Endowment Books

It rarely happens that a great movie actress also manages to be a great writer. Signoret tells her life story in a lively, literary prose. She makes no excuses for the mistakes she made. She is a master in evoking the atmosphere of a meeting, a conversation or a movie set. Her description of the people she meets on her travels are rivetting.

In an article entitled "In Praise of Older Women," "Time" magazine once remarked that Simone Signoret was "everywoman's Bogart, in a trenchcoat, dangling a cigarette, in "Room At The Top." Should you find yourself saying some modern equivalent of "Right on, sister,"at this, you might want to find this autobiography.

Signoret (born, Wiesbaden, Germany, March 25,1921; died, High Jura, France, September 30,1985 ) might seem typically French middle-class at first glance. In fact,she was raised in Neuilly, a suburb of Paris, in an intellectual atmosphere. She studied English in school, took a teachers degree, and tutored in English and Latin. She spoke English, German, and French. But her father, an officer in the French army and a linguist who later worked at the United Nations, was descended from Polish Jews. He barely made it out of France ahead of the German Occupation of World War II: he fled to England, where he served with French General Charles de Gaulle. This left Signoret, as a young woman, to shoulder the burden of supporting her mother and two younger brothers. She first went to work at a collaborationist newspaper, "Le Nouveau Temps," so collaborationist that her boss Jean Luchaire, faced a firing squad at war's end.

However, she herself discovered the Cafe Flore, home of France's intelligentsia these many years, and decided she wanted to act. Through the Occupation of France, she continued, by working constantly in the film industry, always as an extra or perhaps with just one line,to support mother and brothers. She lacked proper papers, owing to her father; used her mother's maiden name, Signoret, rather than her father's name, Kaminker; and had to keep a low low profile.

But all wars eventually end, even World War II, and her career began to build. Along the way to "Casque d'or, " her first major French picture, she loved, lived with, had a girl Catherine by, and eventually married French film director Yves Allegret. Then in a dramatic, wrenching emotional upheaval, she met French cabaret star Yves Montand. They eventually married, and she even managed to talk him into making a few movies, such as "Wages of Fear," "Z", and "State of Siege."

The couple were outspoken left-wingers, and though Hollywood began to flirt in the 1950's, they couldn't get visas to enter this country. Mind you, they had minds of their own. Previous commitments required them to tour the Soviet Union shortly after its brutal repression of the Polish Uprising of 1956. One evening the Politburo came to late supper, and the pair told then-leader Nikita Khrushchev just what they thought of his methods.

At any rate, in 1959, at age 38, Signoret became an international star with the English-made "Room at the Top." She and her husband were finally able to get visas into the States: she was able to be in Los Angeles in 1960 to collect her Best Leading Actress Oscar for "Room." She was the first woman to win the Best Actress award in a non-American made film. The couple decided to stay on while Montand made "Let's Make Love" with Marilyn Monroe.

Signoret discusses the period when she and Montand lived above Marilyn Monroe and her then-husband Arthur Miller, in Bungalows 20 and 21 of the Beverly Hills Hotel, as "Let's Make Love" was made. There was nearly worldwide gossip about a Monroe-Montand affair, and later Monroe did tell her dresser Lena Pepitone, that after Signoret and Miller left town for other commitments, they did. Signoret, however, never believed it. She wrote of Monroe, "She's gone, without ever knowing that I never stopped wearing the champagne colored silk scarf she'd lent me one day....It's a bit frayed now, but if I fold it carefully, the fray doesn't show."

The author is biting in her treatment of Lillian Hellman, who confided in her book "Pentimento" that she hated Signoret's "Regina" in the French stage production of Hellman's play "The Little Foxes." She's moving in her discussion of a handsome young Greek, holding a carnation in a famous picture. He was a left-winger, and was clandestinely murdered, in the beams of a Dodge truck, by the neo-fascist right in 1953. He and his carnation were reborn in Montand's "Z."

And the woman's wonderful on her decision to age, " like everybody else, and quietly accept the idea that 45 puts you on the road to 46 rather than to 44.... It's very easy to go on functioning at the same rhythm as your contemporaries, to mature with them, and to age with them. And it's miraculous when life brings you parts that seem to grow better each year, stronger, laden with the memories and personal experiences that have put those lines on your face. They are the scars of the laughter, the tears, the questions, the astonishments and the certainties that are also those of your contemporaries. I chose not to go /to the plastic surgeons/. I didn't go because I've never been a star." Now there, Mme Montand, you fibbed a bit.

The actress was also well-known for her films "Les Diaboliques," and "Ship of Fools," in which she co-starred with Vivien Leigh. She is buried in Paris's famed Le Pere Lachaise Cemetery. A French postage stamp was issued in her honor on October 3, 1998. The late great American jazz singer Nina Simone always told interviewers she'd taken her name from Signoret's. Signoret, you see, had a lot going for her, in addition to that dangling cigarette.

This book deals with efforts by Mormon officials after the death of Joseph Smith in Nauvoo, Illinois, in 1844 to ensure that temple endowments were administered to as many of believers in the Mormon religion as possible. It strings together in chronological order many accounts of temple work among the Mormons during 1845 and 1846. The washings and anointings, the eternal marriage ceremonies; the ritual passage from the Garden of Eden through the telestial, terrestrial, and celestial glories; the adoptions; and other endowments depicted in these primary accounts suggest the evolution of the rituals even after the death of Joseph Smith and the promulgation of this aspect of Mormon theology among the rank and file in the church. The haste with which these endowments were undertaken is revealing. On one day, February 6, 1846, 512 people in eight different companies went through the Nauvoo temple. The intention of making these ceremonies available to as many of the Latter-day Saints as possible prior to departing the city was apparent from these actions. This helped to standardize the practice among those who went west with Brigham Young.

What is most remarkable about this book from my perspective is the hierarchies created in the rituals in which men were endowed to become kings and gods and women are to become queens and priestesses. The Mormon temple concept as it emerged in Nauvoo with its secrecy, ritualistic washings and anointings, incantations, preoccupation with Old Testament images, and elaborate rites provided for eternal exaltation where faithful Mormons would "inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths" implies that others must be subservient (Doctrine and Covenants, section 132:20). The temple rituals as documented here always mandated a second-class position for women beneath their priesthood-holding husbands, but women of the faith would be above all others. Did this set of ideas emerge ambivalently over time or was it deliberately fostered by status anxiety or other more subtle factors?

"The Nauvoo Endowment Companies" is a useful addition to the literature of Mormon Nauvoo.

The Nauvoo Endowment Companies 1845-1846: A Documentary History is a compilation of the original, scribed documentation of all activities and events that took place inside the Nauvoo temple of the Latter-day Saints (Mormons) the two months in which it was in operation, December 1845 - February 1846. Since it is a primary source, The Nauvoo Endowment Companies is of paramount insight to historians, particularly those studying the role of women in Christianity in general and Mormonism in particular, as the Mormon beliefs concerning female subservience and male dominance ("Adam, being full of integrity and not disposed to follow the woman nor listen to her, was permitted to receive... the priesthood") is clearly spelled out. The role of church that purported obedience to the law of the land yet demanded converts to swear vengeance against the murderers of Joseph and Hyrum Smith, the trials of its often persecuted followers, and the descriptions of ceremonies and events including live dancing offer a glimpse into daily Mormon life over a hundred and fifty years ago. Genealogists will find the documentation of sealings, including polygamous unions, particularly valuable. A superb, in-depth reference, though the fine interpretation of often dry records and methodical documents is almost entirely left up to the reader.

This was an important book for me because it made me realize that national governments can separate economic freedom from political freedom and that national governments could encourage the former while also discouraging the latter. The book looks at the use of the internet in and by eight semi-authoritarian and authoritarian nations. One conclusion that can be reached is that such governments can be adept in their use of the Internet. A more complete review of the book can be found on the Resource Center for Cyberspace Studies web page for book reviews.

If you are interested in this subject, it is certainly a book that you want to read. It provides an excellent analysis of the situation. In the `90's the irrational exuberance of the economic potential of the Internet created the dot-com bubble. There is also an inflated perception on what the Internet means socially, a condition that still exists. This book is a pin that pops that bubble.

One warning, this book is not a page-turner. At times the way in which the authors deliver the information is somewhat dry. This made the book difficult to read at times. This is not to suggest a fault, you just need to be prepared for what you are about to read.

If you are looking for a fun filled read, this is not the book for you. If you are looking for a book that delivers factual information and insights on the implications of the Internet on closed regimes, then this should definitely be part of your library.

This book goes a long way towards explaining the complexity of Ukraine, a nation that is divided in accepting or rejecting the different identities the world knows of it. Is it the cradle of Russian civilization that includes present day Ukraine, Russia and Belarus or is it the frontier(eastern Ukraine in particular) where eastern Slavs (progenitors of Ukrainians, Russians and Belarussians) escaped to from suppressive powers of overlords (Poland and Russian princes, or is it the center where a new set of Russians-western Ukriane (Ukrainians or Ruthenians or Little Russians) came into being from the amalgamation of foreign influences (Polish, Lithuanian, Slovakian, Austria,Hungarian etc)?

From Gogol's work-Taras Bulba, one can get a picture of how easterners view themselves as Ukrainians (orthodox,eastern slavonic who fraternalise with their other eastern slavonic brothers) and who have been prominent in Russian or east slavic history(Yermak, Krushchev, Breshnev etc). Union Moujik as a story gives a clearer picture of the divide. Two brothers in the same house with one brother stressing on their roots and those they share common roots with(east), and the other brother attaching importance to the influences picked up in the past(west)

'Revolution in Orange' is the first book on the subject written for an academic audience. Particular interesting were the chapters on Russian and American influence on the events in 2004.

However, the chapter on the famous youth group 'Pora' was disappointing. The online history posted on Pora's website is at least as helpful.

Though this book will be of interest to researchers and academics, I would recommend Andrew Wilson's, 'Ukraine's Orange Revolution' for those looking for a more readable introduction.

Stratefic Geography and the Changing Middle East came out in 1997 so some information about the region has changed since then but the book provides a sueful introduction into the issues of the middle east such as the importance of oil and gas in the region and these issues have influenced attempts to control the region. The book also focuses on military planning and operations such as the Gulf War and Weapons of mass destruction.

Obviously, this book is not fireside reading and should be seen more as a reference.

Nevertheless, as the authors argue, whatever theory of international relations you subscribe to--clash of civilizations, multipolarity, etc.--the Middle East remains square in the middle of it all and needs to be better understood by the average citizen. If Sept. 11 didn't drive that little lesson home, I don't know what will.

It was fascinating to see how the lay of the land shapes a region's history and even the attitudes of its residents. The book gives ample attention to not just topography, but climate, resources, migration, and how all these factors shape policy and the movement of armies.

Overall, this is a much needed book. There's a lot of data to plough through, but it's worth it.

The authors have presented an informative and objective analysis of one of the least known and understood of freedom struggles to the American people. Kashmir, a region in South Asia bordered by India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and China is in a state of siege similar to the Balkans in the 1990's. Since the creation of India and Pakistan in August of 1947 by Great Britain, the people of Kashmir have been in a struggle to exercise their right to self-determination, as guaranteed by UN Security Council Resolutions. Thousands of young Kashmiris have lost their lives, as documented by the authors in a very revealing and understandable text.

I highly encourage Westerners who value freedom and civil liberties for all peoples to read this relevant and well documented book. It is one of the finest books on modern Kashmir I have read and a moving tribute to the tragedy of a noble people who are victims of the greed and whims of corrupt politicians who could drag South Asia into nuclear war since both India and Pakistan both possess nuclear capabilities and have fought two wars over Kashmir.

As an American of Kashmiri and Pakistani origin, i found this book to be very intriguing. It explains Indian attrocities that have been dismissed by the rest of the world. I just wish more was written about militants as well. This book could also do with some more pictures. All in all, a good book, if youre willing to forget that it is 6 years old, and in that 6 years is where the Kashmir movement evolved from a mere shoot-and-run rebellion, to a deadly and daring guerilla war.

The authors have presented an informative and objective analysis of one of the least known and understood of freedom struggles to the American people. Kashmir, a region in South Asia bordered by India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and China is in a state of siege similar to Bosnia. Since the creation of India and Pakistan in August of 1947 by Great Britain, the people of Kashmir have been in a struggle to exercise their right to self-determination, as guaranteed by UN Security Council Resolutions. Thousands of young Kashmiris have lost their lives, as documented by the authors in a very revealing and understandable text.(p)

I highly encourage Westerners who value freedom and civil liberties for all peoples to read this relevant and well documented book. It is one of the finest books on modern Kashmir I have read and a moving tribute to the tragedy of a noble people who are victims of the greed and whims of corrupt politicians.

This book offers the advantage of being short and introducing the general reader to recent events in Kashmir. However, I think the book is less of a rigorous history than an advocacy piece. Newberg is right to emphasize the human rights abuses and political repression of Kashmir by the Indian central (federal) government; however, this does not bring out the complexity of the problem, which is also influenced by economic conditions, military assistance from Pakistan, and the inevitable problem with all guerrilla movements, which is that they need popular support, but can quickly turn into oppressors themselves. And the writer seems to have interviewed a lot of militant group members, but not that many local people or government officials for their side of the story. For a more detailed, recent historical analysis, see Sumit Ganguly's book on the Crisis in Kashmir.

The author's concerns about the Kashmiris come through quite well in the book, but her analysis on fixing the blame is incomplete and superficial. Ms. Newberg has taken the safe, well-trodden path of fixing the blame principally, and wrongly, on the Indian government for the strife in Kashmir, but offers few suggestions.

The world should rightly be concerned about the violence in Kashmir, but its judgment on who is to blame should be based upon facts and not emotions, however raw they may be. The Kashmir conflict has deep historical roots that Ms. Newburg completely glosses over in her book.

Although, there are several shortcomings in the book the principal one is a complete absence of a description of the current political environment in the areas surrounding Kashmir. Kashmir is bordered by Pakistan, Tibet, Afghanistan and India. The first three states are hardly exemplary models for secular democracy. The last mentioned, India, has so far borne the burden of introducing representative democracy (however flawed it may seem to outsiders) in a region that has slowly come grudgingly under the authority of religious fundamentalism and the gun. For doing a difficult job made impossible under current circumstances, India should be applauded, not criticized. Holding elections in an area where Islamic fundamentalists, with considerable support from those other model pillars of liberal democracies - Pakistan (which has just had its fourth military coup in its history) and the Afghan Taleban threaten to shoot voters, is not an easy task for any government. This makes the task of correcting previous wrongs by any civilian government very difficult, since democratic expression is not allowed through the ballot. Ms. Newburg completely ignores this in her analysis.

Ms. Newburg also twists facts (unwittingly or wittingly) to suit her theory. The introduction of her book (page 1) has a glaring omission. I quote, "...in 1947, the ruling Hindu maharajah committed his predominantly Muslim subjects to India. Tribal leaders from Paksitan crossed into Kashmir (with the blessings of the new Pakistan government) but stopped short of Srinigar". What is completely missing from the description is the fact that the Hindu maharajah had not acceded to either India or Pakistan at the time. Only when faced with an armed invasion by Pakistan, did he seek India's help. India was willing to commit her troops, but only after the matter of accession had been settled. In the end, the matter of accession was settled, when the maharajah chose to accede to India, and Indian troops came to his aid. India's act was fully legal - as borne out by the various UN resolutions that Pakistan keeps referring to, which require Pakistan to first evacuate its armed forces from all of Kashmir. By reversing the chronological sequence of events, Ms. Newburg obfuscates the issues, in a manner that repeats itself throughout the book.

I felt compelled to write this review because of the poor content by some of the other contributors -- one who didnt event read the book and the other ranting a personal attack with no focus on the book itself.
As a teacher, Colleen Kyle should know better than anyone else to actually read books before judging them. She might find herself actually learning something from the research of others. This is not a history book, and it doesnt claim to be one. Its encouraging people to re-think philanthropy and the long term impact generosity can have by showing how we have all benefitted from private giving already.
Mr. Chuck Jones needs to spend more time actually giving something back to society and little less time complaining about those who choose to take the personal and professional risks required to be a leader.
I would encourage people to read Gaudiani's book, to learn about how generosity affects society, and then think about what they can do in their local community to improve the lives of the less fortunate.

This book is a manifesto and an operational guideline. It explains the "third force" of our social-economic system: philanthropy, and its pivotal role in insuring the successful functioning of free-enterprise in the economic sphere and democracy in the political sphere.

The balance struck between capitalism and democracy is what matters, she says. And that balance is struck by acts of generosity.

"Generosity is capitalism's open and pragmatic acknowledgement that, since democracy's freedoms enhance capitalism's economic powers, then democracy deserves assets from capitalism that contribute to its strength." P. 23. "Capitalism needs democracy's value to remain defensible in society. Conversely, democracy needs capitalism's wealth creation for pursuing justice and opportunity for all." (p. 21)

Gaudiani makes the point that philanthropy (including volunteerism and giving) has been a critical component to the success of the American culture. It was particularly strong in the earlier part of the 20th century: during the "Progressive Era." Since 1970, however, the philanthropic urge has dissipated in relative terms. Because the distribution of wealth continues to get more skewed, and with the conservative trend in today's politics and zeitgeist fostering further disparities between rich and poor and the dismantling of social services such as universal health and social security, the need for philanthropy is never before greater.

But the need isn't simply for more dollars to be given. The crisis is in understanding generosity and how it is part of human happiness. A correct understanding of self interest is needed, she says.

We are at a crossroads and a crisis in our sense of philanthropy and generosity, according to Gaudiani. And, with the incredible rise in millionaire families, the next 30 years will see a class of people who face the choice: keep it all for myself and my children, or give some to insure that the society and culture in which I live will continue to thrive and be great.

It is the American tradition of generosity, according to Gaudiani, and not religion, empathy, or social pressure, that is the most likely cultural force that will sustain the philanthropic spirit. P.168.

Gaudiani speaks in terms of universal human values and wisdom (generosity is a value shared by all world cultures), and forcefully shows with example after example how this force operated in US history. Thus, her book is a great example of interpretive speaking for concrete social action. Her words invoke a cultural shift, and disclose a new world of possibility, while showing us that it can be based on beliefs we already hold, and actions that we already do. She does not introduce new metaphysical premises, but merely reframes, reconfigures, and adds emphasis to what is already within our capacity.

The strength of the book is its organic vision of philanthropy as necessary to fulfill democracy in a free enterprise economy; its comprehensive overview of the main areas of social capital (human, physical, and intellectual capital) and the scores of historical examples of how generosity and philanthropy made important investments in social capital; and its pragmatic program, with specific targets for philanthropy (e.g. increased home ownership by the poor) and plethora of possible mechanisms to achieve these targets (e.g. microlending, ROSCAs, matching donation banks, among others).

The questions that went unanswered by Gaudiani's book, for me, are in the realm of psychology and personal, emotional intelligence. Gaudiani speaks to the need for finding that "correct understanding of self interest" where giving, generosity, and concern for the collective is part of one's personal happiness. She references Enlightenment philosophy about living the good and honorable life, and the new direction in 'behavioral economics'. But she is light on detailing the emotional and psychological dimensions of generosity and altruism. How do I embody a generous outlook and make it work in my life? What does my motivation feel like when I pursue my self interest as incorporating the greater good? What do my interpersonal relationships look like? How do I balance my ego's need for recognition and my concern for others? How do I get from co-dependence to interdependence? How do I transcend my fears of not having enough money or not being good enough so that I am compassionate and know a sense of interconnectedness?

Gaudiani's case is compelling from an objective, systems point of view. And I agree, from this standpoint, with her provocative point: America is rich because it is generous (not vice versa). But from the subjective, personal, 'human interior' point of view, I still wonder how I can be generous and successful. From a personal standpoint, it seems, I can't be generous until I am rich. Perhaps the psychological aspects are for another book.

Gaudiani points to the world's culture wisdom traditions as providing the possibilities for restoring generosity as a prominent value in society. Generosity is truly a universal human value. All cultural traditions esteem it highly. The very concept of human being in the Chinese tradition incorporates benevolence. The Hindu concept of Ahimsa includes sharing one's prosperity with others. The Islamic tradition discourages interest and debt-based financial cooperatives in favor of equity sharing arrangements.

Gaudiani suggests that the cultural diversity of the US - with all the wisdom traditions represented here - is a huge untapped asset for bringing forth new understandings of generosity in our culture. This multidimensional value, that interpenetrates all domains of life, can be re-energized in our culture, she suggests, by encouraging the different ethnic traditions to bring it out.

To me this is an area where citizen discussion groups and workshops could play a big role. These programs would have individuals come together to share their experiences and emotions around the realities of making a living, taking care of oneself, and taking care of others. This is a big complex thing for people to work on, and it is better done within groups, not by individually reading a book. If a companion book is to be written to Gaudiani's important current book, it would be a guidebook for discussion groups to unpack these many personal, life history, and cultural aspects around self interest, the pursuit of happiness, and cultural renewal.

The Philanthropic Revolution started thousands of years ago in the fields of Eygpt when people then new that we need to "care" for each other. Give water to the thirsty passer by.

Claire, with a lot of compassion and breadth, reminds us the the "greater good" needs to be reenvigorated, as did Jane Addams' project to care for the larger community.

Chapter 6 go directly to the undrlyting feeling of the American Spirit.

The past 100 years shows us how to really appreciate and gain from that original intent. This book put's it into perspective and rekindles the spirit of giving.

Happy New Year.

"Most people think that Americans are generous because we are rich. The truth is that we are rich...because we are generous..." So writes Claire Gaudiani. Why should Christians read this book? We don't want to save "Capitalism," do we? Perhaps not, but we know we'd miss it, if it was destroyed. Yes, the Christian community ought to find time to read this wonderful book on the history of American Philanthropy and how it has, in the past, played a vital role in helping to maintain the uniqueness of the American experiment. More importantly, Gaudiani explains the perils of our current "giving habits," the cultural reasons for the trend, and solutions to restore the spirit of philanthropy. She writes, "As more of us are better able every year to satisfy our wants and needs, we are not sharing a larger percentage of our income and wealth. We are retaining it in savings or spending it on ourselves and our families. Yet some segments of the population...are experiencing reductions in their well-being, notably children." Christians for the most part should appreciate America's history of philanthropy, for much of it stems from either the Judeo-Christian worldview or simply from a genuine Christian faith that seeks to "give away what God has given to make other people's lives better." The Christian community should also find a welcome friend in her words: "Philanthropy has, in the past, been quicker than government to imagine, test, and implement innovative methods for solving social problems." Of all people and social groups, the Christian community should read this book, if for anything to learn to appreciate the history of Philanthropy. Giving and developing strategies for philanthropic adventures are more than mere altruism. After reading Gaudiani's book, I find that philanthropy of any kind (American or Christian charity) is the human experience where self-interest and compassion are not in conflict. It is in the best interest of Americans (dare I say Christians) to ensure that everyone has access to the American Dream--the dream of upward mobility. In the humble opinion of this reviewer, more Christian communities and churches should design their own philanthropic adventures and meet the social needs that are knocking on their church doors.

Any leader, executive, or member of our world society can learn and immediately benefit from this book. Dr. Gaudiani is one of the most exceptional and worthy leaders of our time. Her words of wisdom in this book exemplify the essence of her daily leadership practices. Just as the best leaders of our time have displayed, she is optimistic about human behavior and motivation. Critics' opinions expressed only underscore her importance and our need for her as a leader. Ironically, these opinions bring to light the necessity for a civil society and the "Greater Good." Where there is resistance, there is dissatisfaction with the current state in a social system, and Gaudiani is the ideal leader to provide the vision and first steps to bring us to a more democratic, unified, and satisfied state. Read this book with an understanding that you are learning from an exceptional, understanding, compassionate, highly emotionally intelligent, extremely knowledgable, cultured, worldly leader.

If you ever wonder if you can make a difference, this book will clear up any doubts. Collins, Rogers and Garner make it crystal clear that anyone who cares about curing society's ills can make a significant difference by giving what they can for social change. Packed with resources, examples, and how-to charts and guides, Robin Hood Was Right charts a clear path from wondering if you can make a difference to improving things from your neighborhood to countries on the other side of the globe. In a time where "donor fatigue" is cited as the reason why people grow increasingly indifferent to social injustice, less and less concerned with the state of the environment, and more hard-hearted about the homeless, Robin Hood has the cure to what ails you -- and our world.

Anyone concerned with social change and economic justice should run, not walk to the nearest neighborhood bookstore and grab a copy of Robin Hood Was Right. It is a highly readable, wonderfully informative, essential guide to gaining a deeper understanding of how money affects all our lives, and the practical steps we can take to avoid the pitfalls of the unexamined life. Regardless of your class or wealth status, this book will change the way you view your role in the world in relation to money and the power it provides and witholds.

Good intentioned book on the importance of giving money for social change. But the book left me short by not addressing the authors' own observation that "uncertainty about the impact of your gifts" can cause the most philanthropic among us to balk at giving. Book would have been so much more helpful if the authors had spent more time on how a reader can intelligently evaluate the foundations they profile in the book. We get a glimpse of what the book could have been in appendix H where the authors tell us that nonprofits with budgets of more than $250,000 have to have annual audits that are made publicly available. That's the kind of information that's really helpful...and a few words or paragraphs or even a chapter on how to read these audit statements to make sense of the health and intentions of the organizations would have been terrific.

The story of Robin Hood is not one of stealing from the rich to give to the poor. It is a story of too much taxes and Robin Hood returning the taxes to those that were bled dry. Not only does Collins rely on an incorrect myth of Robin Hood, but he latches on to myths about solutions for poverty. Studies have shown that minimum wage does not help the poor. In fact, one study (whose author would agree with Collin's premise) called minimum wage "perverse" in the fact that it took from one group of poor (those that became unemployed because of minimum wage) and gave to another group of poor (those that got a small raise because of minimum wage).

A better book on effective ways of helping the poor can be found in some of the chapters of "Healing Our World" by Dr. Mary J. Ruwart.

"Robin Hood Was Right" is an entertaining and intelligent guide to contributing to social change. Instead of replying to the nightly phone solicitations or the direct mail appeals, the reader can take control of the contribution process to focus on the values and outcomes desired.

I especially enjoyed the cartoons and sidebars. The text is thoughtful and each appendix offers an array of legitimate organizations. I recommend this book to anyone, who like me, wants to be sure that giving will make a difference. That the book is also a good read is just a free bonus.

I have read many book and this would have to be one of ,if not the worst books that I have ever read. If you wanted me to read this book again you'd have to pay me alot of money. Maybe this book shoud be taken off of the shelf. I don't like it!!!

This book is indespensable for anyone trying to understand both sides of the NEA controversy in 1989-1990. The champions of each side are represented, and given almost equal coverage in the book. These arguments are still being waged, and each side hasn't veered from their earlier positions in this book. As the controversy in the Brooklyn Musuem illustrates, this is a relevant topic today.

The person who wrote the above view obviously was either 10 years old or at that reading comprehension level. Perhaps they were expecting something different. It you want a comprehensive, thorough discussion of the events that occured, this is the book for you. Containing congressional letters, reviews, magazine articles, editorials, etc, this volume will lead you to further evaluate and perhaps change your own position on the controversy. A must read for anyone who truly wishes to understand the politics of art and NEA funding.

This is possibly the most interesting and informative book I've come across that discusses the controversies surrounding the funding provided by the NEA for such artists as Mapplethorpe or Serrano. It gives equal information supporting both sides of the debate. I came across this book while writing a term paper on censorship and the arts, and have now added it to my personal bookshelf. If you're interested at all in the arts, this book will be great for you.

This book is indespensable for anyone trying to understand both sides of the NEA controversy in 1989-1990. The champions of each side are represented, and given almost equal coverage in the book. These arguments are still being waged, and each side hasn't veered from their earlier positions in this book. As the controversy in the Brooklyn Musuem illustrates, this is a relevant topic today.

I do believe the reviewer above, LynHak, didn't understand the star system. She gives the book one star, but says her daughter-in-law, for whom she bought the book, says it's the BEST fundraising book she's ever read. I think she meant to give it five stars, which I believe it deserves.

This book was a gift for my daughter in law, a fundraiser for a huge national organization. She stated it was the BEST book she has ever read on the subject. I might add, she ia a very successfull fundraiser.

This book was first published in 1984 and quickly became a classic. Panas calls up the experiences of well-known philanthropists, volunteers, educators, religious leaders, fund-raising experts, and others to underscore a primary principle of successful fundraising: technique is no substitute for a committed heart. Having said that, be sure to check out his 65 Tenets for Success.

This book was almost like listening to a professional and highly experienced fund raiser give his unvarnished perspective on the motivations and realities of raising Mega Gifts. A nice peak into the human nature of those fortunate enough to be in a position to make large gifts to worthy and perhaps not so worthy causes. I found the book to be very helpful being new to the field of fund raising, though experienced in dealing with powerful and wealthy people in other professional settings. Not a "How To" book in the strictest sense, but more a what is and what motivates type of book. Worth the read.