(Larger Image)
|
by Dick Francis
ISBN: 0515123471
Paperback: 320 pages
Condition: Used: Very Good
Comments: Sold with pride. No writing, no highlighting. Copy in very good condition. Normal reading wear from previous reading.
More Product Infomation
|
Customer Reviews
|
Charming father-son saga
Rating  (5)
Date: 2010-02-11
Dick Francis is good at writing about fathers and sons. In this case the father, George Juliard, was too young at the death of his wife to raise his son Benedict. And so Ben grew up not knowing his father, a situation about to change as Ben approaches his eighteenth birthday.
George, who has made piles of money in the City, is going to stand for Parliament. Never having remarried, he needs Ben's smiling presence during his campaign to lend him the respectable aura of a family man. To achieve this, George has to lure Ben away from the dream of being a jockey. The fact is, Ben has limited ability and will never be one of the greats.
Dick Francis himself won over 350 races and served as jockey to HM Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, for four years. He did achieve greatness in the racing world - and went on to become a world-class mystery writer as well. So it's interesting to observe Francis' empathetic portrayal of a young person who must accept his limitations and discover his true strengths.
The plot revolves around Ben's adventures helping with the campaign and outsmarting his father's enemies. Ben combines a methodical cleverness with a brash willingness to throw himself into danger in defense of others. Both father and son are morally upright, which could be boring, but in fact they somehow make niceness seem multi-faceted and attractive.
So yes, I enjoyed the book very much and recommend it. I will soon have read every book available by Dick Francis, and I'll move on to the ones written in collaboration with his son Felix. There's another interesting father-son story!
|
|
Psychology
Rating  (4)
Date: 2009-12-20
Benedict Juliard, aspiring jockey, is dismissed by his employer Sir Vivian Durridge for suspected drug use. Benedict is seventeen. Benedict's father wants him to go to Exeter University. Until the term begins, Ben is to help get his father elected to Parliament. Ben's father is not married and needs a presentable family member to show the voters.
Although a neophyte, George Juliard is an excellent campaigner. He is a wonderful speaker and a quick study. One of the political helpers tells Ben that good politician remember names. Also, he is advised not to buy stamps since all electoral expenses must be disclosed after the election.
The first mysterious incident is a gun shot. At such an early stage, it isn't clear that Ben's father is the intended victim. Benedict finds out the identity of disappointed office seekers, Ben's father having been selected by central party officials to run in the by-election, in order to ascertain whether anyone has a motive to injure the candidate. It seems that George Juliard is seen as a usurper by some of the voters. Benedict has a logical mind. He is also useful to his fatheris cause because he has psychological acumen.
A book by Dick Francis is like a cunning device. All the parts fit and tone is carried out smoothly from beginning to end.
|
|
excellent
Rating (5)
Date: 2009-11-29
the book was inexpensive, arrived in a very short amount of time and in excellent condition. First rate service and product.
|
|
No Penalty Here. Reviewer: Renee S. NY.C.
Rating (5)
Date: 2009-07-19
1 out of 1 customers found this reveiw helpful
I skipped this book because of the reviews, but it bothered me that there was a Francis book that I hadn't read. IMHO the reviews were overly harsh. The story was good, the characters were likeable and the depictions of British politics were fascinating. While I always enjoyed Francis' racing stories, the glimpses into various other occupations that have appeared in many of his later books have always taught me something I didn't know before - never to the detriment of the story. In fact my two favorite Francis books are only peripherally about horses and racing, "Straight," about a gem dealer and "Longshot," about a survivalist travel writer. I like the horses but it is Dick Francis' writing that brings me back every time. This book was no exception. Highly recommended.
|
|
Election Results
Rating (4)
Date: 2008-01-13
1 out of 1 customers found this reveiw helpful
"You're fired for sniffing glue," were not the words Benedict Juliard wanted to hear as his dreams of becoming a steeplechase jockey crumbled at his feet. He was innocent, but his father had other plans for him and had arranged the disreputable incident.
Benedict is whisked into the world of political intrigue and dirty fighting as he prepares to smile his way at his father's side. This rapidly gets dangerous as a fire breaks out in the campaign headquarters and the mayhem escalates. Someone is out to make sure George Juliard does not get a seat in Parliament.
Usher Rudd, the tabloid reporter, is one of the most unforgettable characters Mr. Francis has ever created, both for humor and devilment. Reviewers don't give him the high marks of his other mysteries, but they have to admit the cleverness of 10LB. PENALTY grows on you like a fine wine.
Nash Black, author of SINS OF THE FATHERS and QUALIFYING LAPS.
|
(Larger Image)
|
by Robert Conroy
ISBN: 0891418431
Mass Market Paperback: 416 pages
Condition: Used: Good
Comments: Sold with pride. Gently read book. Ex Library Book Club copy, library markings present.
More Product Infomation
|
Customer Reviews
|
Good read, and from an original POD for a change
Rating (5)
Date: 2009-11-28
With all of the books out there that write alternate history from some obvious point of diversion, this one was a welcome change. Conroy takes the premise that Kaiser Wilhelm II, eager to expand his empire and demonstrate the power of his German Empire, tried to bully the United States into surrendering its gains from the Spanish-American War. The U.S., although unprepared for war against a first-rate European power, tells the Kaiser to choke on his schnitzel. Germany then sets into motion a war plan that they actually did draw up in real life, using their powerful navy to send an army across the Atlantic and attack New York.
After a series of initial defeats at the hands of the powerful German army, the U.S. stabilizes the front, and likely gets a huge break when President McKinley dies, making Theodore Roosevelt the new President. Roosevelt appoints the aged James Longstreet as overall commander, and quietly orders the U.S. Regular Army (then busy fighting Aguinaldo in the Philippines in real life) back home. The U.S. Navy tricks the Germans into a battle on the high seas, where the U.S. ships were at an advantage. The German Army responds with an attack toward Boston, but are crushed by the arrival of the Regulars. The Americans get into the German rear at New York, cutting off the attackers and forcing a mass surrender.
The book ends with the Kaiser going into exile 17 years early, and an ominous note for the future, as two members of the new German leadership discuss blaming the defeat on the Jews, agree that Germany should focus on expansion in Europe, instead of colonies, and toast the coming of a "Third Reich." The U.S., flush with its second decisive defeat of a European power in three years, agrees on plans to build up its standing army. There's a sequel here if Conroy ever wanted to write it.
There are some minor factual inaccuracies, but the plot as a whole is very plausible and believable. The Germans were this arrogant and overconfident, and always did underestimate the United States. The U.S. would have been unprepared for war, but would have stood a good chance to win if they held on long enough to consolidate their resources. And this is a plan that the Germans apparently considered carrying out at one time; all it would have taken was a word from their notably unstable Kaiser.
|
|
"1901"
Rating (5)
Date: 2009-10-29
very entertaining. seemed plausible, but if it wasn't, it was still a very good read. I have read "1942" and "1945" and enjoyed both. I will read all of Robert Conroy's books.
|
|
A lack of the basics
Rating  (1)
Date: 2009-07-25
1 out of 1 customers found this reveiw helpful
Many other reviewers have commented already on Conroy's lack of attention to detail and poor research base. What is most bothersome for me in this book, and in 1862 which I have also read, is the complete lack of a plot. He starts with a good idea but at no point did he actually work out how he was going to get from start to finish.
Thus we have the literary equivalent of "and then a miracle happens" in the plot. In 1901 it is single brand new torpedo which misses the massive heavy cruiser it was aimed at but miraculously strikes one of the ammunition carrying ships behind it, causing every ship so loaded to detonate, sympathetically I'm sure. This reduces the German army to an unfed, unclothed and unarmed military mob. In 1862 Conroy has every throw of the die going America's way, every throw of the die going against Britain; not just one miracle here, a veritable legion of them.
Why can't this author actually plot out his stories before he starts writing? I have wasted my money on two of his books because I liked the ideas. I won't make the same mistake again.
|
|
Impossible cricumstances make for dull reading.
Rating (1)
Date: 2009-06-28
3 out of 3 customers found this reveiw helpful
The premise of 1901, a theoretical Imperial German invasion of the United States, pitting the best of Prussia's seasoned armies against a rag-tag defensive force led by James Longstreet, would seem at a glance to be a fan of military history's dream come to life. As it turns out, Robert Conroy's 1901 is high on sex and gore, low on facts, and full of one-dimensional real-life actors who embody few - if any - of the myriad traits they possessed in real life. Let me just go ahead and list a few of the flaws of this book:
1) Conroy's interpretation of many historical figures is both lax and depressing. As an example, the author's research into writing about Kaiser Wilhelm II seems to have only involved a trip to the U.S. Archives to look up anti-German propaganda from World War I. The real-life Kaiser was a complicated figure - a windbag, as Conroy points out, to be sure - but hardly a temper-tantrum-throwing, overgrown child as 1901's author would have his readers believe (for some real history of the Kaiser, check out Dreadnought). Conroy's interpretation of Imperial Germany's government essentially amounts to a select circle of half a dozen thugs wringing their hands and cackling as they 'hatch their evil plans.' As history happened, the Kaiser actually took a back seat when real war occurred, with the German General Staff essentially running the country for four years from 1914-18.
2) Conroy's belief that the American people would jubilantly accept James Longstreet's promotion to command is ridiculous. Historical acknowledgement of Longstreet as an excellent general has only taken place in the past three decades or so. He would have been a politically unacceptable figure to return to service at the turn of the 20th Century.
3) 1901 is built around the idea that the German Navy could successfully ferry - largely in secret - a massive invasion force across the Atlantic Ocean some forty three years before a similar American/British invasion in Normandy barely succeeded. The logistics that Conroy casually chooses to ignore damn the entire book from the outset.
4) Once landed, the Germans are content to sit in a tiny pocket in southwestern Connecticut and southeastern New York and essentially wait to be defeated. Conroy points out repeatedly in his book that the Germans had previously fought 'minor wars to fulfill limited goals,' ignoring the fact that, even in those 'minor wars' (I surmise he is talking about 1864's Second Schleswig War, 1866's Austro-Prussian War, and the Franco-Prussian War in 1870-71) the Prussian Army remained highly mobile, with the goal in both of the latter conflicts being the capture and occupation of the enemy nation's capital and utter defeat its armed forces - hardly a limited war. This was also essentially the German plan at the outset of World War I. Conroy chooses to ignore this historical strategic precedent and assert that, in a German invasion of the United States, that the commanders of the German Army would essentially be willing to sit on their hands and allow the Americans half a year regroup, train, rearm and finally seize the initiative and attack. The Germans only accepted trench warfare in World War I when their momentum ground to a halt - it wasn't a willing or planned design. That the invading Germans would simply occupy a relatively unimportant (with the exception of NYC) stretch of American coastline, settle in, and wait to be annihilated is one of Conroy's most startling blunders.
5) The romantic relationships in 1901 are both predictable and unnecessary. Chapter after chapter is wasted (or largely wasted) with Conroy's unwilling/willing protagonist (who at one point tells now-president Theodore Roosevelt that 'I'm resigning after the war, I've had enough,' followed a few sentences later by, 'I want a command') wooing his wealthy New York lady friend. It's an affair that's introduced early in the book and manages to gobble up mass numbers of pages throughout the remainder of the novel. That our spit-and-polish hero both abhors war and is brilliant at executing it is quite a stretch; that he falls in love with a blonde, wealthy New York socialite who has a caring heart and is committed to charity work is beyond belief. These figures lack flaws - they are ideal personified.
6) Similarly, Conroy's average Germans are equally dehumanized, rampantly raping, pillaging, and gleefully slaughtering prisoners. I suppose Conroy throws a bone to the German people in introducing the reader to Ludwig Weber, another relatively-spotless character who also happens to hate war, and is conscripted into the Kaiser's armies. Ludwig is, of course, surrounded by a collection of murder-loving rapists (read: ordinary German citizens), and at the conclusion of the book he chooses to immigrate to Wisconsin rather than return to Germany - huge surprise.
7) Naval battles are far less about tactics than they are about average sailors getting blown up and maimed. Conroy seems to neither understand pre-Dreadnought naval warfare, nor to take much of an interest in what should be one of the central focuses of his book. Instead, the 'big naval battle' involves the brother of Patrick's love interest (how convenient) standing in the foretop of the U.S.S. Alabama, receiving minor wounds, getting knocked down, and waking up to find that the fighting is over, with the Americans miraculously proving the victors. It takes Conroy a full two pages to describe this action - obviously he wouldn't want to detract any pages from Patrick's stirring infatuation with his love interest.
8) The Germans, despite a record as being excellent warriors, prove to be incompetent soldiers both on the land and at sea. As World War I was to prove, Germany's High Seas Fleet was, if anything, at least equal to the Army in terms of battle prowess, as the Germans gave as good as they got in several notable confrontations (The Battle of Coronel, the Battle of Jutland, etc). Conroy's German sailors are rank amateurs who appear to be worse seamen than contemporary Russians.
I could go on. The sad fact of the matter is that this is a short-story-gone-novel written by an author who doesn't possess the historical know-how or creative writing skills to flesh it out appropriately. Conroy is flag-waving, America-first writer who would probably argue that the United States also single-handedly won World War I and World War II, and perhaps even the Napoleonic Wars, conveniently ignorant of the fact that we weren't even involved in the latter. It's a darned shame, because the basic premise of a one vs. one duel between the United States and Imperial Germany is a stirring one. However, Conroy's setting, characters, logistics, and unfolding strategy are all either flawed, broken or nonexistent. Unless you're more concerned with bloody, pointless slaughter, predictable romances, and stilted, hollow characters than plausible 'what-if' historical story writing, Robert Conroy's 1901 is one to avoid.
|
|
Interesting concept, flawed execution
Rating  (2)
Date: 2009-03-04
2 out of 2 customers found this reveiw helpful
I'm generally not into alternate history stories, but being interested in naval history, was intrigued enough to purchase the book. The fact that the Germans had considered landing troops in North America and had sent spies to the US to scout out possible landing sites (which was mentioned in Robert K. Massie's "Castles of Steel")made the story more plausible (also, the fact that during the Spanish-American War Admiral Dewey had had a run-in with the Germans- who hoped to snap up the Philippines from the defeated Spanish- made the premise more believable). I had previously read Massie's "Dreadnought" and felt that Mr. Conroy accurately depicted German leaders like Kaiser Wilhelm and Von Bulow. I also enjoyed reading the description of the naval battles.
However, my biggest beef with the book was that the author takes no trouble to depict how the Germans could overcome the obstacles to carrying out such a task. He simply has the German invasion fleet magically appear off New York City. The Germans in reality would have several difficulties in such an operation. For one thing, their fleet was designed for operations in the North Sea, and as a result their ships lacked the range of those in other navies (for example, the battleship USS Oregon had a range of 5,500 miles at 10 knots; the latest German battleship Kaiser Frederich III only had a range of 3,420 miles at the same speed). This, combined with a lack of forward bases, meant a battle fleet would have a hard time reaching the US. Also, considering the ships of the day burned coal, refueling at sea would be very time consuming although they could do what the Russian Baltic Fleet did on it's way to Tsushima (during the Russo-Japanese War) and simply overload the ships with coal. Even still, the fleet would have been running on fumes (or coal dust by the time they reached New York. Nor does the author reveal how the German invasion fleet could have avoided detection. After leaving their bases, the Germans would sail through the North Sea and enter the North Atlantic either through the English Channel or by making the passage between Iceland and Scotland. Thus by the time they reached the Eastern seaboard of the US, they would have passed through several major shipping lanes. The idea that an invasion force of the size depicted in the book could travel all that distance with no one being the wiser stretches credulity. I could also mention the fact that even if the invasion force had successfully landed, they would face a logistics nightmare, with a supply line 5,000 to 6,000 miles long that the US Navy would have no problem cutting. Another thing I found hard to believe was that while Britain provided covert assistance, they refrained fom direct involvement because they were still wrapping up the Boer War. Baloney- the Royal Navy at the time could have swept the Hochseeflotte (High Seas Fleet) from the seas with one arm tied behind its back and not even broken a sweat).
All these factors are probably why the Germans never carried out their plan. Still the idea makes for an interesting story, which is why I was so disappointed in this book.
|
(Larger Image)
|
by James Patterson
ISBN: 0446610038
Mass Market Paperback: 488 pages
Condition: Used: Very Good
Comments: Sold with pride. No writing, no highlighting. Copy in very good condition with minimal reading wear.
More Product Infomation
|
Customer Reviews
|
One star means you hated it, not that you liked it a little.
Rating (1)
Date: 2010-03-05
I read "1st to Die" over four nights. What's it about? Four successful women (a detective, a reporter, a medical examiner and an assistant DA) who are each involved in solving a series of viscous murders of a bride and groom on their wedding night. How horrible.
I think the longest chapter in this book was five pages, the shortest half a page. 120 chapters, no wonder Patterson's books are such a quick read. Many critics say this book will grab you and keep you reading with its fast pacing. The only reason I bothered finishing it was because I knew it would be over soon.
Two things dawned on me early on while reading:
1) No description. When your book is as "fast paced" as "1st to Die," when your chapters are an average of three full pages, there is not a lot of room for description. If you read Stephen King, you may have noticed that he can take a few hundred pages to get a story going full tilt, but his writing is such that he brings you there with interesting characters, settings, and gobs of description (not always, but usually).
James Patterson's book read like a screenplay: dialogue and the barest of description, almost solely devoted to the actions of the characters. And the characters: not very well developed.
There are spoilers below.
There was the lady detective (the main character) who was suddenly diagnosed with a potentially deadly disease. The only reason to do that (because this is a work of fiction) is to create a sense of sentimentality with the reader because everyone knows someone who is or has fought a disease. You relate to her plight in the cheapest and most artificial way.
There was the medical examiner, a black woman who was heavy, but not too heavy, you know? Just heavy enough for our main character to notice the ease with which her friend moved around her heft.
There was the green reporter who stumbled onto the story and developed a friendship with the detective.
There was the hard ass ADA who had, thankfully, a minimal role.
There was the male detective assigned from outside the jurisdiction to assist in the case. He fell into a relationship with our heroine, but ended up dying at the end.
There was the male writer main suspect who was an allusion to James Patterson. There were references to this character's lack of talent and criticism; that his books were tripe, which no doubt referenced negative reviews of Patterson's own work. Fans will think how cute Patterson included that particular homage, a bit of poking fun at himself. I think it's sad people will think that.
Long story short, the writer was framed by his second wife for whatever reason. She put on makeup and dressed like him, fooled everyone she came into contact with, did these killings, etc. The eventually found out it was a woman because the killer pissed herself at the scene of the crime and there was yeast in the urine. They thought it was the ex-wife first, but came to realize it was the second wife. Of course, the author showed up at the detective's apartment, after the murderer was dispatched, and tried to rape her, but she kicked his ass or something, I think - I don't even remember, which effectively brings up the second realization I had:
2) The writing sucked. Sorry, but it did. You can admire the ability to bring a story to its conclusion, but if it sucks, it sucks.
There were parts I was embarrassed to have read they were so poorly written. At times it honestly felt like I was reading a nineteen year old's first attempt at writing fiction. When men write for women, I think of the Jack Nicholson line from "As Good As it Gets" when he was asked how he writes convincing female characters: "I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability." Funny? Yes. True? Depends on the character.
Honestly, I think to write as a woman all you have to do is be honest to the character and make sure the reader knows it's a woman; the readers' sensibilities will fill in how the character sounds in their head and you'll have a convincing woman.
Patterson's sappy, ultra-"feminist" yet silly female characters were childishly written, unless his intent was to create pathetic characters who run the emotional spectrum from content to fragile and who speak like unrealistic dorks who are trying to be slightly hip. I say "feminist" because they weren't burn-your-bra feminists, but they sure formed a girls club to withhold evidence in order to solve this murder mystery themselves. The inner thoughts randomly and clumsily strewn throughout the novel were the most bewilderingly stock feminine mystique utterances to be printed.
And there was the prologue that had the main character on her balcony ready to kill herself, but Patterson never got around to explaining that.
I thumbed through a couple other Patterson books just looking at the chapters and they are all the same: 100-plus chapters, three pages long each. This guy obviously found his niche and is exploiting it for all it's worth.
You take a fantastic crime (and I mean that word as a derivation of "fantasy"), underdeveloped characters and a few plot twists like killing the nice guy detective who can give our main character a happy life, and shave off any originality and you got yourself a James Patterson best seller.
Have any of you read a Patterson book? If you have and liked it, please tell me why because I'm really interested. You know, I didn't like "Analyze This," and I feel alone there so maybe I'm in the minority on Patterson, too. But I want to know.
I thought "Kiss the Girls" was a pretty decent flick. I though the "Along Came a Spider" movie was more disappointing, but fair. I won't be reading the novels from which those movies came. I have to assume they sucked as much as "1st to Die." And I will be unwavering in my assumption. Don't judge a book by its cover, but judge it by the piece of s*** sister book by the same writer.
I just feel like, why is this guy so popular? I don't understand.
|
|
The Women's Murder Club
Rating (5)
Date: 2010-02-28
0 out of 1 customers found this reveiw helpful
The book, "First to Die by James Patterson was in great condition and was an easy read.
|
|
cheesey and gruesome
Rating (1)
Date: 2010-01-22
The first two-thirds of this book were good and exciting. The murder scenes were a little gruesome for me, but I can get over that. What ruined the book for me was the incredibly cheesey last third or so of the book. It's like all of a sudden all you need to do is think to yourself is "what is the most cheesey over-dramatic thing that could happen?" and that's what happens. It's like two books squeezed into one, most of the murder-mystery part is at the beginning.
|
|
Ugh
Rating (1)
Date: 2010-01-05
2 out of 2 customers found this reveiw helpful
I've been having trouble concentrating enough to read anything involving thought and effort so mindless mysteries/thrillers are just what the doctor ordered. This one, though? No thanks.
By page 45 I decided I hated James Patterson writing women. The head of the homicide division and the chief medical examiner of San Francisco are disgusted, sickened, and "have to turn away" from a body. What atrocity can these two strong, experienced, professional women not handle? A body with a single stab wound. What?! Oh, but the male detective? He's just fine! He even steps in to offer our lead homicide investigator an arm to lean on! Seriously? You've got to be kidding me.
I found the interactions between the female friends not realistic in the slightest. I actually snorted with laughter a few times at how ridiculous and cliché they were.
Overall I found the writing to be stilted and not especially engaging. I can't say I enjoyed it much at all. And I don't normally notice these things but the man used the word, "chilling" so many times that, not only did I notice, but was really annoyed by it. Good writers don't need to tell their readers how to react to their writing. I should find your descriptions "chilling" without being told to over and over and over again.
And my most petty complaint: The Women's Murder Club. Four intelligent, urbane professionals and that's the name of their group? Couldn't he have come up with a name that wasn't so hackneyed and immature? It might as well be The Four Females Who Find Killers Club or The Four Awesome Chicks Hunting Bad Guys Club. Would a homicide investigator, coroner, prosecutor, and reporter who were male have to create a "club" and name it something so hokey? Again, I think it goes back to Patterson's inability to write women with any realism or truth. And his desire to create a series and characters that could easily be marketed and turned into a movie and/or TV show.
I enjoy gruesome, bloody thrillers but really doubt I can bring myself to skim through the rest of these books based solely on how poorly written I find the characters.
ETA: I just found out that James Patterson earned $50 million from June 2007 to June 2008. No, that's not a typo. I'm equal parts horrified and inspired to write something that my biggest fans will excitedly describe as a "quick and easy read."
|
|
Parted by Serial Killer
Rating (4)
Date: 2009-12-01
0 out of 1 customers found this reveiw helpful
The Women's Murder Club is born in this captivating novel about a serial killer who has targeted brides and grooms. What a horrible way to start a marriage. "Til death do us part" comes too quickly. Detective Lindsay Boxer has a lot going on in her personal life and needs to rely on close bonds to help her solve the case professionally. She finds help and support from her best friend and two new unlikely allies whose commonality is surviving and thriving in a man-driven world. The story intensifies as the Murder Club closes in on the clues. You will enjoy the shocking twist at the end.
Review by Dilsa Saunders Bailey, author of Dreams Thrown Away,a romantic suspense novel filled with sex, lies, and murder.
|
(Larger Image)
|
by P.D. James
ISBN: 0345430573
Mass Market Paperback: 448 pages
Condition: Used: Very Good
Comments: Sold with pride. No writing, no highlighting. Copy in very good condition. Normal reading wear from previous reading.
More Product Infomation
|
Customer Reviews
|
Good, not Great
Rating (4)
Date: 2010-03-01
P.D. James is always interesting, and A CERTAIN JUSTICE is no exception. Still, reviewers who have noted the less than satisfying conclusion with JUSTICE have a point. But, having said that, James remains head and shoulders above the rest of the mystery writing lot.
|
|
Great characters, but weak ending
Rating (4)
Date: 2009-12-10
The key to P.D. James is her profound psyhological insight into her characters. In this novel, you have the lawyer who puts her skills above all concern for the guilt or innocence of her clients and accumulates her personal enemies. The certain justice of the title probably refers principally to the romance that develops between her daughter and a probable murderer she defends successfully. But it refers to the animosity of several who have been affected by her skill in protecting the guilty as well as the innocent, resulting in a number of suspects when she's murdered.This is, as per usual, a great outing for the author and a treat for those who enjoy her style of mystery.`
|
|
P.D. James always satisfies
Rating (4)
Date: 2009-09-23
As always, P.D.James and Adam Dalgliesh make for absorbing reading. I don't know how I missed this one, but I'm glad to catch up with it now.
|
|
Very Good
Rating (5)
Date: 2009-01-18
0 out of 1 customers found this reveiw helpful
Read one PD James novel and you will see right away what separates the truly gifted writer from the merely entertaining. For me, mysteries are a good diversion from the cares of the day, so I tend to read a lot of them. Most are entertaining and written in workman-like prose. Some even have above-average plots that stick with me for a bit longer than it takes to read the book itself.
PD James, on the other hand, manages to entertain while also offering readers attention-getting prose that makes one really think about how the characters feel and how events in the plot might actually affect the lives of real people, with pasts and futures, families and friends, fears and longings. Take this passage, for example:
"I no longer believed in God...I just woke up one morning to the
same grief, the same dull, daily tasks, and knew with certainty
that God was dead. It was as if all my life I had been hearing
the beating of an unseen heart, which was now forever stilled."
You just don't get writing like that from the usual paperback thriller. And James also delivers on the plotting details and elements of time and place that mystery lovers expect from a good page-turner. Overall, this is an exceptional mystery, with James' signature detective, Adam Dalgliesh, in true and rare form. I highly recommend it.
|
|
Better than most, but not the best Dalgliesh
Rating  (3)
Date: 2008-11-28
I've read most of James' Dalgliesh mysteries and this was by far my least favorite. Which is not to say that it wasn't good - I have yet to read a P.D. James mystery that isn't engaging and well written. It's just to say that compared to her other mysteries, this one was lacking. It seemed like the main plot (the death of a criminal attorney) was lost in the subplot about the attorney's daughter. The denouement of the subplot was great, in my opinion (well-paced, exciting), but the denouement of the main plot seemed tacked on. The impression I have is that James wrote a draft of the book in which one character was the murderer but decided that was too facile or something, rewrote the ending and added scenes in the beginning and middle so that a different character was now the murderer. It feels like the daughter-sub-plot denouement was meant to be the end of the book and the resolution of the central murder feels tacked on. However, just because I was disappointed that it wasn't quite as complete and satisfying as the rest of the Dalgliesh series, that doesn't mean I didn't enjoy it. If it were written by someone else, I would have given it 4 stars, but I know that James is capable of a more satisfying book.
|
|
by Charles Dickens
ISBN: 0866119256
Hardcover: 239 pages
Condition: Used: Like New
Comments: Sold with pride.. No publisher marks. Light shelf wear.
More Product Infomation
|
(Larger Image)
|
by Sebastian Junger
ISBN: 0393059804
Hardcover: 320 pages
Condition: Used: Like New
Comments: Sold with pride. Gently read copy in like new condition.
More Product Infomation
|
Customer Reviews
|
Falls short of high standards
Rating (3)
Date: 2010-02-14
A good procedural is something of a guilty pleasure for me, and it always adds something when the author has a personal interest (see Robert Drewe's The Shark Net for example). And Junger does set the scene well - he describes the fear generated in Boston by the Strangler in the early 60s very well. He describes the arrest and trial of Roy Smith in relation to the Belmont murder well, and tries to be as neutral as possible given the evidence rules in place at the time and the fact that most of the protagonists are now dead.
But then - it sort of peters out. The fact is, noone is really sure what happened that day in Belmont. Junger doesn't really add any new evidence. What indeed can he add? He has his opinion as to what happened, and its one that I probably share, but really its just his opinion. I was left somewhat frustrated by the lack of anything significantly new being added to the evidence and even more frustrated by the pop psychologist attempt to "explain" the motivations and psyche of the putative Boston Strangler, De Salvo. A character has complex of De Salvo needs a more serous treatment of his warped motivations than this.
In short, a book that falls short of the admittedly high standards it aspires to
|
|
interesting story that drags at parts
Rating (3)
Date: 2010-02-09
Being a Boston guy who remembers talk of the Boston Strangler from when I was a kid, I was very interested in the topic of this book. The start of this story was riveting, describing the murder in Belmont, Massachusetts, a quiet suburb. Like good "true crime" books, there was good background on the people and the times. This is a fascinating mystery, with two suspects, but a mystery that drags on a bit. This could have been very well written in 100-150 pages, but the author had to drag it out to 250 pages, the minimum for a published book. I still enjoyed reading this in spite of that weakness. This "unsolved" mystery did get me to think about what really might have happened, and about the justice and injustice that might have occurred.
|
|
Fantastic True Crime Story
Rating (3)
Date: 2009-11-15
0 out of 1 customers found this reveiw helpful
A well told story. Junger does a great job of laying out the facts of not only the Spring 1963 murder of Bessie Goldberg but also the Boston Strangler case. No assumptions are made and when all is said and done, we, as readers, are left with the same questions we started with - Did Roy Smith kill Bessie Goldberg? Was Albert DeSalvo the Boston Strangler? And lastly, on a more personal note for the author - What if Junger's mother hadn't left their Belmont home that Spring day in 1963?
Recommended for True Crime non-fiction fans.
|
|
A Death in Belmont
Rating (5)
Date: 2009-10-03
0 out of 2 customers found this reveiw helpful
This is a fascinating true story, which just proves to me that truth is stranger than fiction. Junger tells a great story, from beginning to end.
|
|
mixed
Rating (3)
Date: 2009-05-14
2 out of 2 customers found this reveiw helpful
I fall in the camp of those reviewers who really enjoyed the book while reading it and then after reading the critical reviews here felt like they were duped by the author.
After reflecting on the book, I noticed more and more flaws that I will share shortly.
On the positive side, it is a very well written book. It is very interesting and spell-binding. It's too bad the author took as many liberties as he did.
Many of the criticisms have been shared elsewhere on here so I will only highlight the ones that I didn't see so much of:
- Despite some parts of the book being thoroughly researched, one must notice the glaring absence of interviews of those close to the case whose opinion on the guilt or innocence of Roy Smith would be most decisive. Since the author neglects to tell us vital information on evidence that points to Smith, it is no wonder that he chooses not to share the prosecutors story etc. Maybe that wouldn't fit into his mold that the judicial system back then in Massachussets was prejudiced against Roy Smith. Junger goes as far as to say that a black man would be more likely to have a fair trial in the south than in the north in the 1960s. I skeptical about that.
- Though Junger attempts to show how he is impartial and at one time even suspected Smith's guilt, his desire for Al to be the murderer is apparent. The simple fact is that Al never admits to killing Bessie and Junger's reasons on why he wouldn't admit to it (after confessing to be the Boston Strangler) are pitiful.
In the end, I am still unsure about just who killed Bessie. As stated in reviews here, there is evidence for Roy Smith (house in a mess still) but as stated in the book there is a lot of evidence against Roy Smith being the killer too.
|
(Larger Image)
|
by Sebastian Junger
ISBN: 0393059804
Hardcover: 320 pages
Condition: Used: Like New
Comments: Sold with pride. Gently read copy in like new condition.
More Product Infomation
|
Customer Reviews
|
Falls short of high standards
Rating (3)
Date: 2010-02-14
A good procedural is something of a guilty pleasure for me, and it always adds something when the author has a personal interest (see Robert Drewe's The Shark Net for example). And Junger does set the scene well - he describes the fear generated in Boston by the Strangler in the early 60s very well. He describes the arrest and trial of Roy Smith in relation to the Belmont murder well, and tries to be as neutral as possible given the evidence rules in place at the time and the fact that most of the protagonists are now dead.
But then - it sort of peters out. The fact is, noone is really sure what happened that day in Belmont. Junger doesn't really add any new evidence. What indeed can he add? He has his opinion as to what happened, and its one that I probably share, but really its just his opinion. I was left somewhat frustrated by the lack of anything significantly new being added to the evidence and even more frustrated by the pop psychologist attempt to "explain" the motivations and psyche of the putative Boston Strangler, De Salvo. A character has complex of De Salvo needs a more serous treatment of his warped motivations than this.
In short, a book that falls short of the admittedly high standards it aspires to
|
|
interesting story that drags at parts
Rating (3)
Date: 2010-02-09
Being a Boston guy who remembers talk of the Boston Strangler from when I was a kid, I was very interested in the topic of this book. The start of this story was riveting, describing the murder in Belmont, Massachusetts, a quiet suburb. Like good "true crime" books, there was good background on the people and the times. This is a fascinating mystery, with two suspects, but a mystery that drags on a bit. This could have been very well written in 100-150 pages, but the author had to drag it out to 250 pages, the minimum for a published book. I still enjoyed reading this in spite of that weakness. This "unsolved" mystery did get me to think about what really might have happened, and about the justice and injustice that might have occurred.
|
|
Fantastic True Crime Story
Rating (3)
Date: 2009-11-15
0 out of 1 customers found this reveiw helpful
A well told story. Junger does a great job of laying out the facts of not only the Spring 1963 murder of Bessie Goldberg but also the Boston Strangler case. No assumptions are made and when all is said and done, we, as readers, are left with the same questions we started with - Did Roy Smith kill Bessie Goldberg? Was Albert DeSalvo the Boston Strangler? And lastly, on a more personal note for the author - What if Junger's mother hadn't left their Belmont home that Spring day in 1963?
Recommended for True Crime non-fiction fans.
|
|
A Death in Belmont
Rating (5)
Date: 2009-10-03
0 out of 2 customers found this reveiw helpful
This is a fascinating true story, which just proves to me that truth is stranger than fiction. Junger tells a great story, from beginning to end.
|
|
mixed
Rating (3)
Date: 2009-05-14
2 out of 2 customers found this reveiw helpful
I fall in the camp of those reviewers who really enjoyed the book while reading it and then after reading the critical reviews here felt like they were duped by the author.
After reflecting on the book, I noticed more and more flaws that I will share shortly.
On the positive side, it is a very well written book. It is very interesting and spell-binding. It's too bad the author took as many liberties as he did.
Many of the criticisms have been shared elsewhere on here so I will only highlight the ones that I didn't see so much of:
- Despite some parts of the book being thoroughly researched, one must notice the glaring absence of interviews of those close to the case whose opinion on the guilt or innocence of Roy Smith would be most decisive. Since the author neglects to tell us vital information on evidence that points to Smith, it is no wonder that he chooses not to share the prosecutors story etc. Maybe that wouldn't fit into his mold that the judicial system back then in Massachussets was prejudiced against Roy Smith. Junger goes as far as to say that a black man would be more likely to have a fair trial in the south than in the north in the 1960s. I skeptical about that.
- Though Junger attempts to show how he is impartial and at one time even suspected Smith's guilt, his desire for Al to be the murderer is apparent. The simple fact is that Al never admits to killing Bessie and Junger's reasons on why he wouldn't admit to it (after confessing to be the Boston Strangler) are pitiful.
In the end, I am still unsure about just who killed Bessie. As stated in reviews here, there is evidence for Roy Smith (house in a mess still) but as stated in the book there is a lot of evidence against Roy Smith being the killer too.
|
(Larger Image)
|
by Sebastian Junger
ISBN: 0393059804
Hardcover: 320 pages
Condition: Used: Like New
Comments: Sold with pride. Gently read copy in like new condition.
More Product Infomation
|
Customer Reviews
|
Falls short of high standards
Rating (3)
Date: 2010-02-14
A good procedural is something of a guilty pleasure for me, and it always adds something when the author has a personal interest (see Robert Drewe's The Shark Net for example). And Junger does set the scene well - he describes the fear generated in Boston by the Strangler in the early 60s very well. He describes the arrest and trial of Roy Smith in relation to the Belmont murder well, and tries to be as neutral as possible given the evidence rules in place at the time and the fact that most of the protagonists are now dead.
But then - it sort of peters out. The fact is, noone is really sure what happened that day in Belmont. Junger doesn't really add any new evidence. What indeed can he add? He has his opinion as to what happened, and its one that I probably share, but really its just his opinion. I was left somewhat frustrated by the lack of anything significantly new being added to the evidence and even more frustrated by the pop psychologist attempt to "explain" the motivations and psyche of the putative Boston Strangler, De Salvo. A character has complex of De Salvo needs a more serous treatment of his warped motivations than this.
In short, a book that falls short of the admittedly high standards it aspires to
|
|
interesting story that drags at parts
Rating (3)
Date: 2010-02-09
Being a Boston guy who remembers talk of the Boston Strangler from when I was a kid, I was very interested in the topic of this book. The start of this story was riveting, describing the murder in Belmont, Massachusetts, a quiet suburb. Like good "true crime" books, there was good background on the people and the times. This is a fascinating mystery, with two suspects, but a mystery that drags on a bit. This could have been very well written in 100-150 pages, but the author had to drag it out to 250 pages, the minimum for a published book. I still enjoyed reading this in spite of that weakness. This "unsolved" mystery did get me to think about what really might have happened, and about the justice and injustice that might have occurred.
|
|
Fantastic True Crime Story
Rating (3)
Date: 2009-11-15
0 out of 1 customers found this reveiw helpful
A well told story. Junger does a great job of laying out the facts of not only the Spring 1963 murder of Bessie Goldberg but also the Boston Strangler case. No assumptions are made and when all is said and done, we, as readers, are left with the same questions we started with - Did Roy Smith kill Bessie Goldberg? Was Albert DeSalvo the Boston Strangler? And lastly, on a more personal note for the author - What if Junger's mother hadn't left their Belmont home that Spring day in 1963?
Recommended for True Crime non-fiction fans.
|
|
A Death in Belmont
Rating (5)
Date: 2009-10-03
0 out of 2 customers found this reveiw helpful
This is a fascinating true story, which just proves to me that truth is stranger than fiction. Junger tells a great story, from beginning to end.
|
|
mixed
Rating (3)
Date: 2009-05-14
2 out of 2 customers found this reveiw helpful
I fall in the camp of those reviewers who really enjoyed the book while reading it and then after reading the critical reviews here felt like they were duped by the author.
After reflecting on the book, I noticed more and more flaws that I will share shortly.
On the positive side, it is a very well written book. It is very interesting and spell-binding. It's too bad the author took as many liberties as he did.
Many of the criticisms have been shared elsewhere on here so I will only highlight the ones that I didn't see so much of:
- Despite some parts of the book being thoroughly researched, one must notice the glaring absence of interviews of those close to the case whose opinion on the guilt or innocence of Roy Smith would be most decisive. Since the author neglects to tell us vital information on evidence that points to Smith, it is no wonder that he chooses not to share the prosecutors story etc. Maybe that wouldn't fit into his mold that the judicial system back then in Massachussets was prejudiced against Roy Smith. Junger goes as far as to say that a black man would be more likely to have a fair trial in the south than in the north in the 1960s. I skeptical about that.
- Though Junger attempts to show how he is impartial and at one time even suspected Smith's guilt, his desire for Al to be the murderer is apparent. The simple fact is that Al never admits to killing Bessie and Junger's reasons on why he wouldn't admit to it (after confessing to be the Boston Strangler) are pitiful.
In the end, I am still unsure about just who killed Bessie. As stated in reviews here, there is evidence for Roy Smith (house in a mess still) but as stated in the book there is a lot of evidence against Roy Smith being the killer too.
|
(Larger Image)
|
by ANITA BROOKNER
ISBN: 0006545246
Paperback: 176 pages
Condition: Used: Very Good
Comments: Sold with pride and shipped with confirmation for US addresses. No writing, no highlighting. This is a used copy in a very good condition with moderate reading wear.
More Product Infomation
|
Customer Reviews
|
Mostly pleased with the item
Rating (5)
Date: 2009-04-27
0 out of 1 customers found this reveiw helpful
I received the book a couple of days ago, which was within the amount of time the company promised. The product is in pristine condition. I have no complaint, except that I wish that I could have received it earlier than I did.
|
|
The subtle perception of feelings and relationships
Rating (4)
Date: 2008-06-08
2 out of 3 customers found this reveiw helpful
Anita Brookner is a master in detailing the perception of feelings and material realities, and above all on the intricate subtleties of human relationships. Usually the drama in her work relates to one or two close relationships .Here the narrator of the story thirty- two year old Rachel is closely connected with the Livingstone family, the loving couple at its heart and their single twenty- seven year old daughter, Heather. The story unfolds as Heather first marries unsuccessfully and then dramatically makes a second alliance which moves her far from her parents. The cloistered and controlled life of Rachel is contrasted with the liberating action of Heather.
As with so many of Brookner's works one feels a great intelligence, delicacy and skill operating on a smallness of souls.
|
|
A novel full of melancholy
Rating (4)
Date: 2007-07-02
6 out of 7 customers found this reveiw helpful
Rachel Kennedy is a solitary and self-sufficient woman who likes to lead a well-ordered life free of commitments and emotional turmoil. She owns a small bookshop in London and one day befriends Heather Livingstone and her parents Oscar and Dorrie - a mutual fondness which is a puzzle given Rachel's character. It soon becomes clear to Heather that Oscar and Dorrie think her a suitable companion for Heather, a kind of elder sister or guardian angel. Their good daughter, who comes home to them every weekend and telephones every day, is the world to them and they wish her still theirs and somebody else's as well, somebody whose supervision could replace their own. To them, Rachel could be Heather's passport to the world. So Oscar and Dorrie regard Rachel as a chaperone for Heather. And to Rachel her odd relationship with the Livingstones is of great value too. For her they are fixed points of reference in a slipping universe, abiding by rules which everybody else has broken.
It is when Heather decides to become engaged to Michael Sandberg, an awkward and untrustworthy man, that Rachel realises that her power over her friend is limited. The fate of this ill-assorted couple is bound to be doomed...
Well drawn characters, plausible situations and sound psychological motives are the strengths of "A Friend From England". A quiet, atmospheric novel as only Mrs Brookner can write them.
|
|
Number found:793 Page 1 of 80 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 80 Next |
|
What customers are saying…
Amazon.com Feedback Rating:
4.9 stars over the past 12 months (994 ratings)
|
Recent Feedback
|
5 out of 5: 2010-03-13
excellent
|
4 out of 5: 2010-03-13
good condition fast shipping
|
5 out of 5: 2010-03-13
it was fine
|
5 out of 5: 2010-03-13
Good packaging, book in great shape
|
5 out of 5: 2010-03-13
fast shipping, thanks!
|
|
|