End-of-Life Books

Joyce's voice is missing - so that punch I was expecting was also missing. Also - I ordered the CD because I assumed that I could listen to a morning message on my way into work and the evening message on my way home. Disk management would have been easier if the morning and ending message would be on the same disk and I would not need to switch disks. Also, hard to tell when day one is done on my CD player. The messages are very good and inspiring, but the ease of the CD method of listening wasn't as expected.

Joyce Meyer's STARTING YOUR DAY RIGHT, ENDING YOUR DAY RIGHT BOX SET: DEVOTIONS TO BEGIN AND END EACH DAY is on 4 CDs narrated by Andra McCollom, whose smooth voice lends quiet inspiration to a wonderful set. This will make either a fine lending library addition or a perfect gift for any seeking inspiration.

Joyce's daughter is an adequate reader of this audio book but she lacks the punch of hearing Joyce herself. I'd rather purchase a DVD with Joyce presenting this material. I am dissapointed in this purchase.

This book is very impressive. The research is first rate and the writing is excellent. The coverage of population as an issue is comprehensive. It is especially effective in presenting the terrible consequences of human overpopulation on habitat destruction and biodiversity. I've read several books on human overpopulation. This is the best

The relentless litany of bad news is unfortunately a common theme in many environmental books,including this one. It completely overlooks the major worldwide trends--more food per capita,safer water,lower infant mortality,for example--that have increased life expectancy by more than 20 years since World War ll.

Being substantially outside of Bell Hooks' target audience, I confess a certain amount of difficulty in hearing what she has to say. Frankly, I had to read this book twice in order to get past her offensive terminology. "Whiteness" is the foundational problem for Hooks, and it leads to racism, colonization, and "oppressive structures of domination."

It is possible that Hooks uses inflammatory language with intention. Her overarching purpose seems to be to rekindle black solidarity in order to complete movement toward racial freedom and equality. This goal is laudable, but I find it easier to support Hooks when she rephrases this goal outside of racial class conflict. She advocates for control of one's destiny, self-actualization, community, and integrity of being, but she does not seem to realize that these are the yearnings of all humanity, not simply American blacks.

American culture, perhaps every human culture, is hierarchical. Even whites must deal with the "oppression" of those higher in the structure. Continued fracturing of middle and lower levels of the social structure along racial lines merely diffuses the power innate to each social class. Coalitions across racial, religious, and ethnic barriers are needed to compete with the hegemonic power of the social elites. Hooks passionate voice may actually work to maintain the secondary status of black Americans by making such coalitions more difficult.

I find two additional inconsistencies in Hooks message. First, she advocates solidarity and self-actualization, but I cannot help but wonder if these two goals can be harmonized. Secondly, I believe she is guilty of baseline distortion in her assumption of hopelessness as the black cultural norm. This implied victimization is self-defeating, and seems to deny the tremendous advances black Americans have made educationally and economically in the last twenty years.

It is possible that America needs to be continually confronted lest we become complacent in the progress we have made toward an egalitarian ideal. If so, Hooks' voice should be heard. But make no mistake about it, Hooks is not a voice of calm reason and balanced reflection. She writes from the fringes where ideals shine so brightly that the merest hint of a blemish is magnified.

Yearning is comprised of a series of essays, which identify, dissect, and communicate cultural politics with a focus on the world's lack of focus towards black women. Various overlooked and underrepresented groups in the media and world literature are given a voice too. Stereotypes and cultural ignorance is dealt with thoroughly. Not only does the author shoot down the upper-class white heterosexual male icon, she analyzes mentally, statistically and historically oppressed peoples own misgivings. All the while, the book is entertaining. bell hooks has a straight forward approach that forces one to look past his-story's rhetoric and recognize truths. hooks writes for those with a vocabulary, so if that's what you lack, grab Webster and learn a few words as you gain insight and recognition on cultural politics.

I have read many many books on Elvis. I picked this book up and was impressed with all the information on Elvis from good to bad. If you are new to world of Elvis, first off congrats, this book is a great starter. It talks about every part of his life but never gets real deep into one subject.

For example, the author speaks about Elvis's relationship with Kathy Westmorland, one of his back up singers. If you find this interesting, you can pick up her book to learn more. You will read a lot on Pricilla, and if that interest you, you can pick up her book.

Just read it and mark the pages that interest you or that you might have more questions about. Then look up more indepth books on that certain topic. There are books from the 50's to Vegas, to his Army days, to the days hanging out with his buddies. It just depends on what part of his life you like the best. There is not ONE book that puts all the many 300 books of Elvis into one.

There is so much about the guy and I will warn you now, once you think you have a question answered about Elvis in your head another one will pop up. Elvis was a star, a person, a friend, husband, dad, spirtual person (and there are books on this topic), he was so many things that it is hard to completley say, what he was actually like.

Compared to say, Sinatra, who after reading two books, you understand the man, why he was the way he was, you could predict his views, actions in his life but with Elvis every year was different, every topic/situation was never what you thought it would turn out to be. You have so many outside distractions, from the colonel to his friends, his past views/emotions, his world around him and his drug use that no one could predict the way he would react to any situation. He was a complex person that is hard to understand.

As you read more and more about the man, you try to put yourself in his shoes and see if you would be the same way. One thing that does hold true for many rock stars, is the day they get big or make it, is the age they stay at and this book mention this. So think of Elvis as always being 21, what were you like? Up all night, finding the next high, friends were at the top of your list, money could always be found tomorrow and you never trusted one person one day but maybe the next day. People told you things and you never knew if you should believe them, and even when they were right, they might be wrong tomorrow. So keep this in mind when you are trying to figure out the man.

One book I have yet to see and hope someone will do, is on his father. He was the closest family member, he was his dad and yet the relationship was there one day and gone the next. How did Vernon feel about Elvis's passing, what did he do for 2 years after 1977? My personal view, is here is a guy sitting in Graceland in 1978, losing money and wondering how can he make money, and the entire time he is literally sitting on a goldmine, even Pricilla figured that out.

Good luck to all the new fans, I can tell you after reading close to a hundred books of the man. Keep in mind that some stories are true some are not. Personally I feel each person from family members to close friends, truely loved the man.

Vernon (Elvis dad) has been heard saying that the night Elvis was born a blue light shined over the house, true or not, it is the same feeling we all get when we first discovert the King of ROCK N ROLL.

Sidenote: I have written many authors and family members, the only one that wrote me back twice was Billy Smith Elvis Cousin, a great person who was impressed with my knowledge and the only person who I think feels truely bad and sad for losing a family member. THANKS BILLY!

Those looking for an intensive, in-depth analysis of his Music are in for a disappointment. This book is about the Life and Times of a musical legend, not his songs, or his accomplishments! The man was not a God and people need to get over that fact. If you're looking for a hero-worshipping book, don't buy this one.

I picked this book of just to have something to read and it floored me. The book gives you ALL of Elvis's life and not just the sanitized versiion. I would highly recommend it to anyone seeking the TRUTH about Elvis. From his greatest moments to his lowest.

A lot of work went into this book, but it lacks objectivity. It is pro-Elvis, though not excessively so, but it seems entirely too kind to Dr. Nick and Priscilla.

Dr. Nick no doubt curbed Elvis's overall drug consumption and minimized the careless peaks that would have occurred had he not been present. However, Dr. Nick was still party to the drug excess. It is difficult not to believe that his interest was primarily money at the expense of caring for Elvis. Despite receiving a hefty income, he found it necessary to borrow $200,000 from his very volatile patient. And then there was the racquetball misadventure resulting in legal estrangement. Still, I received a better appreciation for Dr. Nick's effort by reading this book. He did have a daunting task.

As regards Priscilla, the authors seem to have bought the image she has been trying to project. Finstadt's book on Priscilla presents a more plausible picture.

If Peter Guralnick's mammoth two volume biography didn't exist, this book might serve more of a purpose. But compared to the Guralnick books this is downright flimsy. There is excruciatingly little new here though there are a few early anecdotes and some interesting interviews with marginal players in the Presley story like co-stars Deborah Walley and Mary Ann Mobley who don't get interviewed in connection with Presley very often. There is also extensive interview time spent with the infamous Dr. Nick. Otherwise the book seems like a collection od press clippings that have been trotted out dozens of times before. To make things worse, it seems that in the photo sections the authors deliberately went out of their way to find the most familiar pictures available.
You would think that there wouldn't be anything new to write about Elvis but the Guralnick books were filled with revelations. He didn't stop at the familiar and wound up turning up dozens of forgotten gems just from information that had been in the public domain but had never been gathered in a contemporary work about the king.
This book has other problems besides familiarity. Elvis' music gets glossed over. For example Elvis' 1969 memphis sessions, that produced From Elvis in Memphis and "Suspicious Minds" perhaps the artistic height of his career, get a page and a half. While the authors have an appreciation for Presley's achievement they don't always appear to have the greatest understanding of it. Reading authors like Guralnick, Dave Marsh, Greil Marcus and even Ernst Jorgenson you can feel and hear the music as you read. In their descriptions the music sets off a universe of ideas. That's not the case here. There is a discography, a filmography and a list of Elvis' TV appearances in the back but these have been done better (sometimes in entire books)many times before. In fact, the discography, because of its arbitrary selections and factual errors, is useless.
So, unless you have to read every single word that has ever been written about Elvis you can miss this one.

Ok, maybe i won't manage to be as funny and original as some of the people that critiqued this book before me but let me tell you this: the rapture is about the biggest slice of balony there is.
People floating up to heaven when the end times come, saved by the Lord while everybody left behind will fry....what a crock!
I think there is some mental illness going on here.

This book fails to answer a basic question many Christians have: what if it isn't a convenient time to Rapture? For example, everytime I sit on the toilet, I say "Please, God, don't take me now! I've been constipated 6 days, and here on the 7th I'm about to lose 10 pounds, so don't take me flying until I'm done". Other people ask about what happens if the Rapture occurs while they are having "marital interactions" (there is no sin in the marital bed). I can't picture my wife and me floating up to heaven naked and intertwined like pretzyls! I think the book should have given us more tips on how to be ready for Rapture, and whether God will make allowances for sitting on the pot or on our wife's face! We do keep rain coats and umbrellas in all rooms and in the car, in case we are Raptured during a winter storm.

This was a wonderful book! A must read for all ages. Very informative and, after intensive studies on this subject, accurate.

Back in the late 70s my sister became a born again Christian and told us the "good news"...accept Jesus or we're gonna fry in hell...now up until that point, I really didn't think Jesus had it in for me. I thought we were buddies, but this kind of changed the relationship. Whereas before I thought he was cool, now I was beginning to think he was a little bit controlling. Now I had to believe in him. And y'know what? I got just a little resentful and a little bit rebellious. I mean, if I'm gonna be labeled as bad and as a sinner, I want to do some things to back it up.

This idea that I was constantly displeasing God, that I was constantly being tested, that the end times were always just right around the corner really soured my relationship I had with God and by the time I was 19, I really wanted nothing to do with God so I became a born again atheist...at least for a little while.

And what I realized during that little stint, is that God is Real...more Real than anything else because God is Love and Love is God and Love only knows Reality and True Reality cannot be upset or crippled or thwarted because it is the only thing that is Real. So, no, there is nothing I can do that is going to merit punishment in an afterlife. God created me out of Itself. God loves me as much as God loves Jesus because God created me out of the very same stuff that God created Jesus out of. The only difference between Jesus and the rest of us, is that Jesus knew his Oneness with God, most of us, however, have forgotten.

And it's easy to forget with books like this because these books, these religions, these preachers don't believe in Love as much as they believe in fear, they believe in hell more than Heaven, they believe in sin more than they believe in redemption and y'know why boys and girls? Fear sells. Fear keeps the money rollin' in...fear keeps the parking lots of these fundie churches packed...and it is SAD and DISGRACEFUL...that means, without Grace and I think that God is always Gracing us, always embracing us, always making all things new but how can we let the new in when we're focused on sin, on guilt, on fear?

Jesus the Christ embodied Love. I believe in his simple and eloquent teachings. The stuff that was taught after he left the Earth plane was taught by a guy interested mostly in making a name for himself. Is this what we have come to? People have been predicting the end of the world since the beginning of the world and there will be an end of the world as we know it now and Christ will return to Earth, not outside of ourselves, but within each one of our hearts. We will see everything and every one through Love, through compassion, through the simple and gentle knowing that what we do to others we do to ourselves and what we do to ourselves we do to God because everything is One. There is no sin, but a mistake, and all sin is simply an error thinking and feeling and acting as if you're separate from God and we never are.

Come out of your fear induced nightmare and come to Love...come to God...come to the realization that Heaven is now and stop buying into fear and stop buying books that promote fear. The only reason why I even read this book was because my friend thought I might find it interesting. I found it very, very sad. Jesus came to this life to remind us to live this life abundantly well, to love one another, to remember God in every situation.



At least I have found a good use for this book, however, the thickness of this book is just right to hold up the leg of this coffee table I found at a garage sale. I can use this book until I get a new caster.

Peace and Blessings, everyone and may you allow your thinking to become Love based and God centered.

The notion of a rapture is one of a few outraqeous fantasies which seem to resurface every so often throughout history. Funny how "prophecy" can only be applied to postdiction and never to prediction. I can at least respect the naked profit motive behind the Left Behind series. The writing in this book suggest the authors lack the intelligence to possess such ambition. But if you truly believe in the "rapture", why wait? Go find a sturdy tree and a length of rope.

Im not a Christian anymore so I wasn't interested in hearing any more.
This book is for Christians.
Its nothing what I thought it was. I was so disappointed.
I love books, my personal library is my pride and joy, but this book went into the trash, where it belongs.

It looks like UFOs are now studied like a religion. I felt this in this book.
The author wrote about religious ideas, Jesus and reincarnation.
Do they really belong to UFOs?
I was intriguided by the subjects.
I am not disappointed by the book.
It was an interesting affair.

very very boring

rubbish....

waste of money

copied lines from the bible

and explanations from the buddha sutra's

i guess aurthor was sleeping while writing the book

lol

so boring

makes me sleep

This book contains many truths, but there are many things that I can not agree with, one being his undying belief in reincarnation. I noticed a few times he mentions "The" Christ, instead of just Christ. I would have loved some reference as to where he was getting his material. I know that most of his information was suppose to be from the Angels that visited him, but foot notes would have been nice for at least some of the material. I wish I could just accept his angel story and take what he says as a message from God, I really do. It is just hard to do with so many people claiming to get information from angels, and the reincarnation thing contradicts what I understand the Bible to say. I still say this is a very good reading book!

The only advice I can give you is to read your Bibles. I was attracted to this book, as it touches on issues such as Planet X, UFOs, Aliens, Angels, Pyramids, etc because I find it interesting to study those things along side of Genesis 6, Revelation, Ezekiel---basically ends time prophecy. However, my first issue when I started reading was that he penned the book under JC. The author does not give his name but says those are his initials as well as Jesus Christs. He believes this book to be inspired by the Holy Spirit, so thats why he chose "JC". I find that quite blasphemous actually. The Holy Scriptures in our Bible is the inspired Word of God..and the canon is closed! He claims to have received some new revelations. I'm sorry, but if its not in the Bible, your revelations are not from God. He also believes in reincarnation which is absolutely anti-biblical. He says John the Baptist is the reincarnated Elijah. If you actually READ your Bible, you know that is NOT true. To teach reincarnation also goes against Hebrews 9:27 which says "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:" If a man can die over and over and his soul can live on and on, that is not fair. And if we, the saints, are to receive rewards in heaven, how is it fair that we be judged on past lives of our souls for which we have no recollection of. I only read about half of the book. I stopped because I had more important things to read, but I'll probably pick it up again just to finish it. I found at least one mistake on every single page and my book is marked up with underlinings and notes as to why I disagree and why I think what he says is absolutely anti-biblical. Perhaps the author means well, but I just pray he reads his Bible more and does not rely so much on "supernatural personal experiences" to justify his claims because the supernatural does exist but not all of it is from God. If I could give this book zero stars, I would, but I at least had to give one.

Darbyism (the eschatology expounded in this book) is a Johnny-Come-Lately interpretation of the Bible. It's running rampant among evangelicals today, but that is a phenomenon that is recent in church history. Not Augustine, nor Luther, nor Calvin, nor Knox, nor Edwards, nor Spurgeon held to this view. It appeals to those who are titillated by the "deep secrets" of the end times and/or science fiction and fantasy. Do a wikipedia search for John Nelson Darby and learn more.

Trying to justify a work of fiction by writing another book to try to prove it's true - doesn't make it true. There is a reason there are respected Christian theologians writing books that explain how the Left Behind series doesn't parallel what is in the Bible. The Bible is true, Left Behind is fiction.

I was quite amazed at the "epistle" negative reviews of this book. One in particular talked about the 'literal' weapons and such. It only took reading three sentences of this review to know that the writer has an extreamly limited knowledge of the Bible itself, and biblical prophecy, yet went on to write what amounted to a 300 word essay. Those who are not of the spirit, can NOT understand the things of the spirit.

I have just finished reading "The Truth Behind Left Behind" by Hitchcock and Ice. As a layman who considers himself to be a well read and versed student on the subject of Bible prophecy, I would consider this book to be an highly accurate and well documented explaination of the end times as they are written in the Bible. Many people who study prophecy have many different interpretations of what, when and how the Bible says that the world will end and Gods Kingdom will be ushered in. To many of those people I would say, "stop trying to read between the lines!" The Bible is the inerrant Word of God and what it says as you read it is exactly what it means. People try to put too much conjecture into Gods Word that simply isn't there. The books of the Old Testament and their prophecies of the end times identically match those in the New Testament so I truly do not understand where most of these detractors of the "Left Behind" series come up with their arguments that say the books are untrue and not well founded. These people are supposed to be Biblical scholars, well they either aren't reading the same Bible I do or they need to work on their comprehension skills. "The Truth Behind Left Behind" is right on the money in explaining the Biblical accuracy and validity of the "Left Behind" series of books concerning end times events. So as I stated in my title, "Why Not Believe the Truth?" this book is a must read for all of those who have been distracted by the detractors. I would recommend that everyone who is seriously interested in the truth about end times events should read "The Truth Behind Left Behind"!

Let me cite just one example from The Truth Behind Left Behind that makes it a very weak defense of the Left Behind theology. There are many more, but there are space limitations. In Tim LaHaye's Introduction to TBLB, we read: "Jerry [Jenkins] and I have unashamedly taken the position that all prophecy should be interpreted literally whenever possible. We have been guided throughout by the golden rule of interpretation: When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense. Take every word at its primary, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context clearly indicate otherwise" (7). So shouldn't the reader interpret the weapons of Ezekiel 38-39--bows, arrows, shields, war clubs, spears, horses, and chariots--literally? Not according to our authors. Here's their interpretation from their chapter "The Coming Russian/Islamic Invasion": "Inspired by the Holy Spirit, Ezekiel spoke in language that the people of his day could understand. If he had spoken of MIG-29s, laser-fired missiles, tanks, and assault rifles, this text would have been nonsensical to everyone until the twentieth century" (47). Of course, this is question begging in the extreme. Why would the people in Ezekiel's day need to understand a prophecy if it wasn't meant for them? Why confuse them and us? How do Hitchcock, Ice, and LaHaye KNOW that this is what the Holy Spirit meant? Once the trio makes these ancient weapons of no consequence, they are free to create their own prophetic scenario that can't be tested because it all takes place after Christians are no longer here! Convenient. Consider their words: "The focus clearly is NOT the specific weapons that will be used by these invaders" (47). What happened to "literal interpretation"? The weapons may not be the passage's "focus," but they can't be dismissed as inconsequential to the narrative. The weapons are part of the story from beginning to end, and if taken literally would negate the future scenario outlined by the authors. They claim that Ezek. 38-39 has to be a DISTANT future battle because it takes place in the "latter years" (38:8) and the "last days" (38:16). Most biblical scholars, even some dispensationalists, would say that these two time expressions most often mean nothing more than "in the future" or "in the days to come." The same Hebrew phrase is translated as "the days to come" in Num. 24:14, which probably refers to David's victory over Moab. The prophecy of Deut. 31:29, where the same expression is used, came to pass in the period of the Judges (cf. 2:20-21). Here's how one Bible expositor explains it: "this expression does not refer to 'the latter days' (KJV, RSV) in the eschatological sense. . . , but rather to that portion of the future that falls within the scope of the speaker's perspective (cf. Gen. 49:1)." Then one has to wonder why the authors avoid interacting with Edwin M. Yamauchi's Foes of the Northern Frontier which refutes their historical, geographical, and lexographic arguments line by line, and it was written in 1982! Yamauchi is a noted expert on this subject. The Russian invasion premise is only one of the book's many problems. If readers are interested in this topic, I suggest that they pick up a copy of End Times Fiction: A Biblical Consideration of the Left Behind Theology written by me. Since Hitchcock and Ice refer to it several times, it would be helpful to read what they do not deal with.

Pastor Hagee is one of the best! Says it like it is, why it is, explains thoroughly! No punches pulled, just plain hard truth - like it or not

John Hagee never ceases to amaze me with his knowledge and devotion to the Word of God.

If you want to learn about the Bible from one of the world's greatest preachers, I recommend his books and sermons always.

For an accurate biblical view of Israel read or listen to, "The Future of Israel" by John MacArthur.

.... you can get all three of these wacky books in one neat volume! Doesn't this hurt the bottom line at Hagee Ministries? What, has the pool of his mesmerized followers begun to dry up? It reminds me of when the band, KISS (aka Kings In Satan's Service) re-packaged their first three albums as "The Originals." At least in that case you had an extra track of "Rock and Roll All Nite", assuming you already had the album "Dressed To Kill." On the other hand, maybe Hagee Ministries was using the KISS model, assuming that it wouldn't hurt to have his drivel repeated in one handy, compact volume of fear.

John Hagee is just another tin-horn preacher who has found a profitable niche in peddling his view of the end-times psychodrama. These books contain the usual text out of context Bible quotes and literal interpretations that are unique to Hagee, Hal Lindsey and other end-times hucksters. Hagee serves up the usual hate diatribes against Muslims in this book as well as his idolatry of Israel and its unique role in the end of the world. Hate is an important part of this book and his brand of "Christianity." He basically will keep writing the same book over and over as long as their are people willing to be duped by his "prophecy". For all the poor people who waste their time and money on this garbage, I am reminded of what Billy Graham said regarding the endtimes: "the world ends when you die."

I hate to be critical of something that someone puts so much work into, but the book is a real downer. The dialog needs work and it's a bit too gruesome (think Medieval/Dark Ages Europe meets Planet of the Apes (original)). It reads like it was written by someone who is fairly intelligent, but coming out of a hopeless depression (and used William Blake to pull himself out of it). It's hard to follow in parts; the characters have no depth - there's no real development - they just sort of do what they do. It did have redeeming qualities though: it had some fairly good insight into human character, darker points in history...
Plot: Nazi, Stalin... type regime made up of old school Mormons lands on an inhospitable world (much like Utah, beautiful though it is) and through bids for power manage to destroy most their knowledge, technology, and purpose (envision Roman Empire to Dark Ages Europe). 500 yrs go by and a weakening monarchy is overtaken by an evil advisor when a typical teenage thief gets caught in the middle of various bids for power... Oh, and there are some aliens that make the book a bit interesting, though not enough for me to want to read the sequel.
If that's your kind of book then the author did an excellent job and my recomendations. If you're looking for a fun book, or like reading novels where you come to care for the characters, this isn't it.

This book had a great start... 1)a city civilization fallen from technology on a distant planet, 2)an unusual social structure derived from Nazi socialism, 3)a threatening alien culture, and 4) religious/political intrigue.

With all those ideas to build on, I expected an interesting read. However, the shallow characters and hollow dialogue robbed the plot of its depth. With the dark themes and cold brutality of many of the characters, it was probably a good thing that they weren't developed further. At least when (almost) all the characters die, I didn't really know them enough to care. The ending was a bloodbath that didn't resolve many of the open ends of the plot. I assume that in the next book, more of the ends will be tied up, but I don't care enough about the story or the characters to read it. As a work of literature, the book is consistent with its title - Hope's End. As a story, it falls apart.

...The book has a number of problems in my view. The characters are 2-dimensional and the dialogue is stiff. Vel is NOT a sympathetic character. I admit that I could not find a sympathetic character in the entire book. The vision of the book is very dark. The level of bloodshed is stunning and could only appear reasonable if you spend most of your time playing action computer games. Others have praised the book for its ideas. I was not impressed with the author's creativity--William Blake as dictator for life is all well and good, but I did not find it convincing and Pol Pot's ideas are not uplifting. There are mysterious aliens in the book, but a well-executed plot would have been better. Wading through the text was a gruesome ordeal, and my effort was rewarded by the discovery that this book is the first in a series...

William Blake features as a central figure in this book, and in fact is in some remote sense one of the villains. The real target, though, is not so much the historical Blake as it is the late twentieth century's versions of nature romanticism and "small is beautiful" ideologies.

The dystopian future setting of this book is ruled by an enfeebled monarchy, and an authoritarian Church that forbids reading, and hoards a small cache of remaining technology which it uses to bedazzle an ignorant and oppressed population. The teachings of this Church seem to stem from this romantic, back to nature philosophy.

This critical philosophical and political content lends stature to what is in essence the old story of a thief who learns of his surprising heritage. As a result, this is a book that can be read on multiple levels, either as straight adventure and mystery or as a philosophical critique. The slow revelations of more details about both the history of the world, and the history of the main character, are handled well and sustain interest and suspense.

Hope's End reflects the depths of teenage angst brought to a nasty dark peak. Chambers' allusions to historical figures are done with just enough mystery for Vel's mind and enough accuracy for our own imaginations to make effective connections. For many readers the importance of the poet William Blake might be a bit tougher. (Chambers clarifies his odd choice of Blake in an interview ---which helps considerably since Blake doesn't quite fit into the company of Hitler and Pol Pot--I sure as heck couldn't figure it out!) Anyway if Hope's End is an accurate reflection of how young people view the world today, well it's TOUGH. Even the female characters are rough and tough--there's nothing soft about anyone in this book. It's an intense read, but hardly uplifting.

I base this review on the first few pages of this book that persuaded me to stop reading it. The author is vague and confused. Two choices: Naturalism versus Historicism. author says that historicism cannot be accurate because "pre-modern" societies also display "artistic" tendencies. Tripping all over himself: the historiciss are seem to be saying that the very notion of art is historical, so why is Schusterman extending it into pre-history? I haven't read much philosophy and this lack of precision makes me want to keep my distance.

Most readers will run quickly to the sections on "somaesthetics" at the end of the book, for it is here that Shusterman is making claims that are both radical and fun. The main point of his chapter, "Somaesthetics and the Body/Media Issue," is that there is an interesting parallel between critique of the media (for example television) and the traditional philosophical critique of the body. He notes that at the same time the media seem to dematerialize the body, the body seems to matter more. One must concentrate on the slow savoring of deeper breathing, rather than be a couch potato captured by media-induced passivity. Media advocates often see the body as dull and inert. By contrast, Shusterman sees the body a "the primordial paradigm of the media" since it is the basic medium of human life. The chapter also elaborates the structure of the field of somaesthetics, mainly the invention of Shusterman himself. Somaesthetics is defined as "the critical, ameliorative study of one's experience and use of one's body as a locus of sensory-aesthetic appreciation and creative self-fashioning."

Shusterman is to be commended for bringing our attention to the relations between various body practices (yoga, modern dance, etc.) and the earliest Greek notions of philosophy: here, self-knowledge requires bodily knowledge. He rightly argues that we need to overcome the traditional Western denigration of the body. He uses various arguments to incorporate such body practices is "Alexander technique" into philosophy. However, the same arguments could also be used to meld psychoanalysis, prayer, and architecture with philosophy, since all of these are concerned with producing "the good life." Why can't we overcome the Western philosophical denigration of the body by simply giving credit to the various body (and psychological) practices available as contributing to self-knowledge, while at the same time setting aside a space for specifically philosophical self-knowledge through questioning and dialogue, a practice that traditionally requires no more than a brain, a hand and a pen? Shusterman perhaps answers this when he says that a central aim of philosophy is right action, which requires an effective will, which requires, in turn, an effective body: we need "somatic" (his word for body-oriented) sensitivity to make the will effective. Yet although philosophy is certainly concerned with the pursuit of happiness, and although Shusterman is right that philosophers should pay attention to somaesthetics, it is not clear that these are necessarily connected. The attention philosophy pays to somaesthetics may not significantly contribute to happiness, that is, beyond the pleasure we might gain from philosophically exploring anything. Yoga-practitioners already have a fan base, and these people are not necessarily inclined to engaging in philosophical dialogue. He is right, though, that somaesthetics has "social potential that should not be ignored" and that aesthetics should include such things as improved body feeling in its explorations.

The book ends with a paean to genius and self-styling. Here we see to what extent Shusterman is not only a pragmatist but something of a romantic. The concept of genius has been much denigrated in recent years and, although this essay is mainly a pastiche of quotes from Montaigne, Emerson, Nietzsche and Wittgenstein, it should inspire us to look again at the concept of genius. In opposition to Aristotle, who separated making from doing, Shusterman claims that artistic style must be related to lifestyle. This connects with his Deweyan (this refers to American philosopher John Dewey) desire to forge a more democratic concept of art. Shusterman also shows himself here to be something of an idealist. He writes: "If.. the art of living.. could be practiced by all, then beauty would express itself much more fully in moral integrity, political fairness, and social harmony - not just in works of art." This is a bit optimistic, but worth trying. Shusterman's main point is that the power of individual style lies in a more-than-individual force, and comes only through patient discipline followed by "letting go" -- at which point we are both true to ourselves while also transforming ourselves into something different.

This book is recommended for anyone interested in philosophical aesthetics, especially from a pragmatist point of view.

This is a very exciting and well-written book. Shusterman develops his pragmatist perspective on the themes of aesthetic experience, urbanism, popular art and the new media. There are also illuminating analyses of multiculturalism, style, and body culture. The philosophically most original part of the book may be the two new studies that elaborate his ground-breaking theory of somaesthetics -- a body-mind discipline of theory and practice. But my favorite chapters were those on urban aesthetics, style, and genius that combine strong argument with evocatively lyrical, personal writing. Three of the book's 10 chapters are based on earlier work from his Pragmatist Aesthetics, but they help complement the brand new chapters to turn the book into a very sustained, compelling argument. It all flows together like a great CD.

Having read some of Richard Shusterman's previous books, I have to agree with the previous reviewer that Shusterman is one of the brightest, most interesting philosophers writing today. However, this book, PERFORMING LIVE, is a disappointment: it reads like a boring grocery list that could have been written by a mediocre grad. student. Where is Shusterman's usually sizzling, incisive intelligence? Hopefully, his next book will be better.

Richard Shusterman is one of the most original, interesting, and relevant philosophers writing today. His recent book, PRACTICING PHILOSOPHY, was among the best published in the 1990s. Thus, PERFORMING LIVE comes as something of a disappointment. If you've read PRAGMATIST AESTHETICS in either its original or revised and updated form, you'll notice at least _three full chapters_ here that have been cut and pasted more or less verbatim. The points Shusterman makes in these chapters are eloquent and well-taken, but PERFORMING LIVE isn't that long a book, and one would have hoped Shusterman had something new to say. On a positive note, the new chapters _do_ rank with the best of Shusterman's previous work.