Take a photo of a barcode or cover
calarco's Reviews (760)
Well, I think it’s safe to say I have never read anything quite like Serra Elinsen’s [b:Awoken|18244295|Awoken|Serra Elinsen|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1377395691l/18244295._SY75_.jpg|25693030]. While this is a story about a teenage girl who falls in love with Cthulhu, I would consider this more-so a parody/critique of 2010’s popular YA paranormal romance than one of H.P. Lovecraft’s work. Wow, was this a trip.
The story centers on (the very casually named) Andromeda Slate—Andi for short. She’s an especially obnoxious teenage girl who is more or less unable to see beyond her own feelings, typically to the detriment of her friends and family around her. Andi’s favorite book is [b:The Phantom of the Opera|480204|The Phantom of the Opera|Gaston Leroux|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1327867727l/480204._SY75_.jpg|2259720] and it is referenced A LOT; Serra Elinsen thanks Andrew Lloyd Weber as the “author” in her final author's note, so that should give you an idea for how accurately she nails Lovecraftian lore. Anyway, Andi meets a mysterious Riley who stares creepily at her, refers to her as “puny one,” and inexplicably drives his enemies insane. So, you know, Andi falls incessantly and madly in love. Where others would see red flags, Andi just sees ”beautiful insanity,” because “love” is just that powerful.
And it’s all a hoax.
Now that it’s 2019, I think it’s safe to just put out there that Serra Elinsen was the drunken brain child of Lindsay Ellis (a youtube essayist I highly recommend), Nella Inserra, Elisa Hansen, and five ghost writers. You can actually see how this project came together in the web series Booze Your Own Adventure, where the audience helped the hosts pick the most obscene choices possible to create the funniest YA stealth parody 2013 had ever seen.
Hands down, this book is stupid funny, like, the kind of laughter that hurts your stomach. That said, because this is a parody of the YA paranormal romance genre, there were many elements of said genre present that was genuinely grating. The (beautiful) crack team that wrote this were a little too on the nose at times. That said, even though I enjoyed the story of how the book was made more than the book itself, I would still definitely recommend it if meta nonsense is up your alley.
The story centers on (the very casually named) Andromeda Slate—Andi for short. She’s an especially obnoxious teenage girl who is more or less unable to see beyond her own feelings, typically to the detriment of her friends and family around her. Andi’s favorite book is [b:The Phantom of the Opera|480204|The Phantom of the Opera|Gaston Leroux|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1327867727l/480204._SY75_.jpg|2259720] and it is referenced A LOT; Serra Elinsen thanks Andrew Lloyd Weber as the “author” in her final author's note, so that should give you an idea for how accurately she nails Lovecraftian lore. Anyway, Andi meets a mysterious Riley who stares creepily at her, refers to her as “puny one,” and inexplicably drives his enemies insane. So, you know, Andi falls incessantly and madly in love. Where others would see red flags, Andi just sees ”beautiful insanity,” because “love” is just that powerful.
And it’s all a hoax.
Now that it’s 2019, I think it’s safe to just put out there that Serra Elinsen was the drunken brain child of Lindsay Ellis (a youtube essayist I highly recommend), Nella Inserra, Elisa Hansen, and five ghost writers. You can actually see how this project came together in the web series Booze Your Own Adventure, where the audience helped the hosts pick the most obscene choices possible to create the funniest YA stealth parody 2013 had ever seen.
Hands down, this book is stupid funny, like, the kind of laughter that hurts your stomach. That said, because this is a parody of the YA paranormal romance genre, there were many elements of said genre present that was genuinely grating. The (beautiful) crack team that wrote this were a little too on the nose at times. That said, even though I enjoyed the story of how the book was made more than the book itself, I would still definitely recommend it if meta nonsense is up your alley.
Neil Gaiman is a truly talented story teller with a unique narrative voice. He has a real talent for mythologically inspired stories, as seen with [b:American Gods|30165203|American Gods (American Gods, #1)|Neil Gaiman|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1462924585l/30165203._SY75_.jpg|1970226] and [b:Anansi Boys|2744|Anansi Boys|Neil Gaiman|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1479778049l/2744._SY75_.jpg|1007964]. In this volume, [b:Norse Mythology|37903770|Norse Mythology|Neil Gaiman|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1516128292l/37903770._SX50_.jpg|51396954], Gaiman gives his version of the wacky adventures of Odin, Thor, Loki, Freya, and crew. It’s a pretty solid read.
Even though I grew up in a small town literally named Valhalla, I’d be lying if I said I knew much (if anything) about Norse mythology other than what has now popped into the zeitgeist thanks to the Marvel cinematic universe. Gaiman’s take is tonally similar in that the silly elements are highlighted, but he definitely tells these tales in a way that’s respectful to the source material, and makes me want to learn even more about the Norse pantheon. I liked it so much, not even Ragnarök dampened my mood.
Rating: 3.5 stars
Even though I grew up in a small town literally named Valhalla, I’d be lying if I said I knew much (if anything) about Norse mythology other than what has now popped into the zeitgeist thanks to the Marvel cinematic universe. Gaiman’s take is tonally similar in that the silly elements are highlighted, but he definitely tells these tales in a way that’s respectful to the source material, and makes me want to learn even more about the Norse pantheon. I liked it so much, not even Ragnarök dampened my mood.
Rating: 3.5 stars
I first read [b:Beowulf|52357|Beowulf|Unknown|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1327878125l/52357._SY75_.jpg|189503] in 9th grade and if I’m being honest, I did not care for it one bit at the time. Now, more than half my lifetime later, on a whim I once again picked up Seamus Heaney’s translation, and I liked it—I really liked it. This is an amazing monster fantasy filled with dragons, demons, and even a demon’s mom. It’s pretty metal business.
In keeping with transparency, if I were to reflect on my change of heart, it would be for two reasons. First, my literary comprehension has improved significantly and I actually understood what was happening during this read-through. Second, and perhaps more importantly, I have since read work by Tolkien who was very obviously influenced by this epic poem (I have also now learned that Tolkien studied and taught Beowulf as a professor of Anglo-Saxon literature at Oxford University, which makes outrageous amounts of sense).
At its core, Beowulf is a rich text that really brings this ancient world filled with fantastic biblical elements to life (the cool weird parts). Quite pronounced are the how the different earthly elements of air (Grendel), water (Grendel’s mom), and fire (the dragon) present themselves as Beowulf’s adversaries. Also important in this tale is the underlying message, for while the fights are pretty cool, power for power’s sake is far from the point.
“…Do not give way to pride.
For a brief while your strength is in bloom
but it fades quickly; and soon there will follow
illness or the sword to lay you low,
or a sudden fire or surge of water
or jabbing blade or javelin from the air
of repellent age. Your piercing eye
will dim and darken; and death will arrive,
dead warrior, to sweep you away.”
I had a lot of fun (re)reading this; it is a real treat and I highly recommend it, especially if you love a good monster fight or immersive fantasy world.
In keeping with transparency, if I were to reflect on my change of heart, it would be for two reasons. First, my literary comprehension has improved significantly and I actually understood what was happening during this read-through. Second, and perhaps more importantly, I have since read work by Tolkien who was very obviously influenced by this epic poem (I have also now learned that Tolkien studied and taught Beowulf as a professor of Anglo-Saxon literature at Oxford University, which makes outrageous amounts of sense).
At its core, Beowulf is a rich text that really brings this ancient world filled with fantastic biblical elements to life (the cool weird parts). Quite pronounced are the how the different earthly elements of air (Grendel), water (Grendel’s mom), and fire (the dragon) present themselves as Beowulf’s adversaries. Also important in this tale is the underlying message, for while the fights are pretty cool, power for power’s sake is far from the point.
“…Do not give way to pride.
For a brief while your strength is in bloom
but it fades quickly; and soon there will follow
illness or the sword to lay you low,
or a sudden fire or surge of water
or jabbing blade or javelin from the air
of repellent age. Your piercing eye
will dim and darken; and death will arrive,
dead warrior, to sweep you away.”
I had a lot of fun (re)reading this; it is a real treat and I highly recommend it, especially if you love a good monster fight or immersive fantasy world.
Perhaps the most important work I’ve read all year, The Mueller Report is a sobering account that I would recommend to any voting-aged American. Divided into two volumes, this comprehensive report examines Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, as well as obstruction of justice committed by individuals related to the Trump campaign and presidency.
Reading and assessing a federal document is no simple task for most anyone in the general public. To best understand the report’s contents, I chose The Washington Post’s edition as it also included a detailed list of the players involved, a cohesive timeline, a glossary of legal terms, as well as other official documents with guidance on how they related to the Mueller Report. The Post’s guidance served well to contextualize, rather than editorialize, keeping in the spirit of Robert Mueller’s intention.
Volume I:
While I had seen the headlines on reports from U.S. intelligence agencies stating that the Russians interfered in the 2016 election, it was quite chilling to learn about the specifics, at least in the cases explored by the Special Counsel. Notable were the efforts of the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian organization that has since been charged. The IRA mainly orchestrated a social media campaign, posing as American individuals to spread pro-Trump and anti-Hillary memes and groups. I hate to admit it, but I saw people I know post some of their generated anti-Hillary content on my own social media feed. They were horrifically effective.
Most daunting was how the IRA would pose as pro-Trump individuals to generate buzz for rallies, and then ask an actual American to host as they would not be present themselves. To perpetrate some of these activities, members of the IRA acquired American bank accounts under false identities for the sake of making payments for these purposes. A great deal of the early pro-Trump frenzy appeared grassroots oriented, and even if this report shows much of the blatant hate was artificially generated by a foreign agent, I can’t even say I’m happy given the outcome.
The other main case evaluated in Volume I was how the Russian federation's main intelligence directorate of the general staff (GRU) hacked members of the Clinton campaign. These were direct efforts taken by members of the Russian government, following Trump’s on air statement, “Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” Trump never sat down to speak with the Special Counsel, but in his (aka: his lawyers’) written response, he affirmed that he made the statement, “in jest and sarcastically.” That said, the operatives of GRU did not get the joke, but I digress.
At the conclusion of this volume, no one affiliated with the Trump campaign was charged with committing illegal conspiracy or coordination with the Russians. While many in the media claimed this was a win for the country and that all should be happy the President did not outright commit treason, I feel this public claim to be a bit of a stretch (also, a really low bar—the lowest bar). Members of the Trump campaign (specifically Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner) were certainly guilty of wanting to commit a crime, but they were not charged due to difficulty of “proving willfulness” and in “valuing promised information.” Essentially, they were not charged because they were too incompetent to follow through on their intended crime, which was further compounded by the vagueness of their comprehension. Even if the Trumps never successfully “colluded,” the fact that it was stupidity that prevented the treason is in no way a win for the country.
What I was left wanting with this section, was more information on Trump and his business’ history of financial relationships with Russian entities. Given how fast and loose the president and his family plays with the Emoluments Clause, especially with promoting and favoring Trump hotels when conducting foreign business and travel, I feel that perhaps some of the redacted areas under “Harm to Ongoing Matter” may relate to this shadier element of the president’s personal conduct. But that’s a bombshell for another day.
Volume II
It is Volume II that contains the hottest tea (as the kids say) and most damning evidence against numerous members of Trump’s inner circle, including the president himself. In cases of white-collar crime, federal prosecutors rarely ask questions they do not already have the answers to. Why so many thought they could lie under oath is beyond me, especially folks with legal backgrounds and “expertise.” Stupidity and greed coalesce quite a bit in this one.
This section details the President’s conduct in the Michael Flynn investigation, the President’s firing of FBI Director James Comey, the President’s efforts to remove and/or impede the investigatory efforts of the Special Counsel, the President’s efforts to prevent information on the Trump Tower meeting from “leaking,” the President's desire for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reverse his recusal (followed by bullying him into resigning), as well as the President’s conduct involving Michael Cohen (this is the section that indirectly involves Stormy Daniels). Overall, my takeaways from this was that Trump oversees a remarkably toxic work environment (though it is hard to feel bad for the shady figures who chose to associate with him), and that he really, truly has no understanding of the Constitution or law in general. That, or he simply does not care. Most damning though, is Robert Mueller’s final conclusion:
“Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgement, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intents presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgement. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgement. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
This conclusion may seem a bit perplexing at first—Why wouldn’t you charge someone so clearly guilty?—but the assessment makes perfect sense in context when you understand that the Department of Justice (DOJ) falls under the federal executive branch of government. For a subset of the executive branch to pass a legal judgement on the head of the executive branch (aka: the President), they would inadvertently impede the President’s ability to lead and preempt the constitutional process for addressing presidential misconduct. In part, this dates back to a 2000 memo issued by the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) that a sitting President cannot be federally indicted.
More so, as outlined in the Constitution, the way to address presidential misconduct would be through impeachment proceedings instigated by Congress (the legislative branch)—so goes governmental checks and balances. The fact the Mueller clearly states that after their lengthy investigation, he was unable to exonerate the President (something the President would later blatantly lie about to the press and on Twitter), clearly shows that Congress has a Constitutional obligation to start impeachment hearings, at least in theory.
Will this actually happen? Well, no. I can definitely see why the more liberal freshman Congresspeople want to move on impeachment hearings, but I also understand Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s reasoning for choosing not to follow through. Even if the House (which currently has a Democratic majority) were to impeach the president, for him to be voted out of the office of president would require a 67% majority vote from the Senate, which is not going to happen because they have a Republican majority. Furthermore, partisan voting could create the visage of perceived innocence, which could hinder legal procedures taken against President Trump once he is out of office.
For anyone interested in learning more, Vox made a really thorough educational video on Impeachment and its history in the United States, as well as why no President has ever been removed from office by Impeachment. I know this was the dream for many in anticipation of this report’s release, and the outcome was not what most desired. Even if Congress does not act, the American voter certainly has an obligation to act come the general election in 2020. At the end of the day, the Special Counsel’s investigation led to 34 people being charged with crimes—26 Russian nationals, 1 Dutch National, and 7 U.S. Nationals (including Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn, Richard Pinedo, George Papadopoulos, Roger Stone, and Michael Cohen)—this reality is more than significant.
In conclusion, if you have an interest in this report—definitely read it. Even if you don’t, you could still get a copy to listen to on audiobook for free from your library—just throwing that out there. Rating such a document seems ridiculous, but I settled on 4 stars as there was a great deal of information redacted as “Harm to Ongoing Matter,” “Investigative Technique,” or “Grand Jury.” I would LOVE to know what these sections state and infer, though what we have for now is quite damning all on its own in my humble opinion. Either way, I have never felt more ready to vote come 2020, and I hope you do too.
Reading and assessing a federal document is no simple task for most anyone in the general public. To best understand the report’s contents, I chose The Washington Post’s edition as it also included a detailed list of the players involved, a cohesive timeline, a glossary of legal terms, as well as other official documents with guidance on how they related to the Mueller Report. The Post’s guidance served well to contextualize, rather than editorialize, keeping in the spirit of Robert Mueller’s intention.
Volume I:
While I had seen the headlines on reports from U.S. intelligence agencies stating that the Russians interfered in the 2016 election, it was quite chilling to learn about the specifics, at least in the cases explored by the Special Counsel. Notable were the efforts of the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian organization that has since been charged. The IRA mainly orchestrated a social media campaign, posing as American individuals to spread pro-Trump and anti-Hillary memes and groups. I hate to admit it, but I saw people I know post some of their generated anti-Hillary content on my own social media feed. They were horrifically effective.
Most daunting was how the IRA would pose as pro-Trump individuals to generate buzz for rallies, and then ask an actual American to host as they would not be present themselves. To perpetrate some of these activities, members of the IRA acquired American bank accounts under false identities for the sake of making payments for these purposes. A great deal of the early pro-Trump frenzy appeared grassroots oriented, and even if this report shows much of the blatant hate was artificially generated by a foreign agent, I can’t even say I’m happy given the outcome.
The other main case evaluated in Volume I was how the Russian federation's main intelligence directorate of the general staff (GRU) hacked members of the Clinton campaign. These were direct efforts taken by members of the Russian government, following Trump’s on air statement, “Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” Trump never sat down to speak with the Special Counsel, but in his (aka: his lawyers’) written response, he affirmed that he made the statement, “in jest and sarcastically.” That said, the operatives of GRU did not get the joke, but I digress.
At the conclusion of this volume, no one affiliated with the Trump campaign was charged with committing illegal conspiracy or coordination with the Russians. While many in the media claimed this was a win for the country and that all should be happy the President did not outright commit treason, I feel this public claim to be a bit of a stretch (also, a really low bar—the lowest bar). Members of the Trump campaign (specifically Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner) were certainly guilty of wanting to commit a crime, but they were not charged due to difficulty of “proving willfulness” and in “valuing promised information.” Essentially, they were not charged because they were too incompetent to follow through on their intended crime, which was further compounded by the vagueness of their comprehension. Even if the Trumps never successfully “colluded,” the fact that it was stupidity that prevented the treason is in no way a win for the country.
What I was left wanting with this section, was more information on Trump and his business’ history of financial relationships with Russian entities. Given how fast and loose the president and his family plays with the Emoluments Clause, especially with promoting and favoring Trump hotels when conducting foreign business and travel, I feel that perhaps some of the redacted areas under “Harm to Ongoing Matter” may relate to this shadier element of the president’s personal conduct. But that’s a bombshell for another day.
Volume II
It is Volume II that contains the hottest tea (as the kids say) and most damning evidence against numerous members of Trump’s inner circle, including the president himself. In cases of white-collar crime, federal prosecutors rarely ask questions they do not already have the answers to. Why so many thought they could lie under oath is beyond me, especially folks with legal backgrounds and “expertise.” Stupidity and greed coalesce quite a bit in this one.
This section details the President’s conduct in the Michael Flynn investigation, the President’s firing of FBI Director James Comey, the President’s efforts to remove and/or impede the investigatory efforts of the Special Counsel, the President’s efforts to prevent information on the Trump Tower meeting from “leaking,” the President's desire for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reverse his recusal (followed by bullying him into resigning), as well as the President’s conduct involving Michael Cohen (this is the section that indirectly involves Stormy Daniels). Overall, my takeaways from this was that Trump oversees a remarkably toxic work environment (though it is hard to feel bad for the shady figures who chose to associate with him), and that he really, truly has no understanding of the Constitution or law in general. That, or he simply does not care. Most damning though, is Robert Mueller’s final conclusion:
“Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgement, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intents presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgement. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgement. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
This conclusion may seem a bit perplexing at first—Why wouldn’t you charge someone so clearly guilty?—but the assessment makes perfect sense in context when you understand that the Department of Justice (DOJ) falls under the federal executive branch of government. For a subset of the executive branch to pass a legal judgement on the head of the executive branch (aka: the President), they would inadvertently impede the President’s ability to lead and preempt the constitutional process for addressing presidential misconduct. In part, this dates back to a 2000 memo issued by the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) that a sitting President cannot be federally indicted.
More so, as outlined in the Constitution, the way to address presidential misconduct would be through impeachment proceedings instigated by Congress (the legislative branch)—so goes governmental checks and balances. The fact the Mueller clearly states that after their lengthy investigation, he was unable to exonerate the President (something the President would later blatantly lie about to the press and on Twitter), clearly shows that Congress has a Constitutional obligation to start impeachment hearings, at least in theory.
Will this actually happen? Well, no. I can definitely see why the more liberal freshman Congresspeople want to move on impeachment hearings, but I also understand Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s reasoning for choosing not to follow through. Even if the House (which currently has a Democratic majority) were to impeach the president, for him to be voted out of the office of president would require a 67% majority vote from the Senate, which is not going to happen because they have a Republican majority. Furthermore, partisan voting could create the visage of perceived innocence, which could hinder legal procedures taken against President Trump once he is out of office.
For anyone interested in learning more, Vox made a really thorough educational video on Impeachment and its history in the United States, as well as why no President has ever been removed from office by Impeachment. I know this was the dream for many in anticipation of this report’s release, and the outcome was not what most desired. Even if Congress does not act, the American voter certainly has an obligation to act come the general election in 2020. At the end of the day, the Special Counsel’s investigation led to 34 people being charged with crimes—26 Russian nationals, 1 Dutch National, and 7 U.S. Nationals (including Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn, Richard Pinedo, George Papadopoulos, Roger Stone, and Michael Cohen)—this reality is more than significant.
In conclusion, if you have an interest in this report—definitely read it. Even if you don’t, you could still get a copy to listen to on audiobook for free from your library—just throwing that out there. Rating such a document seems ridiculous, but I settled on 4 stars as there was a great deal of information redacted as “Harm to Ongoing Matter,” “Investigative Technique,” or “Grand Jury.” I would LOVE to know what these sections state and infer, though what we have for now is quite damning all on its own in my humble opinion. Either way, I have never felt more ready to vote come 2020, and I hope you do too.
Ted Chiang is a genius, pure and simple. It is a rare overlap for insightful scientific thinkers to also have great literary aptitude, and Chiang excels at building moving emotional narratives out of the implications of different potential future technologies. I would even argue that this second published collection of short stories, [b:Exhalation: Stories|41160292|Exhalation Stories|Ted Chiang|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1534388394l/41160292._SX50_.jpg|64336454], adeptly showcases and refines Chiang’s talents first introduced with [b:Stories of Your Life and Others|223380|Stories of Your Life and Others|Ted Chiang|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1356138316l/223380._SY75_.jpg|216334].
There were many great ideas explored in this collection. Time travel in “The Merchant and the Alchemist’s Gate” is told in the vein of Arabian Nights and largely centers on the spiritual journey of reconciling the past with the present and future. With “The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling,” Chiang unravels how technology that records events and can create truly accurate memories could conflict with the traditionally (biased) narratives we tell ourselves of our past to make sense of (and build) identity in the present. “Omphalos” opens to a world where creationism is truth, though the assumptions of this anthropocentric reality are still challenged by cosmic events. Also intriguing, is “Anxiety is the Dizziness of Freedom,” which introduces a world where we can communicate with parallel timelines, and how this very real knowledge of an otherwise intangible preponderance of “what if” can impact lives. Just such good stuff across the board.
My favorite though, would have to be ”The Lifecycle of Software Objects.” This story in many ways felt like an extension of Issac Assimov’s world of robots, specifically exploring how artificial intelligence could shape human relationships (both with AI and other humans). This story follows different humans raising AI capable of learning and growing. Ana, a former zoo worker, raises a digital creature, or digient, named Jax using the empathy and training techniques she would employ while caring for her animals. As Jax and the other digients advance, their human caretakers transform from digital pet owners into parents, essentially. These parents form an online community and debate how best to raise their digient children, especially as these kids exist in uncharted territory in an everchanging world. This is a really touching and thoughtful account that will definitely have you reevaluating how you treated your tamagotchi as a kid.
A good read is a good read, and Exhalation is an excellent read. I honestly could not recommend this book more, and definitely look forward to more of Ted Chiang’s work.
There were many great ideas explored in this collection. Time travel in “The Merchant and the Alchemist’s Gate” is told in the vein of Arabian Nights and largely centers on the spiritual journey of reconciling the past with the present and future. With “The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling,” Chiang unravels how technology that records events and can create truly accurate memories could conflict with the traditionally (biased) narratives we tell ourselves of our past to make sense of (and build) identity in the present. “Omphalos” opens to a world where creationism is truth, though the assumptions of this anthropocentric reality are still challenged by cosmic events. Also intriguing, is “Anxiety is the Dizziness of Freedom,” which introduces a world where we can communicate with parallel timelines, and how this very real knowledge of an otherwise intangible preponderance of “what if” can impact lives. Just such good stuff across the board.
My favorite though, would have to be ”The Lifecycle of Software Objects.” This story in many ways felt like an extension of Issac Assimov’s world of robots, specifically exploring how artificial intelligence could shape human relationships (both with AI and other humans). This story follows different humans raising AI capable of learning and growing. Ana, a former zoo worker, raises a digital creature, or digient, named Jax using the empathy and training techniques she would employ while caring for her animals. As Jax and the other digients advance, their human caretakers transform from digital pet owners into parents, essentially. These parents form an online community and debate how best to raise their digient children, especially as these kids exist in uncharted territory in an everchanging world. This is a really touching and thoughtful account that will definitely have you reevaluating how you treated your tamagotchi as a kid.
A good read is a good read, and Exhalation is an excellent read. I honestly could not recommend this book more, and definitely look forward to more of Ted Chiang’s work.
.jpg)
I first learned of Colson Whitehead’s great narrative prowess with the deservedly popular [b:The Underground Railroad|30555488|The Underground Railroad|Colson Whitehead|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1493178362l/30555488._SX50_.jpg|48287641]. Continuing to explore themes surrounding the dehumanization of black bodies in the era of Reconstruction following slavery, Whitehead delves into the lives of [b:The Nickel Boys|42270835|The Nickel Boys|Colson Whitehead|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1539178196l/42270835._SY75_.jpg|65893762].
Based on of the true story of the Dozier School for Boys, a juvenile reform institution that operated from 1900 to 2011 in the state of Florida, this narrative opens with the discovery of bodies and secrets of the nefarious reform school coming to light. Fueled by cruelty and greed, the boys school exploited the young men in its care in numerous abusive ways. As these boys were cast off from society, it did not take much to cover up the institution’s exploits—who would believe young convicts?
Whitehead’s novel centers in the early 1960s with the idealistic young, black Elwood who truly believes that he can achieve his dreams with hard work and perseverance. A hard worker and bright student, Elwood jumps at the chance to take college courses while still in high school, and lacking means of transportation, he hitchhikes to his first class. The car is pulled over and he learns that it has been stolen. The cops care not that Elwood had no involvement in the car’s theft, and instead of college he gets sent to a juvenile correction facility Nickel Academy.
Still an optimist, Elwood aims to stay on the straight and narrow and work to better himself; he believes that good things will happen for good people who work hard. Quickly, and alarmingly, he learns that the only way to succeed (and survive) in Nickel is to keep his head down. In Nickel, exceptionalism is considered insurgence and stamped out the same as any other disruptive behavior. Keeping in line with the status quo, even if it means being complicit to nefarious systemic injustice, is the main means of survival even if to do so slowly kills the spirit. Elwood is still nevertheless affected and effected by what he sees.
”He was all of them in one black body that night in the ring, and all of them when the white men took him out back in those two iron rings… When the state of Florida dug him up fifty years later, the forensic examiner noted the fractures in the wrists and speculated that he’d been restrained before he died, in addition to the other violence attested by the broken bones.”
I would lie if I said it was easy to read about some of the atrocities that the boys faced; to be frank this book is not for the faint of heart or anyone who has a hard time reading about children suffering. That said, it is important to keep in mind that while the good characters are consistently beaten down, these events transpire to narratively build on the historic reality. All in all, this is a great book, and the story of Elwood’s life is definitely worth reading.
Based on of the true story of the Dozier School for Boys, a juvenile reform institution that operated from 1900 to 2011 in the state of Florida, this narrative opens with the discovery of bodies and secrets of the nefarious reform school coming to light. Fueled by cruelty and greed, the boys school exploited the young men in its care in numerous abusive ways. As these boys were cast off from society, it did not take much to cover up the institution’s exploits—who would believe young convicts?
Whitehead’s novel centers in the early 1960s with the idealistic young, black Elwood who truly believes that he can achieve his dreams with hard work and perseverance. A hard worker and bright student, Elwood jumps at the chance to take college courses while still in high school, and lacking means of transportation, he hitchhikes to his first class. The car is pulled over and he learns that it has been stolen. The cops care not that Elwood had no involvement in the car’s theft, and instead of college he gets sent to a juvenile correction facility Nickel Academy.
Still an optimist, Elwood aims to stay on the straight and narrow and work to better himself; he believes that good things will happen for good people who work hard. Quickly, and alarmingly, he learns that the only way to succeed (and survive) in Nickel is to keep his head down. In Nickel, exceptionalism is considered insurgence and stamped out the same as any other disruptive behavior. Keeping in line with the status quo, even if it means being complicit to nefarious systemic injustice, is the main means of survival even if to do so slowly kills the spirit. Elwood is still nevertheless affected and effected by what he sees.
”He was all of them in one black body that night in the ring, and all of them when the white men took him out back in those two iron rings… When the state of Florida dug him up fifty years later, the forensic examiner noted the fractures in the wrists and speculated that he’d been restrained before he died, in addition to the other violence attested by the broken bones.”
I would lie if I said it was easy to read about some of the atrocities that the boys faced; to be frank this book is not for the faint of heart or anyone who has a hard time reading about children suffering. That said, it is important to keep in mind that while the good characters are consistently beaten down, these events transpire to narratively build on the historic reality. All in all, this is a great book, and the story of Elwood’s life is definitely worth reading.
Highly influential amongst interpreters and rangers in the National Park Service (NPS), Freeman Tilden’s [b:Interpreting Our Heritage|2691015|Interpreting Our Heritage|Freeman Tilden|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1421708850l/2691015._SY75_.jpg|2716342] is considered by many as either the gold standard or cornerstone of modern-day heritage interpretation. Originally published in 1957 when education as a field was instructional and based in lecture format, the participatory and more pedagogically inclusive concepts Tilden put forth were quite revolutionary.
Specifically, Tilden defined interpretation as, “An educational activity which aims to reveal meanings and relationships through the use of original objects, by firsthand experience, and by illustrative media, rather than simply to communicate factual information” (33). He further expands on this definition with 6 interpretive principles:
1. Interpretation should relate what is being displayed with the personality/experience of the visitor.
2. Interpretation is revelation based on information, not information itself.
3. Interpretation is an art, and any art is to some degree teachable.
4. The chief goal of interpretation is provocation, not instruction.
5. Interpretation must present a whole, not just a part or faction.
6. Interpretation for children in mixed audiences should not dilute from the interpretation for adults, though it should follow a fundamentally different approach, best practice requires a separate program.
Admittedly, many of these concepts may now read as obvious truisms, though to understand them you must understand the environment in which they were created. Tilden’s background was mainly in service to NPS, which is a federal institution within the Department of the Interior in the United States that oversees the stewardship of so many of the nation’s natural and cultural resources. It is also important to note the historical context which was on the eve of hatching Mission 66—a 10-year NPS program devoting to creating visitor centers in parks prior to the NPS' 50th anniversary in 1966. Enhancing the visitor experience as a means of inspiring protection for parks was centered at the soul of this work.
Tilden’s approach to interpretation certainly pushed the needle forward, though should be honestly evaluated in a modern context. While many of his principles and examples work for many types of heritage properties, I do feel that as is it favors natural resources. This is entirely due to Tilden’s interpretation of what is narratively important and strikes a seemingly primordial sense of wonder. A good example is how he recants the Civil War – which for him is a story of admiration for the soldiers of both sides without mention of the enslaved individuals fighting for freedom. Unless parameters are clearly defined, even empathy can have blind spots, depending on whom you are empathizing with. It should be noted the NPS now teaches the Civil War as one fought for the preservation of enslaving other American citizens, but I digress.
Overall, this book still definitely has value, though should be understood within its context in time and space. Whether you work in heritage interpretation or are curious about the field I would recommend this book; odds are that it has influenced you directly or indirectly in some way.
Rating: 3.5 stars
Specifically, Tilden defined interpretation as, “An educational activity which aims to reveal meanings and relationships through the use of original objects, by firsthand experience, and by illustrative media, rather than simply to communicate factual information” (33). He further expands on this definition with 6 interpretive principles:
1. Interpretation should relate what is being displayed with the personality/experience of the visitor.
2. Interpretation is revelation based on information, not information itself.
3. Interpretation is an art, and any art is to some degree teachable.
4. The chief goal of interpretation is provocation, not instruction.
5. Interpretation must present a whole, not just a part or faction.
6. Interpretation for children in mixed audiences should not dilute from the interpretation for adults, though it should follow a fundamentally different approach, best practice requires a separate program.
Admittedly, many of these concepts may now read as obvious truisms, though to understand them you must understand the environment in which they were created. Tilden’s background was mainly in service to NPS, which is a federal institution within the Department of the Interior in the United States that oversees the stewardship of so many of the nation’s natural and cultural resources. It is also important to note the historical context which was on the eve of hatching Mission 66—a 10-year NPS program devoting to creating visitor centers in parks prior to the NPS' 50th anniversary in 1966. Enhancing the visitor experience as a means of inspiring protection for parks was centered at the soul of this work.
Tilden’s approach to interpretation certainly pushed the needle forward, though should be honestly evaluated in a modern context. While many of his principles and examples work for many types of heritage properties, I do feel that as is it favors natural resources. This is entirely due to Tilden’s interpretation of what is narratively important and strikes a seemingly primordial sense of wonder. A good example is how he recants the Civil War – which for him is a story of admiration for the soldiers of both sides without mention of the enslaved individuals fighting for freedom. Unless parameters are clearly defined, even empathy can have blind spots, depending on whom you are empathizing with. It should be noted the NPS now teaches the Civil War as one fought for the preservation of enslaving other American citizens, but I digress.
Overall, this book still definitely has value, though should be understood within its context in time and space. Whether you work in heritage interpretation or are curious about the field I would recommend this book; odds are that it has influenced you directly or indirectly in some way.
Rating: 3.5 stars
If you are a fan of Kurt Vonnegut, you may very well enjoy [b:Breakfast of Champions|4980|Breakfast of Champions|Kurt Vonnegut|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1327934446l/4980._SY75_.jpg|2859378]. Following a meandering timeline, taking place in Midland City, and including characters from his other work like Rosewater, Kilgore Trout, and Francine Pefko, this book is in many ways a toss up of Vonnegut’s greatest hits. Also present—is the typical narrative buildup to chaos that will inevitably pokes holes at presumed shared norms, all while denouncing arbitrary societal expectations humans push onto one another as ridiculous (peak Vonnegut here).
“Every person had a clearly defined part to play—as a black person, a female high school drop-out, a Pontiac dealer, a gynecologist, a gas-conversion burner installer. If a person stopped living up to expectations, because of bad chemicals or one thing or another, everybody went on imagining that the person was living up to expectations anyway. That was the main reason the people in Midland City were so slow to detect insanity in their associates.”
However, if you are unfamiliar with his work, I feel like Breakfast of Champions may prompt more confusion than appreciation for Vonnegut’s “brand” of madness. This largely comes down to the presence of illustrated symbols interspersed throughout the novel. I believe Vonnegut’s intention was to poke fun at imagery seemingly interlaced with cultural intertextuality, but for me they mostly felt gimmicky and underdeveloped within the context of the narrative.
Overall, this is an entertaining book filled with weird twists and some decent laughs, but I feel compared to other Vonnegut work it does pale a bit. If you are new to Vonnegut, definitely start with something else; I always recommend [b:Slaughterhouse-Five|4981|Slaughterhouse-Five|Kurt Vonnegut|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1440319389l/4981._SY75_.jpg|1683562]. If you are already a fan, definitely go for it.
“Every person had a clearly defined part to play—as a black person, a female high school drop-out, a Pontiac dealer, a gynecologist, a gas-conversion burner installer. If a person stopped living up to expectations, because of bad chemicals or one thing or another, everybody went on imagining that the person was living up to expectations anyway. That was the main reason the people in Midland City were so slow to detect insanity in their associates.”
However, if you are unfamiliar with his work, I feel like Breakfast of Champions may prompt more confusion than appreciation for Vonnegut’s “brand” of madness. This largely comes down to the presence of illustrated symbols interspersed throughout the novel. I believe Vonnegut’s intention was to poke fun at imagery seemingly interlaced with cultural intertextuality, but for me they mostly felt gimmicky and underdeveloped within the context of the narrative.
Overall, this is an entertaining book filled with weird twists and some decent laughs, but I feel compared to other Vonnegut work it does pale a bit. If you are new to Vonnegut, definitely start with something else; I always recommend [b:Slaughterhouse-Five|4981|Slaughterhouse-Five|Kurt Vonnegut|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1440319389l/4981._SY75_.jpg|1683562]. If you are already a fan, definitely go for it.
This book is so emotionally raw that it will hit you, quite frankly, like an overwhelming wave of anguish. In 2004, a massive tsunami hit across the Indian Ocean, killing nearly a quarter of a million people in 14 countries; it was an unprecedented natural disaster. These numbers are hard to fathom; this level of pain even harder to process. [b:Wave|15771862|Wave|Sonali Deraniyagala|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1362126716l/15771862._SY75_.jpg|21480584] is the written account of Dr. Sonali Deraniyagala, and how the tsunami took her children, husband, and parents. She was the only survivor of her family, and in this autobiography, she recounts the tragedy and the subsequent stages of grief she processes in the years to come.
Central to processing this tragedy, lies so much of Sonali’s sorrow, rage, and survivor’s guilt. Typically when someone looses a child they can lean on a spouse, if they loose a spouse they can lean on their parents, and for Sonali these obvious avenues of support are gone. Her friends and remaining family try to help her, but communicating such an unimaginable tragedy keeps her isolated in many ways. Sonali finds that the gravity of the loss also took away elements of her identity along with so many pivotal relationships. This book is a truly a poignant, emotional journey.
Overall, Wave is not an easy read given the gravity of the tragedy. Sonali is brutally honest and how could she not be; what else does she have left to lose? She is smart and reflective, and these elements really make reading this autobiography more than worthwhile.
Central to processing this tragedy, lies so much of Sonali’s sorrow, rage, and survivor’s guilt. Typically when someone looses a child they can lean on a spouse, if they loose a spouse they can lean on their parents, and for Sonali these obvious avenues of support are gone. Her friends and remaining family try to help her, but communicating such an unimaginable tragedy keeps her isolated in many ways. Sonali finds that the gravity of the loss also took away elements of her identity along with so many pivotal relationships. This book is a truly a poignant, emotional journey.
Overall, Wave is not an easy read given the gravity of the tragedy. Sonali is brutally honest and how could she not be; what else does she have left to lose? She is smart and reflective, and these elements really make reading this autobiography more than worthwhile.
This may very well be the scariest Octavia Butler book I have read yet, both in terms of sheer brutality and psychological horror. Thematically speaking, if [b:Wild Seed|52318|Wild Seed (Patternmaster, #1)|Octavia E. Butler|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1388462753l/52318._SY75_.jpg|1330000] details the mythological origins of Doro’s advanced race, and [b:Mind of My Mind|116254|Mind of My Mind (Patternmaster, #2)|Octavia E. Butler|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1389676159l/116254._SY75_.jpg|111957] unravels the beginnings of Genesis (sprinkled with hints of rebellion from the Gospels) with Mary’s new Patternist community, then [b:Clay's Ark|60933|Clay's Ark (Patternmaster, #3)|Octavia E. Butler|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1461533398l/60933._SY75_.jpg|1008173] devolves into the collateral damage of a fully realized Sodom and Gomorrah.
While occurring within the universe of the Patternist series, Clay’s Ark narratively takes place in so largely an isolated time and space, that it can ultimately be read as a standalone novel. This world is the beginning of a bleak dystopian hellscape, one that has arguably progressed further along into chaos than what Butler would later write about in the Parable series (if you are inclined to rank your Butler dystopias). A missed opportunity could have been the inclusion and expansion on the events of Mind of My Mind and how they led to such an unstable environment fueled by mass inequality. Oh well.
All in all, there is some truly dark content in this book—if nearly any other author had written on many of these themes, I would almost certainly have hated the final outcome. That said, Octavia Butler’s unusual comfort zone is accurately capturing how human nature responds to the most psychologically taxing scenarios, and in her world the unexpected have a tendency to unleash surprising resilience. Whether or not survival is actually worth it is another matter for debate. This world is so ruthless that I know I would have zero desire to endure in nearly any capacity amidst such levels of cruelty.
I would expand more on details, but for this one the less you know going into it, the better. If you are someone who has a hard time reading about terrible things happening to young children/teens, take it from me and sit this one out. Or don’t—I’m not the boss of you—but at least you have been forewarned.
Rating: 3.5 stars
While occurring within the universe of the Patternist series, Clay’s Ark narratively takes place in so largely an isolated time and space, that it can ultimately be read as a standalone novel. This world is the beginning of a bleak dystopian hellscape, one that has arguably progressed further along into chaos than what Butler would later write about in the Parable series (if you are inclined to rank your Butler dystopias). A missed opportunity could have been the inclusion and expansion on the events of Mind of My Mind and how they led to such an unstable environment fueled by mass inequality. Oh well.
All in all, there is some truly dark content in this book—if nearly any other author had written on many of these themes, I would almost certainly have hated the final outcome. That said, Octavia Butler’s unusual comfort zone is accurately capturing how human nature responds to the most psychologically taxing scenarios, and in her world the unexpected have a tendency to unleash surprising resilience. Whether or not survival is actually worth it is another matter for debate. This world is so ruthless that I know I would have zero desire to endure in nearly any capacity amidst such levels of cruelty.
I would expand more on details, but for this one the less you know going into it, the better. If you are someone who has a hard time reading about terrible things happening to young children/teens, take it from me and sit this one out. Or don’t—I’m not the boss of you—but at least you have been forewarned.
Rating: 3.5 stars