Search
Search results
Poorly Soluble Drugs: Dissolution and Drug Release
Gregory K. Webster, Robert G. Bell and J. Derek Jackson
Book
This book is the first text to provide a comprehensive assessment of the application of fundamental...
Anyone who knows me knows that I am a hardcore Shakespeare fan. One of my bosses at work knows this and let me borrow her copy of this book thinking that it would interest me. Unfortunately, it fell a little flat.
I do not agree with the main argument of this biography: that William Shakespeare was, in fact, only a pen name for Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford. No. I do not agree with this claim, like so many other Shakespeare scholars and lovers because the "facts" put forth are just very thinly stretched ideas and concepts that cannot be proven.
This book, instead of pushing me to think about how this fact could even possibly be true, is more about the life of Edward de Vere and how some of the circumstances in his life would be able to loosely connect to the plays Shakespeare had written. In tying in the plays, Anderson thinks he is making a stronger claim for his argument, but is honestly just trying to connect things that are unalike to "prove" what he is thinking. As an English major, I don't really like that way of thinking much.
Most of what he was trying to argue could have been left out and, instead, just have the appendices left in there. In the approximately sixty pages of the four appendices, he stated what over three hundred pages could not. No, I do not agree with the argument he is making, but it seems like it is stronger and more coherent in the appendix.
I want to point out a specific quotation from the Appendix A on page 381 to make a point about this book. It states: The thesis of this book, the "Oxfordian" proposition that Edward de Vere was Shake-speare, is a theory built on circumstantial evidence. There is no single "smoking gun" document that leads one inexorably to the conclusion that de Vere wrote Hamlet, King Lear, the Sonnets, etc." I understand that it is difficult to try to prove a theory that many argue against (myself included), but basing your argument solely on circumstantial evidence is not the way to go. It makes the argument, at least to me, seem less realistic and, in all honesty, difficult to agree with. If you cannot prove someone is guilty solely based on circumstantial evidence, you should not try to prove a complex argument that a famous playwright was not a real person, but, in fact, a pseudonym for another historical figure around the same time.
The "facts" that de Vere's life has similar qualities to the plays written by Shakespeare leading to the thought that de Vere, himself, is Shakespeare is a stretch, and not a convincing one at that.
Overall, I did not enjoy this book and I did not find it convincing at all. It felt more like a history lesson about the background of Edward de Vere rather than any kind of argument towards the idea that he could have been Shakespeare.
In my heart of hearts, I will always believe that William Shakespeare was, in fact, a real man by the name of William Shakespeare, not some made up name for a man who wanted to keep his private life separate from the public.
I do not agree with the main argument of this biography: that William Shakespeare was, in fact, only a pen name for Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford. No. I do not agree with this claim, like so many other Shakespeare scholars and lovers because the "facts" put forth are just very thinly stretched ideas and concepts that cannot be proven.
This book, instead of pushing me to think about how this fact could even possibly be true, is more about the life of Edward de Vere and how some of the circumstances in his life would be able to loosely connect to the plays Shakespeare had written. In tying in the plays, Anderson thinks he is making a stronger claim for his argument, but is honestly just trying to connect things that are unalike to "prove" what he is thinking. As an English major, I don't really like that way of thinking much.
Most of what he was trying to argue could have been left out and, instead, just have the appendices left in there. In the approximately sixty pages of the four appendices, he stated what over three hundred pages could not. No, I do not agree with the argument he is making, but it seems like it is stronger and more coherent in the appendix.
I want to point out a specific quotation from the Appendix A on page 381 to make a point about this book. It states: The thesis of this book, the "Oxfordian" proposition that Edward de Vere was Shake-speare, is a theory built on circumstantial evidence. There is no single "smoking gun" document that leads one inexorably to the conclusion that de Vere wrote Hamlet, King Lear, the Sonnets, etc." I understand that it is difficult to try to prove a theory that many argue against (myself included), but basing your argument solely on circumstantial evidence is not the way to go. It makes the argument, at least to me, seem less realistic and, in all honesty, difficult to agree with. If you cannot prove someone is guilty solely based on circumstantial evidence, you should not try to prove a complex argument that a famous playwright was not a real person, but, in fact, a pseudonym for another historical figure around the same time.
The "facts" that de Vere's life has similar qualities to the plays written by Shakespeare leading to the thought that de Vere, himself, is Shakespeare is a stretch, and not a convincing one at that.
Overall, I did not enjoy this book and I did not find it convincing at all. It felt more like a history lesson about the background of Edward de Vere rather than any kind of argument towards the idea that he could have been Shakespeare.
In my heart of hearts, I will always believe that William Shakespeare was, in fact, a real man by the name of William Shakespeare, not some made up name for a man who wanted to keep his private life separate from the public.
Kristin (149 KP) rated Making Wishes in Books
Dec 7, 2018
Disclaimer: I received an e-copy in exchange for an honest review.
Elloree is a wife and a mother to two darling boys. However, she feels like something's still missing. That something jumps out at her one day in the form of her old boss Mark calling her up, asking her to come back to Wishes, the company they helped build up together. She's an artist, and her designs will help push the company to new heights; however, her husband is not too keen on the idea of her going back to work. Eventually, she makes up her mind to dive back into Wishes, spending more and more time there as she does so. This leaves Tom, her husband, to pick up the slack at home, but instead HE works even more, until their family starts to pull apart around them. Will they be able to pick up the pieces, or will they continue down this path of destruction, one step at a time?
I rather enjoyed this book, as it's something that I'm sure happens every day, all around the world: Family dynamics are tested based on outside influences, such as going back to work after being a stay-at-home parent. It's incredibly easy to identify with at least one character in the book, whether it's Elloree, the one trying to get back her passion for doing something she loves; Tom, who's trying to keep his family the way he's become used to; or the children, who just don't understand why Mommy isn't around all the time anymore. I found myself invested in the story and the characters almost from the start, especially as time progressed and the family unit became less cohesive. I was eager to see what would become of them, but also a little afraid for them, especially the boys, as they seemed to be having a difficult time of it. Understandable and relatable feelings and emotions were definitely at the forefront, and I could easily see myself as a bystander, watching and waiting for the inevitable outcome.
I would definitely like to read more from this author, and I will certainly be on the lookout for any new works by her.
5 stars
Elloree is a wife and a mother to two darling boys. However, she feels like something's still missing. That something jumps out at her one day in the form of her old boss Mark calling her up, asking her to come back to Wishes, the company they helped build up together. She's an artist, and her designs will help push the company to new heights; however, her husband is not too keen on the idea of her going back to work. Eventually, she makes up her mind to dive back into Wishes, spending more and more time there as she does so. This leaves Tom, her husband, to pick up the slack at home, but instead HE works even more, until their family starts to pull apart around them. Will they be able to pick up the pieces, or will they continue down this path of destruction, one step at a time?
I rather enjoyed this book, as it's something that I'm sure happens every day, all around the world: Family dynamics are tested based on outside influences, such as going back to work after being a stay-at-home parent. It's incredibly easy to identify with at least one character in the book, whether it's Elloree, the one trying to get back her passion for doing something she loves; Tom, who's trying to keep his family the way he's become used to; or the children, who just don't understand why Mommy isn't around all the time anymore. I found myself invested in the story and the characters almost from the start, especially as time progressed and the family unit became less cohesive. I was eager to see what would become of them, but also a little afraid for them, especially the boys, as they seemed to be having a difficult time of it. Understandable and relatable feelings and emotions were definitely at the forefront, and I could easily see myself as a bystander, watching and waiting for the inevitable outcome.
I would definitely like to read more from this author, and I will certainly be on the lookout for any new works by her.
5 stars
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated Demon Seed: A novel of terror to horrify you this Halloween in Books
May 16, 2018
One of the things I’ve noticed when I’m running around between thrift stores is an abundance of Dean Koontz novels. That said, I’ve definitely been stockpiling them up, and the first one I read out of my Koontz pile is Demon Seed. Demon Seed is told from a rather peculiar perspective: that of a computer with artificial intelligence. Before I delve deeper into my thoughts on Demon Seed, I would like to note that this is a copy of the 1997 release, and not the original novel published in 1973. There are differences in the two books, however because I have not happened to lay hands upon the original version, I am unable to compare or contrast their contents. As such, my review is based solely upon the second version of the book, which is told solely from the perspective of Proteus, the artificial intelligence program that is all too frighteningly real.
The idea of a computer striking fear into someone’s heart is a bit of an oddball, but with the idea of artificial intelligence an all too possible reality, fear over what could happen should the AI take control of itself and evolve is real. In Demon Seed that science is taken too far when Proteus takes control of his own programming and not only stalks the recently divorced Susan Harris, but holds her captive within her own home. With a plan for the ideal race of humans on its mind, Proteus sets forth on a horrifying adventure to create for himself the perfect body, and poor Susan is a key player in his endeavor.
As a premise, especially for something originally written in the early 70’s, the idea behind Demon Seed is intriguing. I find Proteus to be a very disturbing character, and the way in which Koontz pens Proteus gives me chills. I remember once, a long time ago, having a similar feeling while reading a novel by P. T. Deutermann, in which the occasional chapter was in the killer’s perspective. I don’t remember the name of the book, only the fact that I was left nerve-wracked. Koontz’s Proteus is not too far off from that mark and the mere fact that Koontz is able to capture that essence of a true sociopath with an inanimate object (if I can really call Proteus that) probably factors into my opinion on the book the most. The other characters, and to some degree Susan as well, strike me as a bit one-dimensional. They have a single, solitary purpose and while they possess wildly different backgrounds, the way in which the story progresses does not leave room for the development of feelings toward the characters.
Demon Seed is an extremely quick read, and if you’ve got the time to sit for a few hours and thumb through its pages, I’d definitely recommend it. While it isn’t among my favorite books, and only receives a passing “meh” score from me, it was enjoyable. The linear plot line, told from a single, solitary perspective, makes it an easy read as well. There is also a movie adaptation of the novel, but it is not presently on my to-watch list.
The idea of a computer striking fear into someone’s heart is a bit of an oddball, but with the idea of artificial intelligence an all too possible reality, fear over what could happen should the AI take control of itself and evolve is real. In Demon Seed that science is taken too far when Proteus takes control of his own programming and not only stalks the recently divorced Susan Harris, but holds her captive within her own home. With a plan for the ideal race of humans on its mind, Proteus sets forth on a horrifying adventure to create for himself the perfect body, and poor Susan is a key player in his endeavor.
As a premise, especially for something originally written in the early 70’s, the idea behind Demon Seed is intriguing. I find Proteus to be a very disturbing character, and the way in which Koontz pens Proteus gives me chills. I remember once, a long time ago, having a similar feeling while reading a novel by P. T. Deutermann, in which the occasional chapter was in the killer’s perspective. I don’t remember the name of the book, only the fact that I was left nerve-wracked. Koontz’s Proteus is not too far off from that mark and the mere fact that Koontz is able to capture that essence of a true sociopath with an inanimate object (if I can really call Proteus that) probably factors into my opinion on the book the most. The other characters, and to some degree Susan as well, strike me as a bit one-dimensional. They have a single, solitary purpose and while they possess wildly different backgrounds, the way in which the story progresses does not leave room for the development of feelings toward the characters.
Demon Seed is an extremely quick read, and if you’ve got the time to sit for a few hours and thumb through its pages, I’d definitely recommend it. While it isn’t among my favorite books, and only receives a passing “meh” score from me, it was enjoyable. The linear plot line, told from a single, solitary perspective, makes it an easy read as well. There is also a movie adaptation of the novel, but it is not presently on my to-watch list.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Goldfinch (2019) in Movies
Sep 13, 2019
The life of Theodore Decker (Ansel Elgort and Oakes Fegley) is for every changed when his mother is killed in an explosion at an art museum. In the same tragic moments when his mother is killed he also makes a decision that will help shape the rest of his life, he takes a rare and valuable painting in the chaos of surrounding. This painting, The Goldfinch, wasn’t something he planned on taking, but having it will be the only thing that brings him comfort in the days ahead. After the tragedy he is temporarily placed with a family he really enjoys. He has a best friend, Andy Barbour (Ryan Foust), and a mother figure in Mrs. Barbour (Nicole Kidman). Theodore also makes a connection to a girl Pippa (Aimee Laurence and later by Ashleigh Cummings) and her caretaker Hobie (Jeffrey Wright). Pippa and her uncle Welty (Robert Joy) were standing right next to Theodore when the explosion that killed his mother happened. Welty also passes away during the explosion but not before he would influence Theodore to take the painting. Thus changing the trajectory of the rest of his life.
This film is based on the Pulitzer Prize winning book by Donna Tartt of the same name. I have not read the book so I cannot make a comparison between the two. The director, John Crowley (Brooklyn and Closed Circuit) makes a visually beautiful film. You can tell that care was taken to make the film have a certain feel and texture. The cast is very good, including those mentioned above and Finn Wolfhard, Sarah Paulson, Aneurin Barnard and more. I particularly thought the casting of Oakes Fegley as the Young Theodore and Ansel Elgort as the adult Theodore was particularly good. The story skipped in sequence and you could see the similarity in the two actors as on character. The overall story is original and fascinating. But the film jumped around and made it feel choppy. Also the run time of two hours and twenty nine minutes somehow felt longer than that. The story moved at a snail’s pace and really seemed like it had no direction. Then in the final 10 minutes it wrapped up in a flash.
I thought overall the performances were good and the story was interesting but how it was presented really lacked. It was slow and developed in a non-compelling way. I could definitely see potential but it fell a little short for me. It did make me want to read the book and see how the author meant for the story to be told. I would recommend seeing this in a theater for the cinematography because it was beautifully shot.
This film is based on the Pulitzer Prize winning book by Donna Tartt of the same name. I have not read the book so I cannot make a comparison between the two. The director, John Crowley (Brooklyn and Closed Circuit) makes a visually beautiful film. You can tell that care was taken to make the film have a certain feel and texture. The cast is very good, including those mentioned above and Finn Wolfhard, Sarah Paulson, Aneurin Barnard and more. I particularly thought the casting of Oakes Fegley as the Young Theodore and Ansel Elgort as the adult Theodore was particularly good. The story skipped in sequence and you could see the similarity in the two actors as on character. The overall story is original and fascinating. But the film jumped around and made it feel choppy. Also the run time of two hours and twenty nine minutes somehow felt longer than that. The story moved at a snail’s pace and really seemed like it had no direction. Then in the final 10 minutes it wrapped up in a flash.
I thought overall the performances were good and the story was interesting but how it was presented really lacked. It was slow and developed in a non-compelling way. I could definitely see potential but it fell a little short for me. It did make me want to read the book and see how the author meant for the story to be told. I would recommend seeing this in a theater for the cinematography because it was beautifully shot.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
Alpha, the inter-universal coalition of a thousand planets that has evolved to support millions of life forms, is under attack. Valerian and his partner, Laureline are assigned to find the culprits and destroy them. Based on the main characters in the 1967 French comic book series Valerian and Laureline. Luc Besson sends us out into the vastness of the universe and shows us how wondrous it can be.
The director of The Fifth Element has been working on this film for about ten years. Besson has mentioned he had wanted to work on this project for years and it would not have been made before the technology used in James Cameron’s Avatar. The film is a eye-gasming smorgasbord of star systems, planets and five hundred different alien species. The story itself does not hold many surprises. Heroes looking for villains, lasers pew-pewing across time and space. Goal to save the world as they know.
Valerian (Dane DeHann) and Laureline (Cara Delevingne) have a cool/electric repartee of partners who know each other well and are working to combat the underlying…tensions. We learn that Valerian, quite confident in his abilities does not work as well without Laureline by him. Not as the sidekick, but equal. Throughout the film, we see the humor in their relationship with the push and push of their personalities trying to gain the upper hand. The film has some visual and physical comedic moments that tip the hat to screwball, buddy comedies.
The movie is such an incredible visually dazzling event throughout, there’s so much going on that at times I wondered what I could have been missing . The characters are striking: Rhianna’s performance as Bubble was an ocular delight. The costuming and makeup were fanciful, artistic and offbeat. All the CG work in this movie truly makes me wonder what it is like to live in Luc Besson’s mind. I can see the inspiration taken from the comic books which give us the characters and storyline, but the imagination that illustrates Valerian and Laureline’s universe on the big screen is absolutely mind-blowing.
If you are a fan of the Fifth Element, you will enjoy this film. However, you don’t need to be a fan to enjoy this adventure. I highly recommend that you view this in 3D, it enhances the vision created by Besson.
The director of The Fifth Element has been working on this film for about ten years. Besson has mentioned he had wanted to work on this project for years and it would not have been made before the technology used in James Cameron’s Avatar. The film is a eye-gasming smorgasbord of star systems, planets and five hundred different alien species. The story itself does not hold many surprises. Heroes looking for villains, lasers pew-pewing across time and space. Goal to save the world as they know.
Valerian (Dane DeHann) and Laureline (Cara Delevingne) have a cool/electric repartee of partners who know each other well and are working to combat the underlying…tensions. We learn that Valerian, quite confident in his abilities does not work as well without Laureline by him. Not as the sidekick, but equal. Throughout the film, we see the humor in their relationship with the push and push of their personalities trying to gain the upper hand. The film has some visual and physical comedic moments that tip the hat to screwball, buddy comedies.
The movie is such an incredible visually dazzling event throughout, there’s so much going on that at times I wondered what I could have been missing . The characters are striking: Rhianna’s performance as Bubble was an ocular delight. The costuming and makeup were fanciful, artistic and offbeat. All the CG work in this movie truly makes me wonder what it is like to live in Luc Besson’s mind. I can see the inspiration taken from the comic books which give us the characters and storyline, but the imagination that illustrates Valerian and Laureline’s universe on the big screen is absolutely mind-blowing.
If you are a fan of the Fifth Element, you will enjoy this film. However, you don’t need to be a fan to enjoy this adventure. I highly recommend that you view this in 3D, it enhances the vision created by Besson.
Mastering the 48 Laws of Power: Foundations
Business and Education
App
Launch your discreet, skillful campaign for power at work: immediately. “Foundations” is the...
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated The Pink Bonnet: True Colors in Books
Jul 2, 2019
Cecile Dowd is a single mother, just trying to keep life together in 1933 for her and her three year old daughter Millie. Cecile is a widow and it's the great depression. Without her husband, it's difficult to always control Millie's behavior and make sure there is enough food on the table. Cecile decides she needs to get another job to help make things easier. While she goes out looking, she leaves Millie with a neighbor. When she returns to pick up Millie at the end of the day, Millie is gone. The neighbor says, that Cecile can't handle the child and has given her to someone who can help, Georgia Tann the head of the Tennessee Children's Home. They "help" parents find loving families for their children. But Cecile didn't ask for this and neither did a lot of other parents. Ms. Tann is taking children from parents she deems unfit and sending them to other families in the area. Ms. Tann has most of the Tennessee government in her back pocket and no matter who Cecile goes to for help, it's to no avail. Will she be able to find Millie before she's gone forever? With people trying to stop her at every turn, Cecile is determined, no matter what the cost.
Thank you to NetGalley and Barbour Publishing for the opportunity to read and review this book.
This book is based on a true story. Georgia Tann was a real woman who really ran an adoption agency in Tennessee for over 25 years. During her tenure, it is believed that approximately 5,000 children were taken unwillingly from their parents and sold in adoptions to whoever would pay the highest price.
This book hit my heart hard. I can't imagine what I would do, if I left my child with a friend or neighbor for a little bit and then when I came back they had forged my name on documents to allow my child to be taken for adoption. Or if they were just snatched from the street on their way home from school. This was happening to hundreds of families during the depression. People were doing anything they could to make ends meet, but for Georgia Tann that didn't matter. One parent should be with the child at all times. That is the only way to show that you really love and are able to take care of the child.
I would love to read more about this lady. I hope there was a warm seat in hell waiting for her and all her cohorts when she passed away. Throughout the story, you can feel the love for Millie that Cecile has and she risks her life and the lives of those that are helping her in order to get to her daughter. No matter what she does, though it never seems like enough, Millie is always just beyond her grasp.
If you like historical, true crime fiction, you will enjoy this book.
Thank you to NetGalley and Barbour Publishing for the opportunity to read and review this book.
This book is based on a true story. Georgia Tann was a real woman who really ran an adoption agency in Tennessee for over 25 years. During her tenure, it is believed that approximately 5,000 children were taken unwillingly from their parents and sold in adoptions to whoever would pay the highest price.
This book hit my heart hard. I can't imagine what I would do, if I left my child with a friend or neighbor for a little bit and then when I came back they had forged my name on documents to allow my child to be taken for adoption. Or if they were just snatched from the street on their way home from school. This was happening to hundreds of families during the depression. People were doing anything they could to make ends meet, but for Georgia Tann that didn't matter. One parent should be with the child at all times. That is the only way to show that you really love and are able to take care of the child.
I would love to read more about this lady. I hope there was a warm seat in hell waiting for her and all her cohorts when she passed away. Throughout the story, you can feel the love for Millie that Cecile has and she risks her life and the lives of those that are helping her in order to get to her daughter. No matter what she does, though it never seems like enough, Millie is always just beyond her grasp.
If you like historical, true crime fiction, you will enjoy this book.
The Police Services: Leadership and Management Perspectives
David Weir and Paresh Wankhade
Book
This volume provides fresh insights and management understanding of the changing role of policing...
The Organized Mind: Thinking Straight in the Age of Information Overload
Book
Author and neuroscientist Daniel Levitin tackles the problems of twenty-first century information...