this is the one book that you really need to read to make you dream reality.

The dialogue (and internal monologues) of all the characters in this book read like a comic book (lots of "oooo, I'm so scared" and "puh-lease" -type lines).

The author equates sexual marathons with eternal love; Talon and Sunshine hit the sheets every chance they get, and the only way we know they actually LIKE, never mind love, each other--for reasons other than sex--is because they tell us so (no show-don't-tell in this book).

But I have to admit I'm hooked on this series. I like the world Kenyon has created, and I keep hoping she'll hone her craft so that we truly feel like we understand the love story as well as we understand the action (Fantasy Lover came close to this--since the plot required the h/h to avoid consumating their relationship, we actually saw some bonding.).

Relationship development didn't happen in this book, but according to Ms. Kenyon's web site there will be many more books to come, so I'll keep reading them, hoping for a glimmer of real romance to go with my taste for comic book adventure.

Sherrilyn Kenyon has created an alternate world of the paranormal. For those readers who enjoy the vampire/action/love story, this series is quite refreshing. The author uses Greek Mythology to create the Dark Hunters a group of men and women who defend humanity from the things that go bump in the night. Dark Hunters surrender their souls to the Greek goddess Artemis when they die and in turn become immortal with all sorts of powers. Each book can be read on its own although there are recurring characters from previous books and broad hints about what is to come with others.

Talon, the main character in Night Embrace, appeared as a side kick for Kyrian in Night Pleasures. Talon was a Celtic tribal chieftan and warrior who was killed by an evil cousin who wished to take over the tribe; in the process his younger sister was slaughtered in front of him. To make matters worse, the Celtic war god cursed Talon for killing his son in a battle. Therefore, Talon is doomed to have any human that he loves die. For centuries he fights Daimons (evil soul stealing descendents of Atlantis) and is very much satisfied with his life.

Naturally, he meets his soul mate and all his carefully buried emotions come roaring back at a very inopportune time for a being whose career is defending humanity. While the characters are what could only be called ultra-alfa males they all have crippling weaknesses and the author uses humor very, very effectively to relieve the horrendously sad existence that most of the Dark Hunters live.

Kenyon's world is totally outrageous and great fun. It is a tribute to her judicious use of humor and mythology that the reader buys into the fantasy. Furthermore, she really knows her mythology because a quick check on some of her inferences and references revealed that Kenyon had done her homework. And finally the world of the Dark Hunter appears to be very complete in the author's mind. The back story is clear so she avoids the problem of dates that don't match or inconsistent myths to support the story. Finally, these are hot books not meant for children although the entire love story is about redemption and finding THE one person that completes the hero and heroine. Definitely a five star keeper.

I LOVED this book. I love all of her Dark Hunter books so far, but this one is the absolute best! I was cracking up while I read it. It was absolutely hilarious. When Zarek comes to town and meets up with Talon, Ash and Valerius I was literally laughing out loud. Sherrilyn Kenyon truly has an amazing way with words. In this one book alone she made me laugh (very hard), cry (almost), get angry, smile, and wish that the world she has created were real. I would reccommend this book to anyone. It is sure to delight romance fans, action/suspense fans and vampire fiction fans alike. The only problem I had with it was that I wanted to find out more about Zarek and especially Ash. I can't wait until the next book "Dance With the Devil" (Zarek's story) comes out! I will wait with bated breat until next December. She is supposed to write a story about Ash, and I cannot wait for that one. READ THIS BOOK, you WON'T be disappointed. I'd give it a million stars but the limit is five.

When I saw the page I recognized the cover of the book, but I could not believe what people were actually writing about it.

First I want to say that I am an undergraduate biotechnology student. I have a very strong background in biochemistry, cell biology, molecular biology, tissue culture techniques, and immunology; but I have not had any classes dealing with anatomy or physiology since Bio 101 way back when. I have read and am quite comfortable with Alberts Molecular Biology of the Cell and Stryers Biochemistry, and even a handful of primary journal articles, so I do know how to read a textbook.

Now with that out of the way, let me say that this book is completely incomprehensible. It is so full of anatomy and Latin derived words (which it does a poor job at explaining BTW) that I can only assume that it was meant for medical students, and to have physiology an a prerequisite for it, but it doesn't even have an introduction describing the recommended background or whom it is supposed to be for. In fact, most of the book is devoted to the physiology of sensation and movement, not neurobiology. Now if you have the background for it and thats what you are looking for then it is a very thorough text that goes into a lot of depth.

If you are looking to understand the biochemistry or molecular aspects of neurobiology, find another book!

As an undergraduate Psychobiology student, this text served me well in my Neuroscience course. In all honesty I never went. I just read this book. I got excellent marks in the class. As a serious slacker and bibliophile, I recommend this textbook for any like-minded student.

As an undergraduate Neuroscience major I found this textbook to be highly informative and well-written. It was used to a Freshman-level course, and was easy to understand, yet thorough and interesting. The graphics are well done, and the format is better than most textbooks I'm used to. Anyone, even with minimal science experience could dive right in and learn a great deal. It may not be advanced enough, however, for grad or medical students. As a reference it does okay, but there are more-advanced texts which would probably do better. All-in-all it is an excellent book. In-fact, I liked it so much that I didn't sell it back at the end of the semester and keep it on my bookshelf for future reference (and future classes!)

Speaking as an average math student, I found Dr. Simmons' book to be the best "read" of any text out there. The book's writing style was excellent, the example problems were quite helpful, and the appendicies were terrific-- especially the biographical sketches of history's mathematical greats. Those made for a pleasant break when the rigors of infinite series or double integrals took their toll!

On a technical level, the book is as solid as any out there, and does a fine job of covering two semesters' worth of calculus. From derivatives to gradients, it's all in there.

While it is true that Simmons advocates leaving off the absolute value sign when integrating 1/x dx, and even assuming he got one problem wrong involving this, to dismiss the entire book as "rubbish" and to recommend "avoiding [it] like the plague" is completely unfair and totally out of proportion. Furthermore, claiming that it's "confusing" to even introduce the idea of the derivative before a formal definition of a limit is given is also unfair. There's absolutely nothing wrong with providing students with this kind of motivation, and you really don't need a formal definition of a limit to understand the concept. Having a correct and intuitive understanding with a minimum of prerequisites is helpful and an admirable pedagogical goal. [In fact, a classic calculus text (the two-volume set by Tom Apostol) even treats integration before differentiation (and limits), and it's completely correct and clear.] I trust that the fact that every other reviewer gave this book extremely high praise will give students the confidence to read and use this text to learn Calculus in an ideal way.

Speaking as an average math student, I found Dr. Simmons' book to be the best "read" of any text out there. The book's writing style was excellent, the example problems were quite helpful, and the appendicies were terrific-- especially the biographical sketches of history's mathematical greats. Those made for a pleasant break when the rigors of infinite series or double integrals took their toll!

On a technical level, the book is as solid as any out there, and does a fine job of covering two semesters' worth of calculus. From derivatives to gradients, it's all in there.

"The Prince" is one of the view books from college that I've actually kept. It is splendid reading on several levels. First, one appreciates Machiavelli as a problem solver. Italy is divided; what is the most practical and efficient means for a wise prince to consolidate his power and unify it? But one also appreciates Machiavelli as a person. A florentine intellectual banished to the countryside--it wouldn't be a bad life for some of us, but to him it must have been torture.

I was once asked whether Machiavelli was a cynic, a realist, or a patriot, and I believe the correct answer is all three. Much of Machiavelli's advice contains an under current of cynicism and ruthlessness, and this has undoubtedly come to be the dominant portion of his reputation. One of the terms for devil, "Old Nick" is derived from Machiavelli. When one speaks of destroying an enemy or performing a ruthless, sneaky act, that person is likely to be called "machiavellian". But Machiavelli's advice was as realistic as one could get in those times. This was an era when despots and mercenaries ruled by force and assasination. It was a time when popes fathered children and carved out little principalities for themselves. One was not going to remain in power, much less get ahead of one's enemies by being virtuous. It isn't that Machiavelli despised virtue so much as he realized how useless it was in the political context of the times. But in the end Machiavelli was also an idealist. He dreamed of a united Italy under a strong (and practical) prince. When he dedicated his treatise to Rodorigo Borgia, he did so in the hopes that he might be the man to perform such a task.

This book provides timeless practical advice for anyone who wishes to succeed in a hostile, divisive environment. It also illuminates the peculiar political circumstances of Renaissance Italy.

Based upon Michiavelli's first hand experience as an emissary of the Florentine Republic to the courts of Europe The Prince analyzes the often violent means by which political power is seized and retained, and the circumstance in which it is lost. Because The Prince is a political commentary, and not a work of fiction, Michiavelli does not use "characters" in the sense of a novel or a short story. Instead he draws his examples from the current political and social events, as well as from history. His characters are the political leaders of his time. The book is a declaration in plain language the conduct of great men and the principles of princely governments. The book can be divided into four sections.

1. The types of principalities. Michiavelli lists four types of principalities.

* Hereditary principalities, which are inherited by the ruler.

* Mixed principalities, territories that are annexed to the rulers existing territories.

* New principalities which may be acquired by several methods: by own power, by the power of others by criminal acts or extreme cruelty, or by the will of the people

* Ecclesiastical principalities, namely the papal states belonging to the catholic churches.

2. The character and behavior of the prince. Michiavelli recommends the following character and behavior for princes:

* It is better to be miserly than generous.

* It is better to be cruel than merciful.

* It is better to break promises if keeping than would be against ones interest.

* Princes must avoid making them hated and despised; the goodwill of the people is a better defense than any fortress.

* Princes should undertake great projects to enhance their reputation.

* Princes should choose wise advisors to confide and consult with

3. The types of armies A prince must always pay close attention to military affairs if he wants to remain in power. A prince must lay good foundation and those foundations include good laws and good armies. There cannot be good laws without good armies, and where there are good laws there must be good armies. The study of war should be a prince's main goal, for war is a rulers only art.If princes become too refined to study this art they loose their state. The types of armies are:

* Mercenaries or Auxiliaries (loaned to you by another ruler) are both dangerous and unreliable, as they will maintain their interests preceding yours.

* Native troops composed of ones own citizens or subjects are by far the most desirable kind.

4. Italy's political situation Michiavelli outlines and recommends the following

* The rulers of Italy have lost their states by ignoring the political and military principles.

* Fortune controls half of human affairs, but free will controls the rest, leaving the prince free to act. However, the few princes can adopt their actions to times

The Prince by Machiavelli is not about a "prince" but about principles that a ruler, a king, a president, a prince should follow or manipulate to maintain and keep his kingdom or country. Machiavelli's famous treatise is one of the central texts in the history of political thought and a basic foundation to all principles dealing with "How to rule an acquired or inherited kingdom/country," how to be an effective ruler, and government politics. This book is a response to the florentine politics of Machiavelli's time and to the genre of advice-books for princes. Underneath the generalities of his principles, Machiavelli leaves a sense of admonishment to the ruler and the reader alike.
This treatise was written based on his experience as second Chancery and secretary to the main foreign relations committee of the republic, the so-called Ten of War. His writing style lacks verbosity and florid eloquence; Instead, there is a lucid string of concise words in a coherent and cogent order. The brevity and understatements of his general statements makes it very easy for the reader to follow. In every chapter, he states his thesis for a certain principle and gives examples to prove his point. The principles address important issues such as how to win over people, nobles, and soldiers; accomplish political ambitions and necessities by force or fraud, how to be loved and feared by the people, eliminate those with and without power who can possibly harm the ruler, how to make the government agree with the ruler, when to be austere or munificient, how to establish and maintain loyalty, when to build fortresses and how to build alliances and friendships with other kings and kingdoms. This book will not only instruct the ruler how to be a prince and a good one, but also how to maintain oneself as a ruler over people whose hearts can quickly shift contrary to the ruler.

Jensen & Birkett push the reader to understand a book of the Bible that has caused much stress in the church. Their questions & guidence challenge the reader in ways that are a real blessing.

i quite enjoyed burgess dissing of the faults and quirks of '1984'.

the only fault with 1985 is that it tells a unprobable story in a totally un-living fashion. his misinterpretations of syndicalism and anarchism also disturbs me. a good idea, but poorly executed.

Burgess' 1985 is really two works combined. The first is a series of essays and self-interviews that discuss Orwell's 1984. These are a great group of essays that really throw some light on Orwell's novel. Anyone who likes 1984 should read these essays. The second half is a novella of Burgess titled 1985. The dust jacket gives the impression that it is supposed to be a sequel of sorts. It isn't. It is a dystopia that takes place in 1985 (written in 1978) and is supposed to be a (more) possible scenario at the time. It isn't very entertaining, and a lot of ideas, characters, themes, etc aren't fleshed out the way they should be. But I suppose that could do with the shortness of the story. And Burgess should have been more careful with his title. Burgess's 1985 isn't a frightening or as well written as Orwell's 1984, and Burgess drawing the reader to make a comparison only hurts his story. After the novella is a short chapter on Worker's English (WE) which is Burgess' version of Newspeak. The problem is that WE isn't used much in the story, is really nothing more than a little slang, and I understand that Burgess only has the chapter/essay because of Orwell's explanation of Newspeak, but it is dull and unnecessary. Then Burgess finishes out the volume with another self-interview which discusses the possibility of his future. All this in only 270 pages. Still, the discussion of Orwell's 1984 that the first half is comprised of is excellent and the book is worth finding, if only for that.

A stunning book which I stumbled across completely by chance - and one which throws new light on two of the last century's most important novels: Orwell's 1984 and Burgess' own A Clockwork Orange. I have long been an admirer of both books, but this book is fascinating in that it goes some way towards clarifying the moral stances which have long remained open to interpretation in the two previous books. Unusually for a popular work, the book combines a devastating critique of 1984, with it's own fictional riposte (the 1985 of the title). The latter part being particularly interesting as a reminder of just how pertinent the issue of syndicalism was in the days just before the resurgence of rampant lassez faire.

First book was good. well.....Now they (or Mayne himself) is/are not moving foward. repetitious schemes with minimal ideas. Graphics drowned in mindless Form-z models and renderings. Mighty Thom Mayne has lost his creativity.

One of the few architecture books at the brick and mortor bookstore that isn't sealed shut with shrink wrap. After I flipped through it I immediately bought it through amazon. It is designed by Cranbrook design superstar Lorraine Wild, the design perfectly represents what Morphosis is about. I take it from the other reviewers that they only looked at the images and did not read anything at all because they did not "get it". Their work is delivered as a cyberpunk novel outtake, the setting an industrial dance club with torture devices. There is a wonderful surreal short story that acts as a sort of guide to viewing the work as well. I am not an architect but this is inspirational enough for me to spend half a decade in school to become one. Reminds me of the Jean Tinguely book published in the early 70's (with sketch overlays) and a similar design philosophy as Low/Tek

Being an architecture student, I constantly refer to many books, and Morphosis is one of my favourite contemporary architecture firm. This is really a thick and quite a heavy book. Its a compilation of many of Morphosis' work. Their "Best Of.." volume. This marvelous edition is divided into 2 parts. The first part consist of many colourful computer generated views, elevations, plans and 3D computer models etc of their buildings. The 3D models give a good visual understanding of their complicated but exciting buildings. The second part consist of essays by Thom Mayne. The thing about Morphosis is Mayne's writing is clear. He states his intention and theories clearly without getting out of the subject of architecture much. He talks about the difference between a project and a building which is a very good way of looking at architecture today. The graphics and writing provide a very clear understanding of their buildings. The bottom line is, if you like Morphosis, you'll love this book among your collection.

This history of Rock and Roll comes from Rolling Stone, one of the biggest and longest-lasting names in Rock reporting and coverage. It is truly a mixed bag, ranging anywhere from great historical content to outright howlers.

First, the book does an excellent job of covering the entirety of rock history and drawing out its influences and evolutions. It does a wonderful job of covering the different local scenes and how they were integrated in with the whole of rock music. Whole chapters are generally rewarded to the most influential bands, and not just those that sold more album.

However, the book suffers a number of strong drawbacks. First, as many pointed out, the book is clearly slanted toward the Rolling Stone perspective. Artists such as Billy Joel, who have not had good relations with the magazine, have been omitted. Several others, such as Bob Seger, were also given no treatment. There is also a bit of redundent content, such as giving the Beatles two whole chapters and then devoting a third (British Invasion) to a primarily Beatles-related topic. Also, there are separate chapters on Motown and Stevie Wonder.

Secondly, the book is often skewed toward the "pop" scene when it comments on more current acts. Rolling Stone has been getting even worse about this in its magazine. One particular example that stands out is in the heavy metal section. My edition was published in 1991 and the writer heaps load and loads of praise upon such hair-metal acts as Motley Crue, Poison, Ratt and Warrant. Other, more talented but less popular metal acts, such as Metallica, are put down and summarily dismissed. However, we all know that if this were to have been written 5 years later, Rolling Stone would be worshipping Metallica and praising them for destroying such hair-bands. RS makes the mistake of "going with the flow" one too many times.

Overall - nice book, but with some obvious problems.

Rolling Stone has been around reporting on rock music for nearly 35 years. That longevity only earns them stripes, but not exactly the monker of expert.

RS editors - in all fairness like most journalists - have an agenda, and accuracy and fairness in rock isn't exactly one of them. One writer (below) asked why Billy Joel was snubbed. Simple; RS and Joel have publically feuded for years so as far as RS is concerned, one of rock's greatest acts (and an inductee to the Rock Hall of Fame) doesn't exist. In the rock world according to Jann Wenner, there is no greater act in rock history than the Rolling Stones. They're certainly a bellweather act in rock history, but not "the greatest"...but that's how RS sees it, and apparently so should history.

So take what they say with a grain of salt, enjoy it for what it is (their fave-raves, as valid as the Listmania right here on Amazon) - cuz after all, it's only rock and roll.

I am fond of The Rolling Stone series. This is history of Most important artists, and for me every important for the rock&roll music can be found in this book. (And much more than I expected at this low price). I am big music fan and this is real thing for my library. Strongly recommended.

After reading the book I can understand the disparity in the customer reviews. "State of Mind" was a disappointment to me as I found Mr. Katzenbach's "Hart's War" & "Shadowman" among the best books I have ever read. Parts of "State of Mind" just flew by and I became quite engrossed...then periods of dull nonaction. Perhaps it was just too long. Were it not for my faith in Mr. Katzenbach's writing there were many times I would have quit this one. Kept figuring it would pick up in the next chapter. Ending is a pretty good payoff, but takes too long to get there and it's a plodding journey. Set in a Blade Runner world the overall plot made sense and the characters were well drawn. Mr. Katzenbach has entertained me before and will again.

John Katzenbach has created an America of the future where anarchy reigns. It is a violent, dangerous place where employees have to be escorted from the office in groups to ensure their safety, and no-one walks the streets at night for fear of losing their life. Within this grim picture comes a proposed 51st state. A haven where crime will be unheard of. Entry into the state will be closely controlled and stable families will be welcomed with open arms.

But it's here, in the budding crime-free zone that an alarming number of young girls have gone missing with a few of them being found dead. Officially they were reported to have met with an unfortunate accident, but those in the know can see that they are dealing with the work of a serial killer. This is something thought impossible in a crime-free state and is potentially devastating to the chances of the state being accepted into the Union.

The concept of a new state raised a very interesting point. It was created to give people a place to live in safety, when really, all it achieved was the creation of a false sense of security in the minds of the residents. By instilling the thought that the state was crime-free, the residents did not take any precautions against crime. No one locked their doors or took the proper care when walking at night and the police didn't know how to properly process a crime scene. Basically, an environment was created where a criminal could work with virtual impunity.

Although the book starts out with a very clever idea that made me pause for thought about where the world is heading, Katzenbach tended to take the long road to get to the final showdown, which then seemed to pass by with an air of inevitability. Once the concept of the new state was established along with all the differences it would bring, the rest of the book just read as a standard serial killer story, granted, with a couple of twists thrown in for good measure.

I think it must be considered one of the most riveting novel of our time.It is a really page turner and i couldn't put it down!!!J.K.creates real characters,a wonderful plot and a story that is full of suspense with a good ending. Now, i'm reding Just Cause and i consider J.K.a genius of thriller. Buy this book.AND READ IT!!!!!FANTASTIC