New York Times Book Review

Freedman, S. G. (2004, May 16). Still separate, still unequal. The New York Times Book Review, 8-9. 

E. Stange, Million of Books Are Turning to Dust — Can They be Saved The New York Times, Book Review, March 29, 1987, p. 3. 

Cf. Stephen E. Ambrose, Ike and the Disappearing Atrocities. James Bacque s Other Losses New York Times Book Review, February 24, 1991 G. Bischof, S.E. Ambrose (ed.), Eisenhower and the German POWs Facts against falsehood, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge 1992 John Keegan, The Times Literary Supplement, July 23,... 

Samuel C. Florman, Do It Yourself Is the Message, New York Times Book Review (January 25, 1981b) 3, 24. 

Labaton, S. (1988). Government by Bechtel. New York Times Book Review. New York, 39. 

As Remarque owned up in a New York Times Book Review interview It was really, simply a collection of the best stories that I told and that my friends told as we sat over drinks and relived the war. What Remarque had arranged into a novel seemed new in terms of literary genre, but was actually preformed in the minds of millions, corresponding quite closely to the surviving European folk-memory of trench-warfare . Yet it seems to me that this does not undermine the claim I have just made for the perfect mixture Remarque happened to achieve in his novel. No representation can ever give the truth of something - that is a contradiction in terms. But what we have in Remarque is a mixture of modes of representation, and that mixture, as well as its extraordinary reception, has intimately to do with the Front experience in the First World War. 

This point is clearly underscored by Donald Kagan, Yale professor of History and Classics, in his article The Changing World of World Histories. (The New York Times, Book Review, p.l, Nov. 11, 1984). He writes ... 

Brent Staples has written essays, reviews, and editorials for a number of newspapers and journals, including the Chicago Sun-Times, The New York Review of Books, and Harper s, and his memoir Parallel Time Growing Up in Black and White (1994) won the Anisfield Wolff Book Award. He currently writes about culture and politics for the editorial page of The New York Times. This essay was originally published in Ms. magazine in 1986. 

Brief book reviews. New York Times, 4 July, 1937, p. 67. Other reviews were published in the Journal of Physical Chemistry, and the Minnesota Library Journal, while the Times of London reprinted the New York Times review. For a complete list of reviews, see the Book Review Digest, New York H.W. WUson, 1937. 

Scan newspapers and magazines for topics that seem to have caught the attention of an educated readership. Read through the tables of contents of academic journals, and scan popular magazines. Also, look at book reviews published in The New York Times Review of Books and in other national publications reviewers often provide a great deal of information on new trends in scholarship. 

New York Times, April 4,1943,18. Book review. New York Times, July 11, 1943,19. 

The World Set Free received positive reviews—a book critic for the New York Times called it a magnificent piece of workmanship —but the book suffered mediocre sales. And yet, although many members of the public declined to read the book, it would for many years find wide readership among the scientific community. In 1932 the Hungarian-born physicist Leo Szilard discovered the book, and afi er reading the story elected to devote his talents to the pursuit of fission. 

The date of printing is given in Myer, Life and Letters (n. 200), p 191, as just about this time [23 November 1833] the first copies of his book were being turned out. One of them was deposited on December 20th in the office of the clerk of the Southern District of New York. The earlier frequently quoted reviews were based on the Proposal Beaumont issued on 15 August 1833. Throughout, I and everyone else who has discussed the problem of Beaumont s influence in Europe have assumed that no one saw the 1825 papers published by Beaumont. 

I admit that when I first read his proposition, I was not impressed. In 1965 I published a book on Mechanisms in Bioenergetics and did not even mention the chemiosmotic hypothesis. Phil Handler who wrote a generous review of my book in Science objected to my failure to discuss Mitchell s hypothesis. By the time his review appeared I knew that his criticism was justified because Peter Mitchell had visited me in New York in 1965. This was another important event in my scientific life. Not that I really understood most of what Mitchell said during these days of intensive discussions, but I opened my mind to a new way of thinking. I am now convinced that the basic formulations of his chemiosmotic hypothesis are correct, namely that the function of the respiratory chain is to translocate protons and that the return of those protons via the oligomycin-sensitive ATPase is responsible for ATP formation. Thus the problem of the mecham sm of coupling of oxidation and phosphorylation is basically solved. 

---