Take a photo of a barcode or cover
calarco's Reviews (760)
True to its title, [b:Interpreting Lgbt History at Museums and Historic Sites|22962376|Interpreting Lgbt History at Museums and Historic Sites|Susan Ferentinos|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1417981440i/22962376._SX50_.jpg|42529193] is a solid resource for historians and museum professionals.
If you have read other books of the Interpreting History series, this one presents a history and social dialogue in the first two-thirds similar to [b:Interpreting Difficult History at Museums and Historic Sites|27782442|Interpreting Difficult History at Museums and Historic Sites|Julia Rose|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1464477476i/27782442._SX50_.jpg|47759419]. While there remains an absence of literature on this topic, this is a good summation of a complex and dynamic history that takes into account the changing notions of sexuality and identity. It also does not stumble into the pitfall of whitewashing this innately dynamic and multi-layered narrative(s). Penned by author Susan Ferentinos, she deserves credit for doing her due diligence.
The final section includes three case studies, taking on a format similar to [b:Interpreting Native American History and Culture at Museums and Historic Sites|22493814|Interpreting Native American History and Culture at Museums and Historic Sites|Raney Bench|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1412528921i/22493814._SX50_.jpg|41939720] and [b:Interpreting African American History and Culture at Museums and Historic Sites|22962374|Interpreting African American History and Culture at Museums and Historic Sites|Max Van Balgooy|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1417411081i/22962374._SX50_.jpg|42529191]. While I would have preferred more case studies, the content presented does offer unique viewpoints.
Overall, I would recommend it.
If you have read other books of the Interpreting History series, this one presents a history and social dialogue in the first two-thirds similar to [b:Interpreting Difficult History at Museums and Historic Sites|27782442|Interpreting Difficult History at Museums and Historic Sites|Julia Rose|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1464477476i/27782442._SX50_.jpg|47759419]. While there remains an absence of literature on this topic, this is a good summation of a complex and dynamic history that takes into account the changing notions of sexuality and identity. It also does not stumble into the pitfall of whitewashing this innately dynamic and multi-layered narrative(s). Penned by author Susan Ferentinos, she deserves credit for doing her due diligence.
The final section includes three case studies, taking on a format similar to [b:Interpreting Native American History and Culture at Museums and Historic Sites|22493814|Interpreting Native American History and Culture at Museums and Historic Sites|Raney Bench|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1412528921i/22493814._SX50_.jpg|41939720] and [b:Interpreting African American History and Culture at Museums and Historic Sites|22962374|Interpreting African American History and Culture at Museums and Historic Sites|Max Van Balgooy|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1417411081i/22962374._SX50_.jpg|42529191]. While I would have preferred more case studies, the content presented does offer unique viewpoints.
Overall, I would recommend it.
First reading the synopsis for [b:Eleanor Oliphant Is Completely Fine|31434883|Eleanor Oliphant Is Completely Fine|Gail Honeyman|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1493724347i/31434883._SY75_.jpg|47327681], a story about three people who, “become the kinds of friends who rescue one another from the lives of isolation they have each been living,” I assumed that this novel would be similar to [b:The Elegance of the Hedgehog|2967752|The Elegance of the Hedgehog|Muriel Barbery|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1347755370i/2967752._SY75_.jpg|1531887]. This was a very incorrect assumption.
Rather, this is a novel specifically about Eleanor Oliphant. I’ll admit with this shift from expectation it did take me a bit longer to get into it at first. That said, once I was able to better grasp the tone, I found Eleanor to be a truly entertaining and funny character. She has a quick wit and wonderfully dry humor, ultimately making for the perfect dark comedy protagonist. She’s great. Raymond and Sammy are (considerably) less fleshed-out as individuals, but make for solid supporting cast.
This book is also an excellent narrative about loneliness. Glimpses of these parts of Eleanor’s inner psyche are some of the most heart-wrenching, and ultimately lend to real moments of authenticity and good storytelling. On the other hand, this book is a truly terrible narrative about mental illness. There is very little I can write without going into spoiler specifics, and while I do believe mental illness can be smartly utilized to craft an interesting unreliable narrator, in this case it was used for a cheap plot twist. Not so great.
By the end, I really liked Eleanor, but I really did not care for the story she was stuck in—if that makes any sense? Overall, I do recommend it, and am curious to see how Reese Witherspoon will produce the source material in an on-screen adaptation, but I do so with a disclaimer.
Rather, this is a novel specifically about Eleanor Oliphant. I’ll admit with this shift from expectation it did take me a bit longer to get into it at first. That said, once I was able to better grasp the tone, I found Eleanor to be a truly entertaining and funny character. She has a quick wit and wonderfully dry humor, ultimately making for the perfect dark comedy protagonist. She’s great. Raymond and Sammy are (considerably) less fleshed-out as individuals, but make for solid supporting cast.
This book is also an excellent narrative about loneliness. Glimpses of these parts of Eleanor’s inner psyche are some of the most heart-wrenching, and ultimately lend to real moments of authenticity and good storytelling. On the other hand, this book is a truly terrible narrative about mental illness. There is very little I can write without going into spoiler specifics, and while I do believe mental illness can be smartly utilized to craft an interesting unreliable narrator, in this case it was used for a cheap plot twist. Not so great.
By the end, I really liked Eleanor, but I really did not care for the story she was stuck in—if that makes any sense? Overall, I do recommend it, and am curious to see how Reese Witherspoon will produce the source material in an on-screen adaptation, but I do so with a disclaimer.
I must confess that I have a guilty pleasure—and that is psyching people out before boasting that I’m too old to feel shame for liking the things I do. Also, I’m a huge fan of The View. In [b:Ladies Who Punch|31450865|Ladies Who Punch|Ramin Setoodeh|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1547491926i/31450865._SY75_.jpg|52153708], Ramin Setoodeh tries his darndest to sum up the twenty-year legacy of one of America’s most iconic (and a times iconoclastic) daytime talk shows. For me it falls flat.
Splitting the book into three equally partitioned arcs, “Barbara’s View,” “Rosie’s View,” and “Whoopi’s View” was an odd choice for one. While Rosie made for memorable moments (fights), she was only really there for 1.5 seasons, not even. True to the book’s title, this beach read focuses more on melodrama and meltdowns rather than detailing how the show was actually impactful over the changing decades. Was some of this entertaining? Yes. But was any of this truly memorable? Not really, no.
It should be stated that Ramin is 100% a fan of the show and his passion is very present as he delves into its history and lore. Also impressive are the number of interviews he conducted to write this book. Sadly, for me at least, this admiration guides Ramin’s spotlight to follow his own interests to the detriment of a better story. This is compounded by the fact that the book is only 300 pages long, which is too short to waste pages on uninteresting nonsense.
For instance, he writes a good chunk about Jenny McCarthy’s (one season) tenure on the show, but barely spares a word for Sunny Hostin. In addition to being on The View for three seasons, Sunny is ABC’s legal expert and has some truly noteworthy insights on the latest headlines…as well as an intense love for her pet chickens. Now THAT is the combo of expertise and weird schlock that makes me a fan of this ridiculous, beautiful show.
Overall, if you are a MAJOR View fan, sure, give the book a go—it is a super quick read. That said, it’s nothing to write home about, and it’s certainly not a Hot Topic.
Splitting the book into three equally partitioned arcs, “Barbara’s View,” “Rosie’s View,” and “Whoopi’s View” was an odd choice for one. While Rosie made for memorable moments (fights), she was only really there for 1.5 seasons, not even. True to the book’s title, this beach read focuses more on melodrama and meltdowns rather than detailing how the show was actually impactful over the changing decades. Was some of this entertaining? Yes. But was any of this truly memorable? Not really, no.
It should be stated that Ramin is 100% a fan of the show and his passion is very present as he delves into its history and lore. Also impressive are the number of interviews he conducted to write this book. Sadly, for me at least, this admiration guides Ramin’s spotlight to follow his own interests to the detriment of a better story. This is compounded by the fact that the book is only 300 pages long, which is too short to waste pages on uninteresting nonsense.
For instance, he writes a good chunk about Jenny McCarthy’s (one season) tenure on the show, but barely spares a word for Sunny Hostin. In addition to being on The View for three seasons, Sunny is ABC’s legal expert and has some truly noteworthy insights on the latest headlines…as well as an intense love for her pet chickens. Now THAT is the combo of expertise and weird schlock that makes me a fan of this ridiculous, beautiful show.
Overall, if you are a MAJOR View fan, sure, give the book a go—it is a super quick read. That said, it’s nothing to write home about, and it’s certainly not a Hot Topic.
Making a well-argued case for macro level socio-economic structural injustice is no small feat. A great lawyer and an even better communicator—Michelle Alexander accomplishes just this in [b:The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness|6792458|The New Jim Crow Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness|Michelle Alexander|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1328751532i/6792458._SX50_.jpg|6996712]. Even if the topic of race makes you uncomfortable, I would still consider this work a must-read if you want to understand the current status quo of the criminal justice system and the war on drugs.
Often when activists push for social change and equality, they look to make the case for a group’s shared merit and humanity by bolstering their most exceptional representatives—so goes the politics of respectability. While this pragmatic approach cannot be fully faulted as it worked for figures like Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. ultimately enabling them to strategically push the needle forward, there are still many left un-championed in this scenario. Humans are innately imperfect, often lacking the luck and resources to truly stand without a single flaw. What of the social under caste, the pariah, the homo sacer—the convict? And who in this system becomes the convicted?
"Whether a kid is perceived as a dangerous drug-dealing thug or instead is viewed as a good kid who was merely experimenting with drugs and selling to a few of his friends has to do with the ways in which information about illegal drug activity is racially defined." (118)
In a country where those on both the left and right boast “colorblindness” (albeit for differing ends) as part of their central messaging, this prevailing principle will innately trickle into policy and law. Alexander argues that under this guise black Americans have been incarcerated at alarmingly high rates—statistics show black people are not more likely to use drugs than white people, yet they are disproportionately arrested for drug offences. History and science would both show that a person’s race does not make them more likely to commit crimes, but it certainly has (and does) make them more likely to be codified by society as a potential criminal.
That said, this increase in incarceration has little to do with increase in crime, and more to do with a changes in policy under the Reagan and Clinton administrations—politicians who were concerned with being “tough” on crime. These "colorblind" policies compounded by the Supreme Court decision on McCleskey v. Kemp makes it virtually impossible for lawyers to challenge racial bias in court, even when they have overwhelming evidence.
"More African American adults are under correctional control today--in prison or jail, on probation or parole--than were enslaved in 1850, a decade before the Civil War began" (180)
Mass incarceration is innately damaging to the communities effected. When someone becomes a criminal, depending on the nature of the conviction, they are left unable to vote, unable to drive, unable to access government services to help lift their families out of poverty, and with limited access to jobs are left very vulnerable. All that is gained is social stigma and shame. This is a situation that would keep not just the convicted caught in a vicious cycle, but all those associated and dependent on that individual as well.
Prisons, many for-profit, are still here to stay even if they function more as facilities of punishment over rehabilitation. They are also a major force behind the justification of gerrymandering certain districts with black and brown bodies (who are unable to vote) counted juxtaposed to predominantly white communities. This reality is chilling especially as it results in all too similar a situation as the Three-Fifths Compromise over 200 years ago.
This content is not for the faint of heart, but Michelle Alexander truly does a great job of detailing how policy and court decisions directly and indirectly impact Americans on a national, societal level. She is also good at making historical connections, while still emphasizing how each system is innately unique—slavery, Jim Crow, and mass incarceration—each a completely different animal. However, if you aren’t afraid to look the beast in the eye, then I implore you to read this book.
Often when activists push for social change and equality, they look to make the case for a group’s shared merit and humanity by bolstering their most exceptional representatives—so goes the politics of respectability. While this pragmatic approach cannot be fully faulted as it worked for figures like Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. ultimately enabling them to strategically push the needle forward, there are still many left un-championed in this scenario. Humans are innately imperfect, often lacking the luck and resources to truly stand without a single flaw. What of the social under caste, the pariah, the homo sacer—the convict? And who in this system becomes the convicted?
"Whether a kid is perceived as a dangerous drug-dealing thug or instead is viewed as a good kid who was merely experimenting with drugs and selling to a few of his friends has to do with the ways in which information about illegal drug activity is racially defined." (118)
In a country where those on both the left and right boast “colorblindness” (albeit for differing ends) as part of their central messaging, this prevailing principle will innately trickle into policy and law. Alexander argues that under this guise black Americans have been incarcerated at alarmingly high rates—statistics show black people are not more likely to use drugs than white people, yet they are disproportionately arrested for drug offences. History and science would both show that a person’s race does not make them more likely to commit crimes, but it certainly has (and does) make them more likely to be codified by society as a potential criminal.
That said, this increase in incarceration has little to do with increase in crime, and more to do with a changes in policy under the Reagan and Clinton administrations—politicians who were concerned with being “tough” on crime. These "colorblind" policies compounded by the Supreme Court decision on McCleskey v. Kemp makes it virtually impossible for lawyers to challenge racial bias in court, even when they have overwhelming evidence.
"More African American adults are under correctional control today--in prison or jail, on probation or parole--than were enslaved in 1850, a decade before the Civil War began" (180)
Mass incarceration is innately damaging to the communities effected. When someone becomes a criminal, depending on the nature of the conviction, they are left unable to vote, unable to drive, unable to access government services to help lift their families out of poverty, and with limited access to jobs are left very vulnerable. All that is gained is social stigma and shame. This is a situation that would keep not just the convicted caught in a vicious cycle, but all those associated and dependent on that individual as well.
Prisons, many for-profit, are still here to stay even if they function more as facilities of punishment over rehabilitation. They are also a major force behind the justification of gerrymandering certain districts with black and brown bodies (who are unable to vote) counted juxtaposed to predominantly white communities. This reality is chilling especially as it results in all too similar a situation as the Three-Fifths Compromise over 200 years ago.
This content is not for the faint of heart, but Michelle Alexander truly does a great job of detailing how policy and court decisions directly and indirectly impact Americans on a national, societal level. She is also good at making historical connections, while still emphasizing how each system is innately unique—slavery, Jim Crow, and mass incarceration—each a completely different animal. However, if you aren’t afraid to look the beast in the eye, then I implore you to read this book.
If you are looking for a well written and fun collection of sci-fi short stories, then right off the bat I would have to recommend The Martian Chronicles.
Admittedly, as I was not a fan of Fahrenheit 451, I was skeptical of diving into another Bradbury volume. This series, however, addressed many of the issues that I had with 451. Even though the short stories essentially have no overarching characters, I thought that the character development was significantly better. Furthermore, the way that these short stories were pieced together to create a narrative history of the human colonization of Mars, was remarkably well executed. World building was on fleek here, even if Bradbury did get some salient points on terraforming laughably wrong (e.g. the use of trees alone to fully revamp the planet's atmosphere to create breathable air, oh boy).
Additionally, a sub-genre I find myself enjoying more and more are speculative sci-fi novels published decades ago. Historically speaking, I feel that a great way to gauge the pulse of a past time period, is to read the types of imagined futures prolific authors of that time period were creating. Bradbury, not as optimistic as Asimov, nor as pessimistic as Philip K. Dick, creates a world that lies within this spectrum. In summation, I would say that the stories of this particular collection shine a light on human hope and strength within an otherwise bleak world.
Perhaps my favorite element of this collection though, is the general spirit and vibe of the stories. They are very reminiscent of classic series like The Twilight Zone and Star Trek: The Original Series, which are two of my favorites. Undoubtedly, these television productions drew inspiration from Bradbury's work.
Overall, this series was great, and I am excited to try more of Bradbury's stuff.
Admittedly, as I was not a fan of Fahrenheit 451, I was skeptical of diving into another Bradbury volume. This series, however, addressed many of the issues that I had with 451. Even though the short stories essentially have no overarching characters, I thought that the character development was significantly better. Furthermore, the way that these short stories were pieced together to create a narrative history of the human colonization of Mars, was remarkably well executed. World building was on fleek here, even if Bradbury did get some salient points on terraforming laughably wrong (e.g. the use of trees alone to fully revamp the planet's atmosphere to create breathable air, oh boy).
Additionally, a sub-genre I find myself enjoying more and more are speculative sci-fi novels published decades ago. Historically speaking, I feel that a great way to gauge the pulse of a past time period, is to read the types of imagined futures prolific authors of that time period were creating. Bradbury, not as optimistic as Asimov, nor as pessimistic as Philip K. Dick, creates a world that lies within this spectrum. In summation, I would say that the stories of this particular collection shine a light on human hope and strength within an otherwise bleak world.
Perhaps my favorite element of this collection though, is the general spirit and vibe of the stories. They are very reminiscent of classic series like The Twilight Zone and Star Trek: The Original Series, which are two of my favorites. Undoubtedly, these television productions drew inspiration from Bradbury's work.
Overall, this series was great, and I am excited to try more of Bradbury's stuff.
If you are looking for a specific brand of children’s book that is simultaneously wholesome, while containing legitimate sci-fi horror elements, then look no further than Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH.
I’ll admit, I recently found myself re-watching Don Bluth’s film adaptation The Secret of NIMH, which peaked my curiosity to seek out the source material. While I first saw this film as an adult, I cannot say that this story evokes much childhood nostalgia for me as it does for the many others who grew up with the brave, widowed Mrs. Frisby and the ingenious, yet secretive rats.
Unraveling as a story within a story, there are a lot of really interesting characters presented who each provide missing pieces for the “secret” storyline, and/or serve to better contextualize the greater world of sentient animals living on the farm. My only critique would be that given the large cast of rodents (and birds) in such a small book, I was given just enough plot cheese to nibble on without ever really feeling full on complete character development.
My nitpicking (of a children’s book) aside, I’m sure the intended audience would still very much enjoy a tale like this. The entirety of my own childhood was filled with talking animals, and this is a truly unique story that any kid (or adult) with such proclivities could appreciate. Long live rat civilization.
I’ll admit, I recently found myself re-watching Don Bluth’s film adaptation The Secret of NIMH, which peaked my curiosity to seek out the source material. While I first saw this film as an adult, I cannot say that this story evokes much childhood nostalgia for me as it does for the many others who grew up with the brave, widowed Mrs. Frisby and the ingenious, yet secretive rats.
Unraveling as a story within a story, there are a lot of really interesting characters presented who each provide missing pieces for the “secret” storyline, and/or serve to better contextualize the greater world of sentient animals living on the farm. My only critique would be that given the large cast of rodents (and birds) in such a small book, I was given just enough plot cheese to nibble on without ever really feeling full on complete character development.
My nitpicking (of a children’s book) aside, I’m sure the intended audience would still very much enjoy a tale like this. The entirety of my own childhood was filled with talking animals, and this is a truly unique story that any kid (or adult) with such proclivities could appreciate. Long live rat civilization.
Whether you may realize it or not, Monticello, the home of Thomas Jefferson, is in itself so ingrained in the American zeitgeist that it is engraved on the back of the nickel coin. If you were to visit Monticello today, historical interpretation focuses on three elements: 1. its famous Founding Father—Thomas Jefferson, 2. how it exists as a structural marvel of architecture, and 3. its significance as a prominent Virginian slave plantation. As the title would indicate, this book focuses on the third theme.
Monticello is one of the most well-documented former slave plantations in the United States. In addition to archaeological excavation and oral history, this book is able to delve into details that few other sites have done so thus far. It must also be noted that Lucia Stanton does not place Thomas Jefferson on any kind of pedestal in regards to slavery. She makes it clear that he is, more or less, a typical slave owner of his time regardless of his personal predilections.
"Although Jefferson was a lifelong enemy of the institution of slavery, he was continually making accommodations to it. His spoken ideals were often in conflict with the realities of his ownership of human property. While he expressed his 'scruples' against selling slaves, he sold over one hundred in his lifetime. He declared his wish to improve the living conditions of his own slaves, but worsening finances prevented him from making significant progress. Although he strove to reduce cruelty and physical punishment on his plantations, his frequent absences in public service left his overseers free to manage labor in the usual harsh manner. He encouraged the formation of stable families within his holdings, but his actions to provide for his relatives or to make his operations more efficient often led to family separation." (105)
Given the use of historic documents, this book mainly focuses on the lives of those who worked in the big house, with a particular focus on the Hemmings and their descendants. It should be noted that this book does not romanticize Jefferson’s relationship with Sally, which is good; I think most would agree that an enslaved teenager is more or less incapable of consent. Focus is also given to the Hemmings’ achievements and agency, including decedents’ involvement in the Civil War.
My one critique would be the absence of information on the enslaved who worked in the fields or were of lower social rank; this would have provided a better scope of Monticello as a plantation. That said, the Hemmings are unique in that they are one of the most historically well-documented enslaved families in America. The focus on this one lineage shinned light on a number of important issues including colorism, ‘passing,’ as well as how the sentiment of ‘anti-slavery’ is not akin to being ‘anti-racist.’
Overall, this is a solid book and I would recommend it if you are interested in the topic. For information on slavery interpretation, I would also recommend [b:Representations of Slavery: Race and Ideology in Southern Plantation Museums|1271545|Representations of Slavery Race and Ideology in Southern Plantation Museums|Jennifer L. Eichstedt|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1320557623l/1271545._SY75_.jpg|1260488], [b:Interpreting Slavery at Museums and Historic Sites|23235537|Interpreting Slavery at Museums and Historic Sites|Kristin L. Gallas|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1417984895l/23235537._SX50_.jpg|42779433], and [b:Shadows of the Slave Past: Memory, Heritage, and Slavery|17803612|Shadows of the Slave Past Memory, Heritage, and Slavery|Ana-Lucia Araujo|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1398028054l/17803612._SY75_.jpg|24905535].
Monticello is one of the most well-documented former slave plantations in the United States. In addition to archaeological excavation and oral history, this book is able to delve into details that few other sites have done so thus far. It must also be noted that Lucia Stanton does not place Thomas Jefferson on any kind of pedestal in regards to slavery. She makes it clear that he is, more or less, a typical slave owner of his time regardless of his personal predilections.
"Although Jefferson was a lifelong enemy of the institution of slavery, he was continually making accommodations to it. His spoken ideals were often in conflict with the realities of his ownership of human property. While he expressed his 'scruples' against selling slaves, he sold over one hundred in his lifetime. He declared his wish to improve the living conditions of his own slaves, but worsening finances prevented him from making significant progress. Although he strove to reduce cruelty and physical punishment on his plantations, his frequent absences in public service left his overseers free to manage labor in the usual harsh manner. He encouraged the formation of stable families within his holdings, but his actions to provide for his relatives or to make his operations more efficient often led to family separation." (105)
Given the use of historic documents, this book mainly focuses on the lives of those who worked in the big house, with a particular focus on the Hemmings and their descendants. It should be noted that this book does not romanticize Jefferson’s relationship with Sally, which is good; I think most would agree that an enslaved teenager is more or less incapable of consent. Focus is also given to the Hemmings’ achievements and agency, including decedents’ involvement in the Civil War.
My one critique would be the absence of information on the enslaved who worked in the fields or were of lower social rank; this would have provided a better scope of Monticello as a plantation. That said, the Hemmings are unique in that they are one of the most historically well-documented enslaved families in America. The focus on this one lineage shinned light on a number of important issues including colorism, ‘passing,’ as well as how the sentiment of ‘anti-slavery’ is not akin to being ‘anti-racist.’
Overall, this is a solid book and I would recommend it if you are interested in the topic. For information on slavery interpretation, I would also recommend [b:Representations of Slavery: Race and Ideology in Southern Plantation Museums|1271545|Representations of Slavery Race and Ideology in Southern Plantation Museums|Jennifer L. Eichstedt|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1320557623l/1271545._SY75_.jpg|1260488], [b:Interpreting Slavery at Museums and Historic Sites|23235537|Interpreting Slavery at Museums and Historic Sites|Kristin L. Gallas|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1417984895l/23235537._SX50_.jpg|42779433], and [b:Shadows of the Slave Past: Memory, Heritage, and Slavery|17803612|Shadows of the Slave Past Memory, Heritage, and Slavery|Ana-Lucia Araujo|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1398028054l/17803612._SY75_.jpg|24905535].
Nnedi Okorafor created a truly intriguing and absorbing universe with [b:Binti|25667918|Binti (Binti, #1)|Nnedi Okorafor|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1433804020l/25667918._SY75_.jpg|45491127]. Though [b:The Night Masquerade|34386617|The Night Masquerade (Binti, #3)|Nnedi Okorafor|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1495725402l/34386617._SY75_.jpg|55477512] may not be as strong as its predecessors, it still successfully ties together Binti’s coming of age arc while expanding the fun world-building elements of the previous series entries.
Picking up where the chaos of [b:Home|30038654|Home (Binti, #2)|Nnedi Okorafor|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1470413227l/30038654._SY75_.jpg|50442846] left off, Binti finds herself grasping to navigate a quickly escalating conflict. This all transpires while she grapples with her ever changing identity—psychologically, culturally, ethnically, and even the matter of her species is in flux. I do wish that some of these loose strands of her character development, as well as some of the more predictable plot elements, were better developed. That said, by the novel’s end I was still very much invested in the characters and wanted everyone to be okay.
Whether they are (okay) or not, you will have to finish the series to find out.
Picking up where the chaos of [b:Home|30038654|Home (Binti, #2)|Nnedi Okorafor|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1470413227l/30038654._SY75_.jpg|50442846] left off, Binti finds herself grasping to navigate a quickly escalating conflict. This all transpires while she grapples with her ever changing identity—psychologically, culturally, ethnically, and even the matter of her species is in flux. I do wish that some of these loose strands of her character development, as well as some of the more predictable plot elements, were better developed. That said, by the novel’s end I was still very much invested in the characters and wanted everyone to be okay.
Whether they are (okay) or not, you will have to finish the series to find out.
If there is one topic of discussion that makes people more uncomfortable than prejudice, it's privilege. Both elements constitute opposite sides of the same injustice, so to only speak of one would leave the conversation woefully incomplete. In his thematic memoir, [b:White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son|88362|White Like Me Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son|Tim Wise|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1328690631l/88362._SY75_.jpg|1082257], Tim Wise details the self-reflection of his own white privilege in an accessible and personal account.
While good, I do not rate this book higher for two reasons. First, as the concepts of this book are extracted wholly from Tim's personal exploration, I do feel that there are elements of privilege theory that were left underdeveloped. There is an absence of literature on the subject, but the lack of a bibliography was still nonetheless disappointing. Second, Frances E. Kendall wrote a better book on this topic, [b:Understanding White Privilege: Creating Pathways to Authentic Relationships Across Race|929327|Understanding White Privilege Creating Pathways to Authentic Relationships Across Race|Frances E. Kendall|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1347620704l/929327._SY75_.jpg|914320], that I feel better tackles the subject-matter, especially when it comes to different levels of privilege and how they interplay.
That said, Tim's personal account is worth reading. There is something moving about a person honestly detailing how they were wrong about something important, even if it paints a deeply unflattering image, and then how they learned from their mistakes and moved to do better. Furthermore, as many of these examples of Tim's privilege are presented through his own prominent memories of eureka moments in which he erred, he does do a good job of showing how even well-meaning people can unwittingly contribute to societal problems.
"...we mustn't romanticize our resistance, but fight to maintain its presence in our lives, knowing that it could easily vanish in a moment of weakness, anger, insecurity, or fear... it is because we spend so much of our time in that other place--a place of diminished capacity and wavering commitment--that we have to be careful" (92)
Also good, is his approach to being an ally. Pointing out your privilege should be neither an outward accusation (unless it has to be, and sometimes it really does) nor an uncouth call for personal self-aggrandizement to show what a "good" person you are--it should be just stating basic reality. Truth-telling is the bare minimum for being a decent person, and acknowledging racial privilege does not belittle other types of personal struggle (e.g., gender, sexuality, nationality, mental health, poverty, etc.). Tim does a good job of explaining how his white privilege benefited and protected him from poor choices, while others making the same mistakes would have faced far more serious consequences.
Overall, this is a pretty solid book and it's worth reading, though I would recommend the Kendall volume first.
While good, I do not rate this book higher for two reasons. First, as the concepts of this book are extracted wholly from Tim's personal exploration, I do feel that there are elements of privilege theory that were left underdeveloped. There is an absence of literature on the subject, but the lack of a bibliography was still nonetheless disappointing. Second, Frances E. Kendall wrote a better book on this topic, [b:Understanding White Privilege: Creating Pathways to Authentic Relationships Across Race|929327|Understanding White Privilege Creating Pathways to Authentic Relationships Across Race|Frances E. Kendall|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1347620704l/929327._SY75_.jpg|914320], that I feel better tackles the subject-matter, especially when it comes to different levels of privilege and how they interplay.
That said, Tim's personal account is worth reading. There is something moving about a person honestly detailing how they were wrong about something important, even if it paints a deeply unflattering image, and then how they learned from their mistakes and moved to do better. Furthermore, as many of these examples of Tim's privilege are presented through his own prominent memories of eureka moments in which he erred, he does do a good job of showing how even well-meaning people can unwittingly contribute to societal problems.
"...we mustn't romanticize our resistance, but fight to maintain its presence in our lives, knowing that it could easily vanish in a moment of weakness, anger, insecurity, or fear... it is because we spend so much of our time in that other place--a place of diminished capacity and wavering commitment--that we have to be careful" (92)
Also good, is his approach to being an ally. Pointing out your privilege should be neither an outward accusation (unless it has to be, and sometimes it really does) nor an uncouth call for personal self-aggrandizement to show what a "good" person you are--it should be just stating basic reality. Truth-telling is the bare minimum for being a decent person, and acknowledging racial privilege does not belittle other types of personal struggle (e.g., gender, sexuality, nationality, mental health, poverty, etc.). Tim does a good job of explaining how his white privilege benefited and protected him from poor choices, while others making the same mistakes would have faced far more serious consequences.
Overall, this is a pretty solid book and it's worth reading, though I would recommend the Kendall volume first.
Once when I was coming home late, I found myself stuck on a subway car with an angry drunk girl. She had very clearly just left a heated debate that she had not mentally checked out of and began to belligerently monologue aloud this bizarre helicopter argument of how everything she ever did was right and how everyone who ever disagreed with her was wrong. At some point amidst the verbal vomit she literally threw up--needless to say this was uncomfortable. This is the closest lived experience I've had that I could comparably equate to reading Ayn Rand's [b:Atlas Shrugged|662|Atlas Shrugged|Ayn Rand|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1405868167l/662._SY75_.jpg|817219].
To sum up Atlas Shrugged, it is a tale that centers on wealthy industrialists trying to run their businesses while an increasingly totalitarian communist-esque government takes hold of the country. These "great thinkers" are likened to Greek mythological heroes. One of them, John Galt, becomes fed up with the "looters" and the "moochers" of the world exploiting his great mind, sucking his vitality dry, so he leads a strike of like-minded individuals to abscond from society. They "shrug" and the world falls to chaos.
It's a pretty bad book. I'll post the rest of a proper review at a later date; it's been more painful than cathartic to write this one...
To sum up Atlas Shrugged, it is a tale that centers on wealthy industrialists trying to run their businesses while an increasingly totalitarian communist-esque government takes hold of the country. These "great thinkers" are likened to Greek mythological heroes. One of them, John Galt, becomes fed up with the "looters" and the "moochers" of the world exploiting his great mind, sucking his vitality dry, so he leads a strike of like-minded individuals to abscond from society. They "shrug" and the world falls to chaos.
It's a pretty bad book. I'll post the rest of a proper review at a later date; it's been more painful than cathartic to write this one...