Erik

Chang scores a horrifying depiction of the atrocities committed upon the people of Nanking by the Japanese in your gray matter. Many of the facts in this book are still left out of Japanese teachings. It's an incredibly sad tale, but it shows that people from all walks of life can unite under one roof when complete inhumanity runs rampant.

Not a huge fan of the style. It's just a bit too cartoon for my taste - would make a great anime. It's action-packed and rather techie, but I would have preferred if it was a bit heavier on the tech and a lot less heavy on action. Stephenson delivers this rather well with some of his other work, such as the Cryptonomicon.

First of all, I wouldn't recommend this to the average person. It's a very long read (I'm only half-way through it), and it has a lot to do with Alan Turing and the revolutionary work he was doing with the Enigma machine during WWII. It also has about 4 subplots which, as far as I have gotten, haven't really crossed paths completely yet. The jumping around between the plots made me lose some interest, but I have a feeling this complexity will be rewarding in the end. It's also a very long read. But, if you're interested in the subject matter, the first few pages will hook you.

This was a good (but long) read. I liked Dostoevsky's Brother's Karamazov better, but this one had its own twists and turns that made for a fun adventure. You don't really know until the very end what's going to happen, so it keeps you reading. I don't want to ruin any of it, but if you're up for a bit of a read in Dostoevsky's style, go for it.

The only things that really bother me about this style are the names, and the lack of place names throughout the text (X. prospect? V. Prospect? Come on!). Everyone has 2 names that are used interchangeably - for instance, the main character is Rodion Romanovich and Raskolnikov. All the names are similar too - there's an Ilya Petrovich and a Pyotr Petrovich in the book. This is just how Russia was, though, so it's OK. Just make sure to pay attention to who is who.

I enjoyed the pre-communist political discourse that's sprinkled throughout the book - particularly the first interview with Porfiry. I'll have to find a non-fiction source that elaborates the different political factions of the time and place someday.

This was a very interesting read about Ayn Rand. Basically biographical, Jennifer Burns does a nice job of remaining extremely unbiased and non-judgmental throughout the book. I found the book to be rather readable. I hadn't before realized how intriguing and turbulent her life was, and though I heard she had become a bit crazy towards the end of her life, I didn't realize the extent, and the book filled in the details nicely.

This book, necessarily, also details the birth of the libertarian/anarchist movement of the 1960's, which I found more interesting than Rand herself. The interactions between the Conservative movement and the libertarian “hippies” were quite enjoyable - especially the draft card burning.

Her behavior towards the end of her life makes me want to read her works concerning intellectual property, which seemed to be a major difference between her and many anarchists of the time, who she accused of stealing her ideas. Since most of her work is derivative of previous philosophers, I wonder what her criteria were for using their ideas in her own dogma. Does an author have to be dead in order to use their works freely, or at least offer their ideas up to the public domain specifically?

I also enjoyed learning about Rand's personal political beliefs, like her pro-choice stance, opposition to the feminist movement, and opposition to the draft. The beliefs that clearly distinguished her from the conservative right were at many times stark.

Overall, a great book for anyone wanting to investigate the roots of Objectivism and Ayn Rand.

A very invigorating tale of some very odd people - people who make up a new being. By themselves, each piece of the being is special, and has some sort of power, yet together they are capable of anything.

I really enjoyed this book. It starts out really oddly, and it's hard to keep track of all the characters and the time changes (the story spans 20 years or so). Most of the book keeps you on the edge of your seat. The entire last section is a mystery, as you watch a previously insane man regain his memory.

The writing style was interesting. I didn't like the whole “so it goes” refrain throughout the book. This was an odd one because it's so insane. It's like hearing the thoughts of a crackpot for hours on end. I guess some people are into that since this book is so highly rated, but it wasn't all that rewarding to me. The Dresden bombings killed around 25,000 people, where Vonnegut writes of 135,000 dead. Perhaps that should be revised to reflect reality, but obviously that would be a bit odd posthumously, and the book's comparison with Hiroshima and Nagasaki wouldn't hold up as well, since both were more deadly than the modern estimates of Dresden's bombing, so that would all have to be removed/rewritten.

The “war is hell” message is very clear, and this book presents that rather well when it can stay on topic (not talking about aliens) for a few pages. The whole alien bit I thought was very scarce on detail, barely qualifying as sci-fi at all. It's interesting to think about creatures who can peek at any point in time, and who have proof that fate is real, but there's not really any good description of them in the book, and the interactions with them are mostly just as viewers of the human zoo.

I can't help but think that I completely missed the point here, and maybe reading this in more of a group context would help with that, but for now, I don't get it.

This book is pretty damn good. I started reading an earlier translation, and was able to compare and contrast with this edition quite a bit, and let me tell you, this edition won awards for a reason. It's a little heavy, and it might put you to sleep, but it's worth it as it's a classic tale with a plot that has very few parallels. There are a lot of characters, but it's not too hard to keep straight. I read it as part of a class so we had in-class discussion and quizzes, which made it easier to keep the story straight and to get as much as possible out of it.

I finally finished it. This was a very good book. Her philosophy, Objectivism, is pretty close to what I believe. The story is very intriguing, and even had me a little teary-eyed in some places. Her imagery is wonderful. It is a complete and utter romance with lassez-faire capitalism, with an extremely verbose brain-dump around page 900 that takes quite a while to absorb.

The book is basically a warning to those who wish to be free from the bonds of others. One should be able to live one's life without depending on his betters nor funding his lessers. While the book depicts an extreme failure of the political system, with an extreme economic failure following, it is not too far from what has happened in Russia and many South American countries. Bad investments should not be made on the basis of ‘need,' but rather on the basis of ability and viability, which directly corresponds to credit, which should never be issued to those who are unable to live up to the terms. Businesses should never be run by the government, and economies should never be planned.

Any believer in personal responsibility should read this book.