Read it the first time,But....
584643
I decided to edit my review because I realized that it was not fair to the author to give this book a ONE.I did give it a four. I did enjoy the first and will probably read the third book in this series when it is published. But be warned that the original was self published and that this issue has half of the original book.
It is sad that there are people out there who like to call folks "idiots" but yet do not have the courage to print their names on their reviews. I feel that I will always give an honest opinion on a book whether it agrees with the masses or not. I have enjoyed JT's book and I look forward to seeing more from him in the future.
4054934
I recalled this book from when I first read it, but it didn't live up to my recollections or the first book in the series
2747186
I know this version purports to be a simpler, easier to understand version, but the original wasn't that hard to read in the first place, and remastering the prose has taken some of the flavor out of the novel.  I bought this as a cheap kindle copy of a book that I lost, and I found, upon reading it, that there were lines and expressions that I missed.
4394056
I've already re-read it once, and I often think about the characters involved in my everyday life.

Parts of this were slow, and I didn't really like it much for the first 200 pages - but that's what "epic fiction" means to me :)
4245151
Read this... I could go on and on, but I won't. Personally, I think it challenged me and also moved me. It's one of those that maybe good to re-read occasionally.
25478
I read this book about a year ago and really loved it. Then, I chose to buy it and have my very own copy to read whenever I wanted to. I reread it again (& maybe I hadn't read so closely the first time,) but it seems like Mike Dooley is really not giving much say on reasoning in each chapter. Basically, what hes saying is law and thats that! I wish he had gone much deeper into why he believes certain things. I do love his mindset, but I can understand some discouragement after reading this book.
225751
I hold very firmly to the belief that this book cannot be fully appreciated in a first reading.  It is necessary to read it at least twice, and preferably more.
 It's not as immediately pleasing as some of Ms. Austen's other works, Pride & Prejudice, Sense & Sensibility etc., but those who take the time to appreciate this book will find it well worth the effort.
3497695
I'm giving it 4 stars because I really love the series. That being said, I found myself a bit like Casey - unsure. In fact, I read the book twice, before I even decided to write a review, because I really wanted to LOVE this book. I did like it a little better the second time. At least I accepted the conflict between Tommy and Carly a little more. But my 2 biggest problems were: 1) I really expected more difficulties with the Tommy/Carly relationship; 2) the introduction of Casey/Dakota dilemma taking away from the main characters.
And while it's always great to see the other family members, rehashing (in detail) soooo many things that happened in the other books got a little old. Besides, most of us have re-read the other books several times. I understand Raeann wanting to attract new readers, but it was a bit too much.
If you haven't read the other books, you should read them first (and I think it was a great idea to offer them at a discount). I know this is a labor of love for the author, and she wants to keep her fans happy, but take your time on Casey, Raeann. We can wait.
4543787
I read this novel  20 years ago and loved it. Thought I would read it again to see if I felt any differently or if I would get any new insights.  The novel itself was just as engrossing as I had remembered, but, the reading experience was less than optimal.  Misspellings, phrases left out or changed so that the sentences made no sense.
I would definitely recommend the novel , just not this awful edition
4180086
I read this book years ago and purchased it recently to read it again, it sort of haunted me. I'm glad I reread it because there were parts in there that over powered me on my first reading. The lives of the artists were so difficult, violent, and short --  most of them died so young. The elegance of Duke Ellington and the struggles of Monk to bring his genius to fruition jump out, but there are many other facets shown in this lovely, thin book.

<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/Tango-Murder-and-Money-by-the-Bay-Rick-and-Florrie-Dance-Bullets-Fly/dp/B07BB6YTSB/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">Tango, Murder, and Money by the Bay: Rick and Florrie Dance, Bullets Fly</a>
239203
I think I read about 1.1 chapters, thinking that the first chapter was just the introduction. Nope. Sorry, but even giving me the book for free, I still can't read it. I sure hope the rest of the books are done correctly, but you lost me on the first one
2078513
Beautiful! However, I don't quite appreciate Sharon's remark/note/comment/annotation, I stop after reading 2 of her annotations, and just read Hill's materials. If you have read Hill's Think and Grow Rich and enjoyed it, my suggestion is that you completely ignore Sharon's annotation the first time round. Perhaps, when you read it again the second time round, you may choose to read Sharon's annotation.
457100
The Atrocity Archive (Not, incidentally, 'Archives,' despite what the cover says...) initially blew me away. The technologification of magic and the Cthulhu mythos was genius (er...you know...like...super-fun beach-reading genius...not like Faulkner genius...). Unfortunately, I liked it so much that it became like literary comfort food to me, and I read it fourish times. Yeah, I know...books like this are not really made to hold up upon relentless re-reading... Turns out that it doesn't take that long for random, contentless references to the Halting Problem, Godel, and diagonalization to get tedious--especially if you actually know something about these things. Nevertheless, I have to say, TAA was a lot of fun before I burned myself out on it. The Jennifer Morgue...also fun. Enough so that I broke my own rule against buying hard-cover novels, and sprung for The Fuller Memorandum. Meh. I had to be critical of Charles Stross who has provided me with so many hours of reading pleasure...but I guess I can't really give it above a 'C'. Worth a read if you loved the first two Laundry books...but likely to be disappointing.
935674
I gotta be clear here, folks.  This revision of Mrs. Eddy's fine original work was done, I believe, with good intent.  Kudos on trying to update for the modern reader.
Having said that, the main problem is that too often a word [not of Mrs. Eddy's choosing] has been used as a substitute in various phrases and sentences.  Sometimes, where the original uses the word "GOD", the new version has used either "Mind" or "Spirit", which changes the intent.  It really does, at least to those of us who grew up in the faith, studying the original text.
The one sore spot for me, though, is when the revisioner uses "teacher" instead of the intended word "Master".
There are indeed many teachers out there, but very few Masters!!!
I also think that too much emphasis was placed on making the text "inclusive", which again ruins the flow.  As with Biblical revision, much is lost by the pen of one who really doesn't understand the change that has been forced on the reader....especially with a classic like this.

So it is three stars that I give, for at least trying to get the book into new hands, but I hope that new readers will want to read the original text, as Mrs. Eddy wrote it.  It is a blessed work.

Thanks for listening...

Mike Reed+
1310731
First read it decades ago and enjoyed it.  Interesting premise an I know it's considered a classic, but second time around it just seemed a tedious read.
3880297
I can't say that I love it.  I want to love it so badly, but after reading it a second time, I find that it falls short of me loving it.  As for David Rakoff, I found him to be an absolutely beautiful person, who was such an inspirational essayist and actor, and his death is tragic, but I don't think this book is his finest moment.  It's brilliantly written in rhyming couplets, but as the reader, I found the rhyming took away from the message being told.  The rhyming added limitations to the storytelling, and thus I found myself having to re-read portions of the book to make the connections within the different stories.  Looking at it as whole, the book is absolutely brilliant, but I didn't enjoy it like I was hoping I would.  I think of it in the same light as I think of the movie "Citizen Kane"; It's brilliantly done, executed masterfully, but it's not my favorite style.
1567034
I heard this back in the '80s on "Chapter a Day," on Wisconsin Public Radio. I was a music major in college at the time. Lots of references to performance and music that a musician would pick up on.

So, many years later, with a teenage son, I thought I'd get the book, re-read it, and suggest he read it for a book report or something. Didn't seem as good the second time through. I mean, the idea is still good, and it's worth a read, but it seemed to lose some of the excitement.

I think my son got a chapter or two into it and stopped.

Oh well.