Exuberance! Exitement! Reading Log!!!

Eliot Rosewater

If you clicked here because of my provocative title I congratulate you - you have fallen for my excellent feel-good advertising ploy!

Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee - Dee Brown
Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee offers a history of the Indian tribes in western United States during the push west by white settlers, circa 1860 - 1890. It is told from the point of view of the Indians, and covers the (failed) struggle they engaged in to protect their land and liberty from the settlers.

Obviously a book like this is designed to sympathize with the Indians, and its hard to not be skeptical of bias. Saying that, I feel Brown does tell the story fairly, and is unafraid to tell of the times when the Indians committed atrocities. In particular the chapter about Geronimo portrays him as a terrorist, and appears unsympathetic.

This is the first history book Ive read in quite a time, and it worked out well as I think this book is easy to read. This is essentially because the individual chapters cover a set period of time of one tribe, which makes the narratives independent of each other. This ensures the book is easy to digest for the casual reader as there is no information overload.

I would certainly recommend this book to get a different perspective of the States back then, and as an illustration of how easy it is for minority groups to be exploited.

Eliot Rosewater

In Mrs Dalloway Virginia Woolf describes a single day in post World War One London through the eyes of two women: Mrs Dalloway, wife to a member of Parliament and a determined socialite, and Mrs Smith, Italian partner to a shell shocked war veteran.

Mrs Dalloway offers little in terms of plot. The strength of the novel does not lie here, but rather with the authors writing style. Woolfs capacity for description is rightly commended, especially her ability to create atmospheres which surround oneself. This, combined with her "stream of consciousness" technique, gives us an accurate portrayal of character and emotion, and the relationships between people.

From a literary perspective I did enjoy Mrs Dalloway, perhaps not as much as To The Lighthouse. It juggles a few themes and doesn't really do through justice to any of them excepting the stateliness of the character of Mrs Dalloway which is not, in my opinion, the most interesting theme in the novel.

Eliot Rosewater

I will admit - I was skeptical of The Red Pony before I read it and only did so as it is short and I wanted to complete the 50 book challenge. I was skeptical because I didnt think a lesser novel of Steinbecks would be all that good, for some reason. While Grapes of Wrath is one of my favorite works, I was less than overwhelmed by Of Mice and Men. Whatever the reasons I was mistaken.

The Red Pony is a series of stories about a boy on a farm in the West US. They were written in the early 30's and first published as a complete book in between Steinbecks two famous novels, the aforementioned Of Mice and Men and Grapes of Wrath.

The first tale is about the actual Red Pony and the care which the young boy Jody gives it, and the other stories build somewhat on this. They are cast somewhat in The Pearl mode of storytelling, with the simplistic tales offering deep moral lessons beneath. The collection concludes with a short story, external to the others, concerning a lazy man and his fortunes.

As I said, I was surprised I enjoyed them so much and I did really enjoy them. I thought the portrayals of the characters were lively and, despite being done over such a short space, highly believable and "livable." The way in which Steinbeck mapped peoples actions back to aspects of their character was particularly striking.

Comes highly recommend.

Eliot Rosewater

Its not hard to see the opinion Charles Dickens held of the French Revolution, the product of which he describes as the "Republic, One and Indivisible, of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, or Death." A Tale of Two Cities is highly political - at least in comparison to some of his other works - and Dickens firmly plants himself as a supporter of common sense and the middle ground.

Because, in reflection, A Tale of Two Cities is fundamentally an unearthing of the ridiculousness both of the Revolution in France and the corrupt Aristocratic society that caused it. The tale begins with the story of a Doctor Mannete, who has been wrongly imprisoned in the Bastille by the French aristocracy, released some 17 years later, and reunited with his daughter in England. Dickens immediately strikes a keen comparison with his beloved England in next portraying the wholly fair trial and acquittal of Charles Darnay, who was accused of being a French Spy. As the plot develops on either side of the English Channel, the fates of the main characters become intertwined with each other - and the bloody and relentless Revolution.

A Tale of Two Cities was certainly more enjoyable than the other works of Dickens that I have read. I felt it had a strong idea behind it, and Dickens' portrayal of the Revolution - from the personification of The Vengeance to the glorification of La Gullitine - are unforgettable. However I feel the novel suffers from the same negative traits as some of his other works. The characters often feel wooden and bereft of all emotion and feeling, and this tends to give a sense of distance that makes it hard to engage with the action. However it certainly is a rewarding read.

Denerick

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Its not hard to see the opinion Charles Dickens held of the French Revolution, the product of which he describes as the "Republic, One and Indivisible, of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, or Death." A Tale of Two Cities is highly political - at least in comparison to some of his other works - and Dickens firmly plants himself as a supporter of common sense and the middle ground.

Because, in reflection, A Tale of Two Cities is fundamentally an unearthing of the ridiculousness both of the Revolution in France and the corrupt Aristocratic society that caused it. The tale begins with the story of a Doctor Mannete, who has been wrongly imprisoned in the Bastille by the French aristocracy, released some 17 years later, and reunited with his daughter in England. Dickens immediately strikes a keen comparison with his beloved England in next portraying the wholly fair trial and acquittal of Charles Darnay, who was accused of being a French Spy. As the plot develops on either side of the English Channel, the fates of the main characters become intertwined with each other - and the bloody and relentless Revolution.

A Tale of Two Cities was certainly more enjoyable than the other works of Dickens that I have read. I felt it had a strong idea behind it, and Dickens' portrayal of the Revolution - from the personification of The Vengeance to the glorification of La Gullitine - are unforgettable. However I feel the novel suffers from the same negative traits as some of his other works. The characters often feel wooden and bereft of all emotion and feeling, and this tends to give a sense of distance that makes it hard to engage with the action. However it certainly is a rewarding read.

I remember this was one of the first 'literary' books I ever read (As opposed to Roald Dahl, or the Hardy Boys, or whatever ) and at the time I loved it... without really understanding it and getting lost in the big words (I was like 13/14)

Now I'm older, and am also a bit familiar with the French revolution and Dicken's politics, I think I might re-read it. Would you reccomend that?

Eliot Rosewater

To be honest I cant really comment on the the accuracy, or otherwise, of A Tale of Two Cities historically as I haven't read any history books about that time. Certainly I think if you've done a bit of research into the Revolution and Dickens' politics it probably would be worth rereading. But in general I dont find Dickens' works enjoyable because (to quote my attempt to sound like an authentic reviewer) "the characters often feel wooden and bereft of all emotion and feeling" and any excitement is interspersed with extended periods of boredom.

So yeah Id say go for it. Of the three Dickens books Ive read its certainly the one Ive enjoyed the most.

Eliot Rosewater

Anthony Burgess' oft considered magnum opus Earthly Powers is an epic, not only in terms of length, but also because of the vast vocabulary and large scope Burgess packs into his work. Having a dictionary nearby when reading this novel is near essential, and a little knowledge of twentieth century history wont go astray either. The demands Burgess makes of the reader don't go to waste though, once one can appreciate the intellectuality that forms the backbone of the book.

Earthly Powers has Kenneth Toomey, an 81 year-old homosexual and retired novelist, telling the story of his life from before World War One through to the 1960's. The raison d'être for the telling is the recent death of his brother-in-law, Pope Gregory XVII, and the subsequent movement by the Vatican towards his canonization. Toomey is given the task of biographing Gregory's life, in particular the miracles the deceased Pope is said to have enacted. Toomey's reminiscence of the past isn't limited by his brother-in-law. The story focuses on himself, from his getting raped in Dublin on Bloomsday to his helping of a Jewish author escape the Nazis.

The novel is, as its title states, fundamentally about power, especially that of religion and government. As a homosexual, Toomey's lifestyle is repressed by draconian anti-Gay laws in his home country Britain. He is also rejected by the Catholic Church, with whom he cannot reconcile his preference for partners of his own gender. But the scale of the novel is much greater than the personal. The history of European conflict, in particular the Two World Wars, the rise of fascism and the repression of Jews, weaves in and out of the narrative.

Earthly Powers isn't for the new reader. It references many other literary figures such as "Jim" Joyce, Aldous Huxley and George Orwell. The vocabulary, though accurate, isn't easy to digest. However it is a great book, and certainly deserving of the adjective epic. I would recommend that all experienced readers make an attempt to read it.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

"At exactly fifteen minutes past eight in the morning, on August 6, 1945, Japanese time, at the moment when the atomic bomb flashed above Hiroshima, Miss Toshiko Sasaki, a clerk in the personal department of the East Asia Tin Works, had just sat down at her place in the plant office and was turning her head to speak to the girl at the next desk..."

Hiroshima, a journalist undertaking by American John Hersey, describes the experiences of six men and women in the days and weeks after the atomic bombing of the Japanese city of the same name. Five of the six of those involved survived the initial explosion relatively unscathed. Their experiences chronicle the pandemonium, disorganization and widespread injury and death that followed the bomb. One of the witnesses was the only doctor in the Hiroshima Red Cross Hospital who was fit enough to help with the relief effort, which had him working nineteen hours straight before having opportunity to rest. Other witnesses tell of the attempt to survive in an environment of food shortages, sporadic deaths from radiation sickness and general panic.

Forty years after writing the initial story, John Hersey returned to Japan to interview the six witnesses. He discovered that the hardship didn't end in 1945, but plagued the survivors of the bombing for many more years to come through economic scarcity and general health deprivations. The product of his return completes the story that had begun forty years previously.

Hiroshima is a very compelling and well-written book. Its brings the terrible bombing - which is estimated to have killed at least 100,000 people - to a more personal and more tragic level than we are used to. The terrible effects of indiscriminate atomic energy, which caused heats of 6000 degrees Celsius at the center and the destruction of two thirds of the city center buildings, are brought to a level we can easily appreciate. The question of whether nuclear armaments are ethical is still debated, and what happened 65 years ago in Japan is still relevant. This book has lost none of its well-merited importance.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

Following a nuclear "short war" in the 1960's, atomic radiation begins to spread from the Northern Hemisphere around the whole globe, killing within a few weeks all those who fall within its catchment. Of the few places still inhabitable, Australia stands as the last bastion of civilization, with its navy and human order still intact in Melbourne.

It is here that Nevil Shutes apocalyptic novel On The Beach is set. Centered around two members of the Navy - American Dwight Towers and Australian Peter Holmes - it tells the story of their last year alive before the radioactive cloud will engulf and kill them. It is a tale of hope turned to delusion as those still left alive attempt to live in ignorance of the inevitable. And it is a stark warning of the potential dangers mankinds control of science has made real.

In terms of dystopia, On The Beach is in the same vein as Nineteen Eighty-four. It offers us a vision that is alien to our own lives, while illustrating the possibility that this vision could become our reality. Shutes realistic and mundane portrayal of the characters reinforces this point. We see them struggle to plan their lives as if their ends were not nigh, and in the process we get a glimpse of all that could be lost should nuclear weapons govern the earth.

Of the dystopia's I have read, On The Beach is the most engaging. Unlike typical novels of the genre, it does not feel fictionalized and far-fetched. Its power draws from the unnerving and uncomfortable feeling we get that this fate could happen to all of us. Recommended reading.

Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is perhaps better known for the Academy award winning film adaption of the same name. The original book - Ken Keseys debut novel of 1962 - can certainly stand on its own feet as a multi-dimensional commentary on society and what is normal.

The novels inspiration derived from Keseys government mandated experimentation with hallucinogenic drugs and his later work as a caretaker in a hospital. The story concerns the "insane" inhabitants of a psychiatric ward who live under the totalitarian control of the "Big Nurse." She and her workers have a strong grip on the inhabitants until the arrival of McMurphy, a red head Irishman transfered from the work house where he was incarcerated for battery and gambling. McMurphy immediately seeks to disrupt the natural order of the ward, throwing himself into bitter conflict with Big Nurse and the status quo she represents.

The story is told by Chief Bromben, an Indian who pretends he is deaf and dumb so as to to party to the secrets of the ward. As well as giving us access to all areas of the ward, the use of Bromben as narrator offers us a vision inside the head of the insane. He primarily tells of us of the conspiracy by the "Combine" to enslave members of society by planting machinery into them.

Hocus-pocus though it be, one of the central themes of the book is that this "Combine" does in fact exist, in the form of government and societal control of the individual. The scope of Keseys book is thus quite large. At its heart it is an attack on the false norms that society has created and all subsequent attempts to suppress those who step out of line. It is all brought to life by Keseys humorous and unconventional prose style, making One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest a great book on many different levels.

Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

For Esme With Love and Squalor (alternatively titled Nine Stories) is a collection of short stories by American author J.D. Salinger. He is obviously best know for his only novel The Catcher in the Rye. Though these short stories were first published together 2 years after the novel, they had been printed individually in magazines before that. The first story in the collection - A Perfect Day for Bananafish - was what originally brought Salinger into the literary limelight.

Though self-evidently independent entities the stories share some common traits. Many of them revolve around those involved in the Second World War, in which Salinger fought. They are predominantly investigations of people, relationships and minor conflict. They all take the form of a narrative, with the different personalities of those involved shaping the plot progression.

Salinger displays an uncanny ability to convert people into into literary characters. In terms of writing he is a master at the "show dont tell" philosophy. His characters and stories have sense of realism that, from my own very limited reading experience, is generally unchallenged. Yet it is his use of these abilities which is the primary strength of For Esme. His smart commentary on the world we live in and the human condition is as striking as it is heart-wrenchingly truthful.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Free e-texts containing most of Salingers published work including all the stories in For Esme With Love and Squalor (there titled Nine Stories) and lots of other stories unavailable in book format. If youve 20 minutes to spare A Perfect Day for Bananafish is well worth your consideration.

Eliot Rosewater

The Plague, written in French, tells of an epidemic in the Algerian port town of Oran in the 1940's. The disease initially strikes the towns rat population before transferring to humans. The novel is essentially a study of how the townspeople react to the plague, touching upon many inner thoughts of Camus.

Any merit in The Plague is thus of a philosophical nature. In terms of writing the novel is weak. The characters and events are described at a dull distance. Although this may have been the intention of the author, it remains a fundamental literary flaw. There is no opportunity for the reader to connect with the story. This is a shame, as the symbolic and emotional bones of the novel are strong.

A thematic comparison can be drawn between Camus' novel and On The Beach by Nevil Shute. Both describe situations where the characters are forced to deal with impending death. Shutes approach is to portray normal people living normal lives, and to expose their thoughts and fears through their interactions with other characters and the world itself. The theme is thus presented in a way we can easily identify with.

On the other hand, Camus' tactic is to use mundane faceless characters as a foundation on which he can base lengthy philosophical discourse. The result is an abstract work that does nothing to bring the emotions involved to a level we can relate to.

The Plague has moments of intrigue, but as a primarily philosophical work I would consider it of little worth in terms of literature.

Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

This, the final published book by recently deceased author J.D. Salinger, is a collection of two novellas concerning the Glass family. Much of Salinger's published work, including the earlier collection Franny and Zooey and a number of short stories, are based around the Glass family. This quality of Salingers work is rewarding for the reader: the more one reads the more intimate one becomes with his characters.

This first story - Raise High The Roof Beam, Carpenters - recounts the wedding day of the eldest child Seymour from the perspective of his next youngest brother Buddy. Seymour has rejected social interaction and is hesitant to conform with "normal" etiquette with his fiancés family. The slight furore this creates forms the basis of the piece. It is told in typical Salinger fashion - the sharp dialogue underpins the characters' interactions and emotions, creating the cutting realism that is to be found in all his work.

The second in this collection - Seymour: An Introduction - is quite the opposite in terms of delivery. The narrative consists of 40-year old Buddy Glass reminiscing about the now-deceased and idolized Seymour. Although it contains little to none of the character interplay that seems to have defined Salinger, the fact that it focuses almost entirely on the boys' childhood certainly reminds one of the authorship. A certain obsession with the past is certainly a major theme of Salingers, and it formed the backbone of The Catcher in the Rye. Seymour, An Introduction is less obvious and more alluding than the novel, but all the more endearing for it.

At this summary stage of the review it would be tempting for me to compare this collection to Salingers 9 Stories which I reviewed two weeks previously, but I'm unsure is such a comparison would be apt. Although Carpenters is similar is many respects to the short stories, Seymour is an altogether different work. The two stories here feel much closer to the author than the 9 Stories do, which makes for quite a poignant reading experience.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

I know its probably a cliché but I'm going to say it anyway: George Orwell holds a special place in my heart. 1984 was the first "proper" book I read. I bought it on a whim, really, to tie me over me on a dreary bus home from Dublin, September 2008. What I found was (need it be said?) brilliant, and that book along with Animal Farm provided the incentive to start reading regularly, a habit I have continued to this day.

Essays is a collection of 41 prose pieces by Orwell, ranging in length from 2 pages for some to over fifty for the longest ones. They deal with a vast variety of subjects - mainly politics and literature, but also diverse topics such as the changing seasons, murder and cooking.

Orwell is considered by some to be a better essayist than a novelist, and its not hard to see why. The "plain prose" style he uses is highly accessible to all level of readers. The bases of the essays lie in Orwell's observing eye and his innate knowledge of things that are, to many people, obscure. The essays rarely alienate, even when they have clearly aged with time. A 20 page discourse on Boy Weeklies, a kind of action magazine hard to come by these days, is still interesting despite the culture gap.

The only weakness in the collection is Orwell's tendency to bring politics into any subject. The purity of the aforementioned essay on Boys Weeklies is partly tainted when he takes the opportunity to make a snide remark on the conservative sympathies of the media. However the essays that deal solely with politics are enlightening, if bizarrely socialistic at times.

As a whole this collection is an illuminating foray into Orwell's mind, his experiences, the inspiration for his books*, and the times he lived in. I would recommend it to anyone interested in any of those things.

Wikipedia | Book Depository

There is also another collection of Orwell essays published in Penguin Modern Classics, called Shooting an Elephant, that contains 23 essays (as opposed to 41) omitting some of the more important ones.



*On the influence for 1984
One of the most interesting aspects of the collection is seeing Orwells view on totalitarianism mature into the views that would eventually form the backbone of 1984. Consider this extract from "Looking back on the Spanish Civil War" which was published 8 years before Nineteen eighty-four:

"Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as ‘the truth’ exists. There is, for instance, no such thing as ‘Science’. There is only ‘German Science’, ‘Jewish Science’, etc. The implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but the past. If the Leader says of such and such an event, ‘It never happened’ — well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five — well, two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs — and after our experiences of the last few years that is not a frivolous statement."

In other essays Orwell discusses the censoring of language - a concept that would become Newsspeak - and also mentions at one point the idea that machines could create books just to please the populace, something that happens in 1984.

Eliot Rosewater

In Franny and Zooey, a short story and a novella respectively, we once again meet with Salingers infamous Glass family. Although independent entities, the two pieces take place on the same weekend and are, by and large, concerned with the same themes and the same characters.

Franny, a 20 year old girl and the youngest member of the Glass family, has come home for the weekend from college. Emotionally distraught, she finds no solace in her boyfriend, instead sparking a bitter row told in typical Salinger fashion: sharp dialogue, self-interested characterization and sorrowful realism. It is not until the subsequent novella, Zooey, that the source of Frannys unhappiness is discovered. Zooey is her next oldest brother and an actor based in New York. The two siblings have shared a similar childhood - recklessly controlled by the intellectual endeavors of the two eldest brothers and cut apart by suicide and war.

Like many of Salingers pieces, the character and plot development is primarily based on events that preceded the story, even by years. Though an isolated weekend in terms of the narrative, the strength of the work lies in the heart-wrenching way in which Salingers ties up the characters' troubles with their distant childhood. This is ultimately an emotional collection that moves one to genuinely sympathize with the contents of a printed page.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

Published in 2001, Atonement is Ian McEwans eighth novel. A finalist for the Booker Prize, it is best known for the cinematic adaption of 2007, which was nominated for seven Academy Awards.

The novel opens on the hottest day of the 1935 summer. Cast at the center is Briony Tallis, a 13 year old author, playwright and self obsessed teenager. On that day she is the spectator to events she cannot understand. Through her innocence and ignorance she mistakes a frustrated relationship between her sister and her sisters childhood friend as malicious, and sets in motion a chain of events that will destroy those around her and shackle her in guilt through the Second World War and beyond.

Thus begins the search for forgiveness and self-reconciliation. Stylistically, the novel is based on the stream of consciousness mode of writing, and owes a debt of gratitude to authors such as Virginia Woolf (a debt that is admitted in the novel). The characterization in the novel is exceptional, especially that of the main protagonist Briony. She is made to be so real and so understandable that we cant but hate her. Yet the fact that she is so young and unaccountable forms the central paradox that has our conscience in a spin.

The novel has its drawbacks, too. It can be a little verbose at times, even considering the style its trying to achieve. The dialogue is sparse, and individual interactions can be interrupted by page and a half thoughts on character. Yet as a whole it is a great book. The themes involved are brought out so clearly and with such emotion through the ingenious plot and the innovative delivery. I'm convinced that with Atonement McEwan has created a future classic.

Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

In Kingsley Amis' comic and satirical novel Lucky Jim, we are introduced to the mediocre society of the post-WW2 provincial university. Jim Dixon is an underling in the department of history who spends his days hating his work, making stupid faces to himself, and worrying over Prof. Welsh, his boss, and Margaret, his would-be lover. Despite his dissatisfaction with his own existence, Dixon is determined to impress the Professor and win himself a cushy lecturing career in the college. His escapades takes us into the heart of the Professors self-important superficial clique.

Lucky Jim takes a humorous poke at this psuedo-intellectual provincial society with the clumsy renegade Dixon at is heart. Though critical of the people he finds himself surrounded by, he feels compelled to continue on, leaving us with a character who cares little for the etiquette of his prim and proper peers. Exiting a tight social gathering to sneak off to the pub means little to him, as does waking up the next morning finding his blanket full of holes from mysterious drunken behavior.

A funny yet effective satire, Lucky Jim is an easy and enjoyable book that would appeal to anyone, not least those who like to see social convention and decorum thrown by the wayside.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

Jane Austens infamous second novel offers the modern reader a peak into the middle- and upper- class society of the early 1800's. The general story of Pride and Prejudice is so well known that its hardly bears repeating. The Bennets are a land owning middle class family in the countryside of England firmly led by the mother, Mrs Bennet, an excitable gossip whos only goal in life is to see her 5 daughters married off to wealthy gentleman. When the charming and well made Mr Bingley and his dark friend Mr Bennet arrive at Netherfield the local society is sent into a flurry of romantic hysteria. As the tale develops we see class, status and personal prejudice cause restrictions and obstacles to happiness.

The principle appeal of Pride and Prejudice lies in its portrayal of the snobby and formal culture of the authors time. Austen invokes a diverse group of characters who each represent some component of that society: the out and out snob; the desperate bachelorette; and all the misunderstood types in between. For therein lies the central conflict at the heart of the novel; that between subterfuge and truth. In a world based on appearances alone, true happiness is only luckily come by. And though some of the characters try to reject it, they are still prey to its subconscious influence.

Though a bit of a crowd pleaser due to its chick-lit connotations, Pride and Prejudice is a serious and worthy novel. It deserves to be read if only for the remarkable way in which Austen can make a 200 year old society open up to the 21st century reader in such an easy way.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

Jennifer Government is Max Barrys unsuccessful attempt at satirizing consumerism and laizze-faire economics. The story is set some time in the near future. The government and policing services have been privatized and the world has effectively been taken over by corporations and loyalty schemes. John Nike, a marketer for Nike, embarks on a campaign to promote the latest Nike product line by shooting those who wear them, thus giving the impression that the shoes are so valuable they are worth killing for. Jennifer Government is called in to investigate, and the story takes off from there.

The novel is an extraordinary failure. An effective satire must be realistic on two grounds. First, it should be attacking an actual ideology. Even allowing a margin of error for over-exaggeration, Jennifer Government still fails to attack a system that is based on actuality, or a system that anyone claims to promote. The novel contains excessive breaches of human rights, corporations willing to hire the police to murder, and other serious omissions in describing what a anarcho-capitalist society would be like. The topic of insurance never arises, for instance, because that would give credence to capitalism. In short, Barry is either unable or unwilling to attack real capitalism so he instead conjures up a hocus pocus version of it that makes it conventionally easier for him to debunk.

Tied in with this is the utter lack of feeling in his execution of the plot. The success of books like 1984 lies partly in the fact that the story feels very real to us. Not so in Jennifer Government. This fact strikes one from as early as page 5, when one particular character cries when offered a job promotion out of a hesitance towards embracing change. In the book marketers regularity use expletives, despite this being the last thing marketers would ever do. Max Barry himself uses expletives too, apparently in an attempt to appear cool. But it merely reinforces the lack of quality lying at the heart of this novel. A book to be avoided at all costs.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Valmont

I'm sure you enjoyed every minute of that one Eliot! When will you start Atlas Shrugged?

Eliot Rosewater

Valmont wrote: »

I'm sure you enjoyed every minute of that one Eliot! When will you start Atlas Shrugged?

I actually would like a satire on capitalism if it was genuinely insightful and done well ... but oh to claim back the wasted hours on Max Barry!

I'm aiming to read Atlas Shrugged during the summer. I'm making a conscious decision to avoid long books during the college year lest they take too long and I lose interest. Ill hopefully be reading enough in the summer so that I'll be able to finish long books like Atlas Shrugged and War and Peace in a week or two.

Eliot Rosewater

Wuthering Heights is Emily Bronte's only novel. It was published in 1847, one year before the author's rather untimely death at the age of thirty. Before reading it I had naively expected a kind of second Pride and Prejudice; a turn of the century novel full of civility and blessed romance. How wrong I was!

The novel retells the unified story of two families: the Lintons and the Earnshaws. Though it is directly set in the early 1800's the narrative primarily takes the form of a housekeeper relating the history of the area to a passing visitor. This flexible setup allows the focus to jump from the present right back to the time when the families first met. The housekeeper initially introduces us to the family in 1771, when they adopt an abandoned baby Heathcliff - a move that immediately divides the family. However his adoptive sister Catherine develops a love for him; a love which, years later, she has to reject due to the pressures of society. The subsequent bitterness and resentment in the "devil" Heathcliff comes to shape the fate of the two families for the next generation.

Wuthering Heights is a very dark novel. Its themes are primarily concerned with the destructive influence Heathcliff plays in the lives of those around them. Yet the novel does maintain a sense of sympathy towards all those involved. It is made clear that Heathcliff's character is really a product of his upbringing, particularly the multi-tiered society in which he is considered an inferior. But yhe ease with which he then passes this curse onto the next generation is a stark lesson in the unrelenting power of hatred.

As I said, I was expecting something like Pride and Prejudice, but Bronte's novel is so much more. It structure and its scope are wider and its gritty messages are brought home harder. A very memorable book.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

The English Patient is Sri-Lankan-Canadian author Michael Ondaatje's Booker Prize winning novel. Published in 1992, it was adapted into an Academy Award winning film four years later.

The novel is set in the closing months of the Second World War, when four veterans of the conflict converge in a villa in Northern Italy. At the center is the English Patient, a heavily burned and debilitated man who is identified only by his English accent. Through him and those around him - the Canadian nurse Hana, her father's friend Caravaggio and the Indian sapper Kip - we see a present and retrospective vision of the individual struggling against the intolerant forces of nationalism and war.

The English Patient is a difficult book. It rewards only those readers willing to give it the thought and reflection it deserves. The main themes of the book are carried through by means of heavy symbolism - changing desert; dogs of identity; books that link us together - and imaginative imagery. Ondaatje encases the work in his poetic prose style that really raises it to the level of majesty. "Words, Caravaggio. They have a power." Probably the best book I have read from the last two decades.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

"Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury/ Signifying nothing."
Macbeth.

That the first section of The Sound and the Fury, Nobel laureate William Faulkner's fourth novel, should be told by a mentally retarded 33 year-old makes it very clear from the off that this book is one to push the boundaries. The "idiot", Benjy, doesn't tell the story of his day in chronological order. No, his mind works by association, and so for the duration of April 7th, 1928, we see him jumping back up to 30 years every second moment to tell, with much confusion, the story of his family.

The Compsons are an old aristocratic household in the Deep South who have seen much of their old prestige and power lost through petty scandal and changing times. The Sound and the Fury charts the family's disintegration through four separate narratives; the first three by members of the household; the last by the third person. The most of the book is set - very crucially - on the Good Friday, Holy Saturday and Easter Sunday of 1928.

But this is no story of resurrection, only pride and pain. The novel uses superb narrative technique to create initial bewilderment, with two precarious accounts from disturbed children of the family. After this Faulkner begins to blow away the smoke and reveal the true state of the family. The climax of the book sees a distorted and ironic replay of the disappearance of Christ; only where there was hope in the Bible there is anguish here.

The Sound and the Fury tells this emotional equivalent of a train wreck with innovative style and an honesty that begs "read me".


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

I don't "do" autobiographies, for two reasons. Firstly the life of one specific person wouldn't interest me, even if was life of a famous writer. Secondly, I feel there is a self glorification inherent in the idea of writing a book about oneself that you intend to get others to read. It leaves the whole project wide open to bias and all the other human nastiness.

However I was interested in reading the autobiography of Mark Everett, also known as Mr E, the front man for <insert crap genre label> band the Eels. The lyrics of the Eels, written by Mr Everett, are deeply personal and chart his troubled life through death and all kinds of misfortune. I also have a kind of a personal love of the Eels that often turns to sentimentality; I happened to start listening to them during what became a "transitionary" fast-passing period of my life and so listening to them sometimes reminds me of that. Especially late at night. You know the way it is.

For a book centered about so much doom and gloom it remains surprisingly upbeat and humorous. As well as a very lonely childhood, Everett experienced his famous fathers death at age 19, his sisters death after a life of drink and drugs 14 years later and his mother death from cancer a time after that. A cousin of his died in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. But through all this he managed to keep on, finally making a living out of his passion for music. One of the morals of the story is that being so near to death made him appreciate life.

As with all autobiographies, a personal interest in the writer is probably mandatory. I would imagine that most fans of the Eels and Mr Everett would find this light and funny book enjoyable to read.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

The Unbearable Lightness of Being is a fictional philosophical work by Czech author Milan Kundera. The novel is partly set during the Prague Spring, the failed uprising against tyrannical Soviet rule in Prague. It is primarily about 3 Czech people who involve themselves with the uprising in some cultural way.

The heaviness versus lightness conflict that forms the backbone of the novel is based upon Friedrich Nietzsche's concept of eternal return. An endless re-occurrence of life would attach a weight, or heaviness, to our lives, while the existence of one and only one life would make us light, or weightless. In the novel, characters are either heavy or light depending upon their attitude. Heavy characters are those who take life and loyalty very seriously, while light characters are more prone to extra-marital affairs and a general detachedness towards their existence. The characters thus assume a very symbolic role.

The novel isn't as heavy (!) as it's description might indicate. The narrative has a rather light and easy tone, making it very accessible. However it does manage to pack a lot of a depth, and it contains some excellent concepts such as Kundera's take on the German word kitch, giving the reader a little more than it demands.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

Set in the Deep South during the inter-war period, The Color Purple stands as an inspirational tale of one black woman's rise above the tyranny of a negative culture and its manifestation in those around her.

The Pulitzer prize winning novel tells the story of Cellie through her correspondence with her sister and with God. At 14, when the letters begin, she is living under the domineering rule of her sexually abusive father. This servitude is traded for another when she is given away for marriage to a heartless and cruel man. But soon she meets Shug Avery, a staunchly self-reliant singer and performer, who has firmly taken control of her own life. Avery provides the promise and encouragement Cellie needs to break out the corrupt lifestyle she was born into and live for herself.

The Color Purple is a broad book. Its basis lies in a kind of feminism, with thick lines drawn between the men (usually in tight control) and the women. The scope of the novel grows when a sister of Cellie's goes to Africa as a missionary. There another conflict is told of: that between the natives and the black missionaries, "the brothers and sisters they sold". The central theme of the novel - the individual's desire to break out of the culture they're brought into - takes on a wider meaning, and is carried through to the end with spectacular honesty and wisdom.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

Imagine my trepidation: I'm about to write a review for a book about punctuation. But I have a plan. I'm going to start by saying that the book satisfied my inner desire for order with its stringent tone, but that it kept me relaxed with its humorous anecdotes. I'm going to admit that it's pushed me towards "grammar fascism". When I've done that I'm going to have to look over what I have written at least ten times. The dictionary will have to be consulted; as will the punctuation guide I'm supposed to be reviewing. And finally, I will lament the overuse of the verb "going" in my opening paragraph.

Ah, to hell with this. The stress is too much. I enjoyed the book.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

The 1965 novel of Kurt Vonnegut, God Bless You, Mr Rosewater is an ostensible attack on everything the American Republican Party stands for.

Eliot Rosewater is an amazingly intelligent, witty and well-loved poster on boards.ie the chairperson and auditor of the Rosewater Foundation, a charity that was set up to keep the fortunes of Rosewater's predecessors away from the tax man. While in control of the foundation, Eliot begins to lose control of himself and throws away his money and his self-esteem. An opportunistic lawyer then hatches a cunning plan to prove his insanity, so that the Rosewater fortune will be transferred to Eliot's second-cousins, the lawyers clients.

And that's all there really is to it. I was exited by this book (I feature as the main character!) but the principal adjective I would ascribe to it is "underwhelming". The main problem wasn't the presence of anything particularly bad, but rather the notable absence of anything particularly good. The book just meanders along without any kind of direction or cohesion, reading more like a series of short stories than a novel. And there's little of the trademark Vonnegut humour to carry it along.

Given that his best known work, Slaughterhouse Five, is one of my favourites, God Bless You, Mr Rosewater was a big disappointment.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Denerick

Ouch!

Eliot Rosewater

At Swim-Two-Birds is immediately bizarre. The narrator, a self-obsessed, self-congratulatory, self-important student of Trinity College Dublin, frequently dabbles in spare-time literary activity and wastes no time in informing us that "one beginning and one ending for a book is a thing I do not agree with". Without further ado he unleashes three separate narratives; those of the Pooka McPhelimy (member of the devil class), John Furrisky (born aged twenty five) and Fionn McCool. Furrisky isn't a creation of the narrator per se, but rather of Dermot Trellis, writer, who is. Furrisky is unhappy that he is controlled by Trellis, so he hatches a plot with his fellows to drug Trellis, so as to gain liberty.

This spare-time literary activity is only one part of it though; in the intervening periods we hear of the narrators adventures through Dublin, visiting public houses, having run-ins with his Uncle and assuming vacant and preoccupied expressions. The satirical description of Irish life and culture is the making of the novel. O'Brien takes hilarious potshots at everything from Irish mythology to the nuances of Irish interaction, from Gaelic league committees to pseudo-intellectuality. It's very hard to say much more: the book defies classification or summary. It probably ranks as one of my favorite books I've ever read, if that counts for anything. Conclusion of the foregoing.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

"The characters in this books are fictitious. The historical circumstances which determined their actions are real. The life of the man NS Rubashov is a synthesis of the lives of a number of men who were victims of the so-called Moscow Trials. Several of them were personally known to the author. This book is dedicated to their memory."

Of Hungarian birth, Arthur Koestler falls into a long line of Eastern European writers from the mid-twentieth century who abandoned the collectivist ideology of their countries of birth to move West. Darkness At Noon, Koestler's best known work, was published in 1940 and is an cutting indictment of the totalitarian system of government practiced in the USSR.

The lead character, NS Rubashov, is a former member of the governing regime who has fallen out of favor due to his transition towards a more humane way of viewing individual people. He is arrested and sent to prison to be tried for fabricated crimes. His brief but torturous experience of captivation is described, as well as his previous life of loyalty, portrayed through his memoirs and interrogations. We thus get an image of the regime from both sides.

As the dedication states, the book is based on the Moscow Show Trials. The Trials were to become notorious for the orchestration that sustained them, whereby dependents were tortured into submission and then put on "show" for an international audience. The novel explores this, and through Koestler's pen we get an honest glimpse of Soviet totalitarianism and the solidarity of those cast against it. A primary influence for George Orwell's Nineteen eighty-four, Darkness At Noon is well worth the consideration of anyone interested in the times it describes.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (sol-zuh-neet-suhn) is, like Arthur Koestler, a member of that class of author who had to leave their Eastern European homeland under the threat of authoritarian government. Solzhenitsyn's exile was not voluntary, however. In the closing stages of World War Two, in which he commanded a "sound ranging" battery, he was arrested for writing a letter critical of Stalin to a friend. He was sentenced to 8 years in a labour camp. After his release and temporary exile in Kazakhstan he worked in Russia and wrote in his spare time. The KGB discovered he was writing what was to become the infamous The Gulag Archipelago, and upon the death of Nikita Khrushchev he was banished from the Soviet Union.

One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is a story based upon Solzhenitsyn's experiences of Soviet labour camps. It describes the typical day of a prisoner. The power of the book lies in its honesty and in its plainness. The actions and motives of the prisoners are laid bare with a cunning sense of normality. The fact that a prisoner would cherish a single bite of sausage enough to que in a line for half an hour is portrayed without any sense that this is something strange, something extraordinary. But that it is makes the prisoners' lot seem so much more horrific.

I'm very tempted to compare One Day to the previous book I reviewed, Darkness At Noon. Both books are attacks on totalitarianism, specifically the Soviet type, but they each take a different angle. Darkness At Noon is concerned with exposing the official processes in all their perversion, while One Day simply seeks to portray the inhumane cruelty done to the average man, by the regime, though the gulag. Both good books, but One Day manages to strike harder.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Valmont

Fantastic, I have the last three books you reviewed on my shelf waiting! Great stuff, Eliot.

Eliot Rosewater

Yevgeny Zamyatin, like Arthur Koestler and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, was one of those dissenters of Eastern Europe that were exiled from their countries of birth. His dystopian novel We is, however, far more of a science fiction than the books of the other two. It was apparently written under the influence of HG Wells.

The novel is set over a thousand years into the future in a city separated from the barbarian world by an enormous wall. The society is highly authoritarian: people do not have names but rather numbers; they live in apartments whose walls are made of transparent glass; people live their day by means of a state-mandated timetable, and even sexual encounters are dictated by means of a coupon system. The central protagonist, D-503, has been conditioned to be happy with the state of affairs. In fact his main qualm is that the timetable contains 2 hours of "free time": too much, in his opinion. His existence is shook when he means I-330, who goads him into a rebellion.

We has achieved fame as one of the first dystopias and because of the huge influence it had on George Orwell, who acknowledged it, and Aldous Huxley, who didn't, but who has been accused of lying by various personalities such as Kurt Vonnegut. The novel itself is, in my opinion, nothing special. Though I can see the merit in it, and how it broke ground, it is really eclipsed in the dystopian sense by Nineteen Eighty-four etc, and in the political sense by books like Darkness At Noon. The only lasting impression I got from it was of the rebellion that started with the breaking of the wall around the city, a prophecy of the way in which communism would fall in Berlin nearly 70 years later.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

"We were somewhere Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold." As an opening line, it's pretty much a success in defining the tone for the whole novel. As a prime example of the Gonzo/Faction genre, the novel combines elements of fact with fiction. It is based upon two journeys to Las Vegas that the author, Hunter S Thomson, characterised as the narrator, took with his attorney, who is referred to as "The Samoan" in the book.

The first port of call of the duo is to a 24hr rally in the Nevada desert, which the narrator is reporting for Rolling Stone magazine. However they immediately get taken off track, and begin to roam about Las Vegas continuing the drugs binge ("We has two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powdered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, and a whole galaxy of multi coloured uppers, downers, screamers, laughers ... and also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of Budweiser, a pint of raw ether and two doze amyls"). The next day they report to a police convention about tackling drug abuse.

I found Fear And Loathing to be enjoyable and well-written with its nice and easy prose style. It's a light and often funny read, emotions accentuated, no doubt, by the fact that when I read it I was just after three books on Soviet totalitarianism; the break was nice. I don't know if I'd put much more stock in it, frankly!


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Eliot Rosewater

(Full title: The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open-Source by an Accidental Revolutionary)

The phenomena that prompted the title essay in this collection was the unprecedented growth of the open-source Linux kernel project*. To say the project was organised in such or such a way would be to give the impression of a tight organisation; in reality anyone and everyone was free to contribute. This conflicted with the usual production model (in open- and closed-software alike) whereby by a manager/owner retained close control of development and planning. Despite a lack of such centralised control and direction, and of paid developers, the Linux kernel developed into a high-quality product in an extremely short space of time.

Within the metaphor, the Linux organisation is the bazaar, free for all to help out, whereas the traditional method of development is the cathedral, centrally planned and closely controlled. The author set up his own project to test the bazaar method, and saw a repeat of the Linux phenomena: great innovation and quality development. So convincing are the arguments made for the bazaar method in this essay (published 97) that in 1998 Netscape made its Navigator browser open-source, a move that would lead to the modern day Firefox browser.

The other equally brilliant essays in the collection deal with how this bazaar model operates in terms of sociology and economics. The author, Eric S. Raymond, is a programmer himself, so I wasn't expecting the essays to be academic and "learned". It was a surprise to see him refer to people like Plato, Nietzsche and FA Hayek. In one essay he successfully compares open-source culture to Lockean land tenure. But yet the essays still brim with common sense and are very digestible. An intriguing book for anyone interested in economics/sociology and an absolute must-read for followers of open-source.

*Linux, in its broadest sense, is an open-source operating system (like Microsoft Windows). The Linux kernel is the core of the operating system that communicates with the hardware and performs other "low-level" tasks.


Wikipedia | Amazon.co.uk | Free e-text (this is open-source, after all )

Eliot Rosewater

I read much of Babbitt in public - sitting on a wall in my local park and on a train to Dublin - which probably looked a little strange to those around because I couldn't hold back the many smirks that this book forces upon its reader.

The main target of Sinclair Lewis' satire is the conservative middle class mindset of the 1920s and the society it exists within in. This mindset is represented by the central protagonist George F Babbitt, a real-estate agent and devout Republican, Presbyterian and supporter of Sound Business and Good Fellows. He is also immensely mediocre and constantly contradicting himself. Babbitt believes that the US should never interfere in foreign government, and that the US should invade Russia. He believes that black people should rise up in society, and that they should stay within their current social position. The novel goes beyond the main character and explores the society as a whole, with its social tiers, its competitiveness and its people fighting to conform.

I think Babbitt (the book!) is everything a social satire should be. It's composed of funny subtleties and delivers its point in a clever indirect manner. Lewis doesn't say "Conservatives are hypocrites because..." He doesn't say "Consumer society is bad because..." He merely describes that society as he sees it, lightly emphasising the silliness at its heart. He resists the urge to be melodramatic and outrageous, things which are the downfall of many unrealistic satires. Babbitt is balanced, convincing, witty, and very funny.


(Find the links yourself )

Eliot Rosewater

...lest I forget. I may write reviews for these later, if I can motivate myself.

Pincher Martin - William Golding
Cat's Cradle - Kurt Vonnegut
As I Lay Dying - William Faulkner

Eliot Rosewater

When The Lord of the Rings films came out in the early 00s I joined the craze with gusto. The principal remnant of this is over a thousand euro worth of Warhammer models in the attic. But the craze also left me with a very soft spot for JRR Tolkien that I have maintained despite the fact that, up to a week ago, I hadn't read any of his books in at least two and a half years. My girlfriend had suggested that this may simply have been a subconscious nostalgia; a positive shadow of the past, if you will.

I decided to re-read the novel (The Lord of the Rings is a single novel, remember!) to see if there was truth to this, and to see how it would fare now that I had read a lot of 'classic' literature. (Back in the day 'twas only Harry Potter and the like that I had read, so it was no surprise that Tolkien won out.) And the result was, well, mixed.

Previously, the book's length and its 'difficult' writing style overwhelmed me and, because of this, held me in awe. Not being able to easily digest the novel used enhance that fantastic depth of history that pervades throughout. Reading The Lord of the Rings this time was easy, a breeze even, and the quick reading that resulted somewhat dulled the impact of the book had on me.

Yet, I still found The Lord of the Rings very good. It never feels like Tolkien is writing his own story, but rather that he is noting down some proper history external to himself. The depth of world (the diverse peoples, the history, the geography) is thorough believable, and it is amazing precisely because of that. The plot is exciting, and deep with meaning.

In the two and a half years that have passed, the effect of The Lord of the Rings on me, personally, has shifted. However, I can still appreciate its glory and what makes it so great. The book, itself, hasn't changed. Rather, I have.

Denerick

I re-read Lord of the Rings last year and rather than having drifted away from it, I felt that I was able to engage with it even more, to find even deeper analyses and a window into a thoroughly beautiful and enviable moral absolutism; it still remains as one of my favourite books (Even after the fourth reading!)

Eliot Rosewater

If I've drifted away from it, it's only because when I was younger I was inordinately attached to it. But I don't think my appreciation has lessened, I think it's just has changed. Before, I was like "wow, this is amazing; so exiting etc" whereas now I've a more intellectual appreciation of it. Certainly it assumed a greater moral importance for me during this latest reading.

I'll be reading the Simarilion again, for sure.

sponsoredwalk

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

In Franny and Zooey, a short story and a novella respectively, we once again meet with Salingers infamous Glass family. Although independent entities, the two pieces take place on the same weekend and are, by and large, concerned with the same themes and the same characters.

Franny, a 20 year old girl and the youngest member of the Glass family, has come home for the weekend from college. Emotionally distraught, she finds no solace in her boyfriend, instead sparking a bitter row told in typical Salinger fashion: sharp dialogue, self-interested characterization and sorrowful realism. It is not until the subsequent novella, Zooey, that the source of Frannys unhappiness is discovered. Zooey is her next oldest brother and an actor based in New York. The two siblings have shared a similar childhood - recklessly controlled by the intellectual endeavors of the two eldest brothers and cut apart by suicide and war.

Like many of Salingers pieces, the character and plot development is primarily based on events that preceded the story, even by years. Though an isolated weekend in terms of the narrative, the strength of the work lies in the heart-wrenching way in which Salingers ties up the characters' troubles with their distant childhood. This is ultimately an emotional collection that moves one to genuinely sympathize with the contents of a printed page.


Wikipedia | Book Depository

Such an amazing book, I went out of my way to find the book "The Way of
the Pilgrim" & read about his travels. I just got side-tracked & never
finished it but it was going good. I was more interested in the idea, it
seemed to me like it offered some sort of biological satisfaction,
i.e. the rhythm was like a soothing mantra in time with his heart & acted in
a similar fashion to that of listening to music. I think the idea of Franny
really illustrated how a person in pain will go to great length's to seek
solace & indirectly try to heal their wounds, eventually though, just as in
this book, it requires admitting the problem, talking it through & I was really
moved to find how she ultimately found her problems lay in her own fears
and felt changed upon this recognition. I think everyone has those
moments. There is a great lecture on the book here.

Eliot Rosewater

History Of Western Philosophy is, as the name so profoundly suggests, a history of Western philosophical thought. It begins with Ancient Greece, circa 550 BC, and finishes with John Dewey, who was a contemporary of Russell. The book was published in 1946.

I wish to comment on the book from two perspectives: firstly, what it is in and of itself, and secondly what my personal experience of it was.

I approached the History Of Western Philosophy as a novice, and as such I can't comment on its accuracy. What I can say is that the book is accessible to the new reader and (I imagine) is about as light as a book on philosophy could be. Russell's writing style is nice, and I especially liked the witticisms that are peppered throughout. He dedicates a number of chapters to history in order to contextualise the philosophical arguments; this is great.

Now, my subjective experience. The book gives you as much as you're willing to put in. Initially I didn't give it much attention, reading it as one would read the newspaper, and I got nothing from it. Then about halfway through I took out a pencil and got really stuck in, and the enjoyment started in earnest.

The first thing I realised is that philosophy is not one homogeneous thing. It consists of "two parts inharmoniously blended: on the one hand a theory as to the nature of the world, on the other an ethical or political doctrine as to the best way of living." Each of the two parts is subdivided again.

I far preferred the ethical and political parts, principally because of my science background. I found the Greek theorising about the nature of existence, while notable for its time, to be boring and irrelevant in a world where such knowledge is collected by scientists. "Facts have to be discovered by observation, not by reasoning; when we successfully infer the future we do so by means of principles which are not logically necessary, but are suggested by empirical data."

But for all the lows there were highs to more than compensate - in particular I loved the chapters in and around John Locke. I think the success of the book can be concretely measured in two ways. The fact that my reading list has bulged is proof that the stuff inside is very interesting, and that it is presented in an equally interesting manner. In addition, I have come away from the book feeling genuinely better informed than I was before I read it, and I feel I've learned some important things about humanity and the world.

Denerick

Damn you Eliot Rosewater, now I have another juggernaut on my ever expanding reading list.

Eliot Rosewater

The Sea - John Banville
The Turn of the Screw - Henry James
The Little Stranger - Sarah Waters

Eliot Rosewater

I recently signed up for an optional module in college, History and Philosophy of Science, and Patricia Fara's book was assigned as the course textbook. Well, it isn't a textbook, it's written as a narrative. The book begins about the time of Babylon, and continues up to the present day.

In the introduction Fara makes it clear that she wants to challenge some of the preconceptions of scientific history; in particular, she criticises Eurocentricism and the lack of acknowledgement of the role of women.

The facts themselves are presented well enough. Considering that the book is meant to be an introduction to scientific history her writing style is good: easy, almost conversational, but still effective at communicating the ideas.

The problems develop once Fara starts stamping her own personal biases on the story. As I said, she seeks to challenge the dominance of men and Europe, but in doing so she goes to other extreme and gives credit where credit is most certainly not due. For instance, the Islamic world, which was very involved in science from the 8th century, effectively gave up on the pursuit of it around the 12th. From the standpoint of someone interested in science this is definitely a Bad Thing as it stalled progress. But Fara disagrees, and tries to portray the Muslim's abandonment of science to be a Good Thing. Why? Well, by praising the Islamic world she's effectively having a dig at Europe. So the book assumes a reactionary stance: in seeking to remedy the overstatement of Europe's role in science she ends up attempting to understate it.

Some of her views are also a little bizarre. Among the things she bemoans are: the introduction of the metric system into France, the increased dominance of scientific medicine and the industrialisation of Britain. The last becomes especially ludicrous when she later praises the industrial production of birth control. As the book develops her Marxist rubbish takes on a bigger chunk of the narrative, and she firmly establishes herself as one of these people who moan about everything on the mystical presumption that her undefined way will be better. At one point she criticises capitalism's propensity to pollute, a fair point, but she conveniently disregards the fact that her Marxist system has historically been a far worse polluter.

The book is also interlaced with some Feminist nonsense. In the chapter on DNA she goes off on an uncharacteristic rant about James Watson, which came as a surprise. It makes sense later on when she explains that Watson and Crick effectively beat a woman researcher to the answer. As a Feminist Fara cannot take this, so she attacks Watson on unscientific grounds.

My final criticism is that the book is too short. Yes, it's an introduction, but it could have been a little deeper, especially in regard to the sociological context and the changing attitudes of the world. Saying that, I still think this book is good enough; it's generally interesting, often informative and a good motivator. You just basically need to to ignore the Marxist and Feminist bollox.

Denerick

Ah... The dangers of anti Eurocentrism... When will people accept that all biases are equal, to denounce the west means to praise the orient, which accompanies all sorts of 'noble savage' quandries of their own...

metrovelvet

I just don't understand how you can be a feminist and praise Islam in the same book.

Am I missing something? Was I sleeping in that day in college?

Eliot Rosewater

Denerick wrote: »

Ah... The dangers of anti Eurocentrism... When will people accept that all biases are equal, to denounce the west means to praise the orient, which accompanies all sorts of 'noble savage' quandries of their own...

Well, the awkward fact for Fara is that the West has dominated science for most of recent history, though if pushed I think she'd say there's no such thing as universal science, that it means different things to different cultures, or something. There were a few little subtle excuses she had planted throughout.

metrovelvet wrote: »

I just don't understand how you can be a feminist and praise Islam in the same book.

Yes, I suppose it's like those people who praise Castro because he's anti-America: what you're trying to be against is more important than what you support.

Speaking of feminism, there was an extract I meant to quote that I forgot about. It's something like: "Scientific advances have had negative effects. DDT boosted crop yields, but severely damaged the eco system. Atomic physics resulted in sustainible energy, but caused much damaging radiation. The internet has connected people together, but hasspread pornography."

Because, you know, pornography and the radioactive fallout from the Chernobyl disaster are directly comparable things.

sponsoredwalk

I'd just like to add that the Rosalind Franklin story has merits not simply
because you think it's due to her personal beliefs or due to some
feminist ideology but because this has been a contested issue for 50
years, especially with Watson admitting how much she contributed to
their discovery. However, she does not deserve most credit for she didn't
acknowledge Watson & Crick's work for what it was but no doubt if she
wasn't there things would have been very different. They didn't "beat
her" because she was never looking at DNA in the way they were.
I assure you that if you read up on this story you'll see how it's not just
her unscientific biases that are the root of this story. She wasn't
considered for the nobel prize for nothing, she was an
integral part in the discovery due to her own personal work albeit it
was not being used by her to form a theoretical explanation.
Also, read Watson's own book to find the sexist undertones overtly
present, and admitted by him... I'd be surprised if she hadn't brought
in a little feminist critique to understand the situation at the time, but
that said feminism has nothing to do with the discovery of DNA.

There is no doubt that Franklin's experimental data were used by Crick and
Watson to build their model of DNA in 1953 ...

...
Franklin was probably never aware that her work had been used during
construction of the model,[106] but Maurice Wilkins was.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin#Nobel_Prize
(quoted in reverse order for cogency)

His more recent book kind of apologises for it, and rightly so. The new one
is highly recommended to learn why IQ tests are a joke steeped in
racial profiling & lacking a lot of justification

As for her praise of the East, the roots of this belief explain so much about
contemporary society. I was shocked when I first read this book called
Occidentalism: the West in the Eyes of it's Enemies. This book is laced
with stories of Voltaire, Turgenev, Chernyshevsky, and plenty of
other people who take the view that this "materialistic stance" of
the West is the root of all evil and reverting to our old ways is best.
Contrast this view with nationalism or any ideology for that matter &
you'll be shocked, the stories of the youth of today being all about
sex and drugs etc... is not a new one by any stretch of the imagination.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Speaking of feminism, there was an extract I meant to quote that I forgot about. It's something like: "Scientific advances have had negative effects. DDT boosted crop yields, but severely damaged the eco system. Atomic physics resulted in sustainible energy, but caused much damaging radiation. The internet has connected people together, but hasspread pornography."

Because, you know, pornography and the radioactive fallout from the Chernobyl disaster are directly comparable things.

I think it's obvious she's talking about the positive and negative aspects of
science, after all she is writing a book about the history of science.
You don't have to be a feminist to dislike pornography, in fact I think you'll
find feminists champion feminism. If we're talking about the charicature of
feminism, which I feel is the one you've been presenting here then yes
feminists hate men/porn/science etc...
You have to understand that because some feminists dislike porn etc...
It does not mean they all do.