Hester > Recent Status Updates

I am disturbed by the phrase "women aged 10-18," used to describe the incarcerated girls next to Riverbank.

Paragraph two of section one on page 25 is spot on.

In theory, I like poetic turns of phrase, in practice, I miss them or they annoy me. This quote, however, got me:
"Gazing past them, across the water, Will watched a low barge slowly work its way up the river. To his sideways mind, the small glimmering gas lanterns on the boat's sides seemed to be heading off to a rendevous with the flickering stars above, their luminous sisters in the floating constellations."

In theory, I like poetic turns of phrase, in practice, I miss them or they annoy me. This quote, however, got me:
"Gazing past them, across the water, Will watched a low barge slowly work its way up the river. To his sideways mind, the small glimmering gas lanterns on the boat's sides seemed to be heading off to a rendevous with the flickering stars above, their luminous sisters in the floating constellations."

In theory, I like poetic turns of phrase, in practice, I miss them or they annoy me. This quote, however, got me:
"Gazing past them, across the water, Will watched a low barge slowly work its way up the river. To his sideways mind, the small glimmering gas lanterns on the boat's sides seemed to be heading off to a rendevous with the flickering stars above, their luminous sisters in the floating constellations."

While there is much to love about this book, I find its worship of loner, educated wealth and greed disturbing. I can't help, though, loving all the exotic fruit and health food (who ate quinoa in Vegas in the 60s)?

I need to use the Alex method. I am already annoyed since one of the characters "won the Nobel prize for mathematics" (which doesn't exist) and he claimed "mathematicians are washed up by forty" (a destructive, false urban legend).

page 99--She has never met a mathematician. She makes comments about how we hate culture. I used to usher in grad school and I always saw math professors at the chamber concerts.

I need to use the Alex method. I am already annoyed since one of the characters "won the Nobel prize for mathematics" (which doesn't exist) and he claimed "mathematicians are washed up by forty" (a destructive, false urban legend).

So far a really mixed bag. In general, Lester del Rey's book was better, but every now and then Bradbury has moments of genius. Chrysalis is fine, Pillar of Fire is uneven with a brilliant idea, Zero Hour seems to presage Betty Friedan, and The Man is a little bland. The Man, Time in Thy Flight, and the Pedestrian are all classic Bradbury. A little nostalgic, a little paranoid, and he definitely feels beleaguered.

I understand why other people love this, but I am just finding Kinbote's insanity discomfiting rather than amusing.

It was a relief to find out that this is a YA novel. I love Kay's usual prose and found this book clunky, but it is good for younger readers. So far, I have two problems with the book. One, if Ned is fifteen, why do I recognize all the music on his ipod? Two, I am not surprised that Ned's father's assistants engage in suggestive banter around him, but I am SHOCKED that Melanie made such a dirty comment TO Ned.

They claim this is a good book for advanced undergrads. So far, the 2nd chapter required knowledge of compactness (learned in 1st yr of grad school), exact sequences(3rd semester of algebra), and inverse limits(6th semester of algebra). Liars! I am learning a lot, but much goes over my head.

This is not a book for beginners. Well written, but expects the reader to figure out huge amounts on one's own(see a trigonometric lemma on page 9). Best for people who already learned the material and want a beautifully written overview that delves deeper and approaches material from another angle.

I just finished the Dutch tulipmania chapter, which was better than the rest of the book. Still felt the writing lacked focus.

This is like the "Handbook of American Prayer," in that it is about regional American culture, a dangerous hero, and the idiocy of crowds.

I find myself with this book. The author never focuses; at times it feels like lists of tulip prices. She needs to focus!

There were parties of the sultan's where tortoises would roam with candles on their backs! The tulip market is still behind the New Mosque.

This book needs more color plates. She makes fleeting references to mosque roofs covered by tulips, with no pictures or explanations!

So far the book is clear and I am whizzing through it. I am skimming the sections on function fields, as I do not have the background.

I was lost in almost all of section 5. It has Fourier transforms, operators, and L-functions. I know nothing about operators.

I have got to brush up on representation theory.

Section 3 went better. I could vaguely follow the proof. Now if only I could understand how Q came in...

Things go much better if I focus on the results and not on the proofs.

The proof on page 9 of the lemma on page 8 lost me when it defined the function delta. Still don't get 1st theorem.

The proof on page 9 of the lemma on page 8 lost me when it defined the function delta.

I do not understand the statement of theorem 1. I think I may be in trouble.