Moamen Ahmed từ Montelaterone, Grosseto, Italy

i_o2men

05/08/2024

Dữ liệu người dùng, đánh giá và đề xuất cho sách

Moamen Ahmed Sách lại (10)

2018-05-18 14:30

Những Thói Quen Tốt Cho Sức Khỏe - Vụ Nổ Bong Bóng Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi: Aleix Cabrera

This was one of the 2004 RUSA Notable Books winners. For the complete list, go to http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/rus...

2018-05-18 15:30

Giới Thiệu Giáo Án Địa Lí 12 - Chương Trình Chuẩn Và Nâng Cao Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi: Phạm Thị Sen

I first began reading it as a passage on the AP English test, five tries later I still don't know whether they get to the lighthouse, but as I get older the poignancy dawns, I imagine myself peeling many potatoes, skin everywhere. I am in layers. One day I will fry the potatoes ... probably when I'm fifty. Delish.

2018-05-18 16:30

Tủ Sách Tuổi Hoa - Ngày Tháng Nào Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi: Tôn Nữ Thu Dung

Books better than the movie as usual. Totally over-the-top but also incredibly moving given that this is a personal memoir.

2018-05-18 17:30

Mở Lối - Triết Lý Nhân Sinh Của Vị Thánh Kinh Doanh Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi: Matsushita Konosuke

Difficult to read this book. Difficult to start this book. I thought there were holes in the writing. There were paragraphs of pronouns where I didn't know which he was which person. Saying that, great scope. "Epic". Imaginary island in the Caribbean. It's about love, and its many forms. Some good ideas there. Sparking thinking about loves in one's life = life. -- "provocative" I didn't like the writing, I didn't like the style of writing. I thought perhaps it was the translation, but no, I think it was the writing. I didn't think it was poetic. I thought his scene transitions were quite deft. I thought the plot paths were also excellent, unexpected. Not trite. I would not want to read this book again.

2018-05-18 18:30

Chuẩn Bị Kiến Thức Ôn Thi Tốt Nghiệp Trung Học Phổ Thông Và Tuyển Sinh Đại Học, Cao Đẳng - Môn Vật Lí Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi: Nguyễn Hải Châu

I read this book for the first time in the 8th grade, around my birthday - so I guess that would have been around November of 1994. I loved it so much, I never forgot it. I've been meaning to pick it up and read it again for years, but only got around to it back in January. I'd forgotten so much about it, it was like reading it for the first time, which was awesome. It still held my interest and I feel it's one of the more unique horror novels I've ever read.

2018-05-18 19:30

Khúc Mưa Tan Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi: Kawi

Richard LaBonte referred to Jill Malone's first novel, Red Audrey and the Roping, as a "nonlinear novel that jitterbugs through time and place." Malone's second novel is a smoother dance, more of a raft ride down the rapids, where your position changes with every whorl of current. The characters and the plot leave you facing one way, then whip you around like white water roiling around outcroppings, to finish the ride looking behind you in wonder. How did I come to be in this position? You may start out believing the story is going one way, but you will be spun and spit out many a time in this new novel, whipsawed between ideas and feelings and concepts. Each character in this book glows, and shifts and pulls us toward them, and at times repels us. We are drawn in and thrown out. Just when you think you are comfortable, settling in, sure of your assessment of Claire, or Liv, or even Claire's son, just when you think you know them, you don't. Nothing is as it seems to be at first. Everything changes, or our perception of things, the people, their relationships, shift, with each snappy, well-paced scene. It is complex, and fast, and deeper than you may assume when you begin reading. Like the depth of a fast-moving river, which changes when boulders rise up to make the water swirl and eddy, rush into white, and recede to allow the water to slow down after a lazy curve to almost silent running, this book speeds, then slows, catches us, then tosses the reader back, stirs emotions, causes whiplash as scenes are revisited, layers added and stripped away. You really do need a field guide for this one. Malone is a wonderful writer, and sights, smells, sounds, tastes, all the senses come into play as she takes us on a journey, and with great, deft skill leads us through the characters' misconceptions and missteps like a camp counselor leaping from stone to stone across a stream. A Field Guide to Deception is a rare treat. When a debut novel like Red Audrey shows so much skill and promise, it is a pleasure to find a second novel as delightful and engaging as this one. Jill Malone's first novel, Red Audrey and the Roping, won the Bywater Prize for Fiction. Her second, A Field Guide to Deception, won the 2010 Lambda award. I can't wait to read her next novel, and see what greater honors it may garner.

2018-05-18 20:30

LinguaForum Hooked On TOEFL iBT Listening (New Edition) (With An MP3 And A CD-ROM) Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi:

These novellas are so well done that they make me wonder why King doesn't write more of these types of stories. Maybe precisely because he's so good at them? He made his name with horror, obvs., but if I had read these first, I would've been sorely disappointed with the Cristine's and Kujo's he crapped out.

2018-05-18 21:30

Ngọn Pháo Bông Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi: Nguyễn Thị Thụy Vũ

I tried to read this when it first came out and for some reason it just didn't click but this time I tore right through it. The plot is very good, not brilliant but certainly moves the story along at a nice clip. It's the descriptions of India that are extraordinary, mouthwatering even (mmm, the food: I am totally having puri, chapatis and curry this week); mostly the imagery is delicious, but when she wants to gross you out, the author is also vurrry good at that. Laurie King is very insightful. For instance, she describes one of those epic Indian feasts you see in movies like Indiana Jones, but she makes it clear that the host of this particular feast is using all this food (much of it disgusting) to put himself subtly in a position of power over his Western guests. It's fascinating passive-aggressive behavior; and it seems so obvious once she points it out. Also, as in all the books in this series, she creates a perfect wife for Sherlock Holmes — and I'm not normally enthusiastic about "fan fiction," even at high literary levels. King is the only author who really writes enjoyable post-Conan Doyle stories with Holmes. And his young bride, in this series, has so many interesting contrary views to those of her husband; she is his conscience, his feminine side, without being a bore about it. This is a totally great book. I don't know how men would like it, but as a female fan of Holmes, I highly recommend it.

2018-05-18 22:30

Combo Sông Máu + Lòng Dạ Đàn Bà Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi: Nguyễn Ngọc Thạch

Slightly less laugh-out-loud-funny than Lamb, but still awesome. I really think Christopher Moore's author-skills are improving.

2018-05-18 23:30

Dạ Khúc - Tái bản 03/2011 Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi: Ploy Ngọc Bích

The first half (until he warns you that he's about to go off the deep end) is one of the best books I've ever read. The second half is almost postmodern in its imbecility. Heretical, placed on the Index of Prohibited Books, but still an exhilirating read by a powerful writer whose mind was fixed only on the most important questions--that of God and of death. Unamuno is classed with the Generation of 98, but I think he is spiritually closer to the postwar existentialists, Camus, Sartre, and Heidegger, (1) because he deals only with questions from the perspective of a mortal man and does not attempt like a Hegel to become an omniscient god via science/philosophy; (2) because he deals primarily with the extreme situations of life; (3) because he is unashamedly emotional; (4) because they stole his ideas and secularized them. Unamuno's main point, which I would like to distinguish from other tragic views of life, is that in every man--he rejects such abstractions as "humanity" or "mankind," like Nietzsche (to whom he and the above men--and, incidentally, me--were heavily indebted), since the only men that are real are men of "carne y hueso"--feels in himself the desire for eternal life and knows that he must die. This is the tension of all existence; it is death that gives meaning to time and temporality, to all our actions, decisions, and our loves. Unamuno errs all over the place (like all of the above men), but is still fun to read (like all of the above men except me). His outlook reminds me of Hemingway, his style just as masculine, displaying, as his translator puts it, "a contempt for form and grace." Unamuno was a Basque, a people which fascinated Hemingway and made up the characters in the middle section of The Sun Also Rises. They are notoriously tall (like Unamuno), strong (check) people from the mountains who hate grandiloquence (also check). Unamuno aggressively seeks out the harsh truths, the brutal ones; his is a very Basque sensibility in contrast to the Latin/Roman prettiness of the Costa del Sol. Unamuno's chief error is fideism. Because one's reason is incapable of finding God, one must "create God." This is his chief heresy which leads to all his other errors, one crystallized in San Manuel [coincidence anyone?] Bueno, Martir, his fiction masterpiece, in which a priest pretends to still believe in Catholicism for the sake of his parishioners. Unamuno's hunger for God will never be satisfied, since he cannot find God. Camus calls this the problem of Absurdity, and was the main point of his entire writing career. Camus found himself in the same situation as Unamuno, caught between two irreconcilibles. Sartre recognized in himself a "God-shaped hole" but blamed it on fifteen hundred years of Christian civilization, from which he claimed to have inherited it. Whereas Camus found his reasoning about God inconclusive, Sartre rejected God outright because God's existence would diminish his freedom, and proceeded from there. So Unamuno is more closely related to Camus than anyone. Camus, though, reaches radically different conclusions. Whereas Unamuno rightly figures out that life is not worth living if God does not exist; Camus cops out and says that to commit suicide would be giving in to absurdity, even though elsewhere Camus admits (and even wrote the Stranger based on this idea) that if there is no God then we cannot say for sure what is good or bad. Unamuno thinks we must just throw ourselves at God's feet, and if we die and sleep forever, we have lost nothing. Pascal's influence is obvious. Of course St. Augustine is also relevant to the topic, as Unamuno agrees to about half of Augustine's argument from desire ("All innate desires have objects; man innately desires God; God exists."), agreeing that it is quite curious that we want what we cannot have. I'd like to mention Schopenhauer too. Schopenhauer profoundly concludes that life is not worth living, that we should never have been born, because (1) our desires are irrational (who would do something as unsanitary as have sex if we didn't have a biological drive to do it?) and (2) cannot be satisfied except by death. We are in a perpetual state of desire-torture, such as Gautama realized. The Buddha was right, except that there is no reincarnation. Unamuno is right to keep reason within the bounds of life and not try to contain life within reason, but he despairs of reason, something which is by definition unreasonable and therefore untenable. It is inspiring to read this tall, mighty man bearing his emotions, passions, fears to the world, but, as Bertrand Russell said of the existentialists, it devolves into psychology, rather than philosophy. Which reminds me of Kierkegaard, who faced the same dilemma and reached many of the same conclusions: if science makes you doubt God, throw out science. Why is it that I never hear Unamuno classed as an existentialist? I'd also like to make mention of another "tragic view of life" with which it might be easy to confuse Unamuno's conception. Walter Kaufmann claimed to have detected in the Greeks, especially Homer, in Shakespeare, Goethe, and others, a view of life as tragic resulting from the following conceptions: (1) man is the measure of all things, the paragon of animals, etc. (2) not only do all men die but human civilization is going to die and someday there will be no value-makers (as Nietzsche puts it, though he believed in eternal recurrence). It is tragic because it is the downfall of something great into something weak, just as Oedipus starts off as King and ends up blind and without a crown; though it may just as well be referred to as an elegiac view, in my opinion. The conspicuous proof of it is that none of the great tragedians (or even theoreticians of tragedy) have been Christians, at least not particularly religious ones--O'Neill, Nietzsche, Shakespeare (who else, writing in Elizabethan times, would write so little about Christ or about the Reformation?), Sophocles, Beckett, and so on. Christian writers are more disposed to comedy, as the Christian view of life is a comic one--that of a low being (fallen and sinful man) rising to great heights. There are far more great comedians in Heaven than tragedians--Flannery O'Connor, Swift, Evelyn Waugh, Anthony Burgess, GK Chesterton, etc. I agree with Unamuno that life would not be worth living without God [in fact, what I found so exhilirating about this book was finding so many things I realized around age 18 and 19. I always love discovering some spiritual sibling in the long dead past.], and that Schopenhauer would in fact be right in that case. Schopenhauer's gloss of Hamlet in the World as Will and Representation is enlightening: "Every one who has awakened from the first dream of youth, who has considered his own experience and that of others, who has studied him self in life, in the history of the past and of his own time, and finally in the works of the great poets, will, if his judgment is not paralysed by some indelibly imprinted prejudice, certainly arrive at the conclusion that this human world is the kingdom of chance and error, which rule with out mercy in great things and in small, and along with which folly and wickedness also wield the scourge. Hence it arises that everything better only struggles through with difficulty; what is noble and wise seldom attains to expression, becomes effective and claims attention, but the absurd and the perverse in the sphere of thought, the dull and tasteless in the sphere of art, the wicked and deceitful in the sphere of action, really assert a supremacy, only disturbed by short interruptions. On the other hand, everything that is excellent is always a mere exception, one case of millions, and therefore, if it presents itself in a lasting work, this, when it has outlived the enmity of its contemporaries, exists in isolation, is preserved like a meteoric stone, sprung from an order of things different from that which prevails here. But as far as the life of the individual is concerned, every biography is the history of suffering, for every life is, as a rule, a continual series of great and small misfortunes, which each one conceals as much as possible, because he knows that others con seldom feel sympathy or compassion, but almost always satisfaction at the sight of the woes from which they are themselves for the moment exempt. But perhaps at the end of life, if a man is sincere and in full possession of his faculties, he will never wish to have it to live over again, but rather than this, he will much prefer absolute annihilation. The essential content of the famous soliloquy in " Hamlet " is briefly thisOur state is so wretched that absolute annihilation would be decidedly preferable. If suicide really offered us this, so that the alternative " to be or not to be," in the full sense of the word, was placed before us, then it would be unconditionally to be chosen as " a consummation devoutly to be wished." But there is something in us which tells us that this is not the case : suicide is not the end ; death is not absolute annihilation. In like manner, what was said by the father of history has not since him been contradicted, that no man has ever lived who has not wished more than once that he had not to live the following day." (Book IV) [By the way, Bertrand Russell thought Schopenhauer had a mental disorder.] Schopenhauer, way ahead of his time, antedating Darwin, argues that if we could really see the world for what it is, which our stupidity and physical weakness prevents us from doing (for example, we can only see ROYGBIV), we would kill ourselves because we would see that it is all Becoming and dying, that nothing Is and everything is changing. So it is our stupidity, our epistemic horizon, if you will, which sets us free, he argues. If we could know everything, we would be determinists, but since we know very little, we feel ourselves to have free will. Ignorance is freedom; ignorance is bliss. Unamuno sees that this view is unbearable (and I haven't even got into Nietzsche and the acid bath of all morality) and that man NEEDS God. Which he does.

Người đọc Moamen Ahmed từ Montelaterone, Grosseto, Italy

Người dùng coi những cuốn sách này là thú vị nhất trong năm 2017-2018, ban biên tập của cổng thông tin "Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn" khuyến cáo rằng tất cả các độc giả sẽ làm quen với văn học này.