The Republic is an odd duck to review. Classicists (and more than a few political philosophers) have now for many generations regarded it with an attiThe Republic is an odd duck to review. Classicists (and more than a few political philosophers) have now for many generations regarded it with an attitude approaching holy awe, finding deep intellectual reward in studying its language and even its structure. These persons collectively vacillate between recommending the work as venerable or at least indispensable. Without question it is deeply significant to the history of thought, and has been massively influential on Western culture; in that sense it merits reading.
On the other hand there are those, whom I suspect to be the majority of its readers, it has left cool. Its passages, not threatening enough to inspire a direct response, yet leave them uneasy; or not novel or provocative enough, still seem furcated and immaterial. It fails to fire their imaginations.
Having read The Republic for both middle and grad school, I incline toward the latter crowd. I thought perhaps the years between readings would improve my appreciation; they did, but not wholeheartedly. Plato's vision for social order is fundamentally dystopian and in many respects disturbing. More than a few proposals lack clarity for aims and goals, and its most famous passages all seem best suited to be analogies for subjects other than political organization. I wonder if it did its best work in the age when books were few and common referents for intellectual debate were rare....more
I remembered enjoying this one as a kid, but it doesn't bear older eyes. Hutchens' narrator voice is phenomenal, one of the strongest I've encounteredI remembered enjoying this one as a kid, but it doesn't bear older eyes. Hutchens' narrator voice is phenomenal, one of the strongest I've encountered, and it kept me reading through silly nonsensical plot errors and a tale overwhelmingly punctuated with "directly-at-the-reader" preachiness.
Apart from the voice, the best this book has to offer is a glimpse into "normal life" as Hutchens himself might have known it growing up (early 1900s). Some of the details are jaw-dropping - like deliberately pouring gasoline over the swamps to coat stagnant pools with an oily toxic film to keep mosquitoes from breeding. I get it, but... wow....more
Always goofy, often hilarious, and sometimes magical, Silverstein's illustrated poetry collections are perfect read-alouds for kids and great nostalgiAlways goofy, often hilarious, and sometimes magical, Silverstein's illustrated poetry collections are perfect read-alouds for kids and great nostalgia trips for adults. His best work is so evocative it leaves an outsize imprint on the imagination and prompts scrutiny of everyday absurdities, whether "out there" in the world or "in here" in one's own head.
About half the work in this collection is half as clever as I dimly remembered from childhood, while the other half drops away from memory like a discarded pebble. And even some of those would be (and probably were) a delight to encounter as a child....more
I wasn't much for reading nonfiction voluntarily in my youth. The Problem of Pain was the second installment of Lewis' nonfiction I chose of my own frI wasn't much for reading nonfiction voluntarily in my youth. The Problem of Pain was the second installment of Lewis' nonfiction I chose of my own free will (after The Abolition of Man, only because of the preface to That Hideous Strength) and my first propositional apologetics book by any author. It therefore probably wields outsized influence on my opinions, being formative; but I still think The Problem of Pain is Lewis' best propositional apologetics book (I think his essays are generally stronger than his books), and ranks among the best-in-genre.
Baldly titled, the book considers how to square the obvious realities of human suffering, evil, and moral imperfections in the natural world (including animal suffering), plus the asserted existence of Hell, with the asserted existence of a benevolent divine Creator.
It is not a book designed to comfort readers, nor to provide definitive or authoritative answers to these questions. Rather, it presents well-considered, well-researched, morally- and intellectually-satisfying hypotheses that, if true, resolve the apparent contradiction between Christian belief in the Creator's goodness and our lived reality of the Creation's pain.
If that paradox troubles you, this book may help -- even if you don't find it fully convincing.
This book, and all books of its kind, do their best work by helping us clamber out of the narrow spaces inside our own heads, where shades of error in our education or the solitary spiral of our inner puzzlings can trap us, and into a wider world of hope. I don't mean mere speculation; I mean the realization, which strikes me often, that many thousands of people much smarter than me have considered these problems deeply, and concluded that certain beliefs are reasonable, even after rigorous examination. I may not find all the right answers, but the search is not meaningless; and I am not alone....more
All of the swashbuckling adventure that made Mariel of Redwall so much fun, plus a bit of the moral complexity and friendship-depth that made Outcast All of the swashbuckling adventure that made Mariel of Redwall so much fun, plus a bit of the moral complexity and friendship-depth that made Outcast of Redwall so compelling.
In my opinion, only the first 8 Redwall books published are worth reading. I pressed hopefully on through Lord Brocktree (#13), but after Outcast each new title felt like a rehash of what Jacques had already written. I've no idea if any of the later stories rose to new originalities. ...more
I hover between 2 and 3 stars here. I remember enjoying it with some skepticism, for it seemed to me to be a product of insightful navel-gazing, aspirI hover between 2 and 3 stars here. I remember enjoying it with some skepticism, for it seemed to me to be a product of insightful navel-gazing, aspirational imagination, stylized writing, and a rather severe lack of research. And yet, for better or worse, it hasn't stuck with me at all. I remember almost none of it. I do, however, retain the impression that Eldredge's definition of manhood was quite narrow, and a little obliviously self-referential.
Wild at Heart was, in certain Christian circles, all the rage for several years in the mid- to late- 00's. I suspect, like many "inspirational" books, that it lacked the substance required for staying power. But I'd have to reread it before placing that bet....more
A pseudo-allegory about struggling from provincial superstitions toward rationalism, wrapped up in a highFunny, clever, adventurous, and provocative.
A pseudo-allegory about struggling from provincial superstitions toward rationalism, wrapped up in a highly entertaining and comedic quest/adventure story, that strikes me as unparalleled even with twenty additional years of reading behind me. It's got elements of Asimovian or Clarke-esque sci-fi anthropology, tropes from post-apocalyptic group survival stories, and of course, Pratchett's signature absurdist wit and gift for imparting plausibility where there ought to be none.
Liking Enid Blyton has been unfashionable since long before I was born, due to a combination of deserved criticisms (touches of racism, xseries review
Liking Enid Blyton has been unfashionable since long before I was born, due to a combination of deserved criticisms (touches of racism, xenophobia, and sexism in her stories) and perhaps less-deserved criticism (general moral simplicity; touches of snobbery). They're phenomenally successful commercially - often in lightly revised forms nowadays - but have also very often been banned or censored. In fact they were not available in the U.S. when I was a child; but my mother remembered The Famous Five fondly from her own childhood, and so we collected them, a few at a time, through friends visiting the U.K.
The stories generally feature four children and their dog going on trips and having thrilling adventures during their school holidays. The world the Five inhabit is a kinder, calmer, less populous, and less dangerous version of the real world, where even the criminals are hesitant to harm children: the sort of place in which a group of preternaturally responsible children (and their dog!) can be allowed to take long trips on their own, with little or no adult supervision. It is a wish-world: a perfect setting for children's adventure stories.
As a child, the Five's formative influence led me to conclude that choosing to behave responsibly would be rewarded with increasing freedom and privileges (as in fact it is, both while growing up and as a grown-up). This is moral simplicity of a sort, but a positive kind digestible by youngsters.
As to the genuinely deplorable inclusions - which I little remember but which might well trouble me more if I reread these books now - I feel that Blyton's critics and book-banners may have overlooked the primary moral dilemma of reading. It takes place, not between the protagonists and the other characters or situations within the story, but rather between the reader and the book itself. The moral act of reading consists primarily in discerning, assessing, and either accepting as good or rejecting as bad the attitudes and ideas contained within the book, whether voiced by the hero, the antagonist, a side character, or the narrator. Very young readers need help doing this: they need the exercise modeled for them, so they can go on to beneficially read books on their own.
And the moral act of populating childrens' libraries and reading lists consists of selecting titles that lend themselves to developing readerly discernment: first by telling exciting and engaging stories; second by presenting diverse material, some worthy, some unworthy, of empathy; third, by not explicitly signalling the reader which is which, for that would be true moral simplicity, more apt to stunt a child's moral development than stimulate it....more
Notable for the sheer scope of action and swashbuckling adventure, plus the introduction of Mariel and her father Joseph the Bellmaker. Even separatedNotable for the sheer scope of action and swashbuckling adventure, plus the introduction of Mariel and her father Joseph the Bellmaker. Even separated, believing one another to be dead, their wills to survive and their resourcefulness and ambition to do as much as they can to fight back against evil made this book and its sequel, The Bellmaker, two of Redwall's best installments....more
I owe this book a re-read; I was probably twelve my first time through. I remember it as a book that might now be characterized as "evangelicalism's cI owe this book a re-read; I was probably twelve my first time through. I remember it as a book that might now be characterized as "evangelicalism's counter to mainstream toxic masculinity." Evangelical culture has, of course, its own breeds of toxic masculinity, but if memory serves (I hope it does) you'd find no support for that kind in Weber's book either.
It ought to go without saying (but probably doesn't) that any book which isolates men or women, or compares/contrasts them, in order to propose an ideal model for any gender, is necessarily complementarian, at least implicitly binary, and almost always unconscious of the extent of cultural influence on the author's views.
(Complementarianism: the view that persons of each gender have unique and particular strengths to contribute to any cooperative social unit, rarely so available to persons of another gender; as opposed to Egalitarianism: the view that persons of all genders are potentially fully interchangeable in all social and collaborative respects, except reproduction. And it's really difficult, if not impossible, to address either of the basic assertions "men and women are essentially different", "men and women are the essentially same" in the abstract, because of how deeply and indelibly culture influences gender).
I suspect, however, that there are many ways to be "ideally human," and that people are, so to speak, "kitted out" for a subset of these ideals through a combination of biology, personality, formative experience, and individual aspiration. If so, then books which point to a particular subset of human ideals, like Weber's, are valuable and worthwhile for persons of a particular kit, who need good models to shape the raw material of themselves toward; and only become harmful when touted as a singular ideal with universal application. Books like these are written to serve the mainstream, not the outliers. Whatever their good intentions and good effect on the mainstream may be, they don't - and can't - help outliers determine who they should become. That requires a more nuanced learner - or a more nuanced guide....more
Even reading this as a kid, I could appreciate the Bard's subtlety in dealing with his material. The Merchant of Venice includes, superficially, plentEven reading this as a kid, I could appreciate the Bard's subtlety in dealing with his material. The Merchant of Venice includes, superficially, plenty of the stereotyping that a majority of his audience would have expected, both of religion and ethnicity. Thus placated, the audience would be able to entertain Shakespeare's more nuanced message about the essential humanity of all people. And if that weren't enough, he manages to work in commentary on comparative religion, law and justice, and the ways that people appropriate their beliefs and prejudices to justify their actions and desires. Masterfully done.
It's a credit to the play, as well as an indictment of society, that The Merchant of Venice can still be considered progressive 400 years after it was written....more
Enjoyed the read, but found it disappointing. I'd been looking forward to admiring Edmond Dantes, if not for magnanimity and pardon toward some of thoEnjoyed the read, but found it disappointing. I'd been looking forward to admiring Edmond Dantes, if not for magnanimity and pardon toward some of those that did him wrong, at least for creativity in his vengeance.
Instead, once he recovered the treasure, I found him and his story rather bland. His money made him invulnerable and his enemies toothless. I kept expecting an emotional payoff to reward my investment, but the third act of the story bored me....more
I remember liking it, feeling that Card had made tangible many of the elements of good fantasy that I admired in favorite genre Overdue for a re-read.
I remember liking it, feeling that Card had made tangible many of the elements of good fantasy that I admired in favorite genre books, but couldn't clearly "see" because the authors were too adroit to let readers glimpse the scaffolds....more
Primary school kids have no business reading Shakespeare.
They should absolutely be involved in Shakespeare performances - at minimum, by attending thePrimary school kids have no business reading Shakespeare.
They should absolutely be involved in Shakespeare performances - at minimum, by attending them. But reading the plays, self-guided, without reference to a production?
I was required to read a number of the Bard's plays as a child, with no particulars as to which. I believe Hamlet, Macbeth, A Midsummer Night's Dream, and The Tempest were my first picks. I liked them. I got "the gist". But despite being an avid reader with reasonably strong archaic vocabulary, I simply wasn't capable of appreciating Shakespeare's subtlety. While you could argue that these early readings laid a foundation for future appreciation (and you may be right), I maintain that there are far better ways to introduce students to theater than having them read a script.
P.S. Joseph Pearce's introduction to this critical edition is quite good. Among other fine points, he offers a pretty convincing argument for why the Ghost is not, in fact, the restless spirit of Hamlet's father, but some other woe-worker entirely.
I have not yet read the other included essays....more
DNF. So don't put too much stock in that two-star rating.
Someone gave me this book in my early teens. I tried reading it twice, and both times stoppedDNF. So don't put too much stock in that two-star rating.
Someone gave me this book in my early teens. I tried reading it twice, and both times stopped after the introduction: it seemed to me that Piper had conveyed his complete argument there, and if I kept on reading, all I would uncover was needless elaboration.
When I first heard of the book, its core idea did indeed seem to be as "paradigm-shattering" as its hype and marketing are pleased to proclaim. And in that respect, as the vehicle that popularized a foundational Christian idea which the Calvinist / Puritan / Reformed traditions had under-emphasized almost to the point of total loss, it is a worthy work which has done many people good.
On the other hand, Piper does claim to present, as if for the first time, an insight long-present in Judeo-Christian theology that was hidden in plain sight. But it wasn't hidden at all. Many theologians, poets, psalmists, and devotees of both faiths had written much the same thing. Nor did they consider it particularly wondrous or profound. Perhaps the most striking example appears in C.S. Lewis' Reflections on the Psalms (published ~30 years before Desiring God), in which Lewis makes the exact same observation about the Westminster Catechism and claims that "a moment's thought" will reveal to anyone that worship and enjoyment of God are one and the same.
As I've gotten older and better informed about Christianity, my mind keeps straying back to the Desiring God phenomenon. And I've begun to wonder whether its popularity has less to do with how insightful it is, and more to do with how underexposed and ignorant we of non-liturgical churches have become, through successive generations of tradition-shedding, to the fullness and richness of our theological heritage.
To illustrate that thought with a personal anecdote: I'm pretty sure that despite growing up "churched," the back cover of Desiring God was the first place I encountered an actual quote from the Westminster Catechism....more
Reviewing this book now, in the wake of Harris' renunciation of not only the book, but the religious perspective that inspired it, is in many ways unfReviewing this book now, in the wake of Harris' renunciation of not only the book, but the religious perspective that inspired it, is in many ways unfair. It's been more than twenty years since I read it (the '97 original); at the time, I would have given it 3 stars.
A book occupying I Kissed Dating Goodbye's niche in the late 90s was perhaps inevitable. Casual serial dating and hookup culture had been normalized for two or three decades, with significant support from pop-culture pressure and peer pressure (identifying with a subculture was not yet "okay" even to the extent that it is now). A significant minority of younger Gen Xers and older Millennials - not to mention their parents! - were uncomfortable with rampant dating, and the emotional and psychological trauma it caused many of their classmates made it easy to justify their fears. So a book by a fellow young person that persuasively advocated "responsible romance" was bound to be embraced.
If IKDG had been allowed to stand on its own - if it hadn't been couched within the toxic authoritarian culture of a particularly ill-bred Evangelicalism - if Harris hadn't followed it up with "courtship" advocacy, including the absurd Boy Meets Girl - then perhaps its legacy would have been less damaging.
As it stands, IKDG was: - at best, a well-intended pendulum swung too far; - accepted too-uncritically by those predisposed to agree with its arguments; and - rejected too-uncritically by those predisposed to disagree.
With few exceptions, although it seemed to change many people's opinions, it changed almost no-one's behavior, and saved even fewer from heartache, relational baggage, and abuse.
If memory serves, its great error was repackaging the good advice guard your heart as the bad advice hide your heart, implying that the former means the latter....more
This book anticipated, and may have helped create, the end-of-millennium wave of apocalyptic imagination that the Left Behind series commercialized soThis book anticipated, and may have helped create, the end-of-millennium wave of apocalyptic imagination that the Left Behind series commercialized so spectacularly. Best read as a stand-alone (I read, but did not enjoy and barely remember, the sequels coauthored with Robert Wise).
My head is fuzzy on the details, but as I recall the plot was based on a fairly literal take on Revelations/Apocalypse, and on biblical prophecy in general. I kept the book on my shelf for years because of the Appendix, which included a mind-bending conspiracy-theory-esque reading of the prophetic timeline that seemed, perplexingly, less and less brilliant the older I grew.
On the whole, this book is probably more valuable for its glimpse into the American Evangelical/Fundamentalist mind and the state of popular hermeneutics at the end of the twentieth century than for its story.
I appreciated this book's clear departure from Jacques' typical formulaic Redwall plot, and appreciated even more its foray into moral complexity. ThiI appreciated this book's clear departure from Jacques' typical formulaic Redwall plot, and appreciated even more its foray into moral complexity. This was the first (perhaps it remained the only?) Redwall book which explored the possibility that the "evil" predatory/scavenger species of Redwall's sentient animal world were capable of reform, growth, and transformation. That perhaps their inclination toward vile behavior owed much more to their upbringing within abusive, marauding cultures, or even prejudicial cultures, than it did to their genes.
Moral complexity was badly wanted in Redwall stories up till this point. It is often lacking in high-adventure stories in general, even from books written for older audiences. Bravo to Jacques for taking it on in a middle-grade fantasy novel, and for doing a profoundly good job. Emotions run deep in this story, as characters must decide repeatedly what price is worth paying for true friendship, and work out how to recognize good and evil in their companions. As a child, I cried reading this book.
What I remember appreciating most about Kim was Kipling's use of humor to underscore his characters' awareness of themselves, of their suffering, and What I remember appreciating most about Kim was Kipling's use of humor to underscore his characters' awareness of themselves, of their suffering, and of the imbalance, unease, and ambivalence of their social and political environs. I remember almost nothing about the plot.
I couldn't remember why I couldn't remember anything about this book. So I reread it, & now I do: it's boring. "Nothing much" happens to Henry HugginsI couldn't remember why I couldn't remember anything about this book. So I reread it, & now I do: it's boring. "Nothing much" happens to Henry Huggins before his dog Ribsy shows up, and honestly, nothing much happens afterwards either!
Most episodes (chapters) feature Henry hoping to get out of things he doesn't want to do, like enact a character wearing pajamas in the school play, or working to earn enough money to buy something he wants, like a new football. Henry is driven by a simple sense of decency, envy, peer pressure, and desire for excitement; but these qualities are thoroughly average, and as the book never examines them or forces Henry through any real growth, the story itself remains thoroughly average. Meanwhile, none of the other characters are treated with any depth, nor does Henry (except once, for the space of half a line, in the last chapter) receive any insight into their inner worlds. Finally, the circumstances of Henry's childhood are quite dated - not one most kids could relate to anymore.
This book made me chuckle a few times, but it's not a keeper....more
J. Aleksandr
>
Books:
childhood
(82)
Loading...
