Social Sciences Books

The book overlooks the obvious. One the one hand clearly communities down through the ages have been part and parcel of the world's problems. Iraq today is all about community, for example. The point that communities must be other than therapeutic is parodoxically quite on target but because communites are very frequently coercive, repressive entities. On the other hand people aren't alienated ala Durkheim. Alienation came about because of an information dearth. People would move to the big city and lose all contact with sources of information vis-a-vis the 'village square' but fail to connect up to the larger world but with the mass media now omnipresent there is no lack of information and people are if anything overconnected. This book is part of a sociology debate that was doubly irrelevant when written and is triply irrelevant now. The US chose to stress free association rather than community thanks to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers. This is an unwise book.

HABITS OF THE HEART is a tour de force whose insights into America are as relevant today as they were nearly twenty years ago when the book was published. It was hailed at that time as an instant classic of sociology, and compared to such influential works as MIDDLETOWN and THE LONELY CROWD. If anything, its insights are even more pertinent now.

The subtitle "Individualism and Commitment in American Life" is the main trope guiding the book, a bipolar perspective that neatly describes the American inability to reconcile the "utilitarian individualism" of Hobbes' "war of all against all" as exemplified in the liberal economic philosophy that grew up with America, with the "expressive individualism" of Whitman and Emerson which developed as a reaction to (in Henry James'' words), the "grope of wealth." The final chapter which elucidates "Six American Visions of the Public Good" describing them as three pairs of conflicting visions: "The Establishment versus Populism," "Neocapitalism versus Welfare Liberalism" and "The Administered Society versus Economic Democracy" is the best example of this dualist view of America, but as Bellah and his fellow authors describe it, these competing visions often hold as many similarities as differences.

Specifically, from the latter 19th century until the depression both The Establishment and Populists recognized there was and needed to be a moral component in American public life. The Establishment side was represented Andrew Carnegie's "Gospel of Wealth," while on the Populist side were economic socialists such as Eugene Debs. The mores of the that time, de Toqueville's "habits of the heart," were still moralistic, still partaking of the ideal of the legacy of Jefferson's freeholding citizen even capitalism shook America off its foundations.

Of the next pair, Neocapitalism (which rose to its greatest heights in the form of Ronald Reagan) and Welfare Liberalism (exemplified by FDR), while they have different means look to the same ends according the authors. The first seeks to empower citizens through the "war of all against all" and keep the country competitive by unraveling the safety net. Slackers and failures must not be encouraged to take advantage of the winners because it is morally debilitating for society as a whole. Welfare Liberalism on the other hand believes that the net should be stronger because it has less confidence in the Market God believes in better chances and social justice, but still views Americans as individuals who must be encouraged in the Hobbesian war.

Of the last two visions, Felix Rohatyn, is the poster boy for the Administered Society -- a continuation of the Progressive ideal of scientific "mastery" a la Lippman, while Michael Harrington represents Economic Democracy. As compared to Rohaytn, who endorses a "partnership" of elites who work to adjust and balance the multiplicitous machine of political, economic and social interests, Harrington would spread out the decision making to at least nominally include the people. Harrington admits this would require a massive reorientation of consciousness -- an unlikely event in the view of the authors. But ultimately the authors say both sides endorse a similar kind of governance by expert, without moral content. The authors saw this last pair dimly stirring when they wrote this book in the mid-80s. Their prediction is perhaps half true as we have also witnessed the covert reassertion of NeoCapitalism in the last three administrations, if especially the current administration.

This dualistic strategy is supplemented by the touchstone use of Alexis de Toqueville's political and sociological insights to show how the seeds of much of American life today were sown early on. A fairly effective narrative trope, it serves their often stated goal of showing that it is through our shared history, our communities of memory, that we may see how others confronted the shifting landscapes of political economy, that we may today find a way to stop or at least hold at bay, in the words of Habermas, the "invasion of the lifeworld by systems logic." They maintain that such a course cannot be found through nostalgia for older institutions that once stood athwart the Mega-State. Many of those institutions, such as traditional churches, were paternalistic and discriminatory. Still social movements such as abolitionism grew out of them and were sustained by them. To recognize how the message of freedom forged by the founding generation has been reforged into a double-edged sword to enforce radical individualism, and destroy religious and republican morality and virtue. Government by a managerial elite, a kind of "democratic despotism" which de Toqueville saw as a potential of individualistic American mores has arrived.

As an example of the earlier language of America, they cite as an example Martin Luther King deployment of the language of the Bible and republican virtue in his "I Have A Dream" speech. His ringing biblical cadences, his use of "My Country 'Tis of Thee," and the words of the old Negro spiritual: "free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty I'm free at last," evoked our foundational civic and religious language. Bellah, like King, helps us remember and recapture the earlier language of America.

Along the way they also trace the politically neutralizing penetration of the individualistic "therapeutic mode" into religious life, the loss of "communities of memory" based on shared values, along with the "second language" of religious and republican virtue. All have which have acted to depoliticize American culture. Where once there was a language of sin and redemption, there is now only the therapeutic language of the self, a radical self which is encouraged by the therapeutic mode to consider one's self and one's happiness as paramount and thus mirrors and supports the ideology of the free market. We richly deserve the oxymoronic label of "private citizen."

I think Steve Seim's review is excellent. The book is a famous statement of an editorial point of view, namely the communitarian claim that individualism has led to the incoherence of Americans' religious and moral claims. But like so many books, the authors dissemble to pretend they're scientifically reporting objective news rather than a kind of editorial. In this sense, the book is not substantially different from the kind of pseudo-science we've come to expect from sociologists, who, after conducting some interviews and handing out some loaded surveys, tell us "what's really going on" with the "modern American woman" or "Generation X" or, in this case, the "modern [misguided] liberal American." I, for one, view such work as social criticism vital to our society, and it makes thoughtful reading, but it is not scientific, and I wish we could get beyond this need to justify such claims with "scientific" surveys.

Considering this book represents more a kind of punditry than research, despite its claims, please consider reading the most famous response to the book, the chapters from Jeffrey Stout's "Ethics After Babel" devoted to the book. Stout, in one instance, close-reads one of the interviews, in which a guy is asked what's important to him, and whenever he talks about "being good" and "being honest," the interviewers grill him "but why? but why?" until after many replies relating to maturing and learning from his experience, he finally says something like "it benefits me to live a life of honesty" so the authors end the interview and conclude he's a rabid individualist whose only basis for his ethics is egocentric utilitarianism. They did not, for example, explore whether he has a rather rich concept of personal honor, or even a sense of Stoic maturity, either of which seems a more accurate way of describing his answers up to the point they choose to end on. Either alternative reflects a vocabulary of long standing moral traditions, which would contradict the authors' claims - ala Alisdair MacIntyre-- that modern liberal Americans have no such vocabulary. In fact, I find it rather hilarious that they use this subject as the quintessential amoral individualist, since communitarian founding father Aristotle says repeatedly throughout the Ethics that living a life of virtue must benefit the individual, for to say the opposite would be akin to saying that giving a plant sunshine doesn't benefit the plant. Of course this connection of virtue and human benefit is problematized in other ethical systems, but, still, it's funny to me that Arisotle could be characterized as lacking a moral framework because he connects living virtuously with personal benefit.

In any case, reading both this book and Stout, you're in a good position to come to your own conclusions.

"Habits of the Heart" is not an easy read. There are five authors, none of whom seem to identify themselves. For example, in the edition I've read, there are three Prefaces, none of which ends with the name of an author.
Because of this, there may be less coherence in the flow of the book than there could be. But there is so much "meat" in the book that it is still a good read. But because there are so many quotable areas, and so many opinions expressed, I'm sure a variety of reviews could flow from the book. Here's mine:

The thesis of the book appears to be the argument that in a simpler America, we were tied by obvious economic and social interactions. We could be fiercely individualistic, e.g., as the Blacksmith of a small community, but we were linked because our livelihood was probably dependent on neighbors, and our social base, probably our church, was common to the community.
But, today, with our "utilitarian individualism" remaining, we have spread out and now are confused by our links to our neighbors and communities. We move more often. We are not as likely to be economically dependent on our immediate neighbors. We can easily be convinced that the "success" we have achieved has been via our own hard work and ambition and that we may not have much responsibility to contribute back to our immediate neighbors or communities.
The book mentions, but does not dwell on, the Biblical tradition/obligation to respect and acknowledge the dignity of all. It also talks about the "underclass," saying at one point that solving its plight is one of the greatest challenges of all and that this will take an enormous amount of money. But it also points out that in today's world, it is also easy for successful individuals to convince themselves that those in the underclass have only themselves to blame and/or to think that welfare reform efforts do more harm than good.
The authors seem to come from a personal therapy background and viewpoint that may have been gathered first-hand: "Many people feel empty and don't know \why they feel that way. They have been sold a bill of goods by our system: cash, convenience and consumerism....The reason you don't feel part of it is because nobody is a part of it."
But, at the same time, they appear to be more than willing to look at various sides of an issue, and not take a "hard," simplistic stand:
Values: There are skeptical references about how people form "values" and if they can be trusted to be anything more than based on self-interest.
Marriage and family: There is support for marriage and family responsibilities, but it is pointed out that "to imagine that society's problems can be traced to individuals with inadequate family values seems to us sadly mistaken." Next to religious commitment, kinship and family provides another basis of "social solidarity."
Being single: It is no longer disgraceful to remain unmarried. Further, no one HAS to have children. And one can leave a marriage one doesn't like even when young children are involved.
Government programs: "Neocapitalist ideology aims to convince us that all government social programs have been disastrous failures."
Religion: "Major religious can move people away from the preoccupation with self toward some larger identity." Religion is one of he most important ways that American's "get involved."
Television: "...it would be difficult to argue that there is any coherent ideology or overall message that it communicates."
Business Leadership: "Leaders are frequently power-hungry bullies without any moral restraints."
Childrearing: Children are trained to be independent self-sufficient individuals. Leaving home involves separation and renewed identity. "Leaving home" may include also leaving the parents' church.
Trend to liberalization: "Younger folks tend to be more liberal, less accepting of hypocrisy, e.g., rejecting the belief that only Christians get to heaven."
Public Service: "Most people involve themselves in social institutions to achieve self-interests or because they feel an affinity with certain others."
Today's metropolitan world: "...a wold of diverse, often hostile groups, interdependent in ways too complex for an individual to comprehend." "...we spend most of our time navigating through immense bureaucratic structures - multiversities, corporations, government agencies." And, don't forget those megachurches!

Get the drift? A ton of subject areas are covered and tons of ideas and opinions expressed.
Plus, throughout the book there are references to Tocqueville's studies of America. He found Americans to be "restless in the midst of prosperity." He also found the "new individualism" strangely compatible with conformism. Reference to Tocqueville weaves in and out in the book.
There is also a sense of limits to what can be done: "The individual's need to be successful in work becomes the enemy of the need to find meaning of one's work in service to others." And "Americans know that society is rigged, as is the marketplace."
And an occasional dose of reality: "Midlife, especially for middle-class American men often marks the end of the dream of being able to move forward without compromise, to achieve `perfection.' Unemployment can be particularly painful." (Or, how about a kid or two with "problems?")

But let's end by getting back to what appears to be the book's thesis, by stringing some quotes from the book together:
"What has failed at every level...is integration...we have failed to remember our community as members of the same body."
In an ideal world "it would become part of the ethos of work to be aware of our intricate connectness and interdependence."
"...traditions help us to know that it does make a difference who we are and how we treat one another."
And, "...in our desperate effort to free ourselves from the constrictions of the past, we have jettisoned too much, forgetting a history that we cannot abandon."
"In a healthy society, the private and public life are not mutually exclusive...they are two halves of a whole, two poles of a paradox." "Taking cared of one's own is an admirable motive. But when it combines with suspicion of and withdrawal from the public world, it is one of the conditions of despotism Tocqueville feared."

Another suggestion is that "only effective institutions - economic, political and social - make complex, modern societies livable." Another: "We are facing trends that threaten our basic sense of solidarity with others." And: "The erosion of meaning and coherence in our lives is not something Americans desire."
But a coherent, confident plan to get us "back" to some state of integration is not really convincing in the book. Instead, we get: "it is not clear that many Americans are prepared to consider a significant change in the way we have been living. The allure of the packaged good life is still strong"...even though..."our material belongs have not brought us happiness." And, there is "no question that many Americans find their contribution of work and private lifestyle satisfying."

Today's politicians of all stripes can score points by saying that "America is not headed in the right direction." The statement is broad and open to interpretation. The statement assumes that government leaders are not to be trusted to make the "right" decisions. But the statement is also shallow and meaningless without specific suggestions/recommendations.
For the most part, this is the problem with "Habits of the Heart." I don't think it is ever very convincing in telling us how to turn the ship of state back in the "right direction." Or even if it truly IS in the wrong direction.
But, as I said earlier, there is so much information and so many interesting ideas included, it is a good read. And, maybe, it becomes the basis for individuals to begin to make decisions within their own lives as to where they fit in their "commitments in American life" and the world.

End of Book Review by George Fulmore.

This is a brilliant, deeply thoughtful, open-hearted book, one of the ten or twelve most important studies we have so far of the culture of the United States. Those who take the time and make the effort to read it carefully will learn a lot not only about American history and society, but also about their own private thoughts and fantasies and the background assumptions of their everyday lives. The dismal state of American education is the main thing you can learn about in most of these reviews. This book has limitations. The most obvious: it's about white/Anglo middleclass Americans. But the only sensible response to the book is still gratitude. If you haven't read it, read it.

Although published as a textbook for university students, this volume is an excellent read for anybody wishing to understand the course of evolution. The authors have assembled a wealth of material, organised it in an effective manner and presented it with outstanding prose skill. Lead author Craig Stanford, whose books on primate behaviour are well-known, is joined by neurologist and geneticist John Allen and anthropologist Susan Anton. The trio brings many years of experience to the task of explaining human origins.



After a brief introduction explaining what is meant by "Biological Anthropology", the authors provide a fine survey of the basic mechanisms of natural selection - DNA and genetics. Their depiction of how the genome is formed and how that structure builds the elements needed for natural selection to operate is an outstanding brief summary. Using available chemicals, DNA's mechanisms to build cells are explained, supplemented by vivid graphic images. From the process of cell building, the authors move on to show how the completed organism must deal with its environment, which includes other creatures, plant life and climate conditions through adaptation down succeeding generations. The authors describe the various factors leading to producing new species, isolation, elapsed time and new conditions. They also address the issue of how fossils and conditions are recorded in time and how researchers use a variety of techniques to determine age and place.



The species of concern, of course, are the primates. The sudden demise of the great reptiles that had ruled the Earth for over 150 million years opened new vistas for the life that survived the catastrophe. Little, fur-bearing creatures moved into niches that allowed rapid change. Many varieties emerged, but noteworthy among them were shrew-sized omnivores. Spreading over the land and forests, some of them developed new traits that would ultimately lead to us. The origin of the primates is lost in the mists of time, compounded by the paucity of fossils and lack of agreement on what typifies a "primate". The earliest proposed species bears the ungainly name of "Plesiadapiforms". The authors describe the traits suggesting these were our earliest ancestors, while explaining what is lacking to establish a firm identity. Each of the points they introduce is enhanced by the contending researchers' arguments over lineage.



Once past the vague beginnings, the team offers insights into how ape transformed into human. The physiological trends, such as jaw structure and teeth are outlined. Each of the fossil examples of pre-human hominids is examined critically with the important elements indicating its lineage in the human story assessed. From a lonely skull in a desert to remote caves, creatures that one day would lead to you and me are revealed. At some point, one or more of the ape-like animals stood upright. Demonstrating what a major step this was, with changes in spinal column, head position and posture, the new form proved to be even more adaptable than its predecessors. Not the least of the advantages gained, they note, is the ability to travel long distances with minimal energy expenditure. As much as we've learned, the authors remind us of the many questions remaining. The actual number of species, where and how they lived, and how many lineages did the ape ancestor lead to over the millennia?



Emerging "modern" forms bring new challenges in understanding. Although early apes sent offshoots out of Africa, it was the hominids that proved to be the most ambitious travellers. Homo erectus spent over a million years traversing Asia, leaving fossils in far-flung sites across the continent and in the islands southeast of the mainland. Their remains have been dated to as recently as 25 to 50 thousand years old. The recent find on the island of Flores suggest an even more recent descendant. A new species, Homo sapiens, and its own diaspora out of Africa follows. Its most significant aspect, the development of intelligence and language is thoroughly examined. A major change took place leading to the one species with the highest proportion of brain size to body weight. Coupled with changes in physiology, our species created a new form of intricate communication abilities. The brain also went through changes in organisation. Which factor made the greatest contribution to human behaviour patterns is the concluding segment of the book. It is that aspect of our history that remains most contentious and the authors examine the various views surrounding that issue. It's a fitting conclusion to this in-depth and comprehensive study. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

This nation owes a debt of gratitude to Gary Webb. The same people responsible for Iran Contra are still among us.

I did not purchase this product for myself, but my boyfriend really likes the book.

The book is packed with information on an intriguing and eye-opening subject matter. Gary Webb cites what appears to be legitimate references adding credibility to the story's claims. The abundance of information did become overwhelming at times. Although after completing the book I found myself thinking "Right, wrong or indifferent...It all makes perfect sense. There's nothing not to believe about it."

Mr Webb's book here ties in with Rodney
Stich's Flying the Unfriendly Skies and
Bo Gritz troika of bokks during this era!

Every time the news reports a homicide even remotely connected to crack (and this would include most gang related murders, even to this day..), they should mention the international crack trade and its role. This will never happen, obviously, which is why we need people like the late Gary Webb in this country.

My only problem with the book, it goes into detail a bit too extensive for my attention span. But there's an obvious reason for this; the book is primarily written to back up his news story in which the mainstream press vilified him for, accusing him of unsubstantiated claims. The full circle detail is necessary. Fortunately, Webb is a good enough writer where even someone with no more than a high school education, like myself, can hang in there and read the entire book without resorting to skimming over paragraphs. Just when I start to say to myself, "alright, got it, we know these guys are contras, we know they're dope runners...what now?", the question is seemingly answered in the following paragraph. I don't know if a writer could have done a better job balancing the act of exhausting resources and laying all of them into full detail and making the book understandable to a lay person like me.

One of the most important books ever written on government corruption and its effect on it's citizenry. As you're reading this review, crack cocaine is still eating American inner cities alive. Rest in Peace, Gary Webb. And may your courageous reporting echo through this country as long as poor American communities suffer from this pandemic.

This was a well written book regarding soccer in the global community. I would encourage anyone who enjoys the game to read this interesting perspective on how soccer is influenced by religion and race and vice versa.

Overall a pretty interesting look at the world. The author looks at how different countries treat soccer, and what that says about their culture. Due to the fact that soccer is a pretty much universal sport, it does act as an interesting way to compare cultures. In fact one could make the argument that he actually leaves a lot of material on the table in examining cultures and economies through sport.

My biggest complaint is that it often becomes way too travel essay like. I am glad he likes the game and all, but frankly his enjoyment of the sport isn't interesting enough, I had never even heard of the author previously. Stick to the game.

Franklin Foer is definitely onto something. Indeed soccer might ultimately explain the world. Unfortunately the National Best Seller he has written, "How Soccer Explains the World", does not. Yet Foer is a good writer. His chapters are nice introductory essays on the culture of soccer in it's many forms throughout the world. He stops well short of linking the many disparate aspects of multi-cultural supporter rivalry, prejudice, and greed into why the beautiful game is, in fact, such a phenomenon throughout the world. Soccer fans will enjoy this book for the insight into leagues they do not follow and for some historical trivia. Others might enjoy it just so that can laugh at the absolute freaks who show up to support their passion and sadly for the crimes against humanity committed in its name. But he does not explain, to the uninitiated, why soccer is the world wide beautiful game. Those of us who play or follow the sport, might think we know how soccer explains the world because we live it, it's a part of our lives, we feel it everyday. But the same is true for any other passionate human endeavor. If you are passionate about it, it is the undisputed answer to the world and holds the key to the meaning of life -- serious stuff. So a book claiming to actually know why, not just locally but globally, must stand up to it's title. There's a lot of competition out there and Foer fails to bring anything else to the table for a comparison -- but he could. Further, he does not link the fundamental building blocks of society into the game -- he touches on them, but does not link them into society -- I guess that's because he is an economist and not a sociologist or a theologist. However as an economist he really misses the big business that is soccer. Without a chapter devoted to the business of soccer he has ignored a very important link. If soccer explains the world than FIFA must be running the world, for example. There is no chapter on FIFA. And if soccer is akin to religion, while he did write a chapter about the King, he failed to mention God. Where is Diego Maradona? And if soccer is a social building block -- while he does mention yuppies in America, where soccer is the least stringent of societal glue, he does not mention the societies where soccer is one of the very few but incredibly binding influences. So to recap -- no elements of the beautiful game itself, no comparisons to other global influences, and no expansion into other phenomenon directly attributable to a functioning society. Foer wrote some nice essays after taking the opportunity to travel the world. I am envious to say the least. But he failed miserably to live up to the title of the book. Perhaps he should write a sequel and call it -- "How Soccer Really Explains the World". For now we must continue to wait for the explanation of what we already know.

I could write another BOOK as to why this tome should NEVER have been written.
For all those who understand my title caption of the review,no more needs to say. For the USian uninitiated to world football, you can look up the concept of 'relegation' on internet, no problem and you will understand what I mean by this title.

1st , a side note, if you really want an educated and informed story of the HISTORY of futebol* (*fútbol, calcio, fussball....PLEASE no call it 'soccer', hahahahaha!), read the englishman David Goldblatt's remarkable book "the Ball is Round" (or as we say , "A bola é redonda"!).

Em Breve, Mr Foer is a newcomer to the beautiful game, and has NO historical background for it.

Mr Foer writing a book on futebol can only be equalled as a supremo absurdo , if , por ex. Madonna (the singer) wrote a book on Cabala (Jewish numerical mysticisms that she experimented , and well documented by the USA "news" media, ih!!).

Or Michael jackson writing a manual on, say " how to romance women in ten easy (moonwalk) steps" would be another humorous(?) way to view this ???

Either way, Mr Foer has not the background , even with the research he did (and I commend him for that), he has no "muscle memory" regarding great moments of futebol both distant and recent past.


How can he describe how ,ex.~ in 1982 , Rossi's THREE gols destroyed one of the best seleção brasil even appeared on a pitch, what it meant to Rossi personally in his life,italia and brasil em geral...How can he know, futebol did not even exist for him in 1993, alone 1982!

He can research it, but can he feel this in his bones , not only as an italian or brasilian can, but almost ANY longtime football fanzaço do/did?? I am STILL torn between my admiration for the seleção and my beloved Azzurri of the impact of Rossi's momentary brilliant light that Copa!

NO, because he is from USA where futebol is STILL out of favour, even if milliards and milliards of immigrants and children of soccer moms play futebol daily at their neighborhood pitch, the sport gets minimal press, and is denigrated regualr basis by these sportstalks show idiotas, more/less!

A note-- Mr Foer is editor of a center-right journal in USA.

I had hoped this would have minimal influence on his "new love for the game" when he writes this book (which for reason unknown, is found in the POLITICAL SCIENCE section of local book stores!!!???)

,That this book is in the Poli Science section seems to denegrate political science discourse, as Mr Foer's book is a "lightweight" and more belongs to ficcion than poli-sciences.

Mr Foer's futebol "worldview" seems to be that of a partisan right winger/ super patriot (pun intended, obvious I mean his political preference), and this premeates the book perspective.



The first chapter, he rehashes what he has READ from futebol books written in Engleesh,after this "lesson" about futebol, he is to make right wing politics out of each passing chapter, including a chapter where he berates "soccer moms" as being "left wing" and goes on the attack! (??)

Personally,it seems that most USian "mammas" become very CONSERVATIVE after having children, and I make a guess more than a few these women voted BUSH as for the "opposition", no??

(I think there is even a study-report that "liberal" people become more conservative in USA once with child/children, no??)

If I remember, and I believe it so as it got me quite angry at time I read this book, Mr.Foer also attacks liberal parents in the book,I not impressed by that at all to publish derogatory comments about one's famiglia.

Sad sad, as I see it.

Again, Mr Goldblatt's book is poesia (or romantic prosa), a loving and THOROUGH history of the beautiful game as well as very non partisan overview of the world as applies to each country he "visits".

Mr Foer's book, sacanagem puro!

He cannot possible show how "soccer explains the world", futebol does NOT "explain" the world, but is an integral part of it (as , again, Mr Goldblatt's wonderful book indicates).



To sum, Mt Foer has an axe to grind, I have seen some of his political writing, and it is even worse than what is contained in this book.
As David Zirin has written, Mr Foer seems a proponent of the Freidman school of globalisation, and this is BAD BAD for everyone on the planeta, save the few elitistas in USA who profit from this arrangement.

In Italian football terms, this book is barely "C-2" division as a football book, as a political book, it not worth to use the pages to wrap fishbones..


To be charitable for Mr Foer's entusiasms for the world game,and a passable first chapter for all USian football "new boots", I allow the one star to be kind for a ZERO stars offering

o mundo gira é a bola rola

PS in the spriti of full disclosure, Eduardo Galeano's delightful (an partisan, so call me a hipocrite!) football book is translated inglés, "Football in Sun and shadow" , and takes a delightful PROGRESSIVE worldview, and of course,

Sinhô Galeano is an 'aplicado discipulo' of the world game since a boy in uruguai. A MUCH better choice also than this book, a "classic" of futebol literature.

_How Soccer Explains the World_ is an unfortunately misleading title; rather than explain the world, Foer uses soccer as a metaphor for globalization and the various reactions of parts of the world to it. He is only partially successful in this.

Evidentially the opposite of globalism isn't nationalism, but what Foer referrs to as "tribalism", as demonstrated by English (and Serbian) "soccer hooligans." How this has developed and been used by the likes of Slobodan Milosevic was an interesting premise, if a bit of a stretch. The global recruitment of soccer players - Nigerians playing for Ukraine, Brazilians playing for anybody, Dutch coaches working in the Near East - are cited as evidence of how soccer has become a "global marketplace" - with mixed results. The metaphor fits on one level (yes, it IS global - how 'bout that?) but fails horribly on another. (How can one make generalizations about the way a "nation" plays soccer?)

Foer also goes into great detail about the politics of the sport - I think he was on to something here, but the idea was only one of several that he persued, to its detriment. (In addition to the "national styles" of coaching and playing, Foer also discussed the sociology of the sport and its appeal - or lack of - in the United States, and its role as a social safety valve in Spain and Iran.) His would have been a stronger case had he pursued only one idea, rather than several.

As a soccer fan, I enjoyed his detailing the stadiums, the chants between rival teams, and (especially) his thoughts on soccer in America. Given his thesis, though, it only warrants 3 stars. An interesting book and there is much to like here - but the central idea, sadly, is very thin.

The cover was missing and I didn't see anthing on the info that it was messed up

This author needs to take two classes at whichever university she teaches: (1) instructional design and (2) writing concisely. This book has quite a lot of good information, but it is all buried within convoluted fluff.

There are many other books on research methodology that (a) do a better job of explaining, (b) include more comprehensive rules for research, and (c) don't take up so much of your valuable time with fluff. I recommend you look at those other books -- especially if you are a professor who is choosing a book for your students.

I am teaching out of this book and the accompanying workbook for the first time, and I cannot express how terrible they are. The text is extremely overwritten (10 pages for something that could be expressed in one page), the statistics section is not clear at all, the workbook exercises are either too basic or overly complicated, and the text and the workbook answer key are riddled with errors. As a result of this last issue, not only do I need to do the usual work of crafting and giving lectures, I also have to comb the book for errors so that I can correct them for my students and redo all of the exercises so that I have an error-free answer key. I will never use these books again.

Great tool and guide to write social work research papers.

This information written in the Preface would have been helpfeul before I purchased this book. (Social workers should not expect this book to replace the Publication Manual. They should be aware that this is one of several reference books that belong on their desk when they write. Somtimes the transition from first-year English composition classes to social work classess leaves students confused because these first-year classes tend to be taught with emphasis on the Modern Language Association (MLA) style. In these courses students learn how to organize a coherent paragraph, how to develop a thesis statement, and how to write an essay or a library research paper in generic (MLA-based)style. This is a useful start, but it does not enhance students' technical writing skills when it comes to using APA gudelines. They must now learn to write using APA Style, which includes not only rules made excilict in the Publication Manual but also other conventions that constitute the unwritten rules of the APS style. For example, rather than write about what other authors "said" or "believed", they should concentrate on what the author "found or "reported". Also, the title of an article should not be mentioned in a literature review, and passive voice may sometimes be used.)

Short, conscise, easy to read, and thought provoking. This manifesto sums up the communist credo in just a few short pages. It gave me a better understanding of where the communist philosophy orginated--necessity.

A concept born in a simpler time used as an excuse for many things from Socialism to controlled capitalism. As with any pivotal work one should read it for his/her self. There is always the chance of misinterpretation by an individual, but if you do not read this then you are just accepting someone's word anyway.
This is more than an economics book it is a way of life. It sounds good on paper but makes a lot of assumptions. Instead of worrying about workability, look at the logic that is built on assumptions of that time (written, in 1848). Add this to your library.

You can pick a side (pro or con) and make a stand if you like; but look at the size of this book and realize that many people will just use the title and build their own case. You will have read the real thing. And be sure to balance it with. "The Capitalist Manifesto" by Louis O. Kelso

This book has helped me tremendously in my class. I'm glad I bought it from Amazon b/c it was very affordable.

This is an interesting book. I am using it for my Writing for Mass Media class. The author puts at least 5-10 exercises at the end of each chapter for you to review the concepts which were talked throughout the chapter. Not really a sit down and read book, but does go over writing for media basics.

I'm not sure what every one's problem is. I thought the book was great, with a lot of action and suspense. There's even a tease at the end to get readers wanting more.
***SPOILER ALERT****
Okay all you goobers out there that don't read and comprehend at the same time. Don't you get it? They are not brother and sister! The novel is chock full of hints...Jace does not look anything like Clary, her mother, or Valentine. Valentine tells Clary his blood travels through her, but tells Jace he has the blood of angels. The fae queen tells them she knows a secret about them, then tells Jace to ask his father about his parentage. The Inquisitor looses her son and his wife (who is seven months pregnant)yet their bodies are missing. Hmmm...I wonder what happened to that unborn child? Gee, I don't know? Perhaps if I wasn't a moron I could figure it out. Then the Inquisitor dies saving Jace's life.
***end of spoiler****
Okay, sorry for my tyrant...uncomprehending complainers seem to be a pet peeve of mine.

When I first picked up City of Bones, I wasn't sure what to make of it. As I was reading, I fell in love. No, it's definitely not heavy reading, and yes, there is better quality prose, but the book was just so fun and made me laugh out loud (which is rare), and the writing, while not amazingly spectacular, works perfectly for the story and is far from bad.

City of Ashes was even better. The characters are the kind of people you wish you knew, but don't; yet they're also just the kids next door. They bridge the gap between the ordinary and extraordinary, and you love them all for their weaknesses and strengths.

If you love fantasy, if you love sarcastic, witty conversations, if you love star-crossed lovers...READ THIS BOOK!

This book seemed like much less of a mush of other books than the first one in the series did, which was a relief. It picks up shortly after the first book left off, with all the main characters just recovering from the wounds they sustained in the big fight against Valentine's Forsaken. Which brings me to my only major problem with this book: the timeline. Although we're told that it was August during the events of City of Bones, in this book it seems to be late fall (there's always a chill in the air). Clary wakes up and eats a doughnut on her way to meet Simon, and then suddenly it's late afternoon. And a few more occasions of missing time...

If you can ignore those inconsistencies, though, this is a good read. Plenty of twists and turns, and unexpected action. A few characters wind up not being dead a few too many times (an author can only pull that trick so many times before all the tension leaks away). And, although the book dragged in a few scenes (ok, Inquisitor, we get your point), I'll be waiting with a fair degree of anticipation of the (hopefully, since I don't think this story-line can last for more than one more book) last book in the trilogy.

Alright. So let me point this out to everyone: Yes, there is incest in this book. No, I don't mind it. Yes, there is homosexuality in this book. Again, I don't mind it.

For all of those people who are like: 'Omg! it's terrible because of what's going on with the characters!'Please, keep in mind that the author started out writing fanfiction. Incest and Homosexuality is fairly common in Fanfictions.Honestly though, I really like this book because it's so different then other books that I've read because the characters ARE so different. Really, I have never really read a book with a homosexual character, or have the main hero and heroine be in love yet are siblings. It's unique, in a mildly creepy way. I am a huge fan of the books, not only because the characters are often times witty and sarcastic, but because many of the aspects are unique.

I don't know how many times when I've read about 'orphan tries to find place in world, and saves the world!' books, or 'girl wants to break mold and runs off to join the army!', or 'destiny has chosen [characternamehere] to save the world!' type of books. The plot lines are over used, dull, and really repetitive. This book though totally broke the mold for me. And when I mean 'break the mold' I mean, seriously, breaking the mold.

I went onto about a two year reading hiatus (because no books really interested me) and I just picked up the first book in the series and could not put it down. It's not about a little orphan, or a princess running away from an arranged marriage. It is truly, truly an amazing book that I really do adore. I can't wait to see how the series ends honestly. The books, as far as I'm concerned, are very consistent so far.
It's not like the Twilight series, where the first one was just amazing, then drops off in quality after that, or really the Harry Potter series where it gets better and better. These books are amazing, and I really don't know how else she could improve them, so they're consistent in the whole 'amazing' factor.

-De

The past few weeks have been hectic for Clary Fray to say the least, and they only seem to get even more so in the sequel to Cassandra Clare's popular debut City of Bones. Clary's mother still hasn't awoken from her strange sleep induced by Jace and Clary's father, Valentine, and Jace is having troubles coming to terms with his true parentage.

Things only get more complicated when an Inquisitor is sent to the Institute to question Jace's loyalty to the Clave, and he doesn't make a good impression. Suspicion is further aroused when children of magical descent are found dead all over the city, making everyone suspect that Valentine is up to something more sinister than they have anticipated.

The second book in the Mortal Instruments series is full of fast paced action and twists and turns that you won't see coming. Clary gets more and more involved in the supernatural world as she and Jace struggle to accept their relationship, while at the same time fending off attacks from all sides. In between it all is exhilarating excitement, the awkwardness of being a teenager, and intriguing mysteries. Readers looking for more breathless adventure and a spectacular battle against evil will delight in City of Ashes.