A series of short, some very short, non-fiction pieces on the Scottish environment. I find it difficult to overstate how much I enjoyed this book. WhaA series of short, some very short, non-fiction pieces on the Scottish environment. I find it difficult to overstate how much I enjoyed this book. What seems like simple prose, is a powerful, elegant, flowing series of short pieces, almost musings and observations on nature. Highly poetic, which is not surprising as Jamie is also Makar - Scotland's national poet.
Although obviously a much later book, it reminded of Nan Shepherd's The Living Mountain a little - not just because they are both Scottish women writing about nature, but more because of the way they write about it. They are not just observers of nature, though fine observers they are as any good writer must be, but they are situated within nature. They are partaking of it, not merely commenting on it. The big difference is that Jamie's book is much more melancholy reflecting the state of, and decline of, nature in her surrounds.
I could have read this book in one sitting, but I stretched it out for 4 days to savour it more. I shall look out for more of her work. I did not know her writing before this book, but if this is anything to go by, I shall look for more....more
A little complicated to review this book, as the edition I have contains Camus thought piece called "The Myth of Sisyphus", plus 5 other essays and anA little complicated to review this book, as the edition I have contains Camus thought piece called "The Myth of Sisyphus", plus 5 other essays and an afterword. They make an odd mixture, and I assume it is done to flesh it out to book length.
Let me start with The Myth of Sisyphus. Here Camus explains his views on the absurd, and through this that perennial philosophical question of how one should live. It is about 100 pages long, of which only 4 pages are actually his analysis of the Myth of Sisyphus and the rest is building up to that with other examples of the absurd. To be honest, half the time I was not sure what he was on about. But when I was, I thought it all good and interesting. The 4 pages on The Myth of Sisyphus I found rather wonderful. Much of the rest, less so. I think it exemplifies that difference between the sort of philosophy I was formally educated in, and some other European examples. I got most from it when I read the afterward by John Woods included in the book, where it says: "... we should not mark Camus as if he were sitting a metaphysical exam, but judge his essay as a work of art. That is to say, we should judge it by the dignity of its argumentation, not by the grandeur of its proofs, by the beauty of its effort, not by the conclusiveness of its attainment." I can't really say more or better than that.
As always with Camus, amongst the general flow, there are some striking, pithy and memorable phrases, of which I will add a few.
The other 5 shorter essays are a mixture of memories of Algiers (complementary) and Oran (the fictional site of his book The Plague - and desperately uncomplimentary) and a few other bits and pieces. They are each interesting enough, but apart from being written by the same author have little connection in terms of theme or style other than they are non-fiction opinion pieces.
For the time being this marks the end of my short foray into the works of Camus....more
Well, my second attempt at Fosse, and since he is so regarded I felt worth a second attempt after being rather underwhelmed by Aliss at the Fire. ThisWell, my second attempt at Fosse, and since he is so regarded I felt worth a second attempt after being rather underwhelmed by Aliss at the Fire. This was better, although similar in terms of style and with what I now assume is his typical style. (Whether that's a fair judgement after 2 books, I don't know, but its all the data I have). That style: simple short sentences, a high degree of repetition and banal statements interspersed with opaque intriguing ones.
More than the images this book creates in ones imagination, the most striking thing for me was the rhythm. This book has a definite and unusual rhythm, and I think this more than the actual story kept me entertained enough to read it in one sitting. That, I have to say, is no great achievement for a book that reached only to page 46 in this edition. Any longer and it might have become tedious given the repetitive style. I'd agree with the commentators who compare Fosse to Beckett, at least on this book, unlike the previous one I read. Although strangely, given that this is about a man lost in a freezing forest at night who may well die, I'd say more upbeat than Beckett.
I enjoyed the pace and tone of the book, and the mood it created. I would not put this in the must read category, but I enjoyed it enough to not completely discount future readings of Fosse. Although I've given it 4 stars - it was a just scraped into 4 stars for me. ...more
I enjoyed this book, which may be an odd thing to say given the content matter - the fall of someone from a high position. I mostly enjoyed the style,I enjoyed this book, which may be an odd thing to say given the content matter - the fall of someone from a high position. I mostly enjoyed the style, which is a first person dialogue as if the narrator of the book is talking to someone else. Someone, it is not quite clear who it is, but my interpretation at the end of the book is that it is ourself as the reader. The narrator is talking to the reader and basically saying we are in the same boat, same condition as he is. This is a bold thing to do, and I think a hard trick to pull off, but Camus manages to do it quite well.
The content of the book is interesting enough, and follows Camus view on the absurdity of life, but I mostly enjoyed this as a writer feeling that the author has pulled off a good trick that could easily have gone wrong. If I reflect on the 3 Camus novels I have just read, they each have a completely different style, and this I think reflects Camus's skill as a writer.
Although I graded it one star less that The Plague, I actually enjoyed it more so I am probably being inconsistent here. Perhaps Camus would appreciate the absurdity of that. ...more
The second of my Camus books in short succession, but they really could not feel more different. The Stranger feels like quite a modern book, whereas The second of my Camus books in short succession, but they really could not feel more different. The Stranger feels like quite a modern book, whereas The Plague feels like a book written in the 19th century to me. That's not a criticism by the way, and it may of course be deliberate - it's just a reflection of how it felt to me.
Some people claim this is an allegory for the experience of France in WWII. That is possible. I chose to read it simply as a novel. Although Camus apparently did not like the title existentialist, (that seems to be common amongst people labeled as existentialists), there are themes one can recognise from existentialism. The idea of making a choice, and living with that choice whatever it is and for other not to judge that choice. The images of the absurd, like the man who spits on cats but who mourns when they are not there. The theme of the uncontrollable nature of life and the world, but that not giving us a reason to give up.
The main characters are not portrayed as superheros, but ordinary people rising to the challenges (and in one case opportunities) that the plague raises. It would be easy to position some of the characters (e.g. Rieux, Tarrou) as heros, others as villains (e.g. Cottard), and some others as finding repetence (e.g. Rambert) - but the book passes no judgements on the characters. It merely presents them as people who have made their choice to respond to the plague in different ways.
It is a novel, so fiction, but it is set in the real non-fictious town of Oran, which did seem a little odd to me, although I am sure there was a reason Camus did this.
Although this is a well known "classic", to me it just scraped into the 5 star category and on another day I might have given it 4. A worthy read with some interesting themes and occasionally brilliant passages, it has not quite lived up to the fanfare for me....more
Reading Camus for me has been a long time coming. I have regularly found myself thinking, over the previous decades, that I must read some Camus, but Reading Camus for me has been a long time coming. I have regularly found myself thinking, over the previous decades, that I must read some Camus, but for one reason or another I have never got around to it. Well, that is something I am putting right now.
I have to admit I was most of the time, slightly underwhelmed by this book. That's not because it is not a good book, but because I had such high expectations. Having said that, it is powerful and that power all comes together in the final chapter. The prose seems simple, but Camus gets a lot across in those simple sentences. It is profound, but that profundity seeps into you slowly. It's a short book, my version stretching to 111 pages.
In some ways it feels like a very modern book, rather than one written 80 years ago. On the other hand, the main character, Mersault, I suspect would be treated differently nowadays. There are points when rather than being the non-conforming anti-hero seeing the absurdness of life, he comes across as someone who is neuro-divergent, possibly severely autistic - very bright but unable to see how the world works for other people. However, I think this would be an anachronistic reading, but for me it took until the final chapter to really get ones head around the way Mersault thinks - and the challenge this provides to all of this. ...more
I enjoyed this short book on neoliberalism. It's an imperfect and ambitious book that tries, in my view, to do a bit too much and I don't quite agree I enjoyed this short book on neoliberalism. It's an imperfect and ambitious book that tries, in my view, to do a bit too much and I don't quite agree with everything that is written here, (e.g. the definition of capitalism sounds as if it is taken directly from a marxist book). But it is very well written, and brings together some thinking that for someone with a traditional liberal viewpoint on the world, (completely and utterly different from a neoliberal, by the way), educates, annoys and even to some degree frightens.
What it does well is to explain what neoliberalism is, how it works, its insidious, corrupting and hidden nature and its, in some societies, all pervasive nature. This is a valuable service, as it is something many people do not understand and yet it underpins a lot of the politics in a lot of countries. I was originally educated in my first degrees in free market economics by a strong Hayekian basis, so I understand the origins well.
I think what is slightly less successful is that it veers between being a fact based dissection of neoliberalism and a polemic. Either would be ok, but the combination does not always work. There is also a tendency to blame every evil of modern society on neoliberalism, and although I would agree it is to blame for a lot of things, it is not the root cause of all evil. Finally, at the end of the book the authors offer an alternative solution. Nice, but too quick to be convincing.
Overall, a worthy read and this could be for many people an important and enlightening book. It is though not quite as perfect as it might have been with a little more focus....more
This book wasn't really for me - I don't mean it was a bad book. My grade reflects its usefulness to me, rather than is a general review, which I do nThis book wasn't really for me - I don't mean it was a bad book. My grade reflects its usefulness to me, rather than is a general review, which I do not think I am qualified to give.
I think it was pretty good, just it was not what I was after. I wanted an introduction to romanticism and was lent this by a friend who is a philosophy professor. It's really not an introduction, although to be fair it does not claim to be. However, given this long caveat, I did get something from the book and did learn a fair bit about romanticism.
This volume focuses on the very early days of romanticism and really only a few years from about 1797 to 1804 (from memory, the exact dates are in the book introduction). It is a collection of essays by the author, on the same topic, but not originally written as a book, so there is some degree of repetition. The bits I learnt from were clear, but I would imagine hard for anyone without any formal philosophical background. Occasionally, it went over my head, but that points back to my opening point that I am not really the intended reader of this book.
The only annoying thing is that the author uses frequently German language phrases and words without explaining them. Perhaps, they would be clear to anyone who was familiar with romanticism, but I felt it would have been easier with more explanation as some of the terms were critical to understanding the book. ...more
A collection is short stories written mostly to Keegan’s very high standard. I think this was her first collection, and although it’s not perfect, it A collection is short stories written mostly to Keegan’s very high standard. I think this was her first collection, and although it’s not perfect, it is very good and it does point to her talent and potential.
It’s not a happy book. Starting with the first story, named like the book itself Antarctica, with its unexpected and shocking ending. There are a couple a little lighter, and I enjoyed Sisters with its satisfying unpleasant twist that Roald Dahl would have approved of.
If you like short stories and are not bothered if the mood is mostly downbeat, well worth reading. ...more
I thought this was rather good, although due to the normal unexpected events of life, it took me a little longer to read than expected. Runciman has aI thought this was rather good, although due to the normal unexpected events of life, it took me a little longer to read than expected. Runciman has an engaging writing style which eases one into some quite complex topics.
Runciman does two things in this book. Firstly, he presents a key thinker in political science/ political philosophy, starting with Hobbes, and presents a simple, accessible and enlightening description of their thinking relating to one of their core texts - starting, of course with Hobbes’ Leviathan.
Secondly, as you read through the 12 thinkers he draws comparisons between them. He stays reasonably neutral - pointing out where their predictions have proven in time to be wrong, but the focus is on presenting their thoughts rather than critiquing them in any significant way.
One strength is that the thinkers are varied, and although there are several “dead white men” presented here, he does not restrict himself to the usual limited crowd. Although mainly western thinkers they are not all white or all men. This is a strength.
It’s not a deep analysis, but then 20 or so pages per thinker does not allow this. But it is deep enough and I certainly learnt from his explanations and was introduced to thinkers I was personally less familiar with such as Constant and Fanon. (But then again I have not studied political philosophy formally and so am a relative beginner).
There are elements that can be questioned - such as why start with Hobbes. But for a single volume text aimed at the intelligent lay reader you have to have some limits. If you are interested in political thinkers, and want a good place to start, I think this is a rather good place. ...more
Hmmm - Kurkov has written some good books, but this was not for me one of them. I considered 2 stars, but could not bring myself to go quite that low.Hmmm - Kurkov has written some good books, but this was not for me one of them. I considered 2 stars, but could not bring myself to go quite that low.
It’s certainly imaginative, but the story meanders as if he came up with random ideas as he went along. It does all get wrapped up at the end, but in a way I found unsatisfactory.
But if it’s imaginative it definitely not a literary masterpiece. If you read this and nothing else by Kurkov my suggestion is try again - he has written a lot better books. ...more
Not reviewing yet - as I’ll probably be reading in again over next few weeks as part of a reading group. Plus I need time to reflect. But you can see Not reviewing yet - as I’ll probably be reading in again over next few weeks as part of a reading group. Plus I need time to reflect. But you can see from the dates that it took me a while to get through - so it was work! That’s not necessarily a bad thing but I wanted to be honest that I did not find it an easy read. ...more
I am a fan of Berlin’s writing - it is both accessible and erudite. On top of this his writing is a pleasure to read. The combination is often not achI am a fan of Berlin’s writing - it is both accessible and erudite. On top of this his writing is a pleasure to read. The combination is often not achieved in philosophical texts. I know a book is good when I think it is too short and I want the reading experience to continue.
The book contains many familiar themes for anyone who knows Berlin’s views or has read other books on his views on the history of ideas. It was not actually written as a book - this is an edited transcript of a series of talks Berlin gave in the 60s. But it reads extremely well as a book, and it does have that sense of listening to a brilliant person talking directly to you.
I am not (yet) well enough read on romanticism to determine if I agree with all of Berlin’s views. But they felt convincing. But my review and grading is as much about the pleasure of Berlin’s writing as it is about the philosophical and historical interpretation of the roots of romanticism. ...more
An ambitious and unusual book. (I seem to be using the word unusual a lot at present to describe books). It is almost two fictional biographies combinAn ambitious and unusual book. (I seem to be using the word unusual a lot at present to describe books). It is almost two fictional biographies combined - one of the eponymous Elizabeth Finch and one about the non-fictional Julian the apostate.
It is hard to describe what the book is about. Partially celebration of a certain style of academic teaching, partially about a certain sort of cultured intellectual, partially about personal intellectual development, partially just a story, partially polemic against certain political and social attitudes, partially I strongly suspect a reflection of the author’s dislike of certain features of English society- and more.
Barnes combines his intellectual and literary merits in this complex novel. I have to be honest it did not totally work for me, but it is highly original and a good journey to take. Well worth 4 stars.
I suspect though very much not a book for everyone. ...more
A period piece of English manners and behaviours amongst a small group of old people, of a certain class, aging in a residentialBoth amusing and sad.
A period piece of English manners and behaviours amongst a small group of old people, of a certain class, aging in a residential hotel. (Do such things exist anymore I wonder?)
The author captures both the humour of situations, language and thinking - as well as the melancholy of being old and largely forgotten beautifully. It is hard to be both funny and sad simultaneously - Elizabeth Taylor achieved this.
But this is a very English book of a certain era. Will it travel in time or place well? I am not sure. ...more
My first Calvino - it was ok. It had at points descriptions and sections that were enjoyable to read. It was an easy and unusual read.
But there is soMy first Calvino - it was ok. It had at points descriptions and sections that were enjoyable to read. It was an easy and unusual read.
But there is something a little artificial, to me, about the structure of the book. It was as if reading something engineered to a specification rather than developed on artistic impulse.
I read the illustrated folio edition (as with all folio books without ISBN). If nothing else, a very pretty object in its case. ...more
Another brilliant piece of writing from Keegan, although if you buy it as a standalone book you may feel short changed - 46 pages of generously sized Another brilliant piece of writing from Keegan, although if you buy it as a standalone book you may feel short changed - 46 pages of generously sized font and this is scarcely a 30 minute read. When I bought it I realised it was a small book, but not quite how small.
But as in her other books Keegan packs so much into so little.
It describes the attempt at a relationship and its failure because of the inherent misogyny of a man. Although I don’t believe all men are like this, this picks at a certain behaviour common to many. Little is said of the woman - it is all about the man and his failure to understand or adapt, but to expect a woman to do so.
So, this is hardly a jolly read, but it is a good one. ...more
An interesting writing style - unlike any other I have read. Stream of consciousness, but jumping between different peoples’ viewpoints mid sentence. An interesting writing style - unlike any other I have read. Stream of consciousness, but jumping between different peoples’ viewpoints mid sentence. As an original piece of literature this rates highly. But 3 stars because it never truly engaged me, and I found reading it to be a bit of a chore even though it is only 74 pages long.
I picked it up, drawn by the fact the author is a Nobel prize winner for literature. Although in the past I have had mixed feelings about the works of Nobel prize winners. I also like short books when travelling and I read this whilst on a journey.
Should I try more of the author or is this typical? That’s the main question going through my head today. ...more
Loading...
