Westerns Books

I've read almost every book L'amour wrote, but if I had to chose a favorite out of all of them The Last of the Breed would win, hands down!!! I've read it at least 3 or 4 times.

Mediocre writing makes 'Last of the Breed' a dull and frustrating book. Does L'Amour believe his readers lack intelligence and memory? How else can one explain the frequent lapses into pedantry or the repeated repetitiveness? 'Last of the Breed' contains numerous mini-lectures on climate, cold weather survival, Soviet history, 'red' Indians, etc. It also contains phrases that L'Amour loves to repeat, such as the need for meat and fat when hiking across cold lands or that death will result minutes after immersion in cold water when the temperature is 40 below zero. Even if a reader had not known these facts, writing them once is enough. After reading numerous such phrases for the third (or fourth or fifth) time, my internal reply became, "I got it the first time."

With an interesting main plot (wilderness trained Air Force pilot Joe Makatozi (Mack) escapes from a Siberian prison) and an interesting protagonist (intelligent, athletic Sioux who knows and loves the 'old ways'), this novel had great potential. Unfortunately, L'Amour does not stick with the main plot and main protagonist. The subplots make little sense, and the minor characters provide no interest or appeal.

The first illogical subplot involves the capture of Joe Mack. Somehow, a GRU colonel in Siberia has enough influence 1. to know about a top test pilot, 2. to get a Soviet operative in the U.S. Air Force personnel department to reassign Joe Mack to an Alaska posting, 3. to know when Joe Mack will be flying an experimental jet over the Bering Sea, 4. to have a special Soviet ship positioned below the flight path that can bring down the jet without guns or missiles (electromagnetic pulse beam?), and 5. to have the downed pilot brought to a special interrogation prison more than 1000 miles inland. That's one helluva colonel.

A second illogical subplot involves Joe Mack's desire for revenge on the GRU colonel. Joe Mack escapes the prison and then plans to spend a year or more to cross half of Siberia on foot, cross the Bering Sea, report back to the Air Force, return secretly to Siberia, and find the GRU colonel for a man-to-man showdown. If he needs revenge, why doesn't he just loop back to the prison a week or so after his escape? Why delay revenge for more than a year, especially since his odds of surviving are so low?

A third illogical subplot involves an old Lithuanian man and his adult daughter who are living in a cabin in Siberia when they encounter Joe Mack. The three get along smashingly, Joe Mack and the woman silently fall in love (maybe), and Joe Mack promises to help them escape the USSR after he returns to kill the GRU colonel. This makes little sense: Joe Mack had been avoiding contact with people but then stays with these two for weeks despite encountering a nasty man in a nearby cabin who hates him. Joe Mack had a chance to kill this man but did not take it. Why would our savage protagonist leave alive an enemy who will report him and who also might harm his Lithuanian friends? After Joe Mack leaves that is exactly what happens: hundreds of soldiers now search for him, and his friends had to leave and go into hiding from the KGB and GRU.

It's been more than twenty years since I last read a Louis L'Amour book: his simplistic westerns were unappealing to me. I bought this book because of its very different plot and setting, and because it garnered great reviews. But, this book reads like his older westerns except it is longer and even more repetitive. Avoid 'Last of the Breed' unless you like other L'Amour novels.

I read LAST OF THE BREED decades ago & wanted to reread it & have it in my library. Once again I was thrilled by the tale of a US military Sioux pilot whose experimental airplane is brought down over Siberia, back in the days when the Soviet Union was still a menace. Interred in a gulag Joe Mack's only chance for escape is to do it immediately before the lack of food saps his strength. So he does, in an ingeniously simply way & sets out across the desolate tundra, finding friends & foes on his way to freedom. I'm not a fan of L'Amour's writing although this one is a pure modernday survival adventure. Occasionally repetitive, always on the go with something to say about living one's life.

The pure talent & genius of Louis L'Amour.... WOW! This is by far one of my favorite books of all time! One of the 1st novels I actually enjoyed reading so much I didn't want to put it down. I was assigned this book in high school (early 90's) and thought, "crap, not a friggin' western!" My grandpa liked L'amour and all I knew was that all of HIS book had pictures of cowboys on the cover. Well, I was soooo pleasantly surprised by this one that I actually started reading the westerns too!!!

Louis L'Amour was writing at the top of his game in the years prior to his death. LAST OF THE BREED is one of the finest examples of his story telling skills as he took the American West to Siberia. This story was written before the opening of the Iron Curtain revealed the kidnapping of American pilots by the Soviets, which is another reason it is so intriguing.
Joseph "Joe Mack" Makatozi is a descendant of a Scotch grandfather and Native Americans. Warriors all. His struggle to escape captivity by the Soviets across Siberia is the very essence of wilderness survival and high adventure. If you've never spent evenings in the company of Louis L'Amour take LAST OF THE BREED as your introduce to a fine craftsman. It ranks near the top of my list of favorites.
Writing as a Small BusinessQualifying Laps: A Brewster County NovelThe Bluegrass Dream: A Wilderness Adventure of Early SettlersUnder the Liberty OakGuns Across the Rio: A Texas Ranger in Old Mexico

Tillich believes that modern man's predominant anxiety is a sense of meaninglessness leading to despair. This is the Existentialist's plight. Tillich states that meaninglessness has not always been the predominant concern. In prior ages it had been death and later guilt.

In order to resolve the angst of modern man, Tillich imposes upon himself that "The answer must accept, as its precondition, the state of meaninglessness." This precondition creates the cul-de-sac for his rational argument.

Tillich himself, offers the naïve solution of "The faith which creates the courage to take [meaninglessness/anxiety] into itself has no special content. It is simply faith, undirected, absolute. It is undefinable, since everything defined is dissolved by doubt and meaninglessness."

In other words, Tillich suggests that to resolve meaninglessness and despair one should resort to having faith without subject matter.

Tillich further explains himself by stating the requisite courage/faith is not without subject matter but rather is in "pure being" or "the God above God". This is nonsense. The God of the Bible is the great "I AM", pure being. There is no God above God.

By giving the proposition "God above God" Tillich is either:

a) making a substitution identical to that which is being substituted, making the proposition gibberish

b) removing God from the equation, replacing Him with the power of being within ourselves as the basis for our courage (what an ersatz this exchange would be, a finite force within ourselves, leading to certain death, rather than a personal God who could be implored that held the power to gift eternity).

or

c) replacing the definition of God handed down through the ages and substituting it for one, more amenable to his existentialist philosophy. In so doing he is falling into the trap of creating god in his own image. One also would have to ask the question why he feels he should be trusted with elucidating to mankind who God is, using his reason alone? The credentials of Jesus and Moses are likely more qualified for this which is likely why their assertions are believed more than those of Tillich.

If you were not certain before reading this book that Existentialist philosophy has no real legitimate answers for meaning in life this book should provide another nail in the coffin towards that conclusion.

TILLICH'S BASIC IDEAS OF GOD AND THE GOD-ABOVE-GOD ARE NOT CLEAR IN THE COURAGE TO BE SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE HE STATES AS THE ESSENTIAL FUNCTION OF CHRISTIAN CLERGY KEEPING PEOPLE FROM REALIZING THE NATURE OF "GOD" FOR WHICH PURPOSE HE IDENTIFIES THE "GOD-ABOVE-GOD" THE NATURE OF "GOD" IS
THE GREAT MACHINE WHICH IN ALBERT EINSTEIN'S VIEW FOR EXAMPLE OBVIATES HUMAN FREEDOM. THAT IS: THE UNIVERSE IS MACHINE GOVERNED BY FIXED LAW; WE ARE ALL PARTS OF THE UNIVERSE, NO MORE FREE THAN A ROCK TO HAVE FREEDOM FROM, SAY, GRAVITY. TILLICH SAYS THAT TO REALLY GRASP THIS IS
BEYOND HUMAN ENDURANCE. IF ONE IS A SERIOUS STUDENT OF THE BIBLE, ONE CAN SEE THAT THE "GOD" OF TILLICH IS PRESENTED TO THE JEWS, BUT WITH A SET OF ILLUSIONS, AS CHOSEN, THE NEED FOR AN ENEMY TO DEFINE AS OTHER THAN AS THE "GOD" OF TILLICH THE NATURE OF THE JEWISH INDIVIDUAL, THE LONG-TERM ETHIC OF GHE GOOD DEFINED AS WHAT IS BEST FOR JEWS THROUGH CENTURIES. EINSTEIN CALLED THE JEWISH GOD (THE "GOD" OF TILLICH) AS THE
NEGATION OF SUPERSTITION AND WITH IMAGINARY CHARACTERISTICS ADDED.
THE "GOD-ABOVE-GOD" IS AN INTELLECTIZED JUSTIFICATION FOR IGNORING OR NOT PERMITTING OTHERS TO COMPREHEND THE MECHANICAL NATURE OF REALITY. TO IGNORE INVOLVES RISK. A MAN WHO IGNORES THE MECHANISTIC NATURE OF CAUSE AND EFFECT IN FAVOR OF COURAGE, HOPE, ROMANTICISM OR WHATEVER EXERCISES EITHER HIS IGNORANCE OR HIS COURAGE.

I purchased two books written by Paul Tillich for one dollar a piece at Half-Price books. One is this book particular title. I have heard of the author because RC Sproul has often argued his thoughts as a mischaracterization of Christianity and the relationship possible between God and man. Paul Tillich's philosophy is clearly contradictory to Christianity. The author clearly states his thoughts are not biblical; he plainly does not believe in a greater being nor does he like the Being described in the Bible. This book is about man's relationship to the universe absent God. It is an argument that one needs to have courage absent the security of traditional religion; there is no God in his philosophy describing right and wrong; there is no higher Being protecting you. His perspective is part pantheism. Man does not die to be part of a conscience state, but pure dust and part of the whole of creation. One may have a social conscience but there are no arbiters to determine what one think is correct. This book is about the implications of this Worldview and the implications of grasping this `truth".

I believe the author could have made a more organized and clearer argument. The language is clear and easy to understand, but the thoughts could have been more organized.

It seemed at the beginning that it would be too abstract. Too involved in a history of philosophy in its discussion of the Stoics. That Tillich was asserting too much, as if "ex cathedra". But even in the early chapters, I sensed something special and by the time I reached Chapter 4 ("Courage and Participation: The Courage to Be as a Part"), I began to feel the my current situation was being directly and wisely addressed. That feeling only grew stronger from that point on.

There's so much value in this book that I feel somehow unworthy of reviewing it. It doesn't seem that any amount of time I spent preparing a review could do justice to "The Courage to Be". I had heard so much of Tillich but this is the first time I have read him. I have missed a lot and I am grateful I finally turned to him. I had been concerned about religious myths and whether Christianity retained any value for me. Gnostic Christian myths seems fascinating and they made me wonder if Christianity might offer more to me than I had suspected. That concern with myths and Christianity led me to read several books by the progressive Christian Bishop John Shelby Spong (e.g. Jesus for the Non-Religious)). Spong mentioned in at least one of his books that he had been a student of Tillich's. Tillich had challenged Spong with the concept of nontheism, a position that Spong has moved to. That has been my own understanding since my teens but I had turned to nontheistic Eastern religions and to unorthodox, nondogmatic Western religions. Only recently had I been open to reconsidering liberal Christianity. To some extent I had already done that with such postmodern thinkers as Thomas Altizer (The Gospel of Christian Atheism and Living the Death of God: A Theological Memoir) and recently Spong. Following up with Tillich and this book has been literally a godsend.

In much of "The Courage to Be", Tillich applies his knowledge of Western Existentialism. This meant all the more to me as in my teens I had devoured such existentialists as Sartre, Camus and to a lesser extent even Nietzsche and Kierkegaard. But it was difficult to apply it to my situation. Altizer had helped by tracing developments from Christianity into postmodern movements including atheism but he was difficult to follow.

Here now is Tillich who ties together Western Existentialist topics such as anxiety and meaninglessness and a postmodern concern to rediscover the relevance of the Christian tradition. Is one's self in danger today of being a thing, or as he writes "a matter of calculation and management"? As Tillich points out, the Existentialist Revolt strongly opposed such objectification. But by transcending the theistic way of understanding the sacred ,by turning to "the God above God", Tillich shares a hope ( at least in finding courage) that speak to those Existentialism addressed but recovers something from Christian roots. It is a project that seems to take better advantage of Western history and Christianity's role in it as it was than Spong's dependence on speculations to salvage an acceptable image of Jesus.

This is not a book for a single reading. I've started already on my second reading and I am also reading more of Tillich, already The socialist decision and am planning to read soon A HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN THOUGHT Edited By Carl E. Braaten. I somehow overlooked Tillich all these years and I am eager to make up for lost time. The timing is good because, as Spong has described, I seem to be "a believer in exile", raised a Christian and, although having questioned much about it, still influenced by my Protestant upbringing and by the many writings such as those of the Existentialists, that proceeded directly from or in reaction to Christianity.

Finding "A Courage to Be" and Tillich may be a way for me to accept my background without rejecting what I have learned and felt since.

Tillich gathers strands from stoicism, theistic existentialism, dialectical thought and fideism in an attempt to weave a unifying belief-system. I don't think he completely succeeds in doing that. However, he does manage to express some spiritual insights. And it is in the mining these spiritual gems that makes the book a worthwhile read.

Many reviewers have voiced the opinion that Tillich's writing style is very difficult to read. I do not necessarily agree with this assessment. Tillich employs paradoxical language in an attempt to explain that which is beyond all words. At times, his writing is dry. But it is not terribly difficult to follow.

Here are some of the insights that I have gathered from the reading of this book:

- The human predicament is the estrangement of one's existence from one's essential being. This estrangement is sin.

- God is understood as "being" itself. And "being" is a "creative process."

- There's a dialectical tension between being and nonbeing. And "the courage to be" is the power of being to will itself, to overcome the threat of nonbeing.

- "Courage needs the power of being, a power transcending the nonbeing" pg. 155

- Existential angst takes on three distinct forms: 1) the anxiety of fate and death, 2) the anxiety of emptiness and meaninglessness and 3) the anxiety of guilt and condemnation.

Tillich discusses at length the sociological implications of these three forms of "anxieties" as they played out in history.

At the heart of Tillich's discussion is the dialectical tension that exists between the individual and the group of which the individual is a part. Both the individual and the group are affirmed and denied. By affirming the self, the individual denies the group; by affirming the group, the individual denies himself. How does one overcome this conflict? By "the courage to be," and the "courage to be" is none other than faith itself.

"The 'courage to be' is the courage to accept oneself as accepted in spite of being unacceptable." pg. 164 This is Tillich's interpretation of the doctrine of "justification by faith."

I found Tillich's discussion of death to be very interesting:

"The courage to die is also the test of the courage to be. A self-affirmation which omits taking the affirmation of one's death into itself tries to escape the test of courage, the facing of nonbeing in the most radical way." pg. 169

We must learn to embrace death by taking death into ourselves. And it is with this acceptance that we affirm the "courage to be." It is only by dying, by dying to the self, that we are reborn to eternal life. Faith defined as the "courage to be" is where we derive the power of God, who is being itself.

Here are some examples of Tillich's paradoxical statements or aphorisms:

- "He who participates in God participates in eternity. But in order to participate in him you must be accepted by him and you must have accepted his acceptance of you." pg. 170

- "The courage to be is an expression of faith and what "faith" means must be understood through the courage to be." pg. 172

- "Faith is not an opinion but a state. It is the state of being grasped by the power of being, which transcends everything that is, and in which everything that is, participates." pg. 173

The major criticism that I have of Tillich's thought as represented in this book is that he failed to link the "courage to be" or faith with love. Ultimately love is the power of being. And God is not only being itself but also love. They are inseparable.

I am concerned I have read too many Miller books for I am now at the point of reading her RE-RUNS. It seems as though this story has been told several times over under different titles. I read it, it passed the time... BUT I'm sorry this book was very similar to some of her past books namely, Two Brothers. I will say there were times in this book where I did get very emotional. The loss that the Hero experiences is very well written and touching.

The Man From Stone Creek is a historical western romance set in 1903 in the Arizona Territory. The main romance is filled with suspense as the hero seeks to round up cattle rustlers and train robbers. The novel achieves an emotional depth as the heroine's romance heals a past tragedy. Linda Lael Miller's romance, however, is not just a hero-heroine romance --- it is the romance of a whole town where justice is found and the downtrodden find love.

Lawman Sam O'Ballivan has come to town to replace the schoolteacher. The minute he arrives, the local schoolboy fight and the boys learn justice O'Ballivan style. The boy who teased another is himself held by his feet with his head dangling down the well. The disciplined boy's complaints to his mother brings him to the attention of postmistress Maddie Chancelor. The sparks fly. When they collide, circumstances force Maddie into the sight of the most dangerous family in town. With Sam by her side, will she conquer the past or will his secret mission place her in the thick of even more trouble?

Sam may be working undercover to capture the castle rustlers and thieves terrorizing the local area, but his efforts to blend just seem to lead him into more trouble. Just as he realizes Maddie has his heart, his intended bride comes in on the stagecoach. Can it get any worse? Of course! The question is can all this danger change hearts so that romance succeeds?

Linda Lael Miller's magnificent romance is more than just Sam and Maddie. The reader sees problems that plagued the American West: the terrorists of the day, sickness, brothels which were often the only way for a woman to survive, children left orphaned or in need, and those left behind in the huge expansion of the West. The author does not shrink from the unpleasant realities of the historical setting, but she creates a romance where hearts are healed. Orphans and lost souls (children, adults and animals) find goodness, and justice is served. When her characters dare to opens their hearts and expose their vulnerabilities, love is found, and the lost or neglected who surround them get found.

Back of book: There was trouble in Haven, Arizona, and Ranger Sam O'Ballivan was determined to sort it all out. Badge and gun hidden, he arrived posing as the new schoolteacher, and his first order of business was to bring the rough ranchers' children under control. To that end, he called on Maddie Chancelor, the local postmistress, whose young brother was in firm need of discipline.
Sam wasn't sure what to expect, but it was definitely not this graceful woman whose prim, proper stance was so at odds with the fire in her eyes. Working undercover to capture a dangerous band of rustlers and train robbers was a job that had always kept him apart from other people. He was a man with his heart firmly in check, until Maddie. Now she was unwittingly tempting him down a path he'd sworn he'd never travel.
This story has some wonderful twists and turns that are not expected. It has a very sweet and touching love story. The main characters are well developed and interesting. Hard to put down, once you start reading.

The comment on the jacket is right, the author has made quite a story of what could be pretty dry material. As an introduction to the history of Western thought on the level of, say, Joseph Campbell's work (one of those quoted as praising it), I'd recommend it. In fact I got so interested in the the implications of what looked like a quote from Justin Martyr that I went looking for the original.

Fortunately, what we have of Justin Martyr's work is on the web, and it does not take very long to read it all. Unfortunately, the quoted phrase was not present in that work. Instead of unreservedly praising Plato as a "Christian before Christ", Justin Martyr actually spent a lot of time saying unkind things about him and the harmfulness of his philosophy. He did in one place suggest that a virtuous man like Socrates should indeed be regarded as a christian, following the spirit of Christ before his appearance, but Plato was not mentioned in that connection. I saw nothing that would really support the point that Tarnas seemed to want to make. And then in the last chapter Tarnas went off on a tangent that seemed to me of minor significance and doubtful validity.

So a good read, and worth the time as a first introduction or as a source of interesting ideas, but not entirely trustworthy. Anything you are going to rely on from it should be checked.

A single-volume history of the ideas that have shaped the Western mind. Unique in its capacity to empathize with all the variant worlds it describes, bringing history to vibrant life. It's a page turner. You can't wait to read what happens next in this complex narrative, and then you realize it is telling your own story.

I won't write much here as many have done a great job of summation, however I did just want to voice my disappointment with the epilogue. Much of the book seems to have the intellectual and reasearch rigour I like to see in such books, but the new age nonsense really leads me to question his credibility and so doubt I read till I reached it. Though its obviously not as up to date or the same in its attempted scope I would personally recommend Russell's "History of Western Philosophy" for a more insightful look at Western thought or even Watson's "Ideas: A History of Thought and Invention, from Fire to Freud".

I think, Richard Tarnas has done a spectacular job of compressing the whole history of the west into one comprehensive volume. Being a PhD student of science who has also explored spiritual ideas, I really like the fact that the author tries to highlight the existential crisis facing the world today.
I really recommend this book and would suggest people to be wary of negative
reviews on the book. The people who have negative opinions about the book and consider the eplilogue wacky are in denial of the fact that every opinion that they make can also be classified as wacky and subjective. In this pluralistic and subjective world they need to tolerant of opinions if they consider themselves reasonable. But if people want to be completely close minded about anything except their apriori judgements about things like depth psychology, what can be done. They ignore the fact that inconsistency rules even the most precise branch of science --mathematics. Godel's incompleteness theorem actually led to this conclusion.

Tarnas begins with Plato, working backward and forward from him. Plato's Forms, in particular, set the stage for the rest of the book, in my view. According to Plato, there are transcendent Forms for 'Man', 'Tree', 'Woman', for example, that the soul was exposed to before birth and remembers later in life. These Forms are timeless, trancendent and most, Beautiful.
Aristotle, the tenth in line from Pythagoras, quickly relegates Plato's Forms to the particular, noting their birth, maturation and decay within the object with no recourse to a transcendent realm.
The important thing is, in the greek rationalism of both Plato and Aristotle, the world is knowable and is a Cosmos, an ordered whole that can be readily understood by the human mind.
The philosophies of Plato and Aristotle move to the Arabics during the Dark Ages, until the medieval times, when the Arabics courteously return the two behemoths to western civilization where St. Augustine applies Platonic thought to theology, while St. Thomas Aquinas later does the same with Aristotle.
Somewhere in the mix, Ockham applies his razor to the idea of the Forms, being the first to deny a Form's transcendent or immanent reality, but rather positing that the Form is a construct of the human mind. Party pooper.
Modern science, which has divested the world of anything human,where the universe now contains no spirit or transcendent form, sets it's sights on a disenchanted universe that is now viewed as being mechanistic at best, lifeless at worst.
Man is taken, by way of Copernicus, then Kepler and Galileo, from being the absolute center of the Ptolemaic universe, to being a nondescript inhabitant on a planet moving about a sun, which is one of potentially millions of such stars in the now vast space of the experienced world.
During the Enlightenment, man having eaten the soul of the Cosmos and stolen it's intelligence and claimed it for himself, suddenly turns the lense on himself thorugh Descartes and Kant.
Not only is the Cosmos dead and lifeless and altogether inhuman, but man is incapable of perceiving said Cosmos in an objective way. Man inherently attaches Reality to the universe by viewing the world through the apriori lenses of time, space, cause and effect and so on.
So now, we have a dead and lifeless vast impersonal universe inhabited by man, who, due to his psychological makeup, can never understand said world objectively.
Nietzsche sounds the death knell. He says God is dead, but really, it is man, glourious understanding, at one with the world, man who is crucified. Nietzsche pronounces the birth of the modern era, where not by intelligence, which has been discounted, not by religion, which is suffering cognitive disonance due to the emerging scientific worldview (Darwinism, Atomism, the everexpanding nothingness peered at through ever stronger telescopic lenses), but sheer Will that will decide who is right.
Finally on to the postmodern picture. History has been dominated by white european males. Not only is the universe (and man) unknowable, but we don't even know the proper questions to ask. Language is a prison, seeking to encapsulate experience and reduce Reality to the constructs of the human mind. Western man, through the prevailing dichotomy of his science and religion, has raped women, the environment, destroyed the ozone, produced the atomic bomb, and on and on. No one has hold of the Truth. Truth is provincial, localized and relative, dependent upon a contingent human being. No world view has precedence over another. There is no prevailing meta-narrative that can capture global humanity and unite it.

But dear reader, there is hope. There is hope from the beginning pages of this book through to the epilogue. Tarnas wisely weaves a thread throughout that offers a glimpse into a potential new birth for mankind. Tarnas points out history seems to be coming to a culmination, something is definitely on the horizon for all of us.

I leave it to you, to read this wonderful book, to discover what possibilities (if not facts) lie ahead for humanity.

The book is well worth the read.

The first time I tried to take economics, I gave up. The teacher was no good, and the textbook we were using didn't help. So I put the course off for two years until I couldn't wait any longer.

But things have changed, thank God! The second time around I had a much better teacher, but more than that, we used this textbook instead, and I swear it helped me do well in the class. It is SO clearly written, with great examples and great stories. I admit I was intimidated by economics at first, but this book has a way of explaining the concepts that makes you think, "Hey, I actually get this." The authors give you credit for being an intelligent person, and they provide really clear analysis while walking you through the tougher parts step by step.

As for the review here that talks about the authors' political agenda, I have to come to the authors' defense. I consider myself very middle of the road politically, and believe me, there is nothing objectionable here. The authors are very careful to present both sides of various debates, and those debates are always framed as two sides of a story - and they don't take either side, they just report the controversy and let the reader decide for himself.

After reading this book and taking this course, I feel that I understand the newspaper and TV news much better. So, thanks Robert Hall and Marc Lieberman, I got an A in principles of econ when I thought the best I could hope for was a D.

Easy and fun to use. Excellent blend of academia and real-life examples. Charts, graphs, and illustrations were colorful and easy to understand. Also, authors Hall and Liberman provide readers access to their macroecon website for additional study. I used this text at the postgraduate level - great for undergrads, too.

I was required to use this book for a college macro course. I found this to be one of the worst business textbooks I've seen so far. I think it fails its job at giving the average college student a good understanding of the macro economy.

When explaining simple concepts that should be easy to grasp, the book loads the reader down with obscure mathematical equations and other gobblygook. On rather complicated topics where additional details would help, they try to condense the topics making it difficult to see the big picture. To figure out what I was supposed to learn, I had to use other sources to help me out (i.e. websites and other business books). I also think the authors are poor at making comprehensible analogies.

Perhaps the most annoying aspect was the author's injected liberal opinion. In a few chapters, they innuendo their griefs about how businesses are unfair to poor people and that successful individuals should have their winnings reallocated to the less privileged. They also gripe about how not everyone can find a job in a capitalist society. It seems that the authors have little understanding of concepts like competition and motivation to be successful.

If you are a course coordinator considering this book for a macroeconomics class, please do your students a favor and seek a different book. As a student, it is more helpful to have a book free of opinions. A book that uses clear explanations rather than confusing lines and charts. If the websites and other sources I used can clearly state the material, so can a textbook!

The class was great and the book was great. Give you real life cases so you understand material. Gives you information on how the US compares to other nations. Also has funny facts and snippits of funny cases. Highly recommend, can learn a lot!

to the sender of this book:

I was sent the wrong version. I was sent the 7th ed. not the 8th ed.

Please send me the 8th ed. of

The Legal Environment of Business...

ISBN: 0324121512

I taught out of this text for several years. It's excellent. The materials are sensibly organized; the writing is clear without being juvenile; and the legal analysis is flawless.

Students respond well to the book.

This is one of the best texts that I've ever used in any class, and it's certainly the best text that I've found for teaching business law to non-law students.

This is the second book about Matt Jensen, I think, its a fun escape book of the west. If you like westerns like Louie L'Amour, you will enjoy reading these books!

This book is just wonderful because while you read it, the author gives you illustrative examples whereby you understand general policies and ideologies within the economy. It is just a five and odd star winner!!

I liked this text and might adopt it for my classes. Economics is not an easy subject but Prof. McEachern's text is clearly written. The end of chapter summary of key ideas help to clarify what the chapter was about. The problems and exercises are rigorous, but within reach of anyone who has had algebra.

The case studies bring a real world aspect to the material.

This book is terrible. The author is for one thing extremely dull. Worst though is the questions he expects you to answer at the end of most chapters. The examples he gives while reading the chapter are totally different from the questions he asks at the end of the chapters. As a result of this you are left asking yourself, when the hell did we do this?????? To make matters worse their is no answer key to any of this, so even if you attempt to answer the questions, you will never even know if you did them right or not! Stay away from this book if possible, take a teacher who uses another book, because this book is very poor. In my class, probably half dropped because of this!

When I saw GLNP on PBS, I was surprised to find that Christine Barnes had yet again discovered more national treasures to share with us all. I have all of her books, and like the earlier ones, she makes these lodges come alive in so many ways. I suggest you only read one chapter at a time, then let the experience sink in overnight. The photography by itself tells a story with a great selection of photos including priceless historical shots. Those who appreciate history will not be disappointed as the author covers each topic in an accurate, but interesting way. Architects will appreciate the detail and early renderings. And finally, for those who are looking for new places for the family vacation, this book is a must. I visited many of the lodges featured in her previous books, both in the US and Canada. I can assure you there is nothing artificial about any of these places. As they say, they are the "real deal" and part of our history we can all be proud of and experience ourselves

Fun reading if you are an explorer of the National Parks, which I am. Certainly the most detailed descriptions in general circulation of these historic places. The second edition had a few places in it that I did not know about and have now placed on my list of lodges to stay in. Without a doubt all these places still have great position. For example the Many Glacier Lodge was the most dramatic nature setting of any hotel I have ever stayed in. This includes some really fabulous places in Europe. But the level of the rooms does tend to vary. Check Frommers, AAA, or others to get a sense of what the room quality may be. Frankly with some like the Many Glacier, it did not matter. But to those wanting to stay at a "Four Seasons" level accommodation in a National Park you may not be happy.