Truyện Cổ Tích Việt Nam Dành Cho Bé Thông Minh (4 - 10 Tuổi) tải về miễn phí cuốn sách

Raquel Siza raquelsiza — ** spoiler alert ** I have to give the whole book 2 stars, because it was "just ok". The ending was of course very good and original, but you have to work yourself through 400 painful pages. My main problems: - STORY: Brandon said he wanted the book stand on its own. In my opinion, he failed completely in that regard. The biggest part of the book deals with the consequences of the first novel. The last 50 pages are exposition for the last novel. - STRUCTURE AND PACE: The Pace of the first 350 pages is horrible. The story could be compressed to maybe 50 pages and deals with the siege of Luthadel and Elend's struggle as King and boring politics. It starts to get interesting at the first climax at around page 450 (Vin kills Zane)! Then the typical "Brandon Avalance" hits and its all resolved and very rushed. Only the last 50 pages deal with the Well of Ascension and are nothing more than a teaser for book 3... but to be fair, they are very good. - CARACTERS: Okay Kelsier was my favourite character in book 1 and after TWoA I know why: He tied together the whole crew. In this book the crew is absolutely shallow and unimportant. Some of them were so obsolete that Brandon noticed this and killed them off (Clubs, Dockson). Main Characters are of course Vin, Elend and Sazed. The Terrisman is great and the best character in the book. His inner struggles are great, his relationship with Tindwyl is subtle, yet intersting. But to be honest I found the love-relationship of Elend/Vin very boring and especially Elend is very uninteresting. Also no surprise that he has to become an Allomancer, even Mistborn, because there would be nothing to write about him in book three. I just hope we won't see a "Vin trains Elend"-theme in the final novel. So every main character is now a superhero (except maybe Spook) because the author ran out of ideas. I really can't understand why many people rate this book so high. Maybe it's the fantastic finale and the end leaves them with a false impression of joy. But the Well-ending doesn't even belong to the mains story of the book and I believe that you shouldn't have to work through 450 pages to come to the interesting parts. Read "The Final Empire", then the summary of book two and then "The Hero of Ages".

Tamiris Villardo tamirismoreira — I dislike the fact that Gladwell proposes to be stating something 'new'--I feel as though he's trying to pass off his insights as revolutionary, 'this could make you thousands of dollars' but it's merely common sense. I do enjoy reading his anecdotes and some of his analyses--for example, his discussion of how Blue's Clues finally topped Sesame Street was pretty interesting.

Ricardo Rodrigues ricardordrigues — This book came very close to receiving a 1-star rating (generally I reserve those for books which are so bad I can’t even finish them), but it did redeem itself a bit at the end. Of course, one cannot expect too much from a book on the subject of Hitler’s incestuous love affair with his much younger niece. It is by its nature a sensational subject, with little to offer in the way of exploring legitimate historical concerns (in the end, who cares what a historical figure did or did not do in bed?). The author is a playwright who has also written several other popular biographies, including those of de Sade and Nietszche. He has no historical training, and it shows in his use of sources, his prose, and his interests. Probably for me the biggest problem was the question of sources. Hayman sticks almost exclusively to secondary works and published memoirs, except where he has been pointed to a specific primary document by such a source. He is generally uncritical of his sources, accepting them at face value, and often treating vague recollections written decades after the fact as if they constituted “eyewitness testimony” in a court trial. When he is critical, it is usually because a source contradicts his own preconceptions, and he is inconsistent even about this; sources are treated as perfectly reliable in all respects except when the author chooses to undermine a piece of evidence. The poor documentation does not help. Two books by Joachim Fest are referenced (in abbreviated form) throughout the notes, but their full titles and citations do not appear in the bibliography. When I would check a source that was cited, I found, as often as not, that the wrong page had been referenced, or sometimes the wrong book entirely. Some quotes are so severely out of context as to suggest that the author never actually read the book, but found the quote in some other source and cited the original without checking it. Based on this flimsy evidence, Hayman tries to argue that there was a conspiracy to cover up the truth about Geli’s death. The “truth,” for him, is that Hitler shot her in a fit of possibly drunken pique when she began to resist his control. Ironically, however, he admits that had the Nazis themselves not issued a statement to the press, “the newspapers would have announced that Hitler’s niece had died after shooting herself accidentally, and, almost certainly, the official verdict would have been accidental death” (171). In order to explain this, he has to postulate the collusion of the Munich police with an extremist political party which was not in power, and to seek “contradictions” (often fabricated through his own mis-reading of sources) in the “testimony” of people who were often writing decades after the fact and the official police report made at the time. He makes much of the fact that an elderly deaf lady was not questioned, who lived in the same apartment building as the shooting, although it is unclear whether this would have been standard police procedure at the time and place. Indeed, much of his allegation of “conspiracy” needs to be examined in the light of standard procedure, about which he knows nothing whatsoever. Apart from this, much of the book is concerned with salacious details of Hitler’s supposed coprophagia, sado-masochism, and impotence. This is culled from the scurrilous gossip of former followers eager to distance themselves from the excesses of the regime, with no attention to the distinction between hearsay and evidence. Hayman does at least shield himself from indulging in slander by using terms like “if this is true…” but it is clear enough from the conclusions he draws that he believes it to be. The final chapter of the book puts the possible murder into historical context by examining some fairly good sources on the Holocaust with far more intelligent criticism than had been applied in the rest of the text. He does manage to use the psycho-historical speculations he has drawn to good effect here in discussing the possible motivations for this catastrophe, and for Hitler’s behavior after 1941 in general. Even with its shaky foundation, this section does have some interesting ideas to contribute, which more serious historians might follow up on to their credit. Certainly, the possibility that Hitler began his career of mass murder with the murder of the one woman he loved has a certain logical appeal, but that detail will probably never be proven. In any event, some work could still be done in examining the psychological effect of Geli Raubal’s death on the man and the movement.