Return of the Book Thread

[proudft]

Oddly enough (considering how much I like military history and how many books on the subject), I've never really read a history book dedicated to the Napoleonic wars.  Could somebody recommend a good book that covers this whole period?

No idea on a history book, but once you're done with the history and ready for fiction, I recommend the Sharpe's Rifles books by Bernard Cornwell.  The main series is something like 12 books and then he did a bunch more after that (which I haven't read).  I wouldn't read 1-12 straight through just from sheer Napoleonic War gory repetitive battle overload, but there is a fair amount of variety in there.  Think James Bond, 1809, for the sorts of hijinx.

[Chimpy]

Does people discussing Glen Cook books count as part Ironwood's first of the law of the book thread? Or does it have to be *those* books?

If the latter, page 85 broke the first law!

[Paelos]

Does people discussing Glen Cook books count as part Ironwood's first of the law of the book thread? Or does it have to be *those* books?

If the latter, page 85 broke the first law!

Meh, it's what I'm reading. Sue me. 

[Ingmar]

Reading Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. Next on the list after that is the Richard Burton translation of the Arabian Nights, but I give even odds on whether I actually manage to make it through that or not - I tried once when I was much younger and the uh, non-modernity of the English defeated me.

[Brennik]

1 of: Felaheen [Paperback]
By: Jon Courtenay Grimwood

Thanks for reminding me! Read Pashazade and Effendi a long time ago, then I found the whole set in a collected edition, only to have my brother loan it before I could get around to starting the last book.

[Johny Cee]

1 of: Felaheen [Paperback]
By: Jon Courtenay Grimwood

Thanks for reminding me! Read Pashazade and Effendi a long time ago, then I found the whole set in a collected edition, only to have my brother loan it before I could get around to starting the last book.

Doh!  Sorry Morfiend.  Pashazade is the first book.

[Morat20]

Reading Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. Next on the list after that is the Richard Burton translation of the Arabian Nights, but I give even odds on whether I actually manage to make it through that or not - I tried once when I was much younger and the uh, non-modernity of the English defeated me.

You should try Jon Stewart's "America!".

Sure, it's not as "accurate" and "fact-filled" and "true" but it's fucking hilarious, especially if you can still remember 7th grade social studies texts.

[WayAbvPar]

Absolutely devoured Changes. Loved it. Ending wasn't quite what I was hoping for, but I am definitely interested in seeing what happens from here.

[Morat20]

Absolutely devoured Changes. Loved it. Ending wasn't quite what I was hoping for, but I am definitely interested in seeing what happens from here.

I'm sorta curious as to whether

[Khaldun]

Reading Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. Next on the list after that is the Richard Burton translation of the Arabian Nights, but I give even odds on whether I actually manage to make it through that or not - I tried once when I was much younger and the uh, non-modernity of the English defeated me.

Zinn is incredibly readable and it's the kind of thing that really benefits an innocent high school student. But honestly, as a historian, I gotta say that there is a lot of misleading stuff in it, some mind-boggling exclusions (Zinn has almost nothing to say about religion in American history, for example, which seems pretty important to any history of popular or general experience in this country) and the narrative line of the book is ultimately phony and contrived. E.g., almost every chapter goes something like this: The powerful controlled everything at this moment in time in America. The American people grew increasingly angry and discontent about this control. They became more and more radical. They tried to overthrow the powerful. They almost succeeded! And then the powerful got control over the situation and crushed the dissidents. There are times where that's a pretty fair characterization of things, but Zinn just sets this up as a never-ending treadmill that describes every single important episode in American history. In his view, nothing has really changed, there's been no real lasting progressive achievement, etc.--which is a pretty transparent bit of agit-prop that is trying to convince the audience that now is the time to finally really win out over the powerful, who are more or less the same powerful who controlled things in colonial times and during the American Revolution.

[naum]

Reading Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. Next on the list after that is the Richard Burton translation of the Arabian Nights, but I give even odds on whether I actually manage to make it through that or not - I tried once when I was much younger and the uh, non-modernity of the English defeated me.

Zinn is incredibly readable and it's the kind of thing that really benefits an innocent high school student. But honestly, as a historian, I gotta say that there is a lot of misleading stuff in it, some mind-boggling exclusions (Zinn has almost nothing to say about religion in American history, for example, which seems pretty important to any history of popular or general experience in this country) and the narrative line of the book is ultimately phony and contrived. E.g., almost every chapter goes something like this: The powerful controlled everything at this moment in time in America. The American people grew increasingly angry and discontent about this control. They became more and more radical. They tried to overthrow the powerful. They almost succeeded! And then the powerful got control over the situation and crushed the dissidents. There are times where that's a pretty fair characterization of things, but Zinn just sets this up as a never-ending treadmill that describes every single important episode in American history. In his view, nothing has really changed, there's been no real lasting progressive achievement, etc.--which is a pretty transparent bit of agit-prop that is trying to convince the audience that now is the time to finally really win out over the powerful, who are more or less the same powerful who controlled things in colonial times and during the American Revolution.

Eh, sounds like you're channeling flag waving, nationalistic, American exceptionalism apologist state historians…

Zinn never intended his narrative to be a comprehensive, definitive guide to history. Just another biased (self-admitted proudly, with caveat that *all* history is biased, no matter the devotion to objectivity or NPOV, that it impossible not to be selective or frame) perspective, but one tilted to a view from the lower, poorer, relatively powerless (though quite a bit of the narrative is indeed a celebration of the triumph of the people, and not the rulers as mainstream "hero" focused history grants credit to) class of American. Unlike the bulk of history, whitewashed and sanitized by "official" state historians, framing the narrative in a grand metamorphosis of American pride and liberty.

I've read "scholarly" historians dis Zinn but most of the prattling is centered on elevating rather inconsequential details he got wrong (or in the cases I saw, where Zinn presented historical themes from another writer that was discredited).

About the best testament I can give for Zinn is reading a blog post where an author met Zinn IRL and glowed over his books, to which Zinn scolded him that his PHotUS only merits as a "starter" and queried the young man on how much of the bibliography he had proceeded through.

[Ard]

[WayAbvPar]

[Morat20]

[Ard]

[WayAbvPar]

[NowhereMan]

I think I lost my clearance for this thread. Did you guys find out I've been spying for the other side all along?

[Morat20]

I think I lost my clearance for this thread. Did you guys find out I've been spying for the other side all along?

Enough stuff changes in Changes, and it's new enough, that it's better to be safe than sorry about spoilers for it.

That's all speculation about the ending, however.

[Ingmar]

[Khaldun]

stuff

Oh, please, girlfriend. Marcus Rediker, for one example, has radical credentials to rival Zinn's but his histories of the the Atlantic and slavery are never about a bunch of star-chamber nastykin masters of the universe versus virtuous working people. And he's just as readable as Zinn for a wide audience--I totally recommend his recent The Slave Ship for this crowd. You can write history with a very strong political bent and not skimp on human complexity, and still be perfectly interesting to read besides. Leaving out huge, crucial dimensions of popular experience in American history isn't a matter of minor facts if you're aiming to write a comprehensive popular history of the country.

[Morat20]

[Ard]

[Johny Cee]

Eh, sounds like you're channeling flag waving, nationalistic, American exceptionalism apologist state historians…

Zinn never intended his narrative to be a comprehensive, definitive guide to history. Just another biased (self-admitted proudly, with caveat that *all* history is biased, no matter the devotion to objectivity or NPOV, that it impossible not to be selective or frame) perspective, but one tilted to a view from the lower, poorer, relatively powerless (though quite a bit of the narrative is indeed a celebration of the triumph of the people, and not the rulers as mainstream "hero" focused history grants credit to) class of American. Unlike the bulk of history, whitewashed and sanitized by "official" state historians, framing the narrative in a grand metamorphosis of American pride and liberty.

I've read "scholarly" historians dis Zinn but most of the prattling is centered on elevating rather inconsequential details he got wrong (or in the cases I saw, where Zinn presented historical themes from another writer that was discredited).

About the best testament I can give for Zinn is reading a blog post where an author met Zinn IRL and glowed over his books, to which Zinn scolded him that his PHotUS only merits as a "starter" and queried the young man on how much of the bibliography he had proceeded through.

Can we keep the meaningless rhetoric twatter to politics, with the rest of the nonsense?

[Morat20]

Can we keep the meaningless rhetoric twatter to politics, with the rest of the nonsense?

Boiled down, the point that "If you like reading about history, be sure to read about any given event from multiple sources" is probably a good one. Best history class I had in college had a prof who would take a single event and show how it (and it's impact on events) was described by multiple people, both contemporary actors and historians looking back.

It was rather enlightening.

[Xilren's Twin]

Finally got around to finishing the Mistborn series by Brandon Sanderson and I can see why they picked him to finish the WoT marathon.  He did a nice job expanding and explaining a lot of the seeds he planted in books 1 and 2 in ways that made sense and wrapped up the whole thing fairly nicely.  He also isnt afraid to let important characters die and while there was a little hand waving at the end, he didnt go full mode "everyone lives happily ever after", which is nice.  Though his magic systems and the way they intertwined was well done.  Having read his first WoT offering I think he'll do fine to at least get us to the end in a way that makes sens, especially since we finally got that whole "Rand has done gone plum crazzzy" stuff finally out of the way.

Also, Michelle Sagara's latest book in the Chronicles of Elantra is out - Cast in Chaos.  Reading that now.

[murdoc]

Just finished the fifth book in Butcher's 'Codex of Alera' series. It's merely ok. Rather cliched fantasy story, but entertaining enough and easy to read on the backdeck in the sun. The Vord are the most uninteresting villians I've come across in awhile.

[Khaldun]

Finishing the new Naomi Novik dragon book. It's pretty decent, though she's still not going where I think she ought to go with the series--this one feels like a side trip designed to defer some big narrative developments, like she's stalling.

Some nerdery follows:

[Morat20]

Just finished the fifth book in Butcher's 'Codex of Alera' series. It's merely ok. Rather cliched fantasy story, but entertaining enough and easy to read on the backdeck in the sun. The Vord are the most uninteresting villians I've come across in awhile.

You mean the Zerg, right?

I swear, the idea for that book either came from a drunken dare or a bet. "Hey, hey, hey...I bet you can't write a Lost Legion v Zerg smackdown. And get paid for it".

Still, I think I enjoyed Captain's Fury the most, simply for the ridiculous battle tactics used.

[Johny Cee]

Been reading some pop history.  The Great Bridge and The Panama Canal by McCullough (the John Adams guy).  19th Century public works are just...     The accepted death toll on the Canal was unreal. 

[FatuousTwat]

Almost done with The Coming of Conan the Cimmerian, then I will be trying to finish Hero With A Thousand Faces. I got about half way through the last time I tried, but got distracted by some other book.

[Sky]

Quickly sped through Arms Commander by Modesitt for a light mind-cleanser before diving back into Erikson with House of Chains. What an amazing beginning to a book, it could've been Howard writing about the Teblor. Really amazing stuff and prejudices one against just about every other fiction venue out there. I find I want games to have much grittier narrative, for instance.

[Paelos]

Now I'm reading "Boys will be Boys: The Glory Days and Party Nights of the Dallas Cowboys." It's awesome and over the top. Absolutely nothing is sacred and it points out every crazy ass thing going on with the Dallas dynasty in the 90s. Freaking awesome if you are a fan, or you hate them to death and want to know what POS most of them really were in lurid detail.

Must read for the NFL fan.

[dd0029]

Finally finished up The Passage by Justin Cronin.  I really enjoyed most of this, but the second quarter of the book is a real slog, which is a real shame as the opening quarter was very strong.  It does not do a whole lot for the narrative.  It runs through a ton of PoV characters that don't seem to add much of anything other than make you pleased to see them dead.  Once that is past, things tighten up on a much smaller cast of characters and things start moving along.  Additionally, I am a sucker for found narrative and/or epistolary pieces and he seeds in half a dozen nuggets like these.  With that bias in mind, I think these are some of the best sections of the book.  They really capture that post-apocalyptic weary survival vibe.  Without that annoying section, this would have been a great book instead of just pretty good.

[Johny Cee]

I also just finished a 3-1 book of Heinlein early novels/novelettes.  Like most of Heinlein's stuff, it was readable and entertaining.  Definitely lesser works, but can't complain with the deal.  Copyright in the '50s hardcover compilation from ye olde used book store.

The Puppetmasters - Alien invader story set in the near future.
Waldo - Awkward technical genius, near future, quantam physics = magic.
Magic Inc. - Really, this is prototypical urban fantasy with a bunch of local/state politics.

[Chimpy]

The Puppet Masters is one of my favorite of Heinlein's short novels.