Carol Marques từ São Miguel das Matas - BA, Brazil

_arol_arques

11/05/2024

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

Carol Marques Sách lại (10)

2019-07-26 02:31

Bộ Đề Kiểm Tra Trắc Nghiệm Và Tự Luận Môn Toán 11 Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi:

** spoiler alert ** Was the highlight for this being able to demand my "Freedom" from my wife and kids, when looking for the book? Nah...but close. I'm trying to figure out why the book did not really engage me. It sort of feels like a 70's/80's TV show. Quite a long book to spend with so few characters. And catching them with pretty much their worst decisions strung end to end one after the other. Are we to marvel at Joey's awkward eventual devotion to his blow-up doll girlfriend Connie? Or that the loyalty of a betraying friend/partner must be weighed somehow in the opposite manner I'd expect, that is for me the better the friend, the more bitter the betrayal. But I'm not Franzen's mother, who evidently planted the contrary seed. Are the "autobiagrapher apologizes asides" meant to capture an element of Patty? Or do they just allow Franzen an excuse to distance himself from the writing here. I did not really catch Patty's tone at all from that angle, nevermind that later there are scenes relayed that would be beyond Patty's powers of observation. Anyways, maybe this was more comedic for some folks than for me. I didn't laugh once, and the book is easy to read in its content and prose, but stretched on and on, like a 70's/80's show would past its expiration by a year or two. As for the underlying crying of the eco-crisis, I am curious how sincerely Franzen believes that. I think he gives it more sway than what my fellow readers at our monthly book gathering suspect he does. At the depiction of the sex in this book, made me feel like the humans were being observed as a species, and the author debating whether it was worth being preserved from its own endangerment. Despite the false sense of "redemption" that gets tacked on after sacrificing a weakly drawn character of exuberant hope (Lalitha, we barely knew ye), embracing the one you are doomed to love feels more like a punchline than an epiphany. I felt a nihilist grinning from the dark corners too much of the time.

2019-07-26 04:31

Mẹo Vặt Và Thủ Thuật Trong Sử Dụng Word Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi:

The "collage" style is not pleasing to me -- among other things, I fail to see why Beatles lyrics are relevant or necessary to the points being discussed. I'm also finding that too little support is given for the assumptions underlying most of the book's prescriptions: in one instance there is a mention that the author began to wonder if gender was socially constructed, and then the next paragraph assumes that gender is socially constructed, as do all subsequent paragraphs. There is a step missing there: it is the step between wondering and taking as read: "proving it". (Or putting a line in to indicate that while it is unproven it is going to be the basis of all subsequent points.) I'm uncomfortable with the use of colonialist descriptions of Native American practices in re: gender being used as examples of alternative cultural attitudes to the subject. If the goal is to illustrate that contemporary Western customs are not the only option why are Native American practices the only alternative systems mentioned? And why are only accounts by white settlers (and terms coined by white observers) used to describe them? The sweeping statements made about transsexuality seem largely generalised from Bornstein's own experience. I don't know how much of this appearance is produced by the fact that the book is fifteen years old. Perhaps some of the topics that seem unduly fixated on from my perspective were commonly presumed to be widely applicable in 1994? There is a section that lists some common "myths" about transness and proceeds to disavow their relevance or accuracy. One of these is the idea that transpeople are the chosen people of some particular higher power. A few chapters later, Bornstein seems to suggest that the proper role of a transperson in society is that of a "shaman" or a "fool." The "shaman" idea--the idea that gender transition gives trans people some kind of mystical knowledge or exceptional insight that they then have a responsibility to share with the world--seems to stray awfully close to suggesting that transpeople are "chosen" for a mystical task, IMO. The "fool" idea is offensive on almost every level: it suggests transpeople are freaks and fitting subjects of exploitative entertainment, and that their obligation is to laugh first at what other people may perceive as laughable in them -- to make light of their own mistreatment by others. (Of course, the idea that there are certain specific roles that are somehow the only (or most) fitting roles for transpeople is ridiculous and offensive in itself. Urk.) This section is in fact so weird and transphobic that I almost think it must be meant to say that this is what society thinks, and to denounce it, except that there is no indication of that whatsoever. But hey, maybe that part's like the bit where socially constructed gender is proven, i.e. MYSTERIOUSLY MISSING.

Người đọc Carol Marques từ São Miguel das Matas - BA, Brazil

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.