History Books

because of so many bad reviews i almost didn't buy this book
but it was the last book of a series[the secret and ransom] so
i took a chance and i'm so glad i did.i really enjoyed the book and read it in one night.if you liked her other books you will like this one too.
i have bought 14 of her books and she has never disapointed me.
buy the book and enjoy as i did
this is one of her many medieval romances and it has the same
excitement as the rest of them

Princess Gabrielle of St. Biel, is prized for her exquisite beauty, the daughter of one of England's most influential barons, Gabrielle is also a perfect bargaining chip for a king who needs peace in the Highlands: King John has arranged Gabrielle's marriage to a good and gentle laird. But this marriage will never take place.

Princess Gabriel of St. Biel is all set to be married, when her split-second decision to come to someone's aid suddenly throws the country into all-out war.

Betrothed to a stranger by King John, Gabrielle, the last of her royal line, is in possession of a powerful secret that could plunge the entire highland Scottish kingdom into anarchy, while her growing love for Colm MacHugh, a fearsome and powerful warrior, could cost her everything, as hidden enemies threaten to destroy them both.

For Gabrielle, everything changes in one last burst of freedom-when she and her guards come upon a scene of unimaginable cruelty. With one shot from her bow and arrow, Gabrielle takes a life, saves a life, and begins a war.

No one writes historicals like Julie Garwood. This is an exciting and reviting tale with her trade mark wonderful herione and brooding hero. True Colm MacHugh could have been a little more enamoured of Gabrielle from the first. However it's soon clear how strong is his devotion. Would have liked to seen resolution to the story with Joan as it seemed prominent but fizzled. The book was charming and lovely to read from start to finish. Thank you Julie for bring back your historicals, always on my keeper shelves.

I love Julie Garwoods books,however I would have to say this was not one of her best. It fell a little flat for me. The characters and storyline did not deliver like Julies books usually do. It's a good book to borrow from someone but I don't think I'd buy it if you haven't already.

I really loved this book! I was so happy when she returned to historical... I mean I love her contempories, but she writes a wonderful historical romance. My one problem with this book is that she seems to forget her previous stories in the mix. Early on in the book her previous character Broderick asks Colm if remembers how he met his wife and Colm responds - Yes, when she was returning Laird Ramsey's brother to him. Anyone who read Ransom know that she was returning Alex MAITLAND to his father, not Ramsey's brother. Other than the little mistakes like that, which Ms. Garwood should have caught, this book was awesome and I think a great way to get back into historicals. I am hoping she will write more historicals soon!

I absolutely LOVE Julie Garwood's books... Have all of them and have read and reread them a hundred times... that is, till I got my hands on this book. What IS this?? It read like a first draft to me - there was no romance, the scenes were forced and the plot holes were HUGE. I am terribly disappointed. This book is a waste of space, not to mention the characters like Brodick (oh wait, JUST Brodick - the main characters were so underdeveloped maybe they can be recycled and used for a completely different book and no one would notice... I doubt anyone would remember them from this book. I take that back. They would TOTALLY remember because of how badly the characters were written!). Is there such a thing as a negative star rating?? If Amazon would let me give a no star rating, I would.

This modern-day Herodotus is remarkably unpretentious and his writing style is straightforward and accessible (probably one reason why Kapuscinski has been so widely translated and read). The simplicity is deceptive, though. Kapuscinski's own experience of being poor, cold, and hungry in postwar Poland allows him to empathize with people in similar conditions in other parts of the world. He describes how he and his Ethiopian driver were able to communicate almost without words. Yet he also recognizes cultural barriers that prevent a European from understanding what he sees in India and China, and that manifest themselves during a concert by Louis Armstrong in Sudan. Readers already familiar with Herodotus may not be interested in reading the quotations, and the book wanders and drifts a bit between Kapuscinski's reading of Herodotus and his own experiences, but the author's gift for observation and storytelling never fails. Reading this book is an enrichment. We come away from it with greater knowledge of the world.

Kapuscinski reports on the people and political culture of the third and fourth worlds( the third being countries like Iran and the fourth countries like the Congo).

He is very humble to recognize that it is difficult if not impossible to report on a country if a reporter does not speak the foreign country language such as India and Iran.

He laments the total chaos of countries in Africa, the total anarchy !

He also made us realize through Herodotus Histories that a good reporter is more than the reporter who provides snippets of sound and images clips for immediate daily consumptions.

He forces us to realize that men in their psychological makeups are still the same as in Herodotus times.

Through the Histories of Herodotus underatand today's events.

This book steals the reader away from the present in a journey through time. Although his own stories and narratives are fascinating, Kapuscinski's enlivening of Herodotus becomes what holds you. You can't help but feel excitement for the reading journey ahead when you pick the book up after having put it down for a break. Furthermore, his analysis of a certain type of "traveler" (versus tourist) will haunt (or inspire) any of those who find themselves more the former than the latter. In the realm of memoirs, this book is of par excellence.

Kapuscinski writes with wit and charm, or at least his translator makes him sound utterly adorable in English, a gentle observer of life who treads very lightly on places and events. For sheer reading pleasure, I have to give this book a five-star rating as an airplane book. In the end, however, I was disappointed with it; I kept expecting something... something?... that Kapuscinski never delivered, an insight into the nature of the world he traveled through, a bridge between events as such and history. What I got was a colorful traveler's tale, interspersed with excerpts from and reflections on the writings of Herodotus. There were times, it would seem, when the scenes and events described by Herodotus 2500 years ago felt more real and proximate to Kapuscinski than the scenes and events surrounding his journalistic assignments. If so, he certainly conveyed that dissociation with the present convincingly.

What Kapuscinski professes to find in Herodotus, and to admire, is a recognition of the multicultural splendor of human civilization - a tolerance of diversity based on the discovery that "we" are not as exceptional as "we" have supposed, that "we Greeks" and "we Americans" didn't invent ourselves but rather learned most of our cultural 'memes' from peoples who only now appear dissimilar to us. This is a worthwhile and important lesson for Americans especially, and if Kapuscinski's musings about Herodotus can convey it to them, he should have a Nobel... not for Literature but for Peace.

"We are, all of us, pilgrims who struggle along different paths toward the same destination."
- Antoine De Saint-Exupery


Ryszard Kapuscinski was Polish. He was born in Pinsk which is now Belarus ; but became one of the most famous and honored foreign correspondents. He is now deceased. For forty years, he traveled the globe from Iran to China to El Salvador to India. Like the ancient historian Herodotus, whose book The Histories was carried by Kapuscinski in all of his travels, Ryszard traveled the globe learning about the similarities and the many differences between the cultures of this planet.

Kapuscinski takes us on his journeys and through his eyes we capture his views of the new globalized world. He shows the reader how an ancient man (Herodotus, considered the Father of History) taught him with the work he published almost 2500 years ago to seek understanding first; and then to learn from the various cultures he would come across as a foreign correspondent.

Kapuscinski shares his gifted insights and observations as he remembers his past journeys; this memoir captures the essence of a very sensitive wanderer who wants to talk intimately about his travels and his life.

When Kapuscinski "crossed the border" and was allowed to travel outside of Poland, his world and his vantage point exploded into a vast number of possibilities that he had previously only dreamed about. It is my feeling that with this memoir the author wanted all of us to reach across our boundaries and our self imposed borders so we could experience more of what life has to offer. Maybe he is saying that all of us should not only look around us; but seek the unknown and wander beyond our comfort zone.

The author owed a lot to Herodotus as he traveled and this is as much a tribute to the memory of the ancient Herodotus as to the "memory of Kapuscinski".

"All memory is present."
- Novalis

Recommended.

Bentley/2008

Travels with Herodotus (Vintage International)

My wife and I found the book to be very enlightening. People of all ages should read especially those who use make-up, prospective mothers, those pregnant, teen-agers, and folks with children, and members of government and people who just need to or should know about cosmetic industry, its potentially harmful effects of use and lack of protective health regulation.

We found the book riveting and to be honest a little scary, especially with our having three grand daughters.

A friend picked up this book to read with her older sister one day. Less than three monthes later, the pair started their own e-business called The Nature Of Beauty-- carrying all organic cosmetic lines. The truth, exposed in Not Just A Pretty Face shocked them, so they decided to fill the hole in the market for products that contain none of the chemicals mentioned in this book. She promptly gave this book to me to read after infoming me of her new business, and I finished it in one night! Not Just A Pretty Face is a very easy, "user-friendly" book to read, and is a must-read. After reading it, I looked at all of the labels on my cosmetics, and made a life-altering change to what I use. I urge all of you to read this book!

This book was great! It was very interesting. I couldn't put it down. It gives you a great insight into how big cosmetic companies really think.

THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT MAKEUP, IT IS ABOUT THE PRODUCTS WE USE ON ON BODIES! I COULDN'T PUT THE BOOK DOWN.

First let me put my biases up front. I do not like the cosmetics industry. I do not like the petroleum industry and I certainly do not like the advertising industry.

Having said that, let me try and and provide a constructive review.

This is a book that proposes to expose the seedy underside of the cosmetics industry. It is very readable and "user friendly". I read it from cover to cover in just a few days and in every chapter learned/was repulsed by something new. Given my biases I do encourage readers to check out the provided sources to determine for themselves the veracity of the information (I did so and was convinced). However, be aware that this is not an unbiased perspective. The author has a definite point of view (which I happen to agree with) but still raise some interesting and important issues that are worthy of further consideration beyond the "preaching to the choir" crowd. It is a well written, entertaining read and encourages you to pause and think a moment without being overly preachy. My wife is now regularly visiting the database the author and the affiliated organization has set up and made self informed choices about makeup, sunscreens and other cosmetics. Not as a reactionary "go all natural" consumer but being able to make reasonable choices about products that work for her and possible alternatives that are less risky/carcinogenic.

I highly recommend this book.

I have not begun using this material due to the semester not starting until the Fall but it is a required text.

i have not yet recieved the book ( 02/25/08), though i am supposed to reciev it by 02/13/08

Since a few of the other reviews are too over-the-top to take seriously, I thought I would add my comments: It's nice 'cause it fits in your pocket, & it's nice cause it has lots of the Bates pictures in it. Unfortunately, it includes a lot of basic text at the expense of the more uncommon presentations and PE tests. I'm in the middle of my PA rotation year and I already ignore this book most of the time for that reason. If you have already memorized the more basic aspects of the larger Bates text, don't expect to reference this often. I'll repeat though - it IS nice to have the pictures...

This "Bates' Pocket Guide to Physical Examination and History Taking" is an easy-to-comprehend manual which was structured in a way that should meet the needs of both doctors and nurses. The information contained in this book are simple and straightforward; and just like the complete edition, they included paediatric coverage. The chapters of this book examined both morphological and physiological abnormalities and/or irregularities. They included several illustrative charts and tables, which facilitate comparative analyses of clinical data.
If appropriately adhered to, the supervisory procedures outlined in this book would assist medics in making correct evaluation of each case they encounter. Also worth pointing out, is the way the book paid attention to drug administration.
In all, this is a good medical adviser, which inexperienced medics should have in their lab-coat pockets.

The Batess' pocket guide is a wonderful tool for clinicians.
It is simple, thorough, and clear with good illustrations. Keep it within your reach !!

I've read all of the books in the "Don't Know Much About.." series. If you're interested in getting a rather thorough overview without becoming an expert, these books are for you. They are so easy to read, that I couldn't but them down.

If the last time you read about history was decades ago in high school, this is a good book to use as a brief overview. The 1-star reviews are primarily from politically conservative readers. Mr. Davis does lean somewhat to the left, but leaning to the right is just as error-prone ( i.e. the recent reviewer who whitewashed JD Rockefeller, using JDR's autobiography, no less, as one of her 3 sources ). The book is a fun read, and might just get you interested in reading more detailed, nuanced works.

I am in the process of reading this book for my AP class. As a summer reading book and the third one I've read this summer, i was not expecting much from this book. I was pleasantly surprised upon completing the first chapter. Kenneth C. Davis writes in such a way, that you feel he is talking to you. As a book about history you would think it to be very dull and boring, but as i said before, his style of writing makes reading all the more endearing. Plus his "Must read" notations are surprisingly interesting, and I have to say, choices I would actually read.

The book attempts to make history interesting and debunk many misconceptions. The initial writing starts off strong, then quickly falls into the following traps:

1) Opinionated. The author injects strong opinions where it's not needed or supported. For example, he likes to mention the "myth" of American opportunity, even right after sections about prominent figures that started from very poor backgrounds. Every motivation is boiled down to greed and racism, even the abolitionist movements.

2) Inaccuracy. This is a deal-killer for historical books. Facts are frequently wrong, which is a problem since there are no sources cited. For example, the "small and unprepared" Polish army in WW2 consisted of 900,000 men and had been industrializing and training three years before the NAZI invasion.

3) Tireless racial notes. The author never misses an opportunity to point out a person's racism or antisemitism, even though that was the rule as opposed to the exception in pre-1960's thinking. The book should have been titled "Greed and Racism in American History."

4) Dubious choices of inclusion. Why does Whitewater, Watergate, and Iran-Contra occupy passages as large as the Vietnam war? Far too much attention is given to meaningless detail in the later sections. What about the failed equal rights amendment, the fall of unions, and the airline strike?

5) Failure to connect the dots. "Historical inevitability" is a phrase I never want to hear again. It's a cop-out term when the author can't come up with a good reason for something.

The book isn't a total loss. Several ridiculous theories are debunked and some interesting anecdotes are included. But once you're past the revolution, you get a tireless sermon of greed, racism, and uninteresting, disjointed text.

What was the point of the Afterward, other than to lament America's violence?

I can't recommend this book to anyone.

In terms of objectivity, this book has little to offer. Bias in the modern sections is easily spotted. Read the sections that describe Ronald Reagan as an incompetent dolt and Bill Clinton as a brilliant but flawed politician. If his bias is so readily apparent in these modern passages, then what kind of bias is probable in sections where a reader is less able to discern his 'slant' on history to suit hisown agenda. Historians should offer up facts and figures and weave from a variety of sources to come up with a solid profile of history. Davis has an ax to grind for the liberal camp. At the end of the book, he refers to Howard Zinn, a hard left historian, who offers a 'necessary corrective' in his books.

If you're looking for history books, keep looking.

Professor Friedman's book shatters most of my beliefs since childhood relative to who wrote the Bible. My earliest beliefs were formed by my teachers who were strict orthodox protestant believers. Basically I believed that every word of God in the Old Testament was there as if God had dictated it to those who penned its contents. I can recall questioning authorship at least of some of its sections, such as the death of Moses. It was logical to assume that the account written describing his death and burial was written by someone other than himself. I questioned that if Moses did write the first 5 books, why did he keep referring to himself as "Moses said", or "Moses did?" That didn't make sense. Why didn't he use the first person referring to himself? In seminary, the Documentary Hypothesis was studied as a satanic deception. We had Jesus own testimony with his referral to Moses throughout the Pentateuch and Paul's own statement that every word of God was written under inspiration. My viewpoint was as most of the editors of the 1995 version of the NIV: "These first five books were most likely written by Moses, except for the last chapter of Deuteronomy which tells about Moses' death."

It is evident that the first 3 chapters of Genesis contain two totally different narratives, each telling not necessarily a complimentary account of the same event. He points out that the first version of creation, the writer always refers to the creator as God (35 times). The second version refers to the creator always as Yahweh God (11 times). "The first version never calls him Yahweh; the second version never calls him God." He illustrates the two flood stories, with contradictory numbers of animals taken into the ark, number of days of the flood, and other details. He takes you though other Old Testament stories containing doublets and written in different language. He gives the history behind the Documentary Hypothesis and gives reasons for the scholastic credence of it. I had to cast away some of my superstitious ideas of how the Bible came to be after reading this. The Bible was cobbled and woven together over a long period of time. It is evident we don't have final answers for a lot of it, but I came away believing it is as logical to believe Ezra wrote most of the first 5 books during the exile as it is that Moses wrote all of them.

This is a very good book, making careful and reasonable arguments about the various authors of the Bible - J, E, D, P, and their redactor R. While I am not an expert in this field, Friedman makes arguments that seem very compelling and accessible even to a lay audience not deeply familiar with the historical, academic of constructing the Bible's authorship. Careful reading is required, and an open mind. Friedman's analysis seems to be fair-minded and academically honest, without sounding pretentious or claiming to have an absolutely definitive view. Anyone interested in a review of Biblical History (Old Testament or Jewish Tanakh only) should read this book to become acquainted with the field. It provides an excellent staring point into the historical construction of one of our most important and pervasive texts.

This book is an excellent read. For those who are literary critics of the Holy Bible, this would prove to be the back bone for understanding who evolution of who wrote the bible, why they wrote it, and when. Friedman's emphasis' lies on the Pentateuch, or the first five books of the bible which were purportedly written by Moses. Friedman however dismisses this, and provides a more plausible explaination behind these first five books. His image of the documentary hypothesis cannot be matched in this day and age.

Most of this book concentrates on a hypothesis for how the Torah, not the bible as a whole was written (regardless of what the book's name or some of the reviewers say)- it is the origin of Torah that is attributed to Moses, not the bible as a whole.

Torah in its own right, if this hypothesis is correct, is a) an omelet and b) has a history. I don't know why for Christians it is important that the written Torah was revealed to Moses all at once, for the Orthodox Jews, this is important because Torah is the covenant between the Suzerain - God and a King - the people Israel. This relationship between God and Israel is at the core of Judaism. Also, it is important for the Orthodox that Torah is attributed to Moses because of the position that the Orthodox hold that the ancient state of Israel had to find its justification in the Torah - not the other way around. Israel only has one ruler and law giver - God.

I will leave it to the reader of this review to look at the other reviews to see what the book is talking about. In my review, I would like to raise a few questions about the validity of some of what the author of "Understanding The Bible" wrote.

Firstly. The author Richard Friedman, wrote in Chapter 14 about how the various pieces that sometimes contradicted and were totally unrelated were put together and that they created something that the originators could never have imagined. I argue that this is not correct. There are major themes in the Torah that are constants that are seen throughout and have been preserved all throughout the "merges".

1) The theme that leads from the creation story to the Tabernacle and the first temple. The idea is that the first temple represented Eden.
2) The moral growth of humans as well as the moral changes in the conceptions by God. This leads us from Cain who killed his brother, but was tolerated by God to the dictum made by God that all those who shed the blood of man will die by man's hand. As well as that God will demand a reckoning from every beast for killing men. This was a legal principle that Israelites used from the earliest time (even if the writing down of this principle is attributed to a later age). Additionally, we go from Adam and Eve who are children, to Noah who is the most righteous of his generation, but doesn't attempt to change God's mind about killing all people and animals, to Abraham who tells God not to dare to destroy an entire city.
3) The covenental formulary is preserved throughout all the so called modifications, "arbitrary additions", political feuds, etc. To learn what covenental formulary is and why it is important, please read the book Sinai and Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible by Jon Levenson.

Here is another thing that one has to watch out for. The so called contradictions. On page 229, the author lists two "contradictory" passages.

(1) "Remember the Sabbath day to sanctify it...because in six days Yahweh made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and he rested on the seventh day. Therefore Yahweh blessed the Sabbath day and sanctified it."

(2) "Keep the Sabbath day to sanctify it...and you shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and Yahweh your God brought you out from there with a strong hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore Yahweh your God commanded you to observe the Sabbath day"

The author claims that (1) and (2) above are somehow contradictory and yet people who read them seem to be able to reconcile them. Let me suggest that (1) states why the Sabbath day is sanctified while (2) states why you should keep it sanctified. Had the author understood that the story of the bringing out of the land of Egypt is the reason for why we as Jews obey God's commandments, he would have understood the reason for (2). (1) simply states that given that you will obey God and keep Sabbath holy, here is an explanation for why it is holy. Contradictory? Perhaps in the author's imagination.

In any case, the bible is a living book. It is the way in which one communicates with a living God. Perhaps the reason that so many people object to the kind of study that leads to the documentary hypothesis is the notion that it is like cutting up a dead frog in order to do a postmortem. Instead, you can use the book to create a relationship with God that has been described by many as a relationship between lovers.

There are precious few books out there that critically examine the Bible as an archaeological item without bashing the religions that hold it up as a divine creation. While there are few fundamentalists or traditional religious believers who would applaud Dr. Friedman, "Who Wrote the Bible?" is a fantastic work that critically examines some books in the Old Testment and places them in a historical context.

In looking at "apparent contradictions" and other anomalies of the Old Testament, Dr. Friedman's explanations provide a plausible alternative to the strange, twisted logic of apologists. Archaeology tells us that the Bible was written by many different people over a very long period of time. Dr. Friedman lays that path out for us with stunning clarity.

If you consider yourself a "Bible Freak", or know someone who does, then you owe it to yourself to learn about the Holy Book. Dr. Friedman's book is a great start.

This book is not well written--it's irritating how the order of happenings is jumbled, particularly concerning Dr. Carson's earlier life--but it's an interesting read about a fascinating person and his work. For those who think Dr. Carson comes across as arrogant--I think anyone who does what he does has to have a certain amount of arrogance!

This is an excellent read for young adults onward. Interwoven in all of Dr. Carson's stories is a testament to what GOD can do. Dr. Carson was child by societal standards was not supposed to succeed. He was raised in a single parent home with a mother who battled mental illness yet he overcame struggles by focusing on what he could do as opposed to what he couldn't do. This book will truly inspire you to be the very best in your God led profession. Awesome!!!

Amazing, this man knew what he wanted to do at an early age, with his Mother's hard work, he was able to fulfill his dream.

The book documents the early life and rise to medical stardom
of Dr. Benjamin Carson- a now famous neurosurgeon. The volume
begins with the childhood experiences and upbringing of Ben
and his brother Curtis. Ben tended to cram his studying at
the last minute. Nevertheless, he did well in grammar school.
Later, he would struggle in a marathon study session to
achieve a 97 in chemistry.

Ben attended Yale University and proceeded to the
University of Michigan to study medicine. He skipped a
General Surgery rotation to go straight to a Neuroscience
residency at Johns Hopkins University.
The volume contains a series of memorable pictures depicting
Dr. Carson MD as a neurosurgeon.

The presentation describes some very complicated surgical
procedures; such as, the hemispherectomy on the
patient Miranda. The procedure was lengthy and complicated
in this particular case because a part of the brain matter
had to be extracted. Ultimately, the procedure was successful
due to the skillful surgical manipulations of Dr. Carson
and a concept known as plasticity. The concept deals with
the ability of the brain to attain a similar mathematical
dilation or shape despite pressure deformation during surgery.
The patient was speaking shortly thereafter.

Brain diagnostics and surgery can be a complicated
undertaking due to a number of factors including the lengthy
time in surgery and extensive bleeding. Diseases of the brain
can have very technical distinctions; such as, cerebellar atrophy
and Marchiafava's disease. The presentation documents just how
far brain surgery has come through advances in the
art of surgery. The book makes a very interesting read for a
wide constituency of the general public and especially
medical practitioners.

This book has not only allow me to change my outlook on life, but I have also developed a more positive attitude towards myself. This is a very inspiring book and I wish there were more books on the market like it. These are the books children should be reading in class to help build their self-esteem.

Delivered early. Great condition. Good delivery info provided. I'll do it again.

I'm currently doing a History course for the IB. A reasonable percentage of final grade orignates from my internal Assessment.

For this i need two realiable sources. This source proved itself to be very helpful and explanatory for it is written in a manner that the reader wants to always know more. The book explains why the Soviet put Nuclear Missiles in Cuba how the Jupiter Missiles influenced this and at the end, it shows how the Americans were able to make the Soviets withdraw their missiles form Cuba.

An execellent book. I recommend!

Reading "Essence of Decision" resonates with Kurosawa, or maybe Stoppard. We have a central story - one of the great non-events in human history, the moment when the Soviet Union and the United States "came eyeball to eyeball" (as Dean Rusk is said to have said) before someone blinked. We hear it three times: one, from the standpoint of the "rational actor;" second from the internal logic of organizations; and third, from the perspective of politics where people more or less rub along together.

It's an event that bears retelling and, with qualification, the device works. The upshot is that we get some insight into the missile crisis. But not at all incidentally, we get some insight into the academic study of politics (I resist calling it "political science"), and a whiff of what it might have to offer for our better understanding of the world.

Aside from the Kurusowa effect, there is another structural innovation. We have, in a sense, two books interleaved, like Faulkner's "Wild Palms." The even-numbered chapters tell (and retell) the basic story. The odd-numbered chapters offer a framework of "theory."

I suppose you might read just the even-numbered chapters - indeed the authors themselves suggest as much, though rather half-heartedly. And indeed, the odd-numbered chapters can be heavy going. One cannot help recalling the old canard about the sociologist as a person who gets a government research grant to find the bordello next door. You are tempted to say that their theory is what sophisticated people know anyway, and the clueless will probably never figure out.

But there is an answer to this dismissal. That is: most (or at least) a lot of history gets told from the standpoint of the "rational actor." A survey of the competing approaches makes it clear just what this approach leaves out. And if the polyphonic approach is so obviously superior to the single narrative line, then why have historians from Thucydides to Henry Kissinger been willing to do without it? One answer might be: for all their talents, they simply haven't learned the way to tell a story in any other way.

So on the whole, retelling works. But not, perhaps, as well as it might. Another reviewer has said that this isn't really a case to illustrate "organization" theory here because this is not a case that highlights organizations - rather, at least for the United States, the response to the Cuban missile crisis was the work of a small group of men, working together in close cooperation. There is some merit to this view: concededly, you do not get the clash of bull elephants that you might have got at another time when Defense makes war on State, and both work together to fend of Intelligence. But you get a taste of it: we find that the Joint Chiefs were most hospitable to an invasion; that State thought that maybe we could talk it through; and that John McCone from the CIA was the one person who most clearly anticipated the threat. Moreover, you see the "organization" problem in a somewhat different light, when you see how the President's orders were massaged or modified by the military (sometimes, even, within the military).

But perhaps in any event, I need not get too distracted by the framework. Along the way, there are any number of nuggets that stand pretty well on their own. I liked in particular, for instance, the discussion of the role of committee work. We tend to stick up our nose at any project done by committee. But, argue our authors, in World War II it was Churchill, high-handed as he was, who worked through committee-and virtually always followed the committee's advice. The "strong leader" who kept things close to his vest, was Hitler.

But more generally - I was already an adult at the time of the Cuban missile crisis, and I remember it well. Specifically, I remember how frightened were so many people in my surroundings. I wasn't that frightened; I figured that one way or another, we would rub along. In the end, of course, I was right - we did rub along. But I think in retrospect, it was I who was kidding myself and the Nervous Nellies who had the right attitude. We did rub along, but as Wellington said about the Battle of Waterloo, it was a near thing. I particularly like Robert Kennedy:

"The fourteen people [in the American inner circle] were very significant-bright, able, dedicated people, all of whom had the greatest affection for the U.S. ... If six of them had been President of the U.S., I think that the world might have been blown up."

[Final technical note: one or more of the other reviews appear to be discussing the first edition of this book. The (current) seocnd edition is not a mere cosmetic update, but substantially a new book].

A great number of books and articles has been published attempting to explore and explain the Cuban missile crisis that had brought the world to the brink of a thermonuclear world war. Allison and Zelikow, in Essence of Decision, explain the Cuban missile crisis through three different lenses, that is, The Rational Actor Paradigm, Organizational Behavior Paradigm and Governmental Politics Paradigm, each of which is based on a different set of assumptions, each of which has a distinct bundle of organizing concepts and, each of which brings different general/specific propositions for the issue under question. Allison and Zelikow investigate the Cuban missile crisis through the lenses of three models in turn by asking three simple questions:

1. Why did the Soviet Union decide to place offensive missiles in Cuba?
2. Why did the United States respond to the missile deployment with a blockade?
3. Why did the Soviet Union withdraw the missiles?

The analyst looking to Cuban missile crisis through the lens of "rational actor model" conceives of governmental action as a "choice" made by a unitary and rational nation or national government. In this model, national government is treated as if it is an "individual" identifying problem, producing solution alternatives and picking one of those alternatives up whose result would satisfy the expected utility function of the nation best based on the "purpose" of the nation. The rational actor model analyst generates hypotheses, for example, about why the Soviet Union decided to send nuclear missiles to Cuba: to defend Cuba, rectify the nuclear strategic balance, or provide an advantage in the confrontation over Berlin? The virtue of the model comes from its power of explanation especially in case it is able to expose the "purpose" of the nation/state. So all the puzzling pieces of the relevant issue under question are to be tied into a coherent and satisfactory story.

The rational actor model falls short of fully understanding of the issue under question in that it does not take account of other equally important considerations. Admittedly, the rational actor model neglects the organizational processes and capabilities that structure the issue or problem under question, and, limit or extend the policy alternatives available to "rational" policy actors. In final instant, it is manifest that policy executives have to decide policy alternative from the "menu" that current organizational technologies and capabilities write. In organizational behavior model, the analyst investigates, for example, the standard operating procedures (SOP) of government organizations in order to understand which policy alternatives are available to political actors and which one is chosen and why. So, the organizational behavior paradigm closes the gaps of the rational actor paradigm.

Finally, the governmental politics model conceives of governmental policy under question not as a rational actor choice or organizational output but as a "resultant" of bargaining along regular circuits among players positioned hierarchically within the government. In this model, the political actors and their intentions, positions and interests, their relative power, the action channels through which the political actors input and exert their influence, decision rules and similar matters stand to the fore in analysis.

The three models, according to Allison and Zelikow, are complementary to each other. "Model I fixes the broader context, the larger national patterns, and the shared images. Within this context, Model II illuminates the organizational routines that produce the information, options, and action. Model III focuses in greater detail on the individuals who constitute a government and the politics and procedures by which their competing perceptions and preferences are combined" (p. 392). Rather than giving different answers to the same question, each of the three models illuminates one corner of the issue and contributes to our understanding. By integrating the factors identified under each lens, the authors argue, explanations can be significantly strengthened.

The final chapter of the book in which the authors hypothetically demonstrate how the interaction of the factors identified under each lens can lead to a nuclear war should be perused by those who firmly believe that after the collapse of the Soviet Union there no longer exists the precipice of a nuclear slaughter.

Though I believe this book is a must-read for everybody (not necessary to mention all the fields), I recommend this masterpiece especially to students of strategic management who have read Strategy Safari by Mintzberg et al. (1998) for which I believe Essence of Decision will be an excellent field book and to students who have read Case Study Research by Robert Yin for which I think Essence of Decision will be a perfect workbook.

Overall, this book is a living example of a dedicated and illuminating scholarship. Highly recommended.

This is a political-sciency version of the closest we came to a nuclear war, in effect using the crisis to introduce the reader to a methodology on how people make decisions. The authors see three ways that things get decided, and when observers confuse them, dire consequences may follow. First, there is the rational-actor who does things for explicit reasons, as if there were one decisionmaker who controls everything from conception to implementation. Second, there is the political decision, often made for purposes of manipulation rather than for stated goals and hance are harder to read. Third, there is bureaucratic decison-making, according to which actors on the ground carry out orders in the way that they are trained (i.e. by standard operating procedures, or SOPs).

Basically, in my reading, they argue that these modes were mixed in the Cuban Missile Crisis - the US thinking that there was a (rational actor) policy to militarise Cuba with nuclear weapons when in fact much of the provocatively appearing construction was due to SOPs of the military who installed the missiles. Thus, the US had less to fear, but its political reality made an over-reaction inevitable.

Now, these are very useful distinctions and the analysis is interesting. However, they do not make for very interesting reading or very good history. That makes this book a slog, which limits its appeal to academics rather than the general reader. I read this for a class - otherwise, I would never have gotten through it.

Recommended on balance, but go elsewhere if you are looking for a good story rather than a rather staid acadeimic analysis.

This book is a wonderful journey into the greek, what a vat of information, and brings such depth and understanding to the scriptures, I never miss a day. Thank you Rick Renner for your time and effert that went into this book of sparkling gems.

This book is a powerful learning tool that enhances the reader's experience into God's word. The book is a 365 day devotional that takes readers into a deeper look of our English words through the Greek language. This is an exceptional read that truly touches and moves the believer to stir up the fire for Jesus inside of themselves. I recommend this "gemstone".

This daily devotional is excellent. It has The Word, it has the definition of The Word, it has a daily prayer to pray, a daily declaration to declare, and a list of questions to ask yourself.

It is a comprehensive, truth revealing, life changing study/gem.

I have bought 8 to give to others. It is the only daily devotional/study book that I have actually greatly anticipated reading and done so on an ongoing basis.

It is an excellent tool and investment for your life.

This is one of the most helpful books I have ever had. Not only is it a daily devotional thought, but it explains how the words used in the Bible relate to our every-day lives. After I saw how wonderful it was, I went back to Amazon and purchased two more copies for gifts, and they are in daily use and much appreciated.
Highly recommended.

This devotional is wonderful. It is a great way to get some in-depth study for a devotional time. It will enlighten and deepen your walk with God in a very real way. It is a great book to give you more in-depth study, but to apply it to your every day life.

Excellent book

This excellent book is a manual of animation.
Everything about animation you can find on it.

Anyone who loves Disney animation and anyone who is learning the process of animation needs to get their hands on this book. It is long, it is detailed, but it is well worth it. This book mainly covers the essential Principles of Animation such as Squash and Stretch, Anticipation, Follow Through, etc. Go get it!

This is a really inspirational book! It takes you through the history of Disney animation and how the founding animators discovered their secrets and modeled their craft. You will learn all about the fundamentals of great animation and how to apply proven techniques to form your skill. It is easy to read and is full of great imagery and references. Highly recommended!

Wow!..First of all, the presentation of the book is amazing. The cover, the paper, everything. And wen you open the book, is simply what you need for start to see animation as an art...no, in my case, an "excuse" for use a software (I sarting to go to 3d animation). Buy this book!

The love produces animation! That book exhibition that! That amazes of book! That fantastic thing is the friendship and the production of those two geniuses of the animation! The life and the those two men's art is a thing that contemplates in all us, impassioned by animation. They are my life examples, and one day I would like cannot at least to arrive close to what did. That book, and the dvd about the life of the two, is obligatory things in any school, or shelf peculiar of any person that has feelings and sensibility to understand the beautiful things of the life. Wonderful? Spectacular? Grandiose? I don't have as defining that book. He is more than any definition that somebody can create. It is the love transformed in cartoons overflowing for the pages of that wonderful book. I will buy more a, to be in the shelf without nobody opens it, and my descendants only can you make it for they know a time and such some brilliant people and magics as these highlighted in that spectacular book.