Endowment Books

There are over 50,000 foundations in the U.S. today. With $448 billion in assets (1999), foundations are an unbelievably huge philanthropic industry compared to almost 40 years ago, when the federal government launched its War on Poverty. Foundations' assets then were well under $30 billion.

Mark Dowie, author of American Foundations: An Investigative History (MIT Press, 2001), does not blanche in analyzing this industry, despite its diversity and differences in grant making and style of operating. Dowie sets an ambitious agenda. He reviews foundation funding of education, science, health, environment, food, energy, art, civil society, democracy and imagination! He is an accomplished writer with16 journalist awards and five books to his credit.
Perhaps consumer activist and Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader suggests best why this book should be read by those involved with the foundation world either as a staff member, trustee, grantseeker or academician. Dowie, says Nader, "is a scholar and a muckraker," who analyzes "foundations' past achievements and failures and then critically [takes] the institutions to task for directing their grants so often away from ?root causes.' Dowie shakes up the complacency, myopia, and insulation of [the] giant foundations by naming names and places."

Dowie clearly raises the most important questions about foundations' performance, and offers thoughtful, usually balanced answers that certainly pull no punches. As the longtime director of a national watchdog nonprofit organization charged with monitoring and redirecting foundations' grantmaking toward the disadvantaged and disenfranchised in the USA, I believe this study is both highly readable and extremely informative.

Education receives the largest share of foundation grants. Dowie observes that "Foundation trustees...seem to favor the spawning of an elite intellectual force over the principle of equal educational opportunity...The great preponderance of educational grants...have found their way to institutions of higher education where scientists and other experts are educated." Recently, however, more foundation money has been poured into reform of primary and secondary education, especially inner city schools. This money was stimulated by Walter Annenberg's $500 million challenge grant in 1993. Dowie applauds this trend. Nevertheless, he raises the question: Can such money ever change the entrenched public education monopoly to enable it to do significantly better educating poor and poorly prepared students? Maybe the foundations should "also be funding community organizations that demand more of public schools..."

"American foundations' second largest area of grantmaking is health." Dowie concludes that "foundations' enthusiasm for high-tech diagnostic systems, pharmacology, and the disease model of medicine has not only inhibited the development of preventative and holistic approaches but has also retarded public health and fostered the evolution of an essentially unjust health care system...Until quite recently the public health effects of environmental pollution have been virtually ignored by the large foundations."

More generally, beyond specific subject areas, Dowie identifies proactive philanthropy for criticism: "...when proactive philanthropy is pursued without the participation of the people most affected by it" serious problems result.

The 50-year Green Revolution is often touted as one of the foundation world's greatest achievements. Dowie acknowledges its success in significantly raising food production per acre in the developing world. But he goes on to challenge its social, economic and environmental consequences for the peasant-farmers and the urban poor. Unfettered scientific experimentalism in increasing crop yields, supported by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, with little heed to culture, economics and sustainability, meant the rich got richer and the poor poorer, with 800 million people still hungry in the world.

The Energy Foundation was created in 1991 by the Pew Charitable Trusts, MacArthur and the Rockefeller Foundations "to assist the nation's transition to a sustainable energy future by promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy." This was a major proactive foundation initiative to do what the environmental movement was not perceived to be doing. Dowie records the positive accomplishments of the Energy Foundation, but worries that "concentrating so much leverage in one funding body could create serious power problems, as well as an orthodoxy, that, if misguided, would be difficult to challenge." And, in the end, he identifies how the Energy Foundation gave its largest grants to environmental legal organizations which were "agents of capitulation...deferring to free market arguments," while "throwing mere crumbs to energy visionaries, renewable activists, and consumer advocates."

Dowie's investigation into American foundations is not all negative. The author identifies several individual philanthropists as possible harbingers of "a new and imaginative era of philanthropy." In fact, the author seems mesmerized by the big money and big ideas of these individuals.

He singles out Irene Diamond, Ted Turner, Walter Annenberg and George Soros as "venturesome" philanthropists -- because they "imagined, respectively, worlds without AIDS, without strife, without ignorance, and without tyrants, then made massive and immediate financial efforts to make those worlds real"

The author acknowledges that it is an uphill battle for these individuals to be creators of "a new and imaginative era of philanthropy." He observes, "If historical precedent were to hold, foundations would [take] courses [that] would be safe and uncontroversial."

On the war of political ideas and foundations, Dowie writes, "During the last twenty years of the twentieth century, it was conservatives who prevailed.., financed the Reagan revolution, and provisioned the Republican recapture of Congress. A dozen or so medium-sized, uncharacteristically patient foundations can take a good deal of credit for the rise and endurance of America's conservative revolution...More recently, following this bold twenty-five-year foray into public policy by right-wing foundations, the Left has stepped timidly into the fray with a few programs in economic and political justice. Will mainstream foundations, too, learn from the conservative foundations' triumph of leveraged influence? Or will they continue their minimal, unimaginative funding of safe and soft institutions proposing weak, incremental solutions to urgent and undeniable crises?"

"Brilliant and constructive as some of their work has been," writes Dowie, "much of it has also been fruitless, uninspired, and designed to do little more than perpetuate the economic and social systems that allow foundations to exist."

He explicitly faults foundations for not doing enough for social movements which they have aided: "With the single exception of civil rights, foundation interests in America's signature social movements ? for women's rights, peace, environment, environmental justice, students, gay liberation, and particularly labor ? [have] been parsimonious, hesitant, late, and at times counterproductive...In any case, all foundation support for social movements...remains small potatoes any way it's measured."

In summation, Dowie argues that "Those empowered to make grants should not assume that they have the wisdom to solve such serious problems simply because they control the money." As a student of philanthropy and seeker of foundation largesse for the past 30 years, I can only say, "Amen!"

(Foundations&Phil\Dowie-amazon Book Review) Dec. 19, 2001

There are over 50,000 foundations in the U.S. today. With $448 billion in assets (1999), foundations are an unbelievably huge philanthropic industry compared to almost 40 years ago, when the federal government launched its War on Poverty. Foundations' assets then were well under $30 billion.

Mark Dowie, author of American Foundations: An Investigative History (MIT Press, 2001), does not blanche in analyzing this industry, despite its diversity and differences in grant making and style of operating. Dowie sets an ambitious agenda. He reviews foundation funding of education, science, health, environment, food, energy, art, civil society, democracy and imagination! He is an accomplished writer with16 journalist awards and five books to his credit.
Perhaps consumer activist and Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader suggests best why this book should be read by those involved with the foundation world either as a staff member, trustee, grantseeker or academician. Dowie, says Nader, "is a scholar and a muckraker," who analyzes "foundations' past achievements and failures and then critically [takes] the institutions to task for directing their grants so often away from ?root causes.' Dowie shakes up the complacency, myopia, and insulation of [the] giant foundations by naming names and places."

Dowie clearly raises the most important questions about foundations' performance, and offers thoughtful, usually balanced answers that certainly pull no punches. As the longtime director of a national watchdog nonprofit organization charged with monitoring and redirecting foundations' grantmaking toward the disadvantaged and disenfranchised in the USA, I believe this study is both highly readable and extremely informative.

Education receives the largest share of foundation grants. Dowie observes that "Foundation trustees...seem to favor the spawning of an elite intellectual force over the principle of equal educational opportunity...The great preponderance of educational grants...have found their way to institutions of higher education where scientists and other experts are educated." Recently, however, more foundation money has been poured into reform of primary and secondary education, especially inner city schools. This money was stimulated by Walter Annenberg's $500 million challenge grant in 1993. Dowie applauds this trend. Nevertheless, he raises the question: Can such money ever change the entrenched public education monopoly to enable it to do significantly better educating poor and poorly prepared students? Maybe the foundations should "also be funding community organizations that demand more of public schools..."

"American foundations' second largest area of grantmaking is health." Dowie concludes that "foundations' enthusiasm for high-tech diagnostic systems, pharmacology, and the disease model of medicine has not only inhibited the development of preventative and holistic approaches but has also retarded public health and fostered the evolution of an essentially unjust health care system...Until quite recently the public health effects of environmental pollution have been virtually ignored by the large foundations."

More generally, beyond specific subject areas, Dowie identifies proactive philanthropy for criticism: "...when proactive philanthropy is pursued without the participation of the people most affected by it" serious problems result.

The 50-year Green Revolution is often touted as one of the foundation world's greatest achievements. Dowie acknowledges its success in significantly raising food production per acre in the developing world. But he goes on to challenge its social, economic and environmental consequences for the peasant-farmers and the urban poor. Unfettered scientific experimentalism in increasing crop yields, supported by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, with little heed to culture, economics and sustainability, meant the rich got richer and the poor poorer, with 800 million people still hungry in the world.

The Energy Foundation was created in 1991 by the Pew Charitable Trusts, MacArthur and the Rockefeller Foundations "to assist the nation's transition to a sustainable energy future by promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy." This was a major proactive foundation initiative to do what the environmental movement was not perceived to be doing. Dowie records the positive accomplishments of the Energy Foundation, but worries that "concentrating so much leverage in one funding body could create serious power problems, as well as an orthodoxy, that, if misguided, would be difficult to challenge." And, in the end, he identifies how the Energy Foundation gave its largest grants to environmental legal organizations which were "agents of capitulation...deferring to free market arguments," while "throwing mere crumbs to energy visionaries, renewable activists, and consumer advocates."

Dowie's investigation into American foundations is not all negative. The author identifies several individual philanthropists as possible harbingers of "a new and imaginative era of philanthropy." In fact, the author seems mesmerized by the big money and big ideas of these individuals.

He singles out Irene Diamond, Ted Turner, Walter Annenberg and George Soros as "venturesome" philanthropists -- because they "imagined, respectively, worlds without AIDS, without strife, without ignorance, and without tyrants, then made massive and immediate financial efforts to make those worlds real"

The author acknowledges that it is an uphill battle for these individuals to be creators of "a new and imaginative era of philanthropy." He observes, "If historical precedent were to hold, foundations would [take] courses [that] would be safe and uncontroversial."

On the war of political ideas and foundations, Dowie writes, "During the last twenty years of the twentieth century, it was conservatives who prevailed.., financed the Reagan revolution, and provisioned the Republican recapture of Congress. A dozen or so medium-sized, uncharacteristically patient foundations can take a good deal of credit for the rise and endurance of America's conservative revolution...More recently, following this bold twenty-five-year foray into public policy by right-wing foundations, the Left has stepped timidly into the fray with a few programs in economic and political justice. Will mainstream foundations, too, learn from the conservative foundations' triumph of leveraged influence? Or will they continue their minimal, unimaginative funding of safe and soft institutions proposing weak, incremental solutions to urgent and undeniable crises?"

"Brilliant and constructive as some of their work has been," writes Dowie, "much of it has also been fruitless, uninspired, and designed to do little more than perpetuate the economic and social systems that allow foundations to exist."

He explicitly faults foundations for not doing enough for social movements which they have aided: "With the single exception of civil rights, foundation interests in America's signature social movements ? for women's rights, peace, environment, environmental justice, students, gay liberation, and particularly labor ? [have] been parsimonious, hesitant, late, and at times counterproductive...In any case, all foundation support for social movements...remains small potatoes any way it's measured."

In summation, Dowie argues that "Those empowered to make grants should not assume that they have the wisdom to solve such serious problems simply because they control the money." As a student of philanthropy and seeker of foundation largesse for the past 30 years, I can only say, "Amen!"

You simply cannot understand the social and political order in the United States without reading this book. Dowie is at the top of his game here, and that says a lot since he is arguably America's best left-leaning investigative journalist. Some people slow down in their 60s, but Dowie is picking up his pace. He has the wisdom and perspective and gonads to speak it like it is, picking apart the influence of wealthy foundations in helping, and mostly hurting, the cause for social, political and economic democracy and environmental sustainability. Too bad he left out an analysis of foundations and their impact on the worsening state of US media, but maybe that's the next book. This is a great follow-up to Losing Ground, his brilliant critique of the failures of US environmentalism.

This was an excellent book on how foundations spend their money. But as the author points out, they distribute only about 5% of their assets per year. As a reader, I wanted a more searching analysis on many interesting economic issues raised by the other 95% of foundations' money.

There is little on the tax aspects of foundations. Namely, I would be interested in reading about the policy consequences of allowing large pools of capital to aggregate in perpetuity. Readers need some statistics on the cost of this tax exemption to government revenue and, by inference, to taxpayers-at-large. The author could have collated the data from public records filed with the IRS. IRS mandates that foundations file financial disclosure forms each year (unfortunately, many fail to comply).

There are only a few pages in an appendix on foundations' impact on capital markets. Where and how they invest their endowments? Do their trustees sit on corporate boards and, if so, how does the presence of these trustees affect corporate decision-making? Are the assets held offshore? What institutions invest the assets on behalf of the trustees of the foundations? How well do the trustees perform? The answers are of considerable importance as some of the larger endowments rival in size mutual funds and pension funds.

There is little on the legal framework within which foundations are created and operate. This is a key failing. If the author were familiar with the Statute of Elizabeth, adopted by virtually every common law jurisdiction, he would understand why foundations do not contribute to political activists. Political activities - defined by the Internal Revenue Code as the funding of electoral campaigns of individuals or parties and as exercising direct influence on the legislative process - would cost foundations their charitable status. They would be subject to taxation, which would rapidly erode their capital and force them to divert resources toward fundraising. The author repeatedly criticizes the restraint of the trustees. Much of this restraint is the product of fiduciary obligations imposed upon the trustees by law.

I would like to know more about the background of trustees. Where are these people from? where are they educated/trained? What about their attitudes to American society? Why did they join a foundation as opposed to government or the private sector?

One last complaint: the book focuses primarily on a handful of older, well-known foundations (Rockefeller, Carnegie, etc.) at expense of the tens of thousands of small family foundations.

the story of maria tambini, the teenage pop star who rises to fame and then nearly dies of anorexia nervosa, is the main plot device, yet it is not the high point. the strength of the book is the depiction of maria's family, italian immigrants in scotland whose lives were traumatized by world war II, when italians in scotland were attacked for their link to the nazis. the family's fish and chip shop is trashed and maria's grandmother, lucia, is taken to a refugee camp. she is reunited with her daughter, sofia, and tries to escape on a ship, but the ship is bombed and she loses her daughter. the loss cripples her for the rest of her life and o'hagan makes the point in a fascinating way, through a suitcase with items from sofia's life that is returned to lucia 30 years later. o'hagan actually lists the items at the end of the chapter on the saga, which is a beautifully sad moment, one of a few in this fantastic book that doesn't let the main story steal the show. it's amazing how all the reviews you read focus only on maria's saga. how can they have missed the best parts of the book?

There is a "note to the reader" prefacing this book which proclaims it it not based on any one person ,a disclaimer that will ring hollow in the ears of British readers above a certain age who will clearly see the similarities between its main protagonist Maria Tambini ,and the late Lena Zavaroni ,whose tragic career so closely prefigures that of Maria -a child star who died of anorexia nervoso at a tragically early age .
It opens in the Jubilee year of 1977 on the Isle of Bute in Scotland .Maria ,a small child of 13 possesses a powerful singing voice ,and she is discovered by a scout for the TV programme Opportunity Knocks (an actual show ,presented by Hughie Green ,who also appears in the novel ,under his own name ).She is taken to London ,taken on by am ambitious agent ,Marion ,and swiftly enrolled at the prestigious Italia Conti stage school(also a real institution ).She wins Opporunity Knocks numerous times and is eventually retired from the show on the ground she is unbeatable .A hit single follows ,along with a round of TV appearances and sea side variety shows ,as well as sell out shows at the London Palladium ,trips to Vegas and a White House performance .Sadly also featuring are bouts os self starvation ,a heavy lazative ingestion and prolonged bouts of hospitalization .
This is pure Zavaroni -even the interview featured in the book ,whwre she appeared on the Wogan chat show is lifted almost verbatim from the actual programme .It is impossible at least for British readers to escape the " roman a clef "elements of the novel .This is not to downplay its merits as imaginative fiction -merely to point out its reliance on actual people .There are plenty of real people namechecked in the book ,from the unctuous Hughie Green whose oleaginous personality is captured faithfully ,to doyens of British comedy such as Les Dawson .Diana ,Princess of Wales -herself a victim of eating disorders -appears as does Nancy Reagan ,saying it is impossible to be too thin .
Aside from the passages devoted to Maria's career the emotional epicentre of the book lies back on Bute with the family from whom Maria sprang and the milieu of the island and the Italian community in particular is evocatively captured .
The narrative proceeds through a variety of voices particularly various family members ,interviews and letters from Maria's childhood friend Kalpana and her stalker Kevin .Especially vivid are the voices of her neurotic mother ,Rosa ,and her uncle Alfredo ,a womanising barber ,not to mention her grandmother Lucia ,although the cumulative impact of so many narrative voices is a detriment and even confusing at times .
The book works as an account of one person's rise to fame and the world in which it takes place ,a world which is changing and becoming more ruthless. If the narrative now and again bogs down -which it does -there are ample compensations namely in the strongly drawn characters like the Italian clan and Maria's protector ,Michael ,and the pathetic celebrity stalker Kevin .
Its a rich and rewarding book full of incidental detail and some fine minor figures ,like Kalpanna's father ,Dr Jaggadanam .
Enjoy it for its insight into the corrosive impact of too early fame and as a study in deracination -the plight of the person who takes flight from a small place to a larger stage only to discover they are at home in neither one .

The ending is upbeat and cautiously optimistic -would that its inspiration were around to read it .

There's a lot to admire in this beguiling and heartfelt story. O'Hagan deftly whisks us away to the picturesque island of Bute and the beautiful sounding town of Rothesay. Growing up in Australia, and being familiar with British television or "telly" as the British like to call it, there was much in this novel that was familiar to me and so much of it bought back memories: the Basil Brush Show, sausage rolls, LWT, and Opportunity Knocks etc. O'Hagan really brings back to life the 70's TV variety shows and the people who starred on them. And there's no doubt that his research of the period is absolutely meticulous.

Personality is so much more than an account of one young girl's rise to fame and fortune as a "Cilla Black" style variety singer. The Italian immigrant experience - which I must confess I knew nothing about - the terrible disease of bulimia and anorexia nervosa, the meaning of family ties, and the culture of celebrity in Britain are all issues that O'Hagan tackles in this work with differing success. The many multiple story lines and secondary character confessions do, at times, clutter and stifle the central chronicle of Maria's rise to stardom and her battle with eating disorders. However, the secondary characters are still beautifully developed: Rosa, Maria's mother, spends her days running the family "fish and chip" ship in Rothesay, supportive of her daughter, but also regretful of what "might have been"; Lucia, the Italian immigrant grandmother who holds terrible family secrets from World War 2; Mrs. Gaskell the work obsessed entertainment agent who drives Maria to the brink of no return, and Michael, Maria's childhood friend who falls in love with Maria and comes to her rescue later in the novel. There are also many other characters equally rich in detail.

O'Hagan is also a wonderfully descriptive writer and he experiments with different styles throughout the novel - he uses newspaper reports, the epistolary form, and various chapter-like monologues to reflect the characters' inner-most thoughts, and to help tell us the story of Maria, her struggles, and her journey to stardom. This works well in some sections and not in others, and sometimes the novel becomes cluttered with too many subplots. There's also a rather unnecessary twist involving a stalker in part three, which seems hurried and tacked on, and at times, particularly in part three, the story meanders too far from the central plot. But this novel is still worth reading and the fact that the author can authentically transport you to Great Britain in the 1970's and present an era in such vivid detail shows tremendous talent and literary creativity. Anyone who grew up watching 70's British variety shows and has an appreciation for them will just love this book!

Michael.

In a run-down resort town on a Scottish island, a family pins its hopes on the youngest daughter, Maria, who is working on her singing and her looks. As an early teen, she is whisked off to London, where she wins a televised talent contest. Three years later, she is a famous pop singer. By twenty, she is anorexic, looney, and is being stalked.

The characters in Personality are astonishingly complex & well described, the plot is not particularly compelling. Still a fine effort by Mr. O'Hagan, and well recommended!

This is an excellent book on Iran's nuclear program. It is brief but gets the point accroos forcefully.

This is not so much a book as a long article. But it reveals more about what Iran thinks about the nuclear issue than any other work I have read recently. It is critical of the Iranian leadership but its assessment of their ambitions and goals is balanced and revealing.

This book is a very concise, short analysis of the book's title - Iran's nuclear ambitions. However, it's main flaw is that Chubin doesn't analyze the historical context, which I believe is essential to understanding Iran's current behavior. Otherwise, the book is an invaluable resource for understanding current events, and specifically, provides some of the best arguments for just why Iran shouldn't acquire nuclear capabilities.

Plenty of nations have nuclear weapons. Why is it that some people are worried about Iran obtaining them? Part of the reason may be that the risk to everyone increases as more and more nations possess such weapons. But the author adds the following:

"In its refusal to dispense with the cult of victimhood, revolutionary rhetoric, and subversive acts and in its unwillingness to assume normal relations with others lies the origin of the reluctance of others to see Iran acquire a nuclear capability."

Of course, nations can change with time. A nation that behaves reasonably could change for the worse after it builds some nuclear weapons. Or it could change for the better. However, if Iran does not become more reasonable, the world will become a more dangerous place.

Is there a way to convince Iran to avoid becoming a nuclear power? According to the author, it would take some sort of threat to accomplish this. Absent an external threat, Iran will get nuclear weapons, it will remain "reflexively hostile to the United States and Israel," and it will use its nuclear weapons to elevate its "penchant for brinkmanship." That does not sound good, but I think we all need to be aware of it even if we have no plans to do anything about it.

Nuclear weapons are only part of the problem Iran poses for itself and for others. Still, Iran really might use nuclear weapons directly (say, against Israel) or transfer them to a terrorist group. The book has some recommendations about what we ought to do, but I think the point is that we need to think about it and make up our minds rather than simply ignore the problem.

Historian Bernard Bailyn answers a series of questions about the field of history as well as what the title states, ON THE TEACHING AND WRITING OF HISTORY. He comments dwell on all gamuts from historiography to the teaching of the subject at the college and high school level, and he provides no nonsense and succinct responses. After reading the book, one can see that Bailyn has had many experiences during his years within the profession, which makes the book interesting.

Three points stood out in his conversations. First, Bailyn comments on on one of the basic premises to understanding history. In terms of approaching the subject with an understanding, Bailyn states as well as many historians, that in order to understand a particular period or event in history, one must look within the context of its own time without the present in mind. And furthermore, history is distant or a different world (51). For those who have already studied history, this is the standard approach when first attempting to read a document, such as a journal or letter that may have been written hundreds of years ago; one must look through their eyes and experience. Second, his approach to teaching the subject at different levels from a teacher-student perspective, be it undergraduate or graduate, makes a difference in order to effectively teach the course. And third, Bailyn's perspective on implementing all histories within the historical narrative that may not have been studied or included before; this is a hopeful thought that the study of the past is a never ending task.

Overall, the book provides an insightful view to studying, teaching, and writing about history from an eminent historian. In addition, ON THE TEACHING AND WRITING OF HISTORY may be a good book to refer to or a reminder of what the subject of history is all about.

Just what this country needs to learn - how to approach history without manipulative distortions.

Someone had the inspired idea of having one of the greatest living historians take part in an interview on his craft and profession. The result, ably edited and presented by Edward Connery Latham, is one of the wisest and most accessible books ever written about writing history. Bailyn's work spans the range of historical scholarship, and he is perhaps the most influential historian of the second half of the twentieth century; the list of his graduate students that appeared in the 1991 collection of essays published in his honor is in turn an honor role of the nation's most creative, able, and productive historians.

I would recommend this book enthusiastically to anyone who is considering entering the historical profession or anyone who simply wants to understand what it is that historians do. The questions, by Professors Jere R. Danielle and Charles T. Wood of Dartmouth, are incisive and provocative, and Bailyn's answers are uniformly enlightening and engaging. Everyone having a role in the creation of this wonderful book is to be congratulated.

-- Richard B. Bernstein, Adjunct Professor of Law, New York Law School

Bernard Bailyn, brilliant historian, answers a series of questions at Dartmouth College while in residence there on the subject of writing and teaching history. To the average reader, this guide will be not be hard to read, but probably not very necessary unless there is an intent to teach undergraduate or graduate students in a small class setting or if research is in process to complete a larger work on history. The book contains practical knowledge for all history teachers and offers some very general assumtions that must be kept in mind whether teaching or reporting on history. Well written and constructed, but intended for the serious historian.

Like a previous reviewer, I'm not sure what the ending of 'The Stillest Day" means either. I re-read it several times myself and concluded -- but not to my complete satisfaction -- that Bethesda was paying penance. I sent the book to a friend whose wisdom and judgment I trust and she was equally mystified.

I've decided that's OK. Josephine Hart is not the greatest writer in the English language, but she is not without prodigious gifts. And like those of greater authors, many of her stories are open to interpretation. So are periods in most of our lives.

Ms. Hart set a tone and style with her first novel, "Damage," and seems committed to it. Her prose is spare and her perennial theme of obsession remains an irrestible draw. "The Stillest Day" was the first of her novels to be set in the past and the first with a female protagonist, but the universality of obsession remains vivid and relentless. Like all Hart's other main characters, Bethesda is the only one in the novel convinced of the liberating power of obsession. She cannot see that while she is closing windows in her life, neither is she opening doors.

Josephine Hart is truly the mistress of her domain.

I am speechless. Speechless because this novel is written with such brillance and intellect that few writers can achieve such a feat. Speechless, too, because even though I consider myself a good reader I do not think I understood the ending of this novel. I closed the book saying, "what happened?" After re-reading the final 10 pages 3 times I feel I have a grasp of 90% of what the author was illustrating with her characters; yet, I'm still perplexed by the remaining 10%. I cannot divulge too much of what I do not understand for fear that I may ruin it for other readers. I only hope that other readers who partake in this novel may respond as to the conclusions they draw upon its ending. The first half of this novel tells the story of Bethesda Barnet, an unmarried artist and teacher living a life of routiness. She takes care of her invalid mother, paints and teaches day after day after day. It is not until she lays her eyes upon Mathew Pearson that her life becomes a sea of obsession. Bethesda uses her artistic abilities to obsessively paint Mathew on mirrors. Ms. Hart brillantly weaves the reflections life and art have on the soul; and, in essence, this theory becomes the heart and soul of "The Stillest Day." And, after a major event occurs, which one may call courageous or violent, Bethesda's life is severely changes. And, thus, we enter into the second portion of this novel which examines Bethesda's life and state of mind. Often times, it seems like Ms. Hart becomes overly dramatic in her story-telling; yet, when one considers gothic pieces of literature, Ms. Hart seems justified. Ms. Hart display much of how I find truly gifted English novelists to be - sparse language steeped with complexities. One must read in-between the lines to understand Ms. Hart's writing. And though I did not understand this novel entirely, I can appreciate the brillance. One will always look at a major traumatic event in one's life as "The Stillest Day." This is a difficult novel to read but I think one which people should be exposed to. Please, I hope someone out there will explain to me the final 2 scenes of this novel.

Every once in a while a writer comes along who refuses to indulge in the illusions we rely on to bolster life in the modern world; she refuses to pander to the need for sentimentality and the romantic belief in the perfectability of human nature;she graces us with a dark lingering pathos and we return again and again because we believe that in the process some crucial feauture has been restored to our humanity, some insight bequeathed to us which leaves us wiser and more grown up but not cynical. Such a writer is Josephine Hart whose unique and dark vision can be found in her three previous novel. The Stillest Day, perhaps her most chilling, is a tale of the obsession, love and cruelty that lie below the artifices of civilization, artifices that are really cosmetic gestures we devise to prevent ourselves from killing each other. Bethesday Barnet, artist and teacher, falls for Mathew Pearson. Why? We don't know. She sees him. She is hooked, so to speak, and the rest is pure tragedy.She finds herself inexorably pulled to a destiny whose outcome she knows will end in her destruction but which she cannot resist. Like the moth drawn to the flame she honors her destiny and fate by succumbing to the will of the gods who plan it all. The last few pages of this novel are among the most chilling I have ever read. Hart also allows us to own our shadows in the process of witnessing her dark characters. We can't really like these people, partly because they teach us about the sides of ourselves we wish didn't exist. We are drawn to her strange and twisted characters because they lead us out of the darkness by allowing the integrity of their lives to shine through their every action--even the deceptive ones. In the process we attain spiritual freedom, or perhaps enlightenment because we leave with an expanded consciousness and a sense of new moral realities which they have traversed and which have cost them their lives. Apart from all this, however, Hart has some really beautiful turns of phrase. She is simply an exquisitely beautiful craftsman whose writing is lean, mean and cold as a tombstone. She is a writer of wisdom who, in the style of the pithy aphorism, sheds more light on the human condition than a room full of many a philsophical treatise. Among some of the gems are: "Small societies practice best a democracy of silence. And sins of omission and commission fall softly into a collective, selective amnesia." And further: " I fear that our honesty has a quality of finality about it. When there is nothing to preserve, only then are men and women honest with each other." Here is the description of the first time she set eyes on Mathew: "His rain-washed face was what I first saw. It was turned to the heavens which drenched the wetness further, so that rivulets of water ran down his white skin. And in that instant I longed to let my hair loose to dry the unknown wonder of that vision." An elegant craftman who lets you into the minds of her characters just enough to let you recognize yourself before shattering the temptation to pity you might be inclined to feel because of this self-recognition, The Stillest Day is an invigorating and disturbing read.

The book starts off slow, but gradually rises. The language is beautiful, though the middle to the end is a bit disturbing, to say the least...

The author touches on many aspects of analyzing the performance of an investment portfolio and the investment manager. The book is more basic overview than handbook or how-to manual. It is not quantitative or in-depth enough for the practitioner but may be of use to a layman finding himself with new fiduciary oversight responsibilities. The book is now 10 years old so most of the tables covering historical performance of investments and investment styles cover a period ending in 1995.

Very insightful in helping understand the elements that must be considered in investing into a portfolio and in managing a portfolio. Very well written and complete.

The book is very well written and strikes the right balance between portfolio math and a discussion of the various ideas in investment performance. I specialize in automating financial reports and this book explained what many of these reports were trying to do (but which, I now see, could do better). I spent ($$$) for this book (...) and it was well worth it. This book isn't about beating the market, it's about understanding the components of one's investment return. How much is related to the balance of the portfolio, the stock selection, the market's broad movement. Was the manager taking unnecessary risks? If he did well was it due more to the portfolio's balance or the market's movement. I also keep going back to this book, it's a great reference.

Surprisingly interesting to read. The authors use reasonably sized sentences. You absorb important concepts about endowment management without realising that you are reading a technical book. The charts and graphics, coupled with real life examples, make this book come alive. A good buy for people who are involved in Endowment management at non-profits as trustees, directors or accountants.

A little bit of colour in text and graphics would help, though.

This book is an excellent reference for a foundation or endowment board member trustee. The process of investing is laid out for the reader to follow in detail. This is the best reference book that I have found on the subject of investing foundation and endowment assets.

This book offers an excellent overview of the management of assets for non-profit organizations. For those unfamiliar with investment jargon, it may be a tough read, however all the modern approaches are described. One criticism may be the lack of spending policy options which may be useful to many.

Nibley is, once again, thorough and thought provoking. He points out clear connections between ancient Christianity and Egyptian temple ceremonies that one would not expect to see.

While this book was incredibly difficult to read through, it also included more information about the Egyptian Endowment as it relates to the LDS endowment than I have seen anywhere. The translation of the Joseph Smith Papyri, mechanical as it was, was very educational. What really made this book worthwhile was the commentary on the papyri's actual meaning and what it meant to the Egyptians. From that I could pick out specific applications to the LDS endowment. There has been very little written by LDS authors on the LDS endowment. I loved it and look forward to the comprehensive guide to the Pearl of Great Price by Nibley.

This book is one that requires patience and a good deal of meditation. Of all of Hugh Nibley's books, this is the most interesting and thought provoking yet it is by far the most difficult. The footnotes are extensive and actually add to the body of the text. If you enjoy ancient history, archaeology, or near eastern studies, you will find this book fascinating!

I've worked for a number of years as a communications director for nonprofits and I ordered this book because I was hopeful it would be a tool to help move hesitant decision makers in the direction of more strategic thinking. Sadly, when it comes to nonprofits, communications pros often have to spend more time persuading their colleagues and directors than the public. There's nothing like a book in print to solidify your advice!

This book was disappointing in that it joins the many books already out there that focus on the mechanics, aka "basics," but not the critical thinking that is required for PR in today's competitive and changing information age. Yes, it's helpful to know how to write a proper press release or pitch letter, but the reality is zillions of press releases get faxed into newsrooms every day. Newspapers are dying, TV no longer reigns the news world and the rising go-to news sources - the internet and bloggers - abhor all the traditional basics, such as press releases, making it a time-consuming challenge to insert your campaign into their discussions. This means that more than ever, community advocacy groups and charities -- this author's audience -- have to re-think PR strategies in order to insert their issues and causes into the news stream. Bigger organizations are already there.

To her credit, the author does touch on how to evaluate what is and isn't news, and how to transform your beloved cause into a news item -- that no matter how worthy your cause, newsrooms are about NEWS. As the author is clearly a seasoned pro and a good writer, I look forward to her sequel, which will hopefully offer guidance on how to navigate today's stormy PR waters. I need that book to convince my little groups to make the leap.

Sandra Beckwith has put together a very readable book with practical insights for handling public relations in the real world. This work will help you develop a strategy for getting your organization's message out into the public square. Her step-by-step process even has forms you can use in your PR planning. Public relations is so much more than just talking to media when they happen to be interested in your organization. The author shows how you can become proactive right now in getting your message noticed.

What a wonderful book. It was pretty to look at, and easy to read. If you are starting a nonprofit or want to improve on your existing nonprofit, then this book will probably help you in either project. It will help your organization generate media exposure that usually leads to awareness, growth, and contributions for your organization. And all at minimal cost. Use this book to create or improve upon your organization's publicity plan.

All nonprofit executive directors and development directors should have a copy of this book! It is broken into four sections:

1. Getting started
2. Tools
3. Tactics
4. The plan

Topics covered in detail include media materials, news releases, and pitch letters. The information provided is light on theory and jargon and heavy on instruction. And if you follow the advice in the four sections you will without a doubt create a solid publicity program for your organization.

The author also discusses alternatives to publicity that amount to traditional marketing techniques. They include:

1. Direct mail
2. Advertising
3. Public speaking
4. E-Newsletters, and
5. Viral marketing

All in all, a great book and one that will get a lot of use by the people who head a nonprofit. 5 stars!

"Democracy, historically, is a fairly late child of capitalism." This concise statement, buried halfway through this slim volume, goes a long way to summarizing Trenin's well-argued point. The West gets it wrong, he says, when it sees Russia as a failed democracy. Instead, it needs to look at Russia as an emerging capitalist society, where private ownership is creating stakeholders in the system, which will inevitably lead to a rule of law (one's property, after all, needs to be protected), which will only then lead to a more democratic society.

The point is well taken. As is this: "Russia is probably not going to join the West, but it is on a long march to become Western, `European,' and capitalist, even if not for a long while democratic." We do best, therefore, not to emphasize our differences or the distance yet to be traveled, but to embrace the progress made and help ensure that it is permanent (for Trenin, that means encouraging consumerism, trade and business investments). As Trenin, no apologist for Putin, well knows, Russia's democratic future is not assured, and the Kremlin's parliamentary puppeteering could well turn sour. It brings to mind a summary made some years ago by a respected economist: It takes Detroit a decade to design a single new car. Yet we somehow expected Russia to redesign and remake a whole country in little more time than that. (Reviewed in Russian Life)

The author utterly hits the nail on the head with his analysis of modern Russia. The current administration's Russia policy was to treat the country as a failing democracy as opposed to a emerging one. Russia will likely never be a pro-U.S. country in the sense of an Australia or Japan, it sees itself as a great power that should at least be on equal terms with the most advanced nations on Earth. Putin's frustration & anger & that of many Russian's is understandable. Bush Sr promised not to enlarge NATO and Clinton moved Nato to their doorstep. The current government feels encircled by hostile American interests. High oil and gas prices have allowed the Putin camp to restore a measure of economic stability to the country when compared the chaos of the Yeltsin years. Yet the minimum wage was just raised to $88 a month. At least half the population lives in poverty. The author is correct in that the West needs to look at Russia in new terms of a re-emerging capitalist society not in the old Soviet term. The biggest threat to Russian stability is economic. So much of the GDP of the country is related to Oil & Gas, as was seen during the late Breznhev and Andropov years, prices for both can suddenly become depressed without warning. The West needs to do more to help Russia diversify it's economy. As in Soviet times Russian manufacturing is at least 70 years behind other G8 nations, the country's infastructure is falling apart. Hillary will have to formulate a realistic policy to Russia one that is based on a solid working relationship based on mutual respect for the other's interests. I doubt Russia & America will be allies in the sense America & Europe are but the relations need not be so hostile either.