Thomas
I liked this. A very wholesome story, though one that I really had to work to leave behind my real world perspective as a social worker and former caseworker (though not in child welfare).
This book has a lot in it about “objectivity” and I sort of wish it were explored a little more. Good boundaries really are important in this line of work, but good boundaries doesn't translate to cold, compassionless work by itself. But, I realize this book wasn't written for that. I can solemnly swear that none of my casenotes read like Mr. Baker's reports.
I found a few characters pretty convenient (Helen), but enjoyed basically everyone. I kept thinking about the X-Men comics and the Mutant Registration Act while reading, another story metaphoric to LGBTQ+ experience.
I found this fascinating. I've read books where the narrator is unreliable, but less often do I see a narrator that essentially deludes himself in thought in the way this book's does. The men in the book are driven by petty squabbles, lust for money and possessions (including, in their eyes, women), and take their country on a descent with their feuds. I found the commentary of educated elites vs “commoners” striking and unfortunately, apt today globally.
I may add more to this review when I get to a full keyboard.
DNF. I got to page 97 out of 220 pages of content in this book, and the writer made me work to get there.
This is a shallow recounting of Cage's filmography. If you would like pages spelling out summaries of Cage's films loosely connected by biographies of the various people directing, writing, and casting them, you may enjoy it. Very little of Cage's personal life is covered. Very little of what informs Cage's decisions is covered. The writer often suggests things very boldly with not much in the way of evidence — thankfully these are typically opinions, but it still feels odd.
The writing is shoddy. Maybe I'm on high alert for adverbs having just finished Strunk and White's The Elements of Style and King's On Writing, but wow! The author loves writing sentences like, “Hugh Wilson never really fit into Hollywood...” (that's the hum-dinger that made me put the book down). At 97 pages, you could build a little home for yourself with all the “never reallies” in this book. I never really liked that phrase!
You know what else ‘never really' satisfaction'd me? The pattern of sentences. The writing here feels reportorial, but not in a New York Times or David Simon way. It feels like writing where the author is paid by the word, and the sentences written as such. They are repetitive, and the structure repeats itself over and over again.
I'm annoyed, I'll admit. Cage's career is interesting! It beggars belief that this book is so dry and boring. For all the talk of Cage's karate kicks and high-energy, I'm not sure this book would kick if you hit its knee with one of Gallagher's hammers.
I read this in elementary school the first time. I remember being entranced with the series and had many of them back then. I itched to re-read this one recently and thankfully the library had a Kindle copy. It does what it says on the box! Short, quick to read, and pretty ludicrous if you stop to think about the plot. But it's a kids book, so why would you?
This is the second or third time I've read the book (first time reading the Tenth Anniversary Edition). I love King's writing, and his advice on writing here is short (maybe not always sweet) and to the point.
I'm going to reply to this review with a comment or two tomorrow so I can port over some of my highlights and tabs from the physical book to goodreads for my future reference.
Found this in a little free library and recognized Kotter's name. Yet another Business Fable. The fable is not the most interesting read, but it's better than Lencioni's atrocious writing. Pages 131-134 are the practical parts of the book. I'd guess this was made for people “too busy” to read Kotter's other stuff, but one wonders: if someone can only process change when told a story about penguins on a melting iceberg, will they ever be competent enough to manage it?
This book is a lot like a Big Red Vanilla Float soda. It's very good in small doses.
I don't know, I enjoyed big chunks of it pretty thoroughly. I really liked the Illinois of it all. I liked the cats — but there really could have been a lot more of them.
There came a point where I think I got a little tired of all the jokes. I was having a really good time for the first few chapters, and then in the middle was coasting from good joke to a lot of the same stuff over and over again. Then by the end I was really wishing it were about 50 pages shorter. I don't really have a big ask of the story here. I wish it were a little shorter and more about the cats.
Some of the dialogue is pretty bad given the context in which it's appearing. People don't talk like this. Kind of baffling. Still, overall I enjoyed the book.
This is quite a stunning delve into the Marvel movie world. I follow Joanna Robinson's podcasting work and have been excited to read this for some time. Even so, I wasn't prepared for just how thorough this is while being totally gripping and endlessly readable.
There are some humdingers in this book, especially concerning the early days of Marvel's cinematic efforts and how figures like Ike Perlmutter fit in. It is so clear that some folks have no sense at all of what an audience wants to see - one of the most astonishing bits of this book was a quote citing executives wondering, who wants to see superheroes fight each other? Baffling.
My favorite piece of “little” trivia is that Kenneth Branagh thought aloud about not calling Mjolnir by its name, instead calling it Uru, because he found "Mjolnir" hard to say. Can you imagine!? There are several bits of Branagh in one chapter that I loved, actually.
I couldn't put this down. In a recent The Big Picture podcast, Sean Fennessey said that comic book movies are “dead as disco.” I doubt that very much (and he could have been dryly joking), but they are clearly in a fragile state right now. This book helps illuminate how Marvel came to totally dominate our cultural experience and the price it's paying for that and for the constant demands of more and faster. It also makes clear just how indispensable Kevin Feige is to the whole concoction, if there was ever any doubt.
This is quite a good contemporary look at chart design and literacy. I've been reading a lot about data visualization and chart design over the past few months, mostly the work of E. Tufte. I've been frustrated by the datedness of Tufte's work and the lack of practical focus.
While Cairo here is more concerned with chart literacy, rather than teaching chart design, there are lessons that can be applied to design and execution. Chapter 1's basic breakdown of “How Charts Work” is great reading even for someone familiar with statistics and the visual communication of data.
Some of Cairo's writing gets a little long-winded and a little too granular, mostly in the second half of the book, but I think these can be forgiven. Some of the topics are political (as they would be!) and it seems like Cairo spends a little too much time trying to state his neutrality and engaging in both-sidesism that is probably not needed.
My copy is an apparently unread 1st edition hardback that comes complete with a stapled trifold press release from the publisher, leading me to wonder if this was an advanced copy or from some event. Regardless, the first edition has a few type issues and more noticeable layout and printing issues. These are thankfully addressed in an online errata by Cairo. The press release happens to be a very succinct summary of the book that would do well as a quick reference sheet for the practitioner hoping to apply the book's lessons.
I read (listened to) the last few chapters of this while walking laps in the park, a very odd thing to do given the really weird concluding chapters.This is a genuine, bona fide, 1980's King book. I haven't read anything from Stephen King for quite a while, maybe not since I finished up my first read of [b:The Dark Tower 5091 The Dark Tower (The Dark Tower, #7) Stephen King https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1372296329l/5091.SY75.jpg 6309701], unless I'm forgetting something. There's a lot to love in this book. We've got a ka-tet, a horrible villain, and genuine fear wrapped up in places and things that few writers get to like King.There are some really bizarre things in the book. Most of them are just fine. I think I probably would have left the orgy between the kids on the cutting room floor.That said, fantastic book and a fantastic narration by Steven Weber. It has me wanting to read [b:The Gunslinger 43615 The Gunslinger (The Dark Tower, #1) Stephen King https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1554220416l/43615.SY75.jpg 46575] again!
What is the theoretical minimum of understanding a text necessary to log it as “read” on goodreads without lying?
I can tell you that my eyes touched every word in this book. I can't tell you how many of the typed elements penetrated the various parts of my eyeballs and how many of the equations were lost on their way through my nerves and into my brain. I was not a strong maths student, and never had a pre-Calculus class let alone Calculus. So, many of the equations in this book were essentially static to me.
I read all of the prose(?). But much of this prose broke down the equations—unfortunately not in a way that could make much sense to me. I thrived on the parts of the book that explored concepts more than the parts focusing on calculus.
As it turns out, the theoretical minimum to start doing physics is more than the practical maximum of my maths competency. The fault lies with me, not the book. I do think with a primer to Calculus, I could figure this out, but not in this form.
Another read for work. This is the third Tufte I've read and they certainly have diminishing returns. I found [b:The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, 2nd Ed. 17744 The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, 2nd Ed. Edward R. Tufte https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1560425455l/17744.SX50.jpg 522245] dated, but worthwhile in its approach to data. Then [b:Beautiful Evidence 17743 Beautiful Evidence Edward R. Tufte https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1392420570l/17743.SX50.jpg 19271] to be more of a coffee table book repeating some strong opinions from Tufte that have not survived their aging.This is more of the same. Tufte loves complexity - in several of these books he cites archaic handmade train schedules. These are prettier to look at than to use, and they're not the prettiest things to look at to begin with. Tufte often talks about simplicity being essential, but then also repeats statements something like: “you can't treat your audience as if they're stupid, uncaring, or obtuse.” It feels like he makes those statements to get away with overly complex graphics.He highlights a projection of the Rockefeller Center surroundings by Constantine Anderson as a great joy of visualizing information, noting that it goes so far as to depict individual windows. What is the point of identifying individual windows on a map? There really isn't one. Tufte notes that Anderson spent 20 years on this map, and then it becomes clear that this is an art piece, not a utility.I would be interested in seeing a modern version of these books, using modern examples and modern design language. These have been rather left in the past, and I can't imagine anything but the first book being useful to the practicing data scientist or designer. I think [b:Rastersysteme für die visuelle Gestaltung - Grid systems in Graphic Design 350962 Rastersysteme für die visuelle Gestaltung - Grid systems in Graphic Design Josef Muller-Brockmann https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1173989527l/350962.SX50.jpg 341206] is an excellent design reference for layout and much more practical, having read it over 10 years ago, anyway. Page 82 of the Tufte cites [b:Die neue Typografie 5785533 Die neue Typografie Jan Tschichold https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1677797992l/5785533.SX50.jpg 114711] which I haven't read, but the excerpt/graphic from that seems in the same design language as Muller's work and so is probably the most practical thing I took away.
I really enjoyed this, though am having a hard time figuring out what I'd like to say about it. I found the exploration of sex and gender pretty extraordinary for late 60s science fiction, prescient even for today (the afterword has some good additional notes on how it was perceived then and how it has aged). I was a little surprised at how many concepts and words I stumbled upon that have become more or less grammar in science fiction (notably, ansible).There are a few lines that I really like, that stood above the rest for me on this, my first read:“‘We are not a sophisticated people.'” Perhaps this doesn't stand as well outside of its context. This is one of our primary characters comparing a neighboring government (a “full-blown bureaucracy”) that has developed Orwellian methods of population control and thought-policing. A few lines before, there is a discussion of the Farms and how the neighboring government would boast about them. This lie in the truth of the thing is a theme throughout the book that I found fascinating.That line pairs well with a line about 50 pages before, also comparing these governments, with the monarchy the ‘more primitive' of the two: “It was odd that in the less primitive society, the more sinister note was struck.”It's hard not to think about [b:1984 61439040 1984 George Orwell https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1657781256l/61439040.SX50.jpg 153313] here, and maybe [b:Brave New World 5129 Brave New World Aldous Huxley https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1575509280l/5129.SY75.jpg 3204877] (though this one I've never given a thorough read and always sort of glazed over).Later in the book, there begins an exploration of nationalism and patriotism. “Very few Orgota know how to cook. Hate Orgoreyn? No, how should I? How does one hate a country, or love one? Tibe talks about it; I lack the trick of it.I know people, I know towns, farms, hills and rivers and rocks, I know how the sun at sunset in autumn falls on the side of a certain plowland in the hills; but what is the sense of giving a boundary to all that, of giving it a name and ceasing to love where the name ceases to apply? What is love of one's country; is it hate of one's uncountry? ...“(Another dash of Orwell in the “un” language, to my eye.)And then:“And I wondered, not for the first time, what patriotism is, what the love of country truly consists of, how that yearning loyalty that had shaken my friend's voice arises, and how so real a love can become, too often, so foolish and vile a bigotry. Where does it go wrong?”I'll be reflecting on the book for a while, but these all stand out to me.
This was a very, very good and fun read. I love this sort of setting (aesthetic??) – the sort of near-future science fiction where everything is pretty grounded in reality (with a few exceptions). I couldn't put the book down! More than that, I wanted to keep picking it up. Big change from things I've been reading lately.
I could see one critique being that it's basically The Martian but Kind of Different, and I suppose that's true. I still enjoyed it!
There are only a couple of things keeping this from 5 stars for me. The biggest is a scene taking place from pages 191 to 194. I'm not sure why the editor let it through. The scene does not involve our protagonist and serves only to show Stratt's authority–something already well-established. Stratt's character and this whole operation sort of push the reader to suspend their disbelief, and that's fair for a fiction book. This scene beggars belief. It is simply nonsense and really took me out of the story. Stratt is kind of an odd character, to begin with (why does an administrator at ESA seem to know so little basic science? Kind of weird), but that's okay. You could lose this scene and lose nothing of value from the book.
I really enjoyed Rocky! I loved the language learning, I liked the description of the species, and the exploration of xenobiology. This was really fun and I was worried for Rocky.
I'm wondering if a book being readable is the same as it being good. This book is very readable, in that once it is picked up, you can easily read big chunks of it. That said, I had to make myself pick it up. I think the magic system is interesting - though towards the end it gets pretty incomprehensible.
There are no likable characters in the book. Big chunks of the book are an extended marriage spat in a relationship that is as-near-as-makes-no-difference domestically violent. Both partners are variously emotionally abusive to one another, and then every other character enjoys meddling in the marriage. The society is set up in a way that seems to condemn itself.
I think a good editor would have slashed about 100 pages of this. I'd cut big chunks of the marriage spat, and I'd probably cut about 50 pages of the ending where the magic system gets really convoluted and hard to follow.
An incredible book which has aged at once splendidly and terribly. Some parts are flat out depressing to read as decades have passed with very little improvement (and in some parts, decline).
Some of Sagan's recommendations feel so impossible at this point that it almost sounds like someone shouting at the sky.
A lot to process.
I almost rated this at 2 stars, but my complaints mostly have to do with the type of reader I am.
The book is not for me, but I think it is for someone. I'm not sure the author knows exactly who he wants that someone to be. There is a lot of interesting trivia in the book, things that can whet the beak of someone and get them interested enough to sit back and picture what the skyline of Mars might look like, for example. I imagine these would make a person look for other content around Space and our place in it. Unfortunately, the trivia is interspersed with a lot of filler material. Sometimes, these are just adverbs and unnecessary spacing. You could carve out about a quarter of this book and be left with a better product for the time saved.
There is another component - small fables told usually at the front of each chapter. These weren't for me, and I think they point to who the author thinks he's writing for - junior high or high school kids. I can see these being good hooks for that population, and the book, I think, reads as if it is aimed at that level (most of the time, anyway). I did not like the fables because they were written in the second person present tense, which I absolutely hate. Sometimes (and weirdly), these narratives pop into the regular sections of the text, and that felt discombobulating.
I think this book is trying to be 3 or 4 different products at once. I think it could be better in one of the following forms:
- A generously illustrated traveler's guide to the Universe, 80 to 100 pages.
- A first-person narrative of someone experiencing the story being told, in a more classical sci-fi way...(?)
- A much more scientifically detailed, but ultimately more refined version of the book. I know that seems counterintuitive, but I felt that much of the content in this version is filler.
The author describes himself as a “science populizer,” and that is fitting because in some sections it read like Neil deGrasse Tyson explaining things at me in a way that even I, someone who loves space, felt a little annoyed by. I think the author means well and it's possible I couldn't get past the writing because of my tastes and/or prior knowledge. I do wonder if science needs “populizers” as opposed to something else, something about that term feels a little icky to me. I don't know.
I read an Advanced Reader Copy.
Don't take my rating too seriously. Whenever I read something like this, I realize that I have no idea how to read poetry that isn't in a rhyming meter or basically anything except for iambic pentameter. I end up feeling pretty dumb. I get lost in all the line indents, the stanzas, never knowing where to pause or what to do. Reading aloud is no help (at least with this, the O'Donoghue translation). I always feel like I'm stumbling around a dark maze blindfolded.
At least this version that I found in a little library has some lovely notations in it from a previous reader.
I grew up in a rural part of the country and didn't like it. And yet, reading Cormac always makes me want to put on double denim and a pair of boots and go horseback through the American Southwest as if I would enjoy that. Also strange given that none of the characters in Cormac's book have a particularly good time in the borderlands.
Here are some lines that stopped me in my tracks, either because I found them beautiful, relatable, or despairing (often all at once):
Blevins rolled down the leg of his overalls and poked at the fire with a stick. I told that son of a bitch I wouldnt take a whippin off him and I didnt.
...I wanted very much to be a person of value and I had to ask myself how this could be possible if there were not something like a soul or like a spirit that is in the life of a person and which could endure any misfortune or disfigurement and yet be no less for it. If one were to be a person of value that value could not be a condition subject to hazards of fortune. It had to be a quality that could not change. No matter what. Long before morning I knew that what I was seeking to discover was a thing I'd always known. That all courage was a form of constancy. That it was always himself that the coward abandoned first. After this all oter betrayals came easily.
I knew that courage came with less struggle for some than for others but I believed that anyone who desired it could have it. That the desire was the thing itself. The thing itself. I could think of nothing else of which that was true.
...the weight on his heart had begun to lift and he repeated what his father had once told him, that scared money cant win and a worried man cant love
He stood at the window of the empty cafe and watched the activities in the square and he said that it was good that God kept the truths of life from the young as they were starting out or else they'd have no heart to start at all.
hates
I picked this up from a Little Library this morning, recognizing it from when I read excerpts of it in a Clinical Supervision class in grad school. I read several of Lencioni's articles in the Harvard Business Review, as that class was married to the publication as The One True Source of Knowledge. Lencioni is thus partially to blame for my near-lethally allergic reaction to that magazine. Now, when I see an article come through my work e-mail with an HBR link, I have to launch myself from my desk in search of an Epi pen.
Anyway, Lencioni spends nearly 200 out of 228 pages of the book telling tales. No joke, the first several parts of the book consist of The Fable. It's about a blue-collar-adjacent retiree (at 57) who is brought out of the shadows to lead a tech company in the Valley and whip them all into shape. It's dreadful writing, which is probably why it sells so well to the Fortune 500 dweebs.
Starting on Page 181 and going through the rest of the 228 page book (if you don't count the page about contact info for CONSULTING, god help us - oh and where the author thanks God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit), you get The Model This is helpfully written in great big, bold, serif text so you know you've gotten to The Good Stuff (tm).
Lencioni's core 5 Dysfunctions are good to pay attention to: Absence of Trust, Fear of Conflict, Lack of Commitment, Avoidance of Accountability, and Inattention to Results. He sets these up on a pyramid with Absence of Trust as the foundation - makes sense. It reads a little like a Corporate Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, and that's well enough.
I didn't plan on lighting the book on fire until, skimming through the TEAM ASSESSMENT (don't forget your business serif), I stumbled upon this shiny little firecracker: “The profiling tool that I use is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). However, a number of other personality profiles are also popular, and one of the best and most common is Everything DiSC. The purpose of most of these tools is to provide practical and scientifically valid behavioral descriptions of various team members...”
Folks - neither MBTI or DiSC are scientifically valid. The phrase itself, “scientifically valid” is an oxymoron. These tools are not well founded in research, they are not peer reviewed, they suffer numerous reliability problems (notably test-retest). Lencioni goes on a few sentences later to say why he likes them, “their basis in research (they are not founded upon astrology or new age science)” - I wonder what makes old age science better than new age science? I can tell you these tools are exactly as reliable as astrology, and if you read the horoscopes for today, you'll have as good an idea about your team's performance as you will if you spend thousands to some consultant to waste your team's time taking a personality quiz to then chat about how “omg it's so insightful).
Yuck. This is going back to the little library.