Which book are you reading now? Volume XI

[Azale]

Too many readins'

Theory of International Politics by Waltz (for school)
The Making of Global Capitalism: The Political Economy of American Empire by Panitch & Gindin
The Mind of Egypt by Assmann (tee hee)

 

[caketastydelish]

We've moved towards Mongol-fappery nowadays.

Let's not forget that the Mongol attack on the turks delayed the capture of Constantinople. Perhaps a certain someone I won't mention has just found out about this?

 

[sophie]

We've moved towards Mongol-fappery nowadays.

Hipsters prefer Manju-fappery.

 

[Dachs]

At the time it sounded good. I'm not so sure now.

I feel like most world systems stuff that I've read mostly consists of making dubious connections and ignoring causation. You probably have a better sense of the literature than I do though.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Made in America by Bill Bryson. The subtitle indicates what it is about: "An Informal History of the English Language in the United States". Very interesting. The development and expansion of language in new social, political, and economic environments is quite dizzying to behold, like a linguistic Cambrian Explosion. It's kind of dated though, being nearly two decades old, so I should probably be wary of any misconceptions about American history corrected in that time.

 

[civvver]

Conn Iggdulen's series on Ghengis Khan. Really good. His Rome series is even better. Historical fiction for adults.

 

[Cutlass]

I'm reading Chernow's bio of Hamilton now. Haven't had the time to get too deeply into it. I have mixed feelings on it. On the one hand, it feels really strongly researched as to the facts. And well presented. But Chernow has this habit of tossing in little pieces of pure blind speculation. I sense that he's doing so to maybe lighten or humanize the subject some more. Bring it to life, so to speak. But to me it just kind of leaves me flat. It feels jarringly out of place in an otherwise good, well written, and detailed book.

Finally finished this. Despite the fact that I have some issues with the way the author presents things, I think it's overall a pretty strong biography. The author clearly admires Hamilton, he doesn't pull any punches where he thinks Hamilton was in the wrong. The book is probably a little too long. And he really shouldn't have put in those speculative bits. But otherwise it reads as a well researched book.

 

[Antilogic]

Finally finished this. Despite the fact that I have some issues with the way the author presents things, I think it's overall a pretty strong biography. The author clearly admires Hamilton, he doesn't pull any punches where he thinks Hamilton was in the wrong. The book is probably a little too long. And he really shouldn't have put in those speculative bits. But otherwise it reads as a well researched book.

Is the JAQing off limited to a relatively small fraction of the book or is it widespread enough to be a constant distraction? I'm thinking about picking up the Hamilton bio and this is giving me pause.



I've finished To Crown the Waves, it left me wanting a little more on the minor navies and their planned expansion. Otherwise, I think my prior mid-book review covers it--seems like an excellent survey for the uninitiated like me on the doctrine, technology, and numbers of the major fleets, but the experts will probably want to bypass it in exchange for the detailed works.

 

[Cutlass]

After the first couple of chapters it tapers off to the point where it's not really distracting from an otherwise good book, in my opinion.

 

[Cutlass]

Actually, I don't know if I bought the Hamilton book or not. I'm dog sitting these days.

 

[Antilogic]

Library copy?

As a guy who tries not to break a single spine on his paperbacks and keeps his books in as pristine condition as possible, I cringed at that photo.

 

[Cutlass]

Yeah. I get most books from the library these days.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Responding to Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell:

If you want a basic grounding, that'll do fine. Just keep in mind that everything in that book should be read on the understanding that most of it is wrong, simplified to the point of being useless and/or misleading. Having said that all that, you do need to grasp the basics to be able to understand the more useful stuff. Once you've done that there's a few of us with economics backgrounds who can make further recommendations.

A study in diagnosed lunacy?

Having finished it recently, I'd be most interested in reccommendations to compare against it, or follow up on it.

 

[Antilogic]

Finished up Barry's The Great Influenza and it inflicts all the depression you would expect from a book about millions dying from the most recent pandemic. I wrote above about how it wove the history of American medicine, politics around the founding of the medical schools, and the scientists' personalities into the account of the Spanish influenza. Spoiler alert: ultimately, none of the research finds a decisive cure because it's caused by a filterable virus and even the early vaccines are failures, so it's a story of heroes racing against time... and losing. Horribly.

Starting up on a biography about Earl Warren, a particularly influential US Supreme Court Chief Justice: Jim Newton's Justice for All. The book is a little beat-up, I got this one for cheap used. Fortunately, the text isn't highlighted or underlined.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The Trikon Deception by Ben Bova and Bill Pogue.

It's really well written, probably fresher than some of the 'grand tour' books Bova has written. I'm a huge fan of that series but they can get a little repetitive and overly-similar. This one is very different, at least in setting if not theme. It's about an international bunch of researchers on a space station that are all spying on each other and sabotaging one another. Then there's an ecological disaster on the Earth and they have to figure out how to band together to fix it, if that's even possible (I'm 2/3 through so I don't know how it ends).

It's funny how dated even books from the 90's can be. There's no internet, cameras still use microfilms, no mention of computers, so on and so forth. Still a good read though.

 

[Smellincoffee]

It's funny how dated even books from the 90's can be. There's no internet, cameras still use microfilms, no mention of computers, so on and so forth. Still a good read though.

I wonder if, as a book written in the 1990s, its authors deliberately didn't mention computers so it wouldn't be dated. Given the pace of technological change, any predictions or assumptions made today are liable to seem quaint twenty years from now, so perhaps they decided the safest course was to not mention something even as obvious as computers, relegating them to the background.

 

[Masada]

Having finished it recently, I'd be most interested in reccommendations to compare against it, or follow up on it.

What do you want to look at: micro or macro; financial or industrial etc?

 

[Smellincoffee]

What do you want to look at: micro or macro; financial or industrial etc?

I'm interested in principles that govern all types of economic activity in general, as well as studies on subjects that relate to cities -- the economics of housing, labor, infrastructure, and so on. I'm planning to pursue Jane Jacob's series of books on cities and the economy.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I wonder if, as a book written in the 1990s, its authors deliberately didn't mention computers so it wouldn't be dated. Given the pace of technological change, any predictions or assumptions made today are liable to seem quaint twenty years from now, so perhaps they decided the safest course was to not mention something even as obvious as computers, relegating them to the background.

That's quite possible, actually. I can't say for sure that computers have been explicitly avoided, however they are absent enough for me to notice. I guess it's the other items such as a microfilm camera dated it. Then again, the piece is set in 1997 so maybe it's not that far off from where we actually were back then. Good observation.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

The Tragic State of the Congo by Jeanne M. Haskin certainly introduced me to the more recent history of said region. Not much help in understanding it though, but I can't complain as the small size of the book is obvious. Gets rather tedious at the end, putting the entire texts of signed agreements and then repeating what they said as an explanation.

Here on Earth by Tim Flannery professes to be "A Natural History of the Planet". Thumbing through it and initial chapters show that it does not disappoint in this regard. However, I do wish Mr. Flannery wouldn't simply gloss over the early criticisms of Lovelock's Gaia Hypothesis. The Earth and all of its inhabitants are not necessarily planning for an environment conducive to life. Only when the mechanism involving natural selection did it finally have a basis, and previous concerns were justified.