Lolita

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov

Movie by: Stanley Kubrick

---

The 1962 version of Lolita was a rare case in which the movie actual performed better than the book. In a quest to get MPAA approval the movie had to tone tone down the sexuality (which in all truthfulness hardly even existed in the book), and relied more on the psychological vengence. In the movie, Humbert's obsession seems to center primarily around his possessive, self-destructive love for his 'nymphet' Lolita; whereas in the book she evolves to become his carnal slave.

In the book, we delve a little more deeply in to the individual characters. All the characters eventually die premature deaths. None of the characters are inherently bad. They are all mostly good people, who try to do the right thing. Unfortunately they place themselves in temptenting situations, and eventually fall to one small sin, which eventually leads to the greater sexual sin, which eventually leads to their premature death. Lolita is on the outside a complex love-traingle with changing players. However, underneath lies sinister horror story. Not so much concerned with death as with the psychological, theological conflict. The characters wonder what evil can be seen coming out of their satisfying of carnal desires. Only later do they relize, that the long-lasting and wide-spread consequences of their acts.

Lolita's mother takes in a foreign boarder in hopes. In itself not a bad act. However, her intentions are less than pure. From the start the romantic inclinations can be seen. She neglets her family, her own daughter, who she mistreets and wishes to avoid at all costs, in favor of a romantic fling with H. H. Her marriage to him seems to be not so much out of love and family good, but out of a carnal desire and quest for power to rule over the household. Her failure to provide a balanced heart-fealt relationship, lead to her mistrust of H.H. which as a direct consequence led to her snooping around in the diary and freeking out. However, instead of trying to resolve the problem, she went beserko, and tried to do everything herself (as has been her prime fault throughout the story), and in this fit of rage she runs out, and is overtaken by a car, thus instantaneously brings about her own death. Throughout, her intentions (she thought) were always the most pure. She desired to have the perfect little family, with the distant, yet well-bahaved little girl. She wanted to do everything herself to make sure it came about exactly the way she wanted it. She failed to take in to account the desires of others.

Humbert has had a rough past, having to undergo treatment, and suffering through a broken marriage. He couldn't forget things and people that had affected him in his past and go on. This inability to erase the past lead to his seaking out of nympettes: young girls with certain quasi-demon like lustful qualities. He accepted the house with Mrs. Haze only apon becoming infatuated with her daughter, Lolita. He obtained thrills from every little nymph-like action she undertook. Had he sought help to control his desires, the problems might have ended. However, he continued to amplify his lustful urges, always keeping in mind the purity of his little nymphette. His first major transgression came about when he agreed to marry Mrs. Haze. He had no love for her, and was only doing so to become closer to Lolita. His side of the relationship, perhaps as much as his wife's was filled with secret entrigue and double-entendre. They had no love for each other. They didn't even really care for each other; they were just running a show each hammering out his own personal desires while hoping that the mate wouldn't do anything to interfere.

He had at times secretly wished for the death of his wife (for after all, death had become some of his previous loves), even planning out a murder. Yet, his conscience would not permit him to bring about the death of another human being, no matter how much he so desired. Eventually, when his wife's accidental death accored, he jumped on the opportunity to seak his little nymph, hiding the truth from her and even creating a false story in the hotel. His conscience was already guilty, before he had actually committed any perverse act. Had he not harboured carnal desires for his nymphette he would have not brought himself in the situation of easy temptation. And even there, he had outwardly decided that he would not do anything to remove her purity (however, inside, he his libido was urging him to do so.) Once, she made the first advance, his mental decision fell (after, he could reason, since she is no longer pure, there can be no wrong in the repition.) Now he had gone in to deep. There could still be escape and return to normality, though it would be very difficult. In the short run, it was much easier to carry out the present course of carnal gratification, roaming the country so as not to arrouse suspision. Eventually settling down, he was forced to bribe his 'daughter' for every act he wished performed. With an outward goal of providing her with the best possible life, he spoiled her with material items, and sheltered her from other possible 'rivals' and 'evil' activities. He grew dependent on the pleasures that she could extend him, and had to bribe her to keep doing so. He also grew extremely jealous, an obvious symptom of a lastful (as opposed to loving) relationship. Instead of seaking a return to normality, he tried to escape the problems, and continue on the sinful trail. Unfortunately, he had been too restrictive with her and now had a rival for her passion.

Quilty, like Humbert adored Lolita. He employed various forms of trickery, at first (in the movie) merely to get her to be able to grow and participate in a play. However, he had futher desires, and eventually resulted in trickery to snatch her from Humbert. Instead of desiring her to go through a transformation to a normal life, he sought her for his own purposes of perversion. Thus she quickly fled. Quilty's perverse life-style led to the kidnapping of Lolita, which as a direct consequence leads to his murder at the hands of Humbert.

Humbert's obsessive lust lead to his own inability to function normally without his Lo. He had to have. His actions had numbed his conscience to the punt that he would now be able to carry out a murder. Upon receiving a letter from Lolita (Mrs. Dolores Schiller), he immediatley assumes that Mr. Schiller is the kidnapper, the person who stole her and her passions from him. He readies a gun for the trip and a quick assassination. He still is obsessed with Lolita. Even though she is married and expecting a child, he cannot let go of her. He makes one last plea. He desires that she return with him, that they become a couple. Everyone else is now insignificant to him. He has become so obsessed with her, that he cannot have anyone else, and cannot see anybody else with her. Little tidbits such as marriage seem trivial. His own sins have already mentally destroyed him. He viewed as his only salvation, a return to the past glory days with Lolita. However, the past is the past, and there is no returning. Now his only goal was to kill the man who had robbed him of his past pleasure. Upon beeing informed that it was Quilty, he sought him out, and went to his house to perform the murder. Not content with a mere killing, he also desired to see him suffer and moan under the same suffering that he had undergone. After draining his gun on Quilty, Humbert was able to walk away, his conscience long since seasing to play a major role in his thought process. He has now totally destroyed. His death in prison was nothing more than the body's delayed reaction to the death of the soul.

Lolita was perhaps the most innocent or perhaps the most guilty of the players. She was a rebellious child. Instead of honoring her parents, she did everything against the desires of her mother. She let peer presure overpower her morals and repeated the deflowering act at camp. Her consceince now weekened by sins and a desire for freedom, fell easy prey to Humberts desires. She used her sexuality to secure all kinds of material benefit at Humberts expense. When this relation finally failed to delight her, she was ready to jump ship again, joining the Quilty camp. Unlike Humbert, her conscience still remained intact, and she was able to remove herself from the perversions of the Quilty group, and began anew her life, trying to hide the past. Unfortunately, she had already lost her childhood, and now was trying to start life anew with a real husband. However, she had already learned too much about the world, and still was clinging to tidbits, though she remained the most reformed of the characters. (Doing, perhaps, to her initial naivity.) However, perhaps as fateful, dramatic irony, she died will giving birth to a still-born infant.

Lolita tells the tragedy of four characters who fall victim of their own sins, and live in closed worlds. Both the book and the movie dwell on this metaphysical horror. Can the soon to be released new movie capture this same magic? Misinterpreting the point, Lolita's character is seen today as a pornographic symbol. However, Nabokov's novel was thematically strong, but physically tame. (Noticably absent from the work were profanity and detailed sexual descriptions.) Will the new movie do the same? Will it succeed in portraying the psychological tradgedy, or will it become yet another Hollywood scum movie? Well, I'm not holding my breath. jh 19 June 1996

Canterbury Tales

 [Written circa 1991. I have a  separate version from the 2013 audiobook]

Through The Canterbury Tales, Geoffrey Chaucer exposed his distrust in the organized religion of the middle ages. He believed that a true, humble faith was far more important than the illusion of religious service. He respected the high ranking church officials, who did nothing more than mechanical reproductions of archaic ceremonies, about as much as pagan infidels. To show his abhorrence toward organized religion, he created pseudo-christians, such as the pardoner and friar, along with one sterling example of a true religious zealot, the parson.

Chaucer has absolutely no respect for the Pardoner's character. He noted the pardoner had the "same small voice a goat has got" and a "chin no beard had harboured, nor would harbour". However, Chaucer did not perform a one-sided attack on the pardoner's masculinity. He also used his ignominious character to paint a bleak picture of the church. The pardoner "made monkeys of the priest and congregation" when he sauntered in through the town. The willingness of the churchgoers to accept this treatment indicated they lacked true faith in their deity, and instead were peons ready to cling to anyone claiming divine authority. The pardoner could, in one day draw more money than the parson could "in a month or two." How did he do it? Not by powers from heaven, but instead with his "honey-tongue". He also is referred to as "a noble ecclesiast" to the church. Instead of condemning this thief, the church praises him. Chaucer subtly says that any church willing to hold insolent embezzlers in a high position was obviously not in touch with its deity.

The friar characterized the degradation of the medieval church. He had used the church as launching pad for his pursuit of carnal pleasures. To pay for his escapades, he gathered money in the name of the church. He was no slouch, in fact, "he was the finest beggar of his batch." He also gathered money when he would "arbitrate disputes... (for no small fee)." What did he do with all this money gathered in the name of the church? It was not used to help the poor. Instead he flaunted it on the town. He was no stranger to the bars, for "he knew the taverns well in every town." That was just the beginning. He also knew "every innkeeper and barmaid... better than lepers, beggars and that crew." He ignored the people that needed his help, and instead focused on himself. He was the epitome of the pseudo-Christianity that Chaucer so abhorred.

The parson was the one church figure that the Chaucer genuinely trusted. He was trusted because of his loyalty to the people instead of the Catholic bureaucracy. "He hated cursing to exhort a fee." Instead, he "preferred beyond a doubt giving to poor parishioners... both from church offerings and his property." Unlike the other religious figures, the parson was loyal to the scriptures and his people, not the central church or wallet. He did not "leave his sheep encumbered in the mire or run to London for easy bread." Instead, he cared for his own flock. He also followed his own teachings; "He taught but followed it himself before." This dedication to serving represented the true essence of religion.

By employing a sophisticated sarcastic tone, Chaucer attacks the medieval church that gave legitimacy to such crooks as the pardoner and friar. His faith in the organized church was fast fading, and he was slowly loosing his religion. However, his faith in the scriptures still was strong. He was a protestant on earth just a little too early.

Teddy and Catcher in the Rye

Catcher in the Rye (1951) and Teddy (1953) by J.D. Salinger

[originally from 1991-1992]

Most literary works delineate the lives of superhuman characters: people who achieve monumental goals in the face of great adversity, yet still respect the idiosyncrasies of man. Salinger's characters, however, follow a different path. They keep in touch with reality, and rarely accomplish anything extraordinary in the eyes of men. They attack the rules of society, and become victories only by escaping from its confines.

The character that comes closest to achieving public prominence is Teddy, the ten year old prodigy. The world's major universities interview him, tapes of his mediational thoughts are played at parties, and he corresponds with many distinguished professors. Even though he has a cult falling, Teddy is oblivious to the world. He is dressed in a tattered shirt that's too big for him, coupled with non matching pants; he attempts to avoid conversation by choosing an isolated seat. He is fascinated by the orange peels floating out the 'window', and feels no need to correctly refer to his looking spot as a 'portal'. Through meditation, Teddy has achieved peace with himself, and has no need for the world's knowledge. His philosophy entails the deletion of all knowledge to achieve a greater state of consciousness where a square is not necessarily a square. He has fought and won the war against the world, and rejoices the opportunity to leave the battlefield.

Similarly, Holden Caulfield was fighting his own war. Throughout Catcher in the Rye, Caulfield figuratively spat upon the world of sycophant conformists. However, unlike the most nonconformists, he shows a great deal of respect for true followers of organized religion. The catholic nuns he meets are among the few outsiders he respects. He feels obligated to provide them with a monetary assistance, because he realizes that they are doing what they feel they believe in, and are not 'fake' (like the man who played Christ in the Christmas pageant). In addition to disliking the actor who "couldn't wait to smoke a cigarette after he got down from the cross", Caulfield despised the majority of the prep school personnel. They were phony, thrilled by there own bombastic tautology, and reluctant to impart any useful knowledge to the students. Indeed, Caulfield was much like the Dead Poet's Society students: he was inspired by a few thought-provoking teachers, and thus decided to drop his sycophancy in favor of an expression of true thoughts. Unfortunately, society was unwilling to accept someone critical of its fallacies, and he was not ready to completely ostracize himself from it.

Holden's younger brother, Allie, had the strength to remove himself from the binds of society. Unlike other baseball players, who felt it was necessary to bore themselves waiting in the outfield, Allie occupied himself with poetry inscribed on his glove. In addition to meditating upon his 'baseball glove' poetry, he also pursued many other avenues of learning, and was (in Holden's eyes) a 'perfect child' before he was abruptly taken from the earth. He was probably good friends with Teddy, and felt great relief that he could be taken from the earth to join his friend in a place more fitting to their intellects. However, he probably turned over in his grave when he saw all the unknown relatives, who waited for a supposed catastrophe to pay homage to him.

Salinger's characters were constrained by the rules of society, and attempted to overcome them. Some, such as Holden, had stayed too long, and were overcome by enticing facets of society and forced to stay. Others, like Allie and Teddy, had completed their trial on earth by overcoming the uselessness of society, and were taken away.

The Scarlet Letter

 The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne

[This was written around 1990. I'm not sure what edition was being used. I picked a random one for the links. I doubt the pages match.]

The world of Puritan New England, like the world of today, was filled with evil influences. Many people were able to withstand these temptations; unfortunately, many others have fallen victim to the evil. Often, a single act of iniquity has devastated a person's life. In The Scarlet Letter, Hester, Chillingworth, and Dimmesdale were each destroyed mentally and physically by one diabolical act that mushroomed to overcome their lives.

---

Hester's life was the one which most externally displayed the destruction inflicted upon it by wrong-doing. Physically, she "stood on the scaffold of pillory, an infant on her arm, and the letter 'A' in scarlet, fantastically embroidered with gold thread upon her bosom" (The Scarlet Letter 66). Because of the "A", the entire community knew she had sinned, and she became a social outcast. In her attempts to pay penance for her sins, she lived a life of poverty, donating most of her income to charity. However, even the most lowly and wretched of the creatures in Boston, which she helped, "not unfrequently insulted the hand that fed them" (87). Furthermore she left behind her beauty and elaborate dress for a dress of the "coarsest materials and the most sombre hue" (86).

Hester's sin also harmed her mind and soul. The joy she found in knitting, "like all other joys, she rejected it as a sin" (87). Also, she suffered each time she saw Dimmesdale. A mutual love remained between them, but they could not show the love. Even a brief encounter with Dimmesdale, the father of her daughter, would cause "a deeper throb of pain; for, in that brief interval, she had sinned anew" (89). Moreover, at one point, she had begun to lose faith in the fact that her daughter was human. She began to believe the sayings of townspeople who "had given out that poor little Pearl was a demon offspring" (100). Hence her body and mind suffered greatly for her sin of adultery.

Roger Chillingworth's life was also destroyed by his evil. The most noticeable of his changes was the degradation of his physical appearance. When he was first seen in the novel, "there was a remarkable intelligence in his features, as of a person who had so cultivated his mental part that it could not fail to mould the physical to itself and become manifest by unmistakable tokens" (67). Chillingworth then took up residence with Dimmesdale and began his quest to punish the minister. After he began his quest the townspeople observed "something ugly and evil in his face which they had not previously noticed, and which grew still the more obvious to sight, the oftener they looked upon him" (126). Soon his wife, Hester, found "the former aspect of an intellectual and studious man, calm and quiet, which was what she best remembered in him, had altogether vanished and been succeeded by an eager searching, almost fierce, yet carefully guarded look" (163). Furthermore, his life had become controlled by evil to the extent that once Dimmesdale had died, Chillingworth "withered up, shrivelled away, and almost vanished from mortal sight" (242).

Though evil took a great toll upon him physically, it caused much more damage to his mind.

He had begun the investigation, as he imagined, with 
the severe and equal integrity of a judge, desirous 
only of truth, even as if the question involved no 
more than the air-drawn lines and figures of a 
geometrical problem, instead of human passions and 
wrongs inflicted on himself.  But, as he proceeded, a 
terrible fascination, a kind of fierce, though still 
calm, necessity seized the old man within its gripe 
and never set him free again, until he had done all 
its bidding. (127)

When he started, Chillingworth did not notice the change that had come upon him, but, after it was too late to change directions, he realized that his life had become obsessed with evil. He told Hester that "he had grown to exist only by this perpetual poison of the direst revenge" (165). And furthermore, he declared, "I have already told thee what I am! A fiend!" (166). He knew that the devil now had full control of his life, and he could do nothing but further perpetrate the evil that he had started.

Though Dimmesdale committed the sin of adultery with Hester, his punishment was augmented because he failed to immediately confess. As the town's minister, he knew the harm of an unconfessed sin, and charged Hester to:

"speak out the name of thy fellow-sinner and fellow-
sufferer!  Be not silent from any mistaken pity and 
tenderness for him; for, believe me, Hester, though he 
were to step down from a high place, and stand there 
beside thee on thy pedestal of shame, yet better were 
it so, than to hide a guilty heart through life.  What 
can they silence do for him, except to tempt him - 
yea, compel him, as it were - to add hypocrisy to the 
sin?  Heaven hath granted thee an open ignominy, that 
thereby though mayest work out an open triumph over 
the evil within thee, and the sorrow without.  Take 
heed how thou deniest to him - who, perchance, hath 
not the courage to grasp it for himself - the bitter, 
but wholesome, cup that is now presented to they 
lips!" (73)

However, Dimmesdale held his sin within himself, using the justification that some sinners, "guilty as they may be, retaining, nevertheless, a zeal for God's glory and man's welfare, they shrink from displaying themselves black and filthy in the view of men; because, thenceforward, no good can be achieved by them; no evil of the past be redeemed by better service" (130). Unfortunately, he did not trust this reasoning. He had tried many times to confess his sin, but he always fell short.

Dimmesdale's feelings of guilt for his unconfessed sin caused him to seek his own private penance. To help relieve his soul of the agony caused by his sin, Dimmesdale fasted "rigorously, and until his knees trembled beneath him as an act of penance" (141). He also "kept vigils, likewise, night after night" (141), that he might have the evil of his sin relieve from his conscience. This resulted in a great physical suffering, for:

His form grew emaciated; his voice, though still rich 
and sweet, had a certain melancholy prophecy of decay 
in it; he was often observed, on any slight alarm or 
other sudden accident, to put his hand over his heart, 
with first a flush and then a paleness, indicative of 
pain.  (119)

His continual decline of health allowed Chillingworth to obtain residence with him. In these close quarters, Chillingworth became "a chief actor in the poor minister's interior world" (137), and had the ability to make the minister suffer both mental and physical agony.

Evil destroyed the lives of Hester, Chillingworth, and Dimmesdale. Each had the potential for excellence in his own field, whether it be medicine, ministry, or womanhood, yet a single sin turned their lives on a downward path. Each of the primary characters in The Scarlet Letter failed to see the consequences that he would face after tasting the fruits of sin. Likewise, Jim Bakker, Marion Berry, and Gary Hart are examples of people from today's society who committed major sins. Their sins grew to crush their hopes of obtaining great success in life.

A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court

[Retro from around 1991]

A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court by Mark Twain

A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court is an excellent example of Mark Twain's humorous style. His humor, coupled with his satire make this novel one of the best ever written.

Mark Twain's style is best exemplified by his humor and satire. Twain style allows him to place examples of the things that he loves in positions that require everyone to like them. He also uses his talents at satire to criticize his enemies in such a manner that sneaks past the readers realm of immediate recognition, to find a place of eternal dwelling inside their brain. From it's origin, the setting of this novel made it difficult for it to be anything but a comedy. But Even though there are many occasion in which Twain details serious occurrences, they are quickly followed up by humorous events.

Satire, too, is an integral part of Twain's style. The omnipotent Catholic church is one of Mark Twain's prime target of satire. Mark Twain is a strong believer in personal freedoms, thus he is against an established church. Twain's strong protestant beliefs are the background for his satire against the Roman Catholic church. He believes that the catholic church is not only teaching untruths, but is also destroying the lives of many innocent people. Through his satire, Twain portrays the church as a group of pit- bulls, ready to obey everything their master says, and destroy anyone that gets in their way.

The king, even though he is portrayed as a friend of the yankee, is one of Mark Twain's targets. Once as a freeman, the king is reduced to the less- than-average person that Twain believes all kings really are. Once his crown and cape are stripped from him, the king no longer has the great power that he had before. He is shown to lack some important skills, along with some basic farming knowledge that is common to all peasants. The king also is difficult to teach. Even with the extended coaching of the yankee concerning how a peasant should act, the king still reverted to his kingly ways.

Twain is also satirizes the beliefs of the middle age people. He is strongly against the middle age people's belief in magic rather than technology and facts. At the conclusion of the yankee's knightly trek to rescue princess, Sandy informs him that some pigs are actually princesses. Sandy, a typical middle age citizen, still believes that they are princesses, even though they are most certainly pigs. Finally, Twain's satire attacks the populace's resistance to change. Even with the great advancements that the yankee has given the people, they still revert back to their medieval war methods.

In the beginning, this Twain was set on creating a completely humorous novel, but gradually, he changed course, and ended up with a serious criticism of the period of King Arthur. Other than this minor flaw of inconsistency, Twain created a superb novel. In their works, Tennyson and Malory paint a picture of the middle ages being filled with brave, and almost god-like knights. On the other hand, Twain paints a picture of how life really was in the middle ages. He also allows common sense to prevail among his star character, the yankee. Instead of having him use dress in armor, and fight with medieval weapons, the yankee fights his duel wearing tights, and using modern weapons. A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court one of the finest pieces of literature ever written.

2010 books read: Candide, Undaunted Courage, Speaker for the Dead, Arcadia

[Separated out from original post from 2/24/10]

 Voltaire - Candide. (1759) Life is a Journey, not a destination. Everything that could possibly go wrong goes wrong, yet Candide remains an optimist. He even gives up on the city of gold and peace to try to find and marry the girl of his dreams. Through it all, he keeps on a face of naieve optimism. Alas, even that starts to go wrong, but he remains happy until he finally sinks in to a dull life on the farm. Finally the "lack of something bad" becomes the one thing that makes him question the "best of all possible worlds". It turns out that bad things actually kept life interesting. It is monotony that is the true bad.

Voltaire takes hilarious jabs at royalty, church hierarchy, society, and just about everybody. Its amazing that it survived all these years. As I was going through it, I kept hearing Bernstein's Candide overture in my head. So, I listened to the CD and ... well, I still don't have anything more than the overture going through my head.

Stephen E. Ambrose - Undaunted Courage. (1996) This is primarily a biography of Merriweather Lewis, with extensive coverage of the Lewis and Clark exploration. The superlatives and endless complements of Lewis get tiring. It reads more like a family tale, attempting to place the family member in the most positive light, with his adventures being the most important in the world. The laudatory prose gets very tiring.

Orson Scott Card - Speaker For the Dead (1986)
This is much better than Ender's Game. The story telling is much more "together" and riveting. It presents some interesting questions. Humans secure intergalatic peace, and in doing so bring their technological and social evolution to a veritable 3000 year stand still. When they do encounter other intelligent life, they look at it through there own condescending eyes. They don't realize that the others may have many abilities that they don't recognize. Furthermore, they also expose the futility of an "observe, not disturb" mantra in science. Any observation will lead to some change in the observed, even if the observer does not notice them.
Then there is the human interaction aspect. A quest to eliminate potential harm may bring about many external damages - while still letting the undesired harm take place.


Tom Stoppard - Arcadia (1993)
This funny play is filled with mathematical references, while at the same time taking jabs at literary critics and biographers. History is storytelling through the eyes of the historian. Their biases and time period can have a significant impact on the story that they tell. I think I'll be exploring other Stoppard plays.

Professor and the Madman, Man Who Loved China

(Post started February 18, 2013 - looks like there was a rating... and then it got left off.)

Man Who Loved China - Simon Winchester 4*
Professor and the Madman

Descartes' Bones, Gilgamesh, a new English version, Animal, Vegetable, Miracle, Thomas Aquinas (read in 2010)

 [Books read in 2010]

Splitting out some books from an old post due to tag limit,

Russell Shorto - Descartes' Bones (2008): The odd history of Descartes' bones show some of the prejudices of the "religion" of rational thought. This is filled with irony. Descartes was religious, yet is treated as the father of a (primarily atheist) rationalism. His bones become a "relic" for those against the church. He sought to find the means to overcome death, yet died in middle age. This book contains plenty of interesting tidbits on the philosopher and his followers and philosophy. However, the main point is the trail of his bones and how they relate to societal sentiments.

Stephen Mitchell - Gilgamesh, a new English version (circa 2100 BC): This is really graphic. It does have similarities to the "Joseph" and "Noah" stories from the Bible. Are they both referring to the same previous event?

Barbara Kingsolver - Animal, Vegetable, Miracle (2007): local eating. Properly raised domestic animals do have a place in the food chain. (They can convert non-human-edible plants in to human food. They have also been adapted to live with humans, and wouldn't do very well in the wild.) This provides a very balanced approach to environmentally sustainable food habits, with an emphasis on local and organic to decrease energy consumption, and even eat with a lower cost. The narrative provides an example of "mostly" local eating for a year. It does require hard work in the yard. However, good food plus hard work is exactly what the doctor ordered...

Thomas Aquinas (circa 1260): Interesting rational religious philosophy

False Economy: A Surprising Economic History of the World

[November 2009] The book opens with late 2001. What if Argentina and United States had traded places? Over the course of less than a century, why did the trajectories of two countries differ so much? This immediately piqued my interest. The continued narrative was compelling, but not quite as riveting as I hoped. The remainder of the chapters fell in to a similar pattern. They started out with a punch, but then seemed to drop it to meander around some ho-hum economic history. The contents are all fairly well written and interesting, but not as good as would be expected from the initial 'hits'.

The Sugar Fix

[November 2009] If we all stopped eating fruit, the obesity problem would go away and we'd all be healthier. At least according to this author. He pins fructose (aka fruit sugar) as public enemy number one. He cites many studies to prove the evil of fructose. Some appear quite convincing. However, the few studies that I was familiar with actually came up with different conclusions than this book's author.
That being said, we probably do consume excessive amounts of 'high-fructose corn syrup' and other sweeteners, and some of the advice is probably worthwhile. However, don't throw the apples out with thhe twinkies.

The Much Too Promised Land

[November 2009] The author has been very involved in the Arab-Israeli peace process through the administration of various US presidents. He is able to tell a fairly non-partisan tale of the good and the bad of presidents from Nixon to Bush Jr. This detailed personal knowledge of the peace process players is also the book's downfall. There is too much information about the people, personal relationships and negotiating conditions. At times it drifts in to minutia of the author's experience that would be more appropriate in a personal memoir than in the general history it purports to be.

Chocolate War

[November 2009] Frank Muller did a great job performing this audiobook. Unfortunately, the story is filled with stereotyped caricatures. Most of the characters appear nothing more than one-dimensional, with the attempts to 'broaden' them oten falling flat. The end also seems somewhat forced on the story.

Go Green, Live Rich: 50 Simple Ways to Save the Earth and Get Rich Trying

[November 2009] This book is nothing more than a string of factoids about "simple things" that can be done to save money and save the environment. Many are simplistic (don't buy fast food every day), while some tend to be inaccurate ('bulk bins' at grocery store have a tendency to be more expensive and still are 'packaged'.)
At times, the author seems like s shill for various companies and organizations. (Many of these seem to be worthwhile. However, there also seem to be many that are left out.
It is also baffling that they made this in to an audiobook. The 50 "simple ways" each have a bit of narrative, a number of factoids, and then a list of a bunch of web sites. Not the most compelling listening experience.

Alphabet Juice

[October 2009] The audiobook is performed quite well. However, the content is merely ho-hum. The author goes through the alphabet, meandering on word meanings, sounds and other random tidbits. A few bits are interesting. Some may be interesting to a certain audience. Others, are just plain boring. As a printed book, this would probably go over better as something sitting in the bathroom. Every section small word discussion stands on its own. However, even in print, the content is rather pedestrian, being neither very scholarly, nor very accessible to anyone but grammar nerds.

Mao: The Unknown Story

[October 2009] From the outset, it is clear that the authors' are not fond of Mao. He is cast in an extremely negative light as somebody who does just what is in his own best interest, with no respect for others, or even his own legacy. Many of his "accomplishments" are passed off as the works of others. (For example, the victory in the Chinese civil war is predominantly seen as a result of bad moves by the nationalists, often due to external factors.)
This overly negative view, however, does serve to paint a picture of Mao as a person, rather than the deity that arises in Maoist propaganda. Unlike fascists of his era, Mao was able to die in is sleep. Also, unlike other major communist countries, China's communist government still remains in place today. Thus, the balanced view of Mao still remains a great challenge. This book may swing the pendulum a little too far to the negative, but remains an important step in understanding an important historical figure.
In spite of the book's length, I did find it lacking in Mao's early history. He seemed to suddenly arrive in a key leadership position in the early communist party, seemingly without any strong qualifications. From the book, it is unclear why people would have such song support for a seemingly unqualified schemer.

The Arctic: A History

[October 2009] This book is a collection of names and dates with a few brief stories in between. Its not quite an 'encyclopedia' of the Arctic, but it gets close. At times it does start to wander in to compelling narratives, but then drops them and begins an unrelated topic. I also found myself consulting other reference works to get more details of some points in the book. In the end, I just started skipping whole chapters and looking for parts that seemed interesting.

War of the Worlds

[October 2009] The narration of this audiobook is properly paced and packed with enough emotion to keep it interesting, while not overbearing. The story is the classic H.G. Wells story of the martian attack. The understated power of the story dwarfs much of the over-the-top Science Fiction fare of today. The environmental message is also significant.

The California Gold Rush and the Coming of the Civil War

[October 2009] The book starts and ends with the duel between Senator Broderick and California Supreme Court Justice Terry. In between it tells stories from California history from before the gold rush to the civil war. The initial portion of the book focuses on the fairly well known history of early settler's, Sutter, and the stampede for gold. The most intriguing part here was the story of transportation to California and Vanderbilt's vindictiveness against those that wronged him.

The bulk of the book covers the movers and shakers in California at the time. These are the stories of men that left there home states in pursuit of greater political power in California. These stories are tied to the quest of politicians in Washington to balance the free and slave state needs. The story of the southern "Chivs" in California is especially interesting.

The many different threads all seem to tie in to the story of California. However, the story ends before the civil war, with the war only mentioned briefly in the epilogue. With the emphasis of the title I would expect a little more coverage at least up to the start of the war.

10 Days That Unexpectedly Changed America

[October 2009] Instead of detailing the dates that we all learn in history class, this book describes some less well known days that were important turning points in the history of America. It is a companion to a History Channel documentary (that was produced by different historians.) The author was fairly balanced in his views, coloring the events as we see them today, but still keeping them in the context of the time they took place. Each event is well written and self-contained.

When Markets Collide: Investment Strategies for the Age of Global Economic Change

[October 2009] This book reads like three articles and a lot of filler: an article from an economics journal, another from a popular investment magazine and finally a foreign policy review article. Unfortunately, these three articles only fill about 1/10th the space, so a lot of repetition and filler is added to bring it to the full length. It does have a number of good points, but, in spite of the excessive verbiage, they seem to be poorly elaborated. The author seems to repeat, rather than elucidate.

It is also difficult to determine the audience the author is addressing - especially since he commonly refers to 'investors'. At times 'investors' seems to reference retail investors who buy index funds. At other times 'investors' are investment bankers managing large funds. Sometimes, I found myself midway through a section before realizing it was a different "investor" he was talking to. And just to confuse matters even more, we spends a good portion of the book addressing desired changes to national and international policy.

In spite of the very poor writing, there are some interesting ideas, especially as they relate to the changing economic landscape with the 'emergence' of emerging economies. Perhaps the author will choose to reduce the book to a few well-written articles.