• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

What book should I read (the recommend a book thread)

Bryson's works is (probably) full of false claims and wrong descriptions. He wrote, as you said, that Pluto would be the size of a bacterium if the Earth was the size of a pea (on page 45 in my book). That does seem odd, especially considering he wrote that it was one quarter of 1 per cent of the earth's size 2 pages earlier. That ratio 1:400 does not to me seem like the ratio between a bacteria and a pea (though it could be, I haven't gotten my ruler out and measured). More errors from the book can be found at:

I did some quick calculations and the pluto:earth ratio is 0.181 and the bacterium:pea ratio is about .00166. That's using the average size of a bacterium. The largest have been found up to .7 mm, and if we use that size, the ratio is a bit closer at .233
.

And I did read that book by Bryson. I liked it. I'm a science guy, but I could definitely tell Bryson isn't. I would definitely recommended it though, it was interesting.

Another book I recently read is The Glass Castle. It's Jeanette Walls's memoir, and her story of growing up with a father that is a drunk, but taught her things ranging from astronomy and mathematics to geology and biology and binary code. She has 3 siblings, and a mom, and while growing up they all essentially lived in poverty. It's a great book.
 
Guns, Germs, and Steel is one of the more frustrating books I've ever had to deal with. Diamond says many relatively innocuous, obvious, non-groundbreaking things about anthropology and macrohistory, and when he gets into details he's kind of hit-or-miss. Possibly most frustrating is that he writes macrohistory but provides an incomplete set of explanations for things, which almost defeats the purpose of writing his book. He discusses the Neolithic Revolution and the Columbian Exchange at length, for instance, but totally drops the ball on the fairly important issue of China.

Somehow this has led to his books being widely fellated among the reading public.

Macrohistory isn't very interesting to me. :p Diamond is just this generation's Toynbee, with similar flaws. From what I have heard, 1491 by Charles Mann is pretty much better in every way on what the Americas were actually like before Columbus.

---​

For basically anybody wanting to read an overview of trade and warfare in the second millennium, I recommend Power and Plenty, by Findlay and O'Rourke, which is a very good guide to the secondary material (except, apparently, in Southeast Asia, but nobody cares about that).

Anything Dennis Showalter has ever written is worth reading for both the casual history reader and the specialist.

On the last four hundred years in Chinese history, Jonathan Spence, The Search for Modern China is a very good introduction.

For the collapse of two different, yet eerily similar states, I recommend Frederic Wakeman, The Great Enterprise: The Manchu Reconstruction of Order in the 17th Century and Guy Halsall, Barbarian Migrations and the Roman West, 376-568. For a counterpoint to Halsall, you should try Peter Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians and Empires and Barbarians: Migration, Development, and the Birth of Europe.

If you want to feel good about yourself and learn about Germany during the Aufklärung at the same time, the play Nathan the Wise by Gotthold Ephraim Lessing is pretty damn good.

On the Byzantines, the best introduction in one volume is Warren Treadgold, A History of the Byzantine State and Society, supplemented by the articles in Jonathan Shepard (ed.), The Cambridge History of the Byzantine Empire.

Christopher Tyerman, God's War is one of the best single volumes on the Crusades, chiefly from the Latin point of view, but with more than a fair shake given to the Greek and Muslim perspectives.

On the First World War, anything Hew Strachan has ever written is good; he is putting out a three-volume detailed study of the war, society, economy, and international relations, of which the first volume, To Arms, has been published. He has also condensed the entire war into a 300-page book that is also more than worth looking at for the nonspecialist.

On an entirely different note, I have always been entertained by Bill Simmons' sportswriting, and his Book of Basketball was very lulzy in that vein; if you like his columns, you will enjoy the book.
 
I did some quick calculations and the pluto:earth ratio is 0.181 and the bacterium:pea ratio is about .00166. That's using the average size of a bacterium. The largest have been found up to .7 mm, and if we use that size, the ratio is a bit closer at .233
.

Wait, you're saying Pluto to Earth is 0.181:1 or slightly higher than 1:6, and Bryson says it's ca 1:400, that's crazy! (Though the pea ration works out, so he is at least consistent. 0.0025 compared to your 0.00166
 
Pratchett, not Goodkind.
And I'd recommend starting with Pyramids. It's not the first, but the first few aren't as good, and Pyramids is mostly stand-alone.

Whoops. I blame my impending midterm for my scatterbrainedness.

I personally started with Guards, Guards! I like the Night Watch arc myself.
 
Guns, Germs, and Steel is extremely redundant, and frequently seems to talk down to the reader assuming you must harbor some sort of racist prejudices that Diamond must dispel. Most of his ideas did not seem that new to me either, as they were taught in my 5th grade social studies class a couple years before the book was published.


1491 by Charles C. Mann is so much better. It is the same length, but is very dense rather than repetitive and its tone seems more respectful to the intelligence of its readers. It covers just about everything Jarod Diamond does and much more. Furthermore it is less fatalistic and less biased towards European superiority, as it goes into detail on how the peoples of the Americas were not as primitive as we like to think and how history could have turned out very differently. It definitely stresses the importance of environmental factors, but also make it clear that the choices of individuals and especially the wisdom learned from studying history play vital roles.




I read The Mists of Avalon as an Accelerated Reader book in higschool. I hated it, but my anger with the author reinforced my memory so that it was easy to get a perfect score on the test. The author seems to be under the delusion that ancient paganism was extremely similar to modern feminist Wicca, when it really wasn't. The fact is pagans were much more misogynistic than Christians, and executed far more individuals for witchcraft than Christians ever did. The medieval church had a generally rationalist approach and officially held that witchcraft did not exist and those claiming supernatural powers not of God were simply deluded or con men. Witch trials didn't really make a comeback until the renaissance brought a return of many elements of pre-christian culture. Her view of Christianity also seems based entirely on an superficial understanding of 19th and 20th century Catholicism. At the time of her story, the Virgin Mary was fairly inconsequential figure in christian art and thought, whereas she tends to depict her as being seen as equally important as Christ.
 
I just read "cityboy"

A chronilogical compliation of newspaper articles written by a man who worked in "the city" AKA the UK's version of Wall Street. It dealt with teh mind-blowing materialism these guys get into and the sick personality it takes to succeed in that place. Each chapter dealt with a different side of life in the city but it weaved well into a story with a beggining and an end. I recommend it because it is A) funny B) informative C) maddeningly left-wing (good for CFC OT ;)).
 
I read The Mists of Avalon as an Accelerated Reader book in higschool. I hated it, but my anger with the author reinforced my memory so that it was easy to get a perfect score on the test. The author seems to be under the delusion that ancient paganism was extremely similar to modern feminist Wicca, when it really wasn't. The fact is pagans were much more misogynistic than Christians, and executed far more individuals for witchcraft than Christians ever did.
By coincidence, Sady Doyle of Tiger Beatdown recently wrote a piece of the place of female utopias in fantasy and science fiction, which, of course, addresses Bradley's work. (Some useful footnotes can also be found here.)

Also, the comment that the "pagans were far more misogynistic": It's worth noting that the particular form of paganism that Bradley was romanticising was Brythonic Celtic, not Roman, and evidence suggests that the former, while perhaps not a paragon of equality, was rather less awful than the latter, and had a certain matriarchal streak to their domestic life. "The women of the Gauls are not only like men in their great stature, but they are a match for them in courage as well", as Diodorus Siculus put it.
 
I've read some of Diamond's other works (Collapse and The Third Chimpanzee) and enjoy reading them, but I've never really gotten far into Guns, Germs and Steel. Nor have I gotten far into 1541 either, even I though I like to think that I am interested in macrohistories like that.

Also, I recommend reading Fiftychat: the Collected Chatlogs. It's the wisdom of the world, distilled into 2 million lines of text for your reading pleasure.
 
Guns, Germs, and Steel is extremely redundant, and frequently seems to talk down to the reader assuming you must harbor some sort of racist prejudices that Diamond must dispel.

Yes, the whole racism thing that he goes on about in the intro and the first chapter or two (I forget, read it a while ago) is just.. annoying.

The book is good but I didn't like that aspect of it either
 
Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison - Michel Foucault
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media - Edward Hermann and Noam Chomsky
and
Walden (and other writings) - Henry David Thoreau

The last is included largely for the essay Civil Disobedience. Anyone who thinks they understand the way the modern world works and who hasn't read all three is probably full of :):):):).
 
Have at it!

For you, check out Ha Joon Chang. First on youtube, then either pick up Good Samaritans or Kicking Away the Ladder. Nice countercurrent macroeconomics, nothing too heavy.

A People's History of the United States - Howard Zinn

...is not something you want to read as your only exposure to US history. Good as a supplement to, I dunno, the Oxford series I guess.


In general, the first books that come to mind as real should read's are:

Everyday Stalinism by Sheila Fitzpatrick, for a real understanding of the travails of normal life in Stalin's USSR.
The State of Africa (might be called Fate of Africa in the US) by Martin Meredith, engaging history of Africa since the end of colonialism. Covers almost every country on the continent, a great introduction to the problems plaguing Africa today.
The Third Reich: A New History by Michael Burleigh, the best single volume history of Nazi Germany out there in my opinion.
Taliban by Ahmad Rashid, the definitive work on the Taliban's origins, how they operate, and who they are. Might be better works out there on them now, but Rashid's book should still be pretty cheap and easy to find.

Also Martian Chronicles by Bradbury.
 
Furthermore it is less fatalistic and less biased towards European superiority, as it goes into detail on how the peoples of the Americas were not as primitive as we like to think and how history could have turned out very differently. It definitely stresses the importance of environmental factors, but also make it clear that the choices of individuals and especially the wisdom learned from studying history play vital roles.

Were you reading the same book I was? It's a great, informative read, and does take a shot or two at Jared Diamond (at least when it comes to the Mayan collapse), but your take on it seems funny given that Mann repeatedly emphasized the essentially inevitable fate of the Native Americans even as he tried to fight against the portrayal of Indians as passive players in their own history. While it shows Indian chiefs make proactive choices like any other leader, Mann doesn't pull punches when describing how little the Indians could do to avoid their ultimate fate.
 
Guns, Germs, and Steel is one of the more frustrating books I've ever had to deal with. Diamond says many relatively innocuous, obvious, non-groundbreaking things about anthropology and macrohistory, and when he gets into details he's kind of hit-or-miss. Possibly most frustrating is that he writes macrohistory but provides an incomplete set of explanations for things, which almost defeats the purpose of writing his book. He discusses the Neolithic Revolution and the Columbian Exchange at length, for instance, but totally drops the ball on the fairly important issue of China.

Somehow this has led to his books being widely fellated among the reading public.

Macrohistory isn't very interesting to me. :p Diamond is just this generation's Toynbee, with similar flaws. From what I have heard, 1491 by Charles Mann is pretty much better in every way on what the Americas were actually like before Columbus.

Guns, Germs and Steel is not a scholarly work and certainly isn't groundbreaking - as you say, but it is a popular book (Pulitzer Prize, best seller) that familiarizes the general public with an interesting topic. His follow-up, cash-in work Collapse, on the other hand, is worthy of contempt.
 
The State of Africa (might be called Fate of Africa in the US) by Martin Meredith, engaging history of Africa since the end of colonialism. Covers almost every country on the continent, a great introduction to the problems plaguing Africa today.

I've read this one too and I can vouch for it. But the point of view is that of a journalist, more than that of an historian, so there are probably many here that will find it lacking. It's just no possible to get into real detail if you're going to cover 50 years of history of an entire continent. But yes, it's a great and easy to read introduction.

There was one piece of information that I felt was particularly chilling. He said that by the year 2000 or so, only 4 or 5 African leaders had ever left office willingly. Most had died in office or been deposed.
 
Were you reading the same book I was? It's a great, informative read, and does take a shot or two at Jared Diamond (at least when it comes to the Mayan collapse), but your take on it seems funny given that Mann repeatedly emphasized the essentially inevitable fate of the Native Americans even as he tried to fight against the portrayal of Indians as passive players in their own history. While it shows Indian chiefs make proactive choices like any other leader, Mann doesn't pull punches when describing how little the Indians could do to avoid their ultimate fate.

Maybe not overall, but he does seem to imply that at least the Incas could have emerged victorious if they had properly used all their tactical advantages (like roads and suspension bridges that Spanish thought were haunted and their horses refused to go near, or those weapons made from tied together llama bones that were so good and tripping horses) and most importantly not continued the civil war between factions fighting in the name of ruler who were long dead.
 
Sun Tzu -> Art of War
Fredrick the Great on the Art of War
Napoleon on the Art of War
Killer Angels
Last Full Measure
Gods and Generals
Plato's Republic
Immanuel Kant (look into most everything he wrote)
I can't think of anymore off the top of my head but thats a good start for you.
 
Top Bottom