The wording on this is unclear. This is Part 1, which, when you download it, has Part 1 and Part 2. However, there is a Part 2, which also has Part 1 and Part 2 (and costs more money). I bought the first and was surprised when the book seemed to end in mid-sentence (as if you could tell with Proust). I see now there there is another version including the whole book for half the price. I don't know whether this one is better, but the narrator is good, so perhaps it is.
This is the second time I've "read" this book and listening to it gives a different dimension. Impressive historian, impressive sourcing and incisive pattern-finding. I'm not a historian but it seems to me there's been a lot of "medieval times were not so backward" going around, like "they discovered X and did Y, etc." but . . . well . . . really?
I don't know if this book counts as journalism, history or whatever, but it was GOOD. It made you feel like you were there (without the agony of BEING there). The author didn't judge the characters or events which was also good. It shows how quickly society can break down even with the best of intentions and how rapidly the dogs of war come to finish the job. Great moral story and warning (which we will probably ignore).
This book is the history of an environment, rather than a traditional history focused on one person or series of events. As such it was harder to listen to (and possibly harder to write). Probably if I'd bought the book instead of listening to it, images would have grounded the story more for me - hey, Audible, why don't you start including .pdfs of the pictures with each purchase? Anyhow I enjoyed it very much even though it was complex.
I'm an academic, so this book was wonderful for me, an easy way to "read" for work. However, it's not for everybody - it's not "lite" history or economics. I enjoyed it very much and also I enjoyed hearing the names pronounced as they should be. More of the same please!!
This is a good book but it starts out with politics and a presumption that everyone feels the way the authors do, a common academic mistake - why do we make such mistakes? Anyhow, I think of the book frequently - getting past the politics, it was good.
I really enjoyed this book. As an academic at a technological research institution, many of my peers think that emotions don't exist. Consequently, emotional intelligence is a very useful competitive tool on par with, say, using performance enhancing drugs to stay up all night tabulating test results. Oh well.
This is an academic or scientific autobiography that discusses drugs in the context of society and the author's life. I enjoyed it and its message is clear. Almost everything I read and see about drug use in the US is from the viewpoint of moral exhortation, which is too bad because it is often untrue (and so no one listens). I'm glad someone is telling the truth.
I like the way the reader does the accents. He's not a southerner but he does well enough that you can tell the character who is speaking by the way he reads - except, of course, when Faulkner himself forgets who is speaking - I still don't completely understand the book and probably never will, which is a good thing, because it's like a gold mine you can go back to over and over again and it never runs dry.
I always wondered about those vague statements I heard regarding autism and vaccines. Now I know why they exist. It's almost like a cult - the human mind is a complex thing indeed.
I think this is the best biography/history I ever read. Using the people surrounding a person to help narrate their lives and time is an excellent idea. It gave me a much better understanding of Lincoln and the Civil war, even though I already knew a great deal about him/it.
Report Inappropriate Content