Matthew Rasnake
Reasonably well-written Holmes novel with characterizations just enough off as to result in a somewhat dissonant read. Audiobook was produced well enough, but the narration left a lot to be desired.
The book itself was decently written and enjoyable. Nothing groundbreaking, but offering some bright spots in characterization and setting. Unfortunately, the narration was a little flat and there was a persistent transformer hum during most of it, which was made more apparent because of the bits that were filtered out during the silences. Some of the punch-ins weren't quite matched well enough to the surrounding recording, which had a dissonant effect. Audio issues were slight enough to be forgivable and not really detract from the overall experience.
It is hard to know what to say about a book like this... first of all, Obama is obviously a shrewd politician (with all the attributes that that implies). My impression of him, however, has always been that he is a sincere one, who truly has the best interests of the country and the people at heart. I also enjoy his oratorical style, over which, i've been led to understand, he exercises great control. It is with these impressions, and in the wake of his victory in the 2008 elections, that I finally grabbed this book off my shelf to read.
The primary feeling I have about this book is that it confirms my understanding the absolute sincerity of his belief in this nation. In every chapter, it is made clear that, while there are obviously hurdles across the long road the country still has to travel, he truly believes that if we just hold to the principles set down by the founding fathers, we can continue to perfect our union, and be the beacon of hope and prosperity that can lead the world itself into an era of peace and understanding.
He takes great care in pointing out how he, and those in his position are riding that razors edge, by necessity, between remaining advocates and representatives of the people, and becoming beholden to the rich and the special interests. He shows how he and his colleagues often have to go out of their way to connect with their constituents, and not get distracted by a schedule filled with private jets, black tie affairs, fundraisers, and lobbyists. Sometimes, yes, it seems like he's trying too hard to say “but look at all these real people I've talked to,” and “look how grounded I am.”
A good deal of the book is about his personal journey, his political and family history. He talks a lot about his wife and kids, his mom, and his grandparents. He also talks a lot about policy, even specific policy proposals that we've seen take shape and become further defined during his Presidential campaign. He also talks a lot about the troubles we still face, with the sharp partisan divide that's plagued the nation for so long. He places blame on both sides, and not undeservedly, I should think. And yes, he talks about race and the progress that we've made that should be celebrated, and the progress that's still to be made that has its roots in all sides of the debate.
He also, talks about the founding principles of the nation, and how we relate to them, how we remember them, and how, perhaps, we should re-embrace them for the betterment of our nation. He gives facts concerning the intention of the founding fathers, their beliefs, and how, in many instances the great compromises they had to make in order to ensure we had a strong foundation from which to build.
He relates all these things to the way that we, as a nation, have to come together. How we need to stop bickering for the sake of our entrenched and unreasonable positions, and come together by defining those things that we can agree on, and leveraging those to reach compromises on those things that we can't. American is not a nation of absolute truths, and black and white moral judgements, and it never has been. The only absolute truths to be found in the DNA of our nation are these: that all are created equal, and that all have the right to live their lives as they see fit in the pursuit of their happiness. As Americans, we have a common ground, we have a common language, and we have a common goal. If we cannot see them, it is because we've allowed ourselves to become distracted on our path to a more perfect union, by thinking that “the union will only be perfect when it's perfect for me.”
Ok, well, some of that was me leaking out, but somewhere in there is the gist of what he was driving at.
Bottom-line is that this a really worthwhile read. For those who are already in Obama's camp, this will surely solidify your understanding and appreciation, not just of the man himself, but of his sincere belief that we can make this a better nation with hard work and compromise.
For those conservatives and ditto-heads out there still harboring resentment and distrust of our new President, I recommend this to you even more highly. If your judgments are based on soundbites, policy breakdowns, and the haranguing of the conservative talking head crowd, you'd do well to get a real introduction to your President, straight from his own pen.
This book came highly recommended by Tim Ferris and a podcast guest, if I remember correctly, but a few chapters in it was just not resonating with me at all, and I've abandoned it. To me it felt outdated, out-of-touch, and cynical. Perhaps I've just read too much other, similar, but better stuff. Perhaps I'm the cynical one. Either way, it didn't grab me, it didn't interest me, and it's not going to waste any more of my time.
Honestly, the best, most useful chapter of this book, I felt, was the final one. The rest of the book was mostly just a bunch of fairly common-sense advice which, if you've done even the barest research into personal productivity, you've probably heard at least once before. The majority of the book is devoted to personal anecdotes about clients she's worked with who are illustrative of the “styles” she divides everyone into. Breaking the book into separate sections for personal styles also functions to make only a small subset of the pages even potentially relevant to the reader. Add these two things together, and you've got the majority of the book devoted to personal anecdotes that will be irrelevant to your life leaving only the smallest minority of it actually containing advice which you've probably already read somewhere else.
All this is not to say that the book is worthless. Sometimes, even if information should be common sense, it's good to hear or see it written to drive home the point–as if, it couldn't possibly be true unless someone else has said it. Also, the bits of the book that aren't personally relevant could still function admirably as an introduction to the personal styles of others with whom you might work or live. This could give you insights into dealing or at least identifying with those whose styles differ from your own. In fact, there was at least a sub-section, if not a whole chapter devoted to working with other styles.
And back to that final chapter. This is where the whole of the book is really tied together, in learning to work within your style to bring your life into balance and focus, to make you happier and more fulfilled. This last chapter is almost like a Buddhist sutra of personal revelation, understanding, and acceptance... like seeking out the optimal you.
So, is the book worth the read? If you've done any research into personal productivity, I'd say probably not. If you're new to the idea of figuring out how and why you work a certain way, perhaps this book could be a revelation. If you're a sucker for productivity discussions or for delving into the human psyche, this might be an interesting diversion. If you're interested in becoming the best you you can be, you'd probably be better off picking up some Buddhist literature on mindfulness, and possibly getting involved in meditation.
It is always with a certain amount of trepidation that I watch or read something “historical” that is set within the Star Trek universe that I love. I am not the kind of geek who lives and dies by the canon, but still I don't quite like it when writers muck about too much with things that might not quite jive with it. This is one of (the many) reasons for my concern and hesitation regarding the forthcoming Star Trek movie “prequel,” and it has ended up coloring, to a certain extent, my enjoyment of this very serviceable Trek novel.
As usual, Mr. Shatner is assisted by a couple of well-known (in Trek circles, anyway) co-writers, the Reeves-Stevenses, and it is unknown just what the extent of their involvement is. I was something of a fan of Shatner's “TekWar” series of novels, and though they were, I'm fairly certain, ghost-written, they were understood to be largely Mr. Shatner's work. My feeling is that he is the “idea man,” and that he and his co-writers work together to build the plot and storyline, while they do most of the heavy-lifting. Ultimately, it's not really all that important, as this is still a Star Trek novel, whether it's written by William Shatner or Joe Bob Davis. What Shatner does bring to this novel, presumably, is a unique perspective into the mind and motivations of the main protagonist–James T. Kirk, rebellious youth.
Overall, this is a nice little book. There's some good character interaction, a bit of peril that's not too over-the-top, and a somewhat interesting main plot that ties into a part of Kirk's past and allows for a large helping of surprisingly good exploration of that part.
I particularly enjoyed some of the interactions between Spock and his parents. I felt like they captured these characters possibly the best out of all of them. We see Spock struggling with his human side, Sarek living in denial, and Amanda trying to be understanding to both and hold the family together. It's a good dynamic and well realized. The same cannot be said for the Kirk family characterization.
But where this book falters, for me, is in those parts that become a bit uncertain when held up to the light of canon Trek. Not that anything in the book (so far as I noticed, anyway) directly conflicts with anything that was explicitly covered by the original series episodes. The trouble is more in that, had these events happened, they most certainly would have been discussed in any of several of the original episodes where they might have been relevant.
That Kirk and Spock might have been friends before the vulcan served with Captain Pike on the Enterprise was never explicitly denied, but you would think that Kirk would have been more familiar with Spock's history with that captain, had they been friends all along. My impression was always that Kirk and Spock were both assigned to the Enterprise, and that they became friends while serving together in that capacity–a notion that this novel doesn't support.
Finally, the manner in which Kirk and Spock (and their small team) manage to solve the puzzle and save the day is a bit too contrived in the details for my taste. Not to give it away, but certain things happen in those closing chapters that would have been impossible for Kirk to never talk about.
I will say that the authors (or their editorial team) did a great job researching various canon and non-canon ideas. There were lots of touches not only from established classic canon, but also from Enterprise-series canon and non-canon sources as well.
Despite my misgivings, this was an enjoyable book, and well worth the read if you're a fan of the Kirk. If you have trouble looking past some of the liberties that authors take with gaps in the canon, you might want to avoid this ‘til you get over yourself a bit. If you're new to (classic) Trek, this might be an interesting introduction to the two major characters, and to the universe as a whole.
At the beginning of this book, the author mentions how he hadn't intended to write a sequel to his original “The Tao of Pooh,” but since that book had been such a Remarkable Success, he eventually just had to. After reading this book, it seems to me that it would have been better if he hadn't. Perhaps he was short of ideas, or hurting for money, or trying to recapture earlier success, but whatever the reason it seems he produced something that didn't really even captivate himself.
Honestly, it's been a while since I've read “The Tao of Pooh,” and it's possible there was just as much political posturing as is found in this book, but I don't recall it that way. My memory says “The Tao of Pooh” was a well constructed, reasonably presented book with a coherent message. My memory says “The Tao of Pooh” achieved its goal in illustrating Taoist principles using excerpts and examples from Pooh stories.
Unfortunately, “The Te of Piglet” doesn't live up to its pedigree. It's a disjointed diatribe hiding behind an alluring premise. There's quite a bit of railing against modern society and its evils, and quite a bit about how the Eeyores, Rabbits, and Owls of the world are causing so much disharmony and destruction. There's even a bit about how Piglet is a Very Small Animal with a Very Big Heart, which seemingly is the purpose of the book, but which gets bulldozed over by the author's pre-occupation with pushing his own political agenda. And I'm saying this as someone who generally agrees with the author's political agenda.
Ultimately, I didn't buy this book to get assaulted by politics, I read it to get a unique perspective on an Eastern philosophy that I admire. And that, sadly, seems to have only been the secondary or tertiary purpose of this book for the author.
If you liked “The Tao of Pooh,” do yourself a favor and don't pick this up. In some ways, I feel this book has ruined my perception of the earlier book, and of the author himself, which is a shame.
I've read or listened to the stories in “The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes” countless times, and enjoy them every time. This is a reasonable audio version with a decent narrator.
It took me five years of intermittent attention to finish it, but I finally made it through. This is an incredibly dense book whose glacial pace matches the glacial pace of the plot itself. Slow, plodding, and choked with scientific minutia (both presumably real and clearly imagined), this is the hardest of hard sci-fi. If you're very interested in the prospects of establishing a human presence on Mars, or perhaps in the psychology of extreme life extension, you may well love this book. Just make sure you have time to focus and settle in for long passages about things like planting genetically engineered lychen.
This ended up being much better than I thought it would be based on the first page. It's not a perfect book, being a bit choppy in places, but it is engaging and visceral. I'm not big on dog stories, but I found myself identifying with Buck in many ways both endearing and disturbing. Overall, a nice little (short!) book.
A decent take on continuing the Hitchhiker's “trilogy,” but a bit too much fanservice and digression for my taste. In all likelihood it fits perfectly, and I'm just being snobby. The author manages to mimic Douglas Adams style fairly faithfully, but there are a few obvious instances where the author pokes his head in and throws things off just enough to remind you you're not dealing with the genuine article.
If you're a HHGTG fan, it's probably worth a read, if you're a purist, you're fooling yourself, and if you're not a fan, you probably won't see past the SEP field in the first place.
I listened to this as an audiobook, and while it was fascinating listening, I didn't quite get how this became such a seminal and influential work. Perhaps it's that I've heard so much about it (the hero's journey, the “monomyth”) from literally everyone who talks about modern storytelling, that the contents are too familiar to seem innovative. Perhaps I just missed too much and I need to re-read it as a physical book.
For a practicing martial artist, I imagine this book would be invaluable. For an “armchair martial artist” like my current self, it's an interesting look into the mind of a great man, and a buffet for thought.
I have long considered Star Trek novels to be a kind of “cotton-candy” literature–mostly sugar and little substance. This novel doesn't break out of this established mold.
Also included is something that has frequently annoyed me with fan-produced and professional non-canon stories–the inclusion of cross-series characters and references. Of course, I can certainly understand the compulsion, considering how all the Trek series are taking place within the same universe, and there is precedent even within the canon stories, but it seems that every time these characters are called into non-canon action, it's just so the author can say “hey, see, I know Star Trek, remember this guy?” without there being a real solid reason, and without putting the characters to appropriate use.
That said, the inclusion of Seven and Janeway in this particular storyline is certainly warranted, if poorly handled. I can't say that Seven is mischaracterized, but Janeway is very ill-served by this novel. If you're a Janeway fan, you're going to hate this novel.
As with most Trek novels, I can't really recommend it if you're not already a fan of the Trek universe, and even then I can really only recommend this novel if you're jonesing for a Trek story.
As a prequel story, it leads—as it must—to the terrible down note that begins the series, which results in a disappointing conclusion here. The book itself is reasonably well-written, and attempts to illuminate the backstories of some of the new characters that populate the series. Somewhat inexplicably, unless I glossed over it somewhere, there's no mention of Laris until the epilogue, which seems a glaring omission.
Not a lot to say about this book... Bukowski lived an interesting life, and his work seems to both celebrate and declaim his apparent depravity. His poetry itself is rather pedestrian in form, generally leaving the reader to deal with the subject-matter in a fairly raw state, without embellishment for its own sake. In other words, there is no rhyme or meter, simply words and stories that hover somewhere between poetry and prose.
If you're a fan of free-verse, this may scratch an itch. If you're a fan of personal stories of individuals who live their lives almost exclusively to service their baser natures, then likely you'll love this collection.
There are some sweeter entries, seemingly from later stages in the author's life, where he celebrates a more stable life and time with the same raw directness. Whether these serve as redemption of a sort, or merely a counterpoint is, I would say, for the reader to decide.
It was always somewhat unclear, in the works dealing with Kerouac's life and methods, just how much he was beholden to classic literature and literary theory. The most famous story, of course, was always about the benzedrine, caffeine, and nicotine fueled three-day writing binge that resulted in “On The Road.” And Kerouac himself, with his later works, and his articles and essays about writing, became a vocal proponent of “automatic” or “stream of consciousness” writing, further muddying the waters of his influences. In reading many of the biographies about Kerouac, we can get something of a feel for his abiding love of literature, and his almost reverent regard for certain writers who most inspired him.In this book, a collection of journals–in whole and in part–taking the form of a mixture of working writing journals, and personal diary-type entries, his interests and desires are made clear.Especially in regards to his first novel, Kerouac is keenly interested in creating a work of import and gravity, to be held among the works of his admired influences. He discusses the great efforts to maintain his momentum, and to edit and re-arrange his work. His fluctuating emotional connection to his own work sees him moving from the depths of despair that he will never be able to finish to his satisfaction, to the height of narcissistic belief that it will be a greater work than anything else in his time. This journal enlightens us to his struggles just to be a writer–which is a far cry from that image of Kerouac as the mindless typist cranking out words in a drug-fueled haze.Later entries shine a light on his most famous novel “On The Road,” that it rarely receives. Showing “[b:On The Road 6288 The Road Cormac McCarthy http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21E8H3D1JSL.SL75.jpg 3355573]” as a careful work, which goes through several conceptual changes, not to mention numerous drafts.Much of these journals are also notes from the journeys that actually appear in the finished novel, so we are able to see, in a way, how Kerouac captures his raw material. These journals are a fantastic opportunity for Kerouac fans to get an internal glipmse at the reality behind the fiction we've come to love. For those who aren't fans, but who are interested in the act and art of writing–and of creating, in general–it is a window on the extraordinary struggles of a man attempting to leave his mark.
This book (the paperback version anyway), is 277 pages that feels like 150. I'm not saying that's necessarily a good thing, but it is a quick read.
The plot, such as it is, feels to me like an over simplified scaffolding from which the author was able to hang his depravity and infatuation with the absurd and perverse. The unfortunate thing is that the scenes and descriptions of deviant sexual behavior and bodily functions both human and inhuman pretty much always felt gratuitous. I say it's unfortunate because these elements are what constituted most of this short work. The smaller part of the novel was devoted to developing the two main characters, who were both, by the end of the novel fairly well defined.
Where the author had opportunities to explore the humanity of the sub-characters involved, he largely missed out. For the most part, his treatment of the perverse activities and their participants was superficial, despite being graphically descriptive. There were a few instances where he'd flesh out a sub-character and delve a bit, but for the most part, they were cardboard cutouts.
As for the main characters and their arc, he did much better. The main character, Mike, is a somewhat older, insecure but self-assured private dick, with poor luck and few friends. When the book opens, he's very much in a place where things happen to him. By the close, he has progressed to the point where he's exerting more control over his own life.
Trix, his companion, starts the book as a run-of-the-mill enlightened, semi-mystic, street-smart, liberated young woman. Her arc is smaller, leaving her at the end of the novel giving up some of her independence.
If you're a fan of Ellis, you'll undoubtedly enjoy this book, though you may end up wishing for a little less shock and a little more substance. If you're really a fan of Ellis, you may think I'm an idiot. If you're not a fan of Ellis, well... maybe you should pick up a few trades of Transmetropolitan first to get your toes wet.
Warren Ellis is a sick little monkey, and if you're not a fan of sick little monkeys, or of gratuitous (or even appropriate) filth, muck, and depravity, then you might want to think twice before picking this one up. The book is good, but not good enough that you need to subject yourself to it if you're somewhat easily offended.
According to the preface, this book is widely considered a work relating to existentialist philosophy though the author has denied it. I can well see how this comparison is made, as the protagonist appears to be dispassionately self-involved through most of the novel, which at least gives the impression of an existentialist worldview. It seems to me, however that rather than being a study in existentialism, this is a study of a man living mostly disconnected from the people and places he nevertheless enjoys interacting with and trying to understand. He seems to be able to go through the motions of living and pass himself off on some levels as a normal thinking/feeling human being, without the burden of really feeling or caring about anything beyond his own immediate desires.
His “breakdown” at the end of the novel is somewhat revealing, but only somewhat. I have to admit that at the end of the novel, I didn't necessarily “get it,” and felt that while it was an interesting character study, it didn't really enlighten any particular societal, psychological, or philosophical objective.
I often wonder if, in attempting to glean the most from a highly-regarded work, the experience is conscribed in such a way as to make it ultimately futile. Or perhaps I'm just too dense or mired in psychological and philosophical considerations to be open enough to truly benefit.
Why do I feel like I just finished a 359 page novelization of a depressing Seinfeld episode?
I adore the Sherlock Holmes canon, and this has to be the preeminent audio edition. It is splendid from start to finish. I can't imagine a better narrator than Stephen Fry, whose mellifluous voice, and deft use of accent and characterization bring every nuance of these classic stories to vibrant life. Early in the set, I was mesmerized by Stephen Fry's adept voice acting, but in the later chapters I heard only Holmes, Watson, and their supporting characters.
My singular critique is that Fry's default “male American” voice appeared with little variation between the stories which called for it, which left a very minor blemish in the veil of believability in the separateness of the characters. There were variations for other “male American” characters, especially when several appeared in a single story, but this standard voice was uniquely identifiable enough to stand out.
This is a phenomenal achievement, and if you're a Holmes fan I would hold this up—along with the Jeremy Brett television series—as one of the definitive, canonical Holmes collections.
As much as I enjoy Kerouac, especially his esoteric/unconventional approach to poetics, I have enjoyed other collections of his poetry/haiku a little better than this one, which achieved its intention of being a comprehensive overview of his approach to the haiku form at the expense of a lighter/less selective editorial hand that resulted in a somewhat unbalanced, meandering straight-through read. Depending on what you're looking for, this may be a bad or a good thing.
I can generally recommend both Scripture of the Golden Eternity and Pomes All Sizes as being better representations (to my taste, at any rate) of Kerouac as poet and spiritual aspirant.
However, as a late entrant to the Kerouac canon, I do appreciate this volume for its chronological structure and the depth of its insight into Kerouac's pursuit of form.