I was temporarily drawn in by the plot - despite the cheesy cover. After a few pages I felt I could go the distance with Vicious Spring. But ultimately I just couldn't handle the lack of substance. One of two things happened here, either the author has no idea how to write and develop characters and theme, or the book was over-edited. From some passages that set the reader up to go further only to quickly dump you, I'm assuming the editor got carried away. The book, at 180 pages or so, seems light from the start and is confirmed by the time you reach the end - IF you reach the end. I did and boy am I sorry. Just horrible.

I found this small gem of a novel to be original, compelling, and written in spare but evocative prose. It is, in fact, the diametric opposite of the book described by the negative reviewer who called it cliched and its protagonist unsympathetic. Contrary to the moralizing tone of so much current fiction, Vicious Spring refuses to sentence its characters to horrid fates simply because they use drugs or profit from their sexuality. In Christy, Hampton-Jones has created a complex and credible portrait of a flawed, funny, unfortunate, but refreshingly less-than-tragic young woman. Vicious Spring is eminently readable, thought-provoking, and more than a little bit sexy.

Alma Marceau...

Although some may feel that "Vicious Spring" is too minimalist at times, Hampton-Jones makes good use of the less-is-more expository approach. It's called good writing. Her broad-brush style takes us from the highs of humour to the depths of despair with a few well-chosen phrases. Her fresh takes on life, family, sex, fear and hope kept me turning the pages and anxious for her next book.

Yes, there's sex (and then, more sex), but - though graphic - it is handled in the same minimalist fashion that is so refreshing compared to the legions of authors who seem to be paid by the word of their sex scenes.

Much in the style of Jay McInerny ("Bright Lights, Big City"), "Vicious Spring" is provocative, funny, fresh and extremely well-written.

This isn't great literature, but it's a fun, easy read that doesn't insult your intelligence. A darn good story. It tells the story of five sisters of the impoverished genteel set who fall in love, get married, etc. on a plantation in South Carolina. It covers the early part of the 1900s on. Your grandmother will love it. Seriously.

An attempt to cash in on the Simpson trial, this book is an embarrassment for all concerned. Just how bad it is cannot be conveyed in a mere 1000 words, so you'll simply have to read it yourself -- but maybe that's too high a price to pay. Read the summary provided by Dove Publishing. It's as though they are trying to expose the jurors as the cerebral cripples they are. Couldn't they find one coherent line in what must have been hours of mind-numbing recordings with the "authors"? While reading the book, keep in mind that this is _their_ side of the story; it is told in a manner most sympathetic to the jurors. Still, they come off as spit-drooling morons. The mind reels at the thought of someone hostile to Cooley, Bess, and Jackson having written this. As for Tom Byrnes (he garners "as told to" credit for this mess) and editor Mike Walker, don't hate them... pity them. Then again, perhaps Byrne and Walker have intended this as an indictment of our judicial system, where the search for impartial jurors has evolved into a quest for those who never read newspapers, news magazines, or even watch television more challenging than "Jackass." If this is the case, their success is complete beyond any possible expectations they might have had.

Upon first hearing the not-guilty verdict in the O.J. Simpson trial, I was sure it was because at least some of the Simpson jurors had some self-serving, self-righteous agenda. However, after reading this pathetic, to the point of being comical attempt, to justify their verdict, I have changed my mind... Not only was their so-called "analysis" of the evidence completely devoid of any truly intelligent thought, it contained leaps of logic so vast, Evil Knevil would have been too scared to jump it. For example, one juror said she had doubts O.J. did it because only a "little" blood from the victims was found in Simpsons bronco.If he was truly innocent, then why is ANY of the victims blood in his car! Throughout the trial Johnny Cochran continuously lied or distorted the truth. During the defence for instance, in an attempt to show police "contaminating" the crime scene, Cochran shows a still picture of a policeman "carelessly" walking through a bloody path. Contamination,right? Well, no. Upon simple cross-examination, we find out that only AFTER the crime scene had been processed and all blood evidence been collected did this officer then walk through this bloody path. Was there any mention of this in this book? Of course not. When Cochran tried to show an attempt by police to "plant" evidence, he showed a videotape of Simpsons bedroom depicting the ABSENCE of bloody socks that the police claimed were there. Planting of evidence you say? Again, upon cross-examination the person who shot the videotape testifies that he was there to videotape the premises for insurance purposes only. And that he was told by police NOT to go into the bedroom until AFTER they collected whatever was in there, including,of course, those bloody socks! Did any of these hapless jurors make note of this?...In fact, rare is it, that you will find consecutive coherent sentences, such is the collective wisdom shown here. So, the question is, would I recommend this book to others? To that question, my answer is surprisingly, a resounding YES!...Because while on one hand, this book was so tedious to read,what with its complete utter lack of knowledge and insight of the subject matter, I still found it facinating to delve into the minds of people who have such little powers of deduction...

This is a pathetic and weak attempt written by the OJ Simpson jurors to excuse the outrageous and incorrect verdict that they arrived at after only three hours of deliberation. It demonstrates the unfortunate fact that even the jurors, who were supposed to be impartial, were clearly biased against the prosecution from day one of the trial, and their IQ's match an anorexic's dress size! Discounting all the other evidence, the DNA alone should have convicted SImpson, since it doesn't inject fraudulent issues into a trial, isn't overwhelmed by its own celebrity, and has no ulterior motives or hidden agenda, yet it was damningly and inexplicably ignored. And I was amazed to read the statement of one of the jurors in a post trial interview that the DNA evidence carried no weight with her! The DNA evidence was as irrefutably tied to the Simpson case as Santa Claus is to Christmas. I wonder how these jurors can live with themselves, knowing that Simpson is a murderer, and deciding that these murders should go unpunished. How could they attend a post trial victory party, hosted by that slime Johnnie Cochran, knowing that because of Simpson, Ron and Nicole are forever lost to their families? Do they ever think of Ron and Nicole at all? Do they think about their last moments alive? I do. Does the particularly gruesome crime scene picture of Nicole, lying folded in the foetal position, her head haloed by a large pool of blood, which looks like blotches of red paint splashed randomly onto an artist's canvas, haunt them at all?

This book was obviously dashed together in a hurry. The authors' assorted essays--the book bears little evidence of editorial cohesion--are of middling to poor quality, and the conclusions are generally facile.

This "pop research" book shows all the signs of having been written over one or two weekends by a bunch of friends who could not take the time to read each others' contributions. The conclusions are as facile as the methodology.

The life of George Bernard Shaw gets fed through the meat grinder in this self-published, amateurish hodge-podge of a play, with a variety of historic figures wandering about pontificating about Lord knows what. Don't bother.

i need to help this chapter 1 so i not understand this book but i need you explain me this clear this chapter 1 about f(x)numbers. Please answer me to explain me this chapter 1 from algebraic, graphical, and trigonometric problem solving on mathematics in action. i need easily answer and explain this chapter 1 as for example. Thankss Christy Gasch

This book was absolutely horrid! Would not recommend wasting my time or my eyesight. It was required reading for a class and I can't wait to get rid of it. If anyone's interested in seeing firstand how awful it is or picking up a copy for class, I'm selling mine (...). Bottom line-don't read it if you don't absolutely have to

I opened this book with the thought that this guide would present me with some unique options for spending romantic time with my special someone. Unfortunately this book did not deliver what the title promises. The locations and activities listed can be obtained by calling any VA visitors center. I was sadly disappointed in the locations mentioned and with the author's idea of romance. This book fell far short of the promises in the title of "Unique" as well as "Amorous".