Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Unavailable
    Экологический менеджмент и экологический аудит
    Unavailable
    Экологический менеджмент и экологический аудит
    Unavailable
    Экологический менеджмент и экологический аудит
    Ebook70 pages1 hour

    Экологический менеджмент и экологический аудит

    By Коллектив авторов

    4/5

    ()

    Currently unavailable

    Currently unavailable

    About this ebook

    Учебный материал рассматривает основные проблемы изучения курса. Пособие предназначено для студентов направления подготовки 280700 Техносферная безопасность.

    LanguageРусский
    PublisherLitRes
    Release dateDec 30, 2020
    ISBN9785040011049
    Unavailable
    Экологический менеджмент и экологический аудит

    Related to Экологический менеджмент и экологический аудит

    Related ebooks

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      Жизнь По-новому

      Oct 26, 2020

      Миссия нового проекта «Лаборатория Долголетия» - дать возможность людям жить долго и качественно! Компания исследует и популяризирует лучшие практики и методы как доказательной, так и нетрадиционной медицины. В проекте задействованы врачи-диетологи,

      1 min read

    Reviews for Экологический менеджмент и экологический аудит

    4/5

    8,148 ratings239 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 5/5
      I have lived and suffered this book. It is without a doubt a masterpiece and I'm not ashamed to say it! As scandalous as the plot might be, it was impossible for me to hate Humbert.
    • 2/5
      I really didn't get what all they hype was about.
    • 5/5
      Simply one of the greatest books of the 20th century!
    • 2/5
      A difficult book to read. The beauty of Nabokov's mastery of language is a distinct counterpoint to the dark subject matter. One finds oneself caught between disgust at the pedophiliac protagonist, and sorrow for him as he is unwilling to seek change for the condition he attributes to a childhood event. He alternates between an acceptance of damnation for himself, to shamelessly indulging his fantasies, to lamenting and recognizing the shame in his actions in the end. The descriptions can leave one nauseated at times, and I won't even discuss the obvious imagery of the the weapon that isn't used until the end, and then not effectively. The articulate European encounter with post-war America is poignant, but an undercurrent to the primary plot.

      If you are looking for an example of the writer's craft, I would advise you to consider this book. Otherwise, it would be difficult to recommend.
    • 5/5
      Having seen the film years and years (and years and years) ago, I was never all that inclined to read the novel. Eventually, after many mentions of the novel's literary references and of Humbert Humbert as the quintessential unreliable narrator, and thanks in no small part to the entertaining analysis by Sparky Sweets, PhD, I decided to give it a go.

      The book is nothing like the movie. The book is not the paedophile smut that its detractors (many of whom never made it past the first hundred pages) claim. This novel is good -- perhaps even required -- reading, and if you're worried about getting strung up by the National Legion of Decency, then read it unobtrusively on a Kindle (next up: Lady Chatterly's Lover).

      Many a better reviewer than I have written countless words on this novel, so I'll keep it brief. This is a novel about the dark side of the male lover: jealous, controlling, mindlessly pursuing his own pleasure at the expense of his partner. The age of Lolita makes her all the more subject to being controlled by Humbert, much as the inveterate drunkenness of older Rita likewise leaves her dependent on him. We have here, in Humbert, a tyrant and a misanthrope, a man who enjoys belittling and abusing others, and who wields what little power he can acquire as zealously as the most small-minded bureaucrat. Other people and their feelings do not matter to Humbert; they exist only for his dark amusement, and when the world works against him he sobs like a newly-toyless child.

      Humbert is, of course, erudite and charming -- another in a long line of literary psychopaths. In writing his memoirs, he turns his charm on the reader, a smooth tongue attesting to his good intentions and the natural simplicity of his desires. Yet his own depiction of the events betrays him, demonstrating a Bluebeardish lack of concern for others, and ultimately sabotaging the sympathy he is trying to inspire.
    • 4/5
      I love the use of language in this story but totally missed any humor or satire that it was supposed to have. Completely got the horror though. The “About the Story” at the end of my copy says it best, “at once exquisite and grotesque.”
    • 4/5
      From my purview, Lolita should have a subtitle. That subtitle should read "A Beautifully Written Book on Disturbing Subject Matter." That basically sums up my thoughts on Nabokov's pièce de résistance. I hope that my use of French doesn't irritate you as it did with me during my reading of this novel. In my opinion, Nabokov's continued use of French phrases was the one thing that damaged the eloquence of his writing style - and make no mistake, he writes beautifully.As mentioned in my proposed subtitle, my primary difficulty was with the subject matter (an older adult man who lusts after a young girl). Oddly enough, in the last year, I've now read two books on this difficult topic, Lolita and Memories of My Melancholy Whores by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. In both cases, I expected to be so disgusted by the content that I would end up putting the book down. Instead, in both cases, the beauty of the writing kept me engaged. It is also worth noting that Nabokov had a more difficult time keeping the book in my hands given that he is considerably more graphic in his lustful descriptions than was Garcia Marquez.Perhaps my review is too similar to other reviews of Lolita. I don't know, I haven't read them. I can only suspect that the two glaring characteristics of the book - the eloquence of the wordsmith and the difficult nature of the plot line - are often repeated. That being said, I'm a person who likes books, movies, etc. that are moving. I want to be genuinely disturbed, saddened, or brought to laughter. In other words, I want to feel the book. Nabokov was able to do that on multiple occasions during my reading of Lolita. I can see why it was a stunner of a book in 1955. Hell, it was a stunner for me in 2007 and I'm no prude.
    • 5/5
      For once it's easy to choose Goodreads' 5-star rating for a book, given that the rollover reminds us this means 'it was amazing' rather than the 4-star 'I really liked it.' Lolita was amazing. I'm not sure I really liked it. I'm very glad I read it. I doubt I'll ever read it again.

      I suppose the most astonishing, and uncomfortable, single aspect of a generally astonishing and uncomfortable book is that for 350 pages it locates us squarely inside the mind, the emotions, the urges and the actions of what must surely be one of the most venal, vainglorious, pathetically evil characters in all of literature. Humbert Humbert is intelligent, educated, witty and eloquent, and as such his confession/memoir, delivered through the veil of his own justifications and excuses, is shockingly seductive. In the course of our time with him we find ourselves laughing at his jokes, agreeing with his assessments, recognising his dilemmas. When his true nature shines through - and this is a negative shine, as it were, chinks of purest black in the light, bright armour of his self-aggrandisement - the pure horror of it is so overwhelming that it is, paradoxically, easier to ignore than to focus on. We don't want to go there. We don't want to comprehend what those flashes of unvarnished truth tell us is really happening to Lolita. His endless expositions of undying love and amused observations on the idiosyncrasies of early adolescence are so much easier to bear. And because he is unable even at the end, when the horror he has wrought can finally no longer be concealed even from himself, to acknowledge that his Lolita was never more than an innocent victim, and he never less than the most guilty of predators, he remains, for me at least, irredeemable.

      Because in some ways his greatest crime is this: Lolita is never a person to him, never an entity in her own right, never a being entitled to any rights. She exists only in relation to him. He defines her nature, implicitly, in terms of his own reactions to her. The notion that he might be, indeed should be, completely incidental is not one he can countenance. And the greatest tragedy of the book is that because he never challenges, never wants to challenge, his own duplicitous perception, he makes of it a reality. Lolita is, in the end, what he has made her, and no more. We are unable to know her except as he has known her. Her life is truncated by his understanding of it.

      It is easy to see why Lolita is on virtually every best-book list since the middle of the 20th century. It deserves to be there. It's a book that should be read, and talked about, and thought about. Should it be enjoyed? Well yes, for its mastery if not its subject matter. Nabokov's achievement is superlative. The style and structure of the thing, the framing devices and concatenation of tales, the pearls of prose, the characterisations, the sheer thrust and power of the narrative, are literally breathtaking. Readers talk about being transported, and it is a book that is deeply moving in every sense. For a writer it is an awe-inspiring work, an intensely difficult story to pull off in the purely technical sense made to look easy by the sheer lyrical bravura of the author. There is much to learn here - and be intimidated by.
    • 3/5
      Many years ago as a young teenage girl I read this and at the time enjoyed the sauciness of the story, and the depiction of Lolita as sulky, knowing & bored - made a welcome change to the goody-two- shoes characters of the Secret Seven children.. Over 40 years later I'm reading a very different book. Narrated as it is by a predatory middle-aged paedophile who kidnaps his landlady's 12 year old daughter and takes her on a 2-year road trip, keeping her with threats and bribes, aware that she cries every single night.Educated, superior Humbert's life descends into nightmarish paranoia.A novel full of black humour and wordplay, though the middle part did seem overlong and tedious. And for once, perhaps the subject-matter is even more shocking today than when it was first published.
    • 2/5
      Absolute trash that is very well written. I felt like more and more of a creep as I read the book, and the plot and character development (outside of the main character) left a lot to be desired. The language, however, is out of this world. It reads like one long poem.
    • 3/5
      > She swam beside me, a trustful and clumsy seal, and all the logic of passion screamed in my ear: Now is the time! And, folks, I just couldn’t! In silence I turned shoreward and gravely, dutifully, she also turned, and still hell screamed its counsel, and still I could not make myself drown the poor, slippery, big-bodied creature. The scream grew more and more remote as I realized the melancholy fact that neither tomorrow, nor Friday, nor any other day or night, could I make myself put her to death.
    • 2/5
      Didn't get it until I saw the Kubrick film. The film is better. It's less gross and the absurdity is more palpable also it's less gross.
    • 1/5
      Vulgär, ätzend und bösartig. Ein sehr unangenehmes, uncharmantes Buch.
    • 3/5
      This must have been a controversial book at the time it was written, I think it is still a controversial book today. Its surprising to me that a book on this topic would even be taken seriously. It must have been a huge risk to the author to write it. Is it possible that he is writing about thoughts and feelings in a character, but he has never had these thoughts and feelings himself? I don't think I could do that. Are many of these ideas his own. Again a big risk. I know Nabokov has a big following. Maybe if I investigated further some of these questions would be answered.
    • 3/5
      I tried to keep an open mind about the novel Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov, but I really couldn’t get past the distasteful fact that the main character was sexually obsessed with pre-pubescent girls. I am afraid that I could find no literary value in his perverse and destructive relationship with the 12 year old Dolores Haze. I simply found the main character and ultimately the book repulsive.This is an author that has great command of language, bending it to the shape of his thoughts and insights. In writing about the nature of lust, there are moments of humor as well as moments of despair. I wasn’t shocked by the subject matter as much as off-put by Humbert’s selfishness and how he uses his writing ability to disguise the nature of his desire. This is not a tragic love story but rather a pervert’s well written cover-up trying to normalize a grown man’s illegal actions towards a child.I realize that my opinion of this book differs greatly from most critics who have hailed the novel as one of the greatest works of the 20th century. I tried to give this book an opportunity to draw me in but unfortunately I was not able to get beyond the difficult and vile subject matter.
    • 2/5
      This was a difficult book to read. Somehow it makes the sexual abuse of children not seem as horrific as it is. I read it many years ago and still feel negatively effected by it. Just knowing that there are many men in the world like this makes me hate the culture we live in even more.
    • 2/5
      “She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at school. She was Dolores on the dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita.” Like the vast majority of the Western world I knew the basic story for this book but had never actually read it so felt that it was time to put that right. Sadly I was rather disappointed with it.The subject matter did not really bother me (despite having a daughter myself) as I'm not so naive to believe that pedophilia does not exist or always has nor do I believe in censorship. Anyway anyone opening this book and expecting salaciousness will be disappointed because although we know that sex goes on within it the actual act is never truly visible. The narrator tries to justify his actions and by suggestion that he did not have to drug Lolita, as he intended, before the first time that he abused her that she was somehow complicit in her downfall but as a reader we soon realize that he is not overly reliable.He endeavours to control Lolita ,by threats rather than physically force, to make her comply with his actions even going as far as using her to bring over 'nymphets' into their house for him to ogle but these are the words of the narrator rather than the author. Some regard this as a love story but personally I don't see it. Yes, Lolita is reliant on HH but I never felt that any love was reciprocated by her rather this is a novel about obsession. Lolita.Lolita speaks little throughout and always remains an enigma despite the book being named after her which is another clever ploy IMHO.Many reviewers regard this book as a modern classic and there is no doubt it is a remarkable book especially as it was written in English rather than the author's own first tongue. Also the fact that the narrator is also a pedophile and as such a anti-hero is quite remarkable.Now I'm sure that many will disagree with me but I actually enjoyed the first half of this book,despite or maybe because of the subject matter,but disliked the second half despite. The second half, as the narrator slips into madness,was just overly descriptive and therefore the plot became ponderous and it stretched credulity just too far for my taste with the seemingly pointless second road-trip.The cover blurb talks of dark humour within but personally I just didn't see it.But perhaps the worst part of this book for me was the constant addition of French phrases, after a while I just gave up looking for their translations. That said and done I'm glad that I've finally read it but whilst the imagery of the book will last the book itself will not.
    • 3/5
      I enjoyed reading Lolita. I liked the writing style and the language, the characters felt real, and I can understand why everyone loves this book so much. However, I was a bit disappointed with the ending.
    • 4/5
      A beautifully ambivalent story which did throw up a few choice looks on the tube. The cover shown is the closest I could get as I have the original film tie-in copy.
    • 3/5
      This was a hard book to read. You really have to dive into an insane mind. I found most interresting the section at the end where Nabokov defends his novel as a piece of fiction. It is a piece of fiction and as that I think everyone should have the right to read it, if they want.
    • 5/5
      One of my favourite books of all time. The style is simply amazing, and I am about to read it for the 4th time
    • 3/5
      The kind of book you are always getting around to read, but put off, forget, or otherwise. Aside from the replusive nature of the plot a most enjoyable read. Nabakov and obvious genius of literature, the way with words and imagination. What struck me most in the plot was HH's revenge motive against the perpatrator of reprehensible conduct of which he himself was most guilty.
    • 4/5
      Boy this was a much more difficult book to read than I had remembered! It wasn't just that the topic is distasteful but Nabokov via Humbert Humbert uses quite a lot of arcane vocabulary (as well as a liberal sprinkling of French).
    • 1/5
      The most disgusting, vile book I have ever read. I forced myself to read this because they say it is a classic. It is only about child molestation.
    • 5/5
      Wow. Just...Wow.
    • 4/5
      Lolita I loved it. I had always assumed that I would hate it, knowing that it was about an older man taking advantage of a very young girl. What I hadn't realized was that it is a book knowingly written from the villain's point of view. I had thought it would be all excuses and romanticism. That stuff is there, sure, but thinly veiled so that the read may hear HH's excuses to himself and still see right through them. Unfortunately, I do also recognize how parts could easily be represented as Lolita's complicity in her situation, but these would fail to take into consideration either her initial naivete (which many girls that young have had about older men), her recognition of a situation that is quite hopeless, or the significant possibility of Stockholm's syndrome. Of course, there is also the fact that HH is writing in the first person and everything about her is therefore subject to his interpretation. The challenge of the book, and part of its genius perhaps, is seeing Lolita herself outside of his interpretation. It makes me want to see the movie and how the actress interprets Lolita's actions. I've read other books by men that are associated more with the way women are perceived by them then women actually are (Great Expectations and The Great Gatsby for starters) that should do the same thing but I had unfortunately not gone into those prepared for their intentional misrepresentation of my gender and hated them on the first read. (I do owe both a reread since I was told the opinion on it that the women were intentionally written the way they were to point out some men's lack of realization that we are in fact fully three dimensional beings) I do hate the definition and use of the word "nymphet" in practical use but I get why the author included it. I thought it really helped deliver the delusional nature of Humbert's vision of Lolita and the way he romanticized and lusted after girls that were far too young. I did, however, appreciate the inclusion of Humbert's background and some notable things within it. Specifically, those things are the lapses in mental health, his attempts at staying within decency, and his prior love, Annabel. I don't know enough about psychology to have an informed opinion on whether her death really contributed to his affinity for young girls but it made an interesting hypothesis on the part of the afflicted. It was interesting, and super creepy, to see the way his ability to control Lolita's life played into both his hunger for her and many of her responses to him. The progression of their "relationship" was again mostly creepy but interesting in that way we only can be in fiction when it's not real people that are being hurt. His power over her made him increasingly tyrannical as power has been historically shown to do. The whole story climaxes in such a way that is so consistent with the character's personalities and strangely satisfying in it's own way. I'd rather not spoil it, though anyone could easily look up the whole synopsis on Wikipedia if interested, it's linked about anyway. I listened to a copy from the library that was read by Jeremy Irons who also played the protagonist in the 1997 film. I had finally picked it up to listen to as my hold on Reading Lolita in Tehran finally came through, which is also proving to be a great book and gave me some necessary insight into Nabokov's writing style and Humbert's character.
    • 5/5
      One of the finest openings in fiction: "Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta.She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at school. She was Dolores on the dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita."Excellent read.
    • 3/5
      Lolita is beautifully written and darkly comic, with some unforgettable scenes. It is hard, though, to get away from the rather disgusting central subject matter. That Nabakov makes it clear she wasn't a virgin to begin with still doesn't make the story go down easy. This is probably something I need to re-read.
    • 5/5
      Lolita has probably one of the most memorable narrators in all of literature, who makes the book a pleasure to read. Humbert Humbert, while a scheming pedophile, is witty and rather sympathetic as he retells (to prepare for a statement before the court) his amorous pursuit of twelve-year-old Dolores (Lolita) Haze. His obsession and paranoia manifest deeper and deeper as Lolita grows more cunning and less childish, and Humbert is desperate not to let his secret affair with the girl get out. Nabokov's characters are unbelievably human, as we see both Humbert and Lolita develop and struggle and adapt, and the writing itself is clever and engaging. Great great book
    • 2/5
      Disturbing story, read it when I was 14... made me so cautions of men for a long time.