether you're a teenage guy having trouble talking to girls; the CEO of a major corporation unhappy with your employees' productivity; or a mother who wishes her kids would clean their rooms without being nagged, you need this book!

It presents a look at developing "rapport" during the first few seconds of meeting someone - a practice that can make the difference in a relationship or a business deal.

The book also presents practical advice on enhancing existing relationships by understanding other people's methods of interpreting sensory input.

Unlike many books by motivational speakers who spout motherhood statements and generalizations, author Nicholas Boothman uses plain language and effective metaphors that provide the reader with concrete communication "tools." A fascinating "read," this book is a guide to be used along your day-to-day life path.

Boothman's writing style is remarkably clear and concise. How to Make People Like You in 90 Seconds or Less is an oasis of simplicity for everyone coping in today's complex world.

This concise, easy-to-read book is all about establishing rapport with people. The author delves into what happens during the initial moments of personal contact when we tend to form "first impressions." Boothman takes a separate look at each of the senses during the meeting process, with a particular focus on verbal and body language. The reader learns to orchestrate an interaction to achieve a specific goal, which is often to be liked and accepted by the other person.

Fiction writers, in particular, will appreciate the chapter that includes a discussion on the three major senses people use to take in information - sight, sound and touch. Surprisingly, we speak using a verbal dialogue that feeds the sense we rely on the most. By incorporating characters' verbal styles and sensory-related actions with their body language, writers can create even more vivid fiction.

The book is written in a straightforward manner, and is peppered with anecdotes and metaphors. This self-help book will empower people invigorate their social and professional lives.

"How should one live?" is the fundamental question driving most of Chekhov's work, and it is very overtly laid bare in The Cherry Orchard. Should the aristocratic family in decline stick to owning their cherry orchard (representative of the grandiose trappings of Russian aristocracy), or give in to modern commercialization in order to survive? What is the value of tradition, and how many trees should one own? Chekhov will not answer these questions for you, but he poses them in most interesting ways. In addition to wise insights into such fundamental dilemmas, Chekhov also provides a lot of witty banter, and a great slice-of-life view at 19th century Russian high culture. But this is not just a Russian play or a 19th century play; its themes, questions, and prospective answers are relevant for individuals coping with society and history in any place, and at any time.

The Cherry Orchard was me first experience with Chekhov, and I was surprised at the depth in this 49 page play. By no means would I considered myself a "literary expert," but this was very readable and you can pull a lot of the deeper meanings and its context in Russian history by yourself. I was confused at a couple people who write that the simply couldn't understand it and it put them to sleep! It's not THAT tough! If I could understand and appreciate it, almost anyone can!

What I like most about Chekhov is that he doesn't simplify his characters. He's a realist in this sense. Lopahkin and Trophimof each have admirable and detestable characteristics, just like you and I. While it may be set in the tumultuous period prior to the Russian revolution, the ideas and the discussions this play provokes are timeless.

Highly recommended!

Anton Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" has been published as part of the Dover Thrift Edition series (that's the version I read before writing this review). No translator is credited for this edition. According to the note at the start of the book, the play was initially presented by the Moscow Art Theatre in 1904.

The play takes place on the estate of Madame Ranevsky, the matriarch of an aristocratic Russian family that has fallen on financial hard times. She faces the possible loss of her family's magnificent cherry orchard.

The play is populated with interesting characters: Lopakhin, a wealthy neighbor whose father was the serf of Madame Ranevsky's father; Firs, an aged servant who longs for the "old days"; Trophimof, a student with lofty ideas; and more. There is a great deal of conflict among the characters.

"The Cherry Orchard" is about people dealing with very personal conflicts and crises while larger socioeconomic changes are going on around them. The orchard of the title is a memorable image that is well handled by Chekhov. The play contains some really effective dialogue, such as old Firs' reflection on the apparently lost art of making dried cherries. This is definitely one classic play that remains compelling.

I mostly concur with those disappointed by this finale to an otherwise enthralling series.

There are really two "stories" to comment upon. First, the overarching story of the eight novels ends less than satisfactorily, with the wholesale slaughter of characters overdone. Where is the final confrontation with Simon? Hardly anyone at the end gets enlightened with Henry's true parentage--one of the main plot drivers of the whole series. And who the heck is Bonne? I'll pay Dunnett the compliment of intentionally leaving a few loose ends (do any of these dovetail into the Lymond books?), but they are frustrating all the same. Don't look for any further character development except for Henry and, perhaps, Jodi a bit. The fascinating Gelis turns into a cardboard character after the reconciliation, and Nicholas morphs into a helplessly manipulated wimp. An epilogue linking to the Lymond novels, though, is understated and beautiful--every word counts here.

Second, the story within the novel is a blithering account of mind-numbing minutiae of Scottish politics and history. Where is the adventure and suspense of Africa, Trebizond, Egypt, and Cypress? Other that a Scot, who cares about which clan supported which palace intrigue? And the occasional list of Scottish lords and their relationships (characters who are otherwise not introduced and about whom we care nothing, although they also pad the bloated List of Characters at the front of the book) are sleep-inducing at best. I am sure Dunnett waxed proud of her beloved Scotland, but had this been the first novel of the series, it would have been my last.

Despite all of the above, of course you should read Gemini if you have read the rest. It's hard to say goodbye to such compelling characters. Just be prepared for a big disappointment.

"Gemini" is the long-awaited finale to Dorothy Dunnett's blockbuster series, The House of Niccolo. Nicholas de Fleury - banker, world traveler, former owner of a small private army - returns to Scotland to make reparations for the economic damage he did in the course of his revenge on the St. Pol family. With a wrench, he leaves his wife, Gelis, and son, Jordan, behind in Bruges in safety because he fears that Jordan St. Pol, his presumed grandfather, and David de Salmeton, an adversary in trade, may take revenge on him through attacks on his family.

Nicholas returns to Scotland as the agent of his wife, Gelis, but finds himself working to shore up an unstable Stuart monarchy, threatened from without by England and from within by cadet members of the royal family.

As with all Dunnett books, "Gemini" is packed with marvelous set pieces, lush descriptions, lucid explications of the politics of the day, heart-wrenching deaths, and moments of joyous triumph. Questions raised in earlier books are answered - mostly - we readers need a few things left to argue about, don't we?

Judith Wilt has provided an excellent introduction that synopsizes the seven earlier books ably, but reading them in order is still preferable.

I am stunned after completing this eighth book in the Niccolo series, but I'm also very, very sad. I have now finished all fourteen books in Ms. Dunnett's saga and it saddens me to know that there is no new installment where I can lose myself in this quite remarkable family. In this book we finally get a lot of answers as to why Niccolo acted as he did in all the previous books. We see who is real enemy has been over the years and it is a surprise to all of his friends even though Niccolo has known all along. He has tried to minimize the damage and tried to control this serpent in his midst, but finds that it can't be done and it comes to a sad, sad conclusion. Niccolo faces great losses in this book, but he comes out a stronger man for them. Ms. Dunnett is truly a master storyteller and I recommend that everyone read her series the way she suggests. She suggests that you read the six Lymond chronicles in the right order and then these eight in the Niccolo series, and then go back and re-read the Lymond chronicles. All will be much clearer and her prose is so complex that a first reading of all the books is not nearly enough to get all the complexities and double-dealings that occur as standard fare. I am exhilerated after completing the series, but as I mentioned, very sad. I don't think I'll find an author or a series to compare. I would give the entire series of fourteen books ten stars if I could.

You buy this type of item for the price. The price was low, and you can wear the book out without worrying about it. Good if you don't want to pay too much for a book.

"Antigone," the drama by Sophocles, has been published as part of the Dover Thrift Edition series. The Dover version is translated into English by George Young. An introductory note states that the play was first performed in the 440s BCE.

The introductory note also includes a brief summary of events leading up to the events of this play. "Antigone" concerns the family of Oedipus, former ruler of the city-state of Thebes. As "Antigone" opens, Thebes is ruled by Creon, the brother-in-law of Oedipus. Creon is at odds with his niece, Antigone, because he denies a proper burial to Antigone's brother Polynices. Antigone's intention to defy her uncle sets this tragedy in motion.

This is a powerful story about familial duty, social customs, gender roles, and the relationship between the individual and governmental authority. The issues in this play remain relevant today, and are powerfully argued by Sophocles' characters. At the heart of the play is this question: Is it right to disobey a law or edict that one feels is unjust?

But "Antigone" is not just a philosophical meditation; it's also the story of a very personal clash between two strong-willed members of a very troubled extended family. A bonus in the play is the appearance of the seer Tiresias: it is a small but potent role. Overall, this play is a solid example of why ancient Greek drama has stood the test of time.

Following the ending of "Oedipus the King," Oedipus was exiled from Thebes, blind and a beggar. We learn from "Oedipus at Colonus" that his sons, Eteocles and Polyneices engaged in a civil war for the throne of Thebes (covered in "Seven Against Thebes" by Aeschylus). The two brothers kill each other and Creon (Manos Katrakis), brother of Jocasta, becomes king. He orders that Eteocles, who nobly defended his city, shall receive an honorable burial, but that Polyneices, for leading the Argive invaders, shall be left unburied. This leads Antigone (Pappas), sister to both of the slain brothers, to have to choose between obeying the rule of the state, the dictates of familial binds, and the will of the gods. This, of course, is the matter at the heart of this classic tragedy by Sophocles.

It is too easy to see the issues of this play, first performed in the 5th century B.C., as being reflected in a host of more contemporary concerns, where the conscience of the individual conflicts with the dictates of the state. However, it seems to me that the conflict in "Antigone" is not so clear-cut as we would suppose. After all, Creon has the right to punish a traitor and to expect loyal citizens to obey. Ismene (Maro Kodou), Antigone's sister, chooses to obey, but Antigone takes a different path. The fact that the "burial" of her brother consists of the token gesture of throwing dirt upon his face, only serves to underscore the ambiguity of the situation Sophocles is developing. Even though the playwright strips Creon of his son, Haemon (Nikos Kazis) and wife, Eurydice (Ilia Livykou) by the end of the drama, it is not a fatal verdict rendered against the king's judgment, but rather the playing out of the tragedy to its grim conclusion.

Note: I have always enjoyed Jean Anouilh's "modern" version of the play, produced in 1944 and loaded with overtones regarding the Nazi occupation of France. The two plays offer a fascinating analog and students are usually quick to appreciate how Anouilh revitalizes the ancient myth with the political situation in which he lived.

The respected Greek-American journalist and biographer Nicholas Gage has written an exhaustive chronicle of perhaps the most sensational episode in Maria Callas' sensational life--her stormy and ultimately tragic involvement with Aristotle Onassis, the Greek shipping magnate.

The tale of Callas' life and art, of course, has been told and retold in many volumes of varying worth, but biographically Mr. Gage's carefully researched and verified effort cannot fail to impress. Due to his dual subjects, his chronology largely limits itself to the last two decades of Callas' life (she became seriously involved with Onassis in 1959), but within this time frame he has come up with some startling new revelations, including the astonishing assertion (supported by convincing evidence) that Callas gave birth to a son by Onassis in 1960. The baby died the same day it was born, and this tragic event affected the entire rest of their relationship. There is a reverent, almost mystical tone in Gage's writing about the pair, a feeling that their romance was fated to happen and should have turned out much more happily than it did. This is backed up by the opinions of numerous people close to the couple that Onassis' impulsive pursuit of and marriage to Jacqueline Kennedy was the greatest mistake of his life.

Undoubtedly Onassis and Callas come vividly to life in these pages as people, warts and all. About Callas the musician Gage is less convincing. Although he speaks denigratingly about the false stories of the diva that have been uncritically perpetuated by biographers copying from each other, Gage himself does the same on occasion. For example, he repeats the standard tale of the January 1958 Rome Opera "walkout," that Callas was voiceless and struggling against hecklers from the very start of the performance. In fact, as Michael Scott has pointed out, a broadcast tape is readily available of the performance which belies both these contentions. Overall, too, Callas, even with her voice in decline, remained much more interested in singing after she met Onassis than the rather indolent portrait that emerges from these pages would indicate. Post-1960 there were several complete opera recordings, and numerous collections of arias released on disc, and these are just the commercial studio efforts.

Still, Callas the artist has been well-served in much other writing, notably that of John Ardoin. Gage's book corrects many more errors than it perpetuates. It is obligatory reading for any fan and, for that matter, anyone who wishes to know more about this eternally glamorous and fascinating pair.

My grandmother gave me my first opera recording when I was 11 years old - the second Callas Tosca, and I spent much time later as an adult buying every recording she made and reading every book I could get my hands on to discover as much about this compelling artist as I could. At last, here is the definitive version of her great love affair, told impartially from many sources close to the heart of their relationship. I had always known that tabloid gossips had put a wrongful spin on what was going on, and it is refreshing to read the facts here, and have many longstanding falsehoods exposed. I knew absolutely nothing of Onassis before reading "Greek Fire", and this book gives a good general overview of his life and rise to being one of the richest men in the world. Onassis does not come off as the villian here - forcing Maria to give up her singing, to have an abortion, and then dumping her for Jackie Kennedy. The intricate byplay of these very public figures is chronicled extremely well, with each side of the "triangle" treated fairly. If anything, it is Jackie who comes off as the greedy, material, and socially power hungry villian, concerned only for herself, finally hooking the wealthiest man she could get her hands on. Since he is not a musical scholar, Gage does not discuss in depth the decline of Callas' voice prior to meeting Onassis, but it is fairly indicated, so at last here is a biographer that does not spin the familiar "Callas gave it all up for Onassis" story. Having read virtually every book published about Callas, I can say that this is certainly one of the best out there. I read it over one weekend, and immediately started reading it again. It was compelling.

When I started this book I said to myself, "How is Gage going to fill this whole book with Callas and Onassis?" Well, he did it. This factual account is so interesting that I couldn't put the book down. Gage gives us specifics and so many details that I have to believe that this is the most truthful account of this relationship that I have read. I have always been in intrigued with Callas's story but I had never read anything regarding Onassis. This book gave me a good start of Onassis and his relationships along with his story of being a ship tycoon. This is so much like a Greek tragedy. Read this well written book!

First, the review from "henry@coombs.anu.edu.au" contains several mistakes. Lestrade does not appear in "The Valley Of Fear", and that story is a prequel to "The Adventure Of The Final Problem". Second, it is probable that Watson altered events in FP in order that it would appear as though it was his first look at Moriarty, since it was the reader's as well. By "Valley Of Fear", readers know who it is, so it is unnecessary to do the same thing. Watson has plainly stated that he altered facts to make stories suitable for the reading public. Third, there is no "official" Holmes continuity. You accept what you, the reader, wish to accept. Nothing more. I disagree with his thoughts on the later Doyle stories, but that is a matter of opinion.

That said, this is a great book which does what Doyle never bothered to do; make the narrative an intense character study where we find out some of the deepest corners of Holmes' mind. This is Sherlock Holmes at it's best, filled with splendid characterization and a cunning mystery. The drama is this story is incredible; Holmes' confrontation with Sigmund Freud is heartstopping, and his moments of weakness are heartbreaking. There are also many nice touches that warm a reader's heart, like examining Watson and his wife, Mary Morstan, and her references to "brandy and soda" and calling him "Jack".

The mystery is also quite good, and appears halfway through the book (but does not forget to deal with Holmes' addiction). There are moments of high drama and action which are integrated nicely and paced swiftly. Holmes' deductions are excellent and well thought out.

If you have ever felt that Doyle's stories lacked emotional investment for the reader, then this is the book to read.

Doyle was an excellent writer, but he did not truly understand what a wonderful character he had created in Sherlock Holmes. He saw him as merely a calculating machine, perhaps never noticing the hidden passion that he placed within the character; the kindness and heart within Holmes.

But Nicholas Meyer did.

And he displayed it in a novel that was a bestseller, that led to a feature film, and revitalized Holmes in the late twentieth century. With creators like these, with people that care so deeply about him, Sherlock Holmes will survive for another hundred years.

Final notes. Meyer is the director of several movies, including the movie adaptation of this novel, and a few Star Trek movies.

This book does have it's mistakes, and one is that if Moriarty is what he is in this novel, then "Final Problem", "Empty House" and "Valley Of Fear" are lies that slander an innocent, if annoying man.

THE SEVEN-PER-CENT SOLUTION is a story unparalleled in the annals of criminal detection. Discovered in Hampshire, England, where it had lain neglected since 1939, then painstakingly researched and annotated for two years by editor Nicholas Meyer, THE SEVEN-PER-CENT SOLUTION marks the first publication of a heretofore unknown and astounding episode in the career of Sherlock Holmes as recorded by his closest friend and chronicler, Dr. John H. Watson.

Even more remarkable than the historic discovery of Watson's transcript are the revelations it contains concerning the real identity of the heinous Professor Moriarity, the dark secret shared by Sherlock and brother Mycroft Holmes, and the detective's true whereabouts and activities during the Great Hiatus when the world believed him dead.

Most astounding of all, THE SEVEN-PER-CENT SOLUTION details the events that led to the meeting in Vienna of the world's two most brilliant investigators and their collaboration on a sensational case of diabolic conspiracy.

John Hamish Watson was born in England in 1847. After a childhood spent abroad, he returned in 1872 and enrolled in the University of London Medical School, where he took his degree six years later. After finishing the course at Netley prescribed for Army surgeons, he was attached to the Fifth Northumberland Fusiliers and sent to India. Severly wounded by a Jezail bullet at the Battle of Maiwand during the Second Afghan War, in 1880, he returned to England, his health ruined, with no specific plans other than to live as best he could on his Army pension. In January of the following year, quite by accident, he met Sherlock Holmes, who was then looking for someone to share his lodgings. The ensuing friendship, which lasted until Holmes' death found Watson his niche as the great detective's biographer through more than sixty cases. In his spare time he resumed the practice of medicine. In 1889 he married Mary Morstan. He died in Britain in 1940.

I thoroughly enjoyed this book and was very impressed with it. I checked it out from the library to read it but I'm definitely buying a copy for myself. First of all, it was just a well written and entertaining book. Some scenes were hilarious while others were postively heartbreaking. Secondly, I found it to be very true to the spirit of Doyle's stories and to his Holmes and Watson. I felt that Meyer did an excellent job with Holmes' character. Holmes was slightly different from what he was in the canon but I felt that this could have been how Doyle would have written Holmes had he ever chosen to write a story such as this. Meyer also had Holmes and Watson's relationship down to perfection. I loved how he seemed to realize how important Watson was to Holmes. The deductions in the book were also very good. Most of them were worthy of Sir Arthur himself. I also liked Meyer's footnotes. I thought they were cool. What I loved most about the book though was that I got the strong impression that it was written out of a love for the canon and not out of a love for the money. The book appeared to have been written by someone who had read and re-read the canon and not by someone who was getting all their information from the Basil Rathbone movies.

I should add that the book does deviate from the canon so I have to advise caution if you're a purist. The book gives a different explanation for the Great Hiatus and Moriarty isn't portrayed as Doyle wrote him. I can understand how some people could have a problem with this. I admit that I did too at first. But I don't anymore. Although I love Doyle's Holmes stories, I realize that they are not perfect. They are not without their faults and contradictions and I feel that those who love the canon the most are the ones who will try to correct the faults and explain away the contradictions. And I felt that that was the reason for the book's deviation from the canon. So I would highly recommend it unless you just can't tolerate a deviation from Doyle's work.