After four years of college, I could no longer run from chemistry. After numerous drops from the class, I finally found a chemistry book which is easy to understand. This book has every example problem you could think of. Every chapter gives you a good introduction, then cuts strait to the points every novice chemistry student should know to pass a general college level class. I do suggest a run through of chemistry in high school before stepping up to this book. I would have liked to have seen a book accompany the text which shows the drawn out ways to answer the review questions at the end of every chapter. Other than that this book is very down to earth and easy to follow.

I had difficulties solving chemistry problems I also bought many books but when I found this one in My local library I was extremely happy with the simplicity of the text problem examples
THIS IS THE BEST BOOK FOR CHEMISTRY CLASS EVER ....I HAD A D IN MY FIRST CHEMISTRY CLASS NOW I AM GETTING As AND Bs Every household should have one .... The best book by far

This book is very well written, with helpful diagrams and detailed examples. It is easy to understand and text and with this book it is truly not hard to understand chemistry and do well. I easily got an A in Chemistry I and I believe that everyone who failed the class simply didn't look over the book or their notes after class. It certainly wasn't the fault of the professor or the text- both explained chemistry very well.

Sir Robert Bolt's " A Man For All Seasons" is a familiar story, but Bolt's telling of it is always fresh. The motion picture version won 6 Academy Awards in 1966 including "Best Screenplay" (Bolt), "Best Actor" (Paul Scofield), Best Director (Fred Zinneman), and finally "Best Picture". The story is set against King Henry VIII's break with Rome, made necessary by his desire to divorce Catherine and marry Anne Boleyn. When Sir Thomas More refused to sign the Act of Supremacy, he was brought to trial on trumped-up charges and ultimately beheaded. More had sought refuge in the letter of the law, but he was required to state his approval of the Act in an oath --an oath which would have required him to state something that he did not believe. For More, an oath was an invitation to God to act as witness and judge. In existentialist terms, the oath would have shattered his integrity, his humanity, that "...something within himself without which life is meaningless." Contrast More with the character, Lilly, of "The Grifters", a modern character who finds fewer and fewer things that she is unwilling to do. She will make any compromise to survive, including the attempted sexual seduction of her own son. In the end she kills him, and escapes the bloody crime scene in an elevator going ominously down...down...down. Both plays: "A Man For All Seasons" and "The Grifters" are about the "self" and express the Jean Paul Sartre view that "man" alone among the animals is capable of inventing himself.

Please don't make students read this book! Being part of an assignment is enough to ruin any literary work for the reader, no matter how great. I first read this play while in Grade 10 (two years ago), without being forced, and I relished every word from beginning to end. It was so engaging and enjoyable that I couldn't put it down, and I actually laughed aloud and cried several times while reading it after classes and on the bus. This play got me interested in Renaissance English history, and I have learned a lot since then which I can relate to characters and events in A Man for All Seasons.

There is the criticism that Bolt made Sir Thomas unrealistically good and considerably more tolerant than he actually was, but Bolt admits this himself in the introduction included with the edition I read. In this play, historic events and of Sir Thomas More's personality are taken and molded slightly to provide a demonstration of one's man dedication to his faith and his conscience. The dialogue is brilliant, the characters are well realized (within the heroic structure for which Bolt was aiming), and--despite what some may consider a boring premise, certainly not me--the plot and issues are fascinating. It really made me think, and I've come back and read it several times when I feel like I need an idea to ponder. A marvellous play to see performed as well, especially when there is a very capable actor in the title role.

A Man for All Seasons has long been my favorite, whether in written form, stage play, or motion picture. The story is fairly simple, another angle on the drama of Henry VIII. Sir Thomas More is a deeply religious man, much troubled by the king's break with Rome and the establishment of the Church of England, naming the king as head of the church (directly contravening the idea that Christ is ultimately head of the church, indeed, Catholics believe the church to espoused to Christ). In an attempt to keep the peace, and his neck, More resigns his office and refuses to make any statement about the issue of the break with Rome or the king's divorce what-so-ever, even to his own wife.

Unfortunately, it would appear that while the king doesn't want to follow the rules, he also doesn't want a bad conscience. This requires him to get the 'blessing' of someone known to be reputable on the subject, so that his conscience may rest at ease. By circumstance of who he is, More is chosen. A document is drawn up in the Parliament, rather craftily, to which subjects of the king are required to swear.

Upon refusing to swear to this document More is thrown into jail. He will neither make a statement about his thoughts on the document, nor make explanation for refusing to swear. In More's thinking, he has been forced to choose between his bodily life and his immortal soul. Eventually More is tried and convicted of High Treason, carrying the sentence of death.

The play is wonderfully crafted and does an excellent job of being subtle and emotional at the same time. It is the essence of a morality play. When push comes to shove, and egos, life, inheritances are on the line, where will you fall?

Some criticize this play for not being historically accurate in some matters. I toss these criticisms aside with two short arguements 1.In some matters, such as More's feelings and private dealings with the king, we will never know the historical truth. 2.Most important to remember, it is a play, not a history text. It owes no wage to historical accuracy.

This play is a very easy read. The language is simple enough. My only suggestion is that those readers who are not Catholic may want to do a tiny bit of research about basic Catholic theology concerning marriage and divorce, in order to understand some of the motivations in the play.

I purchased this book about 6 months ago with the intent of winning the heart of someone special I had met two months previously. Before applying any of the techniques I read the book from cover to cover trying to get a feel for the concept of the book and the reasoning behind them. Once I had a feeling of where my relationship stood at that point in time, I began to experiment with various techniques as described in the book.

It is my opinion that no book can actually make someone fall in love with you. But a book can help you make the other person, the object of your desires, realise that they have feelings for you, if they indeed exist below the surface.

Patience is required, however. Some of the techniques in this book take weeks or longer to play out effectively. But trust me, they do work.

And, while the object of my affections has yet to declare her love for me, I can see the day coming and have this book to thank for helping me not blow everything by being impatient.

This is truly a great book and I highly recommend it!

If it seems that Love is a game where everyone knows the rules except you - this book will enlighten you!

If you've been stuck in a pattern of less than happy relationships - this book will show you how to break the pattern!

Many people are put off by the idea of using tactics to win love, but that is no different than using the tactic of combing your hair before going out on a date: there are simply things you can do to improve your chances of making a love connection, and this book will show you how.

I practically memorised Love Tactics and the sequel five years ago, and almost immediately met a wonderful woman from Australia. We have been living together here now for almost 3 years and will be marrying soon.

Change your love life - read this book!

As a professional counselor I have read many of the "relationship" books on the market and Tom's book is far and away among the very best. Love Tactics explains the way humans interact and the psychology behind what works and what does not work. Tactics may not be the most gentle sounding term, but the reality is everything in life has a formula or tactics that make something work. Love Tactics gives accurate information on how people psychologically respond to different situations. One of the most important concepts covered in the book is the ability to maintain a level of appearing indifference in a relationship and to why this allows the other person to respond without feeling "smothered" I have found the book very well written contrary to a previous review, in which the reviewer had problems spelling basic words. An excellent choice for a person who is serious about having a lasting relationship.

Utopia is a classic masterpiece that conveys More's vivid imagination of the Island of Utopia. Although most of the characters are fictional, it is intriguing to learn about the true values of European societies during the 16th century, when More actually wrote the book (although many scholars believe that the exact year was 1515). Truthfully, the book is quite easy to understand. All More tries to do is convey his own views of how society should be through Raphael. Moreover, the use of imagery in Book I is quite fascinating, including the constant references to Roman and Greek myths and beliefs. It is also quite remarkable to see that the story begins to be more and more interesting after More and Giles come back from dinner. To make a long story short, I think it is a great book because of the actual time it was written in since most pieces of literature written at that time were either lost or destroyed.

As a social critique of Enlgish and European society, this book is very effective. It is also beautifully written. But it should not be read as the depiction of what society should be like. Thomas More, a wise and brave man executed by orders of Henry VIII, knew that Utopia shouldn't be taken very seriously, and that is exactly why he used the word Utopia to name his famous island. Utopia, in latin, means "in no place", that what can not exist. The problem is that this simple fact was not understood by many. And so, "utopianism" was born. The preposterous belief that there is a universal and definitive form of organization for human societies led to disasters like Nazism and Communism. By organizing everything perfectly (according to who?), these systems become the negation of the very essence of the human being: its innate imperfection and its need to be constantly changing, always on the move. It is simply impossible that some political, economic and social system resolves once and for all the troubles of humanity. Problems are exactly what make humans progress and reform constantly. Besides, the State has proven indispensable for survival, but also limited in what it can accomplish (in Utopia, the State provides everything for everybody). Stagnant societies degenerate and disappear, or remain to live from the charity of dynamic societies. Closed, perennial social systems, simply don't work: there is abundant proof in history, ancient or recent. "Utopia" is an excellent account of human shortcomings and a good tale, but it is not, nor was intended to be, a recipe with solutions for the world. Aldous Huxley and George Orwell have shown us what might happen in a supposed Utopia. The Communist world was worse. And Anthony Burgess clearly shows us in "A Clockwork Orange", that in "perfect" societies, the only way to practice freedom is violence. Let's not be perfect.

As a social critique this book is very effective with answers to many arguments. Thomas More is a wise, brave and educated man who was executed by orders of Henry VIII, and wrote Utopia more as an explanation of why society needed to be far from perfect in order to be enjoyable. Utopia, meaning in Latin "in no place", was written entirely in satire, and many have said that it was a great source of entertainment for the more educated as they watched those less educated argue on the side of a Utopian state while quoting Moore, and having never seen the satire present while reading. Mr. Moore's Utopia touches on every aspect of the human existance as it would be experienced if we prescribed to this way of life. I found many of his discriptions colorful, and commonly found myself of the verge of anger before realizing that Mr. Morre was more often than not simply playing the devil's advocate.

This was very enjoyable for me. I would recommend that everyone take a risk and read this one.

This coffee table book was okay, no better or no worse than the others that were put together for West Point's bicentennial. But, I think pictures, whether beautiful or just okay, are substantially empty momentos -- not momentos at all -- with little in the way of meaning or value. There is no substitute for the real thing. I recommend that you personally visit West Point and take the tour --- and take pictures with you in them.

For West Point fans interested in its bicentennial, I recommend "West Point: Two Centuries.." by Robert Cowley. It is like the other lovely books, "West Point: The First 200 Years", "West Point: The Bicentennial Book", and "The Spirit of West Point" in that it is a coffee table book with great pictures, except it has a collection of essays written by well-known highly paid writers. For both the general population and West Point fans, I also recommend "West Point: Character Leadership Education...Thomas Jefferson" by Norman Thomas Remick. It is an easy historical and philosophical cosmology of the USA and West Point that everyone would do well to know, including the world of Islam.

Collaboratively compiled by Robert Cowley and Thomas Guinzburg, featuring an introduction by General H. Norman Schwarzkopf, and superbly enhanced with contributions from a number of noted historians and writers including Stephen Ambrose, William F. Buckley Jr., David Halberstam, Arthur Miller, George Plimpton, Tom Wicker, and Cecilia Holland, West Point: Two Centuries Of Honor And Tradition is an illustrated bicentennial celebration of the endurance and legacy of the United States Military Academy of West Point. Full-color photographs on nearly every page embellish this fascinating, informative, and very highly recommended history of America's oldest (and arguably most prestigious) military academy.

At first, I was a little confused as to how Hardy could stretch what seemed to be a simple plot into such a long novel--especially because the story in blurb on the back cover happened within the first 50 pages. But the story is more than the blurb on the back cover. It is about betrayal, last wishes, the "evils" of drink, and how one mistake can affect you 21 years down the road. Hardy's fatalistic view, seen through Henchard, is, at times, enough to drive the reader crazy.

Like many of the other reviewers here, I cried throughout the book. There are constant turns in the story line that at times uplift your soul, and then crash it into the depths of depression. This book is not an easy read though. There are sections that you will struggle to get through because it is dry, but then there are others that will keep you up at night rushing to finish.

I liked this book slightly less than I liked _Tess_, but it was _Tess_ that made me buy this book. Enjoy!

I remember having read this book in high school. I immediately fell in love with Hardy. (I was also fond of Hardy Boys at that time, so in my opinion the name Hardy acquired a special significance.) Unfortunately, though, I never liked another book by him quite so much. I've read Tess of the d'Urbvilles, Under the Greenwood Tree, Far from the Madding Crowd(which was perhaps his second best novel, as others here have affirmed), and perhaps a few others. It is strange, or perhaps significant that I remember the exact circumstance when I was reading this book. It must have been about ten in the night. I had cleared my study desk, and unlike my common practice of lying on my stomach on my bed to enjoy a book into the night, I sat down on the straight-backed chair at the desk to read it. Very soon, I was overwhelmed by the narrative of Mr. Hardy. My father came in to see what I was up to, saw the tears streaming down my face as I turned the pages of my book, and quietly went away. I have never before owned any story books- my parents told me to read out of libraries. But now I am 22, and have started earning some money of my own, and I'm going to start a little collection of my most beloved books, to pass on to my children, perhaps? And this is among my very best.

Since I have decided to dedicate part of my time spent reading in 2003 to the classics, I started first with The Mayor of Casterbridge, not the most famous of Hardy's works but seemingly a good place to start. I will definitely read the other works by this author since I was so captivated by this book.

The novel begins with the sale of Michael Henchard's wife and child to the highest bidder at a local summer fair. Henchard is drunk and his wife, tired of his habits, decides to leave with the sailor who bids on her and her daughter. Henchard wakes up the next morning, somewhat remorseful for what he has done and vows not to drink for twenty-one years.

The very next chapter picks up the story nineteen years later, with the return of the wife and child into Henchard's life. Henchard is now quite wealthy and is such an important man in his community, he is now Mayor of Casterbridge. From here, a series of wrong decisions and misunderstandings lead to the devastating conclusion.

Hardy is well known for his tendency towards gloomy endings and this book certainly fits the mold. But he is also well known for his lyrical descriptions of the English countryside and describing a way of life which had disappeared even in his own time. There were beautiful passages about the hay carts being driven through town, loaded so high that people on the second floor of homes could reach out and touch the top of the hay. Small details abound, describing the sound of rain on trees and the smell of the local foods. But perhaps the most significant aspect of the novel for me was the feeling that Henchard had wished for everything that had happened to him, and all of his wishes came true, and thus ultimately his downfall. These wishes were almost all made in a rash moment, when perhaps a minute or more of reflection could have produced a clearer head. Yet Henchard lives by his instincts, since for almost twenty years they seemed to serve him well.

I would recommend this book to any serious literature lover and I believe it serves as a good introduction to his other works. His books serve as a bridge from Victorian literature to modern literature, with no happy endings guaranteed.

This book, while exciting, definetly shows the inner sphere bias of all the recent books. The battle is laughable in the stupidity of the Clan commander. I mean, the Comguards can be excused for not having anyting resembling tactics, but the clans have been fighting Warship battles for centuries. Still, it's got some good action, and also points out the weakness of the inner sphere to treachery, something that has been neglected recently. A far better book than freebirth, but not as good as it should have been. Skip freebirth and read this.

This book followed the others in the Twilight of the Clans series. The story started out with an exciting, yet unrealistic, attack that a DEST team launched on a Clan outpost. From there, it moves to the planet (the name escapes my mind) where Task Force Serpent (the task force that is to take Huntress, the homeworld of the Smoke Jaguars) is training. The author goes on to describe a few training exercises. Then they leave the Inner Sphere, travelling via a secret route, into the heart of Clan space. A couple of monthes into their long journey, they encounter a few Ghost Bear warships. The battle is very detailed and well written. Soon after, they approach their destination. But all is not well...before they can get there, the crew is halted by the assassination of...

Come on, you didn't think I'd give it away, did you? Sorry. You're gonna have to read it for yourself.

I liked this one in the Twilight of the Clans series. The cover's the best part of the book, with it's beautifully rendered Raven crashing through the woods.

The story moves along well, though drags out a bit in the emotions of the characters who don't die. At the risk of sounding sexist, I'd almost think this one was written for the fairer sex, rather than we bloodthirsty mechwarriors!

The dying begins in this novel, but there's not nearly enough, and it's disappointingly handled as well. This one's a good read, and a must read, but Gressman could have done better.

This book is a biography of Lee the man, not an examination of one of our history's most notable generals.

The military side of Lee is, of course, a major part of Thomas's story. However, he has attempted to paint a charactor study of Robert E. Lee so that his deportment and decisions during the Civil War can be seen to flow from a man molded by tradition, duty, honor and the uniquely historic family from which he came.

This means that the book spends much time on Lee's pre Civil War life as well as time delving into his relationships with his family and others. The result is a readible book that gives the reader an entre into the man Robert E. Lee. Those looking for a military expose or exploration may be somewhat disappointed, but this is still a worthwhile book.

This book was a very factual, steadily-flowing, concise 1-volume biography of General Lee's entire life. I had read reviews here that felt this book did not focus enough on Lee's Civil War battles, but I thought the author (Emory Thomas) focused as much as he could (in a 1-volume biography) on Lee's Civil War conflicts. Robert E. Lee was an amazing figure, and Thomas does a good job portraying him fairly; neither deifying Lee, nor demonizing him either.

Thomas has given us a post-revisionist portrait of Lee that addresses the general as a human being much better than it presents him as a brilliant military strategist. His complicated relationship with his rakish father, his sainted mother, his demanding wife, and his children are all central foci of the book; his relationships with those outside his family get relatively short shrift. It is amazing how little of this book deals with the actual history of Lee's Civil War battles; more attention seems to be given to his involvement in the Mexican War. Indeed, the book seems to give disproportionate attention to his life prior to the Civil War, with relatively lesser attention to what happened after he became commanding general of the Army of Northern Virginia. Since the latter period is that in which he made his mark on history, this focus is rather disappointing. But Thomas does a relatively able job of dispelling the image of Lee as "the marble man," and for that, Civil War afficionados owe him a debt of gratitude.

Deadlock: The Inside Story of America's Closest Election is a workmanlike and emotionless recollection of the events surrounding the most controversial election of the past 100 years. It is a well organized, easy to follow and not visibly biased view of the relevant events leading up to and following the November 7 Presidential election. Seemingly accurate and double checked to a fault, reading this book left me with the impression that I had just read an excellent 275 page newspaper article and not much more. With almost no humor, lacking any sidebar comments, it is a book Joe Friday would be proud to call his own. While I am a Texan and Bush supporter, I much preferred Jake Tapper's Down & Dirty: The Plot to Steal the Presidency. I guess this means that like most people, when push comes to shove, I'd rather be entertained than informed. I do regret this intellectual weakness and like some of the votes in Florida I may change. But probably not in the next 36 days.

Two things struck me while reading this book, the first is that I doubt there is a book out there that is truly balanced and not somewhat biased. The second thing was that Gore really got the shaft, not so much by the recount wars, but by the election official that came up with the Butterfly Ballot. In the history of the USA this decision ranks up there with new Coke and the XFL, what a mistake. As far as the reporting in the book it was not bad for a review of all the articles they had in the paper, but it did not really dig into the particular issues very deeply. I wanted more detail and behind the scenes with both the candidates. I also wanted more details on the court cases; I felt like the sky-high overview of the issues of the cases did not do such an important issue justice.

In reading the book I think a little bit of a democratic bias comes out, just a little, but enough to notice. I also thought it interesting that they had far more details of the Gore group then the Bush camp, it follows the perception that the Post is somewhat liberal in its views. The book is an overview that came out almost 10 minutes after Gore hung up the phone on the second concession call so there are a few more details out now that they did not get in the book. Overall it is a good effort and a readable book, but not the end all be all on the subject.

I personally think the Washington Post and NY Times are liberal rags that are generally not worth the paper they are printed on. However, in fairness, when they do well I think they should be commended. I read the NY Times "36 Days" and still think that book was not worth the paper it was printed on. It was nothing more than a reprint of their articles.

Conversely, though, Deadlock was a well-written book. Two passages are worth noting. The first is about the book itself. About one-third of the way into the first chapter the book says: "These are the ... decisions, alliances, power plays, snap judgments and personality flaws revealed when a flukishly close election is played out for staggering high stakes. Both sides were nimble and brilliant and occasionally shady; both sides were also capable of miscalculations, divisions and blame. The best and worst of politics were on displayed in those 36 days, and both sides trafficked in each. This is how it happened." Although the Post endorsed Al Gore (no surprise) they tried to be equal in their appraisal of how the two campaigns sought resolution in their favor.

As for the two sides' strategy one only has to look within the first three pages of Chapter 2 where the Post records that the Democrats enlisted the services of three authors who wrote "The Recount Primer". The book reads: "Anyone who read and heeded the booklet could predict how the two sides would play America's closest president election -- at least in the broad outlines. Gore would gamble; Bush would stall. Gore would preach a doctrine of uncounted ballots; Bush would extol the dependability of machines. Gore needed more: more counting, more examination, more weighing and pondering of more ballots. Bush needed it over while he was still ahead." The only trouble for the Gore forces with this gospel was that the Republicans knew the same gospel. The book attempted to show how the two sides played out the roles assigned them.

For a behind the scenes objective look at the two sides, I think the Post did a very decent job. This could have been a... job on the Republicans and conservatives, but generally it was not (though I expected it). It could have been a... job on the Democrats and liberals, but it was not (nor did I expect it). I am not accustomed to this degree of fairness from the liberal Washington Post nor do I expect to see it very often in the future.

After receiving a few mean-spirited e-mails about my review of this book, I feel I must clarify a few issues.

Again, I've gone through nearly 30 books about 9/11. After you get past the austere black cover, this paperback falls with a thud.

Simply put, this book tries too HARD to be profound. You see images you've seen before, such as the sequence of shots of one of the jets slamming into the south tower of the WTC. Nothing new.

Two things bug me: Layout and content.

In the layout, you get the feeling the editors are trying to SLEGEHAMMER the reader with the obvious. I hate this. For example, in some essays, certain words and phrases are laid out into single lines, as if they are poetry. Then there is the awful decision to use fonts of varying sizes to EMPHASIZE certain passages. This is a pretentious device that, I'm sorry, calls TOO MUCH ATTENTION to itself. It is completely unnecessary and smacks of a patronizing tone intended to magnify the depth and gravity of what occurred on 9/11. We all know about that dark day. We DON'T need it pushed into our faces under the umbrella of "literary art."

Meanwhile, about the Chomsky essay: It's short but it's awful. It's laid out, again, in a way that feels like "padding." His message reads like an "I told you so" lesson. Here's what he does: He points to America's "sins" of the past and then turns them around in a way that makes you want to believe that it's NOW THE UNITED STATES' TURN TO SUFFER. This is horrible. His opinions are the stuff of fiery pamphlets handed out on street corners. (BECAUSE WHO WOULD PAY FOR THIS?)

OK, what's good about this book? Well, some of the transcripts of phone calls and a handful essays from victims and witnesses are well done. Why? Because they ARE NOT pretentious. But when others try to be "inspirational," they end up stating the obvious. I can't help but feel most writers were given an outlet to "vent" their own emotions, which have more relevance to the writer than to the reader.

If you want more for less, pick up the December 2001 issue of American Heritage Magazine. There you get five-star opinions about 9/11 from individuals of world repute. It has a "permanence" this book lacks and it doesn't feel rushed together.

In sum, it's fine to read what people like Joan Rivers, Deepak Chopra, Richard Dreyfuss and others "feel" about 9/11. But is it worth PAYING for? You can't judge quality by "good intentions." This is a rush-to-market volume featuring opinions from most who have (or who will have) little if any impact on our lives. Why not opinions from Giuliani, Bush, Blair, Sharon and Arafat, even those recorded by the news media in the AFTERMATH of 9/11? Why not more views from individuals who can effect CHANGE? This book could have been GREAT.

Trust me, this is NOT the definitive book of "think pieces" about 9/11/01.

If you disagree, fine. It's your money. But my advice is to borrow before you buy. There are other books worth buying. This one isn't.

Features a collection of moving photos and thoughtful essays, which capture much of what the world saw and felt September 11, 2001. Notable contributors include Deepak Chopra, author; Gary Fabiano, photojournalist who was trapped under the rubble; Robert Kennedy, Jr., politician; Liam Neeson, actor; Shashi Tharoor, Senior UN Official and author; and more. . All proceeds from this book will go to support the International Red Cross Federation.

This book is not easy to find. I finally ordered it from Amazon.com and I was amazed by it. I read all the critiques to this book. I usually like or do not like a book. I love this book, it is very factual, accurate and explores the feeling of about 30 people that had somenting to say about 9-11. It does not matter to me who they are and what they do, what matters is that the essays touch on fears that I had and still have. I do not pretend this book to change the world but to give me feeling and images to hang on to. On each essay I can find someting I can relate to and this makes the book special, it makes it personal. Highly recommended.