Sylvia Chi
Overall, this is a pretty useful and interesting read, but her dismissive tone (why would anyone want to watch TV when they could instead have a nice conversation with friends!?!) and failure to acknowledge her privilege really turned me off. I found some of her critiques really unpersuasive, especially with regard to online services/retailers and why and how people engage in fashion.
Also, Annie Leonard/her editors do not know the difference between rein vs. reign and positive vs. negative feedback loops.
This book contains four essays. “Why I Write” is sort of too short to be very useful. The longest essay is “The Lion and the Unicorn: Socialism and the English Genius”, in which Orwell argues that World War II should be a revolutionary war for socialism. It's fairly interesting in a historical sense. “A Hanging” is a well-observed vignette of an execution. The last essay is “Politics and the English Language”, in which Orwell sets out his prescriptions for good (or less awful) political writing. It's got good advice that I should heed more often.
An entertaining and fast read which would make a good movie. The characters' social relations are well observed. The writing is funny without hitting you over the head about it.
My favorite phrase in the book is this, from page 266: “...he went into the bathroom, noticing with a certain pain the historic douche bag which had changed their lives.”
What's great about this book is how good Tolstoy is at creating and describing characters. The various plots of all the characters are interesting and move quickly. The story of Napoleon's warring across the continent is quite interesting too. I don't like all the ranting about historians and self-congratulating about how Tolstoy himself knows how to analyze history; in particular, I did not care for Part II of the Epilogue, which should have been entirely excised so I could have gotten on with my life.
This translation seems really good to me, although I haven't read any other translations. It's written in a very lively and modern style, more so than I remember the translation of Anna Karenina that I read being. There are several typos throughout, though.
Overall, a good read and informative, although a little repetitive and even a bit dated by now. My only quibble is, and maybe (likely) I'm biased, but I think Shirk kind of gave short shrift to the pro-independence argument for Taiwan. Granted that this book is about contemporary politics, not history, but in backgrounding the Taiwan issue, she didn't even mention the civil war, which certainly made me question her credibility.
Otherwise, a good view on contemporary Chinese internal politics and how they affect the U.S. and international relations.
A fascinating read on raising, preparing, and eating turkeys, rabbits and pigs on an “urban farm” in Oakland.
I got this book hoping there would be more about the more vegetarian-friendly aspects of urban farming. There wasn't very much said about raising chickens for eggs or growing vegetables generally. It also did not change my mind about not eating animals. It did, however, convince me that I am not up for raising bees after all.
My two biggest problems with the book: (1) it's just generally badly written. Carpenter throws in quotes from other books like she's writing a college term paper and has to meet a word count requirement. She writes sentences like this: “Inside, cradled by white plastic, lay a liver the size of a placenta.” The size of what? Oh, a placenta! Thanks, that helps.
(2) She does that thing white people do where other white people are described without physical description, but with the underlying default assumption that they are white; non-white people are conspicuously the only ones who ever get a physical description. One notable exception is Sheila, the butcher, who is uncharitably described as looking like a “prostitute.” That just rubbed me the wrong way.
Otherwise, it is interesting to read about what goes into raising, killing, and preparing animals to be eaten.
I was first recommended this book by a white guy from Kentucky when I lived in Beijing, so naturally I ignored his recommendation. I got re-interested in it after reading Peter Hessler's writings in the New Yorker, and when my cousin gave it to me as a gift. It's a very good book; clear, quick-moving, and frequently hilarious. It continually surprised me how much Hessler's analyses of Chinese culture overlapped with my own, and maybe that's why I liked it so much. I was constantly amused by how much the Sichuanese peasants reminded me of my parents and how weird they are. Recommended if you want to know about China and what it means to be Chinese.
I feel like a lot of the assumptions that the writer/the two narrators think you have about like, class don't apply in the same way in the U.S. In that way, the two voices in this book come off as kind of irritating.
Also, the two narrators are set in two different typefaces: Helvetica and Garamond. Just sayin'. Some people may find that obnoxious.
Very clearly written, good for the layperson.
The first section, presenting the information processing framework to the brain, is a great introduction to the idea. The middle section, applying that framework to language-learning, dragged a bit. I would have preferred more depth in the last section on neural grammars, especially regarding ECG (Embodied Construction Grammar).
I have kind of conflicted feelings about this book. On one hand, it's super didactic, full of sweeping over-generalizations (especially re: Han Chinese vs. grassland Mongols), and depressing. On the other hand, it's about wolves and promotes ecological consciousness. I am a sucker for narratives about wolves. Plus, the Chinese environment is kind of a pet topic of interest for me. Otherwise I probably would have abandoned reading this book.
We picked this up at the Goodwill for 50 cents.
This book does NOT actually help you determine how smart your dog is. However, it is replete with interesting facts about dogs, their anatomy and behavior.
The science activities alluded to in the title are varied - some of them are basically “guess what breed your dog is!?” while others are well-designed simple science experiments or instructions for training your dog. For example, I am currently training my dog to track scents like a bloodhound! Also, Dr. Coile suggests making noseprints using food coloring, essentially treating your dog's nose like a stamp. I cannot imagine what kind of dog would allow you to successfully execute this experiment.
Don't let the fact that it's written for children dissuade you. This is a great book!
This is a gorgeously written book – in some ways, more of an extended exercise of wordplay than a novel. The other two things I liked most about this book were: (1) reflecting on how poorly suited it is for a film adaptation; and (2) the new words I learned (crozzled, salitter, discalced). It perhaps could only be improved by the addition of zombie killing, but then that would probably be a pretty different book.
This book treats you like you are a third grader. A third grader who believes a Newsweek editor's psychological analysis of FDR and who is easily amused by footnotes comparing presidents with strong mothers.
The majority of this book is not about the Hundred Days. It's mostly about FDR's personality and how that influenced his rise to power. Also, Alter seems to think that FDR deserves a lot of credit for not assuming dictatorial powers, but instead “legally” expanding executive power by working with Congress. Personally, I think that is just goofy on a number of levels.
That said, it's an easy read and a good refresher on New Deal history, with lots of obvious and fascinating parallels to current events. And there are some nice pictures in the middle.
This book is great to read as a companion to your 1L property and contracts classes. Unfortunately, my property class skipped the section on fee tail so I was a bit confused about the whole entailment fiasco. Aside from law, I also learned that perhaps the only thing more refreshing than taking a turn around the room is taking a turn in the shrubbery.
Somewhat uneven. I had read a couple of these stories in the New Yorker and Zoetrope, and on re-reading them, those are still as brilliant as I originally thought. The titular story is also brilliant. But some of the other stories are a little disappointing, if only because I had such high expectations. Overall a great read though, and I'm excited to read more from this author.
