Lorsque j'avais 19 ans , un chameau m' a violé d`une manière plutôt agressive . Je lui ai bouffé les testicules et il est mort .(ceci est absurde.)

Another wonderful work by Ionesco that confronts fascism with the humorous representation of the rhinoceros. If you have read the English translation, you are missing out on what the French version has to offer.

I considered assigning this book in a high school Advanced Placement Literature class because the selection of plays is a perfect introduction to Greek drama, but I decided against inflicting it on students because most of the plays are translated into very awkward faux-Elizabethan English, making them nearly impenetrable for the uninitiated.

Is there no publisher out there who will create an affordable anthology of Greek plays in modern translations?

I work in a small public library which requires me to acquire materials which serve dual purposes. This title has 7 greek plays which give the reader an excellent selection of the best greek dramatists. However, the introduction provides the student with short biographies, overview of the nature of tragedy and comedy, and a history of the greek theater and the play performance. I use this book for those reports on the history of theater too. Good selection for small/medium libraries.

Words fail to describe how bad this book is.
The practice tests and questions have no resemblence at all to the actual gmat questions.
The book is so bad that I was personaly insulted and have decided not to purchase any more "barrons" books.

I chose the book because its content is pretty accurate, and it has tons of questions. Yet, as I was pratising the tense excercises, I lost my track: the question styles are off GMAT style and many questions seem to be artifically awkard. The book has 5 tests, yet all in the old GMAT format. I especially do not like the software, which has only one test in it and does not resember real GMAT experience.

On ...(the webseite), I sorted "GMAT" books by "bestselling"and I found 5 books that fit my needs and have >4.5 stars. These five books have been helpful to my progress! I wish I had logged on ... (the website) and read others' comments earlier. Well.

Good luck to you.

This book the typical job of explaning the test, and what is going to be tested, and will review you over the basic types of quesitons that the test has. Then the book gives you a pretest to let you know where you stand, and then it begins to give you some review sections.

The review sections are pretty good, but they are not helpful if you are someone that needs to brush up on a subject. In fact, they do tell you they are no substitute to real knowledge. So you might want to keep that in mind.

The next sections of the book are a series of practice tests that are good exercises to go through, but some people claim some of the answers are wrong, and I did find a few typos in the book. So it is a little frustrating to work through.

The computer software disk, is worthless. Other books such as the Princeston review's disk has LOTS of questions. This book computerized the first exam in the book only. Not exactly helpful, not adaptive, so don't look for a lot of help.

Now this book might be good if you just want to sit down and do problems similar to the ones on the exam. If you are looking for a reach coach, or anything that is adaptive, this book isn't much help. Personally, I wouldn't purchase the book, but if someone had a copy laying around, I'd pick it up.

DEARS Mrs. AUTHORS BROWN , LeMAY and BURRSTEN of CHEMISTRY: THE CENTRAL SCIENCE

I'm a chemical teacher. I have the excelent book CHEMISTRY: THE CENTRAL SCIENCE, 1999 , seventh edition and I'd like to buy the book'guide. I tried to order by INTERNET but , unfortunately, I don't had success. How to obtain that guide? Thank for attention and I' am waiting for a soluction, if possible, positive.

DEAR Mr.. AUTHOR RAYMOND CHANG of CHEMISTRY

I'm a chemical teacher. I have the excelent book CHEMISTRY, 1994 , fifth edition and I'd like to buy the book'guide. I tried to order by INTERNET but , unfortunately, I don't had success. How to obtain that guide? Thank for attention and I' am waiting for a soluction, if possible, positive.

DEAR Mrs. AUTHORS KOTZ & TREICHEL of CHEMISTRY and CHEMICAL REACTIVITY

I'm a chemical teacher. I have the excelent book CHEMISTRY $ CHEMICAL REACTIVITY, 1998 , third edition and I'd like to buy the book'guide. I tried to order by INTERNET but , unfortunately, I don't had success. How to obtain that guide? Thank for attention and I' am waiting for a soluction, if possible, positive.

Incredibly boring, uninteresting book. With no experience in the aviation or airline industry, the author relies on few interviews and going through the memoirs of some executives. He has no passion for his subject. It would be an OK book if the author had any writing talent. But he is a lousy writer and it shows on almost every page of this book.

...

This book did not interest me at all. It takes first about 200 pages to come to the most important time for Boeing in the commercial airline industrie and even this is not well documented. Written by someone with obvious no feeling with the airline industrie and could have been well written in no more than 100 pages.

A fine brushstroke look at how Boeing got started, the men who built the company and its entry into the jet age.

This book is a collection of anecdotal "For What Its Worth" tips on how to be an effective broker. But the information is seriously dated (it takes about limited partnerships), the stories are overly simple and not poignant, and the final effect is a compelling scenario that makes you wish you were in business in the early 80s when this book was recent and relevent.

Don't waste your time or your money.

Written in a thought-for-the-day format, this is something like a military manual on being a broker, from the highly opinionated point of view of an experienced broker (example: "The new broker should purchase 5 suits, wool, 5 shirts, white, two pairs leather shoes, black"). While it's certainly dated and at times bizarre, it can be useful to the new broker looking for any help in how to start his career in an industry with a very high turnover rate. Until someone writes a better one, it's worth skimming through.

In his _Roll, Jordan, Roll_, Genovese presented the black experience of slavery as fundamentally determined by white power. Yes, slaves were able to "make" a world for themselves to a much greater extent than U.B. Phillips or Stanley Elkins had allowed, but they did so under the constraints of white hegemony as defined by Gramsci. The paternalistic system granted slaves spheres of a sort of autonomy in return for the base acceptance of master control. Black cultural constructions, however innovative and powerful, were constrained within bounds that prevented the power of the dominant class from ever being called into question. Black doings were rife with resistance acts, but their struggles were taken on in the master class' terms and thus failed to threaten its authority at an essential level. The few uprisings that were planned (and the fewer still that were carried out) were directed only towards escaping, not overturning, the system. The "day to day" resistance manifested in malingering, feigned illness or stupidity, theft, or murder, presupposed an accepted status quo that whites had violated and for which slaves could legitimately protest. Thus, resistance among slaves was at its crux limited and "accommodationist." Even open revolts, while they may have made whites afraid, stimulated them to make ameliorative "reforms," and partially shaken their myths of black docility, didn't operate outside of an understanding of slavery as part of the equation of life.

Genovese was criticized for making the conditions of the antebellum Chesapeake region normative for slavery as a whole. In attempting to explain the actions of slaves who did revolt frequently and violently, as was necessary when he shifted his gaze to the Caribbean in this book, however, Genovese only adjusted his understanding of the limits of resistance by expanding it. Significantly, hegemony played no explicit part in this larger schema: the complicated dialectic he described in the American South was replaced with a straightforward before and after scenario in the West Indies. Slave uprisings before 1804, the year of Haitian independence, were "restorationist" rebellions, in that they represented a rejection of the colonial world and an attempt to establish isolated African maroon communities that were fully separate from the slave societies from which they sprang. The revolt in St. Domingue, however, constituted a "revolution" for Genovese. Setting the events there between 1791 and 1804 firmly in the context of a "bourgeois-democratic revolutionary wave" beginning in Philadelphia in 1776 and continuing in France in 1789, he presented the Haitian Revolution as a part of a "modern" movement. Afterwards, slaves would no longer seek to establish "traditional" societies, but instead would break away from the "early maroon vision" and work to join the societies that had enslaved them, albeit on equal terms. St. Domingue represented a vital turning point in the direction of slave resistance in that it comprised a revolutionary bid for nationhood.

Accommodation on the mainland, it seems, was assimilation in the islands. In this book Genovese continues his search, at a fundamental level, for an explanation of resistance -its prevalence and nature in the Caribbean and its paucity and impotence on the mainland. His stories must end, however, with Toussaint or Lincoln respectively: blacks either forcibly pushed white ideology to its fullest implications, or waited for whites themselves to bestow its fruits upon them. While he grants slaves agency, clearly the important actors are white. Until "revolutionary" Haitians adopted and applied "white" ideas to overturn the slave system altogether, "restorationist" maroons and American slaves hedged in by paternalism were doomed to inhabit the limited spaces granted to them.

Of course, the slaves of St. Domingue didn't overturn the slave system, and Genovese's reasons for their failure suggest the limits of his approach. Despite the preeminent place he grants it in the history of slave uprisings, Genovese ultimately sees the Haitian Revolution as a flop. While Toussaint and his successors Jean Jacques Dessalines and Henri Christophe worked to set up a nation state that participated in the world market with its bourgeois capitalist compatriots, the "counter-revolution" of later leaders such as Alexandre Pétion and Pierre Boyer relaxed the dictatorial discipline that had kept the Haitian masses on the sugar plantations. Thus released, Haitians succumbed to a "slave-bred land hunger" that drove them to acquire increasingly small plots of land, and "Haiti slipped into a system of peasant proprietorship and self-sufficiency -wonderful euphemisms for the poverty and wretchedness of bourgeois-egalitarian swindles- and the dream of a modern black state drowned in the tragic hunger of an ex-slave population for a piece of land and a chance to live in old ways or ways perceived as old." Genovese sees slavery as only a system of forced labor, albeit a peculiar one with a host of ideological ramifications including paternalism and Afro-Christian religion. Accepting Eric Williams' portrayal of the Atlantic slave system as a natural product of emergent Western capitalism, he describes the changes in that world as the products of forces (economic and ideological) generated by the market centered in Europe and operating through white minds, mouths, and hands.

Evidence that slaves operated outside this world or independent of its mandates disrupts this conception by suggesting that Genovese himself has become a victim of planter hegemony. If Europe could be present in the socio-political baggage brought by the colonists, why could not Africa have an equal presence in that brought by slaves? What meanings did slaves make of slavery? Others than those dictated to them? How did they understand their condition? Such questions illuminate the constraints of seeing slavery only as a system of labor and make new evidence valid in explorations of slave resistance as "accommodation," "restoration," or "revolution." These terms in Genovese's mouth mark his inability to process evidence of slave doings in terms other than those set out by whites. They beg for an account of the struggles of slaves as perceived by blacks themselves.

VEry helpful for school paper, info not found in other sources

While Bianchi and McDonough offer some constructive and provocative thoughts on the past, present and future of the Society of Jesus, their book contains serious flaws which make it more of a pulp polemic than a serious academic study. The authors make no pretense of objectivity and little attempt to conceal their biases: often, the book seems to be an argument for ending clerical celibacy and an all-male priesthood, using the Jesuits merely as a case study in support of the authors' thesis. As the previous reviewer notes, Bianchi and McDonough rely disproportionately on the comments of ex-Jesuits who left the Society years ago to make generalizations about Jesuit life today. The comments the authors quote are often very repetitive and seem to highlight views with which Bianchi and McDonough agree rather than give a well-rounded perspective on how current and former Jesuits feel about the issues discussed. More troubling is the methodology the authors used to collect the data that forms the backbone of their study. Eschewing any attempt at random sampling, the authors sent out surveys with an invitation to participants to choose other individuals who should be surveyed, allowing participants to shape the results by deciding who else should be given the opportunity to participate. Unsurprisingly, then, the results are skewed toward certain perspectives and probably do not represent the full panoply of opinions held by the target groups. As stated above, Bianchi and McDonough do make some worthwhile points in "Passionate Uncertainty," but their ill-concealed biases and sloppy methodology cast doubt on the value of their conclusions.

The book is interesting, at times fascinating, and the authors have wisely backed up every assertion with quotes from Jesuits and non-Jesuits alike. The honesty of the written responses is astonishing--for an order of men so famous for nuance and "jesuitical" language, the Jesuits quoted here speak frankly about sensitive and complicated issues.

On the other hand, the book relies so heavily on the testimony and study of former Jesuits that the title and marketing efforts are misleading--it is not always a view of the situation "Inside the American Jesuits." For example, the authors draw extensively from the testimony of Jesuits who left the order between 1963 and 1975 for their analyses of issues like priestly formation and doctrinal variation. The equivalent would be asking someone who left the Catholic Church forty years ago to describe a current parish. The former Jesuits are describing their experience (as they remember it, through the distorting lens of decades of lay life), rather than the practice of the current Society.

It is worth noting that one of the authors, Bianchi, is himself a former Jesuit, and may have felt a resonance with those who left for the same reasons or at the same time. Nevertheless, this focus on a specific generation results in a book about what happened to the Society of Jesus between 1963 and 1975, rather than the advertised look "Inside the American Jesuits."

This book really wastes money because its stuff is outdated and
biased. You will find this book can not improve your scores on actual GMAT test if you are studying GMAT through this book.
In verbal section, SC and RC are very poor because they have
dissimilar with actual test. Really, not buy this book.

Does more harm than good in preparing you to the GMAT. The Math questions are OK and reasonably close to the real thing, but contain a lot of typos. The Critical Reasoning part is seriously flawed and very misleading: in a number of instances the author tends to introduce its own view of what the answer is, with no proper logic. The Reading Comprehension is very bad as well: the texts are horribly constructed and do not match what you will find on the actual test ; the questions are not well formulated and the answers are sometimes not adapted to the question. Sentence Correction is OK.
All in all don't buy this book. Get the Official ETS, the Powerprep soft and either Kaplan or Princeton with CD.

I'll be taking my GMAT in a month and decided to buy a few study guides to raise my score. It's difficult to attribute which book works the best, but so far this one seem the most useless although it does have some merit. As other readers suggested, the problems are either very easy or hard. The math is simplistic and the reading comprehension passages are over a page long. The format is outdated and doesn't consider the new CAT format or e-grader. Some of the questions have no answer because they misprinted the question. This is frustrating, but at the very least it is practice, which never hurts. In the end I'm glad I have this, but if you're looking to only get a few books, I suggest the ETS's book (a MUST!) and Powerprep software (highly recommended). These don't give you any hints, but they are the real deal and I've heard that these practice questions are still in use. Arco, Kaplan and Princeton Review are nice for tips, but they make up the questions themselves and have no way of determining their validity by ETS standards. Still, get at least one of the two, preferably both, and with the CD. The difference between Kaplan and PR is that Kaplan is more methodical and PR is more short-cut focused. Choose one based on which works best for you. I don't know what to say about Arco, but I'm here buying it now because I want more practice questions, even if they aren't official. I'm also getting the PR Verbal Workout and GMAT for Dummies because I heard these are both great references for the verbal section (in which I need the most help).

Some advice if you do decide to buy this: don't buy this with the CD attached. The practice problems and text are EXACTLY the same as in the book with no additional information.

Some more advice: if you are taking the GMAT, practice on something....anything, perferably on the computer. This has helped me tremendously and even though I'm spending upwards of $150-200 on all these books, it's worth it to not have to take the $165 test again because I didn't have the stamina to finish the test or the practice. Just keep in mind that the questions are not hard. They're tricky. The tricks are easier to spot when you've been practicing. I wish I considered that when I took my SAT!

This most biased reflection of Charles Eugene Bedaux demonstrates an underlying bias on the part of the Autoho. Unsubstantiated facts based upon Allen's prejudice are slanderous and if Bedaux were still alive, he would have set the record sttraight and possibly involved many prominent US citizens. Bedaux did much to styme the Naxi operarionf in France and this is totally ignored in this book.

This book charges that the Duke of Windsor, formerly King Edward VIII, gave Allied military secrets to Germany in a deliberate scheme to help the Nazis against his own country.

The British establishment, the author says, used Edward's love for Wallis Simpson as a pretext to force his abdication because of his pro-German views. Then, he says, that same establishment used Edward to spy on French military installations for Britain--but that Edward simultaneously passed the secrets along to the Germans through Charles Bedaux, a shadowy character with ties to both Edward and Adolf Hitler.

The book is built around a handwritten letter, in German, from Edward to Hitler, which the author says his father received years later from Hitler's architect, Albert Speer. The book surmises that Edward gave the letter to Bedaux, who hid it in his hat band, or elsewhere, and then personally delivered it to Hitler.

On the surface the letter is cryptic. Was Edward really trying to hurt Britain--or help Hitler put him back on the Throne? Was he being solicitous, or devious? If the circumstances surrounding the letter are indeed what the author claims, then this book has a real story to tell.

Unfortunately, the book's shortcomings as a serious history cast doubt on its conclusions. There is some original research, particularly with respect to the background of Bedaux himself. Most of the text, however, rests either on secondary sources or on no acknowledged source at all. The author does not cite the particular pages of the secondary sources, so it is virtually impossible for readers to evaluate the information for themselves. Worse yet, many highly accusatory and critical passages have no source references whatsoever, leaving frustrated readers to wonder whether the undocumented conversations and events actually happened. The overall tone suggests that the author has let his own animus toward Edward dictate the scholarship, rather than the other way around.

The author explains that many of the primary source documents have been destroyed, are not available for inspection, or are perhaps even being hidden by the British royal family itself. That, though, is not a license to make critical assumptions that result, essentially, in a charge of treason.

The letter appears to bear Edward's handwriting, as far as one can tell from the lithographic reproduction in the book. In an appendix the author recounts that a handwriting expert authenticated the letter. Sadly, however, he does not identify the expert, and the glaring absence of the expert's identity further undermines this book's claims.

Even if the letter is genuine, it does not prove the author's thesis. Edward was not anti-German, and he may well have thought that the Nazis were Europe's best defense against Soviet expansionism. He may also have been careless in his dealings with both Bedaux and Hitler. But that certainly does not mean that Edward would deliberately seek to harm the Empire that he served so long as Prince of Wales, and later as King.

The overreaching premise of this book makes the story of royal intrigue entertaining, but one should not uncritically accept all of the story.

Martin Allen's book „Hidden Agenda - How the Duke of Windsor betrayed the Allies" provides us with an interesting look behind the stage on which the beginning of the Second World War was taking shape. Martin Allen describes in considerable detail the interests of the various parties involved in this conflict - the actors, the observers, and the by-standers, and he adroitly shows how some of the players, at times, would switch from one category to the other.

The lynchpin of the book is a letter, supposedly written in late 1939 by the Duke. Its purpose was to introduce to Hitler the Duke's messenger, the Franco-American industrial consultant, Charles E. Bedaux who, in those early months and years of the war, was able to travel quite freely from one side of the „Sitzkrieg" front to the other.

A facsimile of the letter is shown in the book. Obviously, for a mere reader, it is impossible to say whether the letter is genuine or not. The (German!) text of the letter is, however, just ever so slightly off the track with respect to normal German style, grammar, and vocabulary that it may well have been written by a person, such as the Duke, whose command of the language was good, but not perfect. It would have taken an excellent forger to achieve such a convincing degree of (im)perfection.

The immediate military results of the Duke's overtures toward Hitler were twofold. They represent, in a way, each party's ante in the bargain: the Duke's information on the French defenses allowed the Germans to turn the „sitzkrieg" into a „blitzkrieg" in the summer of 1940, whereas the German contribution was to hold their panzers back when they reached the Channel, thus allowing the British Expeditionary Force to retreat from Dunkerque with acceptable losses.

At this point, the book argues more or less explicitly, it would have been possible for some sort of peace deal to be reached. However, the Duke's position at home had been undermined by internal machinations that had led to his resignation and he was unable to realize his ambition which, according to Allen, was to recover his throne through this admittedly risky alliance with Berlin.

The obvious argument that comes to mind at this point is that any peace with Hitler would have constituted an abandonment of Poland for whose integrity and protection the Allies had, after all, gone to war. We must realize, though, that at the end of September, 1939, when the war in Poland had come to its rapid end, the Germans had occupied only the western half of that country. The eastern half of Poland was, by then, under Soviet domination, because the Soviets had, on 17 September 1939 (when the victory of their German ally was evident) sent in the Red Army to take over the rest - and to hold on to it to the present day.

This overt act of aggression did not cause a stir in the Allied camp and voids the argument sketched out above. The value of Allen's book lies in its exposure of the duplicity of the policy of the Allies. Only five years later, the world witnessed and for the most part, welcomed the complete hand-over of Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe to Stalin who, by that time, had become the West's most valuable ally in the fight for the ideals of freedom and democracy. It took History a mere fifty years and millions of dead to rectify that situation. One wonders if the price that might have had to be paid to Hitler would have been quite as high as that.