Though this piece offers little in the way of a substantive review of ""What the Bleep Do We Know?" I appreciated the commentator's tone. As one of a growing number of millions who've seen this movie, I differ from these millions about one general thing: I strongly disliked this movie. I got the sense that this commentator also was similarly puzzled by the popular acceptance--even admiration--of this movie. As such, I admired his sensible skepticism of the purported wisdom this movie dispenses. This piece raises just a few of the outlandish claims and statements made in "...Bleep..." and justly scoffs. Though I wish the piece was longer and tackled more of the problems I found in the movie, I'm glad to hear a kindred voice concisely articulate a couple of them.

A simple, poppy piece about breaking up. A survey piece including: most common reason for breaking up, why fighting is ok, prefered methods of breaking-up, and advice for getting "over it." This piece was amusing, though I'm not sure that was its goal. If you were to pick a daily segment to increase listenership enjoyment in the age ranges 12-16, this would probably do the trick, however, for a grown-up audience, this piece was lacking a little depth. I did enjoy the style of assembling all the different voices. Recommended for a younger, lighter NPR only.

A cool piece about a love that just won't work. I empathized and I think most people would find some morsel of truth in this piece. I really appreciate the speaker's distance and perspective from the certainly painful subject matter. The feeling of resolution makes this piece enjoyable to listen to rather than nerve-racking and painful, as it must have been to experience. The resulting radio piece is clear and concise description of only the important details, well-narrated by Michael Nutt. The soundtrack gave the piece a lightness that helped move the piece along, not lingering on any one memory of fouled love, but jumping along to the next one as quickly and nimbly as one advances a CD. Do not be put off by the length of this piece. It's about 5:25, with a well-suited extro of Dean Martin's "Memories are Made of This." This would work well as an insert on ME or ATC, but I believe it would be best suited for a Valentine's Day themed program about love and its incarnations. Unlike the previous reviewer of this piece, I did not miss the absence of all the gory details. I rather enjoyed the sparsity of detail, which allowed for the listener with similar experiences to actively connect to the story rather than be a passive listener with experiences made dissimilar to those recounted in the piece because of incongruities in exact details.

I enjoy Sterling Calver's (sp?) stories. They are vivid and moody. Though his subject matter in this piece is politics, it is the story of meeting a stranger in a bar that shines. I will not say it glimmers--I think it could be a bit shorter--but it is engaging. The only problem is when to play it. It's too long (and maybe even too overtly political) for an All Things Condsidered or Morning Edition soft-feature, and it doesn't quite fit the style of This American Life, where a longer-running first-person essay like this could find air time.

If there is a program out there about story-telling, especially with political themes, this piece is well suited for it.

My initial and main complaint about this piece is the voice of our narrator. I didn't feel that he was honestly sharing his thoughts with the listener. There is something forced about his voice, as if he was trying to produce a "radio voice," but without the equalization and reverb (procedures both this piece could stand to benefit from). It's not that I disagreed with the narrator's insights and argument, I simply felt untrusting of him. I felt that he tried to get a rise out of the listener by exaggerating, both vocally and verbally, the description of the hugs he shares with his best friend, while simultaneously arguing against that same rise he tries to elicit. I will reiterate: some of this is tonal, some verbal. It is problematic, however. I was distanced from the piece when I needed to be sucked into it effortlessly.

Additionally, I would like to see the piece shortened by about 1/3 to 1/2 its current length. This could be accomplished by actually quickening the pace of speech, but should be accompanied by streamlining the argument. There are several false endings. I desired a cleaner piece with fewer tangents.

I did, however, like the idea of the piece. I found it accessible and amusing: the idea. Its presentation was unfortunately lacking.

A well-articulated opinion about how to proceed in light of the recent Armstrong Williams scandal. This commentator, with whom I happen to agree, is clear and concise in calling for an independent investigation and the rolling of heads. Not only would I like to see his comments acted upon, I'd like to hear more commentary with this strength of conviction aired nationally. Well-suited for All Things Considered and Morning Edition.

A nice piece that makes me want to hear part two, which I'll listen to now. Besides a particularly cheesy descending harp sound effect to show "going back in time," the piece is refined and engaging. I particularly enjoyed the history about the first ranger, Harvy Lickle. Perfect for All Things Considered or Morning Edition.

I don't think I like this author's work. This is the second piece of his I've listened to. In contrast to other comments posted for this piece, I think his work is subtly self-important. I disagree that the author is a keen observer of the human situation; I feel his observations are carefully placed to highlight his differences from his subject matter. He is most definitely an outsider looking in, and in unexcitedly. I did not enjoy his music choice for the piece. It only enhanced his evident emotional distance from his story. I think the author is trying to mimic Ira Glass, but he lacks the charm or sense of humor that Ira has.

A beautiful piece. I would have liked to hear more from the patients and/or the nurses, but her telling of the story is very engaging. Her voice complements her violin playing almost as a viola--a little darker, deeper, but with tone and age akin to the violin. It's a simple piece, very intimate.

An interesting story, especially if you don't know much about Paul Winter (as was the case for this reviewer). The use of Winter's music to underscore the piece provides an appreciated throughline. I enjoyed the distinction drawn between Winter's music and the "new-agey, mood-setting, nature, music CDs popular in the discount stores." It's a shame that the Shaefer interview had to be conducted over the phone. The contrast between the phone interview and the high quality clips of Winter's music and the rest of the piece is jarring. Paul Winter offers concise insights into his style and techniques. Lester Graham's voice is well-suited for the tone of this piece.