Marcus
This felt like an information dump to me. There's a lot of value, but it's heavily condensed and anecdotal making it really difficult to come away with anything that couldn't be better learned by reading it straight from Munger or Buffett or any of the other sources that are so heavily quoted.
This book is the work of a connoisseur, an aficionado, a cognoscente. There are a lot of how-to books written by people whose knowledge hardly qualifies them to be giving advice. This is not the case with Fluent Forever. It is a best in class guide to picking up another language efficiently.
It's not a book of shortcuts, it's a book for the serious learner who is willing to invest time in the pursuit of polyglotism (is that a word?). I've been using it as a guide for my study of French for awhile and can definitely say that since starting to use the techniques in Fluent Forever, my study has become more directed, more fun and rewarding.
The idea that I like the most from Eastern style thought is that resisting the way things are is crazy. There's a voice in my, and probably everyone else's, head that never shuts up. I'm fine with that and don't feel a huge need to silence it, but a lot of the time what it's saying (what I'm saying to myself?) is pretty dumb.
The voice constantly explains and reframes what I experience to make it feel safer or more comprehensible. It resists what it doesn't understand and tries to explain it away or come up with elaborate justifications for why stuff doesn't fit in with The Way Things Should Be. It demands resolution to anything that doesn't fit my mental model and it creates areas in my mind that are forbidden or painful to visit then tries to push those areas away so they'll be uncovered as seldom as possible.
All these elaborate thought tricks work sometimes, but the idea of The Untethered Soul (and similar books) is that the tricks are unnecessary and detrimental to finding peace. Maybe if I let the voice inside my head keep up its constant chatter, but choose to just recognize what it's saying without either rejecting it or mentally canonizing it, I can be okay with what's happening even without understanding and categorizing every bit of it.
I feel like that way of looking at my thoughts lets me experience both negative emotions like anger and hate as well as positive emotions in a way that doesn't have side effects like anxiety or attachment. It keeps me focused on what I'm doing which results in me doing things better. It helps me deal with situations that I don't like by freeing up mental energy that would normally be spent resisting the problem and letting me instead use that energy to resolve it.
Even though I like the idea, I still mostly don't think this way. I tell and re-tell myself the story of how things are and why they're that way and how I'm going to fix them later and forget where I am and what I'm doing. That's why I read books like this, to remind me that there is a better way.
Caleb Williams is part philosophical novel, part thriller and part vocabulary lesson. Usually the book is cited as being anarchic, but it isn't directly so. It doesn't suggest an alternative to the existing government, it's not pro-capitalism or pro-syndicalism but it does hold to the most basic principles of moral anarchy which are non-violence and non-coercion. It is extremely critical of “monopolists and kings.” In Godwin's own words: “law [is:] better adapted for a weapon of tyranny in the hands of the rich, than for a shield to protect the humbler part of the community against their usurpations.”His case is compelling, especially given the late 18th century England setting. The protagonist is pursued ruthlessly by a man who is able to manipulate the law based on his wealth and reputation. Caleb Williams tries every legal and social recourse to escape, but at each turn is prevailed upon by his more wealthy and influential enemy. At times, this scenario seems pretty unlikely and is possibly a little too pessimistic about the motives of government, but still, it illustrates the harrowing point rather well.Philosophy aside, Caleb Williams is a page-turner. It doesn't move as fast as modern thrillers, William's internal dialog becomes a little tedious, but there is no lack of danger or suspense. He is the archetype of rugged manliness and never subject to moral equivocation. It's plausible that he provided Rand with some inspiration for Howard Roark.At the end of the edition I read, there some great contemporary reviews. Some miss the philosophical point of the book entirely and only praise or criticize it on its literary merits. Most of the rest blast it to perdition for its blasphemous criticism of the English government and its lack of an explicit religious message. Even so, they all praise the writing style (some even compare him to [a:DeFoe 1274408 Mark DeFoe http://www.goodreads.com/images/nophoto/nophoto-U-50x66.jpg] and [a:Cervantes 2601 Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1199114099p2/2601.jpg]). Only William Hazlitt (tellingly, the only one of the critics whose name hasn't been relegated to obscurity today) is somewhat sympathetic to the ideas of the book. A quotation:“Strange that men, from age to age, should consent to hold their lives at the breath of another, merely that each in his turn may have a power of acting the tyrant according to the law! Oh, God! give me poverty! Shower upon me all the imaginary hardships of human life! I will receive them with all thankfulness. Turn me a prey to the wild beasts of the desert, so I be never again the victim of man, dressed in the gore-dripping robes of authority! Suffer me at least to call life, the pursuits of life, my own! Let me hold it at the mercy of the elements, of the hunger of the beasts, or the revenge of barbarians, but not of the cold-blooded prudence of monopolists and kings!”
Hooked has novel and actionable ideas on how to make your product habit forming (hopefully in an ethical way). If you're the target audience, that should be enough to make you want to read this.
It's so rare that I read a book written in third person omniscient that the leapfrogging in and out of people's heads was sometimes a little jarring. It was also a little off-putting to be transported occasionally from the story to the present for the narrator's comments which more than not started with with “poor Will” or “poor Dorothea.” Those are minor complaints though. Overall, I really enjoyed the book. I love how every character's actions shown and explained in context of their internal motivations. Middlemarch really is a great illustration of how nobody thinks that they are bad and everyone feels that what they do is perfectly justified and generally the right thing to do in the circumstances.
Middlemarch isn't a fast-moving book, it's so full of names and characters and sub-plots that I sometimes found my mind wandering and occasionally even had to rely on external motivation to keep me going. For example, the rant on proper practices for doctors was so drawn out that it took a few sittings to get through it. It was all worth it though, the complex characters and plots were woven together into a really rewarding story that I often find myself reflecting on days after finishing the book.
Just so you know, this book really will bring you down. You'll get your prescribed dose of insight into Paris, Parisians and what it's like to live and work in Paris. You'll laugh some and learn how to avoid some French faux pas, but along with it all, you will walk away feeling kind of depressed. You've been warned.
The first 2/3rds I'd give four stars, but the last third, about Caligula, was great. More later.
This isn't much more than a superficial repackaging of stoicism combined with some semi-interesting anecdotes and a whole lot of trite motivational affirmations. The book is written in the style of Holiday's mentor, Robert Greene, but where Greene does something rare and surprising by compensating for his lack of personal experience with deep and compelling research, The Obstacle is the Way falls flat. The anecdotes are common and superficial and their ties to Stoicism feel tenuous at best. Then, to make it worse, rather than allowing the stories and quotes from the stoics to speak for themselves, they are always followed by explicit and repetitive advice that just constantly restates the one idea that yes, the obstacle is the way.
I really like Ryan. I think he's done some great work elsewhere. I have heard him interviewed and he is a sincere and positive guy. This book feels rushed and incomplete though.
Steel World held my attention all the way through, but I didn't find it to be particularly outstanding. The writing is decent, the story is fun and there are a few intriguing ideas, notably the way new bodies are grown when a soldier is killed. I may finish the series up since I am slavishly compelled to do so by some unknown internal drive, but it won't be because I'm on the edge of my seat.
The writing, relative to most fantasy, is very good. Rothfuss has an almost obsessive avoidance of trite or cliché characters and plotlines. I like that. Despite his dedication to the craft, the book never really gets going. The entire book feels like it's just a 600+ page introduction to the rest of the series. Even if it is a very good introduction, I kept waiting for the actual story to really kick in and it never truly does. This isn't helped by the fact that almost the entire book is comprised of a story told in a bar.
Gladwell is taking a lot of heat for biasing the examples he chooses in his books to make points that are often later shown to be somewhat tenuous. That may be the case, but he is a heck of a writer. He knows how to tell a compelling story and the conversations he sparks go on for years.
Whatever harm that may come from the lack of rigorousness in his brand of pop-psychology is easily overshadowed by the positive cultural impact that comes from people giving serious consideration to his ideas and how they apply to their personal lives and to society on a larger scale. As with any book, don't read it passively, decide what you buy and what needs to be further examined. Enjoy it, it's a fun read.
[Update]
I came across a cool and relevant quote in The Tell-Tale Brain by V. S. Ramachandran from Darwin's The Descent of Man:
“...false facts are highly injurious to the progress of science, for they often endure long; but false views, if supported by some evidence, do little harm, for everyone takes a salutary pleasure in proving their falseness; and when this is done, one path toward errors is closed and the road to truth is often at the same time opened.”
This book is similar to an Ayn Rand novel in that the philosophy is the most important aspect of the story. It makes for one dimensional characters that are highly predictable and a story line that is relatively linear. Still, I'm giving it four stars because once you've accepted the fact that you're not going to get a great story in the traditional sense, It's easy to appreciate that the case Eggers is making against ubiquitous technological connectedness is quite compelling.
Some quick notes:
- non-linear, goes through a brief overview then dives into specific aspects
- good section on Islamic State's use of video for recruiting
- heavy focus on the social media aspects of Islamic State. Specifically how they use Twitter and other social networks.
- interesting take on what Twitter has done and should do to prevent Islamic State from growing on their platform
- interesting section with suggestions for how to combat Islamic State - the only book I've read that takes that challenge head on
- nice appendix with a very brief history of Islam with emphasis on the parts relative to Islamic State
Islamic State is consistently portrayed across all three books I've read about them as completely depraved with no redeeming qualities. The worst of the worst.
Nick Winter is a non-expert who wrote this book in 3 months. That said, there is a lot here that is valuable–his enthusiasm is contagious, he's done some good research and a lot of what he talks about led me off with good directions for additional research.
Don't be deterred by the 3 star rating, you'd be hard pressed to walk away from reading it without feeling excited to learn something new, make more of your life and have a little more fun. That's worth the 3 bucks and 3 hours this book will cost you.
I came across this book while listening to the a podcast where the author was interviewed about his upcoming presidential candidacy in the Transhumanist Party. The interview was pretty good, a little far fetched at times, but interesting and thought-provoking. I decided to check out the book since the author talked about how long it was and how he spent so much time over so many years writing it and developing the philosophy behind it.
First of all, the book is not long, let's just clear the air there. This is a novella. Second, despite the time Istzan spent on it, at this point, he is an author and a thinker, but he is far from worthy of being called a writer. I don't say that to disparage him, everyone starts somewhere, but this book is quite obviously amateur. If you're only interested in his transhumanist ideas, you may still enjoy reading it. If you're principally interested in good storytelling and writing, skip it.
I don't know much about bell hooks, I just happened to pull this book off the shelf because I recognized her name as a controversial author. I had no real intention of doing anything other than thumbing through the book to see what it was about. I couldn't put it down.
hooks' writing flows wonderfully. Her honesty and vulnerability is apparent on just about every page. Her own insights on love combined with the quotations from the broad collection of voices she pulls together are beautifully orchestrated. I especially appreciated her discussion of the importance of family and community. I also enjoyed her thoughts on her spirituality and how it's evolved over her lifetime.
I don't think this is necessarily a groundbreaking book, but I certainly feel uplifted after having read it. So, maybe hooks is controversial elsewhere but, by and large, this book exemplifies the ethos of the “Love Song to the Nation” series that it's part of.
For me as a programmer, going from reading most fiction to reading Tolstoy is like going from writing Java to writing Ruby. It just feels right, I feel more relaxed and at one with the world. I can't think of another author that apparently understands the thoughts and motivations of such a large swath of humanity and communicates them so simply and perfectly.
The Cossacks isn't as expansive as War and Peace or as dramatic as Anna Karenina, but it is a story worth reading. It has its share of suspense and murder, of philosophy and humor of nature and depravity, of love and heaving bosoms and of course, beautiful writing.
This is a fun collection of short stories. All four are centered around the sea, though none of them ever really make it out to sea. They touch on supernatural (The Inn of the Two Witches is flat out creepy) without being ghost stories per se. Three of the four stories are from the perspective of a rugged, individualistic man. The other, The Partner, shows what'll happen to you if you're NOT a rugged individualistic man.
What do you have when you have a male protagonist who is rarely competitive, never aggressive, not jealous of another man being with the women he loves and is prone to flights of fancy about stage decorations? You have Jim. The only straight guy in the world who is completely passive about women, is satisfied with the occasional kiss or heart to heart talk by the river and never wants anything more.
The descriptions of the West were nice, simple and poetic, but not much happens in the book. None of the main characters ever really change... I don't know. I think if this book wasn't so hyped up I'd have been able to enjoy it more as a simple, beautiful book about normal people in the expanding West, but I expected a lot more and didn't feel like it ever really got great.
Very good, but because my knowledge of WWI and what led up to it is lacking, the first 1/3 of the book was difficult for me to follow. This isn't a traditional biography that sticks to the life of one person, instead there are several main characters and a lot of, for me, unfamiliar geography. Once I finally settled in though, it was great.
Pynchon is obviously smart, sometimes very funny and capable of producing the most unnecessarily complex plot possible. None of which make up for how he constantly shoves his political ideology in your face, how he he introduces a new minor character every 3 pages, giving you yet another inconsequential name to deal with or how all of his characters feel flat and passionless, driven by a bored curiosity more than any sense of justice or meaning. All of which are huge distractions and make the Bleeding Edge unnecessarily tedious, hard to follow, hard to want to try.
And for a novel about technology, Pynchon's descriptions of technology and the Internet were sometimes right on, but more often than not, and in some very fundamental ways, showed a lack of understanding of what he was talking about. Stuff like looking for the right pixel on a web page to click to take them to the right part of the ‘dark web'. Sigh.
So yeah, there are some interesting moments, funny songs, and amazing sentences, and if I really wanted to weave together all the connections between characters and the intricacies of the plot, I'd probably find some beautiful spiderweb with a big old conspiratorial black widow or evil capitalist or something right in the middle but meh. I'll leave that to someone else. I'm (once again) done with Pynchon.
The book is really funny, insightful and made me think a lot about why I do things I do. I didn't agree with most of the recommendations he makes based on the results of his studies, but the studies alone are very really interesting and he leaves plenty of room to draw your own conclusions. I was disappointed by chapter 5 which wasn't science, just sensationalism, and I found embarrassing to read.