Kitap için kullanıcı verileri, yorumlar ve öneriler
Tarafından yazılmış kitap Tarafından: Seray Şahiner
A lot happens in this sequel, but much of it doesn't seem all that significant. The characters take turns pursuing and then running from the sinister members of the Most Inept Cabal Ever. The author sometimes seems to prefer the villains to his heroes, because the protagonists spend more time in polite, awkward conversation with their deadly enemies than they actually do fighting them. In the beginning of the book, the characters split up in a frustratingly arbitrary way that makes no damn sense at all. I was hoping that the rest of the novel would make up for it, but the story was too coincidence-heavy. I also got the feeling that a lot of things would have turned out the same even if the main characters hadn't been involved, which doesn't make things very satisfying. It's disappointing. I'll probably still try the next book because I enjoy the setting and style. Although at this point I think I might like the sequel better if it abandoned the current plot in favor of Chang and the Trapping children running off to join the circus. The blue glass is really interesting. But it's almost not worth putting up with hundreds of pages of everyone's hatred for yet strange attraction to the Contessa, and her predictable smug reactions.
Tarafından yazılmış kitap Tarafından: Lal Kitap
What is it about Bill Bryson that makes him so eminently readable? Is it that he doesn't take himself too seriously? Is it his tendency to come to the same conclusions we do? Is it his penchant for including humorous insights in parentheses and footnotes? Whatever it is, it's present in At Home in liberal doses.
Tarafından yazılmış kitap Tarafından: Yargı Yayınları
this is what i read when i am on the plane waiting to die.
Tarafından yazılmış kitap Tarafından: Tonguç Akademi
Robert A. Heinlein uses Starship Troopers as a platform to share his views on discipline, citizenship, and violence within civics and the military. It gave me an interesting chance to interact with his views, especially his views for the necessity of violence. I have been learning more about pacifism the past year and am testing it out to see how it works. I'm not defining violence as "force," but as an action with the intent to damage. I'm not defining pacifism as "passivity," but as actions to establish peace without causing damage. Heinlein proposes at the beginning of his book that "violence, naked force has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms." I'm not going to argue his point that violence has been a powerful force throughout history. It obviously has. But I will dispute the claim that pacifism is wishful thinking. History does have examples of pacifism that works. In 1959, when the book was written, the example of Gandhi in India should have been fresh on the mind of the author when thinking about whether or not violence is necessary to establish a society. I would argue that violence may be the natural state of man, but we can and are evolving to a more mature way of interactions which supersede violence. Heinlein goes on to develop his views that war is not pure and simple violence and killing, but rather controlled violence. "The purpose of war is to support your government's decisions by force." I appreciate that the author does not try to cover up war by claiming it as a "last resort" or a "necessary evil." He shows it what it is: forcefully supporting the government. The result of this ethic should be obvious. The most forcefully damaging government will get its way. I have no response other than to suggest we should be able to do better than this. One of Heinlein's strongest points in his book is that citizenship (and thereby voting privelage) should be reserved for those who earn it, particularly by serving in the military. The selflessness expressed by a soldier shows he or she knows how to put the needs of others ahead of his or her own, and therefore should be allowed to decide what is best for society. He states, quite truly, "The noblest fate that a man can endure is to place his own mortal body between his loved home and the war's desolation." This is a beautiful sentence. It is an echo of the sentiment that "Greater love has no man than to lay down his life for his friends." The problem with the ideology expressed in Heinlein's version is that the man placing his body between loved ones and harm is not simply absorbing the harm; he is causing harm to others. This, by necessity, means that there are loved ones of the "enemy" on the other side of the border. When two sides fight, family members and loved ones die. It may be noble to place yourself between war and your loved ones, but it is not noble to feed into the war which threatens others' loved ones. One of the frustrating motifs Heinlein expresses in his book is that morality is a mathematical science. The book, taking place in the future, discusses the "dark days" of humanity with rampant crime before the science of morality was developed. Supposedly reducing moral transactions to a mathematical equation can prove whether anything is good or bad action, policy, etc. I do not know where Heinlein gets this thought. It seems rather absurd to turn a subject which is closer to art into science. I don't know whether taking this out of the book would lead the author to different conclusions. It might make me happier, though. =~) I am not trying to bash the book or Heinlein's ideas; there were many interesting things to think about. I simply enjoyed the experience of trying to see how a pacifist may respond to the proposals in the book.
Tarafından yazılmış kitap Tarafından: Clariss
FASCINATING!!!
Tarafından yazılmış kitap Tarafından: Akıllı Adam Yayınları
Review: http://paperandinklings.wordpress.com...
Tarafından yazılmış kitap Tarafından: HarperCollins Publishers
The story of edgar made me reflect on how much I like happy endings. I hated the book for awhile.
Tarafından yazılmış kitap Tarafından: Pogo Çocuk
Better than the first two. Maybe because our narrator is growing up - fifteen year old boy-speak is a lot less irritating than twelve year old boy-speak.
Tarafından yazılmış kitap Tarafından: Roland
I loved the banter between the two authors at the end of each chapter, and how they tried to change the story back to how they wanted it in each of their chapters.
Tarafından yazılmış kitap Tarafından: Paydos Yayıncılık
I really really enjoyed this one. First of all, the story is really fabulous. I love that it's about bedtime reading rituals and plays with traditional fairytales. The dialog is delightful and the text simple enough to hold a child's attention while still providing a story that will amuse both the adult and the child. The humour is good enough that we're still laughing over our own versions of Chicken's intrusions. The art is is also rather good. I love the richness of colour that's achieved through the use of extra colours mixed in to the crayon. For example, the teal walls (vaguely reminiscent of Goodnight Moon by the way) are not just teal or even a variety of greens with a touch of blue-greens but has the details done in complimentary red and yellow. I also enjoy the variety of styles that are used to convey the different elements of the story. While they're diverse, they also work together harmoniously to help convey meaning while still keeping focus on the relatable main character. Definitely one to keep around for a long time.
Kullanıcı, bu kitapları portalın yayın kurulu olan 2017-2018'de en ilginç olarak değerlendirdi "TrendKitaplar Kütüphanesi" Tüm okuyucuların bu literatürü tanımalarını tavsiye eder.