5 comments about Ten Rings: My Championship Seasons.

1. This is great book to read if you love the pre-Steinbrenner Yankees of Mantle, Berra, and Ford. Yogi
   gives a simple (what else would you expect?) description of the glory days of baseball before big money. I loved the book! If you are a Yankee fan you can't afford not to read this one. Spend the money and sit back and
   let Yogi tell you what it was like to be young and a Yankee!



2. YOGI BERRA DOES A FIND JOB IN REHASHING EACH OF HIS 10 WORLD SERIES VICTORIES. HE GIVES US A LOOK AT HOW THE SEASON WENT, ADDITION OR SUBTRACTION OF KEY PLAYERS, AND SOME DETAILED HIGHLIGHTS OF THAT PARTICULAR SEASON. I ENJOYED HIS HUMOR AND HONESTY CONCERNING HIMSELF AND MANY TEAMATES. THE ONLY THING I WANTED WAS MORE DETAIL ON THE EVENTS HE COVERS. ALL IN ALL THIS IS A VERY EASY BOOK TO READ AND IS VERY ENTERTAINING. FOR ALL YANKEE FANS.



3. If you are a sports fan, baseball fan, Yankees fan, or a Yogi fan this book won't disappoint. The book chronicles the tough, unlikely hero over his career in his words. In many ways Yogi was the bridge between the "old" Yankees (Di Maggio, etc.) and the Mantle / Maris Yankees and beyond. Great book! Fun read!



4. I feel that I can make the claim that Yogi Berra is the most beloved living baseball player, without the same sort of argument I would get if I happened to be making a claim about the greatest living baseball player (Mays or Bonds or Aaron?) or the most admired living baseball player (Musical or Ryan or Aaron?). But who else brings a big smile to your face when you see him still doing commercials on television almost four decades after he retired from playing baseball?

   "Ten Rings: My Championship Seasons" was written by Yogi with Dave Kaplan, a former newspaper reporter who is currently the director of the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center, and you have the sense that Yogi was looking at his scrap books and press clippings talking about what he remembers from each of the ten seasons in which he and the Yankees won the World Series. Yogi also comments on the four years the Yankees lost the Fall Classic and the three years they did not even win the American League pennant, but the focus is mainly on what those ten seasons that ended with him receiving one of his "Ten Rings."

   I have read most of the books by and about Yogi since I was given a copy of Joe Trumbell's biography in the mid-1960s, and I was rather surprised by how many new stories Yogi came up with for this trip down memory lane. Especially interesting "Ten Rings" are what he has to say about Casey Stengle during the 1949-53 seasons when the Yankees became the first team to win five World Series in a row, and his thoughts about the Brooklyn Dodgers during all their classic confrontations in the 1950s. He also provides some nice details on the end of Allie Reynolds's second no-hitter in 1951. Some readers might be dismayed that Berra has little bad to say about his teammates and opponents, although I think it is clear he felt about Yankee GM George Weiss the way many feel about the team's owner George Steinbrenner today, but clearly Yogi is long past holding grudges. He talks about some of the abuse heaped on him in the early days of his major league career and speaks modestly about his own impressive career accomplishments.

   If you read between the lines the key thing you will pick up is the sense of teamwork and professionalism that existed on the Yankees during the Berra years. This book will be of some value to baseball historians in that it contains Yogi's thoughts on the key players in each championship season as well as some interesting anecdotes that show a different side of the Yankees. For example, Mickey Mantle thought calling pitches was not that hard so Yogi lets him do it during a game Whitey Ford is pitching. Then there is rookie Gil McDougald making a point to veteran pitcher Allie Reynolds. So there are a few choice tales in this rather brief book.

   In the fifth grade there were three of us with the same first name and since I had a catcher's mitt, I spent a year as Yogi. It did not matter that Yogi had already retired and that I had never seen him play. I liked New York as a city and the Yankees in the Civil War, so becoming a New York Yankees fan seemed like a good idea. The fact that they had a catcher with basically the same first name and a last name starting with the same three letters as my own, was too obvious to ignore. Since then I have become much more impressed by what Berra did on the field, much more than the celebrated Yogi-isms (although I love the way the best of those make perfect sense if you pay attention to what is meant rather than what is being said). Clearly I am at the point where I will read anything Yogi happens to write, and while we are not talking classic baseball books, you are not going to be disappointed by "Ten Rings" or any of his other volumes.

   Final Notes: Yes, the page numbers are superimposed on a miniature image of Yogi's ring for that particular championship season. Also, I find it somewhat ironic that the cover is done in a layout rather reminiscent of the 1965 Topps baseball cards, which was the first year in which Yogi was pictured as a player-coach for the New York Mets. The back of "Ten Rings" has an Appendix listing Yogi Berra's World Series Career Records along with his season and post-season batting stats along with line scores for all of the World Series games for those ten championship seasons.




5. This light reminiscence of Yogi's ten championship seasons is a quick, pleasant read. Like a fleshed out magazine article, perhaps, it touches on a bit of history, a few sketches of famous teammates, and a recounting of the high spots of this charming hall of famer's career. A good choice for the younger fan with no memory of the game as it was in a simpler time.

5 comments about Mountain, Get Out of My Way: Life Lessons and Learned Truths.

1. Having long admired Montel, I decided to read this book. What a fascinating life this man has led. From the ghettos of Baltimore, a child of hard-working parents, Montel became a good student and class president in high school. He started playing in a band, bass and trumpet, and also sang. His plan was to save money for college.
   Then he took notice of one of his brother's friends who had joined the Marine Corps, and how the friend had changed for the better. It was then that Montel began to think that the Marine Corps could provide him with a college education. He enlisted, and gained a great respect for the demanding, disciplined, character-building aspects of the military system.
   Eventually, thanks to his leadership potential, his superiors recommended that he apply to the Naval Academy Prep School, which led him to Annapolis. There he struggled with the rigorous curriculum, but made it through with his strong perseverance.
   Throughout the book, we are privy to Montel's challenges, trials, and triumphs, all the things that have led him to his monumental success today as a motivational speaker and TV host. He shares his thoughts on many subjects, and shows his concern for our younger generation.
   "We're in danger of becoming a mediocre society, shaped by mediocre minds, because we promote mediocrity in our schools."
   His thoughts on the breakdown of our society are compelling. "Once we legislated religion out of everything, we had to replace it with something else, so money and success became the gospel...all of a sudden, it wasn't good enough to be a hardworking person, making a living, supporting a family. Now we all have to be millionaires, and we have to be millionaires right away. Everyone's looking for shortcuts, but there are no shortcuts, not a single one."
   The title of the book comes from a line William's used to hear from a drill instructor, who got it from an old gospel song. Montel's mantra now, "Mountain, get out of my way, " means "if you have faith, you can move mountains. If you have faith in something bigger than yourself-in God, community, family, whatever- then anything is possible. Faith alone will give you the strength to clear any obstacle in your way."
   I found this book to be inspiring, enjoyable, and informative, and confirmed my impression of this fine man. I believe he's a tremendous role model, a man of grace and courage, who writes in a clear, concise, entertaining style. Highly recommended!



2. In Montel William's book, he brings much light onto the never-ending battle people have with frustration and "hard times." I was given this book as a gift from my mom. She said she heard from people at work that it was very eye-opening and motivational. I would be lying if I said I didn't agree. From the opening chapter, until the very end, you'll get a feeling of warmth and bursts of motivation as you read about the trials and tribulations of Montel as you begin to relate to your own life experiences. His recollection of a motivational lecture at a high school where he calls on a young boy to discuss issues of morals (chapter 2?) will put an ear-to-ear smile on your face. While this book is not a "billion-dollar" winner, it sure is worth a read. I find myself thinking about this book in particular when I come across situations in my life that require personal integrity and determination. I am now 18 and I still think about the words and wisdom that Montel had to offer. Do yourself a favor and give it a chance, it might be as influential on you as it was me.



3. When I first saw this book it was on the bargain/clearance rack at the local bookstore. Having seen Montel's wonderful TV show, I decided that I'd buy the book and take it home for immediate reading. I made a big mistake. Instead of finding glimmering little gems of wisdom and insight throughout the pages of the book, I found nothing but a lot of self-congratulatory references to Montel's supposed superior public speaking abilities and his assumptions that he has all of the answers for society's various ills. When I was through reading this book I experienced a feeling that I have never had before -- I wanted to slowly roast his book in my barbecue grill! No other author has ever managed to raise such a truly unpleasant feeling inside of me like this guy has. Before I read the book, I respected and even admired Montel, but after I read it I began to dislike him immensely. Maybe this would have been a better book if Montel had the common courtesy to check his ego at the door and focused on something other than how great he thinks that he is.



4. I purchased this book several years ago and found it to be very down to earth. I appreciate the fact that while Montel shared his not always so bright life with the public he was able to share lessons learned that could bless someone else who may have been going down the same path. I commend him as a man to be able to receive correction but to also admit fault and openly correct his behavior to make his future better. I also enjoyed the example of him standing up for his show and doing what he thought was a proper format not matter what the cost or what the network execs thought. Being an example for our youth is important and Montel showed that he could influence our children on their level and not preach at them. This book gives us all a reality check in things we can do to improve ourselves, our relationships, our children and our society. Continued success!



5. I loved this book. Montel puts alot of love in everything he does. Not only in the show but in his book as well. He really cares about his viewers and guests. I love his show and I think he is a gift from God for many.

5 comments about Heroes: From Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar to Churchill and de Gaulle.

1. Paul Johnson is a gifted writer. He writes with wit, elegance and clarity. He has the ability to portray people and events in such a deft manner that you seem to be viewing them in person. Unfortunately, he is not only incredibly uneven in his output, but, the closer his writing gets to the events of the XXth century, the more his opinions become skewed by his peculiar world view.
   
   Occasional flashes of his old talents shine through in this meretricious little pot-boiler, but it is mainly just an embarrassment. Where his former writings had trenchant observations, now peculiarities abound. e.g.
   
   p.34 "He [Alexander the Great] invented the Blitzkrieg." Liddell-Hart and Guderian would be surprised at that claim.
   
   p.47 "He [Julius Caesar] was stabbed to death in a Mafia-style killing in the Senate" Twenty-three aristocratic Senators each stabbing their leader once is somewhat different from an ice pick in the base of the skull.
   
   p.178 "Lee's success [at Gettysburg] on the first day was overwhelming, but on the second he did not make it clear to General James Longstreet that he wanted Culp's Hill and Cemetery Ridge taken at all costs. Longstreet provided too little artillery support to Pickett's famous charge." How many factual errors of commission and omission can you find in those two short statements?
   
   One could say that these examples are just "nit-picking" unimportant details. Consider:
   
   In the chapter devoted to Alexander's life and career, neither Hephaestion nor his death, is mentioned once - let alone discussed! There is no analogy of another historic pair with a similar symbiosis that I can think of - Sherman and Grant were not so close, Octavian and (M. Vipsanius) Agrippa were not as equal, Bill and Hillary are too trivial for comparison. If you don't know of the importance of Hephaestion and his death to Alexander, you should read up on it.
   
   His choices of the slutty (but clever) Mae West and the slutty (and confused) Marilyn Monroe as heroes is bizarre enough. Crediting the implosion of the long-crumbling Soviet Union to the fearsome trio of Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II is just loony right wing fantasy (see Wolkenkuckucksheim).
   
   If you would like to read a great book by Paul Johnson try "The Birth of the Modern". If you would like to read a good book about heroes and their place in history, read Lucy Hughes-Hallett's "Heroes, a History of Hero Worship".



2. If you're feeling in need of a hero, Paul Johnson has a few on offer. The 30 mini-portraits presented here cover Western Culture from Ancient Greece to the end of the Cold War. Bookending these are two essays pondering the nature and future of heroism. But be forewarned: in the tradition of his groundbreaking and highly entertaining The Intellectuals, Mr. Johnson has his opinions and isn't in the least afraid to offend the delicate reader.
   
   In fact, I'll wager that Paul Johnson would be sorely disappointed if he learned that scores of people were reading his books and coming away unoffended. Johnson is an intellectual provocateur dedicated to questioning widely-held opinions and the status quo. Like his frequent feuding partner Christopher Hitchens part of the pleasure in reading Paul Johnson is not simply to enjoy his erudition, it's to enjoy the fierce contrariness of his opinions. I don't agree with all their views but I enjoy how they make their cases. Other reviewers here have already noted the vignette about thoughts of Lady Jane Grey helping Nancy Mitford achieve a "satisfactory orgasm" (how on EARTH does that pop up in conversation?) but there are other Johnsonian gems here. John Knox as "the fierce Protestant ayatollah of Edinburgh"? 16th Century Scotland as a "tartan version of Afghanistan"? This is not meant to soothe but incite.
   
   The scope of the portraits is impressive - Jane Austen, Boadicea and Charles de Gaulle in the same book - as is Johnson's take on heroism. His heroes are not paragons of virtue. They tend to be the right person at the right time that does one very necessary thing well, often in the face of significant opposition. A simple, ephemeral definition that encompasses surprisingly few. In the 20th century portraits Johnson occasionally draws on personal experience and it's fascinating to see how he can admire the heroism without particularly liking the person. You won't find complete biographies of any of these people but you will find what is essential to their unique heroism according to Johnson.
   
   This is a perfect book for travel as the mini-portraits can easily be digested on a daily commute or all of them can keep you company on a long flight. If you've read and enjoy Paul Johnson's work before, you'll enjoy this book. If you haven't read Johnson yet but you enjoy lively prose and uncommon opinions this is a good place to start.



3. Paul Johnson remains one of the few serious writers who combines an immensely accessable prose style with an intellect rarely encountered in contemporary non-fiction. In his vivid snapshots he compresses larger-than-live historical figures into human beings while simultaneously making the case as to why they are "heroic". Many of these insights are cleanly fresh and restorative to a reader like myself who has read biographies of them all. Johnson explains his criteria for judging who and why he chose who he did as a hero. And in the process makes a powerful case for each individual, even those who are frankly a little tough to swallow. Among them deGaulle.
   From other works (Malraux's "Felled Oaks" for example) and lengthy biographies, my own assesement of deGaulle never changed. I'd always considered him a mostrously egotistical chauvanist who'se WW2 credentials mainly lay in his lucky proximity to true greats like Churchill, Roosevelt and Eisenhower, who in one way or another tolerated his insufferable ego and pretentions.
   Louis X1V presumably said, "c'estate ce moi" I am the state. In a seventeenth century king it's one kind of conceit, but in a 20th century military and politcal leader of a free democracy, it is a disgrace. Or so was my conclusion. However, Johnson's book brought me a new veiwpoint. I didn't conclude I'd been totally wrong, but Johhnson made me see that had deGaulle not existed, he probably would have had too be invented. And in a way, it wasd probably on balance, more fortunate for France that he was the invention, rather than some of the absurd French leaders who preceeded and
   succeeded him. Johnson made me see that. And in that respect and in all the other sketches, ever new lights went on.
   Paul Johnson is one great writer, historian, thinker. And to me, in this age when so much garbage flows from the media.
   Strongly recommend it and all his other books.



4. This is the first book I read of Paul Johnson and I really enjoyed it. In this book, we are introduced to well-known figures in history who are regarded as heroes. But a hero to one might be a villain to another. Genghis Khan was a hero to many, but a murderer to many others as well. Paul Johnson uses the example of Samson. Samson is a heroic figure in old Judaic scriptures. He was a Nazirite, and God had blessed him with extraordinary strength. However, in order to keep his superhuman strength, he had to make sure he never cut his hair. One day, however, he admits to Delilah that the secret to his strength is his hair. She then lulled him to sleep on her knees and called a barber to shave off his hair. The Philistines then seized him, gouged out his eyes, and brought him down to Gaza. There they bound him with bronze fetters. Eventually his hair grows again, unnoticed by his enemies, and his strength returns. When the Philistines take him to their great feast in the Temple of Dagon to taunt him, he gets a little boy to guide him to the central pillars. Calling on God to give him the power, he pushes aside the pillars from their bases and brings the entire temple down, killing all the people who were in it. According to the author, this ruthlessness in heroism makes Samson the first suicide-martyr-mass killer, adumbrating the suicide bombers of today's Middle East. Samson's act was a brutal unconcern for human life, whether guilty or innocent. Samson kills all the Philistines, including the innocent child who had befriended him and many of those in the crowd who had nothing to do with his capture or blinding. Nonetheless, Samson was honored, and became a hero in the teeming biblical pantheon. The Jews loved Samson, and still do. (p. 18-20). The author says, "Anyone is a hero who has been widely, persistently over long periods, and enthusiastically regarded as heroic by a reasonable person, or even an unreasonable one."
   
   A hero is also created by our own perception of him, and might not be at all the way we perceive him to be. The author gives as an example President Ronald Reagan. Reagan gave back to the United States the self-confidence it had lost, and at the same time tested Soviet power to destruction. He is credited with ending the cold war. He cut taxes, freed Americans from unnecessary burdens, and enlarged freedom whenever consistent with safety and justice. He had a great sense of humor, his smiles were genuine, and he was a charismatic leader. He was viewed as a hero by the American people and the rest of the world. However, according to the author, Reagan was superficially, and also profoundly, ignorant. He did not seem to know how bills were put together or passed through Congress, or how the entire budget process took place. He had little education, and no desire to acquire much more in a general sense, at any rate through books. He was intellectually lazy, and he did not read one word of the carefully prepared briefing book on the eve of the world economic summit in 1983. During his presidency he spent more time watching movies than doing anything else. Sometimes he believed in fantasies, such as that the United States really had much larger hidden oil reserves than the whole of the Middle East. At other times he appeared incapable of speaking coherently about the simplest matters without reference to the cue cards in his left pocket. In some ways he was ill-equipped to run anything, let alone the mightiest nation on earth. He was deaf and sometimes could not hear what his staff was telling him, even with the volume of his hearing aid switched right up. He confused names and faces. He thought his own secretary of commerce was a visiting mayor. He believed Denis Healey was the British ambassador. He addressed the Liberian president Samuel K. Doe as "Chairman Moe." (p. 256-258). Yet despite these deficiencies, he is viewed as an American hero.
   
   This is a really fascinating book that will show you a different side to well-known heroes. The author discusses the human flaws of such heroes as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Henry V, Joan of Arc, Thomas Moore, Lady Jane Grey, Mary Queen of Scots, Elizabeth I, Walter Raleigh, George Washington, The Duke of Wellington, Lord Nelson, Emily Dickinson, Abraham Lincoln, Robert E. Lee, Winston Churchill, Charles de Gaulle, Mae West, Marilyn Monroe, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and Pope John Paul II.
   
   I really liked the chapter on Mae West, and feel encouraged to read more of her books. Mae is really a fascinating character study. I was surprised though that the author included Marilyn Monroe as a hero. I learnt things I never knew about her, like the fact that she suffered from Syphilis and severe depression.
   
   One beautiful quote from this book will be stuck in my head for the rest of my life. Henry Ford once said, "It is a disgrace for anyone to die rich." I truly believe in giving, and being a philanthropist. For this reason, I view Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, among many others, as true heroes. Here's the irony: Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte, among just a few, are viewed today as heroes, despite the fact that they killed millions of people. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, among a few, are also viewed as heroes, but for different reasons: they save the lives of millions!
   
   I recommend this book to all readers who are fascinated by the lives of great people (and some not that great but still viewed as heroes).



5. Paul Johnson, the well known historian, writes a less weighty book that looks at heroes through the lens of history and these peoples contributions to politics, culture, religion, and yes, entertainment. All of these things are often intermix, yet, they can also be studied in isolation if needed.
   
   Johnson starts off with the Hebrew (or Jewish) heroes. It must be of some interest that Moses is briefly mention and is Judaism's greatest heroes and prophet, Johnson spends more time on Deborah and Judith, Samson and probably rightly so, David. His analysis of Samson is interesting and it goes beyond the Sunday School version or the solely negative critical and sees Samson as a hero with great strength and "tantalizing weakness."
   
   The next Chapter, "Earthsakers" is tied for one of the best in the book. Foibles and greatest are revealed when the reader is once again acquainted with Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar. Johnson provides a quick bio, yet, highlights enough "heroism" and "villainy" to make this more than an encyclopedia version of these two men and make them leap of the page. Hopefully, it will spark others to read more on these two, arguably great and fallen figures.
   
   I have always liked the story of Joan of Arc. Every movie has failed in bringing her to life, although many have tried. Johnson briefly reminds me why she is so spectacular a heroine. She is the proto-Wonder Women, except she was real, alive, fighting for France. Yet, she may have been a proto-Protestant, yet, in many ways still distinctly Catholic. She was such an enormous figure that today many English Churches are named after this French heroine.
   
   There is more of course such as interesting work on Churchill (whom Johnson met in 1946) and Reagan, Thatcher, and Pope John Paul II. Lincoln was necessary for this book, but Johnson here didn't bring anything really engaging in a way I hadn't read before. I found, however, the chapter with Mae West and Maryland Monroe to be a bore - I just didn't care. Maybe it is because, there are better "Hollywood" heroes such as Audrey Hepburn, Sean Connery, Alec Guinness, or Bruce Lee not too mention possibly Cary Grant, Charleston Heston, Angelina Jolie, or Christopher Reeves.
   
   In total, this is a great book. It is difficult to provide so many stories on so many figures on 300 pages; but, Johnson does a pretty good job of it.

5 comments about Double Deal: The Inside Story of Murder, Unbridled Corruption, and the Cop Who Was a Mobster.

1. i couldn't put the book down! I live close to this suburb and i can believe what was going on.



2. As a life long resident of the SW side of Chicago I was able to corroborate many of the accounts Mr. Corbitt gives in Double Deal. Many of the "baby boomers" who were "in the Know" from my area stated that Mr. Corbitt was a very influential gangster associate on the SW side. The man was heavy and dangerous. He killed people,but many were in the line of duty. He also made it very clear in the book that he wasn't an angel.The man gives some very accurate accounts of his life and experiences



3. . . .you may wish to spend some time with this book.

   The book tells the story of a small-time hood who, due to friends, and not really to any talent of his own, becomes a moderately significant figure in Chicagoland organized crime in the 60's, 70's, and 80's.

   Believe me, the main character (and co-author) Michael Corbitt is not really a likeable or sympathetic character. What I found most interesting about the book was the willingness of law enforcement -- on all levels, including the prosecutors who eventually brought him in -- to behave in ways quite similar to those "mobsters" they are trying to control.

   There are truly no real "good guys" in this book.

   As I said, if you like this genre, the book is worth reading. If the genre doesn't interest you, "The Godfather" is a much better story!




4. They might have a great sense of humor, or love their mother or support various charities, but in the end, most are cold-blooded murderers.

   That descripion only fits the top mob bosses. Scummier still are the average hoodlums that make up a crime organization and that's where Michael Corbitt fits in. A street thug ends up making a few friends that help buy a corrupt gas station business. Next thing that happens is that he joins a corrup police force in Illinois and when the drunken chief retires, he is made chief.

   Eventually, the law and his fellow sleazebags catch up with Corbitt so here comes his book. Sure, the book is interesting, but Corbitt was never a main man. He was just a very small player in a much larger organization. What's shocking is that he was able to so as a top police official in Illinois, but given some history in that state, how surprising is it?

   To summarize the book, you will find that Corbitt has killed people, he helped cover up a murder, he was involved in all kinds of other corrupt illegal activity, he stole millions from the taxpayers of his community.

   Somehow I'm supposed to feel sorry for this scumbag or have sympathy for him?




5. This was a great read. I live right in Chicago, near Oak Park, so this was especially of interest to me. Iam not sure if its all true or not, but if it is, it makes a lot of sense. This book offers lots of explanations, i.e. Marilyn Monroe, Kennedy assasination,etc. and once you read them, they really make you think.

5 comments about Isaac Newton.

1. Several versions of Isaac Newton's life have evolved in the three centuries since his death in 1727. They are the products of admirers, detractors, philosophers, scientist, and poets. Some have the virtue of being partially true. Indeed, Isaac Newton was brilliant, restless, creative, vindictive, and proud. That his image today is so disjointed comes as no surprise. James Gleick attempts to sort the wheat from the chaff, but his work goes far beyond that, to a splendid essay of Newton in his time.
   
   The 17th century was a curious time to be alive in England. Diarmaid MacCulloch, in his brilliant study of the Reformation, identifies Newton as the pivotal character in the swing from theology to science as the defining key of existence. But the old cosmologies were dying slow, painful deaths, while the new ones were generally infantile, utopian, or speculative. Even Galileo hesitated at first to turn his telescope to the skies, for fear of offending the divine, and when he finally caught glimpse of Saturn, the imperfections of his optics led him to announce "a planet with handles." [Newton himself had to disguise his mathematics of infinity under the cloak of annuity interest projections to maintain proper theological etiquette at Cambridge.] The new science, such as it was, required as much faith as the old religion. A few souls like Kepler understood that there might be logic at the root, but his mathematics were daunting.
   
   What makes Newton's life so interesting is the intellectual and philosophical journey that took him from the age of Galileo into the age of Einstein. He attended Cambridge in the aftermath of Oliver Cromwell but his Protestantism was not entirely appropriate as he harbored closet doubts about the Holy Trinity, finding no scriptural basis for it. His theology evolved from Aristotle as much as from anyone. He respected Aristotle's concept of First Cause, and he had enough innate oppositional defiance to approach his studies with a rigorous scientific method in the manner of The Philosopher, chips fall where they will.
   
   Newton excelled in mathematics, physics, and mechanics, and his interests were broad enough that he brought a philosopher's eye to these various disciplines. In a sense he began his life's work while still a college student, looking for a unifying factor or factors to all the known sciences and disciplines of his day. This was a gargantuan task, and its audacity took Newton to the virtual doorstep of the best of medieval theology. His quest became an obsession, and for several solitary years it led him down the dark alley of alchemy. Alchemy was highly suspect; its practitioners were considered either heretics for seeking divine secrets, or outright charlatans looking to create gold. Newton, however, was attempting to find a bridge between the stasis of matter and the observable flux of actual life.
   
   What seemed to bring Newton out of his cave was the appearance of a spectacular comet in 1681. A young astronomer named Halley, an early admirer of Newton's work, postulated that comets might be cyclic objects with elliptic trajectories. Halley's thesis on the trajectory of comets--rather easily substantiated even in his day by visual observation and Kepler's foundational math--was a physical puzzlement in an age when behavior of heavenly bodies was something of a psychological/religious given. Not even the telescope had shaken that. Why, then, would a comet make what amounts to a 270 degree change in trajectory as it passed the sun?
   
   Gleick traces with broad sweeps Newton's intense pursuit of an answer, which led to the basic laws of physics we call Newtonian. Gleick's economy is appreciated: Newton's paper trail is extensive and exhaustive; one key to his success was exactitude. [The economist John Maynard Keynes led an extensive recent effort to recover and catalogue Newton's body of work.] Although his publications in his day had modest circulation due to the highly technical nature--Halley, in fact, funded some of the publishing--there were two polarities permeating his theories that captured public attention and attracted considerable criticism in his time: his dependence upon the invisible, and the extensiveness of his claims.
   
   There is irony in the fact that Newton's passion for scientific verifiable method allowed room for what his enemies would deride as invisible forces. Gravity is the most obvious example, though here the difficulty was mathematical semantics: just as most of us labor with the material reality of e=mc(2), so too in Newton's day the mathematics and physics underlying gravitational force escaped even many professionals of his time. But in other areas of his work Newton claimed a certainty that was at best hypothetical and at times almost magical. So confident was he in the power of computation and observation that he promoted his ideas about atoms and light transmission, for example, as Gospel. The debate over the nature and transmission of light was an intense one during Newton's working years. Newton himself made major contributions in his work with prisms and improvements on reflecting telescopes. But his hubris and scientific acclaim led him into an alchemy of speculation which later scientists corrected.
   
   On the other hand, Newton was attacked by poets and artists for redefining the world in the cold jargon of scientific certitude. He was accused of stripping the human experience of mystery. Even some scientists worried that Newton had left nothing for them to do. In some cases these criticisms are the fruit of Newton's own exhaustive claims, and like many famous men, he did suffer in translation and adulation. Newton's personality--including his lifelong love of declarative sentences--did not facilitate clarification or negotiation. Having solved to his own satisfaction the mysteries of the universe, Newton turned to an even greater challenge: the English economy. In 1696 he was appointed Warden and eventually Master of the Mint where he essentially restored credibility to the coin of the realm. Little wonder Keynes would protect his memory.



2. James Gleick has written some excellent books -- Chaos and Genius, but this book fails to clear that bar.
   
   Inside the front flap of the dust cover it reads "In this original, sweeping, and intimate biography, Gleick moves between a comprehensive historical portrait and a dramatic focus on Newton's significant letters and unpublished notebooks to illiminate the real importance of his work in physics, in optics, and in calculus." In my opinion, the book fails to meet this objective. The biography and other information is superficial and far from initimate -- the book is a good introduction to basic facts but no more than that. His biography of Richard Feynman in Genius comes much closer to the goal of an intimate biography.



3. How can you sum up the life of Newton in roughly 190 pages. This is nothing but a pamphlet of one of the greatest lives of discovery the world has ever known. If your IQ is below 130 and you are looking for good reading go for it, but if you need meat and deeper substance about Newton, this is not where you look.



4. This book is comprehensive in addressing the themes of Newton's life, though the introversion of the subject limits the detail which the author could provide. More simply stated, this book is well versed and written, so enjoy!



5. I really wish I had liked this book, but I didn't.
   First thing that I noticed is the small volume, I had just read IKE's bio by Ambrose and in comparison this book seemed more like a brochure than an inclusive biographical work.
   What I hated the most was the style. Too pompous for my taste, the author gets in lengthy descriptions on the period and the landscape that surrounded Newton while only giving Isaac himself a mere sentence here and there. I think the author was trying to appeal to a public that doesn't know who Newton was and did, and therefore finds it appropriate to remind us, on multiple occasions that 'yes, Newton is the one that invented calculus and before him there was darkness'. I gave the book away to somebody that could appreciate it, hopefully. Fortunately now I know not to buy "Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman" by the same author, I would have been much more upset to read it instead of this book since I've been a Feynman fan for years.
   Numerous repetition in the descriptions of the era and in the contributions on Newton, I could not force myself to keep on reading. I do not consider this book a serious read, not on the subject Isaac Newton anyway.

5 comments about The Journey of Crazy Horse.

1. Joseph Marshall has done the greatest possible tribute to the legendary Crazy Horse by portraying him as he undoubtedly was--human, troubled, self doubting, and yet a magnetic and inspired leader of men. Marshall's prose is deeply moving, drawing the reader into life as it was then, letting us see the fear of impending disaster from the eyes of the Lakota as their hunting grounds disappeared and they were, bit by bit, stripped of their pride not by military force, but out of compassion for the weak and vulnerable among them.
   
   Marshall demonstrates tremendous insight into the Lakota of the 19th century--he learned well. He described Crazy Horse brilliantly, thus: "He rose to leadership because he actually led. He didn't point to where others should go while he waited. He led." His last moments were a tragedy that should never be forgotten.
   
   There is much more to this book than Crazy Horse. Marshall exhibits what appears to be a Lakota wisdom so needed today. "The fact that we can perform a task more quickly because we've improved on a tool proves that we...have become more efficient, but it doesn't necessarily mean that we've grown wiser."
   
   Amen. One of the finest books I've read.



2. To Joseph Marshall, thank you. You have shared much with us. I am a white of the Dakota plains. I'm glad that some like yourself understand and perhaps your book will help others. Maybe someday another special bow will be given to the people. I hope. Hoka Hey.
   
   And pardon this note. But if some whites say Crazy Horse must have been part white, meaning to explain away his military genius, then I guess Custer must have been part Indian to explain his stupidity. And his terrible cruelty.



3. 
   The murder of Crazy Horse occurred one hundred and twenty-five years ago. The story of his death has been become a legend in the Lakota tribe. Our author tells the story of Crazy Horse and his work to have a fair peace with the United States. This is a sad part of our history. Our forefathers took what they wanted and on their terms. There have been some efforts where later generations have tried to compensate but most of the benefits have been eaten up in our bureaucracy. I don't have an answer and we cannot correct the past. This was a very well written and interesting book. By Ruth Thompson author or "The Bluegrass Dream" and "Natchez Above The River"
   
   Writing as a Small BusinessQualifying Laps: A Brewster County NovelsSins of the Fathers: A Brewster County NoveltTravelersTravelersThe Bluegrass Dream: A Wilderness Adventure of Early SettlersNatchez Above The River: A Family's Survival In The Civil War



4. This is a wonderful offering from my favorite Lakota author, Joseph M. Marshall, III. I also purchased the audio book, and would recommend that as the best way to "read' this book. It is read by the author, and the reader can hear the actual sounds of the language, the way it was meant to be presented.
   
   My favorite of all his books, so far!



5. As a history instructor at a junior college, I highly commend Mr. Marshall for his first class work on the esteemed Crazy Horse. Based on the centuries-old tradition of oral history that is passed down from one generation to the next, Marshall relies on the many traditions of his youth and adulthood.
   
   He has created a work that goes far beyond the idolization of heroes of the past. He presents Crazy Horse as the magnificent leader of his day but the author also tells of a mortal human being with strengths and weaknesses, as all leaders have been throughout history.
   
   Marshall takes us to a time and place in our minds that is both vivid and revealing. The author has written a masterpiece, providing maps and an index explaining the various names given by the Lakota of the months and how they coincide with the Eurocentric definition of the calendar year. This was most helpful.
   
   Marshall closes his book with a very moving story that I hope is not lost on American Indian readers of his book. The insights of his last chapter are so needed today.
   
   "The Journey of Crazy Horse is the fourth book by Marshall that I have read and his works are gems. I highly recommend any and all of Marshall's books and I plan to continue reading his entire collection of works. He is a superb writer and captures the reader. He was also featured in the film productions "How the West was Lost" and the PBS special "The Native Americans."
   
   Mr. Marshall, never put that pen down!

5 comments about Anton Chekhov: A Life.

1. 
   
   If you really have nothing to do or nothing to read you may thumb through this thoughtlessly collected biographical information about one of the greatest Russian writers known for his brilliant sense of humor and innovative approach to dramatic genre. You will lose nothing except for your time and money. You will gain nothing, either: the entire book is much ado about nothing. I wonder what kind of ambitions drove the author to write about something for which he had no feel and no understanding. If he wanted to share his knowledge about the facts he consumed once he would better publish a bibliography instead. This book is not about Chekhov, but rather about its mediocre biographer.
   
   Yelena Dubrovin,
   Writer, poet, literary critic



2. Rayfield's life of Chekhov is clotted with junk: railway itineraries, sexual details, and relentless speculation. Read his 600 pages and you will not be the better for it. You never get a sense of Chekhov the writer, or how Chekhov, the son of a failed grocer who beat his family daily, made himself into a man. Sure, other biographers are less frank about the sex -- but who cares, really? I recommend Henri Troyat's biography of Chekhov instead.



3. Great reading for those interested in Russian literature and history. Extremely detailed and meticulous description of Russian literature and theatrical circles of late 19-th century through the life of Anton Chekhov, his family and friends. Huge amount of rare documents cited and commented. Very impressive job indeed.
   
   The only hitch I could found was about the rout supposedly taken by the heroes of "Steppe". The trip from Taganrog to Kiev, as the author states (p.163, here and below sited by: «Anton Chekhov: a life" HarperCollins h/c edition), was hardly possible technically in the time limit of the story, and the landscape there is quite different from that described by Chekhov.
   The more probable route was from near Lugansk southward to Rostov-na-Donu. The latter city grew very rapidly at the times of Chekhov that also can explain why the hero was send there to study. Another reason for this destination is that Chekhov himself has close relatives in Rostov-na-Donu (an uncle) and probably knew the city well (see p.6).



4. I say sadly because Rayfield really isn't a very good writer. His style is clumsy, and he has no idea how to maintain any sort of narrative. He just throws facts at you. People are mentioned for a few lines and then reintroduced chapters later as if we're supposed to remember who they are. All over the book sentences crop up that are near impossible to figure out. Also, considering how much of Chekhov's personal writing survives, there aren't nearly enough excerpts from his notebooks and letters. The few quotes that are there are so fascinating that they're worth the slog through Rayfield's masses of detail.

   The worst sin that he commits is that he doesn't much seem to like his subject, and invests most of his energy in making Chekhov look bad. To some extent, Chekhov needs some demythologizing, because too many people have made a saint out of him. Rayfield provides plenty of evidence that Chekhov wasn't the kindhearted conscience of Russian literature that people make him out to be - he led on a lot of women, wasn't particularly faithful to the people that loved him, and had a cruel streak. But there are lots of times when Rayfield goes out of his way to push a certain interpretation on the reader. "Chekhov's response was brutal," he insists, without providing any evidence - or, on occasion, actually quoting a letter that doesn't seem to justify his interpretation of Chekhov's bad behavior at all.

   In fact, Rayfield really doesn't know how to marshall his evidence to support his statements. He seems also to dislike Olga Knipper, Anton's wife, and keeps insisting that the marriage was unhappy, and that Chekhov really didn't seem to love her, without showing us why this has to be true. Indeed, much of the material that he gives us seems to indicate the opposite.

   But now comes the Sadly. This is really the only biography that gives you the entire story about Chekhov. Too much about Chekhov sexual drives is left out of other biographies, and as Rayfield pretty conclusively demonstrates, this drive was a major part of Anton's life and motivations. And, for all of his faults, Rayfield really has dug deeper and found out more than any other biographer. From the teachers at Chekhov's school in Taganrog to, well, a host of other occasionally interesting trivia, Rayfield just has more. Until someone else comes along and tries to animate all this material into a biography that's actually enjoyable to read, Rayfield is all there is. Chekhov's letters provide a better introduction to his life, but anyone that really wants to go behind the mask needs to read this book.




5. This is a book that grows and grows on the reader. At first I was put off by the book's clumsy style and by the brutality (really unforgivable) of Chekhov's father Pavel. Then I got "hooked" on Anton's fierce ambition joined to his extraordinary sweetness of temper; until, when he contracts TB and finally marries Olga Knipper, I was wholly sympathetic to him, his milieu, and his struggle to create masterpieces like THE CHERRY ORCHARD. A friend said of him, "Why are such precious contents locked up in such a frail vessel?" (p. 581). The author provides little interpretation of personalities and events; rather, he uses letters (thousands of them) to create, like a mosaic, the rich beauty of Chekhov's personality and the flowering of his genius. Highly recommended. -- Michael Squires, Ph.D.

5 comments about To America : Personal Reflections of an Historian.

1. I, like many other readers/history buffs, greatly respect Ambrose for his ability to take a portion of history and give it personality and make you care.
   This book is really a compilation of medium length forays into different aspects of American history. So, if you want a book that covers a wide variety of historical topics but still gives you a ton of information, pick this one up. This would be a fantastic vacation book for the history buff.
   As I mentioned in the title, this book is very dense with facts and information. I had been reading for a while and was thinking about how much historical terrain I had covered. I checked the page and realized that I was only about 25 pages into the book. Luckily, Mr. Ambrose has a very personable writing style and keeps the reader interested while packing in the information. While the book is dense with information, it feels to be a very casual read.
   I would recommend this book highly. These essays touch on many of the same topics Ambrose has written whole books about and give the reader a taste of the topic that may lead to further interest in the larger collection on each subject.



2. Stephen E. Ambrose writes in a descriptive and knowledgeable, yet fun tone that continues to draw readers back to each of his compelling books. "To America" is no exception to this as it shows an interesting view on main historical happenings in the United States from foundation to present day. After reading this book I was left with many new details and actualities about our nations' history. Ambrose sheds a new light on historicalfigures such as the Founding Fathers, Nixon, Theodore Roosevelt, and Andrew Jackson. He gives details about battles so descriptive that the reader feels like they could have been there.
   
   As I read "To America", I gained valuable knowledge that was never covered in any history class. Ambrose explains misunderstood ideas of quite a few important people, often going deeply into detail about their lives and careers. Besides obvious stories and events given about America, Ambrose also writes about his own life as an historian and author.
   
   Anyone who reads this book will feel that they have a new set of facts about American History. With each story told, Ambrose gives the facts that are often skipped over in textbooks or lectures. Ambrose ties this book together with a powerful sense of nationalism and American spirit.
   
   I would recommend "To America" to any reader who is looking for a new, more detailed view on U.S. History. I give it a 4 out of 5 because although it is somewhat long, any reader breezes throughwhile enjoying Ambroses confrontation of Americas successes and it failures. The reader also is able to much better understand the career of a famous and influential historian.



3. My mother-in-law gave me this book as a gift. It not a title I would have selected myself, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. The rather than a single contiguous work, it is twenty essays (too formal a word) about some of the commonly held 'truths' in Modern America about issues in our history. Mr. Ambrose introduces the issue, the 'commonly' held position on modern america, then describes how he formulated his opinion as he researched different projects. The issues addressed include: The duality of Thomas Jefferson's as Author of the Declaration of Independence and a Slaveholder, Theodore Roosevelt's imperialism, Richard Nixon, Vietnam, many aspects of World War II, Race in the 1960s, and The Battle of New Orleans. The book is written in a storytellers style, which keeps it very quick paced.



4. I bought this book not really knowing what to expect, but as an aspiring historian, I could not resist the final, personal work of one of America's greatest historians' (at $7 to boot). Providing a diverse set of passages that, though they don't always tie together very well, are a pleasure to read.
   
   Early on, Ambrose describes various instances of American history he feels are important, defining moments. These are OK, and Ambrose often attempts to `set the record straight' on different areas from Washington (best president ever), Jefferson (hypocrite but good writer), the robber barons (ultimately good), and Teddy Roosevelt (first interventionist president and conservationist).
   
   The middle section of the book is its weakest. Here, this is a nationalist book, albeit somewhat apologetically so, but truth be told, not really thoughtfully so. If the book had a thesis, it would be that American history (more than any other nation in the world) is about freedom at home and spreading it abroad. Nothing wrong as such, though it can be rather jarring for a non-American who also lives in a free country to read that Americans live in the "freest nation on Earth". It can also be unintentionally tragic-comical as when he writes that had Americans lost the Battle of New Orleans in 1815, the city would have been turned into "a southern version of Montreal" (not a disastrous prospect, either for the slaves living near the city then, nor given the state of city today, though Ambrose could not have a known that).
   
   The real problem, in a book of this length, is the question of emphasis. Teddy's colonialism in the Philippines, Cuba and Panama makes way for his conservationism. As he asserts America was not imperialist post-1945, he will remind us of Ike's opposition to French Algeria but saves Truman's support for French Indochina for his chapter on Vietnam (which is, presumably unrepresentative of the general trend of US history). To prove that America was not imperialist after WW2, he cites Eisenhower's opposition to Anglo-French imperialism at Suez in 1956 but omits that same administration's role in destroying nascent democracies in the Congo and Iran. And, of course, we get reminded of America's role in creating the German and Japanese democracies again and again. (In my personal opinion, America supports democracy if and when she perceives it to be non-threatening to her interests. Which is much of the time, but not when radicals (Islamists, Communists) look ready to win, or it might deprive her of some strategic resource (Panama Canal, oil, copper, cobalt etc.).)
   
   That is not to say Ambrose does not concede the usual sins of America's past (slavery, Jim Crow, women's rights, treatment of natives, colonialism etc,) but one feels he loves his subject too much for these to be anything more than a sideshow. The 8-page chapter on racism is about his personal experiences. Black history is for the most part limited to a few mandatory nods to MLK. That Ambrose feels the need to (albeit briefly) mention sexism, racism and imperialism says much, I think, about America. In that it is important to read. Americans wish to believe they've been exceptionally good since there founding as a nation, which poses problems when, say, a Jefferson or a Teddy is not found to be morally acceptable by today's standards. I think this is a rather American characteristic, no English historian feels morally at stake when determining whether Henry the Eighth was sexist, nor would a French historian feel the need to excuse Francis the First for not being democratic...
   
   Ambrose's `memoir' sections are the best. The parts on the place of racism and sexism in his life are informative. His descriptions of researching and writing books are a veritable goldmine of advice and experience for any aspiring historian or even any writer. Whether it is his decade-long study of Nixon, his first written pieces as a student on obscure figures in the Civil War, his personal struggle with Vietnam or his relationships with Eisenhower and WW2 veterans (American, British and German!), I found them highly enjoyable and informative.
   
   In all, I would not call this a great book, but it is in many places a good book. Although Ambrose fails in his ambition to show America be all that exceptional in most respects, he does succeed in sharing the sense of optimism that is characteristic of American society. And even when To America isn't particularly good, it is certainly good to read for any non-American because it seems to encapsulate America's self-perception as a force for freedom along with its self-doubt induced by the less glorious aspects of her past.



5. I have loved many of Ambrose's books, but this one really brought home to me the debt we have to those who went before. He's not afraid to say someone is not absolutely perfect (i.e. Jefferson) or absolutely evil (i.e. Nixon). But what he does show is that the American way, with a sense of right and wrong, has prevailed up to the end of the 20th Century, and by implication, that sense of right and wrong need to be there for us to continue into the 21st Century.
   
   Thank you, Mr. Ambrose, for this goodbye card to America.

5 comments about Monica's Story.

1. Monica Samille Lewinsky appears to be either incredibly naive or incredibly childish. This book is not a page turner. If you are interested in her camps' POV... then you may like this book. The author says her "disorderly routine and her neurotic behavior over weight perfectly explain why she never cleaned the notorious blue Gap dress that was stained with the President's semen" (page 11).
   
   She is characterized as very naive. She documented every little detail as if it was major, which appears that she had a motive for the future use of this information. It gave me thoughts that she was contemplating possible blackmail, book deals, and/or movie deals.
   
   Yet again... she was either incredibly smart, naive, or silly.



2. This book was quite dumb, and all that it does is emphasize how dumb people can be. If you're a Republican right-winger who's more interested in a president's, a man's, sexcapades than what he does with the economy, then read on by all means. This mindless book was made for you.



3. Any woman in her early twenties, who has ever fallen in love with a man who is married and forbidden by conventional ethical and professional standards, will find empathy in this book.

   Whatever side of truth or political scenario this book attempts to portray, I primarily read it as a romance and enjoyed it more than ever. The book's appeal lies in the dynamics of the affair between the young intern and the president, rather than any political truth-finding. Maybe, there are too many 'truths' out there, and who are we to judge which one is true. This is Monica's version, so why quibble about absolute realities?

   The book certainly does a good job of revealing her a human figure rather than a man-hunting slut responsible for the impreachment of Clinton.

   Why marvel Marie Antoinette and Josephine, and not Monica? I admire Monica Lewinsky as a person who enjoys poetry, loves life, watches her weight, experiments with men, and most of all braves what the world thinks of her. I really think people ought to stop thinking of her as a sex symbol.

   Tragic as the love story's end is, Monica RULZ!!!




4. This book was quite ridiculous. Although I applaud the author on his efforts, the book was among other things boring and without depth. The story somehow tries to paint Monica as highly intelligent, sure of what she wanted and able to speak her own mind. But she is also supposed to be lost, confused, and have low self esteem. Am I the only person who sees the contradiction here?

   I honestly picked up this book simply because it was in the library and sounded interesting. I am not truly interested in either politics or gossip. Although I knew information about the Lewinsky scandal (who didn't?), I never defended one side or the other. I don't think Lewinsky is an evil women who should be burned at the stake. I also think that some people are too quick to criticize her without considering the fact that we've all done something we aren't proud of in our lives. I think she was truly in love with the President and that she didn't try to set him up. However this book goes way too far in trying to make her sound innocent. Any decent person will own up to the fact that they have done something wrong. But this book made Monica into the hurt little victim, without taking any responsibility for her own actions. The thing that bothered me the most was that no one ever considered Hilary or Chelsea seriously in the story. Monica somehow seems to almost completely write them out of the picture as if the family didn't matter. Of course she does mention that she followed Hilary's actions so she could know when the President would call her. For someone who is so intelligent it is surprising to me that she never considered what effect it would have on other people (namely the Clinton family) if she and the President actually did get married, something she often daydreams about in the story. Does she expect to just lovingly become Chelsea's stepmother? Although the author tried to avoid this he truly ended up making Monica sound extremely neurotic.

   In life there is usually no black or white area. Most situations can not be interpreted as completely right or wrong. All people live in a gray area, meaning sometimes they do the right thing and other times they don't. In this book we apparently meet the first person who doesn't, because Monica Lewinsky lives totally in the white area. I wish I had picked up a book with much more depth.




5. Not indepth reading, but remember the story and the people it includes. The book details Monica's emotions to conincide with what headlines the public knew. Worth reading, if you are interested in what took place (obviously from her side). Many facts and the Starr Report excerpts to legitimize assertions.

5 comments about Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope.

1. I enjoyed the book, obviously loving parents of a teenager who maybe willingly fled from home, we will never know. What is important is that she is back, part of a loving family, and she is going on with her life. The book is obviously the parents' side of the story and it is well told, kindly written, and we have to believe that maybe Elizabeth was actually kidnapped, even though the loopholes for this are pretty deep, especially that the culprits have yet to be tried for kidnapping so it looks like they are having a difficult time to prove the case. Still Elizabeth is a young woman, lovingly portrayed in the book by her family, so let's be happy about the conclusion of the case and leave it at that.



2. The first time I read this book, I was watching it all happen. i'ts like I was invisible. I admire Elizabeth for having the guts to do what she did. I would have fought back, but she did it the safe way, she didn't resist. Reading this book, you feel like you know the Smart family. I pray for all Missing Children everywhere. Elizabeth is the luckiest girl in the world! Mary Katharine was so cool and collected. she is amazing too. read this book!



3. Bringing Elizabeth Home was a heartwarming story about Elizabeth's tragic journey. I would of preferred it if Elizabeth told the story rather then Elizabeth's parents: Ed and Lois Smart. But I think that there were rumors going around about Elizabeth's story, and they just wanted to tell the world what really happened.
   They are a really strong family for having to go through Elizabeth's kidnapping. Escpecially her sister (Mary-Katherine) for having to see her sister getting kidnapped, and not being able to do anything to save her sister. I enjoyed reading about the Smart's sad but also happy story.



4. The subtitle says it all, really. Readers expecting to learn details of Elizabeth Smart's captivity should look elsewhere; there are no such revelations in this book. Her parents leave it to Elizabeth to tell that story herself, someday, if she chooses to do so. This is Ed and Lois Smart telling their own story, and that of their family's other members, during the months between Elizabeth's kidnapping and her return.
   
   Faith played a huge role in keeping the Smart family's hope alive during those months, so it's natural for them to speak of it often. For some readers this may give their book a "preachy" quality, while for others it may strike exactly the right note. True crime this is not - it's more like a series of essays, sharing each parent's feelings while walking us through the events as they remember them.
   
   Worth reading, but oddly dry for all the material's tremendous emotional impact. I came away feeling that someone - authors, ghostwriter, editor(s), I couldn't be sure who - worked so hard at avoiding sensationalism that the effort backfired. 3.5 stars, rounding up to 4.



5. As the Smart family has said, they wrote this book themselves because they knew their story would be told, and they simply wanted to ensure that the story was truly being told from their perspective. Anyone who claims that this book was written for profit is off his/her rocker. The Smarts are a very wealthy family who had no need to profit from their nightmare.
   
   As far as suggesting that they were hiding a pregnancy, congratulations on your math skills, but pregnancy doesn't show for at least four months. Are you suggesting that they kept her away just for fun for the remainder of the time? What a preposterous notion! Additionally, while the LDS faith teaches abstinence, it also has an social services system which includes counseling, and if needed, placing babies for adoption, showing that they do recognize that unmarried people have babies and that they are ready to help.
   
   Lastly, my largest commendation to the Smart family. This experience was a test of faith that no family would ever want to endure. Ed and Lois Smart took a terrible situation and used it to rally for the Amber Alert, and turned their nightmare into a blessing for other families. There were few that believed that Elizabeth would return alive. The Smarts gave the example that nobody has the right to question another's faith.