This well-written, confident and elegantly worded book will not be the guidebook to the Baltics of today, but this is not why you would be picking this book in this day and age. 'The Baltic Revolution' is now firmly a part of the shelf looking at history - albeit a recent one, but history nevertheless.

It was fun to pick this book and leaf through it this week. My God - it was only written about a decade ago! So many things changed beyond belief (shops, houses, infrastructure, clothes - these are no-brainers; but also political life has matured incredibly, and Lithuania even managed to impeach its president caught with his hand in the till).

And then, even more bizarrely, you notice that so many things stayed the same. EXACTLY the same.

If you are in the Baltics for more than a week, this book would make a captivating reading: you will understand where Baltic ways of doing things, Balts' thoughts and idiosynchracies come from. In my travels, I found that studies of RECENT history of a country were the most revealing when trying to understand the national character. Maybe it is something about being able to see the process - see it 'to scale', so to speak.

The Baltic people are prisoners of their history more than they are willing to admit (and as a Lithuanian-born and Lithuanian-educated but UK-resident Lithuanian, I can say so without a fear of insulting sensibilities). In Lieven's book, you will read about the same character traits - but, visually, the countries really are nothing like those in which Mr Lieven lived when he used to write for 'The Times'.

Probably the smartest analogy I could think of would be as follows: imagine yourself staying in one of seven-star super-duper hotels in Dubai with plasma TVs and fish-tank walls and internet access in your shower AND while you're at it, read a book about the times when this emyrate was nothing but desert and camels.

It is, however, very sad to realize that, with a bit of luck, the Baltics may never again be in a situation where major newspapers would feel it is worthwile to retain a correspondent there. It is good news for the people of those countries that Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are no longer on the news map. They have developed into predictable democracies - unexciting but better for the people.

However, in the absence of seasoned correspondents, who is going to write books about them like Mr Lieven?

Fodor's was the fourth guide that I bought for Japan. It did not disappoint, but competition is tough and others do a better job in some areas.

My biggest complaint would be a poor map of Tokyo subway (black and white, coding of lines difficult to follow even for someone who is not a complete newcomer), even poorer street map of Tokyo itself and no subway map for Kyoto. True, you can get free subway maps; and decent maps of Tokyo are available separately, but after investing money into a good guide you should not have to worry about this.

The guide sounds inspired and cheerful, sections about dining, culture and the language are better than adequate. It can be quite prescriptive at times, but it does not really stand in the way of enjoyment.

The guide does a good job countering small-minded myths about "expensive Japan". To all those whining about $10 cups of coffee and $100 melons I say this: if coffee and melons and other comforts are so crucial to you, maybe you should stay at home to make sure you have cheap supply of these commodities. One recalls certain Lonely Planet writers who dedicate half of their time spent in Scandinavia to a search for cheap booze; they get very disappointed when they cannot find any and then they go on for pages and pages about it. Well, Fodor's guide does not get its foot into the same trap: when in Japan, do not try to recreate home experiences and you'll be fine. Still, I think the guide worries too much about Italian and Mexican restaurants in Japan: I do not think there are many people so strange that they would go half-way around the world and then try to get something that is available back home for a fraction of a price. Anyway, looking for an italian place in Japan is a bit like shopping for a computer in Ghana - yes, it is available, but why would you do it?

The guide is strong on directions to the attractions and descriptions are brief but accurate. I liked Hokkaido section which not all guides cover adequately (DK Eyewitness, for example, only managed to cough up a few pages - definitely not sufficient for the exciting land that is the north of Japan).

It is disappointing that Fodor decided not to cover Okinawa at all: many of travellers to Japan would want to go there. I understand this was done because they needed more space for Tokyo and Kyoto.

It is evident that the writers do not have the same fascination with Tokyo as they have with Kyoto. It is not a shortcoming because no-one really loves both the same way, yet you may find that Rough Guide does a more spirited coverage of the main city.

Overall, DK Eyewitness has much better maps (not so strong on anything else, unfortunately), Lonely Planet has solid descriptions and practical info of some more remote places and also covers kanji versions of placenames in a very convenient way, but overall Rough Guide Japan is still the strongest book for the destination (and I am not a natural fan of Rough Guide, but in Japan they really surpassed themselves and all others).

Fodor's Japan is good but not ideal unless you like their writing style and their indexing system (admittedly quite good, and goes some way towards compensating for less-than-adequate mapping) so much that you are prepared to ignore the shortcomings.

The only reason to recommend Michelin Sicily would be that nothing much better is widely available. I drove in Sicily extensively and I was not impressed with this map: their printing quality looks cheap in this day and age, distances between points are confusing and preciseness leaves much to be desired.

Maybe I set my standards too high, but this is not an excellent product. If you are driving in Sicily, you will probably be stuck with this map anyway, just do not have inflated expectations.

For those who go to Sicily to look at Godfather and Godfather 2 locations - yes, it DOES have indications of both Forza d'Agro and Savoca (near Taormina, that's eastern coast). And yes, in Savoca they have Bar Vitelli where Michael Corleone talked to Apollonia's father, yes, that bar is still open, and yes, you can sit in Corleone's chair and yes, the curtain is still there, you can touch it.

I had this guide as a back-up to my conventional choice of DK Eyewitness. DK let me down completely, and I had to rely on Frommer - and boy was I lucky I bought this book.

You may argue with the style of writing (for many, it is too patronizing and too prescriptive), but you cannot argue that they have done their reserch and then some more. If you are on a mission to set the world straight and if everything smelling of America appals you, you will not like it: Lonely Planet will make you happier. However, if you seek reliable information for your trip and generously extensive descriptions, Frommer's is your guide.

Good maps, and detailed (if very personal) descriptions for lodging and restaurants. Practical info is as good as you can get in often unpredictable and laid-back Italian south. Info about driving in Italy is honest. Writing style is lively and positive; you get overall sense of authors enjoying themselves and really being in love with the island.

This is Frommer's first guide to Sicily, and first guides are not always very strong - but this one is definitely a major success.

Frommer's does not often come as top of the list in my guidebook recommendations, but this is one occasion where it does so with flying colors.

How things change. Until now, I had only good things to say about Eyewitness Guides. They used to be top of the heap. True, there have been decidedly average jobs (Japan was one, beaten by unlikely contender, Rough Guide, hands down), but Sicily is a major disappointment.

The first and the main thing that is wrong with this book - not enough content, not enough informed text, and tired cliched writing at that, too. The appearance is still there: nice pictures, helpful layout, but there's nothing to read. Description of major attractions is superficial at best. History section ("through the ages") is a bit better, but this is about the only strong point.

There isn't even a decent map of Palermo (tourist office gives you a better one for free), and the maps which are included cannot even be bothered to show a railway station. Information on airport transfers? Forget about it. Talk about sleeping on their laurels.

For comparison: a few years ago, a guide to much less visited (a far more difficult) Sardinia was sharp, well-researched and informative. It seems that they work so hard to enter the league of major guide producers to every popular destination, alongside with Lonely Planet, Fodor's, Frommers and Rough Guide, that they lost their sense of purpose and, most importantly, their pride of superbly produced, all-stops-pulled, product.

I used to commend DK on their cheerful style of writing, so different from a grumpy and grumbling world of Lonely Planet and Rough Guide. Now, it seems, they had taken another extreme: research is so superficial it appears not to exist at all, and practical advice so general they can apply to almost country.

Alternative? I had Frommer's as my second guide on my Sicilian trip, and I found it very good (actually, much better researched and deeper than their latest full-Italy guide). There are drawbacks, but overall it was extremely useful. More than can be said about this Eyewitness Guide.

Lonely Planet is capable of producing very good guides when it tries to cover a destination and not set the world straight. I have seen excellent guides by Lonely Planet, but this is not one of them, unless you wish to read a bit of anti-capitalist rhetoric.

This is not a guidebook to Dubai - this is a guidebook to a city as they would like to see it: as far from civilized world as possible. You can almost see the writers being intensely uncomfortable in the clean and shiny world of shopping malls and air-conditioned breathtaking buildings. I can see them walking around and complaining why couldn't Dubai be a bit more like Afghanistan. I bet if they found some people drinking raw sewage or a possibility to sleep in a rat-infested bus shelter, that would make their day. Except there aren't any of these things in Dubai.

Lonely Planet writers like to think they are after "authenticity" - unfortunately, in this case they miss the point. Dubai IS about wealth and shine and efficiency, glitter and gold ARE its authentic face. When you think about the attitude of this book, "killjoy" is the world that comes to mind. It is like taking your grumpy granny to see 'The American Pie'. She will just sit there and grumble that young people are not what they used to be.

Try Time Out instead: they have an open mind. Lonely Planet still has to learn that a place does not need to be poor and dirty to be exciting.

There is so much built on blues out there, so much derived from it, that it is easy to forget where it all began. Son House is so raw, so unaffected by technical tricks or crafty ideas, so far from any pose, pretence or stereotypical imagery of show business that you feel actually privileged to be allowed to come into contact with his singing.

It is like entering an empty temple in an unfamiliar country: you have seen some of the signs, you have some of the knowledge about the faith, but the experience is new and humbling.

Yes, humbling is the word. If loneliness had a voice, it would be the voice of Son House.

This could have been a tired collection of name-dropping and anecdotes, but it is not - Yetnikoff offers a gripping tale of driving in ultra-fast lane with no brakes.

Many books of this type are reduced to sorry self-important ramblings because their esteemed authors take themselves too seriously and view "stories of their lives" as something approaching gospels. They want every word in their folios to be significant. Some of them are under impression that they did not simply live their lives but went from one revelation of supreme truth to another. Yetnikoff, meanwhile, is endearingly immune to all this. His story of excess and permanent alcohol-, drug- and sex-induced stupor is told in a relaxed and unassuming way.

And, of course, famous names and their albums and songs really put this into the context of the era. I enjoyed every bit of the book.

If you thought "Stupid White Men" was a lot of angry, inaccurate and unfunny drivel, wait until you read this one. Same mantras all over again - George W Bush, Enron, Kyoto protocol, how rich rule the world... And anti-capitalists are clapping their hands in ecstasy. Same old story.

In fact, I kinda feel sorry for them, because it does not seem to take a lot of effort to amuse those lefties and nearly bring tears of righteous indignation to their eyes. This talentless self-centred sorry excuse for a writer just keeps talking to anyone who would listen.

Old-school pinko artists (like Oliver Stone) at least had some talent. Their ideas might have been unacceptable to some but everyone respected their professionalism. Michael Moore just keeps mass-producing trash and making nice money out of it. He is not even a professional, just an incompetent fraud.

Liked his first book and Columbine film? Go on, buy this one too. You'll love it: it's more of the same.

To me, this film was an elegant, understated and highly accomplished masterpiece. I do not blame those who are dissapointed: it is like those things in life that you either love or hate.

I will not say something like "oh they just don't get it", because this would imply that I am somehow more clever and insightful than those who disliked it. No I am not. It is just my taste is different. Let me give you an example: I dislike Robin Williams, in fact I think that he is a shallow and one-dimensional comedian. Is it because I "don't get" his jokes? No. I do get his jokes, and many of them are funny. I just don't like him. He annoys me, just like Steve Martin does.

Now, back to this film - and here comes another example of different people liking different things. I love Japan (although I do understand that in this film it serves only as a background - incredibly rich, a tapestry of a background - but still only a background), but I understand and accept that many people do not. I love and adore Japanese food and their cold tea from wending machines and their trains; but so many people are left cold by this. And it is OK - because I am also left cold by many things that excite others.

I find Scarlett Johansson very beautiful (in this not-so-dazzling way) and her acting razor-sharp; in fact, I think she shines even brighter than Bill Murray in this film. I am also amazed that it took so many years for Western filmmakers to realize that an unfulfilled love can also be an interesting story.

I love that this movie does not have an answer. And I don't mind staring through hotel window: I did that in Tokyo myself, and I did the same in many much stranger places: Accra in Ghana, Vladivostok in Russia, Nida in Lithuania. Some of the most interesting ideas (well, for me anyway) I had at the time when I was staring through hotel windows.