Triumph Reviews

I see that this book is rated hard to find and that is probably just as well as it is no great find. Don't bother with this book unless you have everything else on Triumph and you a strange compulsion to collect for collecting's sake. Don't buy as a gift for a Triumph nut as it really is more of an introduction to the marque. Pictures are limited with many in black and white. Not coffee table quality.

Read in isolation, Scott's journals support the much admired image of the steel jawed Scott of the Antarctic portrayed in the 1948 B&W movie of the same name (starring John Mills & Kenneth Moore). It's "Boy's Own Annual" stuff that gets a bit long winded at times but it is fascinating when you consider the author himself really didn't know how it was going to end until the last chapter.
It is much more interesting however, when read in light of the other accounts that tell us there is much more to Scott's character and this story than you'll find in this journal.
This wasn't Scott's first journey to the Antartic, events on an earlier expedition shaped his views and gave an indication of what was to come when he returned to the South.
I read it after reading Huntford's biography of Shackleton and Shackleton's own book "South". To be frank I really grew to despise Scott for repeating the same mistakes he'd made on an earlier expedition. It's really only in his last few notes when he realised it was the end that Scott gave any indication that he might have "got" what it was all about.
There is also speculation (Huntford) that his journals were edited by his wife and friends to ensure Scott was portrayed in the right light - it wasn't appropriate they acknowledge scurvy or any suggestion of incompetence.

Many times I read a non-fiction book and view it as a piece of history, something I want to learn about. This story was a book I came away with the thoughts 'thank goodness' I was not involved. It is very difficult for a non-fiction author to convey a lot of emotion or tension in a story, the word choice and story construction tend to take away from the credibility of a good non-fiction book. This author has mastered this problem. He conveys all the true terror the flight crew felt as the plane was taken over, the increasing frustration with the situation as the plane bounces from one airport to another, and then finial the desperation and increasing depression as the plane sits for days with endless non-moving negotiations and TV propaganda stunts. Many people will remember this incident, so by reading the book it is an interesting trip back to the 80's. The only thing I would have liked different would have been a bit more on the terrorists themselves, their motives and more background. This is a solid, exciting book that is worth reading if you are interested in the period or terrorism.

It was a okay book. It didn't have much on restoring a TR-6 But it was still okay. My favorite car picture was the one of the red TR-6. Very beutiful. I especially liked the picture of the engine compartment.It was exquisite on how nicely shined the car was, including all the parts. Most helpful on what colors to paint it.

Smith does a nice job of showing Hoover as both a politician and a dedicated fund raiser for a variety of charities. He explains in detail many of the problems Hoover faced while in office, and that the depression was not "cured" by FDR as many people would have you believe. Obviously, there is an element of bias in Smith's work given that he is the curator for the Gerald Ford museum and a devout Republican. But, he does provide a balance of Hoover's good and bad points; apparrently he wasn't the easiest to get along with which makes sense given his difficulty in dealing with Congress. I wish the book had more detail regarding Hoover's upbringing, although Smith in the introduction noted that was not his intention. I think more background into Hoover as a child and his religious heritage would help put some of his actions and philosophies into better perspective. Overall, I enjoyed reading the book and have gained more respect for this "uncommon man."

If you are not a devoted fan of Ivar Lovaas and his method of treating autism, this book is unlikely to convert you into one.

As well as being melodramatic and poorly written, it is extremely sketchy, giving very few details about what actually went on in therapy sessions. The rather implausible impression it leaves is that the therapists stopped her son Drew from "stimming", gave him a few lessons, and as a result he somehow became completely normal in a matter of months.

I also have to say that Drew's own epilogue, written while he was at university, is distinctly reminiscent of accounts by other university students with high-functioning autism/Asperger's syndrome that I know of.

Is there a reward for counting the number of cigarettes lit throughout this book? :) It is so terribly written that I cringed reading it, but the description of the lovaas treatment made it worth it.

I found this book to be uplifting and encouraging.

The author had a good plot and enough basic knowledge of sailing ships to write a decent book. Unfortunately, he apparently lacked a strong editor to send the book back for a second draft. The vapid dialog needed re-writing and his characters could use a little more depth. In addition, there were several places in the book that read like a paragraph or more was accidently left out. For example, Kilburnie is suddently a captain, but the book doesn't tell us how he found out about his promotion. Finally, Mack's description of how the British Navy operated (for example, how Captains were assigned to ships) is very different from how every other author I've read has descripted it. Overall, there are many better choices to choose from if you want to read about 18th & early 19th Century sailing ships.

A very thinly fleshed out novel, with a bare minimum of the details needed to make it a novel worth reading. Mack's attempt to cover a period of Kilburnie career from before the mast to Post Captain didn't allow room to develope the book properly, making the book read more as a synopsis or outline instead of a stand a lone novel. Mack needs to do much more research about the Royal Navy of that period. His ending was a prime example of the lack of a serious attempt to write a seafaring novel worthy of O'brien and his peers. Capt. Kilburnie has his command sunk and he merrily goes to Scotland with no effort to get to the Admiralty or stand trial for the lost of his ship, which was standing proceedure for the time if all the other top authors of the gernre are to be believed. I suggest that Adm. Mack stick to novels of the 20th century Navy, with which he is more aquainted, also a new publicist couldn't hurt.

I enjoyed this novel even though the format is vastly different from O'Brian, Kent, Lambdin, Pope and the other major writers in this genre. Following the career of Fergus Kilburnie from lowly sailor to Post Captain in one book forces a faster pace and fewer details than is normally encountered. While I prefer the normal format of one ship, one major battle or event per book - which allows for better character development, this was a fun read. When I finished, I immediately ordered the sequel.

Have you ever begun reading a book and gotten so distracted by the technical and English errors? Have you ever waded through a manuscript that was so filled with misspelled words, terrible grammatical constructions and English so poor that a 6th grader can spot the errors? This describes my experience with this book.

A few months ago I went on a buying binge of alternate WW2 books, which, unfortunately, included this incomprehensible piece of trash. The author has no style, no concept of how to provide the reader with any sense of continuity, absolutely no schooling in the German language, and very lame technical errors liberally sprinkled throughout the book. For instance: There is a passage that refers to the yield of the atomic device as "twenty thousand kilotons." This comes out to 20 megatons. By contrast the device that was dropped on Hiroshima was a 15 kiloton device. There are many anachronistic references to agencies (NSA, US Air Force) that didn't exist until after the war.

Then there is the junk German: "frau" is a noun and should be capitalized. "tochers" should be "Töchter," which is the plural of "Tochter," the word for daughter. "Prostituierens" is a nonsense word. In this context the author probably means "Prostituierte." "prostituieren" is a verb, not a noun. "Kornel" is not a German word. The author probably means "Oberst," the German equivalent of colonel. "Kreigsmarnie" is a poor spelling of "Kriegsmarine."

The response by an editor at this publisher who responded to my extensive list of problems replied, "In a topic of Alternative History, we depend on the author for his research. And as we come across corrections that need to be made, we apply then in the next printing." In other words, they don't even do a copy edit of the basic English, which was totally atrocious and bears no relation to the language you and I speak and write.

Not recommended on any level. I wish there were negative stars to rate this juvenile attempt.

"The Triumph of the Third Reich" will appeal to WW II afficionados as well as alternative history fans. Mr. Cooper has done his homework and it shows in the accurate historical details about the participants, tactics, weapons, policies, and economics presented in the story. In fact, it's often hard to know when truth ends and fiction begins. The minor shifts he introduces in the timing of certain key events are quite plausible and could easily have happened, perhaps leading to the alternative scenario he envisions. I found the book to be a very enjoyable read.

Readers of alternate history will find Edward Cooper's Triumph of the Third Reich an interesting and rewarding experience. It is well researched and well written.

Those of us who have wondered what would have happened during World War II if the Nazi had been the first to develop vastly superior weapons in quantity, will find Cooper's narrative frightening and compelling. Yet, in the end, it is also a triumph of sanity and humanism over the madness of war. The German people finally reject authoritarian politics, racism, and hatred. They prove themselves to be both civilized and humane. This book is very sympathetic toward the German people and their struggles to atone for their mistake of embracing Hitler and fascism. As such, it will probably not appeal to modern day Neo-Nazis.

Cooper's coordination of complex personalities and events in Germany, France, Italy, England, America, Japan, and The Soviet Union is quite remarkable. The dangers of unrestrained nationalism are demonstrated as patriotic heroes from different countries struggle and often succeed in destroying each other.

And yet the real struggle for supremacy is not on the battlefields but in the scientific laboratories where the Germans win. But ironically, there is an even more basic contest going on at the same time, which the Nazis lose. This is the struggle of the human spirit for freedom. Freedom loving people in Germany and also in other countries reject authoritarian government.

One can only hope that Cooper's optimism is somewhat based upon reality rather than a naive assessment of human nature. Eric Hoffer and others claim that the vast majority of people crave authoritarian certainty and strong leaders who will tell them what is true and false and who to love and who to hate. They claim that most people don't like the responsibility that comes with doing their own thinking and making their own decisions. They are only too willing to turn their freedom and decision making over to some authority figure. We can only hope that Cooper's optimistic view of human nature is more accurate than those who offer little hope for the future.

I have recommended Triumph of The Third Reich to my friends.

Better than his first book, Jewett's sequel is still very uneven. Clearly he is more comfortable with the straight Biblical scholarship than the films, as the strength of the intro indicates.

The film chapters are very uneven, with Jewett often unable to distinguish when a film RELATES to a particular Biblical issue tangentially and when a film PORTRAYS a Biblical issue directly. Stated differently, he seems to make no distinction between films which are consistent with, but not necessarily about, Biblical teaching, and those which seem to be directly about Paul's passages. As a result he seems to stretch to make a movie fit a passage, at times using as evidence the fact that there is some consistency in values. These parallels would, admittedly, be of interest without any claim that the films intendeded a parallel.

At times Jewett seems very liberal in his theology or application. For example he says that Paul would approve of Glen Holland, the teacher in Mr. Holland's Opus, because Holland does not have a sexual affair with a student he finds attractive. While it is certainly good that Holland did not commit adultery, "approve" seems a strong word to attach to a man who knowingly and willingly flirts with a student and cultivates an emotional intimacy that threatens his marriage. I agree with his assessment of PRINCE OF TIDES, that it demonstrates the hurting power of shameful secrets, but he lets Streisand off too easily for her argument that Tom Wingo becomes a better husband and father because his adulterous affair with his sister's therapist somehow "gives him something to give back to the women in his life." He also seems to miss the significance of Tom making psychoanalysis into a "religion" by saying Lowenstein's name "as a prayer" every time he goes home.

Occasionally the parallels are interesting (such as the chapter on BABE). I thought the chapter on GROUNDHOG DAY was his best combination of understanding the film and applying Biblical principles to it. Other chapters seemed to lack application and draw parallels only in subject matter, i.e. both the film and Paul dealt with the issue of "x."

The author's familiarity with Paul's letters and evangelical fervor are undeniable, but his knowledge of film is quite another matter. With the exceptions of "Babette's Feast" and "The Edge of the City" he elects to treat Hollywood hits of the nineties. Since only "Babette's Feast" and "Forrest Gump" pass the author's "Pauline test," it's unclear what his basis for selecting the other 8 films was. Moreover, his attachment to his thesis, one suspects, blinds him to the shallowness of "Forrest Gump," unless he really believes that this new-age, feel-good, self-esteem builder targeted at the troubled baby-boomer generation represents a '"triumph of love." Given the author's preoccupation with the triumph of grace over shame, wouldn't it have made more sense to choose "classic" but not necessarily "popular" films that address this subject--for example, Bergman's "Shame" or Lynch's "The Elephant Man"? Or if he elected to stay within the popular field, why not take a highly-respected "auteur" such as Alfred Hitchock, whose identity is stamped on virtually each of his "texts" by his focusing on the themes of guilt and shame? The author's assumption that popular films are the reflection of deep spiritual currents connecting with Biblical texts is narrow if not naive. Apart from the selection of films, the treatment is limited primarily to the narratives, or scripts, of the films and gives little consideration to the art and technique of the film or the actual experience of the spectator. Although he has consulted some popular reviews, there is virtually no evidence of film theory, aesthetics and history, of the "language" of cinema and the ways in which viewers, vicariously and voyeuristically, make meaning out of that language. Finally, since the author argues that film brings scriptural truths into concrete, human experience, it's surprising that his discussions of the theological meanings of films fails to draw upon "existential" theological thinkers such as Kierkegaard, Tillich, and Buber. As for the author's style, it includes numerous first person references ("I think," "I believe") and indefinite pronouns ("this"), suggesting that the discussions would be a good basis for conversations on the meaning of Paul's letters in the daily lives of present-day Christians. For an audience as specialized as the latter, perhaps the leader of a Bible study group, the book may have greater value than it does for this reader.

This women mentions the fact that she "knew" Jim Morrison at every opportunity. It's clear that she adores name-dropping, something that makes her look like more of a groupie than just one more of Morrison's women. So he "married" her in a Celtic ceremony (legal? no.). Whoopdeedo. It was 30 years ago. Morrison had loooooootttssss of ladyfriends, not to even mention Pamela Courson, whom he appeared to be the most devoted to. She needn't feel so special.

Patricia Kennealy"-Morrison?" If anyone can use hyphenated names so freely, then my new name is Eviepants Kennedy! Guess what? I once saw JFK Jr. in an airport! We were married a year later in an unrecognized, unpublicized ceremony involving bat blood and Tootsie Pops.

*sigh* Sorry, she annoys me.

I was bored with this book. Could not read the whole thing because I felt like I was reading "strange Days" all over agian. Her whole focus is Jim Morrison. Boring book.

I was truly disappointed in this book. The story takes place in Kennealy's Keltia universe, but she has replaced plot and character development with a (thinly) veiled fictionalization of her life with the late Jim Morrison. Her male protagonist is a serene bard (musician), originally part of a popular music group, who splits with his band, is killed with a drug called "hazen" (heroin?), and is rescued by his one true love. His name appears a variation of the Celtic rendering for "Jim Morrison", and his nickname "Fireheart" is (by merest coincidence) also the name by which Keneally refers to Morrison in her earlier non-fiction account of their life together. Where she is not reworking her life, she spends describing Wiccan rites and philosophies. I truly enjoyed the previous two trilogies dealing with Keltia. In fact, that is the only reason why I didn't abandon this book midway through. While the framework remains, the fleshing out is gone. Her characters are shallow, and the plot goes to its inevitable conclusion. I hope she either returns full-bore to her earlier style, or abandons all pretense of keeping to the Keltia theme. Blackmantle just doesn't work.