Download Free Just Being John Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Just Being John and write the review.

John Murray lives a quiet life with his grandparents in a tiny village on the edge of nowhere. He's a high school geek, a nerd, and an introvert, fascinated by knowledge, but they're all traits that earn him few friends in a world filled with noise, instant fame and fleeting trends. A magazine, a chance find in his local newsagent, transports John to a new world, as alien as another planet, but as fascinating as anything he's seen before, as he opens the pages to the Lords and Ladies, Saints and Sinners: The powerful in Japanese history. A freak accident and a convulsion in the world means John's eagerness to absorb new things is tested. He's forced to live the reality of medieval Japanese life, learn the ways of the samurai and battle mythical and supernatural beasts on his quest to find his family and save this alien world.
John Lennon was a rock star, a school clown, a writer, a wit, an iconoclast, a sometime peace activist and finally an eccentric millionaire. He was also a Beatle - his plain-speaking and impudent rejection of authority catching, and eloquently articulating, the group's moment in history. Chronicling a famously troubled life, Being John Lennon analyses the contradictions in the singer-songwriter's creative and destructive personality. Drawing on many interviews and conversations with Lennon, his first wife Cynthia and second Yoko Ono, as well as his girlfriend May Pang and song-writing partner Paul McCartney, Ray Connolly unsparingly reassesses the chameleon nature of the perpetually dissatisfied star who just couldn't stop reinventing himself.
The bold and boundlessly original debut novel from the Oscar®-winning screenwriter of Being John Malkovich, Adaptation, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, and Synecdoche, New York. LONGLISTED FOR THE CENTER FOR FICTION FIRST NOVEL PRIZE • “A dyspeptic satire that owes much to Kurt Vonnegut and Thomas Pynchon . . . propelled by Kaufman’s deep imagination, considerable writing ability and bull’s-eye wit."—The Washington Post “An astonishing creation . . . riotously funny . . . an exceptionally good [book].”—The New York Times Book Review • “Kaufman is a master of language . . . a sight to behold.”—NPR NAMED ONE OF THE BEST BOOKS OF THE YEAR BY NPR AND MEN’S HEALTH B. Rosenberger Rosenberg, neurotic and underappreciated film critic (failed academic, filmmaker, paramour, shoe salesman who sleeps in a sock drawer), stumbles upon a hitherto unseen film made by an enigmatic outsider—a film he’s convinced will change his career trajectory and rock the world of cinema to its core. His hands on what is possibly the greatest movie ever made—a three-month-long stop-motion masterpiece that took its reclusive auteur ninety years to complete—B. knows that it is his mission to show it to the rest of humanity. The only problem: The film is destroyed, leaving him the sole witness to its inadvertently ephemeral genius. All that’s left of this work of art is a single frame from which B. must somehow attempt to recall the film that just might be the last great hope of civilization. Thus begins a mind-boggling journey through the hilarious nightmarescape of a psyche as lushly Kafkaesque as it is atrophied by the relentless spew of Twitter. Desperate to impose order on an increasingly nonsensical existence, trapped in a self-imposed prison of aspirational victimhood and degeneratively inclusive language, B. scrambles to re-create the lost masterwork while attempting to keep pace with an ever-fracturing culture of “likes” and arbitrary denunciations that are simultaneously his bête noire and his raison d’être. A searing indictment of the modern world, Antkind is a richly layered meditation on art, time, memory, identity, comedy, and the very nature of existence itself—the grain of truth at the heart of every joke.
What image comes to mind when you think of Anorexia? Size Zero models floating down the catwalk? Pictures of celebrities in magazines plastered with headlines screaming Thin, Starvation, Skeleton? Or a young girl, wasting away in front of those who love her, desperately trying to be thin? Im sure very few of you will see a young man pounding the treadmill to get rid of an extra few calories. Nor will you think of the same young man throwing his dinner in the bin because the thought of eating anything repulses him. These are the images that John Evans thinks of every day, because John Evans is that young man, and Anorexia Nervosa has been his life for fifteen years. In Becoming John: Anorexias Not Just For Girls, John seeks to explode the myth that Eating Disorders are a female-only problem. Frustrated at the dearth of literature devoted to the subject of Eating Disorders in males, he has attempted to fill that void, at least in part. There are many thousands of male sufferers in Britain, some suffering in silence, some receiving treatment, some, like the author, on the road to recovery. It is hoped that Becoming John will at least provide a voice for this men and maybe even help some of those with no idea of where to turn to or where to find the strength to seek help. Tracing his illness from its origins in the sadness and bullying of his childhood through to the obsessions and the rituals of his adult life, John details how his relationship with Anorexia became the most important factor in his existence. Extracts from his diary detail the struggles of his four-month inpatient admission, attempting to battle his demons and to carve his niche as the only male on a ten-patient ward. Johns story details the occasional highs and much more pervasive lows of living with Anorexia, ever aware of the damage being done but feeling utterly impotent when looking for a way to fight back. By sharing his Eating Disorder with a public audience, John hopes to further weaken the hold it has over him, because nothing hurts Anorexia more than being exposed and being attacked from all angles. Maybe too, you may find something within these pages that helps you better understand the mind of an anorexic, whether you be a Health Care Professional, a carer, or someone who, like John at the start of his journey, just cant understand why they dont eat something. Becoming John: Anorexias Not Just For Girls is a rollercoaster of emotions and belief, of fight and of hopelessness. Something in these pages will touch you, something in these pages could help you fight back. For a review of "Becoming John" from MenGetEDsToo.co.uk, follow this link http://mengetedstoo.co.uk/%e2%80%9canorexia-is-a-memory-not-my-master%e2%80%9d-a-review-of-%e2%80%98becoming-john-anorexia%e2%80%99s-not-just-for-girls%e2%80%99-by-nick-watts
From a veteran culture writer and modern movie expert, a celebration and analysis of the movies of 1999—“a terrifically fun snapshot of American film culture on the brink of the Millennium….An absolute must for any movie-lover or pop-culture nut” (Gillian Flynn). In 1999, Hollywood as we know it exploded: Fight Club. The Matrix. Office Space. Election. The Blair Witch Project. The Sixth Sense. Being John Malkovich. Star Wars: The Phantom Menace. American Beauty. The Virgin Suicides. Boys Don’t Cry. The Best Man. Three Kings. Magnolia. Those are just some of the landmark titles released in a dizzying movie year, one in which a group of daring filmmakers and performers pushed cinema to new limits—and took audiences along for the ride. Freed from the restraints of budget, technology, or even taste, they produced a slew of classics that took on every topic imaginable, from sex to violence to the end of the world. The result was a highly unruly, deeply influential set of films that would not only change filmmaking, but also give us our first glimpse of the coming twenty-first century. It was a watershed moment that also produced The Sopranos; Apple’s AirPort; Wi-Fi; and Netflix’s unlimited DVD rentals. “A spirited celebration of the year’s movies” (Kirkus Reviews), Best. Movie. Year. Ever. is the story of not just how these movies were made, but how they re-made our own vision of the world. It features more than 130 new and exclusive interviews with such directors and actors as Reese Witherspoon, Edward Norton, Steven Soderbergh, Sofia Coppola, David Fincher, Nia Long, Matthew Broderick, Taye Diggs, M. Night Shyamalan, David O. Russell, James Van Der Beek, Kirsten Dunst, the Blair Witch kids, the Office Space dudes, the guy who played Jar-Jar Binks, and dozens more. It’s “the complete portrait of what it was like to spend a year inside a movie theater at the best possible moment in time” (Chuck Klosterman).
What was it like to be John Lennon? What was it like to be the castoff child, the clown at school, and the middle-class suburban boy who pretended to be a working-class hero? How did it feel to have one of the most recognizable singing voices in the world, but to dislike it so much he always wanted to disguise it? Being John Lennon is not about the whitewashed Prince of Peace of Imagine legend—because that was only a small part of him. The John Lennon depicted in these pages is a much more kaleidoscopic figure, sometimes almost a collision of different characters. He was, of course, funny, often very funny. But above everything, he had attitude—his impudent style somehow personifying the aspirations of his generation to question authority. He could, and would, say the unsayable. Though there were more glamorous rock stars in rock history, even within the Beatles, it was John Lennon’s attitude which caught, and then defined, his era in the most memorable way.
It has been the fate of many books on John to be left unfinished, for its interpretation naturally forms the crowning of a lifetime. I have myself been intending to write a book on the Fourth Gospel since the 'fifties, before I broke off (reluctantly) to be Bishop of Woolwich, though I am grateful now that I did not produce it prematurely at that time. It means however that I shall be compelled to refer to and often recapitulate material directly or indirectly related to the Johannine literature, which I have written over the years (some of it indeed while I was bishop). Many scholars in fact, if not most now, think that the author of the Gospel himself never lived to finish it and have seen the work as the product of numerous hands and redactors. As will become clear, I prefer to believe that the ancient testimony of the church is correct that John wrote it 'while still in the body' and that its roughnesses, self-corrections and failures of connection, real or imagined, are the result of its not having been smoothly or finally edited. If so I am in good company. At any rate who could wish for a better last testimony from his friends than that 'his witness is true' (John 21.24)? In other words, he got it right--historically and theologically. --from the Introduction At the time of his death in December 1983, John Robinson had completed the text of the book on which his 1984 Bampton lectures were to be based, so that it is possible to see the full details of his extremely controversial argument that the Gospel of John was the first Gospel to be written. Dr. Robinson himself once described the dawning of his conviction that this was the case as a 'Damascus Road experience', and his presentation of the evidence is made with all the customary vigor with which he would argue for something in which he deeply believed. The objections which need to be overcome to stand on its head what has long been one of the fundamental assumptions of New Testament scholarship are substantial, but here once again Dr. Robinson shows that so much of what is taken as established fact in that area is no more than preference and presumption. Certainly he will provoke rethinking on a whole series of topics, from the chronology of Jesus' ministry to the nature of his teaching. As The Listener said of the equally controversial Redating the New Testament: The greatest pleasure Dr. Robinson gives is purely intellectual. His book is a prodigious virtuoso exercise in inductive reasoning and an object lesson in the nature of historical argument and historical knowledge. This sequel equals, if not excels, its predecessor in those respects and is a fitting tribute to a brilliant New Testament scholar. The manuscript was prepared for publication by Dr. Chip Coakley, Dr Robinson's pupil, now Lecturer in Religious Studies in the University of Lancaster.
A fan's-eye-view of one of tennis' most notorious stars. The greatest sports stars characterize their times. They also help to tell us who we are. John McEnroe, at his best and worst, encapsulated the story of the eighties. His improvised quest for tennis perfection and his inability to find a way to grow up dramatized the volatile self-absorption of a generation. His matches were open therapy sessions and they allowed us all to be armchair shrinks. Tim Adams sets out to explore what it might have meant to be John McEnroe during those times and to define exactly what it is we want from our sporting heroes: how we require them to play out our own dramas; how the best of them provide an intensity that we can measure our own lives by. Talking to McEnroe, his friends and rivals, and drawing on a range of references, Tim Adams presents a book that is both a portrait of the most colourful player ever to pick up a racket and an original study of the idea of sporting obsession.
America, how does the liberal hate thee? Let us count the ways . . . It’s hard work being a liberal these days. Not only do a mere 20 percent of Americans identify themselves as liberal, but one could go broke supporting a skinny double-decaf Starbucks habit. On top of that, when you hate things most Americans love, it’s tiring to have to endlessly correct/educate/fix/enlighten the poor dullards out there who just want to enjoy their lives. Which, taken as a whole, makes the average liberal lonely, short on cash, and mad as hell! So, in the spirit of the compassion they themselves espouse, 50 Things Liberals Love to Hate is truth spoken with love, an invitation to the disenfranchised: it’s not too late, liberals, to join the fun! C’mon, crack open a Bud and throw another T-bone on the grill. But kindly check your disdain at the door when it comes to: WALMART: How about a handmade, locally sourced flat-screen television instead? STEAKHOUSES: There’s no steamed tofu on this menu. McDONALD’S: The stranger in the playground handing out candy to children. FLAG PINS: It’s okay to love America, but not enough to wear it on your lapel. FOOTBALL: War with cleats and pads. THE V-8 ENGINE: There’s just something plain wrong about all that power and freedom under the control of one person. SUCCESS: When you make more money than the rest of us, it hurts our feelings. THE FOUNDING FATHERS: A bunch of old white guys who are making it nearly impossible for modern government to pick our doctors, teach our children, correct our diets, and save our money. . . . and 42 other things that have liberals packing some serious hate. Mike Gallagher—America’s sixth-ranked radio talk show host and Fox News contributor—skewers liberal lunacy with cutting irony and scathing wit. Here are 50 warning signs of a liberal mind implosion, all darn good reasons to lock the doors, crank up the A/C, turn on the game, and let the countdown begin. . . .
Since the Doom series, First Person Shooter (FPS) videogames have ricocheted through the gaming community, often reaching outside that community to the wider public. While critics primarily lampoon FPSs for their aggressiveness and on-screen violence, gamers see something else. Halo is one of the greatest, most successful FPSs ever to grace the world of gaming. Although Halo is a FPS, it has a science-fiction storyline that draws from previous award-winning science fiction literature. It employs a game mechanic that limits the amount of weapons a player can carry to two, and a multiplayer element that has spawned websites like Red vs. Blue and games within the game created by players themselves. Halo’s unique and extraordinary features raise serious questions. Are campers really doing anything wrong? Does Halo’s music match the experience of the gamer? Would Plato have used Halo to train citizens to live an ethical life? What sort of Artificial Intelligence exists in Halo and how is it used? Can the player’s experience of war tell us anything about actual war? Is there meaning to Master Chief’s rough existence? How does it affect the player’s ego if she identifies too strongly with an aggressive character like Master Chief? Is Halo really science fiction? Can Halo be used for enlightenment-oriented thinking in the Buddhist sense? Does Halo's weapon limitation actually contribute to the depth of the gameplay? When we willingly play Halo only to die again and again, are we engaging in some sort of self-injurious behavior? What is expansive gameplay and how can it be informed by the philosophy of Michel Foucault? In what way does Halo’s post-apocalyptic paradigm force gamers to see themselves as agents of divine deliverance? What can Red vs. Blue teach us about personal identity? These questions are tackled by writers who are both Halo cognoscenti and active philosophers, with a foreword by renowned Halo fiction author Fred Van Lente and an afterword by leading games scholar and artist Roger Ngim.