1 comments about One-Person Puppet Plays:.

1. I have several puppet script books that I use at my library for puppet shows and I return to this book over and over again. The scripts are simple to perform and there are not a lot of puppets or props required. It is perfect for libraries with limited budgets, limited staff and limited time to plan, practice and perform a show. I am finally buying my own, personal copy of the book.

No comments about The Show Makers: Great Directors of the American Musical Theatre.

3 comments about The Complete Play Production Handbook.

1. This is an excellent overview of the elements necessary for the planning and production of a theater presentation.



2. This book is a great source of ideas and reminders of things to be aware of. There are better books specifically focused on acting and/or directing. But this book addresses just about all facets of putting on a play, and addresses it at the level of the typical community theater or school production.



3. Here is the equivalent of a full library on theatrical production, all between the covers of a single volume. Clearly and concisely, but with the rich understanding and enthusiasm that come from long association with the theatre, it covers every step in the mounting of a play, from the time the director selects a script to the moment the curtain goes up on opening night.

   The Complete Play Production Handbook makes an ideal introduction to the world of the theatre; teachers especially, from elementary school to college, will find it helpful in staging plays of every sort. At the same time, the handbook's thorough treatment, broad coverage, and extensive appendixes (including a guide to suppliers of theatrical equipment and a glossary of technical terms) make this an invaluable reference work for almost anyone involved in any capacity-director, actor, or stagecrew member-in the hundreds of thousands of dramatic productions that are put on each year by little theatres, community theatres, and summerstock companies.

   This book provides specific, detailed answers to the many questions that trouble any group seeking to bring a play to life. It tells how to read a play and understand the playwright's intentions; how the director and actors can invigorate the play through their handling of dialogue, movement, and business; and how the arts of scene design, lighting design, costuming, and makeup can be meshed to enhance the production. It also tells how to avoid the alltoo-common pitfalls of amateur productions: a play that is badly chosen, either for the performers or for the audience; a play that is misinterpreted, or not interpreted at all; a play that is so obviously miscast that the dramatic values are distorted; a play that is so badly staged that the action cannot be followed; a play that is ruined by poor scenery, lighting, or costumes, or one that fails because the different members of the theatrical team have not agreed on a common goal.

   Here are the fundamentals of directing and acting lucidly explained, with line drawings and photographs of actual productions to illustrate key concepts and techniques, from the composition of the stage picture by the director to the proper handling by the actor of. crosses and turns. Here, too, is a wealth of detailed information on building and painting sets; on properties and special effects; on costumes and makeup; and on house management, promotion, and ticket sales. The proper protocol for the conduct of casting sessions and rehearsals; formulas for mixing stage paints; the making of ground plans, light plots, and prop plots; the necessary contents of a makeup kit and their application; poster design, ticket printing, and box-office procedures-these are only a few of the many topics covered. The Complete Play Production Handbook gives specific "how to" answers to all the many questions that the members of any theatrical group must solve if their audiences-and if they themselvesare to find their productions rewarding. It is essential reading for every member of the theatrical team.

5 comments about Bad Seed..

1. 'The Bad Seed' is certainly a great horror story, made even more remarkable since it was written in the early 1950s when the world was thought to be a kinder, gentler place. In it we have a young mother at the end of her tether in dealing with her adolescent daughter. Her daughter is not all peaches and cream. She is a cold, emotionless psychopath. She doesn't recognize good from bad. All she knows is that when she wants something ... SHE GETS IT. Poor mother eventually comes to grips as to why her daughter is the way she is, and arrives at a decision on what to do about it.
   
   
   Bottom line: although it created a sensation when first published, 'The Bad Seed' has stood the test of time and is worthy of new readership. Strongly recommended.



2. FOR ALL OF US "OLDER" PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO REMEMBER THE MOVIE, THIS IS A GREAT COMPANION TO THE MOVIE. OF COURSE LIKE ALL BOOKS AND MOVIES MADE FROM BOOKS YOU HAVE YOUR OWN MENTAL INTRERPATATION OF EACH. ALL IN ALL, GREAT BOOK WORTH READING, BUT A BETTER MOVIE.



3. I imagine "The Bad Seed" was a truly shocking story back in the fifties when it first came out and it remains a chilling little tale that is well written and quite believable. The sad thing is that you can pick up a newspaper today and read more shocking stories about real childhood psychopaths.
   
   I thought the characters were well developed and the story moved well. I watched the movie (1950's version) last night for the first time and though the movie got all the attention and is what most people remember, the book is much better and though the film was well-acted, Rhoda just seemed colder and more menacing in the book. The book also does a better job at developing the story of Christine's mother and her forgotten past. The ending of the book was much better as well!
   
   Overall, a quick, entertaining read!



4. i got this book at noon the other day and finished it by eight that evening - - a page turner, gripping, gothic, yet campy and with a sense of irony about that campiness that endeared the book to me.
   eloquently written, his language is engaging yet elegant, revealing and graphic, yet dark and mysterious, like sinister housewife gossip and whispered rumours.
   if you root for the anti-hero (and believe me this book has one HELL of a little anti-hero to offer), this is definitely the book for you. i found myself time and again reading it, eyes wide, mouth open... "oh my god. she's the devil... she's FABULOUS!!" Rhoda is an utterly timeless character, and you can tell the author cares about her a lot; she's a little machine, a robot with no soul, she plays back what you want to hear like a broken record and kills without a second thought, but somehow you admire her, even begin to be taken in by her.
   this book captures the feeling of the time it takes place, i see some incredibly caucasian small southern/east-coast town, a nightmare of whitewash, green grass, sunshine and trees and bushes bursting with flowers.
   
   i would like to say how mortified that i am that Eli Roth is helming the (surprise!) REMAKE of this story... hollywood. rotters. yech.
   
   so before the whole franchise becomes tainted with modern horror dreck of the ilk of hostel and saw, READ THIS BOOK and fall in love with it.



5. As with many authors and artists William March's work was rejected and he died a broken man. Publishers told him that The Bad Seed lacked verisimilitude. The truth is there have always been sociopathic children among us, but today the headline is all too common. I was inspired to read this classic after reading Dr. Robert D. Hares Without Conscience: The disturbing world of the psychopaths among us. Even though The Bad Seed is a work of fiction March had some really good insights that Dr. Hare quoted.
   
   The only thing I found slightly corny about the book was that March tried to incorporate a fictional encounter with the real psychoanalyst, Sigmund Freud. Also the book is much better than the original movie version. [...]

No comments about The Senses in Performance (Worlds of Performance).

5 comments about What's It All About.

1. Being British myself and also someone who works in HOLLYWOOD'S Movie & TV industry, I have to say that this is one of the best autobiographies of someone in the same business I've ever read. Michael Caine lays out his rags to riches life with complete candor and in a very engaging narrative style.
   
   His total honesty and recall, specially of his rise to fame in the 1960's, makes the reader really feel part of the scene. Caine's book is most revealing in the behind the scenes goings on in the making of his movies. I'll not spoil it for you by going into detail, but our cockney actor friend certainly got around to meeting just about all of the "in" people of the day and many before they were household names to the rest of us. He mentions the good, bad and the ugly and doesn't spare himself when looking back on the mistakes he has made.
   
   For aspiring young actors, there are lessons to be learned here. Caine has a separate book for that, but still he offers up some informed pieces of guidance in this work. As an Englishman, he's probably the most famous and iconic actor to ever come of old blighty and blimey if ee' don't alf make it one ell' of a read!



2. Michael Caine is one of my favourite actors, and "What's it all about" is one one fascinating read. It has an excellent witty conversational style, which makes it very engaging, especially in the earlier parts. I always took Caine to be a dyed-in-the-wool Brit (he looks like one, and says so in the book himself) and so was surprised and amazed at the amazing life he's led... brought up in a poor family, survived the World War, went to war in Korea and almost got killed himself, struggled like hell, led a debauched lifestyle, and so on.

   "What's it all about" is one of the best autobiographies I've read if you just count the first half, let's say before Caine settles with his family in LA; after this it seems to eschew those little tidbits of gossip, life and human nature for the mundane: what parties/restaurants/hotels/people/homes/flats they went to/ate in/stayed in/met/bought/rented, and so on. This part is quite dull, though it does have the occasional witticism. Also some things are missing... incredibly there's no reference to the one Caine quote which - let's just say - not a lot of people know. Also I'd have liked him not to be silent about his "conquests".

   One thing that really got me though is the mistakes... I dont know whether these are just typos or Sir Michael fiddling with the truth a bit. For example, on page 5 (hardcover) he says at birth his weight was 8 lb 2. Later (page 348), this becomes 6 lb 2. Another instance: on page 35 he is 6 ft tall at age 15 having added a foot in two years, yet on page 25 he is 5 ft 11 at age 11. On page 330, he says "Since then I've only drunk wine" as a result of finding out about his excessive drinking. Yet we have many references later to the drinking of all kinds of spirits, including vodka. There are more such mistakes, which makes me think the book wasnt proofread at all.

   But all in all, this is a very good read, even if you dont know Michael Caine. If nothing, it at least gives the message that dreams can be achieved if you try hard enough and never give up.




3. If Michael Caine's life resembles that one of the average actor, next time I request an autograph from Nicole Kidman or Kevin Spacey, I may be dwelling on their heroic background, rather than on their assumingly obscure and profligatious foreground. Maurice Micklewhite's biography is just a piece of inspiration for any quitter. It can outdo Anthony Robbins' tapes any day. A fighter in Korea, a victim of malaria, a reluctant B-movie castmember, a happy hedonist, a drunk, an opportunist, and aventually a model husband and father. He's had it all. Michael Caine carries enormous weight in his movies not just because of his acting guile, but mainly because of his charismatic persona. His diversification of characters portrayed, whether in "The Man Who Would Be King", "Funeral in Berlin", "The Eagle Has Landed" or "The Cider House Rules", offers the spectator the unusual challenge of discerning him from prior roles, a task traditionally reserved to a Laurence Olivier, Alec Guinness or Ralph Richardon. Can't help but fall in love with the lad.



4. This book is inspiring. Michael Caine knew at a very young age that he wanted to act, and through perseverance, he has become highly successful and one of the most respected actors of our time, with two Academy Awards to his credit. This should serve to encourage those with dreams but who tell themselves "I'll never make it."

   This is the real thing. Caine starts at the beginning and tells it all without indiscreet name dropping. He mentions that he does not plan to write another autobiography and so does not want to leave anything out. That makes for a really great read.

   But what's really special about this autobiography is how approachable Caine seems to be. He comes across as just a regular guy whom you could approach on the street and say hi. Considering that most of the other autobiographies I've read, however great they may be, still seem like stories told by a celebrity who has deigned to share his/her life story, that in itself is an amazing accomplishment.




5. Michael Caine, one of film's most durable actors, tells his story through 1992 in the autobiography WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT?

   How many film performers have done as much as well as Michael Caine? For more than forty years, the actor has delivered shining performances in dramas, thrillers and comedies. He's carried flicks as a leading man, shared the spotlight as a costar, contributed to emsemble casts and has even take small roles.

   In WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT, Michael Caine vows this book is the only autobiography he will write. I hope he changes his mind. I am sure Mr. Caine had to leave a lot of good stories out of his first volume. And since its '92 publication, he has been knighted and won another Oscar. Why not another book?

   The most noteworthy aspect of WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT is that Michael Caine, despite having done almost everything you could want to do, has had the same personal and professional ups and downs as you and me. He tells stories we've all been through, such as being nervous about meeting women and his strained relationships with friends. (Of course, you and I would not be pals with actor Terence Stamp.)

   This Michael Caine fan wants more movie-making anecdotes. If Mr. Caine does publish a second autobiographical volume, I request a synopsis of the making of each of his ninety-something films. He barely mentions two of my favorites: WATER and especially the obscure comic gem WITHOUT A CLUE.

   Bravo to Michael Caine for not kissing and telling. He alludes to the bedroom activity that made the 1960s what it was for the rich and famous but does not name names.

   The night Michael Caine won the Best Supporting Actor for CIDER HOUSE RULES, ceremony host Billy Crystal had been making fun of Caine's role in a JAWS film. Yet Mr. Caine did not return the dig during his acceptance speech, despite notorious Crystal bombs such as MR. SATURDAY NIGHT, FORGET PARIS, and FATHER'S DAY.

   Unless, of course, Michael Caine's saving those remarks for his next autobiography!

   For now, read WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT.

No comments about I Am Hamlet.

2 comments about Lillie Langtry (Manners, Masks and Morals).

1. Many prefer autobiographies to biographies because they feel they are getting the "real" story--straight from the horse's mouth. But when reading an autobio one must always remember: We are seeing a person as he or she wishes to be seen. This appears to have been especially true in the case of the great 19th-century beauty, Lillie Langtry, who rose from obscurity to become not only a mistress of the Prince of Wales, but a wealthy actress of international repute. She was also a friend of (and was immortalized by) Oscar Wilde and the artists Millais and Whistler.

   Lillie, who was born in 1853 on the Channel Island of Jersey and was gifted with arresting beauty, did not in any way, shape, or form have the life of the average woman of her time. She succeeded as a woman in a man's world. She also lived life in the spotlight--and what a life of scandal (which included the secret birth of an illegitimate daughter), illicit lovers, and reckless hedonism it was.

   In 1925, four years before her death at age 75, Lillie wrote her memoirs, entitled "The Days I Knew." As author Laura Beatty states, there were "no references to the Prince of Wales as her lover...or Arthur Jones" (who was her childhood friend and the great love of her life). Lillie herself remarked when criticised for the white-washing of her life: "You don't really think I would ever do such a thing as to write my real reminiscences, do you?" To that end, she appears to have destroyed much of her correspondence.

   But many of the letters Lillie herself wrote have survived, and they have been relied upon extensively by Beatty. Most notable are a bundle of Lillie's letters to her lover, Arthur Jones, that were discovered in the 1970s "preserved in his little green case in the attic at Portelet", his home in Jersey. Beatty provides us with an abundance of "snippets" from the many letters Lillie wrote, particularly during the period of her pregnancy, and they reveal a desperate, clingy side of Lillie that we see nowhere else; certainly, they reveal a side to Lillie that she herself did not choose to show us.

   Rather than being a chronicle of Lillie's career and achievements (as so many bios are), this is very much a book about Lillie, the person. Though we can never know for certain how she felt in every circumstance, Beatty does a splendid job in peeling off the masks that Wilde taught her to wear, revealing the person underneath. There have been a few other biographies written about Lillie, but having been written prior to the discovery of Jones's cache of letters, they are incomplete in their portrayal of this multi-faceted individual whose life, for all its wealth and pursuit of material pleasures was ultimately sad, lonely, and tragic.

   The book was published in 1999 in the UK. I have the soft-cover version, and it is 336 pages (including the index). There are 16 pages of black-and-white photos, which include a few old family photos, photos of her artistic friends, photos of her lovers, and a photo of her daughter, Jeanne. There are 2 portraits and 13 photos of Lillie at different ages and stages in her life and career.

   Laura Beatty acknowledges the support of Lillie's granddaughter through the years it took her to research and write this biography. The result is a well-researched, well-written book that is as interesting to read as it is insightful in its presentation of one of the most famous women of the 19th century. Indeed, if you've enjoyed the outstanding British video series, "Lillie", starring Francesca Annis and are looking to delve deeper into this fascinating life, I think you'll enjoy this book. Highly recommended.




2. Laura Beatty has written an excellent biography with this book. The author had access to letters writen to a long-time lover and admirer Arthur Jones that previous biographers did not. These letters were never meant to be seen by anybody else and they give an insight into her character that is available from few other sources.

   Lillie was the first of the 'supermodels' and the topic of this book is how the 'real' lillie delt with sudden fame in the hot house of manners and morals that was victorian high society. Lillie succeded on a grand scale, but read this book to find out what success cost her.

   If you are at all interested in Lillie Langtry this most recent of books is a must.

3 comments about Love-Lies-Bleeding: A Play.

1. Love-Lies-Bleeding seems like a continuation, or alternate telling of the novel The Body Artist. A (much) younger woman marries an older man who has had a long, eventful life before her, and now he's dying (or in The Body Artist, he's dead) and she sits and thinks and talks and nothing much happens.
   
   While DeLillo is clearly a talented writer, I think that his talents don't transfer to novels, and definitely not to plays, as well as other reviewers seem to think they do. Maybe he should write some poems, or some philosophical ponderings. This is the third work of DeLillo's that I've read, and what I've noticed is that there is always a point in the story when you get to a monologue by one character that really captures the meaning of the whole story. I just wish DeLillo would write a bunch of those and put them out together, instead of writing an extra 100 pages to wrap around these little gems.
   
   In Love-Lies-Bleeding, an old man (70s) is in a vegetative state after a stroke. His present wife (30s), ex-wife (50s), and son (30s) are all gathered to take care of him and contemplate euthanasia. I simply can't imagine this show actually being performed on a stage and not boring audiences to... well, death. Besides the lack of a real driving force in the plot, there are three acts, and probably around 15 total scenes, maybe more. Each scene is short and stilted, and while reading you can see that time has passed and maybe gather the meaning of the scene... on stage this seems like it would be far too distracting. And I know I wouldn't want to sit there through wooden deliveries of these stylistic lines.
   
   Sometimes artistic creative work is really moving. And sometimes it's just self-indulgent and bland. I feel like this play is closer to the latter. There's a line in here where one of the stroke-victim's ex-wives remarks "I'm not sure how it works but men who don't know themselves have a power over others, those who try miserably to understand." I think Don DeLillo has a power over others for the same reason.



2. Love-Lies-Bleeding is the third play written by novelist Don DeLillo. This drama has Alex, an old man who after several strokes is in a persistent vegetative state, being cared for by his current wife Lia, a previous wife Toinette and his son Sean. Except in flashbacks Alex is silent throughout the play, but the wives and the son discussing his life and arguing about him and themselves. This is a play about the end of a life and the decisions family has to make regarding it.
   
   The blurb on the back cover of the book concludes with this description:
   
   "Luminous, spare, unnervingly comic and always deeply moving, Love-Lies Bleeding explores a number of perilous questions about the value of life and how we measure it."
   
   This is a very fine description that gets to the heart of what this play is about, but the key word here is "spare". Spare writing is a trademark of Don DeLillo and he leaves a lot unsaid in the gaps between words. Another trademark of DeLillo's spare writing is this bit of dialogue: "The memory ends here. I draw a total blank. This is the subway. He's reading the sports pages." So many times in DeLillo's writing he will give the reader lines of dialogue which no person would say in life but the dialogue fits in the context of the story he is telling. In Love-Lies-Bleeding the characters are speaking, but they are saying less than usual. The format of a play does not allow DeLillo to truly focus his writing because all of the motion is from the words of the characters rather than description and described action and here DeLillo is less successful. There are questions about the value of life, but I am not sure Don DeLillo addresses those questions.
   
   -Joe Sherry



3. Having limned "the force of history," DeLillo has since turned around and gone in the other direction, into "the small anonymous corners of human experience," as he phrased it, with works like The Body Artist and, to some extent, Valparaiso and Cosmopolis.
   
   Lies-Lies-Bleeding continues this trend. Consisting of brief, spare scenes, clipped sentences, and unnerving silences, the play focuses on three characters as they deliberate over and eventually carry out the mercy killing of a stroke victim trapped in a persistent vegitative state. Though the characters debate the decision extensively and even fiercely, DeLillo doesn't make the mistake having them just reiterate the arguments of pundits and philosophers. It is the play's genius to push through the cheap, politicized controversy towards the immediacy of the dilemma faced by these characters and the death-haunted atmosphere that pervades their lives.
   
   The individual who is the subject of the decision, Alex, appears in three flashbacks, once in robust health and twice while his body is failing, just before the stroke. These appearances, though brief, flare poignantly like the last glimpse of a setting sun.
   
   There is also one scene where Alex's widow, Lia, speaks at his memorial service. Her words summarize the themes, mood, and style of the play quite well, and are worth quoting at length:
   
   "I know people tell stories at these gatherings. I don't want to do that. People tell stories, exchange stories. I don't know any stories. You know things about him that I never knew. This means nothing to me. There are no stories. You're here for the wrong reason. If you're here to honor his memory, it's not his memory, it's your memory, and it's false. There are no stories. There are other things, hard to express, so deep and true that I can't share them, and don't want to. In the end it's not what kind of man he was but simply that he's gone. The stark fact. The thing that turns us into children, alone under the sky. When it stops being unbearable, it becomes something worse. It becomes that air we breathe."

5 comments about Via Dolorosa and When Shall We Live.

1. "Via Dolorosa" is a play in the sense that it has been performed on the stage. Who besides David Hare himself would dare perform it, I can't say. It would take guts. Who would finance such a performance? Anyway, this is an essay for the stage. I thought it very interesting, chiefly because the New York audience drew Isrealis who were enraptured by Hare, sat bolt upright, and reacted with every inch of their souls. This could and should have been done in a lecture hall at the U.N., not B'Way but ... It is a fascinating exploration and almost as interesting as Tony Kushner's play on Afghanistan that opens with a lengthy monologue, riveting, that blossoms into a dull play. Here the monologue ends. Hare spares us the dull play.



2. I first saw this piece performed by David Hare himself as a monologue. As with all plays, a certain amount of drama and charm is lost when the printed edition is the only version experienced. I saw the language and sarcasm as simultaneously refreshing, especially for those who are pessimistic about the Middle East situation, and poetic, often illustrating and describing scenes and people with warmth and edge.
   I would highly recommend finding the dramatic staging of this piece, but this edition is still a beautiful essay.



3. Fortunately i had the luck to actually see David Hare perform Via Dolorosa on Broadway, not once, but twice this past spring. In fact, I was able to see nearly 30 plays in five months as part of a Duke University program taught in Manhattan. My three favorite straight plays were 1. Amy's View, 2. Death of a Salesman, 3. Via Dolorosa. What I appreciated most about Hare's two plays was his ability to reveal the complexity, stubborness, and nobility, closely bordering stoicism, that pervades the human condition.

   As an agnostic and an American I was overcome by the honest critique offered by Hare. Here is someone who has wrestled with the moral and ethical dillemas and subsequently infused them into his work. I excuse his humor, because, sometimes things are so horrible all we can do is laugh, and if we cannot, then it is truly a sad thing. Stones or ideas? When shall we live? So what if you don't like all his answers, at least he's raising the right questions.

   I do not expect, nor do I particularily want Hare to moderate a Palestinian/Isreali debate. What I do want is for him to dig out and contextualize the emotional elements that ground this tragic situation. As a Westerner, I understand how this passion can captivate someone from a culture in desperate need of something to live for besides material wealth. Hare accomplished exactly what he set out to do, and we are in his debt for it.




4. [PLEASE R-E-M-O-V-E the two not-reviews-but letters-to-you you've put in as reviews, and PUT T-H-I-S in. THIS is the review. Thank you.] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

   This is not "a book". It has two totally different parts. The first, "Via Dolorosa", Hare calls a "play". It seems to be merely a monologue, a description of the author's short, recent first visit to Israel and Palestine. Rather than presenting a broad picture presenting major challenges and problems in the area, the author relies mainly on his personal experiences in rather extreme, nonrepresentative situations. E.g., in Israel: he devotes space to a difference of opinion of settlers as to whether the sabbath began at 4:15 or at 4:16 PM, and then states that no one could tell him why males are "allowed an extra 18-minute window to go on doing irreligious things.... No one can tell me why". One wonders what are these "irreligious things", but no answer is given. Hare misinforms the reader with another meaningless description: "We cannot sample [a delicious-looking stew] because today they are eating meat and we have been eating dairy. If we were German, we might be able to, because Germans need only three hours to switch from one to another." "Germans" aside, Hare has his eye of the needle trying to slip through an elephant; his facts are the opposite of reality [meat and milk]. His British Jewish neighbours could have corrected this error. Near his conclusion, he states that "an unnamed Israeli military commander" told him that 20,000 Jews were killed "in the cause of setting up the state. 'Not that every death isn't a tragedy...but...20,000 to set up a whole country; that's not so bad, you know. Not bad, for a whole state.'" - If the point of Hare's "play" is to inform, to educate his readers, his subject matter throughout is scanty; often quite peripheral matters are presented, and even these are on occasion mistakenly described. - The second half of the book is his Eric Symes Abbot Memorial Lecture delivered in Westminster Abbey on 9 May 1996. I was much taken by his opening comments that he, "an obvious heathen", was invited to speak in memory of a man who was "marked out...by the power of his Christian faith and example". Hare states lucidly his positions, many in opposition to those of his hosts, such as "Is there anything firm about Christian teaching, which cannot be reasonably countered by someone anxious to swing the myth round to suit their own prejudices?" He explains the title of his lecture as the words of Seneca: "When shall we live, if not now?" - So, 2 stars for "Via Dolorosa", 5 stars for "When Shall we Live?" - and 2 stars overall, the sad "Via Dolorosa" being the determiner of rating.




5. To the Editor of accepted book reviews:

   I find most interesting your immediate acceptance of my review of don marquis' "Archyology", which you have left on-line and which represents my true feelings about the book. Yet, I twice wrote a review of David Hare's book, "Via Dolorosa and Wnen Shall We Live". I split my grading of the book into 5 stars for the second half, and 2 stars for the first and overall. I did NOT write ad hominem, but rather described what I believe are real flaws and errors in "Via Dolorosa".

   Why didn't you accept it? Is it bad for merchandising?

   I am a regular and enthusiastic Amazon customer and tell all my friends about you.

   I'll also tell them about your rejection of my review, with no obvious reason for it.

   I would appreciate your response.

   Thank you.

   Dr. Baruch Hurwich hurwich@cc.huji.ac.il