Sophie Blake từ Santa Clara, Paraguay

sophied76c

05/05/2024

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

Sophie Blake Sách lại (11)

2019-10-04 10:31

Tập Viết Chữ Hoa Lớp 1 (Tái Bản) Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi:

The sequel to The King Must Die, this book picks up almost exactly where the last book ends. It covers the rest of the legend of Theseus, combining the original legend with Renault's blend of imagination and historical research. This is probably the weakest of Renault's books that I've read. The pacing of the book - cramming most of the life of one of Greece's most famous legendary heroes into less than 250 pages - means that Renault was always going to need a strong and clearly defined character in order to carry the book without it feeling rushed and uneven. Theseus never comes across to me as any of those things. In fact, he never even comes across to me as remotely likeable. There was a coldness and a remoteness to the character that I can't recall encountering when reading her Alexander trilogy, for instance. It's as if Renault was trying to create a real man from an archetypal hero, and got stalled halfway through the process. Overall, she handled the conversion from myth to novel well, providing some plausible and fairly realistic expectations for parts of the legendary cycle. The rest of the historical aspect shall be passed over in silence by me, mostly because I can appreciate that at the time Renault was writing, much of what she was saying was still accepted as historical fact. (But it's not, it's really, really not! 'Shore People'! Matriarchal religion being replaced by the patriarchy! Mycenaeans in 1500BCE!) I was more than a little irked by her representation of some aspects of gender history/interaction. I can buy that, since this novel was from Theseus' viewpoint, - and he was a pretty typical example of a Bronze Age male raised in a patriarchal society - that he would have no problem in ascribing a woman's anger to the fact that it was her 'moon time.' I had much, much greater problems with the representation of Hippolyta; not that Theseus would think of her as he did, but that a woman who was supposedly raised as an independent and self-sufficient Amazon would have thought and acted as she did, and would have what seemed to me to be a high level of internalised misogyny. It made me very, very uneasy reading those sections. I think I'll be re-reading the Alexander trilogy long before I pick this one up again. It's not a bad novel; it just didn't really do so much for me.

2019-10-04 16:31

Hồn Nhiên Trong Thế Giới Đảo Điên Thư viện Sách hướng dẫn

Sách được viết bởi Bởi:

Michael Behe is a perfect example of Science gone wrong. He demonstrates that science has come so far in the past several decades that we now have more questions, and fewer answers, than ever before. Rather than inspiring him to seek out the hard-to-find answers, he seems content, indeed determined, to invoke a higher being as the answer to the difficult questions of science. The logic of his arguements is frustrating, to say the least, because it can't be argued. What ever he thinks he knows about biochemistry prevents him from even considering other potencial explanations. He holds stubbornly to science and the scientific method, yet the heart of his arguements are based on analogies to man-made machines, watches and mousetraps, that have almost nothing in common with real live organisms. Not content to compare apple to oranges, he compares apples to gameboys, then argues that no one would doubt the existence of gameboy engineers. How does one respond to this? Add to this a stubborn faith in a Creator God and the arguement completely exits the realm of science. Mr. Behe's book is a painstaking read, not only for it's lackluster prose and bad science, but most especially for it's arrogance and for the blinders that so obviously obstruct his vision of reality. Here's a clue, Michael: Natural systems portray the illusion of design because only those organisms, only those biochemical systems, only those MOLECULES that conform to the laws of the universe are able to survive, to exist. What is, is because it can be. All else parishes in the struggle for survival, the struggle for resources, the struggle for reproduction. We are here because we obey natures laws, because we have been shaped, tweaked, winnowed by those laws. "Irriducible complexity" is another name for "we don't know the details (yet)." And perhaps we'll never know. But what I do know is that Intelligent Design is an unfortunate product of intelligent people mixing up there causes and effects. Mr. Behe has been thoroughly discredited by science. It's just unfortunate that there are enough laymen with enough blind faith to keep his ideas circulating through the collective consciousness. Read this book for an exercise in patience, an exercise in cheek biting, or if you're really in to masochism.

Người đọc Sophie Blake từ Santa Clara, Paraguay

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.