Which book are you reading now? Volume XIII

[SS-18 ICBM]

Nearly finished with An Introduction to Molecular Evolution and Phylogenetics (2nd edition) by Lindell Bromham. The book covers the subject by starting with an introduction to basic genetics and the principles of evolution, and then goes on to cover sequence alignments, phylogeny methods, estimating rates, and molecular dating. Emphasizing accessibility, the equation-free text requires only that the reader have a basic understanding of the field of biology. More technical content is kept at short sections at the end of chapters, describing methods in a general manner to guard against being outdated by ongoing improvements in techniques. Connections between chapters are highlighted, with full-color graphs and photos illustrating the principles being discussed. Famous figures in the fields of genetics and evolution are featured in sections at the end of chapters, along with more contemporary researchers the author has worked with. She believes that a personal touch is important for humanizing scientific fields.

 

[Birdjaguar]

" A Memory Called Empire" by Arkady Martine. Space opera. I just started it and it sucked me right in.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Sign seen in a bookshop,
"The Post-apocalyptic Fiction Section has been moved to Current Affairs."

 

[Synobun]

The quality of the Animorphs books drops off a cliff after #25. I looked it up and this is apparently when it switched from the original author to ghostwriters.

I'm on #28 right now. If it continues until #30, I'll just stop.

 

[Takhisis]

No such thing as too much Kasrilevke.

 

[Ajidica]

Crashed: How a Decade of Financial Crises Changed the World by Adam Tooze. The book starts in the mid-90s with banking deregulation in the EU and the United States, spending a lot of time illustrating just how badly regulated and unstable European banks were, given their almost unhealthy levels of integration with the US market. When the US market collapsed in late 2008, the European banks were running out of dollars fast and would likely have seen widespread collapses - until the Fed stepped in and basically without telling anyone began funneling hundreds of billions of dollars to the various national European central banks to cover the gap. Tooze also highlights how much the European sovereign debt crisis was just a part of the general economic meltdown. Tooze does an excellent job in this book, being both highly readable and detailed. Recommend it for everyone.

If Tooze is harsh toward the American regulators and governments, he is savage toward the Europeans.* If the American plan was "Save Wall Street, then we can worry about Main Street" (even if they fell down on the job on saving Main Street), Tooze notes that at least the Americans had a plan and put it into action quickly. The Europeans had no coordinated plan, national responses were small and piecemeal, there was a refusal to accept there might be a problem, were limited by German small-mindedness, hamstrung by a badly designed and poorly run ECB, and sort of consumed by the idea -especially in Greece- that things had to fall apart before steps could be taken to help. Effectively, the Europeans who popularly are viewed as being more open to state intervention in the economy kept trying to let the market fix the issues while the Americans conducted partial bank nationalization, required banks submit annual capital plans for Fed approval, and creating a de-facto subsidy Tooze estimates at roughly $34 billion a year for banks that were 'stress-tested' via lower lending costs on the assumption that those banks are 'safe' since they passed the stress test. Oh, and austerity, but that was a transatlantic delusion and cannot solely be blamed on the Europeans. In the context of the Greek debt crisis, there is a telling line by Sarkozy when Obama was pushing the IMF to get involved given ECB reluctance. Paraphrased, Sarkozy said "The IMF shouldn't be getting involved in Greece, the IMF is for Africa!"

*I wonder how much of this is due to who he was able to interview. While he notes in the interview he was able to interview multiple US officials and talked with the BoE Director Mervyn King, he doesn't really mention talking to many European bankers or regulators. It also seems the Americans, on both an institutional and personal level, are much more open and willing to talk.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Read Pathfinders: the Golden Age of Arabic Science by Jim Al-Khalili for some story research. It mainly covers the half-millennium of Arab scholarship from the rise of the Abbasid Caliphate in the 8th century CE in various locations from Baghdad all the way to Andalusia. Topics of particular attention include the founding of Baghdad and its House of Wisdom, the Translation Movement, the chemist Jabir, the mathematician al-Khwarizmi, the philosopher al-Kindi, the doctor al-Razi, the physicist al-Haytham, and the polymaths al-Biruni and ibn Sina. The latter three are particular favorites of the author. After covering the contributions of the Maraghan scholars to Copernican thought, the author finishes by asking why science later stagnated in the Muslim world (one particular reason being a reluctance to adopt the printing press) and concluding with the need for stronger emphasis on it in the future.

The author's life experience with a life where both Western Britain and Eastern Iraq meet allows for the drawing of many parallels that enrich the narrative being told and the analysis being done. The historiography is open to multiple views and a variety of sources both secondary and tertiary are drawn upon, some Arabic-language sources. The main theme is the emergence of the scientific method with these Muslim scholars centuries before the European Renaissance. There are a few examples of clear bias, like saying ibn Khaldun anticipated Keynesian economics simply because he wrote on the role of the state in the economy. This is in a cursory paragraph mentioning the author of the Muqaddimah, which demonstrates how some scholars mentioned by the author is not covered at sufficient length. In fairness, this book is meant for a general audience and not academics who tolerate and even demand longer texts.

 

[cardgame]

I have been reading A Practical Guide To Evil at a blistering pace over the past two or three weeks. There's not a lot of editing or proofreading involved, which is disppointing, but not nearly enough to sour the taste of the story, which is conceptually excellent (and meta).

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I always get sad when a book is poorly edited because I feel like the author was let down.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Ghost Fleet by Peter (W.) Singer (not the Australian ethics philosopher) and August Cole purports to be the next Red Storm Rising, a techno-thriller for our current information age. It explores a conflict in the Pacific between the People's Republic Directorate of China and the United States of America through various viewpoints in a near future where cutting-edge technologies such as autonomous drones, additive manufacturing, and augmented reality are in mainstream use. Endnotes at the back of the book detail sources for concepts used in the novel. The conflict plays out on land, sea, air, space, and computer with a variety of interesting characters, like a serial killer operating in an occupied territory.

Sad to say, the book falls short of the standards set by Tom Clancy and Larry Bond. There's too many changes enacted to bring the situation into play, like the collapse of Indonesia (caused by China. Because destabilizing the area your trade goes through makes sense.) and the radiological bombing of Dhahran in Saudi Arabia (bringing Middle Eastern oil production to a near-standstill). While the novel gets the "techno" part right (aside from Cherenkov radiation detection of nuclear submarines which is complete nonsense), the "thriller" part needs a lot of work. The first two-thirds is build-up, then a burst of high-intensity warfare, then even more build-up. All-out military action doesn't happen again until the last 50 or so pages of the 390-page book, which results in an abrupt ending. One major cause is a bloated plot structure involving subplots of non-frontline characters (e.g. corporate executives, hackers) with limited payoffs. The world-building occasionally gets in the way of the action, the most egregious example being a paragraph-long background info lecture while evacuating a warship compartment. Quite a number of consequences are overlooked, like how China's opening salvo against a number of American satellites somehow didn't lead to a Kessler cascade that also endangered its very own space assets, or piss off other nations by violating the Outer Space Treaty. Entire nations are also overlooked, like the Russians being engaged in border clashes with the Chinese and then later allied with them for some reason. Also, there's too many scenes of people slipping on slick floors.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Picked up "The Silence of the Girls" by Pat Barker which is certain events in the Trojan War from the pov of Briseis.
Been some very good feminist retellings of Greek legends recently so I hope this will keep up the high standard set by The Penelopiad and Circe.

 

[Kyriakos]

Finished Wilde's de profundis.
The 10 or so pages on how in his view Christ is some kind of paradigm of romantic art... are a bit weird. I suppose this had to do with desperation in jail, and the uncertain future.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I have just finished

Das Boot

by

Lothar Gunther Buchheim

which was about, amongst othe things, the joys of being
depth charged by the British navy and bombed by the RAF.

 

[Kyriakos]

I have just finished

Das Boot

by

Lothar Gunther Buchheim

which was about, amongst othe things, the joys of being
depth charged by the British navy and bombed by the RAF.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I have never seem the film.

Found, by chance, an english translation paperback at a charity shop.

In general, I find it difficult to enjoy both book and film, as I keep comparing them.
It is only usually possible for me to enjoy both if there is a gap of a good few years.

 

[Ajidica]

I finished A Brief History of the Anglo-Saxons by Geoffrey Hindley recently and was fairly unimpressed with it. He spent very little time on the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons in Britain. It basically was "There were some Anglo-Saxon warbands in Britain, likely serving as mercenaries. Now lets move to the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms in Britain." I would also have liked more discussion about the early Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, but acknowledge that our surviving sources are little more than what is in my quote "Some great king with brave warriors slew his enemy in a great battle, feeding the local wolves and ravens". He also alludes to some interesting bits about how Anglo-Saxon culture influenced the Normans after 1066, but relegates all that to the last chapter. The author also spends way too much time on Anglo-Saxon religious missions to the continent. Interesting sure, and a topic I knew nothing about, but it makes the book feel like "The Influence of the Anglo-Saxons on Francia and the Old Saxons" rather than a history of the Anglo-Saxons. There was also remarkably little on societal organizations, such as the relations between lord, noble, and peasant, or even what 'daily life' was like which I was a bit disappointed by.

The book wasn't bad, but neither was it particularly good. No good insights into the Anglo-Saxon worldview, nor was it particularly well written. A couple hours on Wikipedia and some of the better internet history sites would give you basically the same info as this book.

 

[sophie]

Recently finished Bhaskar Sunkara's Socialist Manifesto, which was interesting, but as a text I thought it was not so great. The Leftist history he presents is very broad and rather unfocused, and I thought he failed to really connect that Leftist history which comprises the first part of his book to the "manifesto" which comprises the second. It did make me want to go back and bone up on my theory though. It's a quick read, and on that basis I don't think I'd shy away from recommending it to prospective Leftists (particularly as, at least in my experience, the American educational system avoids presenting even the most cursory Leftist/labor history that Sunkara gives here), but I don't think it's anywhere near the powerful, unequivocally convincing rallying cry that many Leftist youtubers seem to think it is.

I've never read Howard Zinn's People's History of the United States, so I'm giving it a try. I'm one chapter in, and so far, I'm a bit disappointed. We'll see if it picks up
Likewise, I've never read Charles Mann's 1491: New Revelations of America Before Columbus, so I'm giving that a read. Based on recommendations from this site, and the mostly rosy reviews I saw from checking out academic reviews of the book, I'm much more optimistic of its prospects.
Finally, I'm picking up Silvia Federici's Caliban and the Witch: Women, the Body, and Primitive Accumulation, which I've been wanting to read for awhile. Pretty excited.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I have never seem the film.

Found, by chance, an english translation paperback at a charity shop.

In general, I find it difficult to enjoy both book and film, as I keep comparing them.
It is only usually possible for me to enjoy both if there is a gap of a good few years.

It's a very good film.

 

[Synobun]

My library holds are finally going through and I read the two latest books of two series I binged earlier in the year. I'll copy-paste my reviews from Goodreads in a spoiler.

First, Storm Cursed by Patricia Briggs. The latest installment in the Mercy Thompson series. 4/5, but a reluctant one.

Spoiler :

Storm Cursed is an acceptable sequel in the Mercy Thompson series. It was a plainly enjoyable read without any unforgivable errors—however, it also wasn't remarkable. Lore-wise, it did not introduce anything new and interesting. Character-wise there was little to no development, so the cast was fairly stagnant. It was just more of Mercy Thompson.

Where that falters is that this led to repetition of, frankly, nonsensical story points. The constant referencing to the "pirate game" and its long-winded acronym is beyond annoying. The constant referencing of "Nudge." because Adam and Mercy are insatiable teenagers caught in lust is beyond annoying, especially when they're doing it in front of a crime scene that traumatizes both characters.

The miniature goat zombie interlude at the very beginning was cute at first but got a little tiring when it was repeatedly mentioned every couple paragraphs.

To don my British hat for a moment, it felt at times that Patricia was simply taking the piss with Mercy's characterization from the past few books, turning her into a caricature to guarantee that she's hitting all the points on the checklist of "How to write a Mercy Thompson novel."

So like I said, it's a Mercy Thompson book. It gives you more Mercy. That's all it really did. If that's all you want, great. If you want more, well, it can feel disappointing. For myself, I wasn't expecting anything groundbreaking, and I kind of enjoyed that there wasn't the convenient inclusion of lore to foreshadow the story in the next book as this is something that annoyed me in earlier titles. Although I'm sure some kind of nonsense will come from Sherwood's new cat and Coyote's obsession with dragons.

Other reviews mentioned a dislike of killing off Elizaveta and turning her into a quasi-villain. I don't agree. I found her story to be inevitable. She always skirted the rules, and Mercy mentioned time and time again that she only tolerated the witch because she was the Pack's ally on retainer. Wulfe being a white witch equal to Death no doubt foreshadows the new witch next book and how the Pack handles matters of magic.

In conclusion, the book was disappointing from a "new stakes and new developments" viewpoint, but it was just fine from a "Mercy Thompson" viewpoint. You want Mercy? You get Mercy in Storm Cursed.

And second, Sweep of the Blade by Ilona Andrews. Fourth (and final?) installment in the Innkeeper series. 2/5. Super disappointing.

Spoiler :

I found this book disappointing. I added Sweep of the Blade to my library holds shortly after it got added to the system and it was finally made available a couple days ago. I was looking forward to continuing Dina's story and reading about her hijinks with the Inn.

Imagine my surprise when I find out that this book is about a completely different character, and that most of the characters of the last three books are nowhere to be seen, including Dina, the MAIN CHARACTER.

Side stories are fine. The other series have them, and they're labelled as such. Why is this book labelled as #4 in the series when it's not about the main character or even the main story? It's a respectable character story but it's mislabeled, and that kind of annoyed me.

The quality of the writing is fine. The book is alright. It's just not what I expected or signed up for. I wanted Dina and the Inn and got Maud and some vampires instead. Meh.

(Note that I do not follow Ilona's blog, nor do I keep up with the web serials, and I don't read book descriptions from series sequels to ensure I always go in blind. I just read the books when they get published.)

The rest of the holds I'm waiting for:

A Darker Shade of Magic by V. E. Schwab (available in "the next few days")
Abaddon's Gate by James Corey (2 weeks)
Cibola Burn by James Corey (3 weeks)
Because Internet by Gretchen McCulloch (11 weeks!!!!)

 

[Takhisis]

I finished A Brief History of the Anglo-Saxons by Geoffrey Hindley recently and was fairly unimpressed with it. He spent very little time on the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons in Britain. It basically was "There were some Anglo-Saxon warbands in Britain, likely serving as mercenaries. Now lets move to the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms in Britain." I would also have liked more discussion about the early Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, but acknowledge that our surviving sources are little more than what is in my quote "Some great king with brave warriors slew his enemy in a great battle, feeding the local wolves and ravens". He also alludes to some interesting bits about how Anglo-Saxon culture influenced the Normans after 1066, but relegates all that to the last chapter. The author also spends way too much time on Anglo-Saxon religious missions to the continent. Interesting sure, and a topic I knew nothing about, but it makes the book feel like "The Influence of the Anglo-Saxons on Francia and the Old Saxons" rather than a history of the Anglo-Saxons. There was also remarkably little on societal organizations, such as the relations between lord, noble, and peasant, or even what 'daily life' was like which I was a bit disappointed by.

The book wasn't bad, but neither was it particularly good. No good insights into the Anglo-Saxon worldview, nor was it particularly well written. A couple hours on Wikipedia and some of the better internet history sites would give you basically the same info as this book.

Play Plotinus' The Rood and the Dragon scenario for Civ III. You won't be disappointed.