Lauren Conrad

I am reading this book and as I kept reading it it reminded me so much of the hills. Like it was not all like the jills but the moving to L. A and the intership job and the college and reality show made me just like hey this sounds and reminds me a lot like the jills. What did you think about the book. I was happy to learn… Lauren Conrad, famous for playing herself on the MTV shows Laguna Beach and The Hills, has somehow been allowed to write a book for Young Adults, and the result is “L. A. Candy. ” Jane and Scarlett are best friends that move to Los Angeles together. While visiting a club one night, they are approached to appear on a reality show entitled L. A. Candy. After the girls agree to star in the show, the book follows their lives as they discover that Reality TV may not be as real as television makes it out to be. I picked this book up hoping for a fun guilty pleasure read, but was ultimately disappointed by a few things. First, Lauren Conrad is not the strongest of authors. The dialogue and the storytelling is quite flat and uninteresting at times. Hopefully as she releases more books, her writing skills increase, but “L. A. Candy” seemed quite amateur and I’m surprised that her publishing company allowed it to be released as it is. Second, the pacing is quite off. 100+ pages are devoted to the set-up of the plot. Once the reality show starts filming, which should be the meat of the novel, it seemed like most details were rushed and glossed over. Plus, the conflict and the climax were ultimately quite weak which leads the reader unsatisfied. Finally, the ending did not work at all. It is clearly meant to be a cliffhanger, but it feels more like the story is incomplete and is missing a proper conclusion. I am alright with books that want to excite readers for the next book in the series, but not when it makes the current book feel like a story that is missing a proper conclusion. Despite being a disappointment, it was fun reading how the characters viewed how reality television really worked and how the editors could portray an event differently from how it really happened. Conrad’s experience definitely added a bit of interest to the otherwise flat story. Still fresh off her stint on “The Hills,” Lauren Conrad’s debut novel will definitely appeal to her fans of all ages. Despite a few questionable words, the majority of the book is otherwise quite clean. And while the book has been a hit, and I predict it will continue to sell well, I was disappointed by it and hope that Conrad improves with future books in the series. Conrad’s experience and insider information with this industry definitely brought any credibility to this book, but the writing was weak, the characters were flat, the plot was rather uninteresting, and the ending was quite abrupt. These faults are too overwhelming and hard to overlook what could have been a great guilty pleasure book.

Diana Madison is hanging out with the super fabulous Lauren Conrad. She has been a pretty busy girl after her hit reality show “The Hills” went off the air. . . .

D.h. Lawrence

“Never trust the artist. Trust the tale. ” Could anyone explain this better to me? I’m supposed to write a 250 word response on this, and yeah, i’m somewhat stuck. At 100 words. Today I found out that… Since D. H. Lawrence was a noted writer, let’s assume he was referring to the written word. The author will have a point of view he will tell the story from whether he is writing fiction or non-fiction. You will see that view reflected by his choice of wording and situations throughout the book. For non-fiction, you might afterward check his facts and find that he was completely incorrect in statements made throughout the book. An example would be a history book detailing the period leading up to and through the US Civil War. If that book were written by an author from New York, his version of the facts might differ greatly from that written by an author born and raised in Georgia. A more current example would be “An Inconvenient Truth” published by Al Gore soon after he left office. Those who believe in global warming embraced the book as a great guide to our future as citizens of the world. Those who don’t believe in global warming saw the book and the movie as pure fiction from a man not smart enough to figure out that his source of data was flawed. Lawrence simply meant it is better to become informed on a topic and then draw your own conclusions about a subject or the content of a book rather than to take everything literally and at face value. In other words, it’s only a story. It is not proof one way or the other.

Filmed during live performances for Blue Orange Arts. Directed by Tina Hofman. Adaptation by Roman de Fuscan. Live event filming and promotional video by Ian. . .

Jean Piaget

. I was so glad to find this — Jean Piaget was born in Neuchâtel, Switzerland, on August 9, 1896. His father, Arthur Piaget, was a professor of medieval literature with an interest in local history. His mother, Rebecca Jackson, was intelligent and energetic, but Jean found her a bit neurotic — an impression that he said led to his interest in psychology, but away from pathology. The oldest child, he was quite independent and took an early interest in nature, especially the collecting of shells. He published his first “paper” when he was ten — a one page account of his sighting of an albino sparrow. He began publishing in earnest in high school on his most prized subject, mollusks. He was particularly pleased to get a part time job with the director of Nuechâtel’s Museum of Natural History, Mr. Godel. His work became well known among European students of mollusks, who assumed he was an adult. All this early experience with science kept him away, he says, from “the demon of philosophy. ” Later in adolescence, he faced a bit a crisis of faith: Encouraged by his mother to attend religious instruction, he found religious argument childish. Studying various philosophers and the application of logic, he dedicated himself to finding a “biological explanation of knowledge. ” Ultimately, philosophy failed to assist him in his search, so he turned to psychology. After high school, he went on to the University of Neuchâtel. Constantly studying and writing, he became sickly, and had to retire to the mountains for a year to recuperate. When he returned to Neuchâtel, he decided he would write down his philosophy. A fundamental point became a centerpiece for his entire life’s work: “In all fields of life (organic, mental, social) there exist ‘totalities’ qualitatively distinct from their parts and imposing on them an organization. ” This principle forms the basis of his structuralist philosophy, as it would for the Gestaltists, Systems Theorists, and many others. In 1918, Piaget received his Doctorate in Science from the University of Neuchâtel. He worked for a year at psychology labs in Zurich and at Bleuler’s famous psychiatric clinic. During this period, he was introduced to the works of Freud, Jung, and others. In 1919, he taught psychology and philosophy at the Sorbonne in Paris. Here he met Simon (of Simon-Binet fame) and did research on intelligence testing. He didn’t care for the “right-or-wrong” style of the intelligent tests and started interviewing his subjects at a boys school instead, using the psychiatric interviewing techniques he had learned the year before. In other words, he began asking how children reasoned. In 1921, his first article on the psychology of intelligence was published in the Journal de Psychologie. In the same year, he accepted a position at the Institut J. J. Rousseau in Geneva. Here he began with his students to research the reasoning of elementary school children. This research became his first five books on child psychology. Although he considered this work highly preliminary, he was surprised by the strong positive public reaction to his work. In 1923, he married one of his student coworkers, Valentine Châtenay. In 1925, their first daughter was born; in 1927, their second daughter was born; and in 1931, their only son was born. They immediately became the focus of intense observation by Piaget and his wife. This research became three more books. In 1929, Piaget began work as the director of the Bureau International Office de l’Education, in collaboration with UNESCO. He also began large scale research with A. Szeminska, E. Meyer, and especially Bärbel Inhelder, who would become his major collaborator. Piaget, it should be noted, was particularly influential in bringing women into experhymental psychology. Some of this work, however, wouldn’t reach the world outside of Switzerland until World War II was over. In 1940, He became chair of Experhymental Psychology, the Director of the psychology laboratory, and the president of the Swiss Society of Psychology. In 1942, he gave a series of lectures at the Collège de France, during the Nazi occupation of France. These lectures became The Psychology of Intelligence. At the end of the war, he was named President of the Swiss Commission of UNESCO. Also during this period, he received a number of honorary degrees. He received one from the Sorbonne in 1946, the University of Brussels and the University of Brazil in 1949, on top of an earlier one from Harvard in 1936. And, in 1949 and 1950, he published his synthesis, Introduction to Genetic Epistemology. In 1952, he became a professor at the Sorbonne. In 1955, he created the International Center for Genetic Epistemology, of which he served as director the rest of his life. And, in 1956, he created the School of Sciences at the University of Geneva. He continued working on a general theory of structures and tying his psychological work to biology for many more years. Likewise, he continued his public service through UNESCO as a Swiss delegate. By the end of his career, he had written over 60 books and many hundreds of articles. He died in Geneva, September 16, 1980, one of the most significant psychologists of the twentieth century. . .

Jean Piaget – Educação.

Rob Van Dam

. Do you know what I found? Rob Van Damm did not renew his contract with the WWE because he wanted to devote more time to his Comic Book Store and his Family . . He ended up selling the Comic Book Store and is relaxing with his family at this time . . Rob says that he “Might” consider returning to wrestling in a year or so IF the right contract can be done . . By making very GOOD investments ; Rob is set for Life and does not really NEED to work ever again . . . He said that he would “Consider” an offer by TNA when the time comes . IF the time comes ; for him to return to Pro Wrestling . .

The name of the song is Walk by Kilgore. I noticed that although I did a crap load of research for my rvd video, not many people were watching or rating. I d. . .

Nancy Grace

Do you think the Nancy Grace has made it impossible for this woman to get a fair trial? I’m not saying she should go free, but what happened to “innocent until proven guilty in a court of law”. I know Nancy thinks highly of herself, but she is hardly a court of law. I think I found an answer. Nancy Grace didn’t make it impossible for Casey Anthony. Casey Anthony made it impossible for herself. Nancy Grace was a lawyer for a long time and has gained the respect of viewers for reporting on the story’s that hit close to home, like the disappearance of Caylee Anthony. Nancy Grace is presenting the facts, and shes giving her opinion on Casey Anthony. Working in the media, Nancy has the RIGHT to do that. Its freedom of speech. If Nancy had been apart of the prosecution, or apart of the Grand Jury, I would see where you’re coming from but since she’s reporting the story and happens to be a former attorney it cannot be fairly said that Nancy made it hard for her. In addition to that, I don’t believe Casey would be able to get a fair trial anywhere. Missing children is something that hits too close to home for people all over the country, and it would be extremely difficult to get a fair trial anywhere in the United States.