For You, Mr. Klimas

Shakespearean Histories: Richard III and Henry V (a villian and a hero)

Shakespeare wrote several historical plays during his lifetime, which related to the political and domestic feelings of the time period. The two focused on in class were Richard III and Henry V. Both men were kings of England, however, there is a very clear difference between the heroic Henry and his villanous counterpart Richard.

PART A:

As does most history, the historical time periods of Henry and Richard involve war, loss, and victory. As such the language Shakespeare uses revolves a lot around the idea of powerful speeches, charismatic leadership, and manipulation. Despite their difference in morality and honesty, both Henry and Richard possess an amazing ability to speak and manipulate others to their will. In Richard III, possibly one of the most amazing and disgusting uses of Richard's dispicable persuations is that of Lady Anne. He woos her over the dead body of her father-in-law, who Richard murdered, and Richard has also murdered Anne's husband. However he is so convincing in his speech and diction that he convinces the weak-minded Anne to come with him and forget his past treacheries. "Nay, do not pause; for I did kill King Henry, But 'twas thy beauty that provoked me.Nay, now dispatch; 'twas I that stabb'd young Edward, But 'twas thy heavenly face that set me on" (Richard III, Act I Scene II). Here Richard manipulates Anne's emotions by saying that although he is guilty of the crimes that she accuses him of it was not his fault but her's by fault of her beauty and charm that caused him to do it. He has expertly turned the tables on Anne, and is successfully able to completely change her opinion on his marriage proposal. Henry is also one in possession of great persuasive abilities, and like Richard, uses it to obtain his goals. However the way in which he achieves them is much different. In Henry V, the most famous speech Henry gives is his St. Crispian's Day Speech, prior to the Battle of Agincourt. "This story shall the good man teach his son; And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by, From this day to the ending of the world, But we in it shall be remember'd; We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; For he to-day that sheds his blood with me Shall be my brother" (Henry V Act IV, Scene III). Shakespeare puts this beautiful speech together for Henry to use to motivate his troops to victory, who even outnumbered must now rush headlong into certain death. However, through his speech, Henry is able to manipulate the emotions of his soldiers, just as Richard manipulates the emotions of Anne, his brothers Clarence and Edward, his nephews Edward and York, and so many others. Through this ralling speech Henry is able to create the idea that this day is bigger than anyone there, that until the ending of time people will remember the names of Henry, Westmoreland, Bedford, and all those who fought at Agincourt, and that live or die, they are brothers in arms bound by blood forever. As it can be seen through these two powerful speeches and other in both plays, Shakespeare uses his brilliant use of language to convey a attitude toward the audience about the charcter's personality, morality, and in-depth feelings; allowing the audience to develop a sense and impression of the character.

PART B:

In both historical genre plays Henry V and Richard III, the story primarily focuses on the main character and the events and consequences of that character's actions. In Richard, the audience is able to follow the events of Richard's betrayals and horrors to places like the Tower of London, where the audience experiences Clarence realizing that Richard was behind his betrayal and then his murder, to Richmond's camp where Richmond and his commanders talk of how to defeat the rooting pig Richard based on his actions. Henry allows the audience to journey from Henry's war council where he blantantly rejects the Dauphin's request to stand down and is outraged by the Dauphin' s insulting gift, to the chambers of King Charles VI where they learn of Henry's intent to invade France and take what is his by rightful lineage. The way Shakespeaere incorportates these ways to consequences of the character's actions into his genre adds a very interesting point of view to the story. Another common theme in the genre is the in-depth view the audience is granted of the character's morality, emotions, and feelings. Richard is very easy to read. He is the villian, as he makes very clear in his opening speech. "And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover, To entertain these fair well-spoken days, I am determined to prove a villain And hate the idle pleasures of these days" (Act I Scene I). However, the methods he uses to obtain his ultimate goal of the crown are deceitful, backstabbing, and covert. Everyone knows that Richard is slime, but they all fail to see it until it is too late. Clarence, for example, knows his brother is not the best of people, but does not see how deep his treachery runs until he learns that his brother is the cause behind his death. Richard is an expert at being two-faced; he is able to entertain people he speaks with and cause them to develop a sense of trust, while in reality either his words have two meanings or he proceeds to laugh about the stupidity of those he manipulates after they are out of hearing. A great example of his ability to put up a facade comes in the first speech where he is dictating his plan to betray his brother and then puts on a facade to build Clarence's trust. "Dive, thoughts, down to my soul: here Clarence comes.
[Enter CLARENCE, guarded, and BRAKENBURY]
Brother, good day; what means this armed guard That waits upon your grace?" (Act I Scene I). Henry is very different in that he is the hero of the story. He is a king and does things that would be horrible for any citizen, but makes him a great king. He is kind, cruel, comforting, and forgiving all at the same time, where Richard puts on the good facades while deep down he is true evil. Henry like Richard, possesses an unstoppable drive to achieve what he sets out to take. Exeter describes him to King Charles as a tempest that will not be stopped. Like Richard, Henry also uses his amazing use of language to affect anyone who hears him. He uses it to initimidate his enemies, as he does at Harfleur where he convinces the Governer to surrender or the death of the citizens will be his own fault. He uses his language to inspire his men to victory, as he does in his famous St. Crispian's Day speech. The main difference between Henry and Richard is that Henry comes right out with what he is doing and those around him develop their opinions based on what they see. Richard on the other hand, is covert and subversive, using his persuasive abilities to bend those around him to his will, and his lack of conscience (as discussed as a major theme between the murderers, and Tyrell) to remove all that oppose him.

PART C:

To reflect upon the historical genre, I would say that in my opinion, it is the better of the two analyzed here. The Histories have a story line to them that is not as predictable as those of the comedies. In the comedies, the characters are more superficial, while in the histories it is possible to achieve an in-depth understanding of the character. One can see that Richard is a horrible, vile villian and Henry is a noble, heroic king through examining their monologues and speeches. One is able to acquire a greater respect (not to be confused with respect meant in a good manner in relation to Richard III) to the way in which the character obtains their goals and, in Richard's case, how his cruelty and lack of conscience literally come back to haunt him and inspire his enemies. Out of the two examined, I would say that I enjoyed Richard more, if only for the reason that it is amazing how he is so crafty with his words, how he is able to manipulate people so easily and then dispose of them as if they nothing more than a toy he was bored with.

Shakespeare: The Comedies (& One Romance) - A Midsummer Nights Dream, Taming of the Shrew, & The Tempest

William Shakespeare wrote many comedic plays during his lifetime, and the two that were analyzed in class included A Midsummer Nights Dream and The Taming of the Shrew. Also analyzed was The Tempest which, although is a romance, can be treated as either a comedy or tragedy since it contains aspects of both.

PART A:

The language of Shakespeare's comedies is very similar. In all the works analzyed in class, they all hold the same style of writing and use of literary devices. For example, in Midsummer, Act I Scene I concludes with Helena speaking about how love is blind and she has been rebuked by Demetrius, but will not give up and pursue him to the forest. However, introduced earlier in the play was the idea that Egeus wants to make Hermia a nun or have her killed if she refuses to marry Demetrius. This is a pretty serious situation since it very easily could end with a battle to the death between Lysander and Demetrius over Hermia, Hermia's death due to her father invoking the law of Athens, Lysander committing suicide over the death of Hermia, and or Helena committing suicide over Demetrius's death. Yet the play is a comedy, Shakespeare's language in this passage in Scene I hints to the reader that although this situation is dire, everything will end well in the end. The hint is in the form of rhyming. In her speech and others throughout the play, characters speak in rhymes which creates a light, singsong kind of air and feeling, not something that one would associate with death and terrible tragety as would be found in Romeo and Juliet or Othello. "Things base and vile, folding no quantity,Love can transpose to form and dignity:Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind;And therefore is wing'd Cupid painted blind" (Shakespeare Act I Scene I). This piece is just a sample of the rhyming theme that Shakespeare uses in A Midsummer Night's Dream to show this is a comedy. Shakespeare once again uses his rhyming theme in The Taming of the Shrew. When Petruchio comes to the city, he is told of a shrew named Kate, who is so horrid and mean that none can tame her. However, Petruchio decides to laugh off their rebukes of Kate, "Katharina the curst!A title for a maid of all titles the worst" (Act I Scene II). The Tempest also contains the rhyming patterns seen in the other comedies. One of the best rhymes in the play comes when Prospero is speaking his Epilogue. After everything Prospero has had done to him, the usurping of his dukedom, the being left for dead, and the exile on the island, he still finds in his heart to forgive his brother, the King, and all the others who had betrayed him. Once again the rhyming pattern shows that everything is going to be okay in the end. "Unless I be relieved by prayer,Which pierces so that it assaultsMercy itself and frees all faults. As you from crimes would pardon'd be,Let your indulgence set me free" (Epilogue). Shakespeare's language makes light of a situation in which it could take a bad turn that later ends up good in the end.

PART B:

In Shakespearean Comedies, the genre itself contains several similarities. There are several comparisons that can be made between the various aspects of the plays: characters, allusions, etc. For example, Midsummer and The Tempest contain similar characters in Puck and Ariel, respectively. Both characters provide much of the comedy in the story. Puck literally makes Bottom into an ass-head, which creates a very humorous situation in that Bottom is really a ignorant jackass, and now he has the head of an ass. Ariel creates chaos among Prospero's enemies by making noises and making sure that the victims of the tempest are okay. He creates one of the most comedic scenes when he pretends to imitate Trinculo, much to the anger of Caliban and Stephano. Another common theme between Midsummer and Taming of the Shrew is found in the idea of a play within a play. These plays within a play are usually funny events and cause much humor in the play. For example, the players within Midsummer add a very comedic aspect to the potentially tragedic play by making a joke out of the tragedy of "Pyramus and Thisbe". The actors are so convinced that they are great, especially the asshead Bottom, when in reality they are terrible and make a complete, comedic mess out of a very tragedic play. Bottom especially, constantly talks in malepropisms and constantly messes up his lines. In Shrew, a Lord and his servants mess with a poor drunkard by pretending that he is a mighty lord and that they are putting a play on for him. This play turns out to be The Taming of the Shrew. These plays are just one way in which Shakespeare uses common threads in his genre to create a comedic scene. Yet another comparison is making a Lord out of a fool. In Midsummer, the fairies pamper the assheaded Bottom like a King, when in reality he is a bumbling oaf with the physical embodiment of his personality resting on his head. In Taming of the Shrew, the Lord and his aides make a King out of the drunkard Christopher Sly, a pretend he is someone of great importance, when in reality he is just a drunk. In The Tempest Caliban elevates Stephano to the level of God and ruler because he has a magic drink (booze) that has Caliban drunk. Caliban's praise causes Stephano to think that he, a fumbling drunk, can truly overthrow the mighty Prospero and go on to rule the island. As it is said in The Tempest, "A most ridiculous monster, to make a wonder of a poor drunkard" (page 87 The Tempest). This idea of making royalty out of an idiot is one of Shakespeare's best ways to create the comedic genre.

PART C:

All and all, the comedies and the romance read in class were all very enjoyable. They contain down to Earth ideas that everyone, including Shakespeare, undergoes sometime during life: trials in love, controversy with other people, and forgiveness and repentance. If I were to guess, most people would find these plays enjoyable because they do not deal in sadness, despair, and death. Instead they deal with things that people enjoy: Three Stooge's style physical comedy, love, happiness, victory, freedom, and laughter. Typically these feelings will make most people enjoy what they are watching. In my opinion, all three plays read, especially The Tempest, were great and I would gladly recommend them to anyone.

The Tale of Two Cities

Charles Dicken's A Tale of Two Cities is considered by many to be one of the best novels of all times. Set in the time period of the French Revolution, it focuses on various characters and takes place primarily in Paris and London, two cities used to contrast the two very societies. Charles Darney and Sydney Carton play the major roles in the novel, both in love with Lucie Mannette, and the stage is set for a story that most likely can only end in tragety.

PART A:
Obviously, during the time of the French Revolution, the revolutionaries were not only fed up with the oppressive French monarchy, but they also were angry with the arrogant, snobby French Aristocracy, and Dickens makes this very clear in his novel. The perfect symbol for the arrogance and coldness of the aristocrats takes the form of the French Monsieur the Marquis, Darney's uncle. He is a cruel, cold man, who like most of the French aristocracy of the time period, felt nothing for the peasants and saw them as the scum of the Earth. This is absolutely clear when Marquis runs over a young child in his carriage and feels nothing for the parent's loss. Instead, he feels a few gold coins can make up for the man's loss and is disgusted when they scorn his "charity". Two lines really sum up Marquis's feelings toward those of lower social status: "Monsieur the Marquis ran his eyes over them all, as if they had been mere rats come out of their holes" (84) and "I would ride over any of you very willingly, and exterminate you from the Earth" (85). These are two very powerful statements, in that they show just how little Marquis and the rest of the aristocracy care for the poor. Later on, Dickens describes Marquis as a Gorgon. This is not what one would want to be called. A Gorgon is a mythological monster, and Medusa is the most common of them all. To first be called a monster and then be compared to Medusa does not speak highly of the character. Medusa turned everything to stone with her gaze and when Dickens describes Marquis home, the entire first paragraph of the chapter "The Gorgon's Head" describes his home as stone. The stone symbolizes how cold-hearted and, by turning everything into stone as a Gorgon, how inhuman the Marquis and the rest of the French aristocracy are.

PART B:
The following passage truly foreshadows what is to come in this novel: the French Revolution. "The time was to come, when that wine too would be spilled on the street-stones, and when the stain of it would be red upon many there" (22). This passage occurs when the peasants are drinking and fighting over the wine that has been spilled in the streets. However, upon closer examination, it is seen how the wine flows between the cracks of the street, how a man writes "BLOOD" on the wall in muddy wine, and how people are sent into a frenzy over this wine. While on the surface ridiculous that these people are all over each other to get the wine, the passage foreshadows the peasants hunger to be free, how they are hungry to be rid of the aristocracy, and how they are physically hungry in a literal sense. The frenzy that these people are in over the wine relates to the frenzy that the people of the French Revolution were sent into once blood had been spilled and was running through the cracks of the streets of Paris. People were executed left and right, people were murdered in the streets, and the Revolution became a massive free for all, with death all around and blood knee deep. This perfectly goes along with what Dickens is foreshadowing in this passage: that soon, the French people will have had enough with their monarch and the cold hearted arisocrats like Marquis, and they will rise up. Essentially, the writing was on the wall for France only it was in blood-like wine.

PART C:
Overall, this was not one of my favorite novels. The difficulty to read and decipher Dickens's style of writing made a great story one that was very hard to follow. In my opinion, there were too many characters to keep track of, and the extremely longwinded sentences were hard to understand. Many times I found myself rereading passages to try and understand the meaning of what was said. On the other side, the story underneath all the long paragraphs was great. The story of a two men who are complete foils of each other struggling through a tumultous time, and in the end one making the ultimate sacrifice to save the other, is one that would captivate me on any occasion. However, the greatness of the story was seriously lessened by the difficulty of reading. If I had to recommend this novel, I would say that unless one really does not mind the styles of writing so common to authors like Hawthorne, to try another novel that is easier to read.

The Importance of Being Earnest

"The Importance of Being Earnest" by Oscar Wilde is a comical farce in which the characters from the Victorian era find themselves in various situations relating to marriage. However, the characters focus on various trivial details instead of the important things in life, making for a very humorous and at times, predictable, play.

PART A:
A perfect character to analyze is Lady Bracknell. Lady Bracknell is Algernon's aunt and is the prime example of the stupidity of the prim and properity of the Victorian era. Bracknell stands as the personification of the etiquette of Victorian society, and by making a fool of herself on numerous occasions, continues to be a focal point in Wilde's berating of Victorian society. Throughout the farce, it is clear that Bracknell is solely focused on appearances and decorum. Everything she does or feels has no true meaing in the work and all she strives towards is upholding her appearance as a lady of the upmost respectability and properity. However, she does not uphold her appearance by focusing on important matters that truly affect her life and the society as a whole. No, instead she focuses on trivial details that have no effect on the story itself. For example, when "interviewing" Jack to see if he would be a worthy suitor for Gwendolen, she inquires about his parents. When she learns he has none, instead of saying, "I'm sorry that's really a shame" she says, "To lose one parent, Mr. Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness" (14). Is she serious? She speaks in the manner that it is Jack's fault that he has no parents, when in reality it is the complete opposite. This statement is just one of Lady Bracknell's many aphorisms throughout the book. While an aphorism is a concise statement of principle or precept that usually can be assumed as true, Lady Bracknell's aphorisms are completely backwards. She feels that it is good that in England education produces on effect whatsoever and that while Algernon has nothing, he looks everything and that is all that matters. Do any of these make sense? How can she say that education produces on effect when England is home to one of the world's best universities, Oxford. When she implies that having an appearance is all that matters with Algernon, she is used to further make fun of the superficial nature of Victorian society and throughout the farce, Wilde uses Bracknell to make social commentary on the stupidity of society.

PART B:
One of the most humorous lines in the play comes when Cecily and Gwendolen are enjoying an afternoon tea with each other. Both are arguing in oh so proper a manner about the serious situation of both being engaged to the same man, but in reality on being engaged to the same man. When offered tea and cake, Gwendolen wants no sugar and bread and butter. However, Cecily ignores her and gives the opposite, much to the anger of Gwendolen. "You have filled my tea with lumps of sugar , and though I asked most distinctly for bread and butter, you have given me cake. I am known for the gentleness of my disposition, and the extraordinary sweetness of my nature, but I warn you, Miss Cardew, you may go too far" (38). Come on. These to ladies are so focused on decorum and their appearance they cannot even have a real argument. In an argument over something of this importance, one would expected there would be yelling, name calling, and maybe even some punches thrown. Do any of these take place in this scene? No, instead Cecily gets at Gwendolen by giving her sugar when she asked for none and cake instead of bread and butter. Gwendolen's anger over such a trivial detail just go to compound the stupidity of Victorian society and the importance it placed on appearance and silly, trivial details.

PART C:
In my opinion, Oscar Wilde's farce is a very enjoyable play to read. What truly makes the play fun is the fact that there is little importance throughout the entire play. It is ridiculous how every, little thing is focused on maintaining the appearance of properity and formality. The characters produce various enjoyable situations where one can laugh at the stupidity of the characters and the ridiculous nature of their conversations when things of great importance are going on. They talk about the cucumber sandwiches, the proper way to eat muffins, and the how it is improper to have been found in a handbag. It is obvious throughout that Wilde is making fun of Victorian society and the farce becomes more and more enjoyable as the reader follows the predictable story that these characters place themselves in. If I had to recommend this play, I would recommend it to anyone who would like a good laugh.

Cat's Cradle

Cat's Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut is an entertaining satirical novel that puts both science and religion under the spotlight. Using diction, humor, and writing style, Vonnegut gives a clear social commentary on his feelings as to the advances of science and religious beliefs.

PART A:

A predominant symbol in the novel is Dr. Hoenikker's Ice Nine. A vastly important invention, since one speck could cast an apocalyptic global freezing that would end the world, ice nine plays a vital role in Vonnegut's social commentary on science. This symbol essentially can be used to define the meaning of the work as a whole by itself: humanity must be wary of technology because for all the good that science attempts to bring about, it can result in dire consequences. Vonnegut applifies this meaning by making the way in which ice nine brings about the end of the world so ridiculous. This is the nature of a satirical piece and Vonnegut uses this ridiculous event to make his point. Papa commits death by ice nine and then a plane crashes, shaking Papa's frozen body into the sea and destroying the world. How unbelievable is this? This incident is used to show Vonnegut's meaning that even an accident in science can have terrible implications. Ice nine also shows how science needs to be more morally aware. Dr. Hoenikker made ice nine simply to prove that he could make it. However he did not consider the implications it could cause had a simple accident like tripping and dropping it into a river or if it had fallen into the wrong hands of a terrorist who wished to destroy the world. Vonnegut is saying that science should not create things that need not and should not be created just because they can be. They should be more careful of what they do and should look to the future as to what their actions could lead to, even if they had been intended to do good.

PART B:

One of best quotes from the novel that points right to Vonnegut's feelings on science is found on page 31. "A winded, defeated-looking fat woman in filthy coveralls trudged beside us, hearing what Miss Pefko said. She turned to examine Dr. Breed, looking at him with helpless reproach. She hated people who thought too much. At that moment, she struck me as an appropriate representation for almost all mankind" (31). This is a great description. This woman is so fed up with science's ideas that everything is analytical and that scientists place too much importance on discovery and research, she has become tired for fighting. She has been dragged down by the unbearable weight that she feels from science and the role that it plays in everyday life, and now she has capitulated and cannot go on. What a great sentence when Vonnegut writes that at that moment she was a perfect representation of almost all mankind. That is saying something. It could be that science plays too much of a role in everyday life and people simply do not care or do not understand it. Either way, science plays too much of a role and the constant analytical nature of it stands in contrast to the ideas that most care about.

PART C:

This novel was a good book. It was enjoyable to read since its satirical nature made it comical and a fun book to read. The constant jabs at science and religion really stood out to me and I was able to make many connections with what Vonnegut was saying. Also the superficial nature of the characters was entertaining and informative. Many of the characters were on such a one way track, either science or religion, they were unable to see the other side and unable to realize the importance that the other side plays in life. If I were to recommend this novel to another, I would tell him or her that it is a good novel, not the best, and that does take a while to get into since for the first hundred pages at least you do not see where the novel is going at all. However, on the whole I would recommend it to anyone.

The Handmaid's Tale

The Handmaid's Tale is a very controversial novel by Margaret Atwood. Full to the brim with controversial topics such as religion, abortion, pornography, women extremists, and sex, this novel no doubt makes for a very interesting read. Taking place in Cambridge, Massachusetts, the current site of Harvard University, the Republic of Gilead is a dystopian society where the rights of all, especially women are virtually non-existant. All of this is for the sake of protecting the women and to allow them to fulfill a sole purpose: the continuation of the human race.

PART A

A very good symbol that points to one of Atwood's problems addressed by the novel is found on page 57. From the break on, Offred speaks of a pillow that is in her room, a pillow with the word "Faith" on it. Now this in itself is strange since women are not allowed to read because it might give them poor ideas. However, there is a much deeper meaning to this simple pillow and it is embedded in Atwood's commentary on religion. Offred describes the pillow as, "A hard little cushion on it, with a petit pint cover: Faith, in square print, surrounded by a wreath of lilies. Faith is a faded blue, the leaves of the lilies a dingy green. This is a cushion once used somewhere else, worn but not enough to throw out. Somehow it's been overlooked" (57). Wow. These few sentences give a crystal clear image of what Atwood is saying about religion and Offred's individual religious views. Offred's faith is faded and worn. By saying how it was once used somewhere else is Atwood saying that Offred once had a use for religion in a past time before the rise of this horrible Republic of Gilead. It had once held a position of high regard of Offred, but all of the things that she has put through has seriously shaken her faith in religion. However, although shaken, Offred still holds onto her religion because her loss of faith has not gone so far that she is willing to, "throw out" (57).

PART B:

One of the most humorous lines of the novel takes place when the Commander takes Offred to Jezabelle's. " 'I thought this sort of thing was strictly forbidden,' I say. 'Well, offically,' he says. 'But everyone's human, after all' " (237). Is this not the biggest statement of hypocrisy in this entire novel. Here is the Commanders saying that even though all women's rights and many men's rights are completely non-existant, all for the good of the women to protect them and to keep inappropriate images and thoughts out of men's minds, here is a place where men are complete breaking the rules. All of these oppression of rights, and here are the Commanders and other high ranking officals having a great time and associating with prostitutes because, hey everyone is human. The nonchalant tone in which the Commander says this makes him sound like a huge hypocrite. He can escape any time he to this place where he can experience a facade of pleasure and "love" that he has been stripped of in this society. Offred on the other hand, has to live day in and day out with no rights and she has no place to escape to. Jezabelle's stands to show what a ridiculous society Gilead is because it is a place of no rights and mass discrimination, and right around the corner in one of the back alleys is a whore house, that serves the needs of the Commanders and other men because after all, everyone is human.

PART C:

Now my opinion. If I ever have to read this book again, I do not know what I will do. Every moment I read it was mental agony. I do not deny the brilliant way in which Atwood makes her stand on extremists, religionist and femanists alike, through uses of diction, tone, and social commentary. However, I hated this book. The monotanous tone in which it was written, while intended by Atwood to convey the meaninglessness and boringness of Offred's life, made reading very difficult and unenjoyable. In my opinion, there was little excitement that would keep a reader interested and after a while, reading virtually the same thing over and over loses its appeal. If I had to recommend this book to another, my suggestion would be to put this book down, never pick it up again, and read something, anything else. Yes I know this view is quite extreme but it really shows how much I disliked this book.