Features of The Viscount Who Loved Me PDF
The Viscount Who Loved Me PDF-The inspiration for season two of BRIDGERTON, a series created by Shondaland for Netflix, from #1 New York Times bestselling author Julia Quinn: the story of Anthony Bridgerton in the second of her beloved Regency-set novels featuring the charming, powerful Bridgerton family.
This time the gossip columnists have it wrong. London’s most elusive bachelor Anthony Bridgerton hasn’t just decided to marry—he’s even chosen a wife! The only obstacle is his intended’s older sister, Kate Sheffield—the most meddlesome woman ever to grace a London ballroom. The spirited schemer is driving Anthony mad with her determination to stop the betrothal, but when he closes his eyes at night, Kate’s the woman haunting his increasingly erotic dreams…-The Viscount Who Loved Me PDF
Contrary to popular belief, Kate is quite sure that reformed rakes do not make the best husbands—and Anthony Bridgerton is the most wicked rogue of them all. Kate’s determined to protect her sister—but she fears her own heart is vulnerable. And when Anthony’s lips touch hers, she’s suddenly afraid she might not be able to resist the reprehensible rake herself…-The Viscount Who Loved Me PDF
Recommended Books For You
Description of The Viscount Who Loved Me PDF
The Viscount Who Loved Me PDF This is the best book for anyone around the world to download and must read whether of any age or any profession as they will improve the thinking with which you live your life dramatically.
Dimensions and Characteristics of The Viscount Who Loved Me PDF
- Publisher : Avon; First Edition (April 27, 2021)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 480 pages
- International Standard Book Number-10 : 006313862X
- International Standard Book Number-13 : 978-0063138629
- Item Weight : 12.8 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.31 x 1.08 x 8 inches
- Book Name : The Viscount Who Loved Me PDF
Anz “Having just read “The Duke and I”, and more or less enjoyed it, I ordered and read this one straight away. It’s nothing I haven’t read before.
The plot is un-imaginative and at times ludicrous. The lead characters spend half of the book threatening bodily harm on eachother and on many occaissions carrying out those threats. It’s supposed to be funny but it’s childish nonsense (some might say abuse).
Anthony was a fairly good character in the first book, but all of that is ripped from him and he becomes a horny teenager who doesn’t know how to keep it in his breeches. Kate could have been a good heroine if I was shown that she was different to all the other ladies and not told so once or twice a page.
As with the first book, the dialogue is clunky, there are a few americanisms and a lot of rubbish. But as with the first it is readable, i whizzed through this in an afternoon, time wasting, brain resting drivel.
If you are looking for high literature, unforgettable characters and the New Darcy, this is not for you, if you are looking to be vaguely entertained … read on.”
I’ve always loved Julia Quinn’s books, especially the Bridgerton series. I had read this book in hardback a number of years ago, but rereading it was still a joy. In fact, I’m going to reread All of the books in this series. Ms. Quinn is a gifted author with a unique ability to tell an engaging story.
In this story, the H is Anthony B. and the h is Katherine (Kate), who is the overlooked older sister of Edwina. Kate and Edwina’s father had died and the family was on a limited budget. As a result, both sisters were having their first Season together, even though Kate was almost 21 and Edwina was barely 18. Kate screened all the suitors for Edwina’s hand and didn’t want the H to court her because he was a Rake. As far as the H was concerned, Edwina was a perfect match because he didn’t want to love his wife and felt sure that Edwina fit in that regard. In her attempts to protect Edwina, the h and H were constantly at odds. However, that gave the H the opportunity to really get to know the h and he realized that he liked what he saw, even though he was going to have to struggle not to fall in love with the h.
Ms. Quinn draws her characters so well that you feel their emotions with them. There are several mildly described sex scenes, but no profanity except an occasional “damn” from the H. All in all, you can’t go wrong with this book and I would highly recommend it to anyone who enjoys romance books.”
Multiculturalism hardly means people living together as a community, it means having community within a larger community. Take the example of London, you have people from Eastern Europe on one side, the Polish only stays with the Polish, the Slovakian with the Slovakian and so on and so forth. Then, you have Black Jamaican who make up another unit. You have Black African (Anglophone and Francophone) – Nigerian, Ghanaian, Ugandan, Ivorian, Congolese…etc. Obviously nobody actually mix together. Nigerian stays with Nigerian, Ivorian with Ivorian and so on and so forth. Then you have Indians and Pakistani who stays with people who come from the same country as them. Even Italian in London usually stays with Italians. In fact not long ago, an Italian told me that there was a big association for Italian in London and that he was a member. There are many other group that I skipped because I couldn’t be bothered but you understand what I mean. And then you have the English – some accept this diversity (usually easier in good economic time), others merely tolerate it.
All group have a natural tendency toward self-segregation. But on top of that, these days we have an external pressure from the Left. The Left does everything it can to remind people how different they are from another, besides picking nonsense battle which erode social trust and our already tenuous social cohesion (i.e tearing statues, protests on university…etc).
The left in its haste to remake fail to understand that a) the world as it is though not perfect is way better than it use to be and b)that if they continue it will only lead us to a civil war. There is still poverty but anyone who’d read history would know that it’s nothing as it used to be (read for example Way to Wigan Road), racism though still a major issue is better now than it ever was. I should also point out something people always talk about how Trump brought a fascist state, about how much of a Nazi he is and so on and so forth. Do they not realise that if they were living in a true Nazi state they could not insult him, or his supporter the way they do on TV or even anonymously on social media? Trump is bad, but no he’s isn’t creating a new Nazi Germany or URSS. And really saying such things is terribly insensitive to the people who lived through those time.
By the way, I do not mean to say that injustice should not be tackled, but it has to be done in a pragmatic and useful way. Concretely, though I understand why he did this, what has Kaeparnick protesting the American flag accomplished besides increasing polarisation? Similarly, for the last couple of years I have heard using terms such as white privilege, white supremacists, old white men, patriarchy and other similar words in almost in every sense and often when they aren’t warranted. But what has it accomplished? It has created a backlash from conservative and annoyed liberals. You also have white liberals who have accepted those terms. But I believe for some, it is only a cool trend they have stumbled into, for other it is a form of religion which I’m not entirely sure they fully believe into, and the last group simply feel obliged.
To be clear, I do believe that in an unfair world, black people are more likely to suffer from unfairness than white people. There are various reasons for this bias and prejudice, the fact that black people are a numeral minority (10% of black in US, only 2% in UK and probably also about 2% in France) whereas white are the majority, lack of economic power of black people in the country they live, lack of economic country of African countries and cultural difference. So, in a sense I believe that white privilege exists, but I think that the way we go about talking about it is simply too divisive and does not promote understanding or even compassion.
I am very well aware of all the wrong white led country have done in history. Though if we’re being very fair about it, Arab countries (slavery) and Asian countries (mostly Japon have done the same [severe colonisation of neighbours]) have done similar misdeed. But really, we can’t expect someone to understand our point of view when we scream have him that the colour of his skin make him a bad person, even if he personally hasn’t done anything. Or when we say that all white people are basically evil. I understand where people are coming from when they say that. Exchanging with someone who has entrenched beliefs about you & your people, who simply cannot imagine that his experience is not the experience of everybody else or someone who is wilfully ignorant/ selectively chose morsel of history (many Conservative) can be very trying. Nonetheless, if our objective is to make a positive change then we need to change how we communicate.
Going back to the book, though Haidt says that Conservative have six moral foundation rather than the Liberal’s three, he does point out the flaws within the Conservative movement. Besides, Haidt never said that having the six moral foundation mean that you can’t be biases or that your reasoning is perfect. In fact, you could argue that he said the contrary. One more thing, someone pointed out that if Conservative score high in Loyalty how come they distrust the government. Well, this reading is wrong. Conservative do trust government to provide a good environment/ market, they trust the government’s words, including its lies. Essentially, they gov to rule the environment but not the individual. You should remember that they also score high in Liberty. Hence, it isn’t surprising that they do not want an external force to rule them.
I suppose some people aren’t happy just because he didn’t call them racist idiots. By the way, even after reading this book, I still have trouble reconciling my initial views with the picture Haidt presented. What I’m trying to say is that though Haidt’s book gave me a lot of insight, I still have much to digest.
I would recommend this book to anyone who want to understand politics and their neighbours with different political opinion.
There’s only one thing which the book is missing for me. It is a niggle and really, Haidt already did enough and couldn’t have looked at this. But I wonder how morality work/ develop across race. For example, a lot of black people are liberal/ democrats because this side have generally been against injustice and willing to do something for the lower section of society. But, could it be that some despite their skin colour are actually closer in their moral spectrum to the white conservative they despise (and who in turn may despise them)? More bluntly said, if instead of being black, they had been born white, could their political leaning be completely different because being white and conservative doesn’t come with the same baggage has being black and conservative? Really, if they white conservative could leave out his bias, could the black who have the same moral makeup as him get along better with him than with fellow black who do not have the same moral buds?
Really, I can’t help wondering how much who you are outside influence your political leaning despite who you are inside. If I had the opportunity I would have done a Phd on this. But ah…I’m way too busy. Has anyone ever thought about this?
In any case, as I said, highly recommended!”
Download Link 1
This site complies with DMCA Digital Copyright Laws. Please bear in mind that we do not own copyrights to this book/software. We’re sharing this with our audience ONLY for educational purposes and we highly encourage our visitors to purchase the original licensed software/Books. If someone with copyrights wants us to remove this software/Book, please contact us. immediately.
You may send an email to email@example.com for all DMCA / Removal Requests.