In this task, you are given books product reviews in English language. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative.
--------
Question: Disjointed Narrative . I had originally seen this book as a subject of PBS' Frontline several months ago. I was enthralled by the subject matter and decided to get a copy from the local library and read about it myself. What a mistake. The PBS Frontline TV program was so much better than the book. I found Maraniss'  switch from the Viet Nam story to the University of Wisconsin protest story very aggravating; and, as another reader mention, it made for a very disjointed narrative. The juxtapositioning of the two narratives does not work!    I found myself more interested in the war portion of the book than reading about Soglin and his friends embroiled in a protest against Dow Chemical. Frankly, I found this portion of the book to be quite a bore and it almost ruined the book for me. Who cares about college kids and their protesting episodes. It is simply not important.     If you are interested in reading the book, read the Nam portion and skip the protest chapters. Better yet, catch the Frontline episode and skip the book completely.

Answer: NEG


Question: What a piece of GARBAGE . This comic is so stupid. When you boil it down, it's NOTHING but " White people do this, and black people do THIS" jokes with "Bush is stupid!" thrown into the mix. This is like an officially licensed webcomic. Not worth the money, or time to read it. And despite it's OCCAISIONAL message against racism, the jokes are usually racist. People who will enjoy this book are those who are too lazy to read a real boo

Answer: NEG


Question: Not badly written, but ultimately preposterous . Toward the end of this novel, the lead character, Reichs' usual heroine Tempe Brennan, remarks on the "remarkable coincidence" of one of the plot points. By this point in the book, this is like pointing out to a rabid dog that it's got some spittle on its chin.  This book relies on coincidence so fundamentally that if it were removed, it would fall into 3 or 4 different books with little or nothing to do with one another.    Reichs is not a bad writer, and for someone who so clearly comes from a forensic background, is passably adept at character, plot and scene setting. She knows how to build suspense and intrigue, and never lets the technicalities of her lead character's profession -- a forensic anthropologist -- or the intricacies of her work, undermine the story.    This book centres on Brennan's investigation of a religious cult that perpetrates a set of murders. There are lots of interesting points about how cults work, ritual murder and even large group awareness programs get in on the action. And, of course, several forensic investigations where we are treated to the processes of digging up bones, collecting maggots and bugs, and examining various grim bits of the human body.    What undermines this book is that the first half is at least three different, unrelated stories; and the second is such a clumsy and outrageous merging of them into one, that one drifts from disinterest to incredulity. The jacket cover says this book is about the excavation of a 19th century nun's bones, and the mysteries therewith. In fact, this is just story number 1, which is of only tangential importance to the ultimate, main storyline.    It is not obvious, even in terms of the world of Death du Jour, why Reichs needed all this intermingling. It feels like she started writing a travel journal, then stuck a murder into each of her ports of call, then simply declared that they all belong to the same overarching plot. In this context, each individual story feels derivative, and the grand plot feels like a desperate trick.    A well-written and, at times, interesting book, which is ultimately unsatisfying and preposterous

Answer:
NEG