Which book are you reading now? Volume XIV

[Birdjaguar]

I just started "First Sister" by Linden Lewis. It is a Sci Fi, space opera set in our solar system. LGBTQ folks take note, they wrote this book for you. And so far, the story is pretty good too!

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I am currently reading Gravity's Rainbow (finally) and The Baron in the Trees, which I have been enjoying immensely.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Ended The three body problem by Liu Cixin. Best Sci-fi book I have read on years and one of the beste books I have read this year. I really enjoyed it.

Started Fuego sobre San Juan (Fire over San Juan) a short uncrony in which Spain wins the Spanish-American war.

Excellent book from an excellent series. I read almost the entirety of The Three Body Problem in a single sitting on a train ride and it was the best experience with reading a book that I've had since I was a kid. I plan on giving copies of this book to all my sci-fi loving friends for Christmas this year.

I've been working my way through this book in fits and starts for over a year. The specific edition I've got was published in 1992 but I have seen snippets of the text and figures in much older texts so I assume it got a final cosmetic update in 1992 but retained much of the material that accumulated in editions from the 60's on. Without coming across random sections of the book in other texts, another way to date the material is by the age of the references it uses. At various points the book points back to rocket designs from the 1950's and while some of these references were in the context of historical discussion, it's clear enough that many of the references to outdated systems - even by 1992 - were near-contemporaneous when written.

It makes me feel smart to realize I am reading about some aspects of rocket design which the book references but which are no longer correct as materials and technologies have improved. It also helps me understand current aspects of design better because by giving outdated examples, it provides some background on how current designs came to be as engineers overcame past problems and it's not as if all of the book is outdated either. By 1992 most of the different propellant and configuration changes had been experimented with and abandoned as dead-ends or nearly perfected - at least for launch vehicle engines in any case - so much of the material is valid. Smaller rocket engines, on the other hand, have been trying radical new propellant combinations in the last decade but even then most of the design aspects for these small engines have remained static as they try out new fuels.

The biggest problem with the book is evident right from the cover. If you think the cover page illustration is ugly, dumb and illegible, then you will understand how frustrated I am with the illustrations inside. They also do not do a good job of framing/explaining the illustrations either so you both have crappy pictures and crappy accompanying text. Super frustrating.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Brothers Karamazov. I did a classics club challenge in which I read 50 classics in five years. I have until Sept 21 to finish Brothers K. I'm only a hundred pages in so far, but am enjoying it. I've already encountered this quote:

"Above all, above everything else -- do not lie."
"About Diderot, you mean?"
"No, not exactly about Diderot. Above all, do not lie to yourself. A man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point where he does not discern any truth either in himself or anywhere around him, and thus falls into disrespect towards himself and others. Not respecting anyone, he ceases to love, and having no love, he gives himself up to passions and coarse pleasures, in order to occupy and amuse himself, and in his vices reaches complete bestiality, and it all comes from lying continually to others and to himself."

 

[yung.carl.jung]

That's a great list (and a great book, I love Brothers K, read it twice already). Pretty weird to not have a single book from the entire Asian, or African, or South-American continent while half the books are from the US post 1900. But it's at least got The Epic of Gilgamesh, 1001 Nights, and three token women so I guess the author of the list was trying He says the list is focussed on western / American literature anyway. Two pretty egregious books that were missing are Faust and Don Quijote, ya can't have western civilization without those I do love that he includes Sci Fi, it is often unfairly glanced over because it's not "high brow" enough.

 

[Josu]

Ended Childhood's End, by Arthur C. Clark. Did not enjoy too much, probably I got prejuices and it was not the book I was expecting.

Spoiler Spoiler :

First part in which overlords arrive was OK.
Second and third parts in which telekenesis, clairvoyance and the overmind appear was a clear "meh"

Started Shogun by James Clavell

 

[MagisterCultuum]

About 45 minutes ago I finished "To Die in Italbar" by Roger Zelazny. Parts were good but overall it was quite uneven. The ending seemed rushed and explained almost nothing. He did not so much tell the story as have a telepath provide a minor character with a rough summary of what the major characters a were saying and doing elsewhere. It was like he got too lazy to write any more dialogue and so just published the notes from his outline. Perhaps that is why the author claimed that it is the least favorite of his novels.

Before that I read "The Dawn of Amber," John Gregory Betancourt's prequel to Zelazny's "Chronicles of Amber." I thought it was good although not quite as good as the originals, which it mirrored a bit too closely. I guess you could say it was a bit like "The Force Awakens" to Zelazny's "A New Hope."

Before that I read "Educated," a memoir by Tara Westover about overcoming her survivalist Fundamentalist Mormon upbringing and going from having no formal education to getting a PhD at Cambridge. It is a good book but not exactly enjoyable. There were parts that came close to bringing me to tears.

I'm now trying to decide which of four other library books I checked out at the same time I should start on next. The options are Zelazny's "Jack of Shadows," "A Farce to be Reckoned With," "A Night in the Lonesome October," or Dan Simmon's "The Fall of Hyperion."

 

[EnglishEdward]

Yesterday I finished:

Chaos Vector

by

Megan O'Keefe

Very gripping, and signs of a good quality review team.

 

[Smellincoffee]

That's a great list (and a great book, I love Brothers K, read it twice already). Pretty weird to not have a single book from the entire Asian, or African, or South-American continent while half the books are from the US post 1900. But it's at least got The Epic of Gilgamesh, 1001 Nights, and three token women so I guess the author of the list was trying He says the list is focussed on western / American literature anyway. Two pretty egregious books that were missing are Faust and Don Quijote, ya can't have western civilization without those I do love that he includes Sci Fi, it is often unfairly glanced over because it's not "high brow" enough.

I'm feeling a bit like Ben Kenobi here. That's my list. I finished Brothers K yesterday -- did you find your appreciation of it changed between the readings? I ask because I sometimes re-read books, and sometimes the experience is COMPLETELY different, like "Is this the same book?" different. I'm currently composing another list of fifty to classics, and if you're aware of any particular titles from Asia, Africa, or South America that are as worth reading as say, Aristotle or Tolstoy, I'd be happy to consider them. I don't practice affirmative action with my reading -- I go after whatever interests me -- but perhaps it will gratify you to know that I'll be taking on The Shahnameh.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I'm feeling a bit like Ben Kenobi here. That's my list. I finished Brothers K yesterday -- did you find your appreciation of it changed between the readings? I ask because I sometimes re-read books, and sometimes the experience is COMPLETELY different, like "Is this the same book?" different.

Hell yeah. First reading brothers K it felt a bit dry, I could not get into the characters as much and much of the orthodox religious stuff did not vibe with me. Second reading was a complete revelation and turned all of that on its head. Easily one of my favorite reads and likely my best re-read to date.

I'm currently composing another list of fifty to classics, and if you're aware of any particular titles from Asia, Africa, or South America that are as worth reading as say, Aristotle or Tolstoy, I'd be happy to consider them.

Why yeah of course.

For LA I would say it has to be Borges Ficciones and maybe 1000 Years of Solitude.

As for Asia, it produced what is considered to be the first novel ever written, "The Story of Genji". The Gita and the Tao Te Ching are two things everyone should read, but they're not novels so might not belong on your list. The poetry of Basho is breathtaking, I like "travelogue of weather-beaten bones". I also really like Yukio Mishima, his shortest read is "Sun and Steel". "Rashomon" is of course a classic Japanese novel. I honestly feel pretty embarrassed that I cannot think of a single work of Chinese literature.

As for Africa, I really dk jack, but I can recommend you Achebe, which I liked, and the muslim scholars which brought back the greeks, first and foremost Averroes (though he was technically not African I guess?), Al-Kindi, maybe Avicenna, too. They were responsible for the renaissance of Aristotle, more or less.

I enjoyed Tolstoy but enjoyed most of the authors I listed here a bunch more. OTOH, I prefer Chekhov, Turganov, Bulgakov and Dosto over Tolstoy so maybe I am biased

I don't practice affirmative action with my reading -- I go after whatever interests me -- but perhaps it will gratify you to know that I'll be taking on The Shahnameh.

neither do I, that would feel silly. for me personally it's not like "hey, my list isn't diverse enough, let's shoehorn some black people and women into it", it's more like "hey, my tastes have stagnated a little, maybe read something which is actually challenging to me, and not more of the same stuff". But again, that's just my way of engaging art, other people may read for different reasons, and none are illegitimate

Don Quijotes, Göthe's Faust, Kafka's Process or Metamorphosis, Pessoa's "Book of Disquiet", Nabokov's Lolita and my favorite: Büchner's Woyzeck are some I wholeheardetly recommend you if you're going more for a "western canon" type of thing. They're all revolutionary books

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Green Chemistry: An Introductory Text by Mike Lancaster is concerned with the sustainability of the chemical industry, as measured by concepts such as atom economy (higher = more complete conversion of all atoms in the reactants to usable products). Topics of interest are waste, assessments, catalysis, solvents, renewables, technologies, and engineering, with the text finishing off with two chapters on industrial case studies and integrated approaches. A main theme is the concept of trade-offs not only between productivity and sustainability, but also between aspects of sustainability themselves. The text is a good, wide-ranging introduction to the subject marred only by a frequency of typos per chapter greater than one.

 

[Takhisis]

While some people read the Brothers Karamazov, I myself am reading The Brothers Mad (paperback edition, 1942).

 

[Ajidica]

Britain After Rome: The Fall and Rise 400 - 1070 by Robin Flemming.
It's an interesting book. The author dispenses with a 'narrative history' of kings and polities and battles, and focuses on the archaeology and by extension the economy and society. While dispensing with the narrative history is perfectly acceptable for 'Dark Age' Britain when we only have one contemporary source (Gildas, Ruin and Conquest) and the next few sources have no strong claims to accuracy (Bede, Ecclesiastic History; Nennius, History of Britain), and a narrative isn't needed in pre-Viking England where it is a long list of people stabbing and surrendering to each other; it turns into a problem in the Viking Age. I think I counted five mentions of Alfred the Great and three mentions of Cnut! The focus on the economy and emporia/wics is fascinating, but the author seemingly has a pathological aversion to written documents. She talks a lot about how English kings used the emergence of trading posts to 'diversify' their revenue from warfare and tribute taking, but I don't remember her referencing any written document establishing royal duties or the relations between the trading post and king. This paucity of document usage extends into near-Conquest periods when we have quite a few documents establishing land rights and socioeconomic relations between king, lord, city, and peasant.
Her treatment of Wales and Scotland was also so cursory as to almost be insulting; I don't remember any discussion about the shift in power from highlands to the lowlands circa 600 which Halsall spent a fair amount of time talking about in Age of Arthur.

So yeah, it's a strange book. The lack of narrative history makes it a poor choice for beginners who are interested as it assumes the reader knows certain Things, like Alfred, Offa, Athelstan, or the Great Heathen Army; but struggles for people looking for a deep dive as there is effectively no mention of the Anglo-Saxon law codes or charters which could be used to give a better understanding of her case studies.
Also, there is basically no discussion about the role of warfare in Anglo-Saxon society. This plays into one of Halsall's criticisms of early medieval history. Warfare was an essential part of royal and aristocratic duties, with military service being the primary method of social organization and obligations. Kings existed to fight and pass laws, ignoring the stabby part and the role that played on society gives an incomplete picture of that society. Just because legions of terrible "historians" have trampled all over the topic of warfare and social obligations deriving from it, that is no reason it ignore it; indeed, it calls for historians to do a better job in writing about it.

 

[Takhisis]

no strong claims to accuracy (Bede, Ecclesiastic History;

I spotted that exact book in my shelves earlier today and was about to start reading it tomorrow…

 

[Ajidica]

I spotted that exact book in my shelves earlier today and was about to start reading it tomorrow…

So, I was referring to Bede's accuracy with regards to 'Dark Age' British history (generally 400-600AD). Looking at Bede's text, it is pretty clear his sources for the period were Gildas (indeed, he lifts a couple passages straight from Gildas), the Life of St Germanus, and wherever he got the Hengist/Horsa/Vortigern stories from; which is basically a reworking of Gildas with names added. (British king invites Saxons in to fight his enemies, Saxons revolt, war goes back and forth.)
Bede's point in writing the Ecclesiastic History was to make a point that the Britons were punished by God for being sinful, and that is why God gave Britain to the Saxons; and that if the Saxon's don't shape up God will punish them like He punished the Britons. When the Vikings showed up, Bede was seen as a prophet.
(EDIT: To clarify, that isn't a knock against Bede. For medieval historians, especially early ones, writing what we think of as 'history' was a distant third in importance. The primary purpose for writing was a form of moral education; and the second was to show off their classical learning, which is why historians like Asser were talking about English fighting in 'testudos' or referring to groups of soldiers with classical Roman terms for cavalry units. This was also seen in Procopius who in one notable passage referred to the Goths as fighting 'like hoplites', which while broadly accurate -spear and shield in dense blocks- was a concious attempt to use classical language and to the educated Byzantines back home, probably quite funny as uncivilized barbarians clearly couldn't be hoplites, something only civilized men could be.)

On this topic, I cannot stress highly enough Guy Halsall's Worlds of Arthur. Halsall has a reputation for being a very dense writer with his heavy reliance on law codes and archaeology, but he (largely) avoids that here; simply because we have so few documents. You can read every 'historical' document talking about Dark Age Britain written between 400 and 900 in a short afternoon. (Gildas, Bede, St Germanus, Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Nennius, some poems, genealogies, and some late Roman chronicles.)

 

[Kyriakos]

I am having a look at this book: https://www.sidis.net/animate.pdf

Not sure what it is trying to show yet, but the first chapter presented the idea of a reverse universe. Also, it was written by a person supposed to be highly intelligent.

 

[Narz]

Doors or perception by Huxley, kind of repetitive 2.5 stars

Shop class as soulcraft, some good quotes but kind of meandering 3 stars

 

[Birdjaguar]

"Vesper Flights" by Helen McDonald. The natural world moves to a whole new level with her extraordinary use of the English language. 5 stars.

 

[Phrossack]

The Squad and the Intelligence Operations of Michael Collins by T. Ryle Dwyer. Not an academic book by any means, and the lack of in-text citations irks me, but it's a start into the Squad. I'm always deeply impressed by how Collins set up the IRA intelligence network and ran it *and* participated in politics *and* set up a bank for the Dáil all at once while having no military or intelligence background.

 

[tjs282]

My wife was lent The Mental Load by a friend of hers, and suggested that I should read it as well.

The author is the mononymous "Emma", a French computer tech (according to the potted bio at the back). It's a collection of cartoons, some wry, some annoyed, some funny, about the cartoonist's life, and things she's learned, and wants to share. Haven't looked to see if the cartoons have been published online anywhere, but they might have been.

Off the top of my head, @Synsensa, @Lexicus, @hobbsyoyo, and @MaryKB (to name but 4 of you lovely CFCOT-ers) might also enjoy/ sympathise with/ cringe at (parts of) it.