Chandler Jechura

On the topic of the Civil War, many people know about the war between the South and the North, at little else. The scope of the Civil War, both its feelings and underlying causes, are far greater than one may initially realize. The idea that the war was fought to end slavery may have been the goal at it's end, but it certainly was not the initial goal. Initially, many people volunteered in order to preserve the Union of the United States, with many people believing that secession amounted to treason. Yet, the war, as it is with any conflict, cannot be generalized so. Although there are many people who believe that the North was a shining Utopia of freedom for former slaves, nothing could be farther from the truth. There were many different people who were just as racist as there brothers to the south, and often enacted policies and political views that perpetuated racist ideals well into the 20th century.
It is with this in mind that we come into the screenplay Riot by Walter Dean Myers. When I looked at this book on Goodreads, I was surprised to find that this book had a 3.2 rating average (For the record, about 4.0 is average for most books on Goodreads) ! This is because that Myers manages to do what all great historical fiction does: take the wider events of a historical time period and narrow it down to the microcosm of a family or individual. It is an excellently done book about how racist ideas can spread and cause violence, even in the midst of fighting for freedom. This book also can be used to explore the different ideas of supply and demand in economics, with the irish immigrants living in already squalor and poverty fighting for the few jobs available, worried about the freed African Americans coming to work for even lower wages. In short this book is an excellent example of that, and it shouldn't be discounted because of it.
I will say that I did listen to this as a stage play with a full cast, so I would recommend that that be how one reads this text. It was excellently done, and I think that is superior over a simple paperback form.
In any case, I would say that this book should not be missed, and is vastly underrated. I give it a five out of five!

This review will not necessarily follow the usual format. When it comes to the Presidential biographies that I am reading, I would like to write first about the president himself, consisting of what their life was like and his eventual presidency, through what I have learned in the text. Next, I would write a review on the text itself. I cannot do this however, since this book feels so...underwhelming.

At a scant 200 pages of actual narrative, this is one of the shortest biographies that one can find on any president anywhere, and this is so incredibly sad, given the man we have to work with. If one word could describe Jefferson, it would be enigma. He was a man who called slavery a sin, yet owned slaves himself, wrote the Declaration of Independence and still held people in bondage. He was a staunch racist yet slept with Sally Hemmings. He was a strong Anti-Federalist, yet he made the single largest land purchase in US history, while also using a system of finance to fund it that he had railed against for decades. In short, Jefferson was a man whom people far better educated than I would struggle to understand. One would think that even reading this short biography would help to resolve some of this confusion.

Sadly, though, it did not. This is mostly a cliff notes version of Jefferson's life. What would take a chapter in any other biography takes about five pages here. Friends that Jefferson had known since boyhood, and whom Jefferson called one of the best people of Virginia? The friend is name dropped, at best and we feel little impact of their relationship. The time of Jefferson abroad, serving as foreign minister to France? Given a few pages, at most. This means that, while we are given ample historical context to events, including theology, foreign policy, and law practices at the time, we never really get to know the man the book is named after. This can leave my journey with the Jefferson in this text feeling somewhat hollow and unfulfilled.

But can I really blame the book? What did I expect when I find that it has a less than 300 page count, including the appendix? As I seem to constantly have to remind myself, I suppose that I should rate this book based on what it is, rather than what I want it to be. On this case, I would say that this book is just not for me. It often goes over basic history that I know already know, while giving Jefferson a scant mention at best. The only reason that I am reading this specific bio of Jefferson at all is because I had to buy it for college, and only read a chapter of it. That said, if you are someone who has not read a history book in many years, then this may be a good book to pick up. For me, however, this text is one that I give a two out of five. Now I can get rid of this and proceed with Madison. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Riordan is an author that I used to love but who I have recently fallen out of favor with. I can (and still do) sing his praises with his Percy Jackson and the Olympians series. These books were an (at the time) fresh interpretation of The Hero's Journey that hold up extremely well today. Then The Heroes of Olympus series took what made Percy Jackson great, and expanded it to a cast of new characters, some with attributes that made them an unexpected but delightful addition to the world of Percy Jackson.

Then things began to change. I disliked the Magnus Chase and the Gods of Asguard series. Where Riordan had previously made his books feel awe-inspiring, with just the right balance of theme vs character, here his message seems to get away from the story. Often, he stops what the characters are doing just to preach a message to the reader that I felt would have been better shown to us, rather than lectured. Then there was the Trials of Apollo Series. While the series had an interesting premise (the Greek God Apollo comes back down to earth in mortal form) it was squandered with annoying characters and a villain plot that I just couldn't get into.

That leads me to Daughter of the Deep. I was excited to read this because (finally!) it seemed to be a story that had no influence in mythology whatsoever (unless you could the mythos surrounding 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea). I anticipated thrilling sea battles and an interesting tie to the original novel. Did I get this? Yes, and I'm all the more excited because of it.

We begin with a story with Ana Dakar, a student at Harding-Pencroft Academy. Along with her older brother Dev, she hopes to join the ranks of some of the smartest marine scientists and naval personnel in the world. We join her on the morning of her final exams for her Freshmen class, where they travel off campus for some sort of secret mission that none of the older students, Dev included, will reveal. Soon though, it all goes wrong and she sees a submarine come out of the water and attack the Academy right after she and her classmates leave for exams. She watches as the school collapses into the ocean. She and her classmates continue on their journey, with their professor informing them that they now must not stop for anything, as it could depend on life or death. She soon finds out that the cause of the destruction was a rival academy called the Land Institute. Far from being your typical high school rival, this academy seeks to destroy HP and all it stands for. This includes Ana herself, who soon finds out that her school's mission is to protect the legacy and the actual submarine of Captain Nemo. What is more, Ana finds out that she is one of the few descendants of Nemo, and has the ability to unlock untold abilities of the sub, far beyond anything she could have dreamed. Now, she and her friends are on a mission to stop Land Institute before they find her and the sub, as well as seek revenge for their destroyed school.

One of the strongest elements of this book is the primary battle itself, the main characters have to battle for their home using a ship that they do not understand, which has been sitting on the bottom of the ocean floor for over 100 years, against an enemy that desperately wants to kill them. These scenes, at the best of times, reminded me of the best episodes of, say Star Trek TNG or DS9, where our heroes are fighting against impossible odds and somehow have to come out on top. This was the point that kept me reading the most.

I also liked the different relationships and representations that we see in this book. For Riordan, I have always felt that his representation can be a two-edged sword. On the one hand, Percy Jackson and the Olympians were groundbreaking in how our main characters were dyslexic and ADHD, at a time when many main characters were neither. On the other, his Magnus Chase series seemed to be overflowing with messages toward diverse people, to the point where his themes of acceptance of other people tended to dwarf the story. Here, however, Riordan seems to have toned it down back to where it should be. People here have some disabilities (one character is autistic, for example) but this fact never outshines them. I never once thought “Oh, here is the character who is autistic.” I instead thought about who they were in relation to our main character, which I definitely prefer.

However, there are some issues regarding the overall story and one relationship between Ana and her brother Dev. For spoiler's sake, let's just say that, while I can understand what Riordan was going for, I don't think that he got the sympathy from me that he wanted when it came to their relationship. Spoilers below.

It is revealed that Dev was the traitor and was the one who helped Land Institute destroy their home. Dev tries to convenience Ana that they were betrayed by their school and Captain Nemo's legacy and that they should betray their school so that companies should have control of their tech. Ana eventually comes to the realization that he was just under the pressure of expectations and their parent's death, and learns to forgive him. However, for me, I just don't buy it. Here is a man who tried to kill his sister and her friends on multiple occasions, and Ana just happens to make the decision to forgive him at the end of the book. This is clearly a problem with the pacing. If the book were longer and we got more interactions with Ana and Dev before the destruction of the school, then I could buy their relationship and the strength of their bond between them. As it is, I just think it is necessary for a life lesson and little else.

As for the continuation of this series, I also found the end somewhat wanting. Riordan clearly set this up to be a series by the end of the book, but with everything he is working on, coupled with the low sales, I doubt this will happen. I have heard rumblings about how there will be a second book, but we will have to wait and see if/when that will happen. This fact alone makes me somewhat disappointed. I am one of those people who want a for sure series to latch on to. Yet I wonder if Riordan can keep up the quality with other projects he is working on.

Still, I would say that this was a fun deviation from the normal world of Rick Riordan, and I will be looking forward to diving into the next book, I give it a four out of five.

I originally picked up this book because I liked the idea of a Roman man in the 21st century. I was thinking of a mix of Wolverine with Maximus, and I was excited to see how things would play out, but with this book, I have to say, I was disappointed.

One major issue for me is how the events of this book are ordered. We see our main character Marcus in the modern day, coupled with important events throughout his life. Being alive for the past 2,000 years, he has witnessed and seen many great and small events. However, we the reader only see a fraction of them, often seemingly out of sequence. We jump from ancient times when he was in battle, to the modern day, then back in the past 200 years after the first flashback, then modern-day again, then back into the past, set about 20 years before the first flashback, and so on. All of this makes for a difficult book to follow if you are reading it in chunks like me. Also, this makes it difficult to understand how the events in the past shaped him as a character. I didn't see how each event changed him, which to me is a disappointment.

And that talk of character leads me to another issue, the people we meet in this book. I honestly cannot remember a single thing about them, which, given the premise, I feel is a shame. This should be an excellent look into what someone who is over 2,000 years old thinks our modern society is like. What does he like or dislike? How does he view the changes of government? What habits does he try and hold onto and why? We get none of that here. Instead, we get a standard action thriller starring seemingly anyone, a crime given how interesting and different the premise is.

So I give this book 2 stars. This book isn't one I love. It isn't one I hate. I just feel nothing towards it.

When it comes to WWII historical fiction, few books have managed to maintain the constant dominance that Number the Stars has. It was first published in 1989, and it has since become a classic among middle grade educators everywhere, and it is not hard to see why, as the story is engaging, and the characters have meaningful relationships. This is about the third time I have read this novel, and I can see that this will be one I will be reading for years to come.

This is primarily because of how the characters are portrayed. Both Annemarie and Ellen are done well, with each of them showing their concern for each other in this trying time, as they face occupation by Germany in their country. This is in contrast to other books on WWII historical fiction that I have read, where I did not connect with any characters. Here, they are all written well, and have a purpose, even if they do not seem like it at the beginning of the book.

I also like the situations that they get into. While I will not spoil it, I will just say that this is not only an excellent way to show the resistance during this time period, but is also a good gateway into thriller books for young readers. I felt an excellent amount of tension in these scenes and much of that is through Lowry's writing, which is as excellent as it was in The Giver, which I also enjoyed.

Overall, I would say that this book still hold up all these years later and is one that I recommend to those students who want to know more about the resistance efforts during WWII. I give it a four out of five.

Financial advice is everywhere. From those self-help books saying how you can save money if you try, to people expounding the virtues of real estate on TickTok, everyone seems to be offering their little piece of money-making advice, most of it of dubious practicality.

That may be why I have never been one for financial help books. Usually, they are one voice in a crowded market, so I never wanted to waste my time on them. But then I found Dave Ramsey's book. To be forthcoming, I read this not because I wanted to know more about finances, but because I needed to listen to something short for the two weeks I could get out of my Libby Library loan.

Also, I had heard of Dave Ramsey on Youtube. His show seems to be filled with advice tuned more to the person who is already up to their eyeballs in debt, rather than someone like me: a man in his 30s with good financial habits. Yet the more I listened to this book, the more I liked what I heard. Despite his demeanor on the show, he sounded here like a kindly Uncle or Grandfather, trying to depart his wisdom onto you so you do not make the same mistakes he did. Say what you will about this book, he sounds like he genuinely wants to help you to become a millionaire, and believes it is possible.

He also offers many different examples of people who have used his program to great effect. Some people come from all walks of life: those who started rich and ended up poor. Those who started off poor to begin with, and had little to no financial literacy, and everything in between. All of this means that we see many people whom Ramsey has helped, which can convince the reader that what he says is right: financial literacy is 20% know-how, 80% willpower.

Yet, there were other issues with this book that I consider negative points. One of which was the references to Jesus and God. While I get that faith can be a strong component of your life, especially when you are struggling to climb out of a mountain of debt, I found his expounding on the Bible here to be misplaced. They often seemed to be here just to expound to the reader how much the Bible can fit into finances when that should not be the focus of the book. I think those passages would have been better served as their own little book (where he can make even more money) rather than written here, taking up valuable space.

Also (and correct me if I am wrong) he never clearly outlines what the Baby Steps are in the book. He talks all about them, and I can gather what they are from the content of each chapter, but it felt like, for the most part, the actual steps would be revealed to you if you paid for another course, book, or whatever. The point is, this annoys me how much time he spent expounding upon a program and only outlining the hints of what to do instead of stating the steps directly.

And it is this major negative that makes me give this book a three out of five. It isn't a bad book, but I would also look at other texts on the topic before diving into what Ramsey is selling.

In today's society of the NSA and CIA, and other acronym-heavy government agencies, the idea of Big Brother is more prevalent than ever before. For many people, even if they have not read the book, they can still know what the ideas of the novel are. Namely, that the government that controls everything, including free speech, offers little freedom to those who live under it. Those who haven't read the book also seem to know that our society will definitely be headed there if candidate X is elected President.

And I think that this is because, for better or worse, there is something that everyone can find in this book that they can apply to today's society. Weather it was 1965, 2015, or the actual 1984, every generation, since this book was published can find some link between the words in this book, and what is going on for their generation. This can, indeed show the timelessness of the book, and that is something to be impressed about. Each nightmarish situation that one finds the characters in can easily be applied to something today. It offers doubt on the current state of events going on in the reader's own life because it comes back to the idea that history is written by the victors. We only know so much about own on history, based on what certain people say, or what a company or government allows to be shown to the public. This novel's main strength is it's sheer spectacle at what could happen to a society if too much information is both hidden from the populace, and sought after through illegal means.

Which is good, because it does tend to lack from a story perspective. This book is divided up into three main parts: Part one: Winston, the main character, engages in everyday life, trying to cover up that he does not like Big Brother. Part Two: Winston reading a book about how Big Brother came to be and how it is all lies. Part Three: Winston getting caught, and being tortured for his thoughts. This book is heavy handed with almost every aspect of the book, which I think, drags the story considerably. It often made me want to stop reading it and pick it up later (or never). Still, after I persevered through it, I found myself more interested in how one views not only the information we are given, but also with what information about ourselves we give away. I think this is a novel I can respect, more than actually like. While I read it just to say I had, I can't say I enjoyed it. Therefore, I give it a three out of five. I think it should be read, if only as a warning, and not as a manual, of how things could go in the future.

Many in the Percy Jackson fandom find this book to be the weakest of the series. I must say, I am forced to agree. While this is by no means a terrible book, it is still the weakest of the series. Perhaps this is because Riordan, in an effort to reference the Odyssey, feels constrained by its story line. Maybe this is because he does not like the journey that he takes Percy on, both plot and character wise. Whatever the reason, this book, although fun, feels like a set-up-book for things to come.

One of the best ideas of this novel is how Riordan manages to shake up the formula of the three companions. In this case, he makes sure to trade out Grover for Tyson, Percy's cyclops half brother. I just love Tyson's loyalty and ability to fix almost anything. He shows Percy the value in faith in others, and confidence in your own abilities. I loved seeing the change that Tyson went on, and I am glad to see him continue to improve to who he will be by the end of the series. Annabeth gets a nice arc here too, in that we see her overcome her hatred for Tyson and learn to be more accepting of him, and her past as well. Also, I have to admit, I am glad there was little to no Grover in this one. I still don't like him anymore here than I did in the last book, so I can appreciate how he does not really have as much of a presence in this book.


Another aspect that gave me a chuckle was the references to Greek mythology. We have Grover who keeps showing his bridal train every morning, and then destroying it every night. Then we also have the battle where Percy and Annabeth assume the identity of Nobody. All these and more made me chuckle.


In terms of negatives, this does feel like a set-up-book in terms of what we see here. We get set up of Tyson and his metal-working skills, the larger plot with Kronos and Luke, as well as additional characters at the end of the book. What this amounts to is feeling like we are setting things up for the next book, without saying much for this story. Also, there is the problem with the main plot being based on The Odyssey. Riordan's creativity just feels constrained by this premise, and this makes the book the weakest for me. I love his other books more because, when he has the freedom to do so, he can just go crazy and really take the plot into places that I would not have seen coming. Yet, here, it feels in some respects like he is going through the motions, with a Percy Jackson twist that is just enough to make it entertaining and different from the source material.

But don't let my negatives dissuade you. This was still a very fun second outing with Percy Jackson, and I enjoyed it immensely. I give it a five out of five.

When it comes to getting people into certain genres of fiction, I have one general rule: Start with what you already know or like and work your way out from there. Do you want to get into Science Fiction because you like Star Trek? Then read the companion novels, as many of their authors also went on to make their own original material. Like the Expanse series on Scifi? The books are just as good (and run longer than the show) and the authors both have their own original work to boot. The same can be said of Jim Butcher. Famous for his Dresden Files series, some may be hesitant to commit to a series that currently consists of over ten installments. This is where I would ask them to pick up this book, as Spider Man: Darkest Hours is an excellent and action packed adventure for the reader, and may just convince a lover of New York's favorite Web head to pick up the series of books about Chicago's favorite Wizard.

One of the best aspects of this text is just how much the writing for Peter Parker and Harry Dresden are so similar. Butcher is an excellent author and he brings all the humor that he is known for with Harry Dresden here into Peter Parker's inner thoughts. This makes for a very funny novel, especially when compared to the other renditions of Spider Man in popular media (I'm looking at you Toby McGuire). The story itself is also enjoyable with a number of Spider Man characters making an appearance including Black Cat, Mary Jane and The Rhino, just to name a few. This makes the world feel real, and as though this is based in Spider Man's reality.

And to that end, let me make another point: if you do not know much about Spider Man and his cast of characters, then this is not the novel for you. Little is explained about him or the people in his world beyond what is absolutely necessary. This has the benefit of streamlining the story for fans, since we know how Peter got bitten by a radioactive spider, however, this is not even mentioned so an uninitiated reader will feel lost. The same goes for other characters of the novel.

Still, I would say that this is a very well-done novel, with plenty to like. I'd go more into the details of it, but I think this is one best experienced for yourself. I give this book a five out of five. Go to your local library and pick this book up. You won't regret it.

My experience with Roots begins with the 2016 adaptation of the novel, which is an adaptation of the 1970's miniseries. When I found that I could get the book for some amount off at a store, I decided to give it a try. Well, in this rare case, the adaptation was better than the book, as most of the time, it could not hold the awesome power of the story consistently within the narrative.

Firstly, I feel that something must be said: This is more a work of Historical Fiction than actual truth. Not only do we get accounts of what certain characters were thinking, which you get in a narrative, but also some of Haley's book has come into question since it's publication. He has been sued at least twice for plagiarism, and while he settled in one lawsuit, and another was dismissed, Haley has maintained his innocence in this, claiming that he did not intend to plagiarize anything. Also, it is believed that he has an agenda in this text, where he tries to promote Islam in Africa, compared to the indigenous religions and other faiths that were practiced. How true this last claim is, I personally am indifferent to. I just have resolved to take this with a grain of salt, and to see the work as more fiction than an actual historical account.

That said, this book is well produced as an audiobook. The first ever audiobook adaptation was read by Avery Brooks, aka Benjamin Sisko from Star Trek DS9. This later won an Audie Award in the Non-fiction category, and it shows. Brooks reads all the voices well, with even being able to make each woman sound distinct, which is not something that every actor can do as women tend to have higher voices than men, and vice versa. If you ever get the chance, listening to this book is definitely superior to the physical version.

Haley manages to create an awesome book of truly epic proportions. Seeing several generations come from Africa into the Reconstruction period, some 100 years later is epic in scope, and Haley manages to do this better than most author's today. Another element that I enjoyed was seeing Kunta's reaction to the African slaves and wondering how they could be so complacent when we the reader know better. This was a good aspect of the novel that I liked to see.

Yet there are some things here that I feel should be mentioned for the reader's sake. One is the writing style. It is very stilted and formal, except for the dialogue. Some readers may find this detached writing style difficult to enjoy. Also, the narrator does not change their style of writing, despite moving through several generations, so each one can sound the same, regardless of if we are looking at Kunta or Chicken George.

Another issue is that we spend a lot of time in Africa learning about Kunta's life before he was enslaved (almost 200 to 300 pages of the book). On the one hand, this provides a nice contrast from Kunta in his old life to the way things are done for a slave in the American colonies. On the other hand, one may feel like this is taking too long given that we know what will eventually happen to him. Which side you fall on is personal, and can very widely based on who you are, with there being no wrong answer. It is just merely something the reader should be made aware of.

Indeed, this book is one of those that, in hindsight, is one that is lost in the shadow of its more popular cousin, the TV adaptation, and later books that dealt with slavery. Both tend to be raw and eye opening for the viewer in terms of how they portray it. While it's depiction may not be true to historical fact, what many readers experience will be based on their own personal feelings about slavery, and their history with it. For me, I felt that this novel, while long and drawn out at times, was a fair look at slavery for over 100 years, and this is something that I suggest one should read. I give it a four out of five.

When it comes to comics, Watchman is a pure classic. It took comics from the childlike innocence that many people saw it as to the real world, with dark, morally flawed and ambiguous characters. Many of whom you are not sure who to root for, or even if you should root for them in the first place. As for me, this was my first time reading this, and wow, it was amazing.

This is a book that was excellent purely because of its gritty realism. These superheroes are ones that, with the exception of Dr. Manhattan, do not have super powers. They are normal people who have decided to take up a mask for a variety of reasons, not all of them savory. You won't find anyone fighting for truth, justice and the American way, nor to avenge the deaths of those gunndowned by violence. Many of the people featured have some fault or another, and many are just as durranged as the people they seek to fight, if not worse. This is the best element of the novel, and it is fascinating to see how their relationships unfold as we meet them and see them try and find the person who is killing all of the former, and current masked superheroes.

The art direction is also good. While the style is not perhaps to my taste, I did like the amount of detail that went into each and every one of the frames. It makes reading these panels an enjoyable experience that makes re reading them a requirement, rather than a desire. I can't wait to reread this to see what I may have missed before.

What are the negatives, you may ask? Well, this can be a bit of a heavy book, subject-wise, with graphic depictions of violence and sexuality that means you may want to look for something more lighthearted after this. Obviously, this should not be given to those in their Middle school years, at the very least. I'd say older high school, at the earliest. Still, these are mere warning, not anything truly wrong with the work as a whole. As an added aside, I did think that the ending with the giant squid thing was kind of stupid. Why couldn't half of New York been destroyed by a regular bomb or something? Still, overall, I liked this novel far more than I thought I would. This is a graphic novel that I know I am going to read again, of only to see the things that I missed the first time around. I give it a five out of five.

Truth time, I don't make things like Adam Savage does. I have no interest in model or craft making at all. However, this is still a book that I think you should read even if you are not the crafty sort like me. Adam makes the point perfectly that creating does not mean just making models or suits for cosplay, it can mean creating anything, from music to writing, to even movies and TV. This alone makes for a good book with a positive message, but, thankfully, Savage has much more to teach us.

Savage makes the most of his experiences, as he tells different lessons he has learned while creating things, using various times in his life as a backdrop. From when he was a kid, first making models, to his time on his latest YouTube channel Tested, no time is seen as a waste when you can learn new things, a message I approve of.

He also gives advice on tools he likes, from common tools available in any hardware store to obscure machines you can only get through potentially sketchy deals on websites. All of this makes for an excellent read just based on this advice alone.

In fact, this can lead me to a negative of the book: some of his advice may be out of date now that it has been 5+ years since this book was published. This isn't really too bad, however, as that just encourages me to see his latest updates and tool reviews on his YouTube channel Tested. I highly encourage it, as there he can show his manic love of all things nerdy.

Still, this is one book that I loved, just for the narration alone. Normally, I am not a fan of authors reading their works, but here, he reads well, allowing his love of his subject to shine through. I highly recommend the audiobook.

All of this leads me to give this book a five out of five. Even if you do not ‘create' things like Savage does, I recommend you pick this up, as everyone can find something to learn from this book.

This was a book that I had heard alot about in various circles. It is a popular book in the psychology community, and in some YouTube channels, such as the college info geek's channel, run by Thomas Frank (not a sponsor of this review). So when I found that I could get this on audio through my local library, I was excited to read a nonfiction book that I had heard so much about. Sadly, aside from a few starting chapters, this book was not nearly as good as expected.

This is such a shame because the opening chapters hold such promise. In them, we discover the different elements to building a habit. There are three components: the cue, the routine, and reward. For example, I like to read my books when I am done with my shower. So my cue to begin reading would be to finish my shower, then I read my book, and my reward would be to either learn new information, or the entertainment of reading a new book (or, I suppose, writing reviews). This is a good habit I have but I also have bad ones that depend on this system as well. This is an element of the book that I found to be the most interesting, and was worth reading for.

Yet, for all this book has in terms of good points, it does contain some bad habits (only time, I swear). This includes the writing style. The author often uses good examples in this story but he often incorporates them poorly into the chapter. For example, he will use two or three example stories in a problem-solution manner of writing to iterate his habit principle. He'll tell you the problem of two to three stories, then explain to you the principle of habit building for the chapter (usually through another story of how the study was conducted that discovered the habit principle), then he will bring it all home by revealing the solution to the problem mentioned in the stories at the beginning of the chapter, and how the latest principles can apply to them. This style of writing is one that I noticed and slowly got me more annoyed with the longer I listened. This means that he also tends to repeat himself with each chapter. Why do we need so much repetition? Why tell us two or three stories when one will do?

Then there is the personal section of the habit building formula. He kept making suggestions, saying things that we should do to change something about our habits, but never saying how, or giving examples. Okay, I understand that I need to change the que to change the habit, or choose a different reward for my constant habit, but how do I do that? How do I know that this change is going to be the right one for me? Ironically, this is one of the times when I wanted for there to be more examples.

From the business standpoint, this book often tends to make leaps in logic that seem to fit a little too well into the overall function of the example he picks, as though that one thing that this CEO did was what revolutionized the company. And this thing can be exactly linked to this habit building principal. It just seemed too convenient at times.

Overall, this book is one that I would classify as good, but not great. Maybe I would have not noticed this, had I read it as opposed to listened it, but I still can't get these issues out of my mind. I am going to give it a three out of five. If you enjoyed this, great, but I will just leave this book alone to go on and read something else.

Well, this was disappointing. When I finally started reading Game of Thrones, I realized that everything that everyone had ever said about it was correct. While it did take some time to set up, the world building was fantastic, the characters were awesome and great to read about, and the situations were excellently made so that we got to see what would happen to these characters when they were put into these unique situations. It may have been almost 800 pages long, but I never felt board reading it, and I was excited for more.

This 2nd book takes all of that and manages to slow it down to the point that I asked myself why I was reading this. The major problem with this book is the plot and the pacing. With the last book, we did not get very many action scenes, so with a book title like Clash of Kings, I was hoping it would be full of battles being waged, limbs being hacked off, and people dying. Instead, with a few exceptions, many of the battles of this book happen off page, and are ones that we only hear about. This means we are left with many characters who are left scheming for power and other political problems. This is okay, but it took up way too much of the book for it to be interesting.

This leads me to the character that suffers the most in this book: Daenerys. In the first book, it was very interesting to explore the culture of the Dothraki, and watch her become a leader in the first portion of this book, but soon her part degrades into her just standing around and trying to get some ships to sail and take back Westeros. We are told that her dragons are too small to be of any value or use to her, and her parts were so dull that I just skimmed through them with no real consequence to the plot.

Which character did I like the most? This will be ironic, but Tyrion Lannister. I say Tyrion, because, for all the gripe I gave about the politics that occur, and that he is the one that does most of them in this book, I cannot help but love his wit and measure, which comes out at its best when he is with Cerci. It is nice at first...but, as it seems to be with everything with this book, even that gets old, and I'm left wondering why I have to watch him scheme on how to save the city for the sixth time, when only four times will do. Still, I loved what he did in the final part of the book. I thought it was a great way for us to see him grow as a character, even if I want to see King Joffrey off the throne.

In the end, this book just had too little actions for something with such a lofty title. I thought that Martians world building was good, and I liked that I could follow the characters well enough without getting lost or confused, but MAN this book got dull at times. Still for all the problems, it was just...fine. I didn't love this book, but I didn't hate it either. Therefore, I give it a three out of five.

I am somewhat ignorant when it comes to anthologies of short stories, but this was one of the nicer ones that I have read. Many famous and not-as-famous authors lend their talents to this book, and so the stories are of very high quality, regardless of if I personally liked them or not. If you have not already, check this out. It may just surprise you. I give it a four out of five.

Truman is most remembered for two major things: taking over after FDR died in office and launching the world's first Atomic Bomb, ending WWII. So, when I went into this book, I knew that there had to be more to this man than met the eye. I had heard about how this was one of the first cradle-to-grave biographies of Truman in decades, so it won the Pulitzer in 1993. I was excited to read another book by McCullough, whose writing style I loved when I read John Adams years ago. However, the more of this book that I read, the more I realized that just because you are the first of something in years, does not mean you are the best.

This book features many elements of Truman that I was unfamiliar with, such as the different struggles that Truman faced while in office. This includes everything from charges of corruption, to a general who refused to listen to him, as well as problems with world leaders abroad. McCullough delivers all of these issues with the usual grace and style that I have come to expect from him, giving weight to the major issues that the man from Missouri had to deal with. This makes for a fascinating read overall.

However, as much as I liked the writing style, this was one of McCullough's first major biographies, in that he seems to love his subject a little too much. Topics go on for longer than they should, and McCullough tends to focus on the wrong thing overall. The election of 1948, for example, gets a whole chapter devoted to it, with the result that it drags as points and speeches seem to be repeated multiple times. The point where Truman is chosen for the Vice-Presidency, on the other hand, is not given nearly enough attention.

A different way to put this is that Truman feels like McCullough's first attempt at a major biography, so when he wrote John Adams some years later, he learned from his mistakes. Adams feels tighter, with fewer words wasted, and a stronger narrative. McCullough knew what to cut and what to keep in with Adams. He does not know how to do so here. The result is a book that I liked while reading, but could not remember as soon as I put it down, or stopped listening, which is a shame.

So maybe this is a case of me just not getting it. Maybe it is a case of my just not understanding the book overall, and I am just doomed to be in the minority who respect this book, more than they like it. Either way, I give this book a three out of five. You should read it, but be warned, this chunky boy might be more of a disappointment than you expect.

The play Romeo and Juliet is considered a cornerstone of classic literature and is a starting point for many high school students. It is no surprise, therefore, that there are books that aim to take a new look at the classic play. One such tale, Prince of Shadows by Rachel Caine tells the tale of Benvolio as he defends himself from Capulates by day, and then steals from them as the Prince of Shadows by night. This seemed like an interesting premise so I was excited to read on, and overall, I'm glad to say that I did.

This book features all of the characters you know and love from the original play. We see Benvolio, Romeo, and Marchuico as the friends we know them to be. They are loyal and have witty banter between them as they work to advance the house Montigue against house Capulet. One of the best elements of this book, from the viewpoint of Benvolio, is that we get to see just how much of a love-sick idiot Romeo is. This makes for a fun perspective as we see Benvolio try and stop his cousin from making a huge mistake, and then the dramatic irony, since we know he will fail.

The writing is also well done with the language striking a good chord, as the reader finds that it is approachable while also sounding like the time period in which it was based. As the story goes on, the author also manages to sneak in the lines from the play as well. This makes for a fun game as the reader hunts for the lines taken directly from the source while the author adds more context for the reader to enhance what has already been written.

As for negatives, there are not very many with this book, but I feel like I should name them nonetheless.

Firstly, if you are already not a fan of Romeo and Juliet, then I am sorry to say that I doubt this will change your mind. Since the book is entirely from Benvolio's perspective, we only see snippets of the play from his eyes, so while we the reader know what is happening, the author knows to fill the story with other plots to fill our time. This includes the author doubling down on the arranged marriage of Juliet and Count Paris, to show different people being married off to others, and schemes to make sure these weddings increase the standing of house Montague. If you do not like this kind of plot in general, then I suggest you look somewhere else for your classic story re-telling fix.

Also, at the end of the book, an element of magic is added for seemingly little reason whatsoever. When Marchiucio dies (spoilers!) and he says the line “A curse on both your houses”, it is discovered that he literally means a curse, like with a witch and spell. This means that we spend the last few chapters of the book with Benvolio running around trying to break the curse so he can be with Rosaline.

This feels like a misstep to me. For the majority of this book, magic has not come into the story at all. This is save for the occasional line that Romeo and Juliet might have been struck by magic, as they fell in love so fast (and even then, I thought it was in jest). So, in this book, instead of being a line on what Marchiucio feels is the senseless violence that both houses are doomed to repeat to the end of time, here is used as a ‘will-they-won't-they' plot device to see if Benvolio and Rosaline will end up together. This cheapens the lines' meaning from the original play and feels like something added at the last minute to extend the page count, and little else.

Still, I would say that this was a fun adaptation of a beloved classic. If you think you might like this then go for it. I highly recommend it. I give it a four out of five.

I'm a sucker for things about books. Whether it is the PBS documentary special The Great American Read, or the different books that talk about books, I can't get enough of them. And there is a good reason why. Reading is a very isolating activity to begin with, often just you and the book. Couple this with how we readers are few and far between, and you have a hobby that can sometimes seem downright lonely. This is why I like books about reading as I can revel in the topic with another reader. Enter Shannon Reed's Why We Read. I had thought going into this that this book would be part love letter, part psychological exploration of the why and what reading does to our brains. Did I get that? Well, sort of.

This book does have a few good things going for it. Reed loves her books in that kind of cozy fun way that stuffy academics will never seem to understand. She isn't here for the symbolism or the belated historical metaphors or some other such nonsense. She is just here to have a fun time reading everything from The Great Gatsby to the latest harlequin romance novel. One particular passage that I enjoyed was her section on the libraries she has discovered over the years because I am a frequent user of libraries myself.

Then there is the humor in this book. She will often write different observations about readers that had me saying ‘That's so true!' with a chuckle and a smile. She also adds different sections like How to Tell if You're An Adult in a YA novel that had me laughing out loud. Reed is willing to recognize and love books for all they are worth, tropes and all, which makes this very refreshing for a reader to read.

But some things kept holding this book back. One of the biggest is that it did not fulfill my expectations when it came to the title. We never discover the ‘why' of Why We Read, at least in the psychological sense. This is because she helps us to see why reading is important because of all the skills and personal development one can get from reading, such as being more empathetic, and an increased vocabulary. Useful? Yes. Was it what I expected from the title? No.

Then there are some of the sections of this book that I could not get into. For example, she spends a whole two chapters on cookbooks. Look, I love a good meal as much as the next guy, but cookbooks just seem to me like the dime-a-dozen section of the used bookstore all featuring either some fad diet or the latest celebrity chief on the cover. I skipped these parts of the book.

So, this book was fine. Not anything excellent, but it was nice being able to ‘converse' with someone about the books that they loved, even if, at times, I didn't understand why. I give it a three out of five.

My journey of reading one biography of each President naturally took me to Grant. I liked the one that I read (American Ulysses by Ronald C. White Jr.), but I was always curious about how Grant viewed his own Presidency when he wrote his memoirs. A few years later, I got the opportunity to listen to his memoirs, and I am sorry to say that this was a letdown for me. I did like the beginning, but overall, this is a book I respect more than I like.

Firstly, let me give some positives: This book is readable. I know that seems like a low bar, but for me, that is high praise. Many writers in the 1800's seem to write with exaggerated prose, writing in five words when one or two will do. Grant does not do that here, leading to a very straightforward writing style I enjoyed listening to.

This made the recounts of his early life fun to read. I especially liked how he talked of his trepidation and problems at West Point Military Academy. This made him seem more human, which is necessary, considering how much he can be mythologized in our modern media.

That's it. That is, sadly, all I have for a book that is 700 pages long.

Most of this book is filled with his recount of his actions of the Mexican-American War, and the Civil War. He describes his actions, orders he gave, and what he thought of those who served under him and with him. Sounds interesting, right? Well, with Grant's plain writing style, it amounts to him talking about giving orders to Colonel A to link up with Major B while they fight across River C before they get to camp. Then once they get to camp, they have to prepare for an ambush by the enemy commanded by Rebel Commander D, and so on. This subject matter, coupled with Grant's plain writing style means that this gets tedious quickly.

‘But what about his Presidency?' you ask, ‘Surely, that must have been good?” Well, I wouldn't know, because he doesn't write about it at all. He stops the book with the end of the war, skipping over his Presidency entirely. This fact alone forces me to wonder if this entire endeavor has been a waste, as if this was all for nothing.

So why do I give it two stars? Well, if you are a Civil War buff then you are going to love this book. And, for me, I give one star to books that I find have no redeeming value, and that is not the case at all. This book, sadly, just wasn't for me.

Well, for me, this would be a book I can classify as “Be careful what you wish for”. In my quest to read one book about each president in chronological order, I inevitably had to read books published under the Presidents of America series. This is because many presidents we have had in our nation's history have been duds, so to speak, and are not worth the authors time to write, nor a publisher's cost to print, a 300 to 600 page book about them. The Presidents of America series seeks to remedy that by making short books about each president, an admirable goal to be sure. Yet, lately, I have been forced to read so many of them that I felt like I was missing something. These books seemed to skip over so much of their subject's lives, that I was beginning to dislike them based on principal. Soon, I was yearning to read Lincoln by David Donald not only for the fact that it was, you know, about Abraham Lincoln, but also because it was a nice thick book. I was anticipating this being filled with a detailed exploration of Lincoln the man and how that changed once he became President. Yet, what I got was a historical lecture on the seemingly mundane details of Lincoln's life, and actions during his Presidency told in the most boring way possible.

Firstly, let me begin with the good of this biography: This is extremely detailed, with much of the text being devoted to showing the primary sources of the day. There are quotes from friends, close relatives, political confidants, and newspaper articles. All of this makes for a comprehensive look at what was said about Lincoln both before and as he was President.

This also makes for a very strong look at how much opposition and hatred Lincoln faced. There were those people who thought we would win the Civil War quickly (why is thinking we will win a war quickly such a theme with us?) and when that did not happen, Lincoln faced growing opposition. I always knew that many people opposed the war for many different reasons, but seeing their anger turned on Lincoln was surprising to me. We tend to idolize Lincoln, or even see him as a god-like figure, yet many people of his time thought him to be foolish and incapable of dealing with the crisis at hand, to say the least. This made for interesting reading, when it came to see the scrutiny that Lincoln was under at the time.

Donald also gives Lincoln a balanced exposure. He shows Lincoln at his best (The Lincoln-Douglas debates), when he is most clever (working with his cabinet), and when he is at his worst (denying men the right of habeas corpus), while showing the myriad of contradictions about him along the way. This makes for a good take on a man who has been mythologized in our own time, and it was good to see him as a human being, rather than an idol.

Yet for all the detail we get in this book, I never felt like I knew Lincoln, or, perhaps, could picture him sitting in front of me. The best biographies tend to make you feel like you can sit the subject down at dinner and have a lively discussion not only about the topics of their time, but also about the concerns of today. You can feel their triumphs and pains, their worries and their personal confidences. John Adams by David McCullough, is, still, the best Presidential biography when it comes to this factor.

This book does not even come close to that. Don't get me wrong, it is chalk full of information, but none of it reaches the level of personal feeling that we should get with a subject like Lincoln. We do not have a writing style that put us in the room with him. Instead, it feels like we are more watching a history professor lecture to us about him back in college: informative? Yes. Entertaining? No.

And that is what leads me to the rating I have given it. A biography for me must be informative, but also entertaining, or, at least, well written enough to draw me into their subject. This book does very well with the information, but it was very difficult to get through. At times, I asked myself why I didn't just put it back on my shelf and get a different biography. Perhaps I'm just stubborn that way. If you have read many books or seen many documentaries about Lincoln and the Civil War, then this may be right up your ally, and you'll enjoy it, despite its writing style. But if you are ignorant of Lincoln and his life, then I'd skip this for another biography. I give it a three out of five.

Edited for clarity.

When it comes to a book, be it non fiction or fiction, I tend to try to go into a review as cold as I can. I may go as far as to read other book reviews, but that is usually when I am in the middle of, or have finished a book and I have no idea what to make of it. In the case of 1776, I knew very little about the book. I could infer that it would be about the American Revolution during the year 1776, and it would mostly focus on the forming of the Declaration of Independence during that year...and I was half right.

This book actually takes a look at the battles and struggles that both George Washington and his British counterparts had to face that year. McCullough actually does an excellent job at painting both sides of the conflict and showing each side's strengths and weaknesses. While the British had better trained and paid troops, for example, both sides suffered from a lack of experienced men. The average British soldier was better accustomed to army life, and had would do every task with, if not pride, then a certain sense of duty and understanding why a task had to be done. They were used to cleanliness, preparing proper camps, and working away the menial, non-fighting hours of camp life. Then there was Washington's army, which suffered problems with disease, insubordination, drunkenness, and lack of proper clothing and equipment. Men deserting from their post was commonplace, as was being drunk on duty. In fact, it is a miracle that Washington managed to accomplish anything at all, given what he had to work with. This novel also gives an excellent look into the relationships between various continental and British officers, and how it affected the command structure. It is most definitely an excellently researched book.

Yet, it does have a few problems. I think that McCullough is a better writer of political elements than he would be battle scenes. While the writing he did about the relationships between commanders was interesting, and I think was his strength, his writing tended to lack when it came to describing battle scenes. This is by no means an easy task, but it still got a bit confusing over who was going where with what troops, especially without a map. It isn't a huge deal, it just makes me excited to see what his book John Adams will be like.

A second larger point was trying to read the book with all of the quotes interspersed in his writing. They are placed so often within the text that I would become frustrated as to why I didn't just read the actual words of the man in a journal, instead of McCullough's. It can create a kind of quote fatigue where I was wishing for the author's own commentary on the topic. I think that this effect is lessened, somewhat, through the audiobook, which is read by the author, and is done very well.

As I finished this book, I think that McCullough is a great author and historian. This is a text that has appeared on many different best history book lists, and it is not hard to figure out why. I have read in other reviews that this is not his best book, and, even though I haven't read anything else by him yet, I can understand where they are coming from. Yet, I am excited to see what this author holds in store for his other historical installments. I give this book a four out of five. If you are a student of history, perhaps you should consider picking this up.

If you were to type in Lincoln into Google, the second website you see in the wiki for Abraham Lincoln. If you type Garfield into Google, on the other hand, all you get is information about an orange cat who hates Mondays. This probably has to do with the fact that James A. Garfield died after a long battle with infection after being shot only four months into his first term as our 20th President. Still, there is something to be said with the death of Garfield, as it marked the end of the spoils system of government and allowed for security to take a more active role in protecting the President. Millard's book manages to display all this and more in her text that I found highly enjoyable and very engaging.

One of this novel's biggest strengths is how it manages to weave the stories of four people, (Charles Guiteau, James Garfield, Alexander Bell, and Dr. Doctor Bliss) together in such a satisfying way. History does not occur in a vacuum, and this book manages to provide excellent context into all their lives and how they intersect on this one important event.

Millard also does a good job explaining the context to the many elements that helped to make this event possible. She is not afraid to lay blame or judgement for who she thinks caused Garfield's death, and she does well to show that it was a multitude of factors. There was the spoils system, which allowed people to be selected to an office not because they were right for the job, but more for what they had done for the politician in question. Then there was Garfield's selection at the party's nomination, where it just seemed to be fate that he be selected over Grant, who was trying to run for a third term.

Arguably the section of the book that gets the biggest focus, and indeed what eventually plays the most important role when it comes to Garfield's death, is the development and thoughts on medicine in the early 1880's. Many doctors wanted to help the patient with practices that, while common for the time, could be considered horrific today by any common citizen, let alone members of the medical community. Doctors liked seeing a person filled with pus, as they believed that was normal and healthy. Assuming they tried to sterilize the tools they used at all, they would only do the tips of the tools, leaving the gripped ends exposed with bacteria that would then make their way to the disinfected parts. Doctors, when performing any kind of surgery would not wash their hands, or even change out of their civilian clothes. If they did use a lab coat, many of them saw it as source of pride and experience to see amounts of blood and pus on it. The more it had, the more it spoke to your experience as a doctor and the people you had helped. All these things that would make a modern person shudder was what would ultimately kill Garfield after he was shot.

Next, we have Charles Guiteau, the office seeker who would sentence Garfield to death by shooting him in the back. This man, to put it bluntly, was his own brand of crazy. He failed at nearly everything he tried to do in life, from being a lawyer, to a traveling evangelist, to living in a free-love commune. Eventually, he believed, somehow, that he was owed a commission to France by Garfield. Through his letters that show his delusions of grandeur, Guiteau tries, unsuccessfully to get the appointment he is thought due. When he does not, he then thinks that he needs to kill the president because it will save the Republican party, and because God told him too. Millard shows this man and how he is seen as insane from the word go as soon as we meet him at the beginning of the book. She does such a good job painting his inner mental instability through his outward writings, I could not help but wonder if there was some research done on his actions and if any modern doctors had put forth any theories about what was wrong with Guiteau. In fact, after the trial and his execution (in which he acts as insane as ever) Guiteau is almost never mentioned again. This can seem like a missed opportunity, as it seems like a natural extension of Millard's writing to go from discussing physical medicine to mental health treatment of the era and how it compares to today.

As far as Garfield's Presidential legacy is concerned, Millard portrays it as though we lost a great Lincoln or FDR. While I won't deny that he definitely was a good man and could have been great after senator Roscoe Conkling stopped getting in his way, how he is represented here is perhaps too good to be true. As far as the reader is concerned, the worst thing that Garfield has ever done, according to Millard, is have an affair, which he quickly apologizes for and breaks off early on in his marriage. His attitude to me on issues such as African American rights seems too squeaky clean and it requires further study to really get an unbiased picture of the man.

In either case, this is an excellent text that does a very good job at working the lives of several people together into a single event. As far as a presidential biography goes, it may not be the most comprehensive, but what it does manage to do far outweighs what I wish it had done. I loved the writing style and the journey this book took me on. I will certainly be thinking about this book, and Garfield in general, in the weeks to come. I give it a five out of five.

This is one of the more standout books of the Dresden Files, as we see that Harry has to join the bad guys for once, and rob a vault. After the lackluster experience that was Ghost Story, and the merely ‘okay' reading journey that was Cold Days, I was ready for a book that would knock my socks off. Did it? Not as much as I would like.

Most of this book was a positive experience for me, as I read about Harry and his latest endeavor to rob the bank of a Greek God. Truth be told, most of this book is very plot heavy, as we see the team become assembled. All of the members are fighters, but we see them being the antagonists of the story, as opposed to the heroes. Think Ocean's Eleven, but for the bad guys, and you have some idea as to what this book is about. I enjoyed seeing the team being built, and all of the obstacles they face along the way.

Then there is Harry himself. This was the only part of the book that I feel lukewarm about. In the book, we find Harry questioning his motives, as he wonders if he is turning into a twisted version of the monsters he claims to battle against. Thankfully, Michael is there to set him straight. I love seeing him and his family, as they are a bright spot whenever they are on screen (page?). The only issue is that I feel like this is an arc that Harry has gone through before, and we are just hitting the main points again. The idea that Harry is not making time for his friends and family and becoming a monster is one that I felt had been handled better in other, stronger installments. This is a minor gripe, sure, but a noticeable one, for me.

Overall, this one was good, but not one of the greats of the Dresden Files. Perhaps it is just me, and what I am currently going through that made me not want to devour this book, but I think that this novel is one that I liked because of Michael, in particular, and not necessarily because of Harry this time around. I give it a four out of five.

Now this is the Jim Butcher I like. The last outing with Harry Desden was not one I loved. Ghost Story was a good book, but not one that I found amazing, like I was expecting. The characters that I met didn't stick with me, and I felt like we had seen many of the tropes of the Dresden files before. So, with the 14th installment, my hope was to see Harry go into his new life with the same spunk that he had in his old one, while also advancing the story. This book accomplished that...for the most part.

The story begins with Harry now claimed as the Winter Knight. As he tours the world of the fae Queen Mab, his boss, gives him a job: kill Mave, her daughter. Harry is troubled by this, to say the least, simply because he doesn't know if that is even possible. So he travels to the human world to contact his friends and to try and solve this problem. While there, he finds that Deamonreach, the spirit of the island in the 12th book, is in trouble. There is more to the island than Harry previously believed, and something has gone wrong there, something that, if not corrected, could destroy all of Chicago.

This premise is something that I liked simply because we got the old gang back together. Many people seemed to change in the months that Harry had been recovering from his ‘death' and the events of the last book. Molly now has a nice apartment, and Butters has himself a girlfriend. This, along with Harry's other friends make a nice reunion, and allow us to see Harry back in the saddle, so to speak.

I also liked how we got to see more elements to characters that we already knew, such as Major General Toot-toot. We got to see another side to his people as he has to help Harry defeat an annoying, but effective enemy that is as small and quick as the Major General himself.

Sadly, there are some things that keep coming up that are starting to wear on me as a reader. One would be the constant descriptions of power. Butcher has a habit of describing things using similes, or comparing X person or thing to powerful people we already know, and the way he does it can become tiring and repetitive. This folds into the idea of Harry being the underdog in the magical community. He used to be this way, back in say book 5 or so, but now, especially after book 7, I feel like he should be kicking butt all over the place. Yet, on many occasions, Harry is the one who finds his face planted in the dirt, so to speak. This makes me wonder how Butcher could keep ratcheting up the tension, when Harry should be wiping the floor with whatever enemy he is facing. It just gets a bit unbelievable at points.

Then there is the direction of the series itself. While I like that we get to see Harry and company again, I must admit that I do not really like where this series has moved. It used to be about a hardboiled detective combing the gritty streets of Chicago, in the same vein as Sam Spade, but without the secretary. Now, however, it seems to be more exploring the mystical world of the fae, which I really am not liking as much as I thought I would. Some people may feel the same way.

Still, this was an excellent book, and a return to form for the series. I am going to gladly explore this series, most likely to the end. I give this book a four out of five.

This was an excellent play about the Lincoln Douglas debates. The actors are masters of their craft and they use all of that talent here to create a play that is over an hour and a half long but feels like it is only 30 minutes. This is definitely something that I am going to buy and use in a classroom, and I would greatly suggest to anyone looking to study the debates. It is awesome to hear them act and put tone and inflection to the words one woud normally read on the page. I give this book a five out of five.