Ambitious But Flawed.
347925
Ambitious But Flawed.
A reminder: I almost never give five stars and I almost never give a plot summary (which is usually already easily available).
Whitehead has two grand concepts, which he does weave in, fairly well. 1) The underground railroad is indeed a physical railroad underground. 2) the states in the 1800s evolved differently that the real U.S. In both respects this makes the novel a speculative fiction/alternative history and a genre that I like. I have long railed against the general prejudice that the establishment has for science fiction and fantasy and cross genre books like this help blur the lines.
My main complaint is given that Whitehead is willing to go down this path he ultimately doesnt bring a whole lot of new thinking to the narrative of slavery in the U.S. or to the concept in general. He ultimately fell back on some tropes, which are fine, but not as interesting as I was expecting. I am, frankly, surprised it won a Pulitzer, other than the topic remains an important one, especially in todays America. Dont get me wrong, Whitehead is a good writer, but this particular book probably is the right topic at the right time that is well written but not great.
I am always leery of over use of flashbacks. Whitehead does not exactly use flashbacks, but he does rewind/sub-stories of side characters that I found less interesting than they could be and ultimately detracted from the main story of Cora. It would have been more powerful if he had stayed with Cora. I believe in some ways this is an homage to Beloved, which is a great book that I feel covers the subject matter in a more powerful method. Morrison, in Beloved, uses a bit of the same technique, but executes more powerfully and it feels more tied into the grand scheme.
One example of this is Coras mother figures behind the scenes as an important figure. The slave owner and slave hunter both carry a grudge against her for escaping and never being caught. Whitehead erroneously thinks we need to know what happened to her and does a short chapter on her story. This actually weakens the narrative by not letting us speculate on what happened and simply focusing on the damage and ripple effect. We assume there is a bit more to the story and I even guessed as to what happened (I won't spoil it), but telling me did not enhance the tale.
There is a certain distance in the Cora POV that I felt. I know it is hard to have the reader really feel the mental anguish and pain, but at times I felt it was a bit too distant.
I understand the arc of Cora constantly getting crushed, over and over (and over), and still fighting, but it is an old arc. I didn't feel Whitehead brought anything fundamentally new to this.
All of the above said, it is well worth the read. I would have liked to have seen more on the modified southern states and I would have liked to see a deeper exploration of something that was touched on in William Styrons Confessions of Nat Turner, concerning the only slave rebellion to have occurred. In a alternative history, with something as improbable (from an engineering feat) as an actual underground railroad, why not explore what it would have taken to have more of a rebellion.
This review was first posted on my website BooksStillMatter dot net.
169385
Sterling has an impressive imagination. He's created a rich, complex, and intriguing universe occupied by a range of so-called `posthumans', chief of whom are the Shapers and Mechanists. These two groups have opposing philosophies and are in conflict with one another throughout these stories. This is reflected in the work, which is heavier on both personal and political machination than on story. There's nothing wrong with that except Sterling sometimes fails to keep the reader sufficiently informed. Clearly he had a clear history of this universe in his head while writing. But the reader does not, and the convoluted nature of the feuding and intrigue can be somewhat impenetrable at times. Compounded with Sterling's often dense, overwritten prose, this detracts from what could have be been an excellent body of work. It's still a good read though and deserves 3.5 stars.
2994461
Huxley's Brave New World was a clear pioneer of early dystopian novels. The book is a frequent pop-culture reference, and is still a must-read for that reason. But, it's questionable whether this will stand the test of time.

The novel revolves around a hyper-sexualized people that focus on pleasure and happiness - at the cost of reality. The basic premise is novel and exciting, but is aging. Newer dystopian novels and films (i.e.,&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/The-Children-of-Men/dp/0307275434/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">The Children of Men</a>) seem to have a grit and closeness to reality that Huxley's book never delivers.

As most dystopias aim to warn the ills of centralization, this follows suit. Unfortunately, the history and possibility for the development seems underdeveloped and unexplored.
3168473
This book is a lyrical reflection on the oneness of nature and mankind's troubled relationship with it. It is recommended for anyone contemplating a journey to the higher latitudes.  However, as a history of arctic exploration it is sadly flawed. The two chapters on early journeys of discovery and the quest for the northwest passage are chronologically jumbled. Furthermore, the inexplicable and virtually complete neglect of Amundson - including his learning from Eskimos - leaves one wondering what other omissions may have tilted the balance of Lopez's otherwise thought-provoking writing.
3122388
This was a faithful execution of the playwright's ideas about history, but his views were not particularly accurate.
  To turn Henry the second, one of the most energetic, masculine, and highly competent kings England ever had, into an effeminate, lazy, hedonistic, misogynistic fop is just too much. In addition Eleonor of Acquit a inexpensive is reduced to a shrewish harridan is again absurd.
  Given the physical descriptions available, Burton should have been the king and O'Toole the archbishop.
  The film is quite beautiful visually, and Burton's transformation and martyrdom are well done, but overall one must throw out the real history to praise this,film overmuch.
4294692
"Late Bite" is centered on a fascinating premise and is told from an equally-fascinating point of view, but the story's narration, structure and organization make it difficult for the concept to reach its full potential. Matsui's primary characters, a public defender and a vampire-esque person accused of several crimes, lead readers on a well-conceived story, beginning when the accused is taken into custody and when the attorney meets him in his holding cell. For fear of spoliers, I'll leave off discussing plot particulars here; suffice to say, though, that the story is interesting and the characters developed, and there's a twist readers probably won't expect toward the end of the story. There's an aspect of the conclusion that leaves a bit to be desired, however, but I can't mention it because it'd be a HUGE spoiler.

The narrative itself leaves a lot to be desired as well. It proceeds linearly -- think "day 1, day 2, day 3..." -- which isn't necessarily a bad thing, though in this case it leads to a lot of repetition and to a lot of wordiness; such hampers the action in the plot and bogs-down the reader in details that have been established earlier in the narrative (sometimes more than once). Additionally, some scenes seem out of place throughout the story; that is, the importance of some scenes, and their relevance and relationship to other scenes, isn't immediately clear. Basic things like paragraphing were also lacking in the edition I read, as were essential punctuation and structural elements, such as questions marks and indention of paragraphs.

That being established, "Late Bite", all of its warts included, was an interesting and fun read. Matsui raises an interesting premise regarding vampires -- or Homo Sanguinus, as they prefer to be called in his story -- and their relation to Homo Sapiens. It'll make readers think.

*I received a complimentary review copy of the book in exchange for an honest, unbiased review.*
1774774
The title of my review is a quote from the novel itself, and it reflects the main weakness of the novel.  Atwood creates a bleak but well-developed view of the future, and much of her political and social satire is spot-on.  She also crafts an interesting "last man standing" story a la "I Am Legend" or "A Canticle for Leibowitz".  However, many of these interesting aspects are overwhelmed by an almost puerile focus on sex.  Almost every chapter includes some reference to intercourse, genitalia, or pornography.  Perhaps, at some level, Atwood is critiquing society's obsession with sex and the way it influences the evolution of a culture, but after the tenth reference to the male organ (not really an exaggeration) it becomes very heavy-handed and a bit annoying.  There were so many interesting dystopian questions left unanswered (more description of "the pleeblands", for instance) that could have been addressed if, for example, the story of Oryx's childhood as a prostitute had been condensed.  Overall, an interesting sci-fi premise (although Atwood doesn't like to call it sci-fi!), some beautiful writing (as expected of a writer of Atwood's status), but an unpleasant and generally uninteresting overemphasis on the characters' (including the genetically altered Crakers') sex-lives.
2172222
The author (Ayn Rand) makes a case for the value of individual responsibility and rewards, but it's got serious holes.

For instance:
1. She would have us believe that all needy people are lazy leeches and communists. This simply isn't true. Our outcomes do not always reward our effort. Some people are hit by tragedy and we should feel some obligation to help them in a way that gets them back to self-reliance as quickly as possible.

2. Her "ideal" world would ensure every act, down to the smallest gesture of kindness, is financially rewarded. Research shows, however, that people will often work harder and more joyously when working under a "social contract" rather than a "business contract". Her world would be stiff and dark.

I do believe we would be better to move closer toward her view of government's role, but she goes much too far. We do have too many ill-advised government handout programs, which often do more to undermine the self-reliance of the recipients. She, unfortunately, doesn't provide a viable alternative in this book.

It's too bad she took such an un-nuanced approach because, philosophically, I think she's in a better space than today's public-pandering politicians.
283029
It is a good book. It is particularly very well researched and starts from a curious idea: the Information Age, in which we live today, with all its paraphernalia of social media, electronic communication, TV, radio, newspapers and whatnot, has always existed.

Technology and means were a bit backward, to say the least, but nothing has changed much: a deserving  "nihil novum sub sole" sort of thought.

These qualities justify my three stars and how I wished they were five!

Many things. however, are worthy of consideration by what they miss rather than by what they cover and this book is one of those cases.

Roger Vaillant, a French writer of the mid XXth century - and strangely a communist to make this comment - once coined the word "to Portugalize" to explain the fast decadence he felt both Britain and France were descending into.

His idea was that Portugal, the first global empire ever, had simultaneous got tired of of her past efforts and narrowed her collective views into herself, clean forgetting the World outside and thus missing the will to go beyond her century of glory.

This is very true of British social and historical review today. Standage's book covers extensively and very well what happened  in England, particularly after the "printing revolution", treats American events as a sort of corollary and devotes  a chapter each to momentous events elsewhere: the Roman Empire, the Reformation, the French Revolution, the birth of Nazism and use of radio, now the Arab spring and modern social networks.

China, Russia, Spanish, Mogul, Persian and so many others go by the wayside. Many had as much population and covered a wider area than the British Empire. And probably as much influence on "writing on the wall" as England ever did.

Nobody in his senses will deny that  England had a lion's share in the development of "distribution" of thought as this is what the book is about. But not giving a simple thought on how Genghis Khan managed his internal politics at home while thousands of miles away  or  Spanish conquerors in South (or North) America kept abreast of court events in Madrid is a failing.

Obviously, one cannot cover everything and this is not my criticism: what is , is that this failure is commonplace in post-imperial Britain as it will be in post-hegemonical USA or was in post-navigational Portugal.

I have to make a strong exception to this general rule of Britain's cultural centrism to, say, Ann Wroe's "Perkin", that covers a subject of almost solely English interest with detailed outside world study. And her other books.

Tom Standage could improve a lot if he read her colleague's books (both work at the same place).

Maybe, next time, I'll add a star.
2978226
My initial review: "There was great coverage of the types of processes involved in the extinction of highlighted species, with an eye on some planetary boundaries and the whole biotic event.  But I think this book could have been more ambitious, thorough, and passionate.  The culprit is clearly human, according to the author; so why omit the crazy ramping up of global development, ever-strengthening market forces, and the utter lack of responsibility of the few who are guiding this industrial revolution on ever-unprecedented, destructive scales? Whereas the author places hope on the positive impacts of environmental laws (unfortunately, they always seem to be under attack) and NGO's (nongovernmental organizations), there is a growing number of scientists and environmentalists calling for a revolution of another sort, that could transform the world if successful.

An addendum: I regret that I used the word passionate in the way that I did in the second sentence--and this has been bothering me for quite some time.  I suppose I wanted to see anger or outrage about what is being done to Earth.  But some people are not wired that way.  So I apologize.  I am now giving this book five stars instead of four, because there's a lot of important science here, and Ms. Kolbert has done more than anyone, in my opinion, to make the sixth extinction part of our lingua franca.
3384004
Hot, Flat and Crowded by Thomas L. Friedman is a difficult book.  One would assume that the book would be embraced by most who are concerned about local, regional and global environmental issues.  Thomas Friedman writes thoroughly and thoughtfully, more so than most.  The book reflects much time and effort spent.

However, within a few chapters, it becomes all too apparent that the book is flawed.  Mr. Friedman's discussions become passionate to the point of degrading his credibility.  His tone becomes more that of a zealot than an investigative journalist.  A tone of political fervor permeates his writing.

His credibility is also degraded by limited sources of information.  Much material is derived from newspaper articles, discussions with experts, some of whom the reader suspects are questionable authorities, and information derived from a variety of meetings and conferences, some of which the reader suspects could have an unintentional or intentional bias.  Little, if any, peer-reviewed, scientific information is used by Mr. Friedman to support his analyses and conclusions.

The book is also compromised by the limited possibilities presented as solutions to the energy and environmental problems discussed.  Mr. Friedman presents some very interesting scenarios to remedy global warming and the international energy crisis, but these often become grandiose and unrealistic, requiring seismic shifts in the scope of government and the sovereignty of our country, the United States.

The book is also limited by two issues that the author fails to deal with adequately.  First, Mr. Friedman simply accepts as fact that growth is a given.  Other than stating this presumption as fact, he never suggests that growth itself encompasses a host of variables that could cause many environmental problems, and should be targeted for mitigation.

Second, although suggested by the book's title, Mr. Friedman never deals with "crowded".  Population growth is potentially the root cause of most, if not all, environmental problems, particularly with regards to energy and resource use, and consequent global warming.  Yet, like many environmentalists and environmental organizations, the author spends no time addressing the serious and fundamental problem of overpopulation, either globally or nationally.

Finally, there is an interesting irony to Mr. Friedman's work.  In an effort to provide documentation to support his arguments and conclusions, it becomes painfully obvious that Mr. Friedman has a huge carbon footprint.  His self-reported frequent, extensive, worldwide travels, some to environmentally sensitive geographic areas, are a glaring contradiction to the entire premise of his book, namely decreased energy expenditure and energy conservation.

In conclusion, Hot, Flat and Crowded by Thomas Friedman is a disappointment.  Reading this book in its entirety requires studied perseverance.  Mr. Friedman should be thanked for his efforts, but the reader should be warned.
463520
Structurally ambitious and yet it falls short of its true potential, spending more time with, arguably, the weakest plot-line. From a literary point of view, the author uses too much the motive of the virgin-whore, trying to combine this with some form of the Pygmalion myth and with a dash of supernatural. From all the novel, as others reviews have stated, permeates a strong sexuality, sometimes misplaced.
Nevertheless, the author did his homework very well, presenting us with a true to life Venice, although at times it seems a bit septic. I also liked very much the talks about sculpting and restoring a work of art. Finally, Stone Virgin is an uneven work, elegantly written, yet marked with a few strange artistic choices
1241646
The idea to chart the final decay of civilisation from multiple realities  each more entropic than the last  was a premise full of possibility, and it set high expectations.  The books intelligent, flamboyant style was, at times, quite beautiful.  But as Lou Reed once sang: Between thought and expression there lies a lifetime.  And its in this space that I found the cycle as a whole disappointing  especially in the final third.

The narrative arc was lacking, and it felt like an impressionistic picture where no recognisable image emerged as you stepped back from the canvas.  To me, the link between obviously related people in the stories seemed tenuous - so that what might have been a unifying device and opportunity to deepen the characters ended up seeming like a confusing gimmick.  There are conceivable reasons why the author may have done this, but his intention remains unclear and the affect is distracting.

In fact, there are many examples of this sort of promising concept that end up serving a decorative function instead of providing an integrated plot element.  And the story fizzles out into a grey obscurity set against the puzzling apotheosis of the Bewlay brothers or something

There must be some kind of meaning I missed, or else that plague of torpor and lassitude was one of the few promising concepts which also served as an integrated plot element in the final act.
1383278
The sheer ambition of this novel is impressive. The book is huge, a door-stopper. It manages to succeed not as a send-up of family saga novels but as a fresh breed of the same. While there are certainly some beautiful and/or biting passages, I found the narrative to be rather needlessly elongated and lacking an impact.
319497
A good and important book which should be compulsory for politicians and economists. I recommend it strongly despite its shortcomings. The basic thesis, that countries which develop extractive institutions fail, wheras those with inclusive instiutions succeed is attractive and convincing. However, it is poorly and self indulgently presented.

The author's basic theory is presented rather weakly in a few pages at the beginning and then supported with countless and I mean countless examples, they go on and on for hundreds of pages, more or less repeating the same thing. Revealation by absorbtion may well work, but with a tighter exposition of the proposed theory, concise reference to the many examples, with detailed explanation of just a few, and a stronger conclusions section, the book could have great rather than merely good.

Despite the authors eminence, the editor was very weak and should have insisted on a book not more than half this length. The Latin American examples were very strong. Africa and other third world examples could have been covered far more succinctly from the point of view of colonialism (or not) generally, rather than detailing every case. Their view of China is fascinating but conversely on Foreign Aid their conclusions are unconvincing.

Notwithstanding its flaws, I still think this is an important book to be highly recommended. One just needs to mine it richer veins rather than merely read it.
4537678
Not a history in the traditional sense, "The Ornament of the World" presents a number of biographical vignettes displaying the richness of literature, art, science, and philosophy in both al-Andalus and Christian Spain and how this intellectual renaissance resulted from the blending of Muslim, Jewish, and Christian heritages. The stories are valuable and fascinating because they rescue an important legacy from the oblivion of the ill-named "Dark Ages." Unfortunately, this rescue mission is hindered by an ill-conceived and even more poorly executed thesis.
One of the major problems with Menocal's work is that she never tells us what she means by "a culture of tolerance." It is an odd and ambiguous phrase containing two very loaded words. Does "culture" refer to artistic and intellectual life, or to the religious, political, and social climate, or to the entire civilization and its customs and mores? Does "tolerance" merely mean mutual influence (in literature and art) or, more broadly, social acceptance (in everyday life)? On the one hand, the phrase "culture of tolerance" could signify the artistic and intellectual life created by the mixture of three religious heritages. On the other hand, it could mean a climate of economic acceptance and social open-mindedness. Or it could mean something in between: that the fusion of Christian, Muslim, and Jewish traditions resulted from (or perhaps resulted in) a more "tolerant" society.
That the Iberian peninsula experienced an unprecedented tri-cultural fusion during the medieval period is nearly incontrovertible. Al-Andalus (as well as parts of Christian Spain) enjoyed a unique flowering of philosophical, architectural, and literary pursuits underscored by multilingual translation activities. Whether that indicates "tolerance" is another matter. Menocal is a professor of literature and language; as a result, her book focuses on literary and artistic achievements, but she ignores social, urban, economic, religious, and comparative history to the peril of her thesis. In the epilogue, Menocal herself acknowledges that "even when political and ideological circumstances are characterized by strife, artistic and intellectual life prospers" (Germany in the 1920s comes to mind). The simple fact that the Christian kings spoke Arabic and read Muslim translations and adapted Moorish architectural motifs does not mean they were "tolerant." When confronted with evidence that certain poets and intellectuals were in fact not tolerated (i.e., they were exiled or executed), she still tries to shoehorn their achievements into her nebulous thesis of "tolerance."
A case could be made that, relatively speaking, medieval Spain did boast a culture or even climate of tolerance, but Menocal's survey is not broad enough to prove this thesis. She acknowledges in her post -September 11 postscript that "the forces of intolerance were always present and ultimately triumphed" in medieval Spain. Nevertheless, her book highlights the cultural achievements of a few literate, upper-class aesthetes and glosses over pogroms, exiles, persecutions, daily harassment, poll taxes, and slavery--not to mention the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim ghettoes. The result is a worthwhile glimpse of a nearly forgotten intellectual tradition but a lopsided view of medieval Spanish "culture."
Finally, Menocal's presentation is hardly improved by her prose style. She persistently and unnecessarily uses the passive voice, she strings together barely related modifiers and clauses to create unreadable run-on sentences, she has a tic of using the word "But" to begin hundreds (no exaggeration) of her sentences, and she is fond of using repeatedly the same cliches and anachronisms ("the center did not hold," "bestseller," "realpolitik") and creating new ones ("memory palaces"). These faults hamper the telling of some otherwise very interesting stories.
2226797
Jack McDevitt's work is clever. It addresses issues of paradox rather originally, as far as I've seen, and offers some insight into an eternal view of history.

However, the work is plagued by a number of errors that, I imagine, only experts could discover. His Greek transliteration is poor, writing iotai as Ys and upsila as Is, and ignoring rough breathings here or soft breathings there. His grasp of Greco-Roman culture, especially religion, is tenuous at best: Jupiter is the Roman king of the gods, a name which would not be applied in Alexandria (officially or otherwise) for at least seventy years after the visit by Shel and Dave in the story... and he certainly would not be associated with Hera, the Greek queen of the gods (whose Roman counterpart was, rather, Juno). Further, prayer in ancient culture, certainly not at the time of the Trojan War, never involved kneeling or bowing before the gods, and a classicist like the character Aspasia would have known that.

McDevitt's view of religion in general is remarkably one-sided, only offering a small potential that any good could come of it at all, and then only if religion were libertarian politically - a small group led by a single individual. By implication, any religion that suggested authority was authoritarian, corrupt, and damaging to society. His history of religion, too, has holes large enough to drive a Buick through.

I am not an expert in every historical era and political issue that McDevitt addresses in this ambitious work, but of those things I am knowledgeable about, McDevitt's attempts are sloppy at best and flatly ignorant at worst.

On top of all of that, McDevitt's - as I said earlier, rather original - approach to paradox hinges upon a significant flaw of reasoning: McDevitt indicates that any event which is KNOWN in history cannot be altered. By that measure, someone completely ignorant of history, or someone misled about the details of history, could travel to any time and do anything at all - including things that would be paradoxical for a more knowledgeable person.

My final complaint: the encounter with Socrates is notable, not because of its moving speeches or discussion, but because it is markedly absent from the problems that plague Shel and Dave throughout the book: no one knows exactly when Hamlet was first produced, or what exact date Luther posted the Ninety-Five Theses, but Dave can show up at Socrates' death with precise certainty? The death of a man some scholars believe never to have existed? It is surprising, at least.

This book had a great deal of potential as I went into reading it. It got my hopes up, that someone might have done a grand time-traveling adventure through history with precision alongside a riveting original tale. But the simple errors that riddled the book compelled me to read the last ten chapters in one sitting, just to get it over with.