Negative Positive
Title: Not a great book on its own.
Review: I found myself reviewing the details of other books checked out from the library (Timoshenko 1956, Seely and Smith 1952, Boresi 2003, and Hibbeler 2003) often hidden in this text just to do the exercise. Furthermore, a lot of examples were the same as those from other textbooks but with much less clarity here. The diagrams were often confusing and the details showing the development of the theory were often highly masked or left out completely. On a positive note (if there is actually one), the book will probably be used later for reference, because, after struggling through the minute details and solving the problems posed here, I have a better understanding of the principles, but definitely NOT because of this book or the professor who used it almost exclusively to teach the course!
Is the review positive or negative? 