Wolf [Hardcover]

Maureen Greeley (Author)

Product Details

• Hardcover: 144 pages
• Publisher: MetroBooks (NY); F edition (June 1996)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 156799296X
• ISBN-13: 978-1567992960
• Product Dimensions: 12.7 x 9.5 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.8 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,866,579 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Wolf, April 17, 2000

By 

"gnwolftiger" - See all my reviews

This review is from: Wolf (Hardcover)

The beauty of the wolf is difficult for any one to capture, but in this book, Maureen Greely brings the reader closer to this fascinating animal and its infinite wisdom. The author satisfies the appetites of both those who love looking at wolves and those who love learning about them. Greely goes into depth when describing the history, breeds, lifestyles, and current status of the wolf. But that depth is matched by the eyes which come forth from the pictures she has included. Read the info, look through the eyes, see the wisdom, see the beauty.

2 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Spend your money elsewhere, February 19, 2002

By A Customer

This review is from: Wolf (Hardcover)

This coffee table book has nice photos and is easy on the eyes, but if you're looking for a collection of striking photographs, you'd be better off with any of the wolf calendars. It also has numerous typos and rampant editorializing. For instance, it uses the generic man regularly, in places where it would be easy not to, and in the very first chapter manages to blame the wolf's endangered status on the spread of Christianity. The verbal descriptions of the wolf's prehistoric ancestors directly contradict the drawings given of the same ancestors. I don't know enough about wolves yet to judge the accuracy of the factual information presented, but when the rest of the editing and writing is so sloppy, why should we trust the factual research not to be equally sloppy?