I'am a teacher for special chýldreen,down syndrom and ceraprel palcy an learning disiblity. I wan to pay some books for specail chýldreens. Can you halp me.I'cant pay for books.I cant found pay form. Thank you

Ms. Chodorow does an excellent job of introducing and summarizing Carl Jung's concept of "active imagination" and its importance in becoming an "individuated" person. I'm currently bogged down in the middle of the book, though, due to the Jungian-ness of it all. (I've never found Jung's terminology to be straight forward or easily understandable...maybe it's just me.) I've jumped ahead and read other portions that seem more practical and have given me a much better idea of what the field is about. This would be a good textbook for a dance therapy program, but as a dancer, I sometimes felt it was too much up in the head (too intellectual) and not enough in the body

Joan Chodorow has done a masterful job of bringing together Jung's work on active imagination in a book that ranges from the extremely dense material typical of Jung to the very practical and "moving." I found myself dipping in and out rather than trying to absorb it straight through.

For a diehard Austen fan, any sequel or attempt is of interest. I found this book to have a much darker tone than all of Austen's work. Aiken takes the story on a path of brooding, sickness and poverty. The characters are drawn with a much heavier hand and seem to be generally bitter and unhappy in a very 20th century way. Worth reading, but if you read Austen to visit a happier, simpler era, this is not the way to go.

In the post-reading analysis, no, this wasn't a five-star book. But it was still a diverting read, and a pleasant way to spend an afternoon. Don't, however, read it as a Jane Austen book. You could only be disappointed. It is written with a modern sensibility and consciousness (and in places, vocabulary), which doesn't fit with Jane's work. Read it as a Joan Aiken book, though, and it is an entertaining little drama.

Having read mixed reviews of Joan Aiken, and having read (and reviewed) her JANE FAIRFAX (a look at a major character in Austen's EMMA), I thought I would try this completion of the fragment THE WATSONS.

The book is indeed entertaining, although there are many dark moments and the whole story is suffused by the determination or desire of Emma Watson to be independent (something that might be labelled as post-modern interpretation, or feminist interpretation). For those of you not completely familiar with THE WATSONS, the book begins when a young lady Emma Watson is obliged to return to her family - a widower clergyman father and his many children - when her rich aunt marries a fortune-hunter and moves to Ireland. Much of the story is preoccupied with the economic and social position of the Watsons, particularly the three unmarried daughters (a fourth unmarried daughter marries at the outset) and the situation of Emma Watson in particular as she is bounced from home to home. The ending is a trifle unrealistic, since it appears to be a pastiche of Austen's own encounters with Royalty and the happy ending of PERSUASION.

The tone is completely unlike that of Austen; I thought I should make that clear for anyone seeking the wit and irony of Austen herself. Although I have not found any sequel or continuation or pastiche completely satisfactory, Aiken's JANE FAIRFAX was the most faithful both in plot and spirit to Austen's own works. This book draws more from Austen's own life and considerably from the situation of the Dashwood sisters in Sense & Sensibility. [In fact, think of this story as Sense & Sensibility, combined with a bit of Persuasion for the ending, with some other highly romantic elements thrown in].

I found the book rather disappointing if I approached it as a Janeite. [Most of Aiken's recent works using Austen characters have been similarly disapointing.] Even as a stand-alone novel, I found the work oddly disjointed. The most brilliantly drawn characters were those who were the villains or the most disagreeable. The personalities of the more likeable characters seem oddly flat, and one of them - the Rev Mr Howard - very different from start to finish. Emma Watson herself, although showing traces of Austen's own character, seemed oddly passive in her relationship with her aunt who had cast her off in preference to a young second husband, a stand that I found too self-sacrificing (compared to her general thoughts and attitudes). I think this could have been an interesting and even a great novel if some characters had been better developed, and if the ending had been made more realistic. For a really good example of how this is done, read Jean Rhys's WIDE SARGASSO SEA.

While the premise of this book is interesting, I found the protagonist, Loretta Lawson, unappealing and character-less, and was confused by the anti-American sentiment and blatant stereotyping displayed throughout the book. The various plots within the book seem disconnected, as though one has had to read previous Loretta Lawson mysteries to know what is going on. An odd tie-in at the end to a previous love affair left me confused. Intellectual snobbism seems to run through the book. References to obscure authors and their work have little to do with the plot, and come across as an excuse to self-aggrandize, rather than adding to the reader's interest. I was very disappointed with this book, as the plot description seemed intriguing, but the characterizations bordered on actively unpleasant.

The Loretta Lawson character was still entertaining, with her misguided attempts to be "feminist" that usually backfire. All was well until the end of the book, when the author unaccountably drags in plot and characters from an earlier book, with no explanation. I can recommend the book for a plane ride or something

A must-read for Loretta Lawson fans and lovers of literary thrillers. True, it helps to have read her previous novels in the series. While "Full Stop" is not the strongest entry (its USA location isn't that enthralling) Joan Smith is an interesting writer, and the series is well worth reading, especially if you are involved in any way with academia and literary criticism.

NEEDED SOME PHOTOGRAPHS. I STILL COULDN'T DEFINITELY IDENTIFY POISON IVY, OAK OR SUMMAC. BUT I DID KNOW I HAD FOUND IT WHEN I BROKE OUT.

I was looking for a book to help identify the different poison ivy, oak, and sumac, against the "lookalikes" like the desciption indicates. This book was written for a 10 year old with NO color pictures, and the pictures are nothing more than poor hand drawn sketches. Not at all a "Field Guide".

This is an essential guide to poison ivy, oak and sumac and their lookalikes prevalent from East to West Coast, with cautionary tales which we can relate to, important information on increasing toxicity with each new contact, & illustrations helpful in distinguishing leaf types at all seasons.

Rest assured I am not an Austen purist disgusted by the whole concept of someone picking up the beloved Austen torch. Far from it; I only require good or at the least entertaining writing and I'm happy. "Mansfield Revisted" does not fullfill these requirements, mostly due to one of the worst endings I have come across in quite a while.
Things start out rather well, actually, as the novel follows the romantic adventures of Fanny's younger sister Susan as she resides at Mansfield while Fanny and her husband are away in Antigua. Many of the old characters return, and I have to give Aiken credit for creditably fleshing out the character of the wicked Mary Crawford. Since the end of Austen's novel, Mary has suffered a great deal, and Aiken does a good job of making her a tad more complex. What she does with Henry Crawford is interesting also; although here Aiken sows the seeds of her novel's undoing. (SPOILER) She sets up Henry to be the romantic hero of her novel, a mildly shocking idea for fans of the original. The next third of the book is devoted to the evolving relationship between him and Susan, and we come to expect the inevitable. And then, in a highly annoying manner, Aiken wimps out and sticks her with another character who has spent the length of the novel being loutish and vulgar, and who at end is redeemed in a completely unbelievable way. I felt extremely sorry for poor Susan, and I don't think that was Aiken's intent. (END SPOILER)
So, while it starts out promising, "Mansfield Revisted" ends badly, leaving a sour taste in the reader's mouth. I do not recommend it, especially not for Austen fans.

I have just discovered the Joan Aiken offerings to the Jane Austen collection. Mansfield Revisited is a quick read, with more description of the odious characters and even some redemption of unsatisfactory characters in the Jane Austen original. However, I wonder why the reader is not made privy to the contents of Fanny's letter to Mary Crawford. And though the lady in velvet at Mary's grave site is not a mystery, there is so little information as to her purpose. Her meeting with Henry later seemed to me to cause more stir than the circumstance warranted. It is gratifying that the unpleasant characters do not get on quite so unscathed as they often do in Austen stories. Julia and Miss Yates are hardly to be tolerated and eventually they pay the price for their incivility. Capt. Sarton is introduced and exits so quickly, he seems no more than a throw away character. William Price falling so quickly for the insipid charms of Miss Harley is inexplicable; still she will have 30,000 -- a not inconsiderable sum that brings its own charms. Naturally, Susan Price and Mrs. Osborne must be worthy of our admiration and I enjoyed being with them.

This book is a sequel to Mansfield Park that centers around a blossoming love story between Susan Price and Tom Bertram. Before their love can conquer all, Susan must contend with the prejudices of Mrs. Norris and the return of Mary Crawford. For those who wish to be reacquainted with Fanny Price and Edmund Bertram, you will only be disappointed; Fanny and Edmund have gone to the Bertram's Caribbean estate for the duration of the book. A better book is Aiken's "The Youngest Miss Ward", a prequel to Mansfield Park.

I picked this book up from the library on a whim. The cover had a glowing review from Nora Roberts, so I thought why not? Let me tell you why not. The dialogue is trite. The plot is boring. Leigh Evans, the main character, is immature, brainless, and cold. She treats her father like dirt for, as a turns out, a very lame reason. Likewise, she takes her anti-men stance too far with her love interest, Michael St. Claire. If she were a real person, I would feel sorry for her family and friends.

Was there a deadline that needed to be met? The ending was so abrupt that it left me totally dissatified. It started out pretty good as a relationship-character story. All of a sudden all the little subcharacters (Shamus/Barbara; Jake/Sheila, etc.) had to be tied into nice little endings except for Leigh and Michael. For all of Leigh's independence, her mere acceptance of Michael's influence on her growing client list was unacceptable. Sure they love each other, but there were still unresolved issues. To be honest, when I got to the end of this book, I threw in on the floor in disgust. How unfilling it turned out to be. I have read Ms. Hohl's other books and I have never felt like this before.

I could hardly believe the disparaging reviews previously featured. I immediately ran to grab the book to see what all the animosity was about - throwing books on the floor?

I read the book and athough probably not the best in the world, I felt it certainly did not deserve the slams it received. Yes, the characters are flawed, but so are real humans. While most of the other reviewers had a hard time with the heroine, Leigh, I had the greatest difficulty with the hero, Michael. What an incrediably obnoxious, arrogant, INSENSITIVE man. All he could do was laugh at every situation not matter how the other person was suffering. I don't think Leigh treated her father like dirt. Considering the brainwashing her mother had accomplished on her, I think she treated her Dad with kid gloves. So she misunderstood her Dad - tell me who isn't misunderstood? I, too, didn't care for how everything was tidied up including the final interchange between Leigh and her father. Life is not tidy. Very, very few of us have a sudden ephiphany where everything in our life is resolved. But then, the majority of romance books are just that -happily ever after endings. We keep buying them, don't we?

THIS BOOK WAS OK. IF YOU WANT AN OK BOOK THEN READ THIS OK BOOK. OK? BY THE WAY MY NAME IS JARED. I HAVE A MAD HAT ON.

Joan of Arc was a pretty good book. The setting of the story was in France and England from 1429 to1439 The main characters in the book are Joan of Arc, Charles the 8th,and the Duke of Burgundy My favorite character was Joan of Arc because she was brave and was one of the greatest leaders of the French army. My favorite part of this book was when Joan of Arc led the French army. I would recommend this book to people who like history of great leaders. This book would be best for people who like history.

This book is a must read for anyone interested in military history. It is interesting and makes for an easy read. It is well informed and historically accurate. It gives the reader the feeling of being there. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in an insightful look into history.

This is another book which ignores the more objective evidence in favor of the slander promoted by Joan's opponents (i.e., the English and their allies among the Anglo-Burgundian clergy) while adding a large dollop of speculation and New Age philosophy into the mix. Joan was never considered a heretic by anyone except her enemies: for a more balanced selection of the clerical views of that era, see Jean Gerson's treatise in her defense (written in 1429) and Inquisitor Bréhal's declaration of her innocence contained in his "Recollectio" at the end of the Rehabilitation Trial in 1456. Similarly, the notion that 15th century women were a stifled class is rather curious, given that there were so many aristocratic women (Marie de Berri, Jeanne de Montfort, Marcia Ordelaffi, Jeanne de Penthièvre...) who took charge of their families' armies and other affairs during the Hundred Years War period (Joan was not the only woman to be given titular command of an army, by any means); this doesn't fit the model of history which certain modern academics subscribe to, but it's the way the feudal system has traditionally operated (that's why England has a Queen right now). Finally, the book's insistence on calling Joan a "shaman" has provoked justifiable ridicule, and hardly needs to be debunked here (I hope).

It seems that some authors cannot resist the temptation to rewrite Joan's history in terms of their own ideology. The end result hardly qualifies as history.

I think one should question how autonomous a woman is if she listens to the voices which supposedly came from outside of her being. I can understand the shaman relation. Of course anyone from a scientific perspective who has made "standards of proof" their god are never willing to accept the factual existence of other viewpoints, but to each his or her own. Altogether, this work has some interesting points, but comes from a lousy angle. You can't blame them, but several Westerners have been caught in a trend for awhile now to concretize myth and magic in order to satisfy "science-types". It just doesn't work and only draws more criticism. You cannot fit a square peg into a round hole.

Irrespective of the claims of the previous reviewer, this is a book based on scholarship. As early as 1986, Barstow uncovered what so many others are announcing today--that a central question of women's lives is the question of authority. On whose authority does a woman speak when she can not speak on her own? In a world where women were tightly hemmed in by culture and religion, where they had no authority to speak, Joan of Arc discovered a new basis for personal authority. In her case, it was her voices which gave her that authority; once heard, she could do no other than to speak what they commanded. As Barstow says--Joan's story is a that of an autonomous woman, one who broke through the limitations and constraints of her time. In this highly documented book the reader learns of Joan's doubts, her humiliation, her torments. Finally, one learns again about courage against all odds.

The book description does not aptly describe the entire book. It describes the last 20 or pages. While I thought the story would be about what happens after Kate's stepfather died and Ethan's divorce, it was not to be. Almost the entire story, was about events leading up to that. Not very exciting events I might add. The character were poorly developed and while a lack of communication and misunderstandings might leading to an interesting story, this one did not. Until the very end of the book Kate and Ethan were also jumping to the wrong conclusion. Frankly I don't see how they even got together. Skip this book!

This was one of the worst books I have ever read. The synopsis on the back cover didn't even come close to the actual story. There was less than no plot and I spent the entire time waiting for something to happen. The characters were flat and the dialogue was trite. This is the only book by Joan Hohl I have ever read and will never read another.

An ok read, but I found it very frustrating because the book was nothing like what was written on the back cover synopsis.

According to the first paragraph on back cover the story is about Kate Quinn, an orphaned girl, who is raised by her wealthy stepfather. The young Kate feels lonely and out of place until she meets the boy next door (Ethan Winston), who becomes her best friend and soul mate. The second paragraph of the synopsis states that Kate, as the legal guardian of her half-sisters, must raise them alone just as Ethan is raising his young DAUGHTER alone (actually he has a son and not a daughter). Kate, who has always loved Ethan, suggests that they join forces and raise their dependents together.

Well needless to say I expected the book to be about Kate and Ethan's marriage and life together... but it was not. I found the book frustrating because I kept waiting for things to happen that would allow the two to get married. It sounds kind of morbid, but I kept waiting for Kate's stepfather to die so Kate would become her half-sisters guardian. I also kept waiting for something to happen to Ethan's wife (how could he marry Kate if he was already married to someone else). Well neither of those things happened until late in the book, and Kate and Ethan don't end up married until almost the very end.

I found myself on edge the entire time I was reading the book. When was this going to happen, when was that going to take place. I think if the synopsis had been worded differently, my impression of the book might have been totally different (but then again maybe not).

Sullivan's "College Algebra" is a mish-mash of material, very little of which has any relevance to the questions at the end of each section. I am extremely upset that my university changed to this text, as it is vastly inferior to our previous book. There are no examples of key points that are needed to complete homework. What explanations that are available are hard to decipher, much less understand. This text should not be allowed to be used in any classroom, college or high school.

This book covers algebra very well. It is a simple, easy to understand text that most students seem to be able to grasp. It's main attribute is that it treats college algebra simply and does not scare students away. This book is also a good place to start if you are attempting to self teach.

order was not shipped the same day, so seller gave me a discount and I still received the book pretty quick. Great customer service. The book is in mint condition.