The Riddle-Master Trilogy was my first experience with McKillip and I must say she has now joined the uppermost ranks of my favorite authors. This series was just incredible. Not only is McKillip a true master of the English language-her phrasings are vocabulary are anything but cliché-and her creativity clearly outside of the box, but the way she so carefully and expertly opens the story to the reader places her head and shoulders above her contemporaries. She leads the reader on a glorious, soul-searching escapade where certain plot elements are introduced early enough that the identities and eventual destinies of several main characters are quickly ascertained but then she presents incongruous difficulty after difficulty that leave you thinking: well, maybe...no, that can't be it...but yes, it must be...how will she resolve this?... and so on.

She carries the reader only so far into the mystery and then deftly skips from A, B, C to E, leaving D undefined and implied. But she never pushes it too far into the esoteric and eternally unreachable. The act of filling in the blanks gives the reader a sense of discovery that makes the story appear just that much more realistic and enjoyable. You are driven, as a riddler yourself, until the very end when it climaxes the way you predicted and yet you are so startled and overjoyed at the discovery in which you've been granted participation, that you aren't disappointed with predictability. Instead, you can't help but feel a terrible sense of loss at having come to the conclusion of such a beautiful thing. While the ending is left wide open, she resolves the plot difficulties she set out to resolve and doesn't waste time or energy on superfluous baggage.

Her riddles are clever, her fictitious world is neither over nor under defined, and her characters as full of energy, strange goodness and strength as they could possibly be. The metaphors she uses-particularly regarding the concept of identity and form-are clever and philosophically sound. After reading this I felt like Goldilocks in the house of the bears: Neither too soft or too hard, McKillip's style is *just right*. I can see why she is the recipient of literary awards.

Four stars for excellent storytelling and creativity. But while I think Kingslover is a gifted writer and the poetic aspects (as well as the excellent characterizations) made me love this story, I don't agree with the philosophical pretext of Poisonwood. She takes a religious nut and uses him as a negative force to shape the mind of the reader, by necessity, to a thing nearly conformed to a gospel of social justice that smacks of Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor and Gandhi. The reader is really forced to stand between diametrically opposed views of the world in a very black and white way that leaves no room for lateral movement of any kind. And in the end, the characters are unable to resolve their deepest hurts and the reader is left with the disturbing sense that there is no intrinsic value to human life, and that the only value it retains is what we assign to it-subjectively and arbitrarily, depending on which side of the globe you were born. And based on the various pursuits of the characters of the book, social action, the humanistic pursuit of "the Good," appears to be the only source of "true" value.

How terribly sad, then, to live in a world where your worth is as variable as another person's whim to give (or not give) it. To state that humanitarian efforts are the source of value (rather than tapping into value that already exists) is to relegate human worth in the same manner as the "bad guys" of the book who place value on lives according to their overall usefulness, or lack thereof. Either way, value is an arbitrary assignment by another human being (who was assigned their value by yet another human being, and so forth through an infinite regression of arbitrary assignments with unknown headwaters...) and the central issue of the source and purpose of human existence lies untapped. The characters wade mercilessly through their lives looking for something that hints at the fact that they have worth, and each time they come up empty and settle for something they can just live with. Ultimately, the reader is left to the unresolved, longing ache and bitterness toward mainstream humanity.

In essence, Poisonwood cries out: If there was a God and we truly believed that there was a God, we would believe in intrinsic human value. And if there was a God, wouldn't there be justice as a result of that human value?

What you seek you find. If you are seeking a world in which God fits into a neat box of your understanding, you'll find it. If you are seeking a world where you can cleanly eliminate God from the box of your understanding on the grounds that he is unjust, you will also find a myriad of ways to do it. The thing that remains is not the existence or non-existence of human value in relation to a Deity, or the existence or non-existence of a Deity altogether (for what kind of Deity-in the truest sense of the word-could be squared up by humanity?). What remains is quite simply the box. Poisonwood deftly maneuvers around the box, but the box is still the central theme. To craft a story that doesn't conform in any way to a box would be, in my humble opinion, quite revolutionary and philosophically closer to Truth by far (and, essentially, way too abstract for a bestseller...)

If you have an intuitive sense of what makes a design good or bad and yet have difficulty conveying that understanding in terms that others can readily grasp, this book is for you.

The Elements of Graphic Design is a great resource not only for qualifying intentional design, but it will also help a designer effectively communicate the necessity of well-thought-out design to the stakeholders of a project. I think most creatives have, at some point, had to justify the design process to people who think of design simply as pretty pictures rather than a strategic marketing platform. While every designer has-or should have-intuitive understanding of the concepts White discusses in this book, his approach gives a very logical framework to follow in explaining why good design processes and planning are necessary. The Elements of Graphic Design is very clear, succinct and densely packed with the most relevant and fundamental aspects of design, which makes this book an excellent resource.

White discusses the concept of negative space (for those of us with formal art training, or simply white space for those with graphics training), the imperative function of truly "seeing" the elements of design and arrangement, and the difference between style and fashion. He also outlines the basics of Purism, simplicity and elegance in design and the communication strategies behind achieving these states of implicit, visual meaning (ie: communicating much in the little). He also delves, briefly, into the way the human brain processes visual information and why certain elements of planned design are effective. In relation, he discusses wayfinding, a concept dealing with how people maneuver through information on a page via visual pathways. Again, a concept as intuitive to an artist as the spring breeding of a hare, but White presents the material in a way that can help designers or artistic directors bridge the gap between the strategic marketing plan and the platform. It will also help you objectively and diplomatically deliver the unfortunate but necessary negation of the ugly, confusing, counterproductive but well-meaning ideas that plague the "idea factories" of many organizations.

Breaking with my normal bias and preferences in the written word, I really enjoyed this little book in spite of the fact that the storyline is incredibly bizarre, fragmented and difficult to resolve in many places. This book is not for everyone.

Lilith is built upon a very old myth about the first wife of Adam-an angelic being-who was said to have been very rebellious and eventually was replaced by the more subservient human Eve (Lewis also references this myth in "That Hideous Strength"). I am not altogether certain where or how the story originated except that the Hebrew word which is translated "night specter" is lilyt, which must have somehow given rise to the story about the female demon who seeks to over power men. At points in the MacDonald narrative Adam reverts to King James old English in addressing Lilith, a touch I found a little disturbing. While the character of Lilith embodies the flesh in all of us-not just women-the use of the KJV linguistic style between Adam and Lilith seemed to adhere to the perceived rightness and superiority of the male-oriented theology of the middle ages (when the original myth was likely to have gained momentum as a means of shaming women into more subservient roles).

MacDonald uses this ancient myth to create a fantastic tale about the battle between spirit and flesh but in the telling he divulges vast philosophical/theological thoughts that take considerable energy to wade through. In the absence of realism, the philosophical core makes up for other narrative flaws. But, it's a very difficult story to read and absorb quickly. I made it about  of the way through several months ago but was only able to pick it up again to finish recently.

The world MacDonald creates in this book is incredibly opaque and over-painted with layer after layer of meaning. One could drill down into each sentence in some places and find a wealth of unending content to explore. It's almost a stream of consciousness style that leaves the reader feeling like they've just fallen, somehow, between the written words and their meaning. Often times I felt like I was barely touching on that deep significance before being carried away on a completely different current. He changes gears very quickly and uses an abundance of metaphorical images that get very mixed together like literary soup. I don't doubt that MacDonald had an incredible mind, but his manner of presenting the material is difficult to follow at best.

It is easy to see MacDonald's influence in Lewis' writings, although I would say that Lewis wields words (and ideas) a little more kindly.

I read the third book in spite of how much I disliked the second one. I figured if the third one was ok I would take the average of the three and move forward. Mammoth Hunters was a little more interesting than Valley of Horses simply because there are more characters to focus on. But overall I can't say I really enjoyed this book either. While I like the idea of anything out of the ordinary, I am also a realist. The more realistic elements a story has-in spite of its oddities-the more memorable and enjoyable, in my humble opinion. I think it takes great ability to craft believable stories from out-of-the-ordinary ideas. With that said...

This series definitely shows that Auel has a great mind for researching and remembering facts and information, she is obviously quite a scholar. The idea of writing a novel series about this particular period in time is a great idea and some of the minor details of the world she has created are very clever, however, her ability to craft a believable, stimulating story with deep, believable and multifaceted characters, around the information she presents is highly questionable. Honestly, I cannot believe these books were bestsellers.

My main gripes:

First, the whole relational struggle between Jondalar and Ayla is just plain stupid. They are living with the Mamutoi who are supposedly very open and frank, often times asking terribly personal questions to satisfy curiosities, and yet NO ONE in this unbelievably open society was willing to say anything about a misunderstanding that was so blatant??? Totally inconsistent and annoying. The way Auel resolves relational conflict of any kind is extremely evasive. The relational struggles of the Mamutoi before the summer meeting and then during are always resolved by Ayla displaying some sort of superiority to the others and they are simply marveled into quiet idolatry. Voila! Conflict resolved. Not exactly what I would call realistic. And the lion shows up at just the right time. How convenient. Not only that, but the way she eventually resolves the ultimate conflict between Ayla and Jondalar is so anticlimactic that you wonder why she spent 600 pages building up to it. While it's true that individuals outside of a collective are often times more creative and innovative in some ways out of necessity, and quick to break cultural molds that may inspire awe in those more ingrained in a strict social structure, Auel takes this concept to an unbelievable extreme.

Second, the animal behavior is just ridiculous and probably the most fictitious part of the story. Wolves and dogs are as different behaviorally as dogs and cats are. While it *may* be true that dogs evolved from domesticated wolves, Auel takes thousands of years of evolutionary leaps in one fell swoop and suddenly our "Wolf" is wriggling and waging his tail, drooling no doubt, and playing fetch with the children. Ayla must have special powers indeed! What an amazing woman! Granted, not everyone has had the opportunity to raise a wolf pup to adulthood, but I can tell you from experience that Auel's Wolf doesn't act like a wolf. Especially in his interactions with Ayla-particularly when scolded-who is the alpha female.

Lastly...

Pedantry. Ugh. The thing that made this book most unbearable is the fact that Auel underestimates her readers in the extreme. Instead of making a point A and then moving, at a later time in the story, to a logical point B and letting the reader fill in the blanks, she presents all of the background information with the new point, again and again and again to make sure you get it. Every time she introduces a new part of the logical progression she gives you A, B, and then C. Next time, it's A, B, C and then D. No jumping just to D. No, we must first endure paragraph after paragraph (and some times page after page) of the same material, with almost identical phrasings to the previous diatribe, before she gets to the next point. For example (only one of many), we are all acutely aware of the issues with clan women hunting and how Ayla felt about that. It was THE issue in the first book. It was discussed thoroughly in the second book. Why must we hear it again and again and again every time a new hunting situation comes up???? Surely a person of average intelligence can connect the dots! This quality of her storytelling gets really, really, really old after a very short time.

There wasn't much notable difference in the final book(s) in characterizations, writing style. plot etc. from the first two, which can be a good thing. There is nothing so disappointing as a dramatic shift in these qualities from one book to another in a series. I suppose some critics have been disappointed with the ending and I was slightly disappointed myself but not necessarily for some of other reasons cited. Williams never delved deeply into the concept of Being or good philosophical discussion of his trailings of good and evil which left everything sort of hanging at the end (which from his own discussion of the series, seems to have been somewhat intentional). Nothing, in the grand scheme of things, seems to have been truly discovered or accomplished. It all just oozes back to a slightly altered normalcy and the furious questions raised about good, evil, existence etc. just sort of slip back into the gloaming like nothing ever happened.

I also found it was too predictable in the big picture elements and somewhat anticlimactic. When I was about a third of the way through Stone of Farewell the friend who recommended the series asked me what I thought of it and I told him how I thought it would end-what the plot of the Storm King was, how he was going to pull it off, the origins of several of the characters and their eventual destinies etc. He just looked at me like I was nuts so I thought I was wrong. Well, I was right. In almost every detail. I rarely am. Less big-picture predictability would have been better, but overall it was a great series with some very creative and unique qualities.

This CD is just plain fun. I love it. I usually steer away from live recordings because a lot of music is not as good live, and it's true that this isn't like a studio recording, BUT... that characteristic fits perfectly with the personality that oozes through this recording. Crowder & Band are completely unbridled in leading worship and a powerful sense of creative freedom emanates from this CD like a flood of light. It will lift your spirit, no doubt.

Added bonus: track 3, while Dave is talking...I *SWEAR* that's Howard Dean! ;-)

Any books that are sanctioned by Cosmo and Playboy should be a red flag for me, but my 76 year old grandmother raved so much about this series that I thought I should give it a shot. She even gave me the last two books as a bonus, so what the heck.

I am beginning to wonder about granny.

It's difficult to say what genre this series falls into. With the amount of painstaking research Auel put into the story, one would expect more of a historical fiction flavor. Perhaps the first book had more of that, but it's clear that once Auel snagged a readership she jumped ship with a schizophrenic flair and landed smack dab in the middle of a grossly explicit and superficial romanticism that I find unnecessary and distasteful. One should not have to provide page after page of explicit sexual descriptors with phrases such as "throbbing manhood" to give a masculine character dimension... As if a man's reproductive organ and the number of eager devotees it finds is the sum total of his worth. The highly revered and well traveled member (and Jondalar's inability to control it) sorely detracts from what could have been a good character in Jondalar. Not only that, but it relegates sexual intimacy (and I use the word intimacy lightly) to the class of lower functions of "relieving" oneself, no matter how nice he is about it. An odious association at best.

The first book had some believable characters (some with integrity and the seminal buds of good, philosophical questions) and interesting plot twists although Auel does tend toward the pedantic in her overly descriptive divulgence of vast knowledge. I was a little disappointed by her tendency to tell the reader about the story rather than leading her readers to experience the plights of the characters. The overall plot and characterizations of the first book, in addition to the clever religious nuances, made the flaws easy to overlook in most instances, but the second book-though it raises a number of wonderful philosophical and anthropological issues that could have added some real depth to the story and characters-is not as palatable. I have no idea whether I will finish this series.

In summary: If you are looking for a great historical fiction series with exciting, intellectually seductive material, try something by Dorothy Dunnett instead. Dunnett tends toward the sexual in many ways (Esp. in the House of Niccolo series), but the differnce in how she presents the material (mostly by seductive implication) places her characters head and shoulders above Auel.

First of all, the whole idea of the "good parts" version of a classic text is hilarious. I wish there was a good parts version of some of the real classics...Goldman's parenthetical statements and commentaries about the original text are what make this book worth reading. His creative comments about the academic interpretations (and his subsequent translations into real people ideas/language) are down right hilarious. Anyone who has ever been up for thesis review or worked in an academic environment can appreciate this to some extent.

I especially loved his little comments here and there about the sexes and cultural mores, like his statement about hairdressers and how they have existed from the beginning of time. He says that Adam was the first hairdresser but that the translators of the King James version of the bible did their best to muddle that fact. Too funny!

His clever wit and the way he so adroitly bleeds the traditional fairytale of excessive romanticism is great. The movie does not do this book justice. Who would have thought of a princess who never bathes and has goobers behind her ears??? And Buttercup's conversations with people (especially her first conversations with Westly and then the first encounter with Humperdinck) are curt, practical, and free of that overly emotional, utterly feminine heroine stereo-type (for fairytale princesses, anyway). There is a flavor of underlying bitterness in this story and I don't think it's a great fiction to say that Goldman himself has had less than a fairytale love life. His dedication to the dire (not so happily ever after) reality of romantic love in the context of "good parts" is the ultimate satirical element of the story.

I went into this book with high expectations. The friend who gave it to me said it was just amazing and he thought I would just love it because of my marketing background. Well...it didn't live up to my expectations and I am beginning to wonder if my friends know me at all!

First of all I think Gibson's writing style is definitely unique in the literary world, but it certainly isn't new in the blogging arena. His first person present perspective is an interesting approach and it seems to justify the almost stream of consciousness writing style. It certainly lends nicely to the overarching theme of the tech generation (yes, cliché, but I can't think of a better phrase), but...the halting stream of thought and the often times esoteric references make the reader pause long enough to dwell on the flaws in the story. Just because the unedited, fragmentary blog-language is a popular way of communicating does it make it "good writing"?

I am a quick reader, but this book took me much longer to read than a book of equal size because I found it so difficult to get over these linguistic humps. I had to really stop and try to decipher his meanings more than once. Some of them never resolved. Some of his sentences are simple fragments with no bearing. It's as if they were just dropped out of space and given no real place to go. On one hand that can be creative, on the other, a serious hindrance to a good story. It's very exclusive feeling...is that what he was attempting to get across? It's entirely possible that Gibson has created, or utilized, a new expression of art with his writing style that I am completely barbarian minded to...I am not sure what to make of that thought.

Also, I would like the plot to have been a little more exciting and believable. The book seemed to have so many parallel themes running simultaneously that it's difficult to say what it was truly about or if there was even a main point. If you want to think of it as a masterpiece of postmodern thought, then you are free to make that assertion. I think it more random than anything. For example, at the beginning we are given the seminal plot structure surrounding this pattern recognition gifting and the fragments of footage on the net.(Regarding the pattern recognition: in reality, fundamentally unrelated to the trademark phobia, but Gibson doesn't make this distinction and possibly doesn't believe that there is one and just lumps everything he personally deems unexplainable into the suggestion of "paranormal"). This was the beginning of what could have been something really exciting and interesting steeped in mystery, but it seemed, in the end, to become very watered down with tons of other seeminly unrelated baggage, steeped in cliché (Russian mafia??????) and anticlimactic. The many, many references to pop culture and name brands was also a difficulty for those of us who are not quite so "conscious." I think it could have been weaved into the plot line just a little more delicately.

In summary: I found myself with the urge to consume large quantities of Portobello mushrooms while drinking Starbucks coffee, and if I ever thought about wearing Tommy Hilfiger clothing I am certain now that it is completely derivative and "un-cool." And where can I get a Rickson's???? Heeeeeyyyyy now, could this just be a marketing scheme????