2 comments about Great Lives: Jesus: The Greatest Life of All (Great Lives from Godæs Word).

1. The insight into the life of Jesus in this book is amazing. You can tell that Mr. Swindoll was writing with the blessing of God. I highly reccommend it and can't wait to read others in the series.



2. I ordered two of these to share with my children. I have given another one as a gift. If you like history and have a desire to learn more about the Christian faith and the early church, I encourage you to read this book. I plan to read all of Chuck Swindoll's books in the Great Lives series.

No comments about Blacklisting Myself: Memoir of a Hollywood Apostate in the Age of Terror.

1 comments about Jungle Jack: My Wild Life.

1. This is a great book. The first part is so funny, I had tears from laughing. The rest of the book is so informative and relates the passion and love Jack Hanna and his family has for animals.

5 comments about Twenty Thousand Roads: The Ballad of Gram Parsons and His Cosmic American Music.

1. This is an amazing book for anyone who is interested in music from the 50s - 70s.
   While reading I suggest you listen to the music discussed to truly appreciate the details and evolution of Gram's contribution to American music. enjoy!



2. A superb book on Gram Parsons. It probes the genius and vulnerability of this great talent. I, for one appreciate the authors in-depth telling of this man's life. One can only imagine the even greater impact he would have had on the music world had his life not been cut so drastically short. It is a true loss for everyone.



3. This book starts REALLY slowly!!! It digs really deeply into Gram's family ..... generations before he's born. I'm sure the stories about his well-to-do family was meant to add background to his own messed-up personality. But it was really boring. The book picks up when Gram finally gets out and starts making music.



4. I've already read the Ben Fong-Torres bio, as well as the Sid Griffin bio.....now, while I am not a Gram-o-phile, I am most definitely a Nez-head. And based on the countless errors I am reading about Mike Nesmith, I wonder just how much research went into this book?
   
   1) "Nesmith...the iconic Monkee, the one who could actually play his instrument." Never mind that Peter Tork was a clasically trained pianist, French horn player and FAR better guitarist than Nesmith...
   
   2) Red Rhodes was "a regular contributor to ex-Monkee Michael Nesmith's country-rock First National Band." Hmmm...seems he ought to have been *in* the band with all of those contributions....oh wait....he was.
   
   3) David Barry "played piano on Michael Nesmith's Country Time Records recordings." They served a lot of lemonade during those sessions, apparently. It was Countryside Records.
   
   4) Red Rhodes "played on Elvis Presley's records." Let's name them:
   
   5)Red Rhodes was the CMA's "Steel Guitar Player of the Year from 1965 through 1968." Close...but Red did not win in 1966. Ralph Mooney and Tom Brumley shared the award that year.
   
   That many omissions on some sidebars to the main story make me wonder how many omissions are in the main story itself.



5. I've read many biographies of rock personalities and other famous people. This one is better than most. It provides a balanced viewpoint with input from varying sources. A good read for Gram Parsons fans.

5 comments about Plutarch's Lives Volume 1 (Modern Library Classics).

1. After having read McCullogh's splendid series on Rome, I turned to this fat, dense book with great expectations. I was not disappointed: the stories are endlessly fascinating, from their basic details on ancient history to the bizarre asides that reveal the pre-Christianised mind-set of the author.

   Like all great books, this one can be read on innumerable levels. First, there is the moralising philosophy that is perhaps the principal purpose of the author to advance - each life holds lessons on proper conduct of great and notorious leaders alike. You get Caesar, Perikles, and Alcibiades, and scores of others who are compared and contrasted. Second, there is the content. Plutarch is an invaluable source of data for historians and the curious. Third, there is the reflection of religious and other beliefs of the 1C AD: oracles and omens are respected as are the classical gods. For example, while in Greece, Sulla is reported as having found a satyr, which he attempted unsuccesfully to question for its auguring abilities during his miltary campaign in Greece! It is a wonderful window into the mystery of life and human belief systems. That being said, Plutarch is skeptical of these occurances and both questions their relevance and shows how some shrewd leaders, like Sertorious with his white fawn in Spain, used them to great advantage.

   Finally, this is a document that was used for nearly 2000 years in schools as a vital part of classical education - the well-bred person knew all these personalities and stories, which intimately informed their vocabulary and literary references until the beginning of the 20C. That in itself is a wonderful view into what was on people's minds and how they conceived things over the ages. As is well known, Plutarch is the principal source of many of Shakespeare's plays, such as Coriolanus and Julius Caesar. But it was also the source of the now obscure fascination with the rivalry of Marius and Sulla, as depicted in paintings and poetry that we still easily encounter if we are at all interested in art. Thus, this is essential reading for aspiring pedants (like me).

   Of course, there are plenty of flaws in the work. It assumes an understanding of much historical detail, and the cases in which I lacked it hugely lessened my enjoyment. At over 320 years old, the translation is also dated and the prose somewhat stilted, and so it took me 300 pages to get used to it. Moreover, strictly speaking, there are many inaccuracies, of which the reader must beware.

   Warmly recommended as a great and frequently entertaining historical document.




2. Plutarchs historic portrayals of the lives of the gretest men in BCE western history, is truly inspiring. From the passionate warrior kings Alexander the Great and Julius Ceasar to the Athenean states men Dion and Draco, the list goes on, each text providing an insight to lives that were lived to the fullest potential.



3. This is one of the most incredible pieces of literature in human history, yet is one of the most often overlooked.
   Plutarch is not as much a historian as he is a moralist, and it is his examination of the lives of some of the most important historical figures of the ancient world for their moral roots that is so incredibly engaging.
   Oddly enough, I was first introduced to the works of Plutarch through the fictional novels of Louis L'Amour, who often has one charcter encouraging another to read various classical authors.
   For a interesting peek at the lives and morals of some of history's most intriguing figures, Plutarch is a great place to begin.



4. Plutarch in his "Lives Of The Noble Grecians And Romans" written around 100 C.E., sheds new light on Greek and Roman history from their Bronze Age beginnings, shrouded in myth, down through Alexander and late Republican Rome. Plutarch is the lens that we use today to view the Greco-Roman past; his work has shaped our perceptions of that world for 2,000 years. Plutarch writes of the rise of Roman Empire while Gibbon uses his scholarship to advance the story to write about its decline. He was a proud Greek that was equally effected by Roman culture, a Delphic priest, a leading Platonist, a moralist, educator and philosopher with a deep commitment as a first rate writer. Being a Roman citizen, Plutarch was afforded the opportunity to become an intimate friend to prominent Roman citizens and a member of the literary elite in the court of Emperor Trajan.
   
   Plutarch's influence and enormous popularity during and after the Renaissance is legendary among classicist. Plutarch's "Lives", served as the sourcebook for Shakespeare's Roman Plays "Julius Caesar", "Antony and Cleopatra" and "Coriolanus". By the way Plutarch is even the only contemporary source of all the biographical information on Cleopatra, whom he writes about in his biographies of Julius Caesar, Mark Antony and Octavian. Thomas Jefferson wrote to his nephew that there were three books every gentleman had to have familiarity with; Plutarch's "Lives", Livy's "History of Rome" and Virgil's Aeneid. In fact all the founding fathers of note had read Plutarch and learned much from his fifty biographies of noble men of Greece and Rome. When Hamilton, Jay and Madison write "The Federalist Papers" they use many examples of good and bad leadership traits that they read in Plutarch's work. His biographies are a great study in human character and what motivates leaders to decide and act the way they do, this masterpiece has proven to be still prescient today.
   
   If you are truly interested in a classical education, put this book on the top of your list! I recommend this book to anyone who is interested in political philosophy, and history.



5. First off, let me clarify that what follows is a review of a particular edition of Plutarch's Lives, the current (2001) edition from Modern Library Classics. It is not a review of the book itself and will not provide any information on the relevance of this wonderful classic or the many lives it includes or the ingenious structure of paralleling the lives of Greeks and Romans or the importance of this text to the history of biography. Several other reviews here do a fine job of that and I see no reason to cover the same ground. Moreover, I've noted rather a lot of confusion about this edition in reviews here on Amazon (see particularly the reviews associated with the hardbound Modern Library volumes). I am still researching the Dryden edition, but thought I might offer a few comments to provide clarity and a better understanding of this edition for those whose buying decisions are based on the nature and quality of a particular translation.
   
   "The Dryden Translation" - this unusual phrasing (which appears on the cover) has become the traditional descriptor for this version of the Lives. In fact, Dryden is not, properly speaking, the translator of this book. In one article in Wikipedia he is described as an overseer for the edition and in another as editor-in-chief, but he is also described as having simply "lent" his name to the enterprise. I am still researching this, but I should not be surprised if Jacob Tonson, the publisher, was not more involved in editing than was Dryden. [Update: My research to date has been inconclusive on the full nature of Dryden's role in this undertaking, but none of the more detailed resources I have turned to suggest that Dryden actually participated in this book as a "translator." Very possibly, this is one of those many little facts of history that have gone unrecorded and for which we shall have to content ourselves with the conjecture of scholarly experts. What is most surprising, however, is how often Dryden is given as the translator of this volume in various less detailed references to the book. Encyclopedia Britannica, for example, has Dryden as the translator; Wikipedia, much to my surprise, does not -- and thus, arguably, the amateurs get it right over the professionals.]
   
   Dryden's primary involvement in the project seems to have been his "Life of Plutarch" which is included in this edition only by way of a two short excerpts in Clough's Preface.
   
   Arthur Hugh Clough's Preface and Revisions - Clough was a nineteenth century poet. Clough's preface was, for me, a major reason I became interested in the Modern Library edition. I found the preface quite intriguing. It is a solid piece of work from an individual who was neither a full time scholar, nor a particularly notable prose writer. In a couple of cases, the argument at the very beginning of the preface for example, he seems to drop his thoughts without fully completing them. But this is a minor problem in an otherwise well thought out and informative discussion of Plutarch and his book.
   
   The text itself - One of the reviewers here on Amazon calls this Clough's "train wreck" assuming that the difficulties in the text must lie with Clough because, concludes the reviewer, Dryden is a much better prose writer. Few would doubt that Dryden was a better prose writer, but I strongly suspect that the translation in this case (not Dryden's as I have already pointed out) was aided by Clough's hand. I am having trouble getting a copy of the original (pre-Clough) "Dryden" translation, although I should very much like to do a comparison. Once Clough's version came out, publishers seem to have had no reason to go back to the original which provides at least some indication that Clough had resolved some of the problems with the text. As a result, the pure "Dryden" editions are older and more expensive.
   
   I find the text quite readable. It is not a "modern" translation (I hate using the word "modern" here because I think of Clough as a modern, perhaps I should say it is not a twentieth or twenty-first century translation). This text is clearly more given to complex clausal structures than we would expect in a popular translation today. I think it more than has its merits. I'm not sure but that the complex clausal structures might not have their own virtue in a text like this. Certainly one of the interesting qualities in Plutarch is a kind of questioning of sources that the syntax of this edition brings out rather nicely. I say that, however, as a non-classicist with little or no Greek, so I cannot be sure whether it really does reflect the original.
   
   Notes - My chief concern with the text would be that it lacks annotation or other textual apparatus beyond an index. This is particularly peculiar given that the cover states that it includes notes by Clough! I am trying to get my hands on an earlier edition of the Clough revision to see what it might contain in the way of notes. Nonetheless, I'm not quite sure what to make of the Modern Library advertising notes on the cover, but providing none. Until I know better what these notes might entail, I'm loath to make any judgment. [Update: I am currently in dialog with Random House trying to understand why they did not include the notes; I have frankly had to struggle to get them to understand that I am not referring to the notes in the Preface, but to notes to the main body of the text. Nonetheless, I am hopeful, that I will eventually get an understanding from them, and, perhaps, may be able to report here that future editions will either remove the erroneous "Notes" on the cover, or, even better, will include the missing "Notes." I have located an online copy with Clough's Notes. These appear to be rather thin by modern standards, perhaps one note to every three or four pages. Nonetheless, it would be nice to see them restored. Although, a more fully annotated version would be a very nice thing to see, indeed.]
   
   Introduction by James Atlas - I wish I could speak more highly of the Modern Library introduction, but I am afraid I felt it was lacking on many levels. It fails in anyway to clarify the nature of the translation. One would think that it would at least contain some mention of the relevance of this particular text (why reprint it now?), of the curious assignment of Dryden's name as translator to a book that he did not translate, and of the role that Clough played as a nineteenth century editor of a seventeenth century text.
   
   Additionally, and perhaps most warranting concern, Atlas's introduction covers such similar ground to Clough's Preface (even using many of the same quotations) that it feels rather curiously redundant.
   
   The cover - I cannot close without commenting on the cover. It looks like wallpaper for a nineteenth century classicist's study. Quite honestly, I like it.
   
   I've given the book four stars because I see no reason to visit the sins of this particular edition upon the text as a whole, and the text has plenty of merits both as a translation and as a classic of literature.

5 comments about God and Man at Yale.

1. It was an honor to read God and Man at Yale, by William Buckley, Jr. In his book, Mr. Buckley writes (in his incredible prose that is unmatched by any other political pundit around) that the 1950s Yale has reached a turning point: it can continue to move towards secularism and socialism, and ultimately work against the public good, or it can choose to proselytize the virtues of individualism and spiritualism (the Christian sort, according to Buckley).
   
   Buckley argues that Yale should stand for something. Skepticism is not a worthy virtue if it does not arrive at a conclusion. Skepticism should be in furtherance of conviction, Buckley argues, rather than skepticism for skepticism sakes. This is a departure from the Socratic method, where the entire purpose is proving how little we know, never arriving at a point or conclusion.
   
   Buckley is perhaps the modern architect of a conversation revolution that has been growing over the last forty years. Some of the theoretical prescriptions that Buckley has outlined have not been proven to be successful over time. Buckley urges Yale alumni to withhold providing support to the university so long as it continues to advance secularism and collectivism. This may well have modified the behavior of the administration at the edges, but it certainly has not changed the foundation of the modern university, let alone Yale. Yale is now at the epicenter of liberalism, spewing as much liberalism as a modern Berkeley classroom. It is arguable that most Yale alumni do not care about the values that Buckley had preached, and if this is so, Buckley is still vindicated since he argued that Yale alumni should simply investigate to determine if the university is furthering values that run counter to their own.
   
   It does make sense, though, that a university should not be a hot bed of crazy ideas simply to allow students the chance to make the right decisions as to what is the public good. Some causes are, simply put, not part of the public good - such as Nazis and socialism. Under Buckley's system, which I would support, the alumni of Yale (and most other universities) should withhold contributing to the university unless they fire communist and socialistic professors, especially those teaching classes such as Marxism, which gives students an unrealistically positive impression of Marx, as well as economics, where modern economic principles are likely to be slammed in favor of socialistic economic principles. This is one of the best books that I have read criticizing the malaise in academia.



2. With all due respect to Mr. Buckley's respect for his religion, Catholicism, the revelation to me is that scholarly steeples at Yale apparently affect persons differently. Some see them as hallowed, others as mere obstacles to hurdle in pursuit of what are often portrayed as lofty ideals within the context of Godly acceptance. For most people those ideals do not easily include pedophilia, but when I once read a "scholarly" paper from the 1960's that defended the practice (though typically moreso in an effort to reconicile the dilemma), it became clear to me that God is not a universal perception at Yale, nor is humankind. Trying to appreciate the scholarship and insightful method of choosing so brave a topic during that period, I still found it hard to accept that anyone - well educated - could justify or minimize the harm done to an innocent. Today, in 2005 my opinions are unchanged, and in fact, perhaps are far more biased for learning of the extent to which Catholicism allowed such acts to become what could only be called a universal norm. The Biblical passage that comes to mind is one well known by most Christian, and the shorted in the Bible, it is said. "Jesus wept." This is the logic most expect from the quality of Yale regardless of how well written or scholarly it is done if Christianity is the objective.



3. What can one say of "God And Man At Yale" that has not already been said? (There must be something, otherwise, why should I start this review?) It is a classic in Conservative thinking, a primer for civilized debate, and a template for structured reasoning. This book came at the forefront of a wave of the new American Conservatism, which seemed like the last dying gasps of the old American conservatism when it initially arrived on the scene in 1951.
   
   Shortly following Buckley's cajoling of Yale, Goldwater ran for President, Phylliss Schlafly battled feminist tyrants and Reagan was swept into office as a result of it all. A whole world of conservative thinkers and pundits found a waiting fan-base, one that Buckley gently "broke in" for all of us.
   
   OK, so that is the history... but what of the book?
   
   Certainly, the names of the then teachers, professors and administrators that Buckley took to task are irrelevant and so is the course load descriptions this far removed from the days of "God and Man Af Yale". But the central argument has, if anything, gotten more acutely realized. That religion, economics and American exceptionalism is anathema to the properly arranged University professor is nearly accepted as axiomatic by everyone on both sides of the issue these days, 50 years after the book was first published. Few argue the point as they attempted to do in the name of "fairness" in Buckley's days at Yale.
   
   But, I will show here a quote from the book that shows Buckley's prescience: "I myself believe that the duel between Christianity and atheism is the most important in the world. I further believe that the struggle between individualism and collectivism is the same struggle reproduced on another level. I believe that if and when the menace of Communism is gone, other vital battles, at present subordinated, will emerge to the foreground."
   
   And that is just where we stand today. Certainly the struggle against Islamofascism is an important one, but we are seeing the University embattled by conservative students and parents more each day in the post Communist world, now that we have the luxury to do so. Communism is on the down turn and we now have the energy to address the sorry state of affairs in American education- as well as the tools with the internet. The building disgust about leftists in the Universities is palpable and growing. We are edging ever more toward "doing something" about it all at long last. Buckley should be excited about the immediate future for the turn around of American education.
   
   Also, this book is a great example on how to structure an argument. Using this book as a template would do any debater well.
   
   Thanks, Mr. Buckley. You have inspired many of us.



4. Implicit in a democracy is the free conversation of ideas. Ideas compete with each other for acceptance by individuals, society as a whole and institutions. One of these institutions is the University. Should the University form the argument or do the professors independently make arguments quite independent what the alumni or University president wants made. Does a University organize around a certain concept or school of thought. Does the University President and trustees form the bases of the argument or do they blindly hire people of a certain criteria and let the pieces fall where they will.
   
   William F. Buckley forms the argument that Yale University of the late 1940's and early 1950's has a school of thought about economics, religion, and society that are not consistent with the values and goals of the alumni of the period the book was written. To be sure the University President claims the values taught at Yale were quite by accident protecting the higher value of academic freedom.
   
   William F. Buckley goes into some detail about how religion and Christianity is expressed by various faculty who teach to the none theological student. One Professor agressively makes theoutdatedness of Christianity with apologetic type arguments, but mostly through characterization. While a Chrisian professor makes some apologetical arguments and careful not to be offensive to the none Christians. The author also goes into some great detail about the social studies department.
   
   William F. Buckley evaluates the economic training at Yale. The role of private enterprize and government in producing and distributing wealth. The author further explains that emphasis on the govermental role and wealth redistribution effect the political thought and occupational goals of the student and recent graduate of the University. He further believes a large portion of the alumni and parents of the student would not be comfortable with what is taught at the University.



5. First of all, I read an older edition of Buckley's book, but I assume the two are very close. In "God and Man at Yale", Buckley concentrates on how Christianity, individualism, and capitalism are looked at by different professors and textbooks. He feels that these beliefs and values are largely either underrepresented or outright attacked. I found Buckley's comments on individual teachers to often be quite interesting though these men are almost certainly retired or dead now. The discussion on economics textbooks was generally drier than the rest of the book, but someone who enjoys the topic may find it very interesting. Buckley's solutions to the problem make me a little uncomfortable though I feel some of those opposed to Buckley's ideals go pretty far themselves. In truth, conservatives will probably enjoy the book while liberals probably wont. I would recommend it to those interested in 1950s education, how students are influenced by what they learn, and probably to William Buckley fans (this is the first book I read by him so I admittedly wouldn't be the best person to judge in that department). Overall, it was an interesting read.

5 comments about Caesar: Life of a Colossus.

1. This is a book I would recommend to anyone with some curiousity about "how Rome worked"...provided the reader has a strong mental filter to separate fact from fiction. It is readable, and the author's English is delightful, in the sense that there is something of the turn of the Century (19th-to-20th - not 20th-to-21st) elegance in it. The focus is perhaps more on the "workings of Rome" than on Caesar's most important years affecting Rome - the author is a bit too shy to appear to "endorse a Dictator". And, this is the weakness of the book. It is somewhat like historical works published in the Soviet era in the Soviet Union or one of its satellites. (Yevgeniy Tarlé's works on Napolean and Talleyrand come to mind [ Bonaparte, ]. Superb history, but Tarlé, a Soviet author, must pay homage to dialectic materialism).. In this case the author cannot keep himself from paying homage to all the "important" concepts that make a British academic "politicaly acceptable". Why, oh why, do so many today contaminate their excellent work with the eager additions to show that their thinking, by they way, corresponds to what is required? In this respect, the Introduction is outright painful. Also, to be popular in the early 21st Century, we must write about sex, sex, sex... Of course, we are just speculating, and therefore to avoid any danger of being accused of mixing history with fiction, we put in some weasel-words when we have no sources... The reason why this otherwise excellent work does not get five stars is the author's self-demeaning with his eagerness to prove that he is Politically Correct.



2. Prior to this Caesar biography we essentially had Shakespeare's version and, in modern times, Meier's as respectively the popular and definitive versions of Caesar's life. This new biography reminds us once and for all that Shakespeare's play is a dramatic butchery. And it makes by comparison Meier's version read like a dry text book bereft of the dramatic juice and blood that were in fact Caesar's life. As a coincidental aside, Goldsworthy lives up to his name as a biographical historian. It requires a master of both genres to weave together the complex political machinations and upheavals, ethnic infighting, cultural norms, economic compulsions, military dispositions, and personal ambitions in Caesar's Rome that helped form who he was as, ultimately, a man. As a fairly knowledgeable fan of Julius Caesar the historical figure I found this book enlightening. As a fan of Caesar the man, I found it completely enjoyable.



3. Adrian Goldsworthy did a fantastic job in writing this book. It's well written, painstakingly researched, and has little bias whatsoever. This is the second biography I've read on Caesar, and while the first [Julius Caesar by Philip Freeman] was a good introduction to the man, I found this book to be infinitely more informative and intriguing. At times the paragraphs can get a bit lengthy but after about 20 pages I got used to the writing style. The story is jam-packed with details that would escape most historians, but Goldsworthy presents them as a vital tool to help better explain just how complex the Roman world was at the time of Julius Caesar. I could go on and on about the various elements included in the book that helped make it one of the most enjoyable historical works I've read to date, but I don't mean to bore any readers of this review. To sum it all up, I must say that I was blown away by the scholarship I found in this book and highly, highly recommend it.



4. Andrian Goldsworthy paints a picture of Caesar as a reluctant dictator--a man who was only looking for the respect he deserved. When his opponents in the government forced his hand by trying to take away everything that he had worked hard for, then Caesar was left with no choice--destroy or be destroyed. Unlike other great conquerors, Caesar was very mild, often pardoning those who fought against him and even including them in his government. It seemed almost as if he were trying to offer chances to those who didn't give him any chances. It seems that it is this boost of reputation is what Caesar was really craving.
   
   I highly recommend this book to anyone who would like to learn about Caesar's life and how the politics of his day helped shape who he was as a person and how it influenced his actions.



5. I disagree with some of the reviews that say Caesar doesn't come to life in this book, I believe he does. You get into his mind, a man who simply dominated life like no other Roman. Admittedly the coverage was skimp on Caesar's time as a dictator, but Goldsworthy does his best in the room to describe the most important and interesting periods of Caesar's life. My favorite part about Goldsworthy is that he tells you what is known from our sources and what is pure speculation. He doesn't speculate himself as best he can which I like, and he doesn't try to make Caesar into Hitler as some modern revisionist historians have tried to do. He simply lays out the facts of what happened and lets the reader decide for himself about Caesar.

5 comments about Fear and Loathing in America : The Brutal Odyssey of an Outlaw Journalist.

1. If Volume I of the trilogy is "Rebel with a Cause (Writing)," then Volume II (this volume) is "Whining for Dollars." If you are new to Hunter S. Thompson, start with Volume 1 -- it will give you a much better feeling of who this man was, especially with regard to the risks he was willing to take to tell a good story. If you are interested in politics of the 1960's and early 1970's, and want to read about all his problems with getting paid, this is the volume for you. Having said all that, HST was truly incredible: in 1968 HST recognized Bob Dylan as the icon of the 60s; HST was everywhere -- from the Matrix, the womb of The Jefferson Airplane in San Francisco, to Saigon in April 1975, during the evacuation; and as a political junkie, HST could see the impeachment of Richard Nixon coming long before it did, as well as the eventual fall of South Vietnam. The first volume is much wilder, and even more sentimental; by Volume II, HST is starting to settle down.



2. The second installment in HST's selected letters, Fear & Loathing in America has proved to be a fascinating read. Beginning in the 1950's, HST keep carbon copies of all his letters for filing purposes in the belief that one day he would be a famous writer and his correspondence would be published. Like so many other Thompson predictions, this one proved true. The range and scope of the letters contained in this volume is simply amazing. HST had contacts and correspondence across almost every section of American society from Jimmy Carter, Pat Buchan, Gorge McGovern, and Walter Mondale at one end of the spectrum to Ken Kesey, Tom Wolfe, Jann Wenner, and Oscar Acosta at the other end.
   
   The time period covered by these letters have proven to be a crucial period in modern history and nobody should be without a view from HST's side of things. From the 68' Democratic National Convention to the 75' American withdrawal from Vietnam, the Mint 400 in Vegas to his own personal bid to run for Sheriff of Pitkin County (Aspen) on the Mescaline ticket, HST was there and more often than not part of the action. In this regards his letters read like a quasi-autobiography, tracing the twists and turns of his life throughout this turbulent period of American history. For the creator of Gonzo Journalism, this was his defining period.
   
   It is certainly preferable to start with the first volume HST's published letter, if for nothing else it provides a better context for this volume. I have to confess that I enjoyed vol. 2 more than the first, so I guess it really depends on what you are after. I found myself laughing out loud at numerous occasions while at other times rather stunned at the insight and predictive nature of some of the correspondence, specifically the politically orientated ones. Of course there are other times when HST degenerates into pure gibberish, but all the parts add up to give a composite picture of that unique and individual whole we have come to know as Hunter. So read this book when you get the chance or anything else by HST for that matter. For me he is the best US writer of the last 50 years and I do not say that lightly.



3. This is my second attempt at writing a review about that ATAVISTIC GIBBERISH called fear and loathing in america.I guess the review GESTAPO didn't like my totally honest review of HST's schizophrenic prose, in my first review(to their credit) i did say some things about HST that would make even DR.Gonzo, go GONZO, LOL!!!
   The MOST DISGUSTING part of this book is on page 199-200 when he offers his writing services for the kennedy's inre: to Mary jo kopechne's SO-CALLED ACCIDENTAL DEATH :-((( Can anyone be more pathetic than that???
   I could go on and on about this ATAVISTIC GIBBERISH but my LOATHING will undoubtedly draw more attention from the review gestapo.
   Don't get me wrong, there are some funny letters from HST and guest, but the DISGUSTING OUTWAY THE HUMOR by 10 to 1 :-(((
   Hopefully this review will see the light of day, i truely believe it needs to be read, there's been enough GIBBERISH from his syncophantic minions.



4. For fans of the good Dr., This rates right up there with his other top sellers.His slant on the American Dream is certinally unique.



5. Short stories. Motivated to stay up all night, blow something up or just ponder.

5 comments about Master of the Senate: The Years of Lyndon Johnson, (Vintage).

1. Caro is a master writer. I found his book 'The Power Broker' about Robert Moses easily one of my top ten reads of all time, five star all the way. Johnson to me was not quite as interesting, but nevertheless this is a top notch book showing how Johnson came into the Senate and transformed it. No matter what one thinks of Johnson, if one is a student of American politics, this is a worthwhile book as it shows the influence of one man and what can be done. He was no saint, but he did manage to get things done. I am slowly working my way through it, it's been about 2 years, I keep picking it up and putting it down, but learn something every time.



2. Despite what you think of LBJ, and I don't think much of him, Robert Caro's series on Johnson far surpasses any other books that have come before or after on Lyndon Johnson. In all three of Caro's volumes, he includes mini biographies of important people in Lyndon's life. In this volume, Senator Richard Russell, jr. of Georgia is given his due, and his importance as friend and adviser to LBJ. Also, the first 100 pages include a history of the US senate that could stand alone as a book unto itself. I can't wait for Caro's fourth volume, alas it probably won't be out for another five years.



3. Anyone know? This is a masterful book series. The one on LBJ's presidency should be the best.



4. I had read Robert Caro's book on Robert Moses, and I found Master of the Senate to be an equally well-written and insightful read about an even more complicated figure. Readers get a real sense of the dark character of Lyndon Johnson. The book also offers a revealing view of the inner workings of the U.S. Senate. His portraits of Richard Russell and Sam Rayburn are particularly poignant. This book is highly recommended for anyone interested in 20th-century U.S. history, and for anyone who enjoys monumental biographies.



5. Caro's triology on LBJ is unrivaled, and this volume might lay claim to the best of the bunch. LBJ's genius in leading the Senate is put on display, but also his raw ambition and dishonesty. Caro shows how LBJ is a model of how to lead and not to lead at the same time.

5 comments about Loose Girl: A Memoir of Promiscuity.

1. For a memoir about promiscuity, there is surprisingly very little about sex. Loose Girl is so much more than a tale about a promiscuous girl. It is a gripping and courageous account of one woman's prolonged struggle with shame and insatiable need.
   
   There is a certain element of seduction buried in the way that author Kerry Cohen frames her poignant story. Only a few pages in, I found myself hopelessly seduced by her impressive ability to captivate the attention of her readers. She is undoubtedly an extremely talented writer and a woman who has clearly mastered a tremendous amount of emotional and psychological growth. Luckily for her audience, she was brave enough to share the painful lessons of her own evolution so that others might learn from her mistakes. It's no surprise that this book has its fair share of critics, but hopefully readers will be wise enough to judge for themselves.
   
   In my opinion, Loose Girl is worth well more than its entertainment value alone. It exposes not only the author's painful past but also the fundamental cracks within the human condition, by which we are all afflicted in some way. It acknowledges the realities of our frailties and dissects the incessant agony of our need, not necessarily in a sexual manner but in a human way. Anyone who has ever felt unworthy, unloved or unsatisfied in any way should definitely pick up a copy of this book.



2. Not about sex but a girl's journey into understanding the double standard game that is out there between girls and guys. It's heartfelt writing and I really felt compassion for the charachter.



3. I was fortunate enough to read a review copy. A MUST READ. Not to be missed. compelling, frightening, heart wrenching, fast paced, horrifying, the sorrowful mysteries. The hollowness of her life makes me vomit. Sadly she can't give, but only take. In the last few pages there is redemption.
   
   I would be curious if young women think this is a typical experience for girls of the writer's age. Her escapades seem to begin in the very early teen years and end perhaps in her mid-twenties. What surprised me also was the unwillingness of some of the young men to jump into bed quickly with her.



4. Most of this book was written with such unflinching honesty, that the poor ending and lack of self-examination or understanding was that much more of a disappointment and shock.
   
   While the author traces her history of longing for physical attention, I felt for the uncertain teenager who believed her worth came solely from males. I believe this is a trap that is easy for any young woman to fall into, but Cohen did so with a vengeance, sleeping her way through high school, college, and beyond.
   
   While I appreciate her bare-bones honesty, I found the book lacking in any sort of self-analysis. I never got the sense that Cohen understood why she felt so undeserving of love, nor why she stayed in unfulfilling, dysfunctional relationships.
   
   Suddenly, she seems "recovered," though I wonder if she truly has made her way out of the abyss. Instead, I think she just replaced one relationship with another. The book ends on a high note, but I think it will be just a matter of time before her insecurities suck her back into her black hole.



5. Loose Girl: a memoir of promiscuity was engaging from beginning to end. I can tell I enjoy something when I can read for at least 30 minutes straight without paying attention to anything else (I usually get distracted very easily). This book hooks you and doesn't let go of you until the end. Around the age of 11-12 Kerry discovers the world of boys and how she can capture their attention and hopefully love as well. She basically becomes addicted to boys and eventually sex as well. She reflects it back onto her upbringing, her mom basically leaving her and her sister behind to start her own life and her father that basically let her do whatever she wanted. I actually identified more so with Kerry's sister, Tyler so it was interesting to read about how Kerry didn't understand her sister and her behavior.
   
   Seeing what Kerry has gone through and what she has achieved in her life definitely makes her a role model. People can't be "cured" of their addictions with the snap of their finger. She realizes that she can take it day by day and can still be OK. She has written fiction and also is a practicing psychotherapist.
   
   I do wish the ending/resolution didn't happen so quickly but this is a memoir so she wrote it how it happened. Maybe I would have liked the book to extend a bit further into her life than where it stopped. All and all a very engaging and important memoir.