Great points, lacks details
356062
Would have liked more in depth explanation and to be able to know which language spouse has instead of guessing.
2877981
I rated this book at 4 stars because it is a thorough primer; in other words, it is a solid summary of arguments for and against an increased application of soft power.  While most contemporary geo-political texts tend to be long on problems and short on solutions, Dean Nye consistently applies his solution throughout the text.
Having said that, it seems to me that this book was compiled hastily.  Based on extrinsic research, I concur with most of Dean Nye's conclusions.  However, his premises are often shallow - or at best, weakly articulated.  For example, Dean Nye relies on passing reference to Antonio Gramsci in support of one of the basic premises of soft power - the ability to shape the political preferences of other nations.  There is neither a cite to Gramsci's work, nor an explanation of why Gramsci's observations are more relevant than a more contemporary political theorist.
Finally, I suspect that reviews which interpret this as a text arguing the merits of  "multilateralism v. unilateralism" may have missed the larger picture.  Since even a unilateral regime can be a leading "soft power", it seems that the theory implicates more about an American approach to international relationships than it does about American policy, per se.
Compare George Mitchell's book, "Making Peace" about the American role in the negotiation of the Belfast Accords and Louise Diamond's primer "Multi-Track Diplomacy: A Systems Approach to Peace" as potential illustrations of the practical application of soft power techniques in international relations.
357736
I love Fintan O'Toole and I generally agree with him on most issues. This book is an overview of the crisis and how it happened and it quite good, but there is a major issue with the book that prevents it getting 5 stars, and that is the total lack of sources. A "Polemical Work" in the words of the author, he drew on his considerable knowledge of the topic and on past issues of The Irish Times for the material, but without a catalogue of sources for his claims how are people to safe in the knowledge that what he says is correct?

I believe him, but that's not enough.
980481
I purchased the Kindle version of this book. The information was helpful, and well laid out. In fact, the tips regarding the Chinatown walking tour, and free city walking tours were really great - as well as the tips regarding getting around, and various restaurant recommendations.

However, over all, the gook was too condensed / summarized for my needs. While the book provided it's list of favorites (Restaurants, Activities, Hotels, etc.), it didn't contain a comprehensive list of these things, so that I could easily compare or find the best Hotel or Restaurant, Tour, etc, based on my needs.

I was somewhat limited in my choices to my desire to purchase a Kindle-based guide book, but if I do it over again, I would have purchased a more detailed guide.
1319850
There were great ideas on how to build your mission and some information for a report. Too bad there is no information about inside the mission.
1679589
The core of the book is a section of 6 chapters, each focusing on a key issue of post modern debate about megacities. I found this extremely helpful because each one starts with a list of 20 of the most important books about the issue, and contains Soja's summary of the main arguments of 4 or 5 important writers with occasionally enlightening commentary. It is Soja's own analysis that tends to fall flat, however. He criticizes the traditional left as not understanding the complexeties of modern cities, but the only examples he gives of modern progressive sucess stories are based on the kind of community organization coalitions pioneered by orthodox leftists like Saul Alinsky. Perhaps to counter it being written off so much as an anomoly, Soja overstates the case for Los Angeles as the model postmodern megacity. In order to do that he has to avoid talking about the main difference between it and larger cities like London, New York, Tokyo or So Paulo - its near total lack of what Oldenburg calls 3rd places: public, non-consumerist spaces where people socialize away from work and home. Soja mistakenly labels advocates of pedestrian friendly cities like Jane Jacobs as "nostalgic", ignoring the positive social factors that vibrant street live gives to every other city with over 10 million inhabitants in the World. He is also occasionally misleading in his statistics, repeatedly siting one neighborhood in LA as being more densily populated than the borough of Manhatten (which has a large non-residential business district and two huge parks), downplaying LAs sprawl problem. On the whole, however, it is a very helpful book to read if you are an urban studies student needing to familiarize yourself with current debates in postmodern urban theory.
2853489
Interesting point but left at superficial unelaborated level.
703397
Good book, written and articulated with good detail and specificity but missing some topics. overall satisfied but still have to look up topics i need from other sources. .
4424714
This nutshell gives a great history and overview of energy regulation, but doesn't really have the content of a law school supplement. I found it helpful, but I'm still looking for other resources. One particularly annoying thing is that this book reproduces all kinds of EIA charts that are COMPLETELY illegible and useless. It shows how careless the nutshell folks really are...
1146957
I found this book, as others have stated, compelling reading. What struck me however, was the stuff that was "missing". If you are not wildly familiar with Freud's ouvre, then the lack of illustrations of portraits under discussion (most notably Parker-Bowles's) is frustrating. In addition, touched upon by other reviewers, is lack of depth of Freud as a person.

I'm not sure though that the author claims this to be a definitive biography so perhaps by leaving his audience wanting more he is opening the way for another book. I found myself wanting more detail about his relationships with his brothers as one example.

At any rate, I'd recommend loaning this book from your local library rather than buying it - it's well written and easy to read, but lacks depth from both a biographical and critical point of view.
4556720
The format and content met my expectations.  It is intended to be a quick overview of each of the individual books with key players, audience and message.  I really liked the way in which the summaries were written, however, I had hoped for a little more.  This is a great idea but not every book can (or should) be explained in a couple of paragraphs.  I would have like to see the longer and more in depth books be given an extra page or so of content.

Overall I would recommend it, just don't expect this to be a comprehensive explanation of all 66 books.
3539792
Great points in the book, and some repeated for emphasis. I liked the nuggets: concise chapters and illustrations make it a light read and easy to understand. I'm definitely implementing some key lessons I have learned here.
2476555
I really enjoyed this book, having known nothing about this subject whatsoever. I learned a lot and it was a quick, easy read. Mostly well written, although needed a few edits. There were literally no footnotes, however, nor bibliography or source materials listed. But what I most wish this book had was maps of some of these conqueror's journeys and pictures of the various military strategies in action. Those would have clarified the explanations and added a whole lot more interest.
813396
There are good points to this book.  The broadsword section appears to be good.  It is referenced (unlike the other sections), and consistent with other material from the same period and the works of other authors on the subject.

I beleive that he really knows how to train effectively for martial arts & sports.  He describes a number of training drills and tools that make a lot of sense and should really help a person, and includes extensive material on  solo training.

I believe that the dirk section is good but could definitely be larger and include pictures to be really useful.

However other parts are lacking.  The section on the two-handed claymore is a waste of time.  Get a book on longsword instead.  There are a variety of basic factual errors (weight of such swords and continental counterparts, use of parrying hooks and down-turned quillons, brute force fighting style), the likes of which could be expected in the 19th century but were proven wrong in the '60s by E. Oakeshott; and which show a sense of Scottish national pride that blinds him to the facts.  He makes a point of ignoring masters whose material he could not figure out (like the Ochs guard, possibly as well as nebenhut, schrankhut etc. )  He says that thrusts don't work well with a two-handed Claymore, a fact which hundreds of years of medieval and renaissance fight masters would object to.  And there is so much material on the use of a longsword that this book is woefully inadequate, barely scratching the surface.

I suspect that the authors primary fighting experience is SCA or something similar, given his advice about melee situations.  He makes numerous suggestions about melee fighting that are consistent with SCA fights and which directly contradict the historical record of how infantry formations operated.  The SCA is a non-historical organization and there fighting reflects that fact.

The author clearly does not have a strong understanding of how to use a polearm (and never fought someone who did), made most clear by his advice on how to defeat a polearm.

Buy it for the broadsword and targe material, and the training guide.  Ignore the Claymore section.
2508910
Lots of good pictures, with lots of ideas from the pictures, but too much information about who built them and not enough information describing how they designed their houses and how they made decisions on what square footage to include and what could be done without and why.  Each house, however, had only one or two pictures which gave you only a glimpse of the livability.  Worth buying for the pictures that were included.
4227168
This little book, as the title suggests, is full of personal recommendations for the newcomer to Paris.  It's interesting and informative, but for the price, it badly needs an index and some maps.  The main section is arranged by arrondissements, but I don't recall seeing an explanation of that zonal system to help put the various areas in context.  And if you try to go back to something interesting, you have to figure out (i.e., guess) where in the book you might have seen it.

That said, I've now been to Paris and did indeed use recommendations from the book in formulating an itinerary, along with other resources and maps.  Perhaps the most useful of these was the map accompanying the on/off Open Bus system.  I highly recommend buying an Open Bus ticket for a couple of days, whether that's your entire time frame or just the beginning of a longer stay.

If I could, I'd give this book 3.5 stars.  But I'm leaning closer to 3 than 4 stars at this time.  I hope a future edition will be expanded and indexed, as it has the potential for a much higher score.
2668591
Aspects of this book are very well researched, yet there are gaps. This shows a clear picture of how we've gotten where we are. The discussion of electronic health records is detailed, likely because of the author's previous experience in this industry.

Other topics are less proficiently handled..

We are told that the insurance industry accounts for only 7% of health expenditures, so they are not "the culprits". The pharmaceutical industry accounts for 11% of health expenditures. (Although I do not recall seeing the figure in this book, clinicians account for about 10% of health expenditures.) But we are never clearly told exactly who, then, the culprit is? Where does the other 72% of the money go?

This book clearly establishes the need for something other than what we have, but leaves little clues for the best path out of the current morass.

It would also have been enlightening to compare WHO outcomes data for cancer, diabetes, hypertension, and stroke. Hint: US is not "dead last".