Take a photo of a barcode or cover
lit_stacks's Reviews (579)
This was a book about a bank robbery committed by Vietnam veterans. The last 20% was fast-paced with a twist ending. The rest was pretty slow and took me a while to slog through. It also featured my least favorite plot device, main characters who are co-workers that start a relationship for the sole reason that they are a man and a woman who are in close proximity. Harry and Eleanor have almost nothing in common (besides the Vietnam connection which they both divulge to each other entirely too early). She constantly comments on his smoking, he doesn’t seem to think about her at all. When you read things like this, you realize why people don’t think men and women can work together.
I picked up this book after watching the HBO Chernobyl series (which is based on this book). One of the things that the series didn’t capture but the book did was the attitudes of Old Russia about winning the War (WWII) and the parallels they tried to draw between Chernobyl and the War. Some viewed Chernobyl as fighting a war, others thought the government didn’t view it that way enough. Also not captured was the Party loyalty, it was striking that a Party employee refused to evacuate his small children because it could incite panic and now they are sick. One interviewee called the atom Russia’s religion. Even if you watched the series, I recommend this book, it is all personal interviews with people who experienced Chernobyl and the prose is just beautiful.
“What should I tell you? Death is the fairest thing in the world. No one’s ever gotten out of it. The earth takes everyone—the kind, the cruel, the sinners. Aside from that, there’s no fairness on earth. I worked hard and honestly my whole life. But I didn’t get any fairness. God was dividing things up somewhere, and by the time the line came to me there was nothing left.”
“What should I tell you? Death is the fairest thing in the world. No one’s ever gotten out of it. The earth takes everyone—the kind, the cruel, the sinners. Aside from that, there’s no fairness on earth. I worked hard and honestly my whole life. But I didn’t get any fairness. God was dividing things up somewhere, and by the time the line came to me there was nothing left.”
I listened to this on the Levar Burton Reads podcast. It is always amazing to me how well these short story authors can develop a story and characters in so short a time. This story was about an alternate universe Russia where the children of royals were adopted children. A brother florist recognizes his sister, who is now a countess (or something like that).
This Hercule Poirot book was weird. I'm still not sure that I understand the ending. I learned afterward that this was an amalgamation of short stories that was then loosely tied together with this criminal organization of four people bent on world domination. However, it did mean that this book was more fast-paced than the others, with several mysteries solved over the course of the book. It also has some great Captain Hastings-Poirot back-and-forths.
'"My dear Poirot, you know now what the enemy thinks of us. He appears to have a grossly exaggerated idea of your bran power, and to have absurdly underrated mine, but I do not see how we are better off for knowing this." Poirot chuckled in rather an offensive way.'
'"I hope that they will not succeed in massacring Hastings also, that is all. That would annoy me greatly." I interrupted this cheerful conversation to remark that I had no intention of letting myself be massacred.'
'"My dear Poirot, you know now what the enemy thinks of us. He appears to have a grossly exaggerated idea of your bran power, and to have absurdly underrated mine, but I do not see how we are better off for knowing this." Poirot chuckled in rather an offensive way.'
'"I hope that they will not succeed in massacring Hastings also, that is all. That would annoy me greatly." I interrupted this cheerful conversation to remark that I had no intention of letting myself be massacred.'
I listened to this one on the Levar Burton Reads podcast. Again, a short story is able to develop a story and great characters in a short period of time.
I think this is my favorite book of 2019. Say Nothing is an examination of a period of the Troubles in Northern Ireland through the eyes of people on both sides. Keefe uses characters to tell the story, which made this book read like gripping fiction. It is the rare nonfiction book that executes twists so effectively that it takes your breath away and Say Nothing is able to do it multiple times.
This book gives a good understanding of the human side of the Troubles. I've read books on the IRA before, but none covered the mental toll that the Troubles took on the Volunteers and the citizens of Northern Ireland. An extremely powerful book.
This book gives a good understanding of the human side of the Troubles. I've read books on the IRA before, but none covered the mental toll that the Troubles took on the Volunteers and the citizens of Northern Ireland. An extremely powerful book.
This is a book that explains how women have been left out of science and cultural anthropology (both as practitioners and study subjects), but it takes the next step of contextualizing how this exclusion has caused a misunderstanding of women, motherhood, and women's role in society which has led to the discrimination and misogyny that reigns to this day. "Let the environment of women be similar to that of men and with his opportunities, before she be fairly judged, intellectually his inferior, please." This was one of my favorite books of 2019 and I highly recommend it.
Saini also stresses those things that women are biologically good at. Women are better survivors than men, "at every age, women seem to survive better than men." While men tend to have more upper body strength, women have a strength of their own. It is fortunate that women have this survival advantage, as few health studies have included women throughout history. It is a recent discovery that a woman's immune system changes during her menstrual cycle, "[i]f a phenomenon affects women and only women, it's all too often misunderstood."
There is also a fascinating section on the gender brain studies which purport to show a difference in the brains of men and women. Saini argues that these differences exist because culture and experience physically change the brain. So when girls are given dolls and boys are given construction sets, culture influences biology, rather than vice versa. "With all these effects on the brain, in a world as gendered as ours, says Rippon, it's actually surprising that we don't see more sex differences in the brain than we do."
The chapter on the anthropological studies of motherhood was also fascinating, which refutes the idea that mothers are to raise their children alone. Human women are also among the only female species that outlive their fertility, perhaps because grandmothers were so instrumental in raising children. Anthropologists also tend to devalue motherhood as an intellectual pursuit. Children are "curious, energetic, but still dependent" making motherhood "difficult and demanding." Mothers throughout history have been responsible for teaching the next generation.
Anthropology has been sexist in other arenas too, with anthropologists focusing on the hunting aspect of hunter-gatherer societies. But gathering provided the majority of food for hunter-gatherer societies, in some cases, up to two-thirds of the food. So not only do women cook the food, set up the shelters, and have the children, they provide a majority of the food. Women even went on the hunts in some hunter-gatherer societies. "In none of the societies that have been studied do men bring home all the food. At worst, they bring in far less than half."
While women are producing most of the food, men spend a lot of energy attempting to keep women chaste. "She asked whether scientists had approached the question of women's sexuality entirely the wrong way. Could it be that women and their evolutionary ancestors weren't naturally passive and monogamous...? Might it instead be the case that for thousands of years women had been compelled by men to behave more modestly?....From the smallest laws to the most sweeping religious doctrines...cultures everywhere had tried to burn away every last scrap of female sexual freedom. This subjugation was the root of the moral double standard, the punishments, and the violent brutality that women continue to live with today."
This violence is possible due to the patriarchal nature of most societies. Women, in patriarchal societies, leave their families and comfort zones to join the family of her husband, thereby isolating her from her support system. "The common thread that unites species in which females are particularly vulnerable to male violence is females being alone."
Saini also stresses those things that women are biologically good at. Women are better survivors than men, "at every age, women seem to survive better than men." While men tend to have more upper body strength, women have a strength of their own. It is fortunate that women have this survival advantage, as few health studies have included women throughout history. It is a recent discovery that a woman's immune system changes during her menstrual cycle, "[i]f a phenomenon affects women and only women, it's all too often misunderstood."
There is also a fascinating section on the gender brain studies which purport to show a difference in the brains of men and women. Saini argues that these differences exist because culture and experience physically change the brain. So when girls are given dolls and boys are given construction sets, culture influences biology, rather than vice versa. "With all these effects on the brain, in a world as gendered as ours, says Rippon, it's actually surprising that we don't see more sex differences in the brain than we do."
The chapter on the anthropological studies of motherhood was also fascinating, which refutes the idea that mothers are to raise their children alone. Human women are also among the only female species that outlive their fertility, perhaps because grandmothers were so instrumental in raising children. Anthropologists also tend to devalue motherhood as an intellectual pursuit. Children are "curious, energetic, but still dependent" making motherhood "difficult and demanding." Mothers throughout history have been responsible for teaching the next generation.
Anthropology has been sexist in other arenas too, with anthropologists focusing on the hunting aspect of hunter-gatherer societies. But gathering provided the majority of food for hunter-gatherer societies, in some cases, up to two-thirds of the food. So not only do women cook the food, set up the shelters, and have the children, they provide a majority of the food. Women even went on the hunts in some hunter-gatherer societies. "In none of the societies that have been studied do men bring home all the food. At worst, they bring in far less than half."
While women are producing most of the food, men spend a lot of energy attempting to keep women chaste. "She asked whether scientists had approached the question of women's sexuality entirely the wrong way. Could it be that women and their evolutionary ancestors weren't naturally passive and monogamous...? Might it instead be the case that for thousands of years women had been compelled by men to behave more modestly?....From the smallest laws to the most sweeping religious doctrines...cultures everywhere had tried to burn away every last scrap of female sexual freedom. This subjugation was the root of the moral double standard, the punishments, and the violent brutality that women continue to live with today."
This violence is possible due to the patriarchal nature of most societies. Women, in patriarchal societies, leave their families and comfort zones to join the family of her husband, thereby isolating her from her support system. "The common thread that unites species in which females are particularly vulnerable to male violence is females being alone."
I listened to this book, which is always difficult for me with nonfiction books. I always lost parts of the detail when my attention wanders. This book made it slightly worse because it is too long. It is not so bad as to be one of those books where you wish you had just read the Wikipedia entry, Parry provides too good a perspective for that, but the audiobook could have been a couple of hours shorter.
Parry was a reporter in Japan, covering the disappearance of a British woman. Because he was a reporter, Parry had a relationship with the family that he could draw on when writing this book. Parry also discusses Japanese history and the culture of Japan to give a perspective on why this disappearance happened. I learned a lot about Japan and Japanese culture and pastimes, all in the context of a true crime story.
Parry was a reporter in Japan, covering the disappearance of a British woman. Because he was a reporter, Parry had a relationship with the family that he could draw on when writing this book. Parry also discusses Japanese history and the culture of Japan to give a perspective on why this disappearance happened. I learned a lot about Japan and Japanese culture and pastimes, all in the context of a true crime story.