5 comments about Nancy Cunard: Heiress, Muse, Political Idealist.

1. Regrettably, this biography is seriously flawed, frankly a disgrace, in respect of Henry Crowder and throughout. There is hardly a page in the book without demonstrable error of fact, misrepresentation, unfounded speculation or garbled citation. Columbia University Press were twice alerted that there were problems when an advance proof fell into the present writer's hands two or three months before publication. The Press did not respond. Caroline Weber's New York Times review is foolish in the extreme. Anne Chisholm's 1979 biography remains indispensable. While Gordon has uncovered new material (not about Henry Crowder in which she is particularly deficient) she has not been able to make sense of it. The true story of Crowder is told in the book+CD Listening for Henry Crowder scheduled fall 2007.
   
   Although readers must judge for themselves, it is incumbent upon someone or other who has studied some of the particulars to point out the book's shortcomings, which are drastic. The book's flamboyant style may appear to be "a good read". All the more reason to alert the general reader. That Cunard's life was replete with extraordinary events and relationships does not confer upon the biographer the right to play fast and loose. Such treatment may befit an exploitative Hollywood movie but not a literary documentation with academic credentials. It may be that few care. Neverthless . . . In respect of, for example, Crowder, by Cunard's admission the single most important man in her life, a good deal of the information the author needed had been available to her for some years in an exploratory article in a journal, which was also posted online. Either she chose to ignore it or she did not find it, though it was easy to find. Unfortunately, she does not even get the facts right from the sources she does use and her misdemeanors extend far beyond that particular subject. (Crowder does not even figure in a list of Cunard's friends in an interview with the author on the publisher's website, while another, with whom she had no relationship whatsoever, is proposed as a lover.)
   
   In response to a comment on my original brief posting: I have mentioned my forthcoming book on Crowder's life (which will not receive wide distribution or review) and Anne Chisholm's earlier, easily available, elegant, sober, generous, decent biography of Cunard, which is grudgingly noted and casually mistreated by Gordon, in order to give general readers the opportunity to find other takes on Cunard, which they might otherwise miss, and so allow them to judge from a well-informed position.



2. I just finished Lois Gordon's deeply moving tale of an unbelievably heroic, remarkable woman about whom I knew very little. I now feel I know the soul of Nancy Cunard, thanks to the author's wonderfully engaging, well-documented presentation. The book's fluent style and breadth of information are impressive. I agree with the majority here who have praised this fascinating biography. Buy this book, settle into your favorite chair, and prepare to meet the caring, complex, flawed, passionate woman that was Nancy Cunard.



3. This is a brilliant, sensitive, thoroughly researched biography which is a model example of how such things should be done. The author writes of the First World War experiences in London as if she had personally lived through them. Her understanding of the complex and bizarre Nancy Cunard, of her weird mother, of her strange friends, of her insane promiscuity, of her serial preying upon the creative elite by means of 'genital consumption', of her impossible psychlogy, of the whole phantasmagoria which Nancy Cunard represented, are really a triumph of empathy and insight, as well as of organisation of material. Lois Gordon's ability to master large volumes of action and hysteria without flinching qualify her for a top military command.



4. A facinating look at a most interesting woman. Well ahead of her time. Also many insights to a span of recent history often neglected.



5. If Lois Gordon was writing about a fictional character she could not have told a story of a more exciting person than Nancy Cunard. However, Nancy Cunard was indeed an individual who lived in the early part of last century whose exploits, altruism, and literary talent were extraordinary by any standards. She was a legendary beauty, with a great mind, who was extremely devoted to the disadvantaged people of the world and their struggles. This is an unusual and remarkable combination of qualities that is brilliantly depicted throughout this wonderful book. Simply, I could not put the book down once I had started reading. I can highly recommend it.

3 comments about In Front of Your Nose, 1945-1950 (Collected Essays Journalism and Letters of George Orwell).

1. Essays and journalism and very good footnotes deal with starvation in Europe, prevention of literature, Gandhi, an attempt to form an organization which would deal with issues like expelling people from their homes, people forced back to Soviet Russia, and much more including civil liberities for anarchists.



2. The late James J. Martin stated that one could learn great prose from reading George Orwell. Orwell's anthology titled IN FRONT OF YOUR NOSE is a good book to learn political insight and excellent writing. Orwell was not only knowledgeable, but he expressed some of the political tragedies and problems of the 20 th. century in this book. Readers should note this book is the fourth volume of essays of Orwell's essays literary criticism, political protest, etc.
   
   Orwell was one of the very few who realized what a disaster W.W. II was for both Europeans and Asians. His essays on the forced repatriation of millions to the Soviet Union to miserable die in concentration camps were among the first to publicize this tragedy. Orwell's essays were blunt in stating that the only real winner from W.W. II was Big Communism especially in lieu of the rapid disintegration of the British Empire.
   
   Orwell gave a good description of the inconsistent thinking of the British people. The British wanted total victory at any cost, and found themselves in bad economic shape. Many British complained about the immigration of Polish refugees to mine coal in Great Britain. Yet, the British public also complained (whined) about coal shortages. Orwell indicated the inconsistency of these remarks and commented that the British failed to see the logic between acts and consequences. Orwell Presented a clear picture of what was to occur with the British Empire which disintegrated rapidly after "victory" during W.W. II.
   
   Orwell's essay on Gandhi is an interesting case study of Orwell's honest assessment of political leaders. Orwell is clear that he could not live like Gandhi, and Orwell admitted that he probably could be friends with the Hindu leader. Yet,Orwell highly praised Gandhi's courage, policy of nonviolent resistence to the British rules, and Gandhi's honesty. Orwell gave Gandhi praise for being honest and a decent man among political rogues, hypocrites, and cowards. Whether one agrees with Gandhi, he was indeed a brave, honest man. Among poltical figures these are rare traits indeed.
   
   This reviewer disagrees with part of Orwell's criticism of James Burnham. Orwell correctly shows Burnham's errors in predicting the outcome of W.W.II. However, Orwell should have recognized Burnham's book THE MANAGERIAL REVOLUTION was a solid account that political and economic affairs were to be controlled by managers and "experts" rather than a market economy and by traditional political processes.
   
   Orwell's anthology has interesting essays of literary criticism and correspondence. Orwell was suprisingly well versed with continental European poltical leaders and literary figures. There is an interesting letter that Orwell wrote to Arther Koestler, author of DARKNESS AT NOON,in which Orwell favorably compares this book with Orwell's own 1984.
   
   Orwell also has some disturbing remarks regarding "allied" abuse and torture of defeated German prisoners of war. Orwell reflected that he remembered British and U.S. propaganda against the Germans before and during W.W. II. Yet, right in front of his nose, the "allies" were acting in the same beastial manner against those caught on the wrong side of the war. This was quite disturbing to Orwell, or any thoughtful person.
   
   This reviewer has always been very impressed with Orwell's work. Any thoughtful individual who is not afraid of clear writing, honesty, and truth would enjoy Orwell. Unfortunately, the number of such people is small. As Orwell wrote one time, propaganda and lying do not decieve people. Propaganda and lying only help people who want to be deceived.



3. This fourth volume concludes the excellent essay collection from a man who died much too young and with whom I do by far not always agree, but who provided me a very satisfying and instructive reading experience.
   I chose the headline from one of the essays in this volume because it gives Orwell in a nutshell, including my own ambiguities about him. He argues against the Soviet apologists, in the early post war time, who say that one must break eggs to make an omelette. (Is that a Lenin quote, btw?) His question: so where is the omelette? strikes me as witty and appropriate, but at second glance as callous and cruel. After all he seems to imply that yes, you may kill a few million people for a 'good' purpose, but the purpose must be met.
   In such moments Orwell is deserted by his own devotion to clarity and he gets caught in his own puns. That does happen to him. As much as he lambasts against bad language, he will write e.g. 'I could multiply these examples endlessly' (talking about bad stories from the Soviet Union), when he actually means, he could add to these examples for some time.
   Reading the man for 4 volumes gives me the conviction, that this suspicious interpretation of mine is unfair. No, he would not have intended to mean that.
   The title 'In Front of Your Nose' refers to our ability to harbor contradictory notions without suffering too much from it: the English intelligencia in the 30s was able to oppose Hitler as well as disarmament and conscription. Another example: the gospel of Matthew tells us that Jesus descended from Abraham and David through his father Josef, and then proceeds to tell us that Josef was in fact not the father. (I am sure theologists are perfectly able to talk this contradiction away.)
   Vol. 4 has plenty of worth while literary criticism as well, like the previous 3. The essay on good bad books predicts that Uncle Tom will outlive the complete works of Virginia Woolf. (Frankly speaking for me that has already happened.) Jack London could tell his stories well, but they are not well written.
   Let us close our Orwellian peregrination with a timeless reminder: political language is designed to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. Right, my AFs in the much afflicted US?

5 comments about Reporter's Life.

1. This book contains the memoirs of Walter Cronkite, pioneering television journalist. Cronkite begins by describing his childhood briefly, noting that even as a youngster, he was pulled to journalism. He credits a volunteer journalism teacher in his high school for introducing him to the rigors of print journalism, but once started, he was hooked. It was this teacher who taught him the prime importance of getting the facts correct, a value that he would hold primary throughout his career. As a high school student, Cronkite competed in statewide journalistic writing tournaments, and won. After high school, he enrolled in college for a while, but decided that pulling in an income was more important than getting a degree (this was during the Great Depression), a decision which he later came to regret. On a lark, he landed a radio news announcer job in Oklahoma City. Later, he worked for UPI, where he honed his collating and rewriting skills under pressure of constant deadlines. The experience from all of these jobs was to prove invaluable later when he landed a job announcing the news on CBS television. Cronkite was not only one of the first early TV news broadcasters, but the word `news anchorman' was even invented just to describe what he did (or so he claims).
   
   In this book, Cronkite reminisces not only about his career, but also about the big news stories of day. He discusses how television came to play a strong role in politics, starting with the 1952 party conventions, which were the first to be televised. He enumerates the presidents he has known, from Hoover through George Bush, senior, and he compares the effectiveness of each, as well as their relations with the media. He analyzes the forces behind the fateful American build-up in Vietnam, and the eventual pull-out. He also relates how he inadvertedly became involved in negotiating peace between Egypt and Israel. All in all, his tales are fascinating. I usually find political discussion hideously tiresome, but Cronkite manages to make even politics interesting.



2. For me who watched Walter Cronkite almost every night from the 1960's to the 1980's when Dan Rather took over, this is most enlightening book. Behind the scene stories were given for a lot of news stories. Unlike Eric Sevaried, Cronkite never stated any of his personal feelings and comments on the air. Quite a lot of them were found in this book.
   
   Two things bother me. None of the chapters in this book had a topic so the reader is completely unaware of what is in there when he/she starts reading a chapter. In addition, no index is avalable and locating a topic or name is very difficult and time-consuming



3. In a fascinating and thought-provoking autobiography (1996), Walter Cronkite reflects on his career in journalism, from the earliest days in which he listened to radio on a crystal set, through his own participation in world events as a television journalist. Without the ego one usually associates with newscaster-celebrities, Cronkite gives the history of journalism--radio, newspapers, news syndicates, and television--by giving anecdotes from his own long career, always showing what he learned from his mistakes (which he is remarkably candid and often humorous in describing), and giving ample credit to the people who helped him. His thoughtful observations about the impact of television and its negative effects on voting participation, along with his predictions for the future of this country, offer a broader perspective and warning about our national vision.
   
   Cronkite's sense of excitement about journalism is obvious from the earliest days of his career, when he used brief, coded teletype messages to invent play-by-play accounts of football games for his radio audience. By career's end, he was participating in world events, his interview with Anwar Sadat and its follow-up bringing Sadat to Israel in a precedent-setting meeting with Menachim Begin and an eventual peace treaty. As he takes the reader step-by-step through this career, he describes his goals as a young man, his earliest jobs at local newspapers and radio stations, his work with United Press, his press responsibilities overseas during World War II, his work in Russia, and his early foray into television, when other serious journalists were avoiding this medium.
   
   The landmark TV coverage of the 1952 political conventions opened the eyes of the country to how the political system worked in reality. The Nixon and Kennedy interviews in 1960 (and Theodore White's book, The Making of the President), show the power of television to affect outcomes. He gives candid, personal insights into various Presidents, from Franklin Delano Roosevelt through George Bush Senior, including fascinating insights into Eisenhower (far more aware of issues than often thought), JFK (with whom he had mixed experiences), and Jimmy Carter (in his view, the most intelligent President).
   
   It is Cronkite's candor and his ability to see himself as a facilitator of communication, rather than as an ego-driven reporter looking for the landmark "scoop," that makes this autobiography so compelling. When, in his conclusion, he modestly offers his own observations about the end of the twentieth century, based on his experience, the reader pays attention. Mincing no words, Cronkite describes the social, political, and economic evolutions taking place around the world and their potential as revolutions, warning, "They have man's dreams on their side. We don't want to be on the other side." Elegantly written, this is a landmark book in the history of journalism. n Mary Whipple



4. To live the life of Walter Cronkite is to live a thousand years. For nearly half a decade Walter Cronkite served as the voice of reason to millions of Americans who looked to his print, radio, and television reports for information and reassurance. This autobiography covers the life of Walter Cronkite from his early life as a lowly radio announcer to his ultimate stand at the pinnacle of journalism.
   
   As usual, Cronkite's wit is second-to-none and comes through clearly in his prose. Still, he never pulls punches and minces no words regarding the multitude of famous and powerful men and women he met along the way. His engrained honesty and objectivity is a refreshing look to when journalism was an honest art, plagued not by corporate sponsorship.
   
   Cronkite's work not only serves as an interesting look at "Cronkite, the man," but is a work of modern American history, written by the man who lived and reported it all. For a readable, enjoyable look at Cronkite's America, "A Reporter's Life" is one of the best.



5. Walter Cronkite who at one time was among the most famous and celebrated Americans tells his life- story . He does this with the dry and clean prose of the good reporter. He tells of his childhood and early years in Kansas City and in Houston, of his work with UP and later on with CBS, his adventures as a war- correspondent. He traces his career in television including the dramatic coverage of what would be the most politically well- covered in his judgment convention of all, that of 1952. He also writes about his wife Betsy their three - children and his family. He in the end provides an analysis of TV journalism and where it has gone wrong, been replaced by considerations of entertainment. This is a decent book by a very decent and modest man.
   In his final chapter he says that he asked himself whether he could say he had really made a difference. Surprisingly and modestly his answer was 'no'. But for many Americans for many years he was the embodiment of the honest and reliable journalist.

5 comments about Strictly Right: William F. Buckley Jr. and the American Conservative Movement.

1. There have been a number of books published in the last few years tracking the influence of "National Review" on the rise of the American conservative movement. And while all have their merits (at least, the two or three I've read so far all do), this was the most entertaining of the three. That's because in addition to being a history of "Buckleyite" or "National Review conservatism," so-called, it's also -- as the blurb on the back cover says -- "an affectionate portrait of the man who started it all."
   
   The authors are long-time NR writers and editors and close associates of WFB, and so they don't claim to have produced a work with the olympian distance and objectivity (real or feigned) modern historiography seems to require. "Strictly Right" is a candid, relaxed, and very personal look at a man, a magazine, a movement, and the close ties between the three.
   
   Fans of the man and the mag will certainly enjoy the authors' storytelling abilities and their recounting of interesting and half-forgotten episodes. Readers interested in the history of this form of conservatism would, I think, do well to pair this book with Jeff Hart's "The Making of the American Conservative Mind: National Review and Its Times" (2005) which, I think, does a better job placing NR in historical and political context (Bridges and Coyne cite "The Making..." in their bibliography). Hart is another NR insider, of course, and so his book too is fundamentally sympathetic to the people and ideas discussed. He, however, has a jaded view of the magazine's relevance to modern conservatism that -- at least to judge by this book -- Bridges and Coyne do not share.
   
   From uniting selected strands of the Old Right in the 1950s to charting a course between neocons and paleocons today (the authors devote several pages to David Frum's 2003 NR ukase "Unpatriotic Conservatives," which read people like, well, me, out of conservatism ... at least as David Frum defines it), Bridges and Coyne do a fair job showing how NR has shaped how "conservatism" has been defined and understood on the American political spectrum.
   
   When you get right down to it, though, this is a book about William F. Buckley, Jr. And in the absence of any full biography of the man since John B. Judis' "William F. Buckley, Jr.: Patron Saint of the Conservatives" in 1988, it's about the best look we've yet had at the man who can justly claim to have had as much influence as anyone on the political and cultural direction of America in the second half of the 20th century. The admiring tone of this book may put off readers not already sympathetic to man and cause, and certainly points out the need for a more scholarly volume or two on the subject. But conservatives and even libertarians -- particularly the young conservatives Hart argues are disconnected from their historical and philosophical roots -- should find much in these pages to appreciate and enjoy.



2. I was quite disappointed. From its title I was expecting more details about Buckley's influence on the movement but instead there were tidbits with filler about his novels, his ski trips, and his sailing. Those details would have been important in a WFB bio. A reader curious about Buckley's influence on the movement would have instead been looking for what was not found in the book, which is more details about his conflict with the Birchers and the Randians, perhaps his differences with libertarians over immigration, with social conservatives over drug policy. I am hopeful that Hart's book will have more meat to it than the present study.



3. I was very excited to read this book. In fact, I asked for it as a present. I have been following WFB since I was a teenager and couldn't wait to get a full picture of his professional life and his role within conservatism and the Republican Party.
   
   Unfortunately, this is not the book for that.
   
   The book is written from an insider's perspective, but a completely uncritical, cloying one. There is more time spent of social details about NR parties and what type of hostess and decorator Buckley's wife was than on editorial debates and business decisions. I was dumbfounded to have to wade through minute details of who skied with who and which daughter of this important person used to ride horses with this other important person when they were young. You will learn nothing about Firing Line, but a great deal about chateaus by the time you're finished. As another reviewer mentioned, it's also surprising how much space is given to each Buckley novel, including excerpts.
   
   The authors, who were both involved in NR and Republican politics, can't resist being a substantial part of the story, turning it into more of a memoir of their experiences than a true account of Buckley's life and impact. You'll wonder throughout why so much time is spent on Spiro Agnew, who one of the authors worked for. Additionally, they reference themselves throughout with the odd device "one of the present authors" such as "one of the present authors recalls". You'll also find pages of shallow American history, such as a retelling of Vietnam.
   
   Again, I truly wanted to love this book. I hesitate to write such a negative review, but I really feel like you should have a better idea of what to expect. For people who were supposedly such insiders, I don't know that you will gain any actual insight into WFB or learn new details that have not been made public elsewhere. It reads more like a scrapbook for former employees of NR, with an emphasis on staff personalities and health problems, the social calendar and the authors' own experience.



4. Linda Bridges gives us the background on how Buckley and his magazine helped transform the American political landscape. In witty fashion shows how this individual could help save the world while having a lot of fun on the way. Young people may not realize how lonely and beleaguered conservatives felt forty and fifty years ago. Those were heady times for young conservatives as well as the rabble-rousers of the New Left. People took ideas more seriously back then, too, not just the slogans and PR cliches that are our diet today.
   
   Janis Starcs



5. William F. Buckley Jr. is here and there in "Strictly Right." Beginning with what its dust jacket promises ("an affectionate portrait") the book, halfway through, first sheds fresh or exclusive information, then primary sources, then any coherent narrative on Buckley altogether -- ending in weirdly detached conjecture by authors whose orbit from the founder of National Review and patron of modern rightism was close, but not that close.
   
   The drift would be OK if "the American Conservative Movement" were more than a subtitle. As the book progresses, biography is substituted by generic history, borrowed-interest anecdotes, and brittle gossip. The worst offense comes when the authors -- who apparently personally dislike Alfonse D'Amato -- take an opportunity to denigrate the former senator as they recount editorial lunches. Fair enough if they don't care for Al. But where does Buckley figure on that page? He is . . . referenced.
   
   "Strictly Right" is an unsuccessful try at a difficult task. There's a characteristic noted by most who have written about Buckley, which is that Buckley was by all appearances hardworking, focused, private, and a little impersonal. He inclined not to biography but bibliography: fiction; nonfiction; commentary, in print and on television. Even in writing his many, touching eulogies, Buckley focused on the subject rather than on himself. Faced with that kind of reticence, biographers have had to search; or like these authors, really strain.
   
   For those who wish to know the man, you can find William F. Buckley Jr. in the work of William F. Buckley Jr. At the very least you won't find him in this book.

5 comments about New News Out of Africa: Uncovering Africa's Renaissance.

1. Three Stars for an extremely laudable premise, especially considering Africa's renewed efforts at "getting it right". Well written, easy to read piece of work.
   
   However, the writer could have done better by focusing on one sub region at a time. Her extended situation in South Africa allows her a relatively in-depth perception regarding progress and developments within the immediate region.
   
   Her attempt to harness East Africa, West Africa as well as North Africa in this one book drastically watered down what would otherwise have been an extremely great piece of work.
   
   She committed the one grave error most foreign journalists make in reporting on Africa- attempting to lump the entire continent up into one short story. This is regardless of the fact that given the diversity of its societies and economies - a country like Nigeria on its own presents a formidable challenge to analyze in a few paragraphs.
   
   In addition, instead of focusing entirely on supposedly positive news alone, readers will be better served if the writer had given a factual country-by-country report.
   
   If aggregate positive development within the entire continent of Africa can truly be outlined in less than 150 pages, I would not think it worth reporting.
   
   I however think it fair to mention the fact that I lived in West Africa for over 30 years, extensively traveled the continent, still maintain strong ties and am an avid Africa watcher, which somewhat gives me an indepth perception.
   
   This book would probably be a good enough read for the casually interested person.



2. I had very high hopes for "New News Out of Africa," but I was ultimately disappointed.
   
   For someone who knows nothing about contemporary Africa, the book does provide a good introduction to some of the main issues that Africa faces (the legacy of apartheid, AIDS, corruption, NEPAD, the African Union) and elucidates some bright spots on a troubled continent. However, there are several problems with this book, in my opinion.
   
   1) THE FOCUS ON SOUTH AFRICA
   Hunter-Gault focuses disproportionately on South Africa (well over 1/3 of the book). This makes sense since she lives in Johannesburg, but South Africa is hardly representative of Africa as a whole. South Africa has the highest GDP per capita in Africa (higher than even Croatia, Chile, Russia, or Turkey). It has extremely low public debt. And it has a world-class infrastructure. When talking about Africa's future, you cannot compare South Africa to [...] Congo-Kinshasa.
   
   2) NARROW COVERAGE OF AFRICA
   The author's overemphasis on South Africa and the book's short length mean that the rest of Africa gets less attention than it merits. The book is 142 pages (before endnotes) and is printed in large font. It is true that chapter 2 (out of 3) jumps all over Africa, giving little snapshots of the situation in many countries (and it is the best chapter). But the author could have written a book twice as long and gone into greater depth. Moreover, if she had divided the book up into a region-by-region analysis, she might have been able to highlight the real disparities across Africa in terms of development and hope for the future.
   
   3) THE "I" FACTOR
   Readers of "New News Out of Africa" should know that the book is not just about Africa and its recent history. The book is also substantively about Hunter-Gault and her personal relationship to Africa. It is about her experiences in Africa, what Africa has meant to her as an African-American, and which famous people she has interviewed in Africa. This isn't a criticism per se, but prospective buyers should know what to expect. Rather than such a deeply personal aspect, I was hoping for a more dispassionate analysis.
   
   4) SOURCES
   I am one of those people who wants to know where facts come from. And Hunter-Gault cites some amazing facts. So, as I read "New News Out of Africa," I was constantly flipping back to the endnotes, but I was very disappointed to see that most of them come from interviews with Hunter-Gault and from websites.
   Many academic scholars (especially historians, but not sociologists) are wary of interviews since they are highly subjective and often not verifiable.
   And who verifies the websites used? How do we know that the information provided there is accurate? I generally trust websites like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, but what about other sites?
   Some of the information seems to be taken uncritically from these sites. As an example, from one website: She quotes a poem by the "Congoloese poet and politician" Patrice Lumumba. I've heard Lumumba called many things before (postal worker, beer salesman, politician, rebel), but never a poet.
   In the endnotes/bibliography, I was surprised not to see page after page of scholarly analyses, monographs, and academic papers. There are some, but far fewer than warranted.
   
   "New News Out of Africa" does provide a very good introduction to important issues; however, the best passages -- those that are the most useful -- are buried among others and are best excerpted. But herein lies the paradox or the problem. The person new to African studies wouldn't know which passages are better than others, and the Africa expert, who does know, doesn't need an introduction.



3. NEW NEWS shows us that there is, in fact, good news coming out of Africa.
   
   This new book by Charlayne Hunter-Gault provides a lively overview of the political, economic and social progress occurring in many African countries in recent years.
   
   Hunter-Gault, who has lived in South Africa for the past decade, personalizes the narrative with her own firsthand stories as a black female American journalist covering African events for CNN, NPR and the MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour. She frequently contrasts her African experiences with her life in the pre-Civil Rights American South. (As a young woman in 1961, Hunter-Gault famously integrated the University of Georgia amid racial taunts, personal threats, and student riots.) Hunter-Gault's personal anecdotes are perhaps the most compelling part of NEW NEWS.
   
   For those seeking to understand where Africa has been in recent years, and where one hopes it will continue to go, NEW NEWS is an excellent start.



4. Veteran journalist Charlayne Hunter-Gault hits the nail on journalism's head with her latest book, New News Out of Africa: Uncovering Africa's Renaissance. Hunter-Gault, who up until recently was the Johannesburg Bureau Chief for CNN, gives her take on media coverage of Africa. Half of the book is dedicated to her work experience in both pre- and post-apartheid South Africa, while the rest of the book examines what she calls the renaissance occurring in postcolonial Africa with the help of enterprising African journalists. If one only depended on Western media for news about the continent, they would conclude that the only things happening in Africa are war, famine and AIDS. This
   Afro-pessimism is further compounded by patronizing celebrities and Live 8 concerts that claim to be "saving" Africa. While she agrees that atrocities, such as the HIV pandemic and the Darfur genocide should be covered, Hunter-Gault feels that this should be balanced out with the new news about the politicians and activists making a positive impact on the atrocities. "Recalling the old/bad news and putting it in context must also be a part of our new news mission if there is to be any hope of the past instructing the future," she says. Hunter-Gault cites the rise in democratic elections, and, thus, more democratic leaders around the continent as part of the new news. The reporter also recognizes being an African American and a woman has also helped her to "come in right" or fairly report news about Africa. A must read for all journalism students and those who care about Africa's future.



5. Charlayne Hunter-Gault provides a snapshot of life in Africa, from the perspective of someone who has lived and breathed news coverage on the continent for decades. Yes, the book is heavy on South Africa, but as the powerhouse of Africa and the launching point for most of her work, it makes the book more personal and anecdotal - a plus from my perspective.
   
   She is a journalist questioning her industry's poor coverage of the continent -- that is the heart of the book. It is not meant to be an academic book or the definitive word on Africa. New News presents a moment in time. She addresses the sad fact that most Westerners have a severely skewed perspective of the continent, largely due to doomsday media coverage.
   
   New News was a modest attempt to give some balance to what Hunter-Gault calls the four D's of the African Apocalypse. Yes, I would like to read more, but was grateful for the 100-some pages of honest, first-hand analysis.

5 comments about Volunteer Slavery: My Authentic Negro Experience.

1. The only other author I ever read who so effectively combined self-pity and wry humor was Erica Jong. Jill Nelson turns a wicked phrase and makes her characters and her situations jump to life. I laughed aloud at her description of her teenage daughter telling her "Mom, get a life!" in response to her lecturing about black conciousness. All through the book I kept wondering where Ms. Nelson's gripes came from. Because her dad left her mom for a white woman, as recounted in the book? She grew up in plush surroundings, with summers on Martha's Vineyard. As the number of unread pages shrank, I kept wondering if Ku Kluxers in white sheets were going to suddenly show up in the book to explain her bitter feelings about white males. Ms. Nelson said that white men are priveleged, but believe me, we too can be put through the grinder. I'm also a former newspaper reporter, born the same year as Ms. Nelson. When she complained about her reporting duries at the Washington Post, saying "I was too old to chase fire engines," I had to laugh. That's exactly what I was doing at another paper at the time she said that. I don't buy what Jill Nelson says, but I did enjoy the way she tells it.



2. As an African-American journalist, I found Jill Nelson's book to be very real. Those who criticize the book because Nelson strikes them as naive are missing the point, on at least two levels.

   In the first place, though she naturally gets into certain generalities, the book is primarily about HER experience. It's not intended to be a handbook for reporters who are climbing the corporate ladder. Given her past, and her particular personality, this is the story of how she happened to react to a specific set of circumstances. How one judges her actions should be different from the way someone judges the book itself.

   And secondly, to the extent that the book does have a larger intent, it calls for the dismantling of an outrageously unfair system. Should we all just accept the status quo, and find clever ways to navigate our way past pettiness and stupidity, or strive for a sane alternative?

   The fact is that Nelson has done just fine since she left the Post. Viewed in that context, the book is a testament to her courage, and her insistence on personal dignity.




3. Volunteer Slavery is STILL the book! Family, friends and coworkers are probably sick and tired of hearing me raving about the revealing, blistering and gossipy tell-all memoir! It's been nearly 10 years since the book was published, but I still regularly reread certain passages when I need inspiration, a good laugh, or a clearer understanding of the journalistic imbroglio with which I frequently have to deal with--after more than 15 years in the business!! Celebrate the anniversary of the BEST book EVER written about what it's REALLY like being a black journalist on the plantation...the newsroom at a daily newspaper!!



4. It is ironic yet predictable that most of the people who don't "get" this book, tend to be individuals who are either not female, African American or both. Jill Nelson wrote an honest critique of the experience that many African American women go through when trying to attain the proverbial golden rings in corporate America. I am sorry some folks could not relate or understand Ms. Nelson's book because the points she brings up are true and still reflective of the socialogical culture most African Americans live in today--approximately twenty years later. The patriarchal blindness that many in this culture experience that prevents them from understanding or relating to another individual or cultures experiences is sad yet expected The best that Ms. Nelson and other writers like her can do is just tell the story and let those who get "it" get it.

   Were some of her experiences hard to hear? Most definitely. Were the experiences unique to her? Absolutely not. Ms. Nelson says on in chapter 2, that she has been doing the standard Negro balancing act which is "blurring the edges of [her] being so that they [white people] don't feel intimidated." There are few African Americans, I would venture to guess, who haven't experienced this feeling at one time or another, yet it is virtually impossible to communicate this experience in a way that is understandable to someone who hasn't had to always be "aware" of how they are perceived and how those perceptions can affect other African Americans as well. Ms. Nelson does an excellent job explaining these details and if some people are still clueless, well, it's through no fault of her skill as a writer.

   Keep on shedding a spotlight on these issues Ms. Nelson. There are a few out there who are truly looking for the light.




5. Jill Nelson is the modern day Harriet Tubman, leading the mentally enslaved from the chains of industrial oppression to the freedom of self-determined realization. If you read this missive and don't ask yourself if you've ever compromised your integrity to further someone else's capitalist agenda, you've missed the point of this brilliant body of work. Angst, inner turmoil, and introspection abound on the pages and tell the tale of a woman trapped in the web of office politics and backstabbing that eat at your joy, that erode your sense of self-worth. What is the price of voluntarily whitewashing your identity to please people with an agenda that does not validate or acknowledge the talents you bring to the table as a person of color? It's so much more than the reflections of a sista who got a position with the Washington Post who got a case of buyer's remorse and didn't like her job. This is the impetus to assess what it is that is important in life and to run towards freedom.

5 comments about H.L. Mencken on Religion.

1. I've read numerous Mencken anthologies, and I think this one is the best. His commentaries on fundamentalist attacks on both evolution and the wall between church and state are as relevant now as they were when he wrote them in the 1920s and 1930s. Moreover, as anyone who's ever read Mencken can attest, the man was a brilliant stylist and frequently hysterically funny. Oh, how the man could write! In contrast to the intellectually lazy media hacks of today, Mencken is sound and fury signifying something.



2. An excellent read if you are looking for confirmation of the fact that all religious extremists are insane. This would, of course, include Muslim as well as Bible Belt loonies. Mr. Mencken was a long ways ahead of his time in recognising this and savages ALL religious dingbats, home grown or imported.



3. Considering most of the articles were written in the 1920s, one is shocked by how timely, fitting and appropriate many of his comments are. The rise of fundie thinking at the turn of last century lasted until the Scopes trial - which is brilliantly covered in this book. (Mencken attended the trial, and covered it with scathing wit) Then, it collapsed. it took the fundies until the late '80s, the 1980s that is, to return to their destructive power that they again hold in our society.
   
   This collection is entertaining, amusing and to some extent, it makes one angry. Why? because we are having to battle with half-wits, nit-wits, baptists, and other witless religions as they try to force their ideas onto others, just as they tried and failed before. Mencken provides an interesting slice of history, as well as a wonderful view of faith healing, the inability of the fundies to hold a rational thought and the dangers of religious leaders impacting political and social policy.
   
   I would strongly recommend this book for anyone thinking about home schooling or considering sending their poor offspring to a religious school. This book will help make up your mind.



4. If we spoke of blacks and Jews like the other commentators speak of Christians, they would no doubt be blacklisted and widely renounced. As it is, Mencken offers nothing to the intellectual study of religion and philosophy except for an eloquent way to say he "doesn't like it." None the less, it would appear from the reviews of others that if you agree with Mencken's athiest world-view, you will indeed enjoy having him fuel you fire. For me, I like a little more philosophy and a little less rhetoric.



5. Even a cursory reading of this collection reveals interesting nuances to Mencken's views on religion that both fans and foes may have missed. It is soon evident that Mencken was more of a religious skeptic or agnostic than the atheist he was frequently taken to be. He certainly did not believe in a personal god, and believed that positive evidence for the existance of a god is unlikely to appear. Nontheless, he was willing to grant the bare possibility of a god. It would seem that like Sartre's grandmother, Mencken's scepticism kept him from being a thoroughgoing atheist.
   
   What really stirred Mencken's bile was the behavior of much of God's fan club here on Earth, many of whom he experenced as being at least intellectually dishonest (if not worse) and dishonorable. Mixed with this was a kind of bemused wonderment at the gullibility of the bulk of his fellow Americans, who seemed ever eager "to believe that Jonah swallowed the whale, or vice-versa." His early career as a Baltimore newspaper reporter observing the Christian nuisances pestering the skid-row bums (see his "Christmas Story"), 'working girls', saloon habitues, and all-around plain folk seems to have ground his rapier to a permanent sharp edge. Was he fair? I don't think he ever pretended he was. His mission, as he saw it, was to apply the lash of verifiable truth to the backs of pious frauds and their dupes. They were perfectly free to reply (and they did) using whatever sort of arguments or language they pleased.
   
   Still, he was not an "anthopophagous atheist of the sort who goes around scaring old ladies", as he once put it. In tones that curiously echo Santayana, he expresses fulsome admiration for the Catholic Church, finding the 'poetry' of the Mass to be enchantingly beautiful; and Church insistance that doctrine was for Rome to decide to be shrewd policy. More interestingly, for a man reputed to be a sour misanthrope, he formed real and lasting friendships with clergy such as Bishop James Cannon of the United Methodist Church--an ardent Prohibitionist! (Normally Mencken consigned Prohibitionists to the lowest circle of his Inferno.)
   
   If Mencken was neither terribly original nor especially profound on the subject of religion; still he--like Mark Twain--put the case for doubt in a frequently hilarious and unforgettable fashion that still serves to kick open otherwise seemingly-closed arguments and minds. This is probably a greater service to civilization than any number of tomes written by philosophers that fell dead-born from the press.

5 comments about This Just In: What I Couldn't Tell You on TV.

1. Bob Schieffer is not only an outstanding reporter and anchor but an excellent story teller as well. His accounts of the history he has seen make the reader feel a part of the story. Highly recommended to anybody interested in knowing more about the stories that have shaped our lives.



2. I enjoyed this book because it gave an insider's perspective on many of the most important news stories of my lifetime. Having worked for a CBS affiliate in the early 80s, it brought back many memories. But what I took away was a sense of Bob Schieffer's genuine, unflashy but solid character. I've never met him, but I watched his work over the years as the "backup" anchor for CBS News. Stars have come and gone, but he has always handled that duty with quiet grace. He was never one to grand-stand, to wax with righteous indignation or pomposity. He's never tried a special sweater or a silly signoff (remember "Courage"?) to boost his ratings. I'll bet he never even owned a blow dryer. Just did his job, said his piece, bringing hard work and common sense to the task. To me, this book was a heartening reminder that the basics really can pay off in the long run.



3. Bob Schieffer who spent his life in journalism and was the anchor of 'Face the Nation'. He offers a behind-the-scenes account of his more than forty years in journalism, including coverage of the White House, the Pentagon, the State Department, and Capitol Hill. Mr. Schieffer also discusses his reporting of Kennedy's assassination, the civil rights movement, Vietnam, Watergate and September 11, 2001.
   
   You can tell that he enjoyed his career as a journalist and seems to be honest in his recollection of his career. And his brushes with those he interacted with. Though he does name drop and seem to let us know when ever fate favored him. Other then some of the few self-serving statements on his personal life and social climbing, his anecdotes are still worth reading. Even though he seems to never have met a person he didn't like. Do not expect to learn anything new, but it will jog your memory of many familiar events.



4. Schieffer is a good storyteller and has seen a lot of important news from the last 40 years. He also manages to have something nice to say about nearly everyone he discusses. This book is certainly not a spiteful political diatribe, and is generally very pleasant.
   
   I gave the book 4 stars because of one small point that nagged me as I read the book. For the Nixon era, he interviews many of the important players in Nixon's administration, or at least consults their memoirs, including Nixon himself, Melvin Laird and H.R. Haldeman. The one glaring exception is Chuck Colson, who has written very thoughtfully about the role he played in the Nixon administration, is very contrite for the crimes he committed during that period, and has done a world of good in this country's prisons since having served his own time. Colson very candidly described the m.o. of the administration as a flawed "ends justifies the means" mentality. Why would Schieffer not interview him, or at least consult the significant body of work Colson has produced on the subject?
   
   In general though, I thought it was a very evenhanded and fair-minded account, and Schieffer deserves kudos.



5. I got the book to have it signed by its author Bob Schieffer. Unfortunately, the book was not in a good condition at all. Half of the front page was ripped off and there was a "low prize" button on the cover that I could not get off.

5 comments about Right Turns: From Liberal Activist to Conservative Champion in 35 Unconventional Lessons.

1. I'm a little puzzled by some of the negative comments from reviewers regarding the book and, broadly speaking, the character of the author. I've just about finished the book and have found little in the way of blanket invectives that some accuse him of casting on "Liberals". Yes, he relentlessly attacks those who he finds to be disingenuous, self-servers (Vietnam war protesters - driven by fear of the draft more than the geopolitical consequences of the US military engagement), angry and intolerant radical secularists, and smug self-righteous Hollywood sycophants. But Medved goes out of his way to point out the decency and good-nature of a young Hillary Clinton; the sincerity and seriousness of Barbra Streisand as a mother seeking spiritual enrichment for her teenage son; and the fact that a high-level Clinton associate, Lanny Davis, is still one of his most valued friends.
   
   He is, no doubt, a passionate advocate for the values he's cultivated and informed in a very interesting lifetime of enthusiastic immersion in anything he seemed to stumble into. He can sometimes seem a little overbearing in his confidence and grand assertions - but I think any fair reading of this values-focused autobiography will find his intellectual and emotional honesty compelling whether or not ultimately convincing.
   
   Relax a little. Don't get caught up in eye-rolling even while he occasionally waxes eloquent on some credulity-straining events in his apparently charmed life and you'll be rewarded with a series of amusing stories, thought-provoking observations and an overall engaging read.



2. Heard Michael Medved read his autobiography, RIGHT TURNS:
   FROM LIBERAL ACTIVIST TO CONERVATIVE CHAMPION
   IN 35 UNCONVENTIONAL LESSONS and must say I was
   impressed--though I don't agree with all his political beliefs.
   
   Yet that's what makes the book so interesting; i.e., that
   Medved gets you to think . . . he has always done that
   for me, even since I started to watch him back when he reviewed
   movies on PBS . . . his opinions were often funny, but they
   were also much more honest than those of his colleague
   Jeffrey Lyons (who could find something admirable in almost any
   film). . . I also got a kick out of his "Golden Turkey Awards,"
   presented to the very worst efforts in filmmaking.
   
   When he described his early liberal leanings, I could
   relate to much of what he said--particularly when he talked
   about Allard Lowenstein, one of my political heroes . . . how
   he transformed to become conservative kept my attention,
   as did his becoming increasingly aligned with Orthodox
   Judaism . . . and when he followed-up an unsuccessful
   first marriage with a loving second one, I found myself
   feeling glad for Medved.
   
   Parts of RIGHT TURNS are funny; much of it is thought-provoking.



3. Michael's book is an example of what happens when adolescents mature. When one starts working and has a family to support they cannot remain liberal unless they are insane. Liberalism is a mental disorder but it can be healed with the right amount of encouragement and soul searching by the sick one.



4. Right Turns: From Liberal Activist to Conservative Champion in 35 Unconventional Lessons
   
   What an amazing life story. What I found so profound, was my own life experiences, in going from a jewish democrat to jewish conservative republican.
   
   I found his life story quite compelling, and inspiring, to help me find my own jewish identity.
   
   Sadly, being a republican is highly discouraged as a jew. It's rather sad, there are no local places in Minnesota, where you can pray, and not have to worry about being silent, rather than being a part of a good community.
   
   Thank you, Michael Medved, for such an inspiring and heart-warming autobiography.



5. I am a fan of Medved's radio show, and agree with most of his opinions, so it was interesting to see how he developed those views.

5 comments about Mark Twain: An Illustrated Biography.

1. Mark Twain: An Illustrated Biography is an informative survey of Twain's life which gathers material from a variety of published and unpublished sources, from his novels and lectures to his letters and photos. Students and fans of Twain thus receive much more illustration than in competing titles, in the form of vintage photos and color ads and drawings, along with a lively biographical sketch surveying Twain's life and times. Highly recommended; much more accessible than most.



2. This illustrated biography of one of America's most memorable and beloved authors holds quite a few surprises for the unsuspecting reader. Anticipating anecdotes from Mark Twain's life that would portray him as a kind, altruistic, and loving man, I was shocked to learn he was also an irrascible, guilt-ridden, tight-fisted lover of alcohol and cigars who was often looking for ways to get rich.

   He was born in 19th century Missouri and raised during a time when major political, economic, social, and cultural issues were forging America's identity. The rugged 19th century also molded Twain into an outspoken critic of those forces, providing him with an unending stream of material for his cogent and waggish observations.

   Amid a collection of excerpts from his novels and speeches, articles and essays, as well as numerous pictures and illustrations, the authors present an insightful analysis of the man best known for writing TOM SAWYER and HUCKLEBERRY FINN. What becomes obvious is the relevance, creativity and importance of all his work, not just the books we were assigned in high school.

   This book is a treasure; the kind of book that can be referred to often. It can give food for thought for hours of reflection. It is Highly Recommended.




3. I wonder how many people could have led the life that Samuel Clemens did and kept their sanity. He went from riches to rags (even though it was his own fault...he spent money like it was going out of style and made some horrendous investments), which forced him, at the age of 60, into making a 10 month long physically and mentally draining around-the-world lecture tour. The tour enabled him to pay off his debts and regain his financial footing. Unfortunately, money was the least of his problems. The authors do not specifically state it, but it is clear (to me anyway) that Clemens suffered from manic-depression. At various times, and not coinciding with anything bad going on his life, he considered suicide. He had lifelong moodswings, as well as a volatile temper. (His daughters were afraid to be alone with him, as his behavior was so unpredictable. They made sure to visit him as a group.) The authors recount one incident where Clemens, angry over a missing button, opened an upstairs window and tossed all of his shirts out into the street. Saddest of all, Clemens outlived almost all of his loved ones. His beloved wife, Livy, who was almost 10 years younger than him, predeceased him, as did 3 of his 4 children. His one surviving child, his daughter Clara, suffered a nervous breakdown when Clemens was almost 70. A heavy load to bear, indeed, but somehow Clemens bore it and carried on. One thing that helped was his worldwide fame. Clemens was hungry for fame, even as a young man. He became well-known early in life, and remained famous and popular right up until he died. (He was a bit of a "ham." He would purposely time his walks for when people were emerging from church, and would then saunter past in his trademark- pun intended- white suits.) This book is an absolutely perfect blend of narrative by the authors, liberal excerpts from Clemens's many writings, "guest essays," and page after page of terrific period photographs. (The research done for the photographs, alone, must have been backbreaking.) The narrative and essays made this a good book. The addition of the excerpts and the photos turned it into a great book. The excerpts are not just from Clemens's well-known works, either. He was once asked to address an organization which consisted of descendants of the Puritans. The written text is reproduced in the book. Twain skewered the original Puritans for killing Native Americans and for kicking everyone who wasn't a Puritan out of Massachusetts, even though, as Clemens makes sure to emphasize, they left England under the banner of religious freedom. (You have to think that when the organization invited Clemens to speak, this wasn't quite what they had in mind.) One of the many interesting items included in the book is a list of the famous sayings "Mark Twain" supposedly uttered....but didn't. (He was so famous that it was assumed that anything clever originated with him.) Unfortunately, one of my all-time favorites was included in this list: "When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years." On the bright side, he DID say "The rumor of my death has been greatly exaggerated." One caution: the excerpts will make you want to read or re-read all of Twain. I've already ordered a copy of "The Innocents Abroad" as somehow, in my youth, I missed that one. Hats off to Geoffrey Ward, Dayton Duncan, and Ken Burns for this wonderful book!



4. The book is confusing. What is the reader supposed to believe? Clemens was a genius, or, Clemens was an imbecile? "Mark Twain an Illustrated Biography" starts with a preface that says: Sam Clemens was a "genius." Next comes the prologue, which states "his own overreaching drove him and his family into exile oversaes."---That statement could not be farther from the truth. A book that starts by rejoicing in Twain's genius and, then proceeds completely to ignore Twain's genius and portray an imbecile is confusing.To understand the confusion and, put the narrative on page 177 in context, review this sentence: "When she died, she was only twenty-four years old." What is the purpose of the word "only" in that sentence? Putting "only" in the sentence confuses facts and, by that confusion makes a biased sentence. Susy was twenty-four years old: An age by anybody's standards where she is old enough to be responsible for her own health. By combining that sentence with "only" and the pictures of a young Susy on pages 87, 94, 99, 103, 105, 119, 132, 146, 150, the book alleges that Susy was very young when she died, which is not true.It was the family publishing business alone that went bankrupt, not Clemens, a fact previously canvassed on page 157 but by page 177 forgotten; The financial recession of 1893, which was responsible for making the tour necessary and separating the family, was not Clemens fault and he would have to be an absolute fool rather than a genius to think otherwise, a fact previously canvassed on pages 155 & 156 but by page 177 forgotten; Clemens knew that he was in no way whatsoever responsible for the death of Susy; When Susy died, she was not the first child that Sam and Livy had buried; What Sam includes in his letter on page 177 are emotions experienced after losing their first child a son, not emotions consistent with losing their second child Susy. Canvassed initially, the book describes how Sam becomes inured to death by experiencing so many deaths in his life. Then on page 177 it is as if death is a brand-new idea, which Sam, has no familiarity with at all? It cannot be both ways, either he was inured or he was not.Sam's writing was so powerful that he easily conveyed feelings that he did not feel; Sam's writing conveys feelings that he does not feel to relieve Livy's feelings of responsibility and grief: Clemens is magnanimously taking responsibility for things that he knows he is not responsible for to soothe his ailing wife (Sam wrote a similar letter after the death of his brother Henry, see page 20, only an idiot would believe himself responsible for too much steam when he was not even on the boat with Henry.); Livy had been diagnosed with heart problems, which forced the family move to Europe in 1891, a fact previously canvassed on page 145 where it incorrectly states "They [doctors] recommended rest and treatment for Livy in Europe," the facts being rather that Livy was "ordered" to Europe by her doctors, but by page 177 the facts after being distorted are forgotten and without thorough study or instruction, the facts are presented with a vagueness that makes' them impossible to understand.Unequivocally, Clemens in 1906 stated for his autobiography, [Edited by Charles Neider, page 428], Livy was "ordered" to Europe by her doctors. If Clemens knew, Livy was ordered to Europe in 1906, it's only fair to assume he knew Livy was "ordered" to Europe when he wrote that magnanimous letter on page 177 taking responsibility for things that he knew he was not responsible for in 1896. And just as fairly, without any assumption, we may know that Clemens knew he did not cause the financial recession of 1893. Sam's stay in Europe, which he loathed and called exile, was never exile at all, but concession to his love for his wife, Livy, and the requirements mandated by her heart trouble.In all honesty, Clemens was being magnanimous when he wrote "Reproaching myself for laying the foundation of all our troubles. . . . Reproaching myself for a million things whereby I have brought misfortune and sorrow to this family."---found on page 177. Clemens was being far from honest, unless he was responsible for the financial recession of 1893, responsible for Livy's heart problems that forced the families move to Europe in 1891, and responsible for Susy's health when Susy was of an age to be responsible for her own health and had been living on her own separated by half-a-world from Sam and Livy for most of a year.For an entertaining book that does not confuse these important issues I recommend: MEET MARK TWAIN, published by Xlibris.



5. 
   This is an excellent biography for many reasons.It is written in very simple language and makes a fast paced read.There are a multitude of excellent and relevant photos of Twain,all the members of his family and at many stages of their lives.There are numerous pictures of where Twain lived and homes he had.Also, many pictures of family life.He lived such an interesting life ,it takes a lot of pictures to make one see what it was all like.The pictures are so good that it would be impossible to convey the same thing in words alone.Along with the personal photos, there are all kinds of illustrations from every aspect of his life.The book contains 275 illustrations,and every last one is a real gem.The book is based on a film that was aired a couple of years ago and undoubtedly will be shown many more times;keep an eye out for it.
   The book does an excellent job of showing Twain as a person and all the things that were important in his life;and there were so many.
   The one thing that is really explained is why "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" is possibly the first,greatest and most important novel in American Literature. If you hadn't thought about it,this book might convince you.
   I read a lot of biographies,but I have a hard job in trying to think of one that was as well done as this.As good as the text is,I believe it is the wonderful photos and illustrations that puts this book over the top.
   If you are a lover of Twain's work and life,you should make every effort to get hold of this super effort.