The Sacred Romance, by Brent Curtis and John Eldredge
I read this book years ago, and loved it, so I thought I would read it again. Unfortunately, I was disappointed the second time around. I think perhaps it is the type of book that requires the reader to be in a certain path of life in order to be able to identify with it.
The book explains that many people have a certain longing to be a part of a bigger story, a grand adventure. Its why kids like to play Cowboys-and-Indians, or Cops-and-Robbers, or any type of imaginative game that looks like it might be an action movie some day. In the book, the authors discuss how we are meant for that grand adventure and that it is actually a romance-adventure, in that God is trying so hard to romance our hearts, but we don't see it because we are not living in that bigger picture. They talk about Arrows, which are like messages we receive from our life experiences that convince us that there is no bigger adventure story, that this is all it is, and you are on your own. To cover our disappointment, we turn to something the authors call "Less Wild Lovers" which is basically anything that distracts you from a deep relationship with God, including church activities (yes, they can distract you if they keep you busy enough that you don't focus on God anymore). Eventually, we have buried the longing for adventure under excuses, like "I'm too busy" or "That's a childish thought."
I didn't feel that the authors actually explained how to get back into the adventure story we all dream of, and I didn't really feel that I have been dreaming of an adventure story. My life is about as exciting as I really need it to be right now, and I'm happy with the smaller picture. I don't know if this means that I have an Arrow I'm not seeing convincing me that I don't need a bigger story, or if this just means the book does not apply to me. Another interesting thing, is that I finished the book in a few days the first time I read it, and was captivated by every word, however, this time around, it took me months, and I felt that the writing was so dry and boring.
Overall, since I had two completely opposite experiences, I would suggest that anyone interested in the topic of the book should read at least one chapter, and make an informed decision based on what I have said, and your gut feeling about whether the first chapter was a waste of time, or a must-read.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
The Case for Easter
The Case for Easter, by Lee Strobel
This author is well known for his books, The Case for Christ, The Case for Faith, and The Case for a Creator. Theoretically, these books would fall in the category of evangelism or apologetics. This legal journalist was astounded when his wife became a Christian. He decided to put his investigative skills to work to prove how silly she was being. While the other three investigative books were full length, this, The Case for Easter, is only a few chapters long.
In the first subject to be examined, Strobel interviews a doctor who describes each moment leading up to Jesus' death, as it is recorded in the known historical documents. From this medical perspective, the reader can understand: why Jesus was sweating blood, why the flogging would have been worse than normal, why he (a carpenter in the prime of his youth) was unable to carry the horizontal beam of the cross (the patibulum), why he said he was thirsty on the cross, why he knew exactly when his moment of death would come ("Into your hands I commit my spirit"), and why when the Roman soldier pierced his side, blood and water flowed out. For any medical geeks out there reading this, the reasons are, in order: hematidrosis, hematidrosis, hypovolemic shock, hypovolemic shock, respiratory acidosis, and pericardial/pleural effusions. Cause of death, cardiac arrest.
From this interview, Strobel was left with no doubt that Jesus died on the cross. He goes on to another interview, where he learns that there is no doubt that Jesus was placed in a tomb, and that three days later (days by Jewish reckoning) the same tomb he was laid in was discovered to be empty, despite several precautions against possible resurrections and/or tomb raiding. Most convincing in my mind is that when the Jewish leaders and Jesus' disciples were arguing, the question was not whether or not the tomb was empty, but where on earth did the body go? Even the Jewish leaders admitted that the tomb was empty.
Ok so where did the body go? In the final interview, Strobel mostly debates the historical reliability of the New Testament books, because they are full of eyewitness reports of seeing Jesus alive (more than 500 people). He determines that hallucinations and groupthink are not possible explanations, and if everyone collectively lied, then when they began to be persecuted for their beliefs they would have given up on their lie, confessed, and lived out their days in peace. They did not. Instead, they became martyrs.
All in all, the book was interesting, but did not inspire me to buy any of his other books. It seems to me that The Case for Easter is The Case for Christ Lite. Once I got a taste, I have whet my appetite, and in my mind, I need no further proof to back up my faith, because I feel that more proof would undermine my definition of FAITH. I would strongly encourage anyone else who needs proof to pick up a copy of The Case for Easter (for about 3 bucks) or if you want a lot of proof, then The Case for Christ.
One last comment: I realize the book analyzes events in chronological order, but starting off with blood and gore is a turn off to some people. Medically I was fascinated. But I'm not the rest of the world. If you do read this book and the blood starts to get to you, my suggestion is just to skip to the next chapter and take it on FAITH that Jesus actually died.
This author is well known for his books, The Case for Christ, The Case for Faith, and The Case for a Creator. Theoretically, these books would fall in the category of evangelism or apologetics. This legal journalist was astounded when his wife became a Christian. He decided to put his investigative skills to work to prove how silly she was being. While the other three investigative books were full length, this, The Case for Easter, is only a few chapters long.
In the first subject to be examined, Strobel interviews a doctor who describes each moment leading up to Jesus' death, as it is recorded in the known historical documents. From this medical perspective, the reader can understand: why Jesus was sweating blood, why the flogging would have been worse than normal, why he (a carpenter in the prime of his youth) was unable to carry the horizontal beam of the cross (the patibulum), why he said he was thirsty on the cross, why he knew exactly when his moment of death would come ("Into your hands I commit my spirit"), and why when the Roman soldier pierced his side, blood and water flowed out. For any medical geeks out there reading this, the reasons are, in order: hematidrosis, hematidrosis, hypovolemic shock, hypovolemic shock, respiratory acidosis, and pericardial/pleural effusions. Cause of death, cardiac arrest.
From this interview, Strobel was left with no doubt that Jesus died on the cross. He goes on to another interview, where he learns that there is no doubt that Jesus was placed in a tomb, and that three days later (days by Jewish reckoning) the same tomb he was laid in was discovered to be empty, despite several precautions against possible resurrections and/or tomb raiding. Most convincing in my mind is that when the Jewish leaders and Jesus' disciples were arguing, the question was not whether or not the tomb was empty, but where on earth did the body go? Even the Jewish leaders admitted that the tomb was empty.
Ok so where did the body go? In the final interview, Strobel mostly debates the historical reliability of the New Testament books, because they are full of eyewitness reports of seeing Jesus alive (more than 500 people). He determines that hallucinations and groupthink are not possible explanations, and if everyone collectively lied, then when they began to be persecuted for their beliefs they would have given up on their lie, confessed, and lived out their days in peace. They did not. Instead, they became martyrs.
All in all, the book was interesting, but did not inspire me to buy any of his other books. It seems to me that The Case for Easter is The Case for Christ Lite. Once I got a taste, I have whet my appetite, and in my mind, I need no further proof to back up my faith, because I feel that more proof would undermine my definition of FAITH. I would strongly encourage anyone else who needs proof to pick up a copy of The Case for Easter (for about 3 bucks) or if you want a lot of proof, then The Case for Christ.
One last comment: I realize the book analyzes events in chronological order, but starting off with blood and gore is a turn off to some people. Medically I was fascinated. But I'm not the rest of the world. If you do read this book and the blood starts to get to you, my suggestion is just to skip to the next chapter and take it on FAITH that Jesus actually died.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Song of Solomon
Song of Solomon, by (presumably) Solomon
A conversation this morning caused me to open my Bible and read Song of Solomon (or Song of Songs, as it is sometimes called). I have read this one before, but it is a classic, and always an interesting read. While I have always been fascinated by love stories, I do tend to lean toward the tragic ones that involve pain and suffering. Song of Solomon has none of that, and it is refreshing not to be depressed while reading.
The book is a collection of love notes from the Beloved (the girl) to the Lover (the guy) and vice versa. Interjecting occasionally are the Friends, indicating to me that at least at some points in their relationship, the Beloved and the Lover are guilty of some unashamed PDA. There is good balance though, occasionally they also slip down to their vineyard for some alone time, where they sing the praises of each other's physical characteristics.
While these things are exciting and I someday hope to experience this kind of love with my husband, I think it would take me about 3 weeks to get tired of it. I prefer a deeper, more calm kind of love. I would have liked it very much if Song of Solomon had a sequel. The whole portrayal of being constantly gaga over your lover seems unrealistic after the honeymoon stage wears off. The book in the Bible directly after Song of Solomon should be Song of Solomon, Part 2: The 10-Years-Down-The-Road Love Story. It should depict the Lover and the Beloved when her boobs are sagging and the kids are fighting and they still love each other but their minds have matured so now they are enchanted by a glint in the eye, a tender look, a caring spirit. They can no longer sing the praises of their bodies (her breasts go from "like fawns of gazelles" to "sea cucumbers") but they can sing the praises of the things they have accomplished together and how beautiful their kids are and how good a father or mother they are and how nice it is to sit and chat over a cup of coffee. That's the kind of love I ultimately want.
Still... I'm young. It would be really cool to chase someone through a vineyard and have somebody tell me my eyes are "like doves." At least for the first three weeks after I'm married. After that, VOMIT.
A conversation this morning caused me to open my Bible and read Song of Solomon (or Song of Songs, as it is sometimes called). I have read this one before, but it is a classic, and always an interesting read. While I have always been fascinated by love stories, I do tend to lean toward the tragic ones that involve pain and suffering. Song of Solomon has none of that, and it is refreshing not to be depressed while reading.
The book is a collection of love notes from the Beloved (the girl) to the Lover (the guy) and vice versa. Interjecting occasionally are the Friends, indicating to me that at least at some points in their relationship, the Beloved and the Lover are guilty of some unashamed PDA. There is good balance though, occasionally they also slip down to their vineyard for some alone time, where they sing the praises of each other's physical characteristics.
While these things are exciting and I someday hope to experience this kind of love with my husband, I think it would take me about 3 weeks to get tired of it. I prefer a deeper, more calm kind of love. I would have liked it very much if Song of Solomon had a sequel. The whole portrayal of being constantly gaga over your lover seems unrealistic after the honeymoon stage wears off. The book in the Bible directly after Song of Solomon should be Song of Solomon, Part 2: The 10-Years-Down-The-Road Love Story. It should depict the Lover and the Beloved when her boobs are sagging and the kids are fighting and they still love each other but their minds have matured so now they are enchanted by a glint in the eye, a tender look, a caring spirit. They can no longer sing the praises of their bodies (her breasts go from "like fawns of gazelles" to "sea cucumbers") but they can sing the praises of the things they have accomplished together and how beautiful their kids are and how good a father or mother they are and how nice it is to sit and chat over a cup of coffee. That's the kind of love I ultimately want.
Still... I'm young. It would be really cool to chase someone through a vineyard and have somebody tell me my eyes are "like doves." At least for the first three weeks after I'm married. After that, VOMIT.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
The Five Love Languages
The Five Love Languages, by Gary Chapman
I found this book to be very interesting. Although the book was originally intended for married couples, the concepts in the book can be applied to anyone in a relationship with anyone else. Gary Chapman has written other books with the same concept, including The Five Love Languages of Children, and The Five Love Languages of Teenagers. As you can see, it is not limited to a married relationship. It seems pretty useful to me.
The premise of the book is that each person expresses love in different ways, metaphorically called languages. Just like with a real language, you grow up speaking a native language because your parents and friends speak it. If you speak English and your friend speaks Spanish, saying I love you is meaningless to your friend. You have to learn to say it in Spanish. In the same way, when you enter a relationship with someone with a different love language, you have to learn to speak their language if you are going to communicate "I love you" effectively. According to the author, there are only 5 real ways to say "I love you." However, just like a real language, there are hundreds of different dialects (which accounts for the magazine articles with titles like "39 ways to turn her on" and "20 ways to keep your man at home").
Ok, so what are the 5 love languages? The first one is "Words of Affirmation." This means verbally saying, "Thank you for taking the trash out, that means a lot to me." "I really love when we find time to cook together." "Oh you did the dishes? Thanks, I was dreading that." It also works in the negative. If your friend's love language is Words of Affirmation, and you constantly ask that person when they are going to get around to coming over to play a game of poker with you, you are just stressing them out. Stop bugging them, and start telling them they are good at something else. They just might come over to play poker with you.
The next love language is "Quality Time." This is simple. Watching TV together is not quality time, because the TV is getting your attention. Washing the car together and hitting each other with dirty sponges is quality time. You are not focused on the car, but on how silly the other person looks with suds in their hair. You are enjoying the person's company. The person who came over to play poker with you might have been a Words of Affirmation Person but the one constantly asking to play poker is a Quality Time Person.
Moving on... "Receiving Gifts." The best example of this is in a child who just picked your prized tulip out of the garden and runs up to you saying "Mommy, look, I brought you a flower!" Instead of getting angry, recognize that the child's love language is receiving gifts, and wants to say I Love You by giving a gift of his own. In a little bunny trail, this chapter contains the coolest sentence in the world: "Fred was... a young black man of 28 years. Fred had lost a hand in a fishing-by-dynamite accident." Just think about that for a minute.
Number Four is "Acts of Service." Imagine yourself going over to a friend's house to hang out and you see a pile of dishes in the sink. If your friend's love language is acts of service, it would mean a lot to them if you did their dishes, not because they hate dishes but because you are doing an act of service. A husband helping his wife around the house is another example of an act of service. Incidentally, you should do these things out of love, not because you are a doormat. If a doormat does the act of service, eventually the relationship will dissolve.
Number Five is the one everyone thinks is them. "Physical Touch." Everyone thinks, "I can't live without sex/kissing/holding hands/hugging my friends/whatever." In actuality, you probably can. But the person whose love language is through physical touch will begin to feel unloved if they are deprived of physical contact. One of the best examples of this didn't come from the book but from a friend of mine, who always went out of her way to come into physical contact with her boyfriend. Sitting down at a restaurant booth, her thigh or foot would always be in contact with his, or walking across a room, passing him, her path would veer just enough for them to brush shoulders. It was not sexual, it was simply physical. She loved him and wanted physical contact.
I found all this information incredibly fascinating, because I found myself analyzing my actions and the actions of my friends. I learned to read the actions and figured out that if you can understand what someone else's love language is, then even if it is not your love language, you can understand anyway that they are trying to say "I love you." Basically, the more I understand the concepts in this book, the easier it is for me to take someone's affirmative words and translate that into "Oh, he or she is actually trying to say they love me. Cool."
I found this book to be very interesting. Although the book was originally intended for married couples, the concepts in the book can be applied to anyone in a relationship with anyone else. Gary Chapman has written other books with the same concept, including The Five Love Languages of Children, and The Five Love Languages of Teenagers. As you can see, it is not limited to a married relationship. It seems pretty useful to me.
The premise of the book is that each person expresses love in different ways, metaphorically called languages. Just like with a real language, you grow up speaking a native language because your parents and friends speak it. If you speak English and your friend speaks Spanish, saying I love you is meaningless to your friend. You have to learn to say it in Spanish. In the same way, when you enter a relationship with someone with a different love language, you have to learn to speak their language if you are going to communicate "I love you" effectively. According to the author, there are only 5 real ways to say "I love you." However, just like a real language, there are hundreds of different dialects (which accounts for the magazine articles with titles like "39 ways to turn her on" and "20 ways to keep your man at home").
Ok, so what are the 5 love languages? The first one is "Words of Affirmation." This means verbally saying, "Thank you for taking the trash out, that means a lot to me." "I really love when we find time to cook together." "Oh you did the dishes? Thanks, I was dreading that." It also works in the negative. If your friend's love language is Words of Affirmation, and you constantly ask that person when they are going to get around to coming over to play a game of poker with you, you are just stressing them out. Stop bugging them, and start telling them they are good at something else. They just might come over to play poker with you.
The next love language is "Quality Time." This is simple. Watching TV together is not quality time, because the TV is getting your attention. Washing the car together and hitting each other with dirty sponges is quality time. You are not focused on the car, but on how silly the other person looks with suds in their hair. You are enjoying the person's company. The person who came over to play poker with you might have been a Words of Affirmation Person but the one constantly asking to play poker is a Quality Time Person.
Moving on... "Receiving Gifts." The best example of this is in a child who just picked your prized tulip out of the garden and runs up to you saying "Mommy, look, I brought you a flower!" Instead of getting angry, recognize that the child's love language is receiving gifts, and wants to say I Love You by giving a gift of his own. In a little bunny trail, this chapter contains the coolest sentence in the world: "Fred was... a young black man of 28 years. Fred had lost a hand in a fishing-by-dynamite accident." Just think about that for a minute.
Number Four is "Acts of Service." Imagine yourself going over to a friend's house to hang out and you see a pile of dishes in the sink. If your friend's love language is acts of service, it would mean a lot to them if you did their dishes, not because they hate dishes but because you are doing an act of service. A husband helping his wife around the house is another example of an act of service. Incidentally, you should do these things out of love, not because you are a doormat. If a doormat does the act of service, eventually the relationship will dissolve.
Number Five is the one everyone thinks is them. "Physical Touch." Everyone thinks, "I can't live without sex/kissing/holding hands/hugging my friends/whatever." In actuality, you probably can. But the person whose love language is through physical touch will begin to feel unloved if they are deprived of physical contact. One of the best examples of this didn't come from the book but from a friend of mine, who always went out of her way to come into physical contact with her boyfriend. Sitting down at a restaurant booth, her thigh or foot would always be in contact with his, or walking across a room, passing him, her path would veer just enough for them to brush shoulders. It was not sexual, it was simply physical. She loved him and wanted physical contact.
I found all this information incredibly fascinating, because I found myself analyzing my actions and the actions of my friends. I learned to read the actions and figured out that if you can understand what someone else's love language is, then even if it is not your love language, you can understand anyway that they are trying to say "I love you." Basically, the more I understand the concepts in this book, the easier it is for me to take someone's affirmative words and translate that into "Oh, he or she is actually trying to say they love me. Cool."
Friday, April 18, 2008
Blink of an Eye
Blink of an Eye, by Ted Dekker.
I thought a good fiction novel would be better than starting off with something heavy and theological, which is another genre I have been interested in reading lately.
This book interested me for many reasons. First of all, everyone is reading all of Ted Dekker's books, and this one I picked up for $5. Also, it is an action-adventure type book, that has a male-female pair of (romantic) lead characters. Everyone knows that when you are running for your life and dodging bullets, the first thing on your mind is, do you get to kiss the girl? And third, amazon had the first chapter online, and I had time.
So basically, Seth and Miriam are the main characters. Seth is not a usual male lead because he doesn't fit into his world, doesn't often dress well, and is somewhat geeky. During the scene in the desert where he rips his shirt off, of course, he suddenly is muscular, presumably from the surfing he did when he was younger, despite not having been surfing in over three years because of college (bachelor's in two years, and almost done with a doctorate- did I mention he is incredibly smart?). Miriam is a Saudi princess who grows in strength and willfulness as the story progresses. Eventually, when she leaves the story, she is convinced that too many Arab men are dogs who view women as possessions and baby-makers, and she is fed up, longing for the freedom that can be found in America.
Of course, the story wouldn't be much fun if she were in Saudi Arabia and he were in California. Naturally we have to get them together. She becomes a political refugee running from a threatened coup, and he discovers he has a special power to see the future, or multiple futures. He saves her life several times because of this power, as they are chased across California and through the Mojave desert by six different entities, both foreign and American.
Love. That is the key word. Despite the intense, almost non-stop action, love is a prevailing theme in the book. Because of Seth's brilliant mind, he has been able to establish for himself the idea that God cannot exist, and yet, has read the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, and the Talmud, cover to cover. He concludes that Jesus was the greatest prophet, because the Bible and the Koran declare him to be without sin. In the end, after several events lead him to question his conclusions, he and Miriam determine that love is the most important thing in the world, because how can you kill your neighbor, if you love him like you love yourself (the second greatest commandment made by Jesus, the greatest prophet)?
Another element that was more subtle but which I found interesting was that Seth sometimes seemed to be guilty of hubris (in my eyes anyway). The most obvious is his insight into the future, with infinite, mind-boggling possibilities, and his quick, brilliant mind. Because of his knowledge of the future, or actually all possible futures, he is able to manipulate situations for favorable outcomes, sometimes including using his choice of words to influence other people. He also acts cocky, although in some cases it is only an act. But the most common example of this is Miriam's constant reference to him as her savior. He IS her savior (he rescued her, like 50 times, in the story) but when he reminds her of it, it makes me want to hold my breath and wait for the lightning to strike.
Still, it made me think of my relationship with MY Savior. At one point or another it was as thrilling and exciting as Miriam's is with Seth, although not quite so dangerous. The spontaneity, not knowing what was coming next, was exciting, and the sometimes crazy plans that came my way only added to it. As Miriam traveled, she and Seth would pick each other's brains, trying to think of things in new ways and see new angles, much in the same way that I was always finding new angles with my Savior. Somewhere along the line though, the excitement disappeared. I suppose no one can live on an adrenaline rush forever; eventually the adrenal gland (physical or metaphorical) will decide it hates you and go on strike.
The story of Miriam falling in love with her savior, and her savior with her, was enchanting to me, and thrilling. It has inspired me to patch things up with MY Savior.
And thats all I have to say about that. I hate conclusions. I'd rather just stop talking when I'm done talking.
I thought a good fiction novel would be better than starting off with something heavy and theological, which is another genre I have been interested in reading lately.
This book interested me for many reasons. First of all, everyone is reading all of Ted Dekker's books, and this one I picked up for $5. Also, it is an action-adventure type book, that has a male-female pair of (romantic) lead characters. Everyone knows that when you are running for your life and dodging bullets, the first thing on your mind is, do you get to kiss the girl? And third, amazon had the first chapter online, and I had time.
So basically, Seth and Miriam are the main characters. Seth is not a usual male lead because he doesn't fit into his world, doesn't often dress well, and is somewhat geeky. During the scene in the desert where he rips his shirt off, of course, he suddenly is muscular, presumably from the surfing he did when he was younger, despite not having been surfing in over three years because of college (bachelor's in two years, and almost done with a doctorate- did I mention he is incredibly smart?). Miriam is a Saudi princess who grows in strength and willfulness as the story progresses. Eventually, when she leaves the story, she is convinced that too many Arab men are dogs who view women as possessions and baby-makers, and she is fed up, longing for the freedom that can be found in America.
Of course, the story wouldn't be much fun if she were in Saudi Arabia and he were in California. Naturally we have to get them together. She becomes a political refugee running from a threatened coup, and he discovers he has a special power to see the future, or multiple futures. He saves her life several times because of this power, as they are chased across California and through the Mojave desert by six different entities, both foreign and American.
Love. That is the key word. Despite the intense, almost non-stop action, love is a prevailing theme in the book. Because of Seth's brilliant mind, he has been able to establish for himself the idea that God cannot exist, and yet, has read the Bible, the Koran, the Torah, and the Talmud, cover to cover. He concludes that Jesus was the greatest prophet, because the Bible and the Koran declare him to be without sin. In the end, after several events lead him to question his conclusions, he and Miriam determine that love is the most important thing in the world, because how can you kill your neighbor, if you love him like you love yourself (the second greatest commandment made by Jesus, the greatest prophet)?
Another element that was more subtle but which I found interesting was that Seth sometimes seemed to be guilty of hubris (in my eyes anyway). The most obvious is his insight into the future, with infinite, mind-boggling possibilities, and his quick, brilliant mind. Because of his knowledge of the future, or actually all possible futures, he is able to manipulate situations for favorable outcomes, sometimes including using his choice of words to influence other people. He also acts cocky, although in some cases it is only an act. But the most common example of this is Miriam's constant reference to him as her savior. He IS her savior (he rescued her, like 50 times, in the story) but when he reminds her of it, it makes me want to hold my breath and wait for the lightning to strike.
Still, it made me think of my relationship with MY Savior. At one point or another it was as thrilling and exciting as Miriam's is with Seth, although not quite so dangerous. The spontaneity, not knowing what was coming next, was exciting, and the sometimes crazy plans that came my way only added to it. As Miriam traveled, she and Seth would pick each other's brains, trying to think of things in new ways and see new angles, much in the same way that I was always finding new angles with my Savior. Somewhere along the line though, the excitement disappeared. I suppose no one can live on an adrenaline rush forever; eventually the adrenal gland (physical or metaphorical) will decide it hates you and go on strike.
The story of Miriam falling in love with her savior, and her savior with her, was enchanting to me, and thrilling. It has inspired me to patch things up with MY Savior.
And thats all I have to say about that. I hate conclusions. I'd rather just stop talking when I'm done talking.
A new blogsite!!
Ok so this is a little experiment. As many of you know, I am now working at a family-owned bookstore near my house. Even before I began working there, I got interested in reading some good books, many of which I am a few chapters short of finishing. I am like that, I start something and then start something else before finishing the first thing. So I thought it would be fun to post a progress report as I complete each book, so other people can get an idea and see if they want to read it themselves (my books are also available for loan- I should start a private library) . And perhaps I will do a few books that I finished years ago, and maybe post a few comments from people who read a book I did not. That being said, if you would like to write a review of a book, I will post other people's writings, if the book they have read and the review they write is rated G. By me. I do the ratings. Ha. I am powerful.
My apologies for the title of the blog. I didn't have any creative genius flowing in me at the moment. I will think of a better title. Feel free to leave a comment if you have a good title.
My apologies for the title of the blog. I didn't have any creative genius flowing in me at the moment. I will think of a better title. Feel free to leave a comment if you have a good title.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)