Paris

The Eyewitness Travel guide series offers the best system in travel guide books. The Paris guide is no exception.

These books include everything. Street maps, metro maps, museum prices, times, information on EVERYTHING.

I left to study abroad in Paris last year, and spent lots of money on essentially useless guidebooks. The only one I used, and the only one I should have saved room for in my suitcase was the Eyewitness guide.

I used it my entire semester, finding new things in it all the time that I wanted to see, and just as an essential tool in Paris.

The first couple of days, the Metro map was indespensable.

This guidebook is one that should not be left at home. It offers hotels, restaurants, museums, and pictures of nearly everything, to boot.

I guarantee that this guidebook will not let you down. The Eyewitness guides are all you need, and all I will ever purchase in the future for my travel guidebook needs.

Enjoy Paris! Bon Voyage.

The DK Eyewitness Travel Guide series is always top notch, the Paris book being a sterling example. My 2001 edition was acurate with opening/closing times for sights, great maps, interesting pictures, helpful informaton, good layout & design. Besides the intricacies of the city, outside sites like EuroDisneyLand or the Palace of Versailles are covered well.
Perhaps boderline as to whether it is a little too heavy to carry around all day, you must have it and take it with you at least as far as the hotel.

My wife and I went to Paris on our honeymoon and we had a fantastic time in that glorious city. One of the things that helped us enjoy more and that helped us take advantage of all the city has to offer was having this travel guide.

The Eyewitness travel guides are a step ahead of any other series of travel books because it not only includes the same information that the other have, but they also include additional information that is really great to know and have while abroad.

This guide has all the usual bits about he city: the top sites to visit (including work hours so as not to get there when they're closed!), how to move around (info on buses, Le Metro, trains, taxis, you name it), lists of shops and restaurants (with different price ranges and organized by location)and great street maps. It also has historic information on the city, which truly enriched our visit by helping us appreciate the places and sites we were visiting.

However, the greatest thing about the guide were the "walk routes", helpful suggestions on ways how to best go site seeing. Even if you don't follow them completely, they give you great ideas on where to go.

It also includes lots of information on sites outside of Paris, which are great to visit if you have the time.

All in all, an excellent travel tool!

well as a Hemingway fan,this was one of the reasons why I choose to read it. I enjoy Hemingway's attention to detail which is why I love reading his works, but I must confess I did not see what all the hype was about this book. I was quite frankly bored with it. I finished it, but if you want know Hemingway read any other of his novels and then read this one.

This book could very well be the best of Hemingway.

A Moveable Feast was published after Hemingway's death and many feel that he would never have wanted it published. I'm very glad they did. It is a memoir of Hemingway's time in Paris during the 1920's. During that time he and his first wife, Hadley, lived on $5.00 a day.

I first heard of this book in the movie, City of Angels (Nicholas Cage, Meg Ryan). In it, Cage reads a quote from it to Ryan. The quote interested me and I bought the book. I was amazed.

The characters in this book are extroridnary including everyone from Ezra Pound to Aleister Crowley. He narrates stories including F. Scott Fitzgerald and his wife Zelda that are so acidic they almost hurt to read.

Hemingway was at his best when he wrote this book. It is a memoir of an aging man looking back on a very happy time in his life. Its a great place to start for Hemingway beginners and a touching read for Hemingway veterans.

Hemingway's classic lucid and laconic trademark writing style is indeed fully alive and well in the posthumously published A Moveable Feast. A Moveable Feast, the unique term used to describe Paris of the 1920's, reads like The Sun Also Rises - with great dialogue and characters. In fact, in the preface, Hemingway states, "If the reader prefers, this may be regarded as fiction."

Hemingway admits to leaving out some details and happenings - some that were widely known and others that were "secrets". That being said, Hem(as he is affectionately called - seeing as he loathes Ernest) nonetheless emits a plethora of juicy details and tidbits that make A Moveable Feast a compelling and delightful novella - even if it is nonfiction.

Hemingway runs the entire gamut(a word F. Scott uses much to Hem's displeasure) with his eclectic cast of expatriates including the virtually blind James Joyce, the alcoholic genius hypochondriac that is F. Scott Fitzgerald, the influential & eccentric Gertrude Stein, the elitist Ford Maddox Ford, the bel esprit of Ezra Pound, the selfish, insane, and terribly jealous Zelda Fitzgerald, a fellow who he profanely derides named Hal whom I suspect is Henry Miller and many, many more. By the way, we learn that La Generation Perdue inadvertently was coined by a garage mechanic of Gertrude Stein, not Gertrude herself. An indescribable feeling of vibrancy, vigor, and passion emanate from A Moveable Feast as Hemingway, despite being poor, inherently loves his life, writing, sipping his cafe de cremes and white wines in Paris cafes, as well as his continuously changing circle of friends. I highly recommend this short, yet unforgettable work, to all who want to learn what it truly was like when Hemingway was poor and unestablished living check to check - and nonetheless exerting an invigorating joie de vivre. Paris in the 20's - a time and place magically unlike any other in history.

"It was all part of the fight against poverty that you never win except by not spending. We ate well and cheaply and drank well and cheaply and slept well and warm together and loved each other." - Hemingway.

But who really is mad in the story? It's sometimes hard to tell, considering how complex the plot, and characters can get at times.
The Phantom of the Opera is not considered as a classic novel. Obviously because of Webber's dark and intrenching musical version of the story.
However, the original book gives new layers to people who have seen the musical, but have never read the book.
Though better I believe is the edition PHANTOM written by Susan Kay. She even goes deeper into Erik's character, and gives him even more justice, and back ground then we could ever imagined.
Even though I am grateful for the popularity that the Phantom of the Opera is enjoying in the twentieth through the twenty-first century. I can understand why it failed to captured the majority interest when it first came out published.
It's almost as if today's reader's understand it better and are eager to read it, and many other versions of the story.
One thing I noticed was the somewhat lack of character development and history for even Erik, and Christine.
This is were Kay's novel come in,
I would suggest reading the original novel first and then read PHANTOM, that way you can understand, and enjoy it so much more.

The first time the words "The Phantom of the Opera" meant anything to me was when I was seven years old. My dad discovered the fabulously composed Andrew Lloyd Webber musical version. Well to my young ears the music was unbearable. The pounding, clashing cords scared me half to death and I was constantly begging him to turn it off. Seven years later, I was fourteen and in a selective singing group at my school in which we were doing a medley of "Phantom" songs for a Spring Concert. To make a long story short, I soon learned that at seven I had no musical taste and had been horribly wrong about "Phantom".

That same school year I chose to read the original novel for a school assignment. Already captivated by the gripping love triangle between Raoul, Christine and "The Phantom" (as he is called in the musical version), I fell madly in love with the whole entire story after finishing the book in only a week.

I truly believe that in this amazing work of literature Leroux created some of the most memorable characters in the history of story telling. His ability to make any reader sympathetic towards a disfigured, criminally insane genius is a task even some of the best writers couldn't hope to recreate.

"Phantom" takes the words "Illusion" and "Reality" and throws them out the window. Blending both what is for certain and what is not into a haunting dreamland, where an unfortunate soul who has never known compassion does not have to see the truth and can pretend that the world is a more forgiving place.

Running themes in Phantom include love, empathy, and the shallowness a vast number of us fail to realize we're guilty of. The best parts of the book (in my opinion) are when Raoul asks Christine is she would love Erik if he weren't so unbearably unattractive. And when Erik sorrowfully confesses that not even his own mother knew how to love him.

"Phantom" challenges readers to care about the feelings of an inwardly and outwardly distorted maniac who's gone crazy in his solitude and only wants to be loved. It's a fabulous expose of the human nature of the most unfortunate type of person and the insufferable way he is doomed to be treated by the rest of the world.

The first time the words "The Phantom of the Opera" meant anything to me was when I was seven years old. My dad discovered the fabulously composed Andrew Lloyd Webber musical version. Well to my young ears the music was unbearable. The pounding, clashing cords scared me half to death and I was constantly begging him to turn it off. Seven years later, I was fourteen and in a selective singing group at my school in which we were doing a medley of "Phantom" songs for a Spring Concert. To make a long story short, I soon learned that at seven I had no musical taste and had been horribly wrong about "Phantom".

That same school year I chose to read the original novel for a school assignment. Already captivated by the gripping love triangle between Raoul, Christine and "The Phantom" (as he is called in the musical version), I fell madly in love with the whole entire story after finishing the book in only a week.

I truly believe that in this amazing work of literature Leroux created some of the most memorable characters in the history of story telling. His ability to make any reader sympathetic towards a disfigured, criminally insane genius is a task even some of the best writers couldn't hope to recreate.

"Phantom" takes the words "Illusion" and "Reality" and throws them out the window. Blending both what is for certain and what is not into a haunting dreamland, where an unfortunate soul who has never known compassion does not have to see the truth and can pretend that the world is a more forgiving place.

Running themes in Phantom include love, empathy, and the shallowness a vast number of us fail to realize we're guilty of. The best parts of the book (in my opinion) are when Raoul asks Christine is she would love Erik if he weren't so unbearably unattractive. And when Erik sorrowfully confesses that not even his own mother knew how to love him.

"Phantom" challenges readers to care about the feelings of an inwardly and outwardly distorted maniac who's gone crazy in his solitude and only wants to be loved. It's a fabulous expose of the human nature of the most unfortunate type of person and the insufferable way he is doomed to be treated by the rest of the world.

I fell in love with the musical The Phantom of the Opera (Andrew Lloyd Weber) Years ago and it wasn't until recently that I really wanted to know more about this story of a love striken masked man and the beatiful Christine who won his heart. Well written, fast moving plot, great storyline, it seems Gaston Leroux was planning that this book become a movie! I got the book a couple days ago and succcessfully finished reading it within the course of two days! It's that GOOD! It has many loveable characters, but the character of Erik (phantom) is very complex! Sometimes you love him, sometimes you hate him, and other times, you pity him! The ending is terribly sad and you crave more, but it also makes you wonder...was the Opera ghost real?

Great book and I strongly suggest you read it!

I bought this book on a whim and read it when I had nothing better to do, and it exceeded my expectations by far!

Its one of my favorite books, and at fourteen, I've read quite a lot.

The 19th century atmosphere didn't phase me at all (maybe because I've read Les Miserables?), though I suppose it might be difficult for some.

The book was well-crafted. I enjoyed Leroux's style; it was interesting to read it as if it really happened. It made it more relavent; if he had written it as if it were just some random made-up story, I don't think I would have been interested.

Some characters were a bit flat, but many were quite good, I thought.

Daee (Christine's father- a dead character, but a major one) and Mme Valerius were interesting.

I love the managers. The relationship they have with each other and the previous managers is great; I always enjoy reading the bits about them.

Madame Giry was wonderful too- I love how she wisely tells everything that she knows (lol).

Erik, the Phantom, was a satisfyingly deep and complex character. In fact, he's one of my favorite characters of all time! I find him fascinating.

Its very complicated- I had to read it twice to fully understand everything.

Its an excellent, exciting, mind-gripping book that made me cry at the end. I would recommend it to anyone.

I just love the phantom of the opera.It takes place in Paris,France which I would love to see someday.Erik A.K.A the phantom is a outcast,because he was born wrong.I felt so sorry for him that people treat him differently.People called him names like monster,freak,loser.I would treat him with care,respect,treat him as a friend even though his looks are hideous.It doesn't matter what you look like on the outside,all that matters is what's on the inside.At least someone cared for him.That was Christine Daae.But I just loved it.They say the play is just as good as the book.I cried at the end when Christine left Erik,for Raoul.I think that was just sad.But I got really scared when the chandelier came down on them.I would rate this book as a 5 star book!

I read many of his books, all of them reflect hate to arabic religion. This man is not afraid of the god and shadinda allah mashta ehonte. No good, he will pay to mikahi dyumi in full. Don't buy his books, don't support this man.

I don't know why this is, but classic books are often bound into heavy, dark tomes and printed in the tiniest print with almost no space between the lines. Perhaps the publisher imagines these books will not actually be read anymore, but instead are supposed to serve as fillers for the large shelves in aristocratic libraries and behind lawyers' desks.

Well, for those of us who still like to dust off the classics and read them, TOR's edition of the Hunchback of Notre Dame serves nicely. It's bound in a modern style--small, with an intriguing cover, with easy-on-the-eyes print. And, it's complete and unabridged (accept no substitutions on this point, otherwise you're depriving yourself of the grand vision of the artist). Also, TOR's 458-page mass market paperback is only [$]--when was the last time you got so many hours of entertainment for so little?

The Hunchback of Notre Dame is a dark, desperate novel, filled with mist and moonlight and echoes in the lonely streets of 15th century Paris past midnight. In the main, it tells the intersecting stories of three lonely characters, each aching in their own way. There's Claude Frollo, archdeacon of Josas, who's spent his whole life cloistered in the tight garb of Catholicism. There's La Esmeralda, an enchantingly beautiful gypsy who's searching for her long lost mother. And, of course, there's Quasimodo, the malformed, hunchbacked figure haunting the shadows of the Cathedral of Notre Dame.

Hugo knows how to tell a story--there is plenty of irony, a few good surprises, and some excellent characterization. He paints the dark places of humanity: people struggling to survive, to find hope in the midst of horror, each clinging in some way to a dream that can never be realized.

One drawback of the book is its pacing, which, at times, slows to a crawl. For example, there is a long chapter on the layout of Paris in the 15th Century, which, if you're not a city planner or fastidious historian, can get pretty long and boring. Even Hugo seems to know it becomes boring, because he recaps so often. Also, Hugo often breaks the fourth wall and directly addresses the reader, which can be distracting and anti-dramatic at times. Thirdly, I would have liked to spend some more time with that loveable wretch, Quasimodo. He has a big part in the end, but not much more. But don't let these minor annoyances stop you from reading a great story.

If you have patience, The Hunchback of Notre Dame will rebuild the gothic Notre Dame of stone in words; if you have imagination, it will acquaint you with the adventures of some extraordinary characters; and if you have a heart, you will shed a tear for Claude Frollo, La Esmeralda, and Quasimodo.

"The Three Musketeers", "Frankenstein", "Around the world in 80 days", all those samples of nineteenth century literature have become true icons of popular culture in our time. Acknowledging that, I decided to read the literary works that originated some of those cultural concepts, in order to better understand their true meaning. That's how I decide to read "The Hunchback of Notre Dame". This little review is based on my impressions on this great piece from Victor Hugo. Since the high quality of "Hunchback" is universally accepted, a text intended to prove that Hugo's work is a good book would be truly pointless. Rather. this review is meant to comment on why it would be interesting for readers going beyond the popular imagery generally surrounding this important piece of literature and actually reading it.

Though I've read an English version of the book, I know the original French title reads just "Notre Dame". That's probably because the focus of the story is not really Quasimodo, the deaf and deformed hunchback in charge of ringing the bells of Notre Dame. The true main character in the book is the cathedral itself. In the story, this edifice is in the center of a series of plots that help to portray medieval Paris.

In fact, one could approach "Hunchback" as a true history treaty, due to extensive descriptions of the medieval city and explanations on medieval culture that the scholar Victor Hugo included on his work.

However, in Hugo's romanticized portrait of a Paris of times gone by, it's possible to list some characters that stand out as true key figures in the drama. Those most outstanding in the book's plot are the aforementioned Quasimodo; Dom Claude Frolo, the taciturn Archdeacon of notre Dame and Quasimodo's foster parent; La Esmeralda, the gypsy girl, who seems to enchant all around her with her charm; Gringoire a foolish and impoverished poet and Captain Phoebus, a selfish and feeble spirited nobleman who holds a position of military officer.

Another misleading notion about "Hunchback" is the belief that it's some sort of gothic version of "Beauty and the Beast", staring the bestial Quasimodo and beautiful La Esmeralda. Quasimodo indeed falls deeply and thoroughly in love with the pretty gypsy, yet, the only feelings her beloved can offer in return are pity, gratitude and tenderness. Despite that, the lady never quite overcomes a deep feeling of disgust towards the bell ringer's hideous figure. Contrary to what many might think, this book is not some mild hearted fable about love and kindness overcoming exterior appearance. In addition to being a historical study about medieval Paris, this piece of literature is an amazing essay on human wickedness. The book is a powerful portrait of several manifestations of evil in the hearts of people. Because of some twists and turns in the story, all those samples of human cruelty portrayed end up being channeled against poor la Esmeralda, causing the complete undoing of she who is the only truly good hearted character in the whole book. Among the examples of how evil can manifest in human's hearts present in the piece's pages, there is the case of Dom Claude who, torn between celibacy and lustful feelings for the gypsy girl, nourishes a love for La Esmertalda stained by mortal hate towards her. There are the towns people who, while charmed at the little gypsy who make dancing performances on the streets to collect some spare change, also despise her for being a vagabond and supposedly a sorceress. There are the officials of law who ruthlessly and mercilessly ensue penalties of torture and deaf under the most improbable accusations. We also see Phoebus, a petty and vulgar man used to taking advantage of women for the sake of his own sexual satisfaction, who, although does not perform any evil toward others, is responsible for the most tragic events just for omitting himself in face of the distress of others. This huge gallery of malefice conspires to bring La Esmeralda her doom, and the only one who comes forth to protect her against such a dark state of affairs is the crippled hunchback Quasimodo. This book conveys a rich yet dark portrait o human psique. Therefore it is truly not advisable to draw from its story a script for some light hearted animated movie for children.

As a final remark, it's important to reinforce that though one might think that is well acquainted with the concept of the popular icon "The Hunchback of Notre Dame", the piece of literature that has given rise to it can prove to be much richer than any preconceived notions we might have about it. The purpose of this tiny review is to provide a very brief idea of what one can expect to find by actually reading this great book.

This novel was utterly captivating! I couldn't put it down! The story really did have the feel of an Anne Rice novel with a werewolf twist to it. I was so emotianally involved with the characters that by the end of the book I had to pace myself for fear of not receiving my copy of this books sequel, THE PROMISE, in the mail by the time I had finished it. The story is about a young human girl named Tessa, who enters the lives of the superior race of creatures known as werewolves. She seeks vengeance for the death of her father only to discover that her father had embraced all things werewolf and had been highly loved by the powerful and rich Alexander Devoncroix. Ultimately, Tessa falls in love with this charming werewolf as he takes her under his care and she soon becomes the "pet" of the "pack". This book becomes fast paced and suspenseful when Alexander's rebellious and human-hating brother Denis enters the picture, with hopes of over-throwing the packs' leader Elise-whom has chosen Alexander as her mate. Tessa becomes involved in a conspiracy which unfortunatly leads to sad events that will change the history of werewolves forever. This book was powerful, sad, erotic and beautifully detailed. This was one of the first times I have ever cried at the end of a book. I would highly reccomend this to fans of romance/suspense/horror/fantasy novels. If you like Anne Rice or werewolves than this book is probably excellent for you.

I was not prepared to find such a treasure in this book. Being a fan of Anne Rice's books (all of them) and knowing her upcoming book is the last one on her supernatural series of witches and vampires, I was looking for something to read on the genere of the supernatural and the occult. I happened to be roaming around Amazon, reading reviews, and I found this newcomer, Donna Boyd. I bought "The Passion". And this, my friends is what I think of this story.

First of all her writing style is beautiful. She takes you from one scene to the other flawlessly. The book is well written and very organized, you don't feel lost in the world of this creatures. She does not bombard you with many characters and keeps the storyline straight all the time.

About the story itself, all I can say is that it is the only story about supernatural characters that has made me cry.

Alexander Devoncroix's character is charming, smart and arrogant; but you are able to forgive the arrogance, for he makes it up with a very human heart even though he's a werewolf. He meets his dead human best friend's daughter, Tessa, in a very peculiar situation. Needless to say they become inseparable. He is bent on "educatin her" just for his amusement and to repay all the kindness his old best friend showed him during the time they spent together. Tessa's character is kind of slow, weak and simple in the begining, very predictable, but as the story develops you find Tessa's soul is very strong; stronger I think than Alexander's.

Tessa is regarded as a pet, an amusement to all werewolves who meet her and Alexander shows her off with pride. Tessa doesn't mind for as predictable as her character is in the beginning, she falls in love with her werewolf friend.

Into the picture comes Denis, Alexander's renegade brother and Elise, Alexander's love interest. Denis is bent of forwarding his position in the pack through a plan that involves marrying the new pack leader, Elise. Alexander of course does not want this for he is, even though he doesn't know it at first, in love with Elise.

Denis' only great characteristic is his ambitiousness. Other than that he's not a complicated character, but as with Tessa's character, Denis' development and evolution will leave you breathless.

Elise is the pack leader, a smart, strong and levelheaded female werewolf with a heart. Elise as the leader has plans of her own and this human girl, Tessa, is just the tool she neeeds to push her cause. Denis, on the other hand, has plans for Tessa too.

The outcome of this story is absolutely unpredictable and completely heart wrenching. I loved every detail and every emotion felt by Alexander, Denis, Elise and Tessa.

If you want a story where werewolfs are portrayed in a very different manner to that which they have been subject throughout history, this is your story. It's a must read. I highly recommend it.

I don't usually take the time to sit down and write a review for every book I read, for then I would be sitting at the computer almost daily. But I think that Donna Boyd has done a tremendous job of this story and I wanted to tell anyone who gets to read this review "BUY IT".

Many people have told you of the story of the Devencroix werewolf family, so I won't go there. What I will tell you is I read these books and I was transported to the world where werewolves live among us unsuspecting humans without knowing they were ever apart of our world.
Donna Boyd stopped with only two books in this series this one The Passion and The Promise. I only wished she'd continued. These books are so much more than I had expected going in.

We are led on a roller coaster of emotions as you read these two stories. The characters are well drawn and you will either fall strongly toward loving them or hating them. The passionate tale draws you in and takes hold of you.

The Passion and The Promise both tore at my heart. Remembering aspects of this book even now is an emotional experience. The books will leave you crying out your emotions whether you are for or against the characters. Donna Boyd has done such a wonderful job of creating a world of werewolves that aren't just horror stories. I don't want to give any of either of the stories away because as you are reading them you will be so eager to find out what is going to happen next you'll want to flip through to get glimpses of what happens, but don't do it.

These books aren't for the faint hearted they have some graphic moments and very adult material. They also have a sweeping story that carried me through this world where superior werewolves run expansive empires without humans being the wiser. At times I caught myself holding my breath as I sat devouring each page.

The only thing I have bad to say about the Devencroix series is that I can't believe they ended at 2 books. This series cries out for at least a 3rd book. However, I understand the pressures authors face, so maybe she just tired of the series after two books. I haven't and I still love to read both of these books but I never pick them up until I am prepared to sit and read them both.

"Giovanni's Room" by James Baldwin is a beautiful novel about the struggling sexuality of a young American expatriate, David.

David is living in Paris, and while there, he meets Hella. David is quite determined to live a "normal" life, with wife, kids and all. But while Hella is away in Spain ("to consider David's proposal") David has an affair with the handsome Italian bartender, Giovanni.

Although the time setting of this novel is in the 1950's, "Giovanni's Room" is a timeless novel, and anyone regardless of time-period, can easily identify with the different characters.

Once I started reading this book, I found it almost impossible to put it down. Actually, I finished it in one long day...

In the 1950'ies it wasn't easy to be neither gay nor black. The author James Baldwin was both. I think he was immensely brave to write "Giovanni's room", especially since he did so, in a time when it was hard to be either one, black or gay. Some of the other reviewers said that "if you are not paying a lot of attention you probably wouldn't even know that the book is about homosexuality" - not to be disrespectful, although Baldwin's writing technique in this book is impressive, I have a hard time understanding how one could possibly avoid picking up that the book is about homosexuality...

Anyway, I think that "Giovanni's Room" is one of James Baldwin's best works, and I highly recommend the book!

This is without a doubt one of the best literary works I have ever read! "Giovanni's Room" is all about a young American expatriate named David who finds himself torn between his fiancee Hella and an Italian bartender named Giovanni. They carry on a love affair but when Hella returns from a trip in Spain, everything starts spiraling out of control in a whirlwind of powerful and excruciating emotion. James Baldwin does an excellent job of presenting this passionate yet painful story in the form of a narrative. The character development is superb, so much so that one believes the characters really do exist. This is a poignant and compelling story that will definitely leave an impression on you. Reading this novel, one really experiences the pleasure, the pain, the loneliness and the suffering these characters experience and endure. This is a powerful work of literary art that gives the readers insight into the emotions that come with being in love and the struggle to find one's identity amidst confusion and self-loathing. The story takes place in 1950's Paris and you'll really feel like you're there as James Baldwin's writing is so descriptive you'll be able to see all the little nuances and minute details. "Giovanni's Room" is a solid testament to James Baldwin's remarkable talent and profound insight. This story would make an excellent addition to any library! Also a great place to start if you're just discovering the genius of James Baldwin. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!

It was just so beautiful. Incredaibly moving and emotional. Like Romeo and Juliet, right from the start you are told it's a tragdey, but that didn't stop me from going through the book hoping that it wouldn't be.

When I reached the end, I just sat there motionless. That was how deep the impression was.

"Paris 1919" took me quickly to unconsciousness. But reading it before bedtime meant I didn't finish it for nearly two months! I'm not saying it was bad but it wasn't a page-turner. I thought it would be more about the dynamics of the Conference itself rather than about the parties involved and all the geopolitical considerations. The book lacks an overarching narrative that would have helped bring the Conference alive. What I was hoping for was more of how the personalities of the leaders; Wilson, George and Clemenceau along with the national interests they represented played themselves out on this international stage.

Instead the events at the conference came to a screeching halt everytime a new country petitioned the Conference for more territory. Ms. Macmillan then provided the backstory on the country's history and the leader appearing at the conference. Often this was interesting but not gripping and I felt that the larger story and personalities got lost in the details. I got a good understanding of the political dynamics of various regions both going back and forward in time. The book made me interested in learning more about specific aspects of issues raised at the Conference such as the German presence on the Shantung peninsula and about the Turkish leader Ataturk. What I didn't get was a strong sense of the historic conference itself nor the larger themes that came out of it.

As the United States finds itself ever deeper in the Middle East morass, I continue my reading to find the roots of the turmoil that afflicts this region. One trail took me back to a critical milestone: the reshaping of the Middle East's political landscape coming out of World War I. Ms. MacMillan's book is an excellent primer on this seminal event in the twentieth century. World War I was supposed to be the war that would end all wars. Of course it didn't, and ironically nowhere could this be better presaged than in the Paris Peace Conference of 1919.

This book is a grand tour of the Peace Conference as well as much of the world in the Great War's aftermath. Ms. MacMillan portrays not only the major combatants, but also many of the lesser combatants and various ethnic groups in a grand arc from the Seine to the Euphrates. Her story is thoroughly researched and rich in detail, not only about people and events, but also the cultural, diplomatic, and historical ambience. Her writing is crisp and clear, factual and anecdotal, and sobering and invigorating. The lynchpins of her tale are the personal involvement of Georges Clemenceau (Prime Minister of France), David Lloyd George (Prime Minister of Great Britain), and Woodrow Wilson (President of the United States) -- their personalities and interactions as well as how they personally shaped the outcome of the conference. A wide variety of other extant and future leaders are included, but none had the same overall influence and power as these three.

Through her writing one senses what it must have been like in Paris. It was more than a peace conference; it was the proverbial house upon the hill lit brightly by the hopes and dreams of millions of people weary of war and desperate for a future wherein nations and peoples would respect each other and commune via the rule of law. It was one of those singular moments in history where hope and faith struggled to rise above the loss, destruction, and misery left in war's wake.

Unfortunately the moment passed. The human spirit was overcome by human frailties such as fear, greed, nationalism, and avarice. The best of hope succumbed to the bitterness of power politics.

Nowhere was this more apparent than in the Middle East. There the perceived national interests of France and Britain were not grounded in demographics, but rather were steeped in spheres of influence, oil, and balance of power. President Wilson's attempts to resolve their conflicting strategies didn't help. In one example that reaches us today, "It never seems to have occurred to [Wilson] that a single unit did not make much sense...In 1919 there was no Iraqi people; history, religion, geography pulled the people apart, not together. Basra looked south, toward India and the Gulf; Baghdad had strong links with Persia; and Mosul had closer ties with Turkey and Syria. Putting together the three Ottoman provinces and expecting to create a nation was, in European terms, like hoping to have Bosnian Muslims, Croats, and Serbs make one country." (397) Alas, we see this today, but few saw it at the time. Combine this with similar conundrums in the region and then leaven the mixture with Britain's confusing signals concerning a Jewish homeland in Palestine vis-à-vis Arab aspirations, and we can see the flame growing under today's cauldron.

The turmoil in the Middle East was paralleled in other regions. Ms. MacMillan weaves together several such stories, from the break-up of Austria-Hungary, to the mad scrabbling between the Balkan nations; from the emergence of Turkey from the ruins of the Ottoman Empire, to the conundrum that was Germany - worn out and overcome, but not defeated. The war left a patchwork quilt of victors and fledgling new and aspiring nations and peoples. Interspersed were the vanquished. Old problems were torn away, only to be replaced by a host of new ones.

The United States' role at the Peace Conference was disappointing. We were highly regarded by all, and our support for one peace objective after another was often sought, especially by various ethnic groups. But, as Ms. MacMillan observes, "Power involves will, as the United States and the world are discovering today: the will to spend, whether money or lives. In 1919 that will had been spent in Europe. The leaders of France, Britain and Italy no longer had the capacity to order their peoples to pay a high price for power. Their armed forces were shrinking day by day and they could not rely on the soldiers and sailors who were left. Their taxpayers wanted an end to expensive foreign adventures. The United States alone had the capacity to act, but it did not see itself as having that role, and its power was not yet great enough. It is tempting to say that the United States lost an opportunity to bend Europe to its will before the competing ideologies of fascism and communism could take hold. That is to read back into the past what we know about American power after another great war. In 1945, the United States was a superpower and the European nations were much weakened. In 1919, however, the United States was not yet significantly stronger than the other powers. The Europeans could ignore its wishes, and they did." (Introduction, xxx)

This is part of a great historical irony - a reversal of positions wherein today the US is chastised for being too aggressive in world affairs versus 1919 when so many around the world looked to the US for leadership and its populist involvement only to find us slowly withdrawing behind our oceans.

The Paris Peach Conference set much of the stage for much of what happened in the ensuing decades. Lessons abound. This is first-rate history, by a first-rate storyteller. It is interesting, sweeping, and relevant to us today. Bravo, and a resounding five stars.

I've rarely found an author who can take such a complex series of parallel stories and weave them together into a coherent whole. Her writing reminds me of Sir Winston Churchill's, both in 'History of the English Speaking People' and 'The Second World War'. Hers is a rare gift indeed.

It's easy to look at the legacy of the Paris Peace Talks and proclaim them the result of arrogance and incompetence. But now I've read this book, I can see that at worst you can only blame Wilson for naivety and Lloyd George, Clemenceau, and Sonnino for trying to get reasonable reparations for their countries. None of them seemed to really understand the threat of emerging Russian Communism. The assertion that the failure of the four to support China's territorial integrity contributed to the establishment of a communist China is a new one to me, and very interesting.

I love the detail in this book; the characters and interplay between the main four. I liked reading about the staid Balfour going to a riskee play, about the petitioners and the players behind the scenes. I particularly liked the descriptions of the interplay that arose when a country had multiple factions competing for legitimacy. That's the kind of insight you rarely get with history books.

This is not a history book any more that Watership Down is a wildlife book. It's much deeper, yet so well written that it reads like a story - a complex story with multiple themes, but a well-written one.

Thank you Ms. Macmillan - I wish I could afford to attend one of your history classes.

Henry Miller wrote a lot of books ... but they are all essentially the same, about Henry. An ex- of mine once said she wasn't sure if HM stood for Henry Miller or His Majesty.

Like all Miller's novels, the book contains some brilliant passages, but you'll have to slog through a lot ... a lot ... of self-absorbed ramblings before you get to them. But it's worth it just for the section of Van Norden's wanting to write something completely original, and Henry's missing of his wife. These sections are profound and true and wonderful and beautifully rendered. There's other good stuff, too, here and there.

Now, the dangerous part. Henry Miller made it fashionable to think you can be a bum/borderline sociopath, make fun of friends off of whom you live for your daily bread, avoid responsibilities and duties, and then publish self-indulgent ridicule about your dissolute lifestyle and derision of others and call it art. Fortunately, Henry was honest and talented enough at times to pull it off. And at times his writing raises to the levels of greatness. But he kicked off a school of writing that has been the destruction of more than one good writer.

Another novel written at the same time, and covering much of the same material (indulgent, pleasure-seeking expatriate meeting up with all levels of a society in crisis), is Christopher Isherwood's Good-bye to Berlin. (It's like, hey, Henry, did you even notice that at the time you were muttering about blowing up the world, the country next door was electing a madman who would try to do just that.) The difference is Isherwood is a masterful writer and artist, and manages to artfully play off his self-absorption so that the reader isn't immersed in it, like in Henry Miller. Isherwood also has class. (Isherwood's Down There On a Visit also covers a lot of similar ground, just better.)

"Tropic of Cancer" is a book that needs to be read quickly, not to make an end of the task, but to get the full exuberant effect of the narration. Its pacing is restless and energetic, which is all the more amazing considering that it has no plot. I don't know how much of it is fiction, but it is obviously autobiographical and reads like a memoir, detailing its author's experiences living as an American expatriate in Paris in the 1920's.

Henry Miller is a bum (it must be admitted) living among the idle intellectuals in the seedier neighborhoods of Paris (might he have bumped into Hemingway?). He's not always unemployed; he takes temporary jobs like a proofreader at a newspaper and an English instructor at a Lycee in Dijon, and he always has a place to live, albeit filthy. Most of the time he's cavorting with friends, making new ephemeral acquaintances, visiting brothels, and engaging in the kind of promiscuity of which such a life avails itself, despite the fact that he has a wife back in America. He doesn't shy away from any of the disgusting details of living and loving -- in the novel's opening scene, he is shaving his roommate's armpit hair for lice, and believe me, it only gets worse -- but Miller thrives in the squalor and wouldn't have it any other way. Compared to his native New York, which he considers impersonal, cold, and hollow, Paris is warm and intimate, brimming with life and beauty.

"Tropic of Cancer" is very similar to two popular books that followed it by a quarter of a century: Jack Kerouac's "On the Road" in content (run-on anecdotes about outrageous activities with his friends, pulsating with waves of existentialist rambling, the main difference being that Miller is a much better writer than Kerouac), and William S. Burroughs's "Naked Lunch" in style (stream-of-consciousness narration using striking imagery in random juxtaposition). Miller possessed the spirit, if not the seed, of the Beat Generation -- his existence can be summarized in his self-description as "spiritually dead, physically alive, morally free."

This is also perhaps the book's greatest fault -- its influence outstrips its literary quality. It may not be a great novel, but it at least it's worthy of its reputation, which is more than can be said for a lot of popular books.

Henry is my god he is the best Ever go him and his writings.

I gave Dark Legend 3 stars because the author, Christine Feehan, uses alot of phrases over repeatedly and it gets annoying. (Ex. Hot silk velvet.) Also, I kina found the whole 'mind-reading' thing between Gabriel and Francesca to be sort of cheesy. Everything about Gabriel was the sterotype vampire. I didn't enjoy it as much as I thought I would because it is alot like other vampire books.

Dark Legend

This was a great book.

So far in Ms Feehan's previous books she would tease us with the Dark Warriors.

The legends go about two dark angels of death.
They protect humans and Carpathian's from the destruction of Vampires.

After so many hundreds of years many believe that this was just a legend.
Few knew of their existence and even they had thought that the Dark Twins were gone.
Gabriel and Lucian were as close as any man could be, closer as they loved each other.

However, Lucian could feel that Gabriel was closer to turning to the dark side with each kill of an evil vampire. Lucian figured that if he gave Gabriel something other than a kill to focus on that it would keep him from turning before he found his lifemate.
So, for hundreds of years the two would battle, until one such battle left them both drained. Going underground in the Carpathian way to heal was the only option Gabriel had. Having just awoken and confused Gabriel walked upon Francesca ready to fed, when..........

You will have to read.

Gabriel has been hunting his twin brother, Lucien, for hundreds of years. He never dreamed that his brother, who was the strongest of all Carpathians, could turn vampire, but he was determined to keep his promise to destroy him before he can ruin more innocent lives. Gabriel knows that he is not Lucien's equal, but he did manage to trick him and imprison them both deep underground for over a hundred years. But something woke him suddenly and Gabriel knew that Lucien was free. All Gabriel felt, though, was a relentless hunger, an overwhelming desire for blood that demanded satisfaction. Before he could find suitable prey, he heard a voice calling to him, soothing, calming, and offering him strength to control his craving.

Francesca Del Ponce was a healer and had dedicated her life to good and helping those less fortunate. Unbeknownst to the humans who surrounded her, Francesca was Carpathian, one of the few females who escaped the bloodletting many years ago. Francesca had separated herself from all other Carpathians and resigned herself to living alone. She knew that she had a life mate out there because she had seen him, but he had turned away from her without saying a word. That man was Gabriel.

Gabriel had no idea that he had caused so much anguish to his lifemate and he was horrified when he found out the truth. Still, he could not be denied and claimed Francesca as his own. For the first time in centuries he could see colors and feel emotions - feel fear... Because he knew that by binding Francesca to him, he had made her a target for his twin, Lucien, who was always watching, waiting for the moment to strike...

I simply loved this book. It is a wonderful addition to the Dark series and I think that Christine Feehan keeps getting better with each book she writes in the series. Gabriel was a very strong Carpathian male, but so sweet and tender with Francesca and he had many soft spots that made him endearing. Francesca was a very untypical Carpathian female and had discovered many wonders and accomplished much in her medical research and study over the years. She is no wilting violet, but she doesn't defy Gabriel over every little thing either, which was a refreshing change. The characters were great, the love scenes were hot and Gabriel and Francesca are simply perfect for each other! If you haven't read any of the Dark Series you are seriously missing out and, if you have, this is definitely a book that you will want to own - it's a keeper!