I have been going through Vonnegut's catalog (slowly) and got to this one. I'm glad I read other things he had written before this, or I might have falsely concluded that "I don't like Vonnegut." As it happens, I read Slaughterhouse before this (like most readers, I'd imagine) and so I was more disposed to enjoy this.
I thought it was kinda weak and didn't live up to the premise.
Yes, but again, I'd say check out other things by Vonnegut if you are new to him.
The characters are complex and well-developed.
The scene where Gene is outside Finny's hospital window.
We all were supposed to read this when I was in the 10th grade and like so many other books, I didn't bother and just read Cliff's notes and faked my way through. My loss. This is a good book with deep, emotional themes about coming to understand yourself and who you are.
It's hard to say, because I was hoping for different material than I found, and the error is mine.
If what you want is to read elegant writing about a variety of topics - particularly reviews of other people's work - and you like the writing style of Hitchens, I imagine this would be a fantastic book, and judging from the reviews of others, my suspicions are well-founded.
But I was looking for material similar to "God is not Great" and was disappointed. Again, my error.
I would. I really enjoyed John Slattery's performance, and the characters are believable and real and sad.
I really like character development more than plot, and the people in this story seemed well-rounded, believable, complex in their motivations, and varied. Having said that, there were plenty of plot developments as well.
He has a great voice, and he deals with the Italian well. He also doesn't overdo emotion in his narration, which is particularly well suited for the narrating character.
Don't want to spoil it, but the ending.
The material was not presented as a dry lecture, but was peppered with fun anecdotes, interesting asides, self-deprecating humor, and witty comments.
A lot of good information about rhetoric and how to make a persuasive argument for what you want.
I would have liked it to include more incidents and information about how things we take to be facts cease being so. The book was far more about the accretion of new facts and how we can predict that than it was about the retirement of old facts that are no longer considered true. Of the discussion that there was about facts going away, it was more about facts that were not actually proven to be errors...they tended to just become obsolete and irrelevant but still basically true.
I would read another book by Hawking but will be avoiding other books narrated by Jackson.
Readers might consider "A Universe From Nothing" by Lawrence M. Krauss. It's also related to cosmology and brings complicated science to the masses...Krauss's book has the advantage of being more current, and being read by the author himself.
He has an obnoxious tendency to pause mid-sentence and even mid-phrase, to include uh's and er's, and use strange inflection as if he were unfamiliar with and bored by the material.
Report Inappropriate Content