YAKIMA, WA, United States | Member Since 2009
I really enjoyed the book. All of the technology references are laughably dated, but the biology, writing and explanations seem to hold up just fine.
The only question I have comes up late in the book. I would like to know Dawkins' thoughts on newer research that seems to support a variation of Lamarkism. Dawkins' vehemently objects to the idea and his evidence seems clear except that I've read about inheritance of acquired traits in recent periodicals and would like to know if any new information has caused Dawkins to adjust his opinions (or if they are still as strong and he finds the new research flawed).
sure, the book is a pleasant, enjoyable listen, especially if you already read Bossypants, enjoyed it and are looking for something different that is almost as good.
I found Poehler's struggles with the process of writing endearing and interesting to hear.
I can't imagine reading this particular book, because it has so many guest narrators (famous comedians, mostly) and a live performance of the last chapter.
Its not that kind of book, but Seth Myers' praise of the Palin Rap made me go watch it again. funny.
If you like Scalzi books, especially those read by Will Wheaton, you'll probably enjoy this one. It's fast paced, interesting but certainly a fairly light read.
Also Wil Wheaton is the best narrator ever (right after Jim Dale) and perfect for this sort of story.
I'm not sure why I thought I might enjoy the second of this series when I only vaguely liked the first. I think I just wish it were written by Connie Willis.
The story kept veering off randomly after what seemed like major events. Bad things happened, but then we're just over it, I guess? Whatever. I think the plot could use some editing to make it more clear or more logical or something.
Neat premise, but skip Taylor and read the Doomsday Book or Connie Willis' other Oxford Time Travel books.
This book was a little underwhelming, but the premise was neat.
I didn't particularly like the main characters, but I did enjoy some of the events that happened to them as they wandered through familiar stories. I also liked the way the changes in the story caught us up to our real world. It was fun to imagine the world as it was supposed to be at the start of their story.
I want more of this, but written by someone else.
Having read all of Pratchett's Discworld books, collaborations and other stuff, like Nation and The Amazing Maurice... I was interested to hear more from this author.
This book isn't as good as Discworld or Good Omens or Nation, but it was still enjoyable and interesting. Pratchett has a type of early onset Alzheimer's which you probably know, but will certainly hear a good deal about in this book. The last few inclusions get a little repetitive, but overall the stories are varied and interesting.
Also, I learned that perhaps I've been saying Maurice (in my head) wrong all along, the narrator says Morris, I've always thought it was more like Maw-reece).
I thought this sounded like fun book about the love of reading. I specifically looked to see if he read some books that I've enjoyed. He did, but once I started listening, I discovered that his taste is diametrically opposed to mine. He couldn't get into Middlemarch and refused to like Austen. Moron. And he read and enjoyed all of Dickens's writings (he says). I don't get it.
I think I could have still enjoyed a book about books I don't like (I enjoy reading the blog "Books I done Read" but I've discovered that I tend not to like the books she really loves), but this was mostly a whiny biography of a man I don't like and I couldn't care less about.
Sadly, so sadly, he didn't really say much about the books themselves. I would have loved to hear his actual thoughts on what the characters did, what they thought, etc, or even how the author phrased things or set up scenes in the story, rather than his vague praise of, or distaste for the author's general writing. (If this guy were writing this book for my class, I'd urge him to be more specific when he praises or disses a book.)
Miller is trying to read these books to make himself better, though he doesn't recommend that we all try reading these particular books. He includes a lot of books I haven't actually heard of (even though I consider myself a fairly broad reader) and he makes a lot of references to British stuff that loses me. (I totally want book tokens for Christmas, though. What a cool idea. Wikipedia says they have them in the US, but I've never heard of them.)
Here's all you need to know: This book is not fun, you'd be better off just reading the books already on your list because this is not a commiseration of your love of books; this is a stultifying slog through somebody else's list, with basically no attention given to what is in the books themselves.
Save your credit for something, anything, else.
So, if you've reached the point where you've read and/or listened to all the Discworld books and The Long Earth books, but you need more Pratchett, this is a good book.
Actually, my daughter kept commenting that it sounded like Harry Potter. She's right in that the stories that helped build the Discworld are the same ones that support the stories in Rowling's world, and probably others, for that matter.
The book is enjoyable and interesting, though I'm not sure I'd recommend it to someone who hasn't read many Discworld books.
I can't even say if the story was good because the narrator was so annoying. She was like a British Valley Girl? At the end of every sentenceeeee, or pauuuuuse, she would drag out the last syllabllllllle?
Why did they choose a female narrator anyway? The book is written entirely in the voice of the male protagonist. Who cares that Eliot is female if her subject is male. Oh, l mean "maaaaaale?"
I found words like brothaaaaaa and othaaaaa to be especially annoying in this narration. I actually sped up the playback which put most of the narration at normal speed but the extended endings were still quite evident.
I got the story because I really enjoyed Middlemarch. In Middlemarch I found the main characters interesting, realistic and though they didn't make decisions I would make, their actions made sense for them. In this story I didn't sympathize or even understand any of the people. Too bad. Maybe with a different narrataaaaa, I would have enjoyed it moooooore?
I often like histories that focus closely on one person like this and both the time and the place sounded fascinating before I began. During the reading, there were moments when I thought the story was going to pull me in, but it never did.
There was nothing glaringly wrong or problematic in the story, but I never got excited enough about what happened to really care--though I kept expecting I would. I would pause and think, "now this is going to get good" but in never quite did.
The thing I missed the most was the lack of connection to what came before and after the time of the "action" in the book. How did this historical event/battle/plan stem from events decades before or decades after. The subtitle is the "making of the modern middle east" but this book ends with the end of the lives of the major players. We are left to remember ourselves what the middle east turned into during and after WW2 and beyond.
I am left with an idea the Lawrence was a remarkable boy and young man, a conflicted adult who felt rightly betrayed by various people and the British government and then he died. the end.
I'd seen the movie long ago, as a kid with my parents. I'd never read the book or had it assigned in school. I was glad to discover it as an adult, since some of the insights would have passed me by as a teenager.
I was especially interested in the book's insights into education, small towns, poverty, family, society, judicial progress, femininity and parenting roles. There is so much in this book to enjoy and so much to wonder at.
I have heard it described as a book to read to understand America. I think that is apt. I would highly highly recommend it.
Report Inappropriate Content