Fiction Literature Books

Winner of the 2008 Newberry Medal, Good Masters! Sweet Ladies! was actually written to be performed. Laura Amy Schlitz has written here a series of interconnected monologues and dialogues which, taken together, depict the life of kids of all kinds in a medieval village. There's the Falconer's Son, the Blacksmith's Daughter, the runaway villein, the Young Lord, The Pilgrim and The Sniggler, all of whom help complete the picture.

The reviewers have covered it all, but such a truly great book deserves ongoing praise. How nice to see that this jewel of a book won the Newbery! Standing ovation from this reader.

A wonderful book from a wonderful person. This is especially good for lower- and middle-schoolers. Quite usable for in-school performances.

I didn't really realize it would be a children's book when I placed the item on hold at my library. I just knew that I wanted to read the latest Newberry award winning book. I guess I figured that if it fell into the same category as "A Wrinkle in Time" by Madeleine L'Engle then it must be good.

I was a little surpised at how thin it was. I was also surprised at how it is not just one coherent story (or even a story in the general prose form).
They are monologue and dialogue plays written by a librarian for the children in her school classes. She wrote them so that each child would have a starring role for three minutes.

They are poetic and easy to read with nice large print. The tone and vocabulary is all medieval - let's face it, I learned a few new words. Large colorful pictures are on every page and even the margins are colored and have text that explain certain words or aspects of the medieval culture/life. A large colorful map is on the first or second page and instead of locations being labeled the specific characters in the story are shown and labeled.

The tempo of the words is good and interesting -- I was particularly impressed with the two monologues done by the sisters talking about the apprentice boy their father has taken and how one of them must marry the apprentice for the apprentice to inherit the shop. The older daughter likes the boy and wouldn't mind marrying him but thinks the boy would want her sister (younger, prettier) instead. The younger sister thinks the boy will want her older sister (so he doesn't have to wait to inherit) but thinks that it's terrible that one of them will have to marry the boy in the end. The dialogues are completely different but manage to come together for a chorus type of refrain.

Another one that does this is the dialogue between the Jewish boy and the Catholic girl. They are able to put aside their differences for a little while and just be children playing together. The dialogue ends with the children saying together "Almost like she's a Jew;" "Almost like he's a Catholic."

The one down spot I can see - if I were the one performing the plays - would be having to play the role of the beggar child or the child of the villein where you obviously are not well-cared for and have to scrimp to survive. Or maybe that's just me being a girl and wanting the character I embody to be noble somehow...

All in all, it was a beautiful book and very easy to read. It took me maybe forty minutes of carefully thumbing through and looking at the pictures to complete it.

The fact that the book is made up of monologues by villagers, like "Spoon River Anthology's" poetry, makes it a natural for dramatic presentations in experiencing life in a medieval village in a social studies class -- middle school, or high school. When students "live" a character first hand, in costume, they experience a different life, and they remember much more of the information. MTL

Leif Enger's "So Brave, Young and Handsome" is a very well-written novel about a novelist who's lost his "mojo," and how he finds it again by taking an interest in the world around him. This novel is set in 1915; the historical research is excellent and the sense of place is profound, but the reason this novel succeeds so well is because Mr. Enger has figured out what makes us all human -- our need for interpersonal relationships, and our even greater need for redemption.

Both the writer, Monte, and the outlaw, Glendon, are searching for redemption. Monte wants to write again and wonders if he's a flash in the pan, while Glendon wants to apologize to the wife he ran out on -- he was a bank robber and killed someone by accident, and ran from his wife because he was running from the law.

At the start of this novel, we're in Minnesota; Monte's working at farming, as is Glendon. No one knows that Glendon is an outlaw, so when Glendon reveals this to Monte and his family, Monte feels a sense of personal responsibility. Monte believes in fair play and wants Glendon to be treated like a man, not like a hunted animal; that's the main reason Monte goes along with Glendon on the journey to find Glendon's former wife and apologize to her. But the secondary reason is that Glendon feels his life has been wasted -- he can't write, he knows writing is his life's work, and he feels terrible about it, so going along with Glendon is something akin to the last straw; Monte hopes this will re-start his writing career in a rather spectacular fashion, and his wife is too kind to shut his dreams down as she knows her husband needs a change.

At any rate, the rest of the plot proceeds quietly, like a river; the inexorable conclusions are drawn early on. People matter, even when they've made huge mistakes. And people can change -- redemption is possible.

And, the biggest and most helpful message of all -- our greatest talents are never completely lost, even if they're occasionally misplaced due to other circumstances.

I highly recommend this novel and believe it's one that everyone will enjoy; please don't allow the fact this novel is a Western to fool you. This is an outstanding work, one of personal growth, life choices, and redemption; also the abiding power of creativity.

Five stars, highly recommended.

"That is how you want to be remembered, my friends. Take a picture in your moment of conquest, when your luck is high and bullets still bounce off. That will do for the ages." - Monte Becket

Monte Becket lives with wife and young son in rural Minnesota along the Cannon River during the second decade of the 20th century. To date, Becket's one claim to wealth and fame is his wildly popular pulp Western, MARTIN BLIGH. His publisher wants more, but, lately, Monte's muse has failed him. Becket is drifting and anticipating failure as a writer, husband and father. Then one day, out of the fog on the river, a white-haired old man paddles his boat past. Enter into Monte's life boat-builder Glendon Hale, formerly Glen Dobie of the Hole-in-the-Wall Gang.

Hale was once married to a Mexican girl named Blue. But, sought by the Federales, Glendon deserted her never to return. Now, years later, he desires to go back and apologize to the woman he truly loved. He invites Monte to accompany him on the journey, and the latter, fearing the stagnation in his life, accepts. Along the way appears Charles Siringo, also once of the Hole-in-the-Wall, but now a self-anointed lawman of some legend, mostly constructed from books that he himself has written. Charles, now an old man himself, is in relentless pursuit of Glen Dobie for past crimes.

SO BRAVE, YOUNG AND HANDSOME is a coming-of-maturation story by Leif Enger. Its characterizations and narrative pace are reminiscent of Larry McMurtry's novels of the West, e.g. the superlative Lonesome Dove: A Novel (Simon & Schuster Classics). Here, Becket rediscovers not only himself and the talents within, but also learns something about the nature of honor, friendship, love and public fame.

In the McMurtry style, the plot of Enger's book doesn't evolve to a climactic and dramatic ending. Rather, random and relatively mundane events accumulate over time to give meaning to the protagonist's life, much as they do in the real lives of you and me. Enger's writing talent enables him to tell his tale with sympathy for each of the characters while demonstrating a keen eye for the story's time and place. What results is not a thriller in the popular sense, but still a book that I couldn't put down. Like Lonesome Dove, it could translate to an intelligent and absorbing film of deep emotional impact.

This book starts out with the lure that action and drama will follow. It is interesting and eloquent. Then, at about page 140, it flat-lines, as in dies. The character who narrates the story becomes boring, letting people treat him like dirt for...whatever reason. He's a wimp, I guess. He just can't defend himself, even verbally. The eloquence becomes tiring, just a bunch of strained metaphors. Coincidences occur, seemingly in an effort to juice up the story. It never gets juiced. It drags along for another 150 pages, to an unpredictable but uninteresting ending.

Leif Enger is back. His "Peace Like a River" is such a phenomenal book, and while this one doesn't quite measure up to its predecessor, it presents us once again with some down-to-earth but often colorful and complex characters who get caught up in events that frequently escalate. I sometimes wondered why the main character kept pursuing his neighbor--not sure that was well-developed enough. Yet it is a point that would be good for discussion, and perhaps that is Enger's reason for not pointedly stating it. It also stirs up consideration of the wanderlust that may exist in many hearts. Enger's narrative is again wonderful and beautifully wrought. It was often a pleasure just to read the beautiful way he put words down on paper. This is one author I will look for again.

I was so very disappointed with this novel. After reading Enger's debut novel, Peace Like a River, I had high expectations for his new work. Unfortunately, I found it to be a dull read. It was disjointed, the characters were not compelling and the fine craftsmanship evident in his initial novel were simply missing. I slogged my way through the book, hoping for the best, but it actually got worse as I continued. What an incredible disappointment!

This is by far the best book I have ever read for so many different reason. Tolstoy is absolutely my favorite author and he out did himself with this book. The realism, the historical background, and the depth of the characters made this book so great.

The Peaver/Volokhonsky translation makes this classic accessible and quite readable. The book is about the people and dynamics around the Napoleonic invasion of Russia in 1812; it is filled with interesting people and thoughtful insights. This topic needed the 1215 pages. If you have ever wanted to be able to brag about reading this book, I would highly recommend this translation.

This was my first time to read Tolstoy and this book is staggering in its breadth, skill and insight. Tolstoy wears many hats in this book--historian, theologian, psychologist, philosopher, military strategist, political scientist, ethicist--and he wears them all exceedingly well. The sheer scope of this novel (if indeed one can call it merely a novel) is remarkable. The battle scenes are stark and real, stripping off the tidy veneer that history puts on such events; not graphic or gruesome, just showing the human side of soldiers in the face of danger and death. The affairs of the Bolkonskys and Rostovs provide profound insights into good and evil, life and death, and those universal things that comprise human nature. Tolstoy's satirical comments on Napolean and the genius historians ascribe to him are well-founded and thought-provoking.

When all is said and done, however, it is the spiritual journey of Pierre Bezukhov that is the highlight of the book for me. You see clearly in this characater the expression of Tolstoy's own sirituality and the parallels are magnificent. This is a wonderful story about life, history, family and what it means to be human. While incredibly dense, this book is worth the time and effort. Highly recommended.

The translation itself is very good, but I agree with other reviewers that maps of the places described would be very helpful. For the price of the book, and the prestige of the translators, this shortcoming is noticeable. And, I agree with those who bemoan the tiny print in which the numerous French passages are translated. I think a better way to indicate when the characters speak French is to use italics (but in English).

War and Peace is, without question, the greatest historical novel ever written.

However, if you carry a copy of War and Peace with you anywhere, you will be subjected to ridicule of many varieties. This, of course, says more about the critics than the reader. It tells us first that most people have largely lived their lives deprived of reading one of the most "need to read" books in Western literature.

The book and an understanding of it are essential for a classically liberal and comprehensive education in Western civilization. No other single book so completely expresses the essence of a critical age in history than War and Peace. As such, the central reason to read it is that it is an efficient window into who we are and how we got here.

The customary joking and ridicule also tells us that many people have been forced to read War and Peace in school, but never understood or appreciated it. That is a very sad state of affairs. It implies a kind of abuse that comes from forcing any good thing on someone just because it is deemed good for them and before they have a chance to understand and benefit from it.

I guess what I am saying is that this is not a book for the young or anyone else, unless the reader is prepared and coached along the way. The only way, indeed, a youthful reader can get the lessons of War and Peace is through extensive preparation and contextual education. War and Peace requires a whole course of background to be fully revealing and illuminating.

The purpose of my review of War and Peace is not to praise it or to evaluate its literary achievements. I am simply not an expert in a position to do that.

My purpose is to draw on my experience with the book and to provide prospective readers of all ages and backgrounds with an efficient but penetrating guide that will make the journey through the pages of the book come to life and swell with enjoyment and comprehension.

For now the review will have to be a work in progress. But in the end, I promise to provide a comprehensive plan of syntopical reading complete with travel suggestions that cement the standing of the book and equip the reader with the ability to disarm any critic and, more importantly, enjoy a life of interesting cocktail conversations upon completion of this great work.

In addition to this review, I recommend that anyone getting ready to mount the challenge of reading War and Peace can and should refer to the reading lists I separately provide on the Age of Napoleon and on the reading of War and Peace, as well as travel to and enjoyment of Paris, Moscow and St. Petersburg.

I actually prefer a series of 7 books instead of a big one, so I could lie down on the couch and read it. Anyway, the book is well printed and inexpensive.

My favorite books and my favorite author -- C.S. Lewis. The stories are about life, living to the fullest, and about the Author of life. I never tire of reading the stories and I learn something new each time I read them about compassion, forgiveness, and redemption.

This item arrived in great condition and as described. They came in good time, as well.

The books were in great condition when I received them. Being a bog fan of the movies I wan't to read the books. However they are defenitly written for children but are also worth your time if you still have a big imagination as an adult.

I got this box set for my 7 year old daughter. As it turns out the whole family has enjoyed it. The stories are simple enough for a child to read and have enough symbolism for an adult to enjoy. We've had great talks about the books we've finished and race to get to those we've yet to read. Your kids are much smarter than we think. My daughter has picked up on most of the symbolism and has great insights on the characters. Don't expect the books to have great layers as the movies do. They're written for children and enjoy them as a child would.

This is a great book for anyone working with children. I lays out everything you need to address anxieties and it lables the anxieties for what they are - I love that. Includes forms, activities, and little stories that children can relate too. This is an excellent guide to get you going when working with children. Would also be useful for parents to read to increase their understanding of the disorders.

This is a completely thorough, easy to read book that will give you an understanding of what your anxious child is going through and how you can help. It explains exactly what anxiety is and what your child is going through. It also explains how to set goals to help your child through this very difficult time. No matter what type and severity of your child's anxiety, this is a must have book. My 8-year-old has a specific phobia (I didn't realize until I was reading this book) and we are currently working to help her deal with it. I have never reviewed a book but I feel so strongly that anyone who has a child with anxiety issues or knows someone who does, to GET THIS BOOK.

I am very happy with this book. I use it to help me with my son. I would recommend this book for parents that know that their child(ren) might or do have fears or anxiety.

This book has been a wonderful resource for my anxious child (and for me). He is able to turn to this book full of strategies and real life examples independently to not only reassure him he is not different or alone but also give him insight and control of the anxiety producing situations around him and his reactions to them. I highly recommend this book.

This book was wonderful and a tool I'll use with my 9-year old son again! It was a conversation-starter because I was able to learn things that made my son anxious about that I wasn't even aware of and he felt less isolated because I completed the activities with him and was able to show him that everyone fears some things.

My son really enjoyed reading it and it was a great bonding opportunity.

Tambu, as the storyteller in this book was able to tell the story in a way that made the reader realize what is good and bad about colonization of third world countries and the lasting effect it can have on the country and the people that are colonized. I know because I am from a country that was a British colony.

I find myself frustrated with some of the more negative reviews here. I understand the argument that the novel is more into telling instead of showing, but I tend to disagree a bit. The novel hinges on the pretext that the central characters are cerebral, and that their intellectual complexity is misunderstood by colonial doctors. For me, the action that was taking place in the mind, whether we saw it or were told about it from an outsider perspective (that of the narrator, who is often an outsider and an observer), was very powerful.

Generally, it has taken me a little while to adjust to African novels, which I read intermittently throughout high school and college, but this one is a wonderful place to start for people who do take time to adjust to the more traditional style. Since the narrator has a Western education, the novel reads more like a Western novel...in a way, this makes the story much more heartbreakingly real, but it also makes it accessible to Western audiences. I highly, highly recommend it.

The voice of the narrator, plantive and engaging, retrospective and sensitive, is the jewel of the story. Although her lovely spirit and shrewd perspective on people/relationships propelled me through the book at a rapid pace, I found the plot quite empty. The story line, mostly founded on mundane details of her challenging daily life, feels dull and predictable. However, in spite of the lack of plot, the most important aspect of the book-- its main value to many readers-- is its thematically rich stew of commentary on gender roles/relations, sexuality, race, class, poverty, family dynamics, love, education, etc.

I gave book 3 stars because, although i fell in love with the narrator, the plot was too meandering and vacant to really make a good story. I also felt the ending, like the plot, was sort of half an ending and very lacking. In the end though, the story, themes, and the characters were so rich that they will stick with me for quite a while.

Read this book if you fulfill at least one of the following:

1) You want to read a tale that tackles intimate yet universal themes
2) You want to hear the too rarely heard voice of an african woman
3) You want a book that is poetic and academic at the same time
4) You are looking for an emotionally intricate read of personal dynamics
5) You need a speedy read for an airplane ride, book report, etc
6) You love books with insightful, shrewd observations of very real characters and family dynamics

Frank T. Scruggs, M.A.
Book Review
October 11, 2007



Nervous Conditions

I really enjoyed reading this book and of the details she wrote about this family reminds me of my own. As an African-American growing up roughly in the same time period I could see how both
Nyasha and Tambu just becoming into a political awareness would begin to see the world take on a new shape.

The strength of the African family is that the extended family is viewed as a unit within the larger society with legitimate head. As in the book as in my own family, problems were mediated by the
Elders of the family and each person functions as a part of the unit demonstrates a commitment to the group as opposed to the individual.

The plan to educate the children in order to help provide for the future benefit of the family shows the adherence to perpetuating the family group (first through Nhamo then Tambu after Nhamo's death. As I
said before as an African American, I don't think we're as far removed from African culture. I think that the author also wanted to demonstrate that the characters Maiguru and Babamukuru benefited a great deal living in England and learning about British culture. The author also show that Babamukuru and Maiguru were already rooted and grounded in the African culture and education, the experience and contact with the distant British culture therefore one could say to be a growth experience and an expansion of their knowledge.

Upon return to Africa, Babamukuru wanted and expected Nyasha to act as an African girl which she was incapable of doing because she was socialized into a British girl. The character Nyasha was in her early formative years and lost her African culture after assimilating into the British culture. The fight between Nyasha (when it became physical) is also representative of the clash between distant cultures where one culture tries to subject the other culture. The fight broke out when Babamukuru began to beat Nyasha but she decided to fight back (she rebelled against his authority). It also shows that in Nyasha it is a defense of which she is and on the part of Babamukuru, it is to subject her to his will. In culture clashes, the dominant culture uses power and authority to maintain its hegemonic relationship with different cultures (e.g., Britain and her colonies, America and her protectorates) quite often through economics and or violence and military force. From my perspective, I' think that the clash between Nyasha and Babamukuru serves as a metaphor of the clash between the British and African cultures.

The character Tambu grew up as an African girl and remains grounded in African culture therefore when she makes contact with the European culture she grows and remained African unlike her cousin Nyasha. Nyasha is not really part of the British culture and not quite African either. What she does have however is an awareness of the social ills brought about by colonialism. This awareness, I think, brings about sadness caused by the isolation from both worlds while living among those steeped in the African culture. It is this very isolation and sadness that causes her to rebel against her assimilation and mourn the loss of her African culture, which was her birthright.

Overall, I think this is an excellent novel. I found the book quite riveting and dynamic. I also think that anyone interested in cross-cultural communication, anthropology, sociology and family would enjoy this book and benefit from the ideas that the author seeks to convey.

This novel is loosely autobiographical and takes place in the 60's and 70's in colonial Zimbabwe, then called Rhodesia. Tambu is a young girl from a very poor rural family. She is forced to live in the shadow of her favored older brother. Tambu begs her lazy sexist father to be able to attend school like her older brother but he feels she should stay home and learn to cook. Tambu is determined and goes to great lengths to earn the money to pay her school fees. She hits pay dirt when her jerk brother, who has taunted her and rubbed his privilege position in her face, suddenly dies. Tambu gets to attend the mission school in his place. There she teems up with her cousin Nyasha. Nyasha's father is head of the mission school, is the most well educated villager, and real tyrant. Nyasha's family has recently returned from England where her father completed his master's degree. Nyasha is seen as a snob by the locals because she has forgotten the Shona language and dresses like a Brit.

Tambu is very aware of just how "privileged" she is to be her uncle's charity case. As she witnesses her cousin Nyasha's rebelliousness Tambu's feistiness dissipates. Unlike Nyasha Tambu's position is precarious and she decides to survive by keeping quiet and trying her best not to cause any discord. Tambu has a rude awakening as she learns that her elite education sets her apart from her compatriots, but she really doesn't fit into colonial set either. She also must confront the realization that education is not a cure for sexism and racism.

The issues of colonialism, sexism, racism, hypocrisy, and the pros and cons of education are subtly and skillfully examined through the eyes of two teenage Zimbabwean girls. I did a graduate class project on this book. There are a lot of critical commentaries regarding this novel on the Internet. Dangarembga has also written several plays and films. There is another novel by a Zimbabwean author about girls and education called Zenzele by Moraire. Zimbabwe is also having a lot of problems right now, mostly thanks to a lunatic dictator. There are many organizations trying to help. If you want to help do an Internet search for "Zimbabwe, women, and education."

This is probably one of the best books I have ever read. We read it in my fourth year french class, right before graduation. It is such a simple tale wherein lies a deep and meaningful message. It is open for interpretation, which is part of what makes it so great. You really have to think in order to gather the entire message. I hope to purchase the french version soon.

this is a classic book -- a wonderful read. i bought this copy for some friends in Burkina Faso who don't get a lot of books. i figured that they might as well have the best.

I originally went into Borders to purchase this book, it was double the price. Not only was the amazon purchase priced better, but i recieved free delivery! One couldn't ask for more....

This book is perfect for French reading comprehension. It's an easy read, with an entertaining story!

I half-expected this book to be a children's book but it actually contained philosophical ideals people would often ask themselves in life. Highly recommended

Most reviewers focus on the issue of religion - Shylock as a Jew - but fail to look past the issues of faith and consider the discussion of business ethics in "The Merchant of Venice".

I won't go into the racism and religions arguments because I have nothing new to say on those subjects, and they have been done to death by everyone from high school freshmen to PhD candidates.

As much as any other theme, greed and impact of greed on business are themes that don't get the consideration in this play. In the era of the collapse of the "Sub-Prime Lending Market" and all the related scams, scandals, and tragedies, and Enron, and the impending collapse of several commodities markets, the theme of greed is more relevant than ever. "Oh my daughter, oh my ducats" has a familiar ring as realtors wring their hands that their properties can only be sold at a loss due to their own thoughtless avarice. As Shylock demanded the pound of flesh he was owned, mortgage firms foreclosing on properties where the buyer was encouraged to lie on the application has familiar feel to it.

"Merchant of Venice" has comedy, and has several other themes, but greed is the least discussed, and has the air of the elephant at a cocktail party that everyone is too polite to mention. The play was written in a time when people would fund military ships in order to share in the loot and salvage the ship brought back. From this play alone, you could make the case that Shakespeare was the first Socialist, the first person to openly question the business ethics and practices of his time. By setting the play in Venice and making the personification of Greed a Jew, he gently deflects the audience to the real statement he's trying to make.

Aside from the possible political message, this is quite a play. The characters are lively and timeless as all the best of the Bard, and the themes of romance, wayward children, and justice are as timely and thought provoking now as when they were written.

Excellent and complex play with as much drama and social criticism as comedy.

E.M. Van Court

_Merchant_ is a hard play to swallow -- brilliantly written and scathing in content. One worries about the futures of all the characters, most of whom are so flawed as to inspire only pity for their respective beloveds. The deus ex machina ending, in which Portia conjures happiness all around out of thin air -- except, of course, for Shylock, is merely bewildering.

Yet _Merchant_ should not be forgotten. One gets the impression that Shakespeare *wanted* his audience to be uncomfortable with some of the horrible prejudices depicted, and one definitely feels challenged. In addition, the extent to which we have moved on from the anti-Semitism so apparently cavalierly brandished in this 'comedy' leaves us with the responsibility to remember and be aware of prejudices that could be recalled to life, given the wrong stimuli.

I bought my Kindle edition for a "Shakespeare Sundae" dessert + reading, and was very pleased with its formatting and readability. The price is right, too.

It's one of Shakespeare's best. I thought the Folger Folio people were a little full of themselves. I mean 3 different reviews of their projects (which are formidable) is a little excessive.

One cannot read Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice without realizing the significance that religion takes in the play, specifically the portrayal of the Jewish and Christian characters. When we first encounter the play's principal Jew, Shylock, we can only feel resentment towards him for the way he carries himself and conducts his business. Then, when first exposed to the play's principal Christian characters--Antonio, Bassanio, and Portia--the audience likely feels sympathetic towards them because of their unfortunate run-ins with the villainous Shylock. But I wonder if this is a truly accurate reading of the play. It appears that critics are divided on whether Shakespeare was further advancing anti-Semitism existent at the time by depicting Shylock in denigrating stereotypes throughout the play or whether he was actually condemning anti-Semitic behavior by turning Shylock into a sympathetic figure by the play's end. It is my contention that Shakespeare is merely reflecting societal norms at the time as he indicts religion altogether.

Though we cannot forget Shylock's appeal to humanity in his "Hath not a Jew eyes" speech, nor Portia's appeal for mercy at the court trial, there is far too much evidence of misdeeds and hypocrisy by all of these characters to think Shakespeare is "picking sides" in this battle of religions. Shylock's greed and need for revenge are certainly damning portrayals of his faith given how religious he claims to be. But given the "holier-than-thou" attitude's of Venice's Christians and their hypocritical actions to the contrary of their religion, it is clear to me Shakespeare has a major problem with Christians who "talk the talk" but do not "walk the walk." I will discuss the villainous representation of Shylock, then analyze the hypocrisy of the play's primary Christian characters and will question if these Christians embody the righteous example of which they speak.

The portrayal of Shylock is paramount throughout the play, mainly because we are torn between disliking him for his cruelty on one hand and empathizing with him because of the abuse he suffers on the other. When Shylock enters the play in the Act 1, Bassanio is trying to get a loan from him using Antonio's credit because he needs a large sum of money so he can appropriately woo Portia. There is certainly no denying Shylock's passion for accumulating wealth. The other characters frequently comment on Shylock's greed throughout the play, and he even tells his daughter that he dreams about moneybags. Shylock suffers ridicule from the Christian community because he charges high interest rates on loans, but also because he is a Jew, comparable to a dog or the devil in their eyes. As Shylock considers the loan, he seems more interested in having Antonio bound to him than with the loan itself, and we soon learn of Antonio and Shylock's mutual resentment. Shylock is hesitant to help Antonio out because Antonio has hurt his own business dealings in the past by lending money at no charge, but also because he is a Christian. The evidence of Shylock's greed continues to mount. In Act 2, Solanio describes "the dog Jew" running through the streets of Venice and crying more earnestly for his lost ducats than for his lost daughter (who has ended their relationship, married a Christian and converted to Christianity, further enraging her estranged father).

Beginning in Act 3 and continuing into the first parts of Act 4, Shylock repeats statements like "I will have my bond"--the dubious "pound of flesh" from Antonio's body. Shylock's repetitions of his claim turn into a death chant of sorts for Antonio since he is now unable repay the loan. When asked what he plans to do with Antonio's piece of flesh since it's obviously worthless to him Shylock replies, "To bait fish withal...if it will feed nothing else it will feed my revenge" (Act 3, Scene 1, lines 45-46). We can now see Shylock eagerly awaiting his chance to kill Antonio and get his symbolic revenge on all the town's Christians, whom he despises.

Despite Portia's famed speech at the dramatic trial in Act 4, in which she lectures about Christian goodness and "the quality of mercy," Shylock refuses to show Antonio mercy. He claims he "craves the law" (Scene 1, line 203) and will not be merciful and forgiving to Antonio, and no one can change his mind. All of these incidents are constant reinforcements of Shylock's bitterness and cold-heartedness, which has been shown throughout the play, and which are clearly not in line with the virtuous nature of Judaism.

Of course we know that there is an unexpected change of events about to happen to Shylock. Instead of having his bond, we find that Shylock's bond with Antonio is impossible to recover since he may not shed a drop of Antonio's Christian blood in the process. Portia then orders Shylock's property seized and "mercifully" allows him to convert to Christianity rather being executed for attempting to take the life of a fellow Venetian, seemingly "delivering" him from his Jewishness. But up until Shylock's sentencing, we might be somewhat content with the depictions of the evil Jew and the righteous Christians. But as we examine Act 4 (and the entire play) more closely, we are forced to recognize that perhaps Shylock is actually a victim of the hypocritical Christian society in which he lives. Being able to read this play in a post-Holocaust and post-Civil Rights Movement world, we cannot help but have some empathy towards Shylock for the way he is treated, though clearly he is not a very virtuous man in his own right.

To analyze Christian hypocrisy in this play, it is necessary to go back to Portia's dramatic speech given at the trial, discussed previously. Portia preaches about the blessings of showing mercy, almost playing the role of a preacher. But if we retrace her steps back to Act 1, we hear Portia confessing to Christian hypocrisy. "Portia alludes to the familiar commonplace of the breach between Christian precept and practice" (Hassel, 117). This assertion comes from the following passage spoken by Portia:

"If to do were as easy as to know what were good to do, chapels had been churches, and poor men's cottages princes' palaces. It is a good divine that follows his own instructions. I can easier teach twenty that were good to be done than to be one of the twenty to follow mine own teaching" (Act 1, Scene 2, lines 11-15).

The primary Christian characters of this play are representative of the people living at the time. Antonio, the merchant of Venice himself, has a great reputation among his fellow Christians who see him as a righteous and self-sacrificing citizen and friend. His bigotry towards Jews is not frowned upon because all of the others share his belief. Behind Shylock's back, Antonio ridicules him as a moneylender, but then enters into a loan agreement with him anyway. Antonio shows no mercy to Shylock when Portia pronounces his sentence. If Antonio were a genuine Christian, would he not have humbly accepted his acquittal then tried to reconcile his differences with Shylock? Instead, Antonio agrees to take half of Shylock's possessions without objection, thus eliminating his main business rival. These actions (along with Antonio's berating of Shylock) are not of Christian compassion and mercy but of selfishness and religious hypocrisy.

Now I briefly turn to Bassanio. Bassanio is portrayed as a bit of a playboy--squandering all he has, refusing to work and willing to beg for financial assistance. He is more than willing to marry Portia for financial gain. He certainly has a tendency toward materialism and consumption, which are not Christian values. Although Bassanio does not really victimize Shylock in the same way the others do, his lifestyle does tarnish the religious credibility of the Christian community.

Now I turn to Portia, who embodies this hypocritical Christian nature and does not practice what she preaches. We are clued in to her racism as she complains about one of her suitors for marriage, the dark-skinned Prince from Morocco. Portia makes the comment "If he have the condition of a saint and the complexion of a devil, I had rather he should shrive me than wive me" (Act 1, Scene 2, line 33). "Portia knows it is a sin to be a mocker, but she mocks her suitors anyway" (Hassel, 114). Portia instead settles for the gold-digging Bassanio.

Although Portia's "quality of mercy" speech sounds like a wonderful description of Christian values, it is really an ironic display of Christian talking points versus actual practice. As I mentioned earlier, Portia's words do not correlate with her deeds. She tricks Shylock in this scene, first by disguising her character, then by turning the perceived law against him, leaving him a shell of his former self while enriching her friends. Shylock's life is completely ruined and she makes an even bigger mockery of his religion. Portia appears spiteful, not compassionate, and certainly does not come off as a merciful Christian.

Though Shakespeare is a tough read for me, I think I finally came to an understanding about what this play was really trying to convey. At first glance, you find yourself hating Shylock and admiring Antonio, Bassanio, and Portia. Later, you find yourself empathizing with Shylock because of the hypocrisy of the Christian characters. While the critics have argued it both ways, I truly feel that Shakespeare is merely commenting on society as he then saw it, which turns out to be a strong indictment of both religions--or at least how their virtues are carried out by their followers.

What exactly was Shakespeare attempting with The Merchant of Venice? Was Shakespeare anti-Semitic? Does the play promote anti-Semitism? What was Shakespeare's purpose in writing such a work?

As the play opens, the eponymous Antonio's dearest friend Bassanio laments his need of cash in order to seek the hand of Portia, the heiress of a noble Venetian family. Antonio is depressed, but it is only as the play progresses that we come to guess the reason for his depression: the marriage of this dear friend will, as such events always do, change the nature of their friendship and make it less intimate. As Antonio shows no other romantic interest in the play, and is alone and lonely, this depression possibly suggests that Antonio is homosexual.

But how would the cash enable Bassanio to engage in this pursuit? In fact we never learn precisely why the money is needed. There seems to be some kind of wealth or social class requirement for playing the game whose prize is Portia's hand and Bassanio needs to purchase the trappings that would, meretriciously, enable him to appear a member of the aristocracy.

As a successful merchant, Antonio is in a position to provide his friend with the desired funds. He doesn't have the cash on hand, however, as his wealth is tied up in his trading fleet at sea. But this fleet provides collateral, and the Jewish moneylender Shylock has access to the ready cash from his own store and from that of his friend and fellow Jew and moneylender, Tubal. But why should Shylock entertain a request from Antonio, a Christian who has reviled him and spat on him in the most public space in Venice for being a Jew, a public humiliation of the most egregious sort, as well as sadistically maligned him in a number of other ways, and now touts his moral superiority by noting that he lends to his own friends without interest. Responding to Antonio's sneering arrogance, Shylock offers to lend the money at no interest -- but demands an awful penalty should the borrower default -- the famous pound of flesh. And why should he not, in the unlikely event of Antonio's default, revenge himself?

Meanwhile, Antonio's and Bassanio's friends help their friend Lorenzo assist his lover Jessica, Shylock's daughter, in running away from her father's home, which she does, stealing a substantial sum in jewelry, including Shylock's most treasured possession, his late wife's gift to him.

Bassanio passes the test of the three boxes and wins the beautiful Portia's hand.

Antonio's ships are reported lost at sea and, defaulting, he is subject to the exulting Shylock's revenge. Shylock proceeds to have the default ajudicated, but the judge fails to appear. Portia arrives, dressed as the out-of-town judge whose fairness and erudition are well-known, and proceeds to play the unsuspecting Shylock with all of Antonio's contempt, to the delight of the vindictive Jew-hater Gratiano, depriving Shylock of his revenge. The "court" relieves Shylock of half his wealth and requires him to convert to Christianity. Antonio, who defaults, pays no penalty, and in the end his ships all complete their voyages to his substantial gain.

In this play, Shakespeare both mirrors the Jew-hatred of his contemporary society and, interestingly, portrays the implicitly parallel society of Venice and its Christian characters with an undeniable condemnation hidden beneath a scrim of identification: the sneering supercilious Antonio who claims the mantle of the generous Christian; the deceiver Bassanio, who borrows a lot of money with which to appear wealthy in order to deceive his future wife; the gratuitously vicious racist, Gratiano; Shylock's daughter and future Christian Jessica, who steals from her father his most intimate keepsake; the angelic aristocrat Portia who mendaciously assumes the identity of a trusted judge and turns the law on its head for the benefit of her husband's best friend and engages in some sadistic Jew-savaging herself to the delight of all the non-Jews present (and apparently Shakespeare imagined that the audience would enjoy it as well).

Shakespeare appears to be playing both sides of the coin here, both playing to popular Jew-hating, and creating a plot which not only exposes the amorality of the Christians but also depicts Shylock as a sometimes truly sympathetic character.

The play's structure is very familiar and guaranteed to please. Evil character plots to destroy innocent protagonist, but with the help of friends the evil character is outsmarted or outmaneuvered and gets his comeuppance, while the good people live happily ever after. Shakespeare though has created a curious drama indeed. The good folks are really quite distasteful characters, though Shakespeare puts beautiful words in their mouths. And the "villain" is in fact much more than an evil stereotype. Shylock is no paragon of decency, but he is the most fully realized human being in the play and commands the careful reader's or auditor's sympathy.

Shakespeare portrayed the Christian Venetians as corrupt characters while on the surface presenting them as the sympathetic actors in a more or less conventional drama of good Christians and bad Jews. A recent book bringing together current research on the life of Shakespeare notes that the most likely identity of the "Dark Lady" to whom Shakespeare wrote a number of passionate sonnets was a Jewish woman. This book (Shakespeare, by Michael Wood) notes that Shakespeare worked in a part of London in which he must have seen Jews frequently. Wood also notes that this play was written quickly at the time of Shakespeare's liaison with the Dark Lady. Interestingly, while Shakespeare was certainly aware that he was portraying the Christian characters as corrupt, he was also treating them, as the "good guys". He was playing a very strange game, both sympathizing with the Jew Shylock, contemning, in a less than explicit manner, the Christian characters, and at the same time portraying Shylock as the evil Jew and the Christians as the beneficent characters he expected his audience to identify with.

The case can be made that, far from producing an anti-Semitic play, Shakespeare wrote a play that, while pandering to the anti-Semitic prejudices of his audience, condemns the hypocritical ethically-compromised Jew-haters of Venice, and, by extension, London.

A ruler of an empire so vast he has never seen most of it, and a foreign traveler who describes for him the cities he has visited. The narrative voice is poetic, even nostalgic, and the story derives from a conversation between Kublai Khan and Marco Polo, a conversation which is interrupted by a series of vignettes describing the many fantastical cities that Marco Polo has seen, dreamed of, or invented. This book does not have a traditional plot, and readers looking for conflict and action will be disappointed. But readers who enjoy nostalgic, dream-like images and prose that reads like poetry will be enchanted by this short book.

This book is such a nice, small size, and it feels great! The cover isn't terribly interesting, but it's enough to intrigue the person next to you on the train and make you look reasonably intelligent.

Also, the sections in the text are often small enough to read one or two during a reasonable commute. Since it is so small, you might even be able to fit it in your pocket. Quite convenient.

I do have a few small gripes about the book, however. The paper seems rather cheap as it is very thin. The typeface is a little too thick, also, the combination of which sometimes makes it difficult to read.

The descriptions of fantastical dream-cities, which make up the bulk of this book, are wonderful, and I only have one small nit to pick: Calvino, during the mercifully short dialogues between Polo and Khan that book-end each section, tends to become a little too sententious for my liking, subjecting his patient readers to such groaning, sage-like laconicisms as, quote:

Marco Polo describes a bridge, stone-by-stone.
"But which is the stone that supports the bridge?" Kublai Khan asks.
"The bridge is not supported by one stone or anther," Marco answers, "but by the line of the arch that they form."
Kublai Khan remains silent, reflecting. Then he adds:
"Why do you speak to me of stones? It is only the arch that matters to me."
Polo answers: "Without stones there is no arch."

Unquote.

At its best, Invisible Cities could have been written by the insuperable Borges; at its worst, the insufferable Kahlil Gibran.

5 stars for brilliance, 3 stars for enjoyment.

The expectation that had been set for me when I added this to my reading list? "This is the book where the city is the story." That said, I was expecting more narrative than what I found here. (Call me a traditionalist but I expect a bit of characterization and plot.) As a "book", I didn't much care for Invisible Cities -- but I would add it to my bookshelf as a good lesson in how to write about places. There is some pretty potent imagery and interesting wordplay at work in here.

I had never read any Calvino before this spring and loved If On a Winter's Night a Traveler. Calvino writes like a more patient Borges, exploring the passages one at a time branching off the main cave gallery. In this breathtakingly elegant work, Calvino shows us cities rife with contradiction, told by Marco Polo to Kublai Khan, with dialogues bookending the city descriptions. The short, meditative reflections on imagined cities gives the book a nice cadence, a postcard-view of the city, usually with its photo-negative or reflection or inversion presented afterwards. Calvino is clearly a master at this type of wordsmanship, while remaining true to his genuine emotion of decline, loss and heartbreak. At one point, the Khan asks Polo about the city of his birth, Venice: "Perhaps I am afraid of losing Venice all at once, if I speak of it. Or perhaps, speaking of other cities, I have already lost it, little by little." (87) Most of the stories focus on the various perceptions of cities which differ depending upon how one comes to the city, which part is glimpsed first, whether one grows up in the city or merely travels through it. Overall, a wonderful collection of descriptions, a jewelry-box of imagined delights, a phantasmagoria.

Once again Deja King left me speechless with this one.This book was sooo good that I could not put it down,I had a feeling what was up with Maya and the scheming done in this book was CRAZY!I cant wait till the 4th installment.And for the record I think we all know who the real father of baby Aaliyah is(jet black curls)I just cant wait until that piece of info is finally revealed.And I hope the 4th installment, we will read more about Nico!I have a feeling he is going to show up and show out in that one.

I love this book, it was excellent!!!! I've read all three and the story gets better and better each book. I love the book so much that I have started my sister to reading again and she enjoys it the same. Come on Deja, come on with the next book, and here is a title for you..."YOU CANT STOP A BITCH!"

I love the Bitch series. i figured out what was going on all along but i read it anyway just to see how it would unfold in Deja's version. i can't wait until i get my hands on part four even though i love Precious and suprem and now baby alliyah i'm ready for a new story with fresh characters. Precious can only keep defying death but for so long. so instead of seeing her get what she finally has coming let's give her and her family a happy ending and move on.

The bitch series is the first urban series i have really got into so i know ms king and conjure up some more exciting characters for us to read about on the gritty mean streets on NY or LA. The bitch is back kind of dragged along a but it was still entertaining non the less.

I read all of the Bitches series, and I think it's time I get my gangster on!!(LOL) Precious is a TRUE GANGSTER BITCH!! The title says it all.

THIS BOOK WAS OFF THE CHAIN! I CAN'T WAIT FOR PART 4 TO COME OUT. KEEP DOIN' THE DAMN THANG DEJA!