Reviews Written By: A2TT4AA3QO0DPYprovided by Amazon.com |
 | ||
 | Outliers: The Story of Success (1st Edition) | |
 | "The Factors Behind Success" | 2009-11-05 |
| In the never-ending nature vs. nurture debate, Malcolm Gladwell comes down squarely on the side of nurture in "Outliers." That's the fast and dirty gist of the book. Gladwell probably won't convince those on the nature side of the question, and in the popular imagination I doubt this will be the last word by a long shot. Still, he is an elegant, persuasive writer who gives us much to think about.
According to Gladwell, talent and hard work are only part of what makes someone successful. They are important, but circumstances have a lot to due with success as well. He gives examples to back up his claim. In Canada there is an elite Junior Hockey League, out of which many prominent NHL Players have come. In the team, he noticed a disproportionate number born in January. The reason that is that the league determines eligibility by calendar year, so children born on January 1 play in the same league as those born on December 31 in the same year. So adolescents born earlier in the year would be bigger and more mature than their younger counterparts, thereby being identified as better athletes, leading to extra coaching and a better chance of being selected for the elite hockey league. That is an example of cumulative advantage. Another example is with the disparities in education results between lower-class and middle-class children. The tests in early childhood that Gladwell quotes show no significant difference between the two groups at first, but with each year, the lower-class kids fall further behind. The reason is that middle-class parents over the summer constantly expose their children to learning opportunities that simply don't exist in most lower-class homes. An interesting part of the book for me was his 10,000-hour rule- You can only truly become an expert in something once you've practiced it for 10,000 hours- natural talent makes a difference, but not that much of a difference. Gladwell gives examples from the experiences of the Beatles, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and others to demonstrate how, through their unique circumstances and opportunities, they were able to practice their craft for 10,000 hours. "Outliers" is an excellent book which will hopefully spark a national discussion about success and the factors that create it. And maybe, just maybe, we can talk about how to change circumstances so that more people are successful. Much in his book is no doubt debatable, but it should be debated, and read, and pondered over. | ||
 | Outfoxed - Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism | |
 | "Valuable, But Take It With a Grain of Salt" | 2009-05-09 |
| "Outfoxed" is at its best when carefully demonstrating how Fox News does indeed create a distorted picture of things. For example, the film demonstrates, through archival footage, how Fox encourages punditry. For instance, they point out that the liberal guests that come on regularly (Dick Morris, Susan Estrich) usually agree with Hannity and O'Reilly's main points. Further, the now-defunct Hannity & Colmes was flawed, as Hannity has this all-American appearance, and is always aggressive, whereas Colmes looked squirrely, and tended to back down easily. In addition, internal memos and interviews with former employees give strong evidence that Fox seeks to create a climate of fear- fear of terrorism, of immigrants, of religious minorities, etc. What weakened "Outfoxed" for me was that it didn't focus just on Fox News- it has an agenda of its own beside that. For example, almost all of the media experts interviewed were from the left media organization FAIR. They made valuable points, but it would have given the movie more credibility if other organizations were represented. Finally, toward the end, Bernie Sanders and others being interviewed appear to press for the Fairness Doctrine, which I think would create far more problems than it would solve. Overall, this is a good movie to rent as a corrective to the "Fair and Balanced" network. | ||
 | Dear America - Letters Home from Vietnam | |
| "One of the Best Documentaries Ever Made" | 2009-05-09 |
| "Dear America" is the only Vietnam movie that I'm aware of that focuses exclusively on how everyday troops communicated their view of the war to friends and loved ones back home. As such, it creates an intimate, panoramic picture of how Vietnam affected people psychologically. "Dear America" intersperses the voices of actors reading letters from actual soldiers with archival footage, while playing period music and giving quick facts on the screen. The tone of the letters becomes more and more bleak as the chronology progresses- from many of them being hopeful to securing a better future for the people in Vietnam to many of them being disillusioned. Some are angry at what they see as lack of support from home. The best reason to watch "Dear America" is that it clearly shows that each of the troops in Vietnam had a story to tell, and that many of them didn't get to fulfill their hopes and dreams. Highly recommended. | ||
 | The Bicycle Thief | |
| "Ladro!" | 2009-04-08 |
| De Sica's great film "Bicycle Thieves" still holds up over 60 years after its release. In fact, many today in this recession will identify with the anguish of the main character. The plot of "Bicycle Thieves" is pretty simple- an unemployed man, Antonio Ricci, in post-War Rome, Italy gets a job putting up posters over the city. To do this job, he needs a bicycle, which he has to get by pawning his linens. Unfortunately, his bicycle is stolen, and the thief gets away. So Ricci looks all over Rome to try to find it, with his loyal son Bruno helping. After World War II, Italy was in a severe economic downturn. Millions were out of work, and were lucky to have food and a home, let alone a job. Automobiles were not yet widely available except to the very well-off, so a bicycle was the main form of personal transportation for most people. Having one's bicycle stolen would seem like the end of the world to most people, especially for those who had a job that required one, and could not afford to buy another. "Bicycle Thieves" is probably the most famous film of the Italian Neo-Realist school of the late 40s. The Neo-Realists wanted to move beyond the immediate Post-WW2 euphoria and take a hard look at life as it really was, and used specific stylistic devices to this end. These are seen in Bicycle Thieves. For instance, the film is shot on location rather than in a studio, which was an innovation at the time. In addition, the main characters are not played by big-name actors, and all of the extras were real people. Further, this is a story about real people facing real situations. Ricci is not a Proletarian prop or an airbrushed comic character- he is a 3-dimensional person who really has hopes- and the way he acts out the dashing of those hopes is devestating. | ||
 | Bicycle Thief | |
| "Ladro!" | 2009-04-08 |
| De Sica's great film "Bicycle Thieves" still holds up over 60 years after its release. In fact, many today in this recession will identify with the anguish of the main character. The plot of "Bicycle Thieves" is pretty simple- an unemployed man, Antonio Ricci, in post-War Rome, Italy gets a job putting up posters over the city. To do this job, he needs a bicycle, which he has to get by pawning his linens. Unfortunately, his bicycle is stolen, and the thief gets away. So Ricci looks all over Rome to try to find it, with his loyal son Bruno helping. After World War II, Italy was in a severe economic downturn. Millions were out of work, and were lucky to have food and a home, let alone a job. Automobiles were not yet widely available except to the very well-off, so a bicycle was the main form of personal transportation for most people. Having one's bicycle stolen would seem like the end of the world to most people, especially for those who had a job that required one, and could not afford to buy another. "Bicycle Thieves" is probably the most famous film of the Italian Neo-Realist school of the late 40s. The Neo-Realists wanted to move beyond the immediate Post-WW2 euphoria and take a hard look at life as it really was, and used specific stylistic devices to this end. These are seen in Bicycle Thieves. For instance, the film is shot on location rather than in a studio, which was an innovation at the time. In addition, the main characters are not played by big-name actors, and all of the extras were real people. Further, this is a story about real people facing real situations. Ricci is not a Proletarian prop or an airbrushed comic character- he is a 3-dimensional person who really has hopes- and the way he acts out the dashing of those hopes is devestating. | ||
 | There Are No Children Here : The Story of Two Boys Growing Up in The Other America | |
| "Compelling and Disturbing" | 2009-03-24 |
| I cannot think of a better narrative of what life is like in the urban ghettos than "There Are No Children Here." The title comes from what an interviewee told the author- "you know, there are no children here, they've seen too much to be children." Alex Kotlowitz followed two young brothers, Lafayette and Pharaoh Rivers, who live in the Horner Housing Project in Chicago, in the late 1980s. They struggle just to stay alive in the extremely violent projects, and to find a way to brake free. Social problems are rampant- gang warfare is a daily occurrence, drugs are abundant, young mothers regularly have more children than they can responsibly provide for, and people are constantly trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty. Kotlowitz explains the origins of inner-city black poverty in the migration to cities from rural communities in the 30s and 40s, and the sad story of the attempts to put forth public housing in the downtown, and the eventual pushing of the housing projects into an out-of-the-way area. But through all of this Lafayette and Pharaoh look out for each other and make it through life as best as they can, with the help of their dedicated mother, LaJoe. This is not an easy book to read, nor does it offer easy solutions to the problems depicted therein. But anyone who seeks to understand inner-city poverty, and how individuals cope with it, need to read this book. | ||
 | I Am a Fugitive From a Chain Gang | |
| "Depressing, Realistic, and Still Relevant" | 2009-03-04 |
| Since we're in the midst of a crisis that is looking like the Great Depression in some ways, "I am a Fugitive From a Chain Gang," released in 1932, is more relevant than ever. It's incumbent on people to understand how a social/economic crisis can affect individual lives. The plot is simple enough. It's about James Allen, a WWI veteran who one day goes with his friend Pete to a restaurant in an unnamed Southern state. Pete coaxes the owner into giving the two men a free meal, but then he pulls a gun and demands the owner's money, and that Allen himself get the money from the cash drawer. At that moment, the police burst in and shoot Pete, and since Allen is caught with the cash in his hand, he is arrested as an accessory. He is sent to a work in a chain-gang, that slave labor punishment that is once again becoming popular in the South, but manages to escape and flee to Chicago. Allen takes on an alternate identity and makes a good living as an engineer, and gets romantically involved with someone in the process. Eventually, his identity is discovered, and his extradition is demanded. Illinois refuses, but Allen agrees to go back to the chain gang, on condition that he be released in 90 days. He soon discovers that that was an empty promise, and has no choice but to escape again. I will say no more about the plot here, but the ending is one of the most effective and devastating in Hollywood history. Many movies in the 1930s were cloying and sentimental, but there was a large social protest genre during the same time period which sought to alert people to the problems going on around them, and "I am a Fugitive From a Chain Gang" is arguably the best example of it. Of course, the film's main target is the chain-gang system, and the vengeful attitude of punishment that spawned it, which has not entirely gone away. But it also gives a glimpse of how the Great Depression affected individual people. The socio-economic situation now is very different from what it was in the 30s, but the kinds of problems people are facing now are very similar. You owe it to yourself to watch this movie, and hope that we don't have a repeat of the history depicted therein. | ||
 | Harlan County, USA | |
| "Which Side Are You On, Which Side Are You On?" | 2009-02-27 |
| "Harlan County USA" is an excellent, compelling documentary. Depicting a strike by coal miners in West Virginia in the early 70s, the film gives a snapshot of arguably the last years of the "organized labor era" that began in the 30s. We see how the miners' families lived- they were very poor even by the standards at the time; mothers give their children baths in tin tubs, for example. Despite the poverty and hardship, the community sticks together, and eventually wins. Particularly interesting was how larger social changes are reflected in the strike. For example, black miners are welcome and included in the miners' community. In addition, the miners' wives play a very big role in organizing and generating support for the strike. At one point, some of them directly confront the sheriff about the picket line- women would probably not have done that, especially in West Virginia, 20 years earlier. Further, it will probably surprise a lot of people to know that there was a grassroots labor movement in the south, but there was. How "union" became a dirty word in dixie even for those who would benefit from one is a complicated subject outside the scope of the movie. Throughout, we hear the inspired folk labor songs of the great Hazel Dickens. It's almost worth the movie just to hear her sing. Dickens herself is a daughter of a coal-mining family, and is very familiar with labor struggles. In sum, watch this if you want a real-life depiction of a unique American time and place. | ||
 | Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion | |
| "Compelling Account of Religion" | 2009-02-21 |
| There certainly is no lack of books about religion, and ideas about how and why we humans have it. Stewart Guthrie has written, to me at least, a very persuasive account of the origin of religion. Accounts for why we have religion can generally be divided into two groups- those of believers and skeptics. Believers of particular religions, of course, try to account for their religion in terms of a special revelation, and all others in terms of either ignorance or demonic influence. Unfortunately, these claims are special, not general, and there is no inter-subjective way of verifying them. Some liberal religious believers account for religion by essentially saying that specific practices and beliefs are irrelevant- they are all manifestations of religious experience. The problem is that mystical experiences are unique, autonomous, cannot be corroborated, and don't offer a way of knowing whether one experience is the same as or a different variation of another. The skeptics' theories of religion are diverse, and make valuable points about perhaps why individuals choose religion and why it persists, but according to Guthrie, they don't explain the origin of religion very well. * Wishful thinking- Popularized by Freud, the theory holds that people made up religion to satisfy their wishes, desires, and to derive comfort. But many religions have elements that would be hard to say are there for comfort and reassurance, such as malevolent spirits, hell, and jealous gods. Further we don't make up things in other areas purely for comfort- hungry people don't comfort themselves by telling themselves they've just eaten. * Fear of death- Many have said that religion is primarily to overcome the natural human fear of death. This theory makes valuable points, but it can't account for the origin of religion. In ancient Greek religion and early Judaism, the doctrine of the afterlife was very vague. Further, in some early religions, the souls of the deceased were condemned to wander the earth forever, regardless of what they did or didn't do. * Social glue- Durkheim and others have said that religion originated as a way to bind people together, just as national symbols do. While religions do do this, they also divide people. Guthrie notes that this theory fails to account for why people would use religion to form group cohesion in the first place. * Intellectualist- Going back to Spinoza, this theory holds that religion is a result of anthropomorphism- attributing human properties to non-human things. People are in a world of uncertain objects, and so seek to understand the world through the use of a familiar model (ourselves). Another branch of the intellectualist theory is that we invent humanlike agents to reassure ourselves in a turbulent world. Guthrie ultimately thinks anthropomorphism plays the main factor, but neither of the explanations for why we do this are quite sufficient. First, we anthropomorphize familiar things (pets, for instance) as often as they do unfamiliar ones. Moreover, there are things (monsters in the closet) that we do not invent to reassure ourselves. Guthrie gives a compelling account of religion. It is systemic anthropomorphism. Anthropomorphism arises out of animism- attributing animate features to inanimate things (trees, wind, etc.) We do this, Guthrie says, because of our perceptual uncertainty. Our knowledge of the world is not certain but interpretive. For instance, a door closing could be the result of wind, or of a person (perhaps a stranger); a shadow may be that of a tree or of a lurking figure- meanings don't reveal themselves to us, so we must construe them. So in assigning meanings, we use what is most significant to us. Since a potential predator would be more significant to our ancestors than pure nature, it would be a natural, safe bet to mistake a log floating in the river for a bear, rather than the reverse. Since humans are the most significant things to humans, we will naturally assign human-like attributes to objects and events in nature- we see storms as angry, trees as resisting us when we try to cut them down, etc. These are misapprehensions, but the impulse that gives rise to the misapprehensions is no mistake; it is an essential evolved strategy we have for understanding the world. | ||
 | Constantine and the Bishops: The Politics of Intolerance | |
| "The Title Says It All" | 2009-02-11 |
| The story of how Christianity went from a marginal to dominant religion in the Roman Empire has been much debated and discussed among historians. Opinions range from that of Augustine- that it was God's will that Christianity triumph- to that of Gibbon and Voltaire- that Christianity is an essentially intolerant religion and gained its prominence through coercion. H.A. Drake's excellent book cuts through the polemics and gives a fascinating historical take on the subject. The narrative begins in 335, when Athanasius was being accused of dictatorial behavior in his diocese, and ends in 380, with the complicated relationship between bishop Ambrose and Emperor Theodosius. Constantine is often the whipping boy or the hero in histories such as these. In Drake's work, he is neither. He did indeed institute repressive measures against Pagan and rival Christian sects when he came into power, but the bishops were not his pawns; they were separate forces that he had to reckon with, just as previous Emperors had to deal with the Senators. By the time of Theodosius, the bishops had replaced the senators as the peace-keepers of the Empire. Each bishop, representing one or another theological position, tried to win favor with the Emperor. When one position gained clout, it was in the bishops' interest to repress their rivals. The reasons why what we call Nicene Christianity won the day were as much political as they were religious. Drake wisely points out that in the Roman Empire, the state was considered a religious institution, where earthly/political success depended on gaining divine favor. This was true of the Roman Empire both in its Pagan and Christian times. The division between secular and religious that characterizes modern thinking simply did not exist then. Pagan persecution of Christians and Christian persecution of other Christians and Pagans was the equivalent of a national security issue, since "wrong" views could invite divine displeasure. It is the great achievement of the modern West to due away this thinking, at least in the form of secular government. | ||
 | The Working Poor : Invisible in America | |
| "Thanksgiving Day, 2008" | 2008-11-28 |
| On this Thanksgiving Day, I reflected on the fact that I am part of an interdependent society, and that the work and circumstances of many people made my own life possible. "Working Poor" by David Shipler illustrates how things people take for granted, from plastic bags to clothes to carpets come to us through the hard work of low-wage workers. Shipler does not engage in sociological analysis, but gives case studies of individuals, who have to struggle to make ends meet, work long hours, and through circumstances both within and beyond their control, are left out of opportunities (i.e., college education) that are available to others. It seems to me that in our country, we need to find a balance between personal and social responsibility, and lately we have lost sense of the latter. I highly recommend this book so that we can at least have a conversation about how to better strike that balance and give more Americans better opportunities and a better quality of life. | ||
 | Joe Williams - Definitive Joe Williams | |
| "Every Time I Listen to Joe Williams, I Don't Have the Blues" | 2008-10-31 |
| Joe Williams is probably the best male Jazz vocalist to have performed. I mean, who could compete with him? Sinatra? Bennett? Jones? They're good singers, but they don't have Williams' resonant voice, charisma, clear tone, passionate delivery, or ability to make a song really come alive. Joe Williams sang almost all his life. Looking at the entry for him in the Grove Dictionary of Music, there was harly a time he wasn't singing. He started out with a local gospel quartet, and eventually attracted the attention of Count Basie. The rest, as they say, is history. For more information on his life, see the link in my comment. I love this man's voice, and you will too. "Every Day I Have the Blues," and "All right, OK, You Win" are classics. If you listen to this album, you won't have the blues! | ||
 | Rendezvous with Rama | |
| "Wonderful Book" | 2008-10-03 |
| Aside from 2001, the masterpiece of the late Arthur C. Clarke is generally considered to be "Rendezvous with Rama," winner of the Hugo Award. "Rama" is unique in the science fiction genre, since it doesn't opt for flashy action scenes with space aliens, or far-flung notions such as a time travel machine. Rather, Clarke writes about what civilization might look like in a couple hundred years, and what an encounter with extra-terrestrial intelligence might be like. The plot's simple enough. An asteroid-like object is observed, only to be discovered that the size and orbit preclude it from being an asteroid- it must be a spaceship, and is named after the Hindu god Rama, since the Greek and Roman gods have been exhausted. The Federation of Planets sends a team to make a rendezvous with Rama. Rama is basically a gigantic cylindrical object, with no observable space launch mechanism, and absolutely no sign of life inside, not even microbes. The only thing of note is some frozen organic mix of water at the bottom. Suddenly, lights come on in Rama, and the planet seems to come alive. The explorers realize they may need to deal with hurricanes, among other things, as the mixture of the now-melted water with closer proximity to the Sun could cause some problems. In addition, there may be some intelligence on Rama after all. What is it? Read and find out. Clarke took a simple idea, and it expands all by itself. If we ever have an encounter with extra-terrestrial intelligence, I think it will be unlike anything depicted in the science fiction genre, as Rama is. Finally, Clarke's novel reminds us that the universe is much bigger than out planet, and if we want to be a part of it, we must learn to think bigger. | ||
 | Rendezvous with Rama | |
| "Wonderful Book" | 2008-10-03 |
| Aside from 2001, the masterpiece of the late Arthur C. Clarke is generally considered to be "Rendezvous with Rama," winner of the Hugo Award. "Rama" is unique in the science fiction genre, since it doesn't opt for flashy action scenes with space aliens, or far-flung notions such as a time travel machine. Rather, Clarke writes about what civilization might look like in a couple hundred years, and what an encounter with extra-terrestrial intelligence might be like. The plot's simple enough. An asteroid-like object is observed, only to be discovered that the size and orbit preclude it from being an asteroid- it must be a spaceship, and is named after the Hindu god Rama, since the Greek and Roman gods have been exhausted. The Federation of Planets sends a team to make a rendezvous with Rama. Rama is basically a gigantic cylindrical object, with no observable space launch mechanism, and absolutely no sign of life inside, not even microbes. The only thing of note is some frozen organic mix of water at the bottom. Suddenly, lights come on in Rama, and the planet seems to come alive. The explorers realize they may need to deal with hurricanes, among other things, as the mixture of the now-melted water with closer proximity to the Sun could cause some problems. In addition, there may be some intelligence on Rama after all. What is it? Read and find out. Clarke took a simple idea, and it expands all by itself. If we ever have an encounter with extra-terrestrial intelligence, I think it will be unlike anything depicted in the science fiction genre, as Rama is. Finally, Clarke's novel reminds us that the universe is much bigger than out planet, and if we want to be a part of it, we must learn to think bigger. | ||
 | The Umbrellas of Cherbourg | |
| "Masterpiece That Stands the Test of Time" | 2008-08-26 |
| "The Umbrellas of Cherbourg" is a one-of-a-kind movie. All of the lines are sung, to a beautiful score, but there are no traditional character solos, chorus numbers, or choreography. So it's not your average musical. The closest thing to a "show-stopper" in the movie is the stunning Oscar-nominated "I Will Wait for You." The plot is pretty easy to follow, yet it develops the characters quite well. The story is set in Cherbourg in 1958, and we first meet Guy, a car mechanic, getting off work to visit his love interest Genevieve. Genevieve's mother runs a business, the Umbrellas of Cherbourg, and soon discovers that she needs a lot of money to pay off the store's debt. She unsuccessfully tries to sell some jewels at a store, but meets a suave Jewel dealer named Cassard who offers to buy the jewelry. It is clear that Cassard is interested in Genevieve. In another twist, Guy has to leave to complete his required 2 years of military service in Algeria. What will happen to Guy and Genevieve, and Cassard, and Genevieve's mother, and Guy's godmother? Watch and find out! Another way in which "Umbrellas" is unique is that it does not try to opt for easy answers. Without giving away the specifics, I can say that the ending is happy, but not in the way viewers would expect it to be, and there are lots of unresolved issues. The ending has a mix of happiness and agony, much the way life is most of the time. Watch "The Umbrellas of Cherbourg" and be enchanted; there's simply not another movie like it. | ||
 | The Umbrellas of Cherbourg | |
| "Masterpiece That Stands the Test of Time" | 2008-08-26 |
| "The Umbrellas of Cherbourg" is a one-of-a-kind movie. All of the lines are sung, to a beautiful score, but there are no traditional character solos, chorus numbers, or choreography. So it's not your average musical. The closest thing to a "show-stopper" in the movie is the stunning Oscar-nominated "I Will Wait for You." The plot is pretty easy to follow, yet it develops the characters quite well. The story is set in Cherbourg in 1958, and we first meet Guy, a car mechanic, getting off work to visit his love interest Genevieve. Genevieve's mother runs a business, the Umbrellas of Cherbourg, and soon discovers that she needs a lot of money to pay off the store's debt. She unsuccessfully tries to sell some jewels at a store, but meets a suave Jewel dealer named Cassard who offers to buy the jewelry. It is clear that Cassard is interested in Genevieve. In another twist, Guy has to leave to complete his required 2 years of military service in Algeria. What will happen to Guy and Genevieve, and Cassard, and Genevieve's mother, and Guy's godmother? Watch and find out! Another way in which "Umbrellas" is unique is that it does not try to opt for easy answers. Without giving away the specifics, I can say that the ending is happy, but not in the way viewers would expect it to be, and there are lots of unresolved issues. The ending has a mix of happiness and agony, much the way life is most of the time. Watch "The Umbrellas of Cherbourg" and be enchanted; there's simply not another movie like it. | ||
 | The Umbrellas of Cherbourg | |
| "Masterpiece That Stands the Test of Time" | 2008-08-26 |
| "The Umbrellas of Cherbourg" is a one-of-a-kind movie. All of the lines are sung, to a beautiful score, but there are no traditional character solos, chorus numbers, or choreography. So it's not your average musical. The closest thing to a "show-stopper" in the movie is the stunning Oscar-nominated "I Will Wait for You." The plot is pretty easy to follow, yet it develops the characters quite well. The story is set in Cherbourg in 1958, and we first meet Guy, a car mechanic, getting off work to visit his love interest Genevieve. Genevieve's mother runs a business, the Umbrellas of Cherbourg, and soon discovers that she needs a lot of money to pay off the store's debt. She unsuccessfully tries to sell some jewels at a store, but meets a suave Jewel dealer named Cassard who offers to buy the jewelry. It is clear that Cassard is interested in Genevieve. In another twist, Guy has to leave to complete his required 2 years of military service in Algeria. What will happen to Guy and Genevieve, and Cassard, and Genevieve's mother, and Guy's godmother? Watch and find out! Another way in which "Umbrellas" is unique is that it does not try to opt for easy answers. Without giving away the specifics, I can say that the ending is happy, but not in the way viewers would expect it to be, and there are lots of unresolved issues. The ending has a mix of happiness and agony, much the way life is most of the time. Watch "The Umbrellas of Cherbourg" and be enchanted; there's simply not another movie like it. | ||
 | David Shire ,Richard Maltby - Closer Than Ever: Original Cast Recording | |
| "Interesting, Different Musical" | 2008-06-05 |
| "Closer Than Ever" is one of the best Off-Broadway musicals to be produced,and won a much-deserved Outer Critics Circle Award for best Off-Broadway Musical. It's actually more of a revue than a musical, since there's not really a plot. Rather, "Closer Than Ever" is a collection of songs on themes relating to getting through life. "You Wanna Be My Friend?" is a funny song that vocalizes what most people think when a relationship is ended and the person ending says "I want to be your friend." "Fandango" humorously explores the difficulties of raising a child when both parents have full-time jobs. These are just a couple of examples of the fine songs you will find in this recording. "Closer Than Ever" is perfect for those who enjoy musicals and are looking for something different from the usual Broadway fare. | ||
 | The Memoirs of God: History, Memory, and the Experience of the Divine in Ancient Israel | |
| "Repressed Cultural Memories" | 2008-06-02 |
| Mark S. Smith's book "Memoirs of God" is a condensed version of his other books, "The Early History of God" and "The Origins of Biblical Monotheism" for the general reader. In addition, Smith adds the element of cultural memory and amnesia to his previous books. The result is a fascinating look at the evolution of theological culture concepts in ancient Israel. The early Isrealite concept of divinity was essentially polytheistic. According to Smith, the concept of divinity was modeled on the family, with a "patron god," a consort or wife, and a group of lesser divinities. The Isrealites apparently were influenced in this regard by Ugarit, an ancient near-Eastern country. When Israel became a united Monarchy in the 8th century BC, the concept of divinity began to change. After the Assyrian conquest and re-population, the re-conceptualization of divinity as monotheism was cemented. What happened was that after families were broken up, it was no longer logical to see the family as the model for divinity. The Isrealites could no longer look at individuals as being punished for the sins of their parents, for one thing. For another, in the old model of divinity, each country had a patron god, and if a country fell, then that god must have been punishing them, or was a false god. So instead of their being a patron god for each country, in the wake of the Assyrian and Babylonian exiles, Yahweh became the god of the whole universe, and the later writings from the "D" source (Deuteronomy) reflect this change in view. Vestiges of the old polytheistic view in the biblical writings could remain, as long as they could be re-interpreted within a Monotheistic framework. As a result, there was a cultural amnesia about Israel's polytheistic origins, or to put it another way, the memories of Israel's polytheism were repressed. The biblical writings are an expression of cultural memory and cultural amnesia. Of course, that was just a general sketch of what Smith talks about in the book. This is highly recommended for non-scholars who want a background on biblical writings. | ||
 | Gilgamesh : A New English Version | |
| "Beautiful" | 2008-05-22 |
| If you've never read "Gilgamesh" in your life...read it! It is a fascinating, satisfying epic. Among other things: 1.) It is a well-written interesting story. 2.) It show the dangers of neglecting the present world for the sake of wild goose chases. 3.) It shows how a seemingly heroic conquest can end in disaster. In addition to all that, Stephen Mitchell's translation is beautiful and his introduction is lucid and insightful. Highly recommended. | ||
 | Osama | |
| "A Harrowing Drama" | 2008-05-08 |
| "Osama" tells the story of what life was like under the Taliban in Afghanistan. At the beginning of the film, we see a mass demonstration of women in burkas who are demanding the right to work, since they're starving. Soon, the Taliban come and round up the demonstrating women and put them in trucks. Shortly thereafter, a widowed doctor dresses up her girl as a boy to work, going by the name Osama, and prevent starvation. Soon, she is rounded up with all the other Afghan boys for religious training. She is constantly struggling to keep her secret from getting out, and is bullied by the boys for her feminine features. I will not give away the ending, except to say that it is not a good one. One online reviewer said that Osama is not so much a story as a record of life during a particular period, and that's exactly what it is. The director Siddiq Barmak used no professional actors, and shot the whole film in Afghanistan, giving a "you are there" feeling. One really well-done aspect of "Osama" is that, though the Taliban do some very inhuman things, they are never portrayed as inhuman; they simply do what people would do when they enshrine religious fanaticism as the governing principle of society. Highly recommended. | ||
 | What Does It All Mean?: A Very Short Introduction to Philosophy | |
| "Excellent Intro to Philosophy" | 2008-05-01 |
| If you are like me and want a short, easy-to-read introduction to the whole discipline of philosophy, you can't do much better than "What Does It All Mean?" by Thomas Nagel. No esoteric language here, or a long complicated historical discussion. Instead, Nagel introduces philosophy by a simple but thought-provoking discussion of some of the main problems of philosophy: How do we know there's anything outside of our minds; how do we know that other people exist; what is the basis of the mind; is there an afterlife; what's the basis for morality; and more. Nagel's primary aim is to encourage curious readers to think about these questions and to read other thinkers who have grappled with them. In this, he has succeeded admirably. | ||
 | Power vs. Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior | |
 | "Pseudo-Scientific Claptrap" | 2008-04-21 |
| Hawkins has given humanity a great epistemological breakthrough- we can test the truth of any statement with Applied Kinesiology, the science of muscle tension and tone. You can try this at home- measure the truth of a proposition by standing with your arm perpendicular to your body, have someone tell you a proposition, while the person pushes your arm down. The degree of truth of the statement is indexed to how much resistance there is in your arm during the pushing. Moreover, reading books and doing critical analysis of them is superfluous. "Simply hold [books] over your solar plexus, and have somebody test your muscle strength. As you do so, your books will end up in two piles; reflection on the differences between the two can produce a revelation." (p. 124) It may even be dangerous to read. "One may think he can maintain his psychic independence by refuting the work intellectually, but mere exposure to the material has a profound negative effect that continues even after the material is intellectually rejected. It's as though, within those negative influences, there's a hidden virus whose invasion of our psyches goes unnoticed." One will be tempted to ask if this is all just a humorous, Sokal-style hoax. Sadly, the answer is no. | ||
 | Power vs Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior | |
| "Pseudo-Scientific Claptrap" | 2008-04-21 |
| Hawkins has given humanity a great epistemological breakthrough- we can test the truth of any statement with Applied Kinesiology, the science of muscle tension and tone. You can try this at home- measure the truth of a proposition by standing with your arm perpendicular to your body, have someone tell you a proposition, while the person pushes your arm down. The degree of truth of the statement is indexed to how much resistance there is in your arm during the pushing. Moreover, reading books and doing critical analysis of them is superfluous. "Simply hold [books] over your solar plexus, and have somebody test your muscle strength. As you do so, your books will end up in two piles; reflection on the differences between the two can produce a revelation." (p. 124) It may even be dangerous to read. "One may think he can maintain his psychic independence by refuting the work intellectually, but mere exposure to the material has a profound negative effect that continues even after the material is intellectually rejected. It's as though, within those negative influences, there's a hidden virus whose invasion of our psyches goes unnoticed." One will be tempted to ask if this is all just a humorous, Sokal-style hoax. Sadly, the answer is no. | ||
 | Power vs Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior | |
| "Pseudo-Scientific Claptrap" | 2008-04-21 |
| Hawkins has given humanity a great epistemological breakthrough- we can test the truth of any statement with Applied Kinesiology, the science of muscle tension and tone. You can try this at home- measure the truth of a proposition by standing with your arm perpendicular to your body, have someone tell you a proposition, while the person pushes your arm down. The degree of truth of the statement is indexed to how much resistance there is in your arm during the pushing. Moreover, reading books and doing critical analysis of them is superfluous. "Simply hold [books] over your solar plexus, and have somebody test your muscle strength. As you do so, your books will end up in two piles; reflection on the differences between the two can produce a revelation." (p. 124) It may even be dangerous to read. "One may think he can maintain his psychic independence by refuting the work intellectually, but mere exposure to the material has a profound negative effect that continues even after the material is intellectually rejected. It's as though, within those negative influences, there's a hidden virus whose invasion of our psyches goes unnoticed." One will be tempted to ask if this is all just a humorous, Sokal-style hoax. Sadly, the answer is no. | ||
 | The Origin of Species | |
| "Simple Idea Yet Powerful" | 2008-03-19 |
| With all of the "Intelligent Design/Evolution" books being published these days, I though I'd read the book that started it all. OK, I didn't actually read it; I listened to an abridged audio version, with Richard Dawkins narrating. (You can download that on iTunes, or buy it at amazon.co.uk.) Darwin's thesis was simple, that species are engaged in a struggle for existence, and that the ones with the features best adapted to the environment will survive. Thus, by a slow process of natural selection, species acquire different traits. Darwin made an analogy with domestic animal and plant breeding, and how different varieties of species come about as a result. He concluded that the distinction between species and varieties was largely arbitrary, and from that extrapolated his theory of natural selection. The way different species in a particular area are related though distinct, Darwin concludes, cannot be explained by a theory of independent creation. It's amazing how Darwin was able to figure all of this out even before our new evidence of embryology, DNA, plate tectonics, etc. have confirmed his theory. Further, Darwin anticipated the "fossil gap" and "irreducible complexity of the eye" objections still in circulation among creationists and IDers. Of course, the fossil record and the knowledge of eye development has only gotten richer since Darwin. Everyone should read this, and see for themselves how Darwin's idea is simple, yet powerful in explaining the world around us. | ||
 | The Seashell on the Mountaintop | |
| "Fascinating History of Science" | 2008-02-13 |
| Ever wonder why there are seashells in rocks or in buildings made out of rocks? Nicholaus Steno did too, and through his inquiry and investigation, discovered the geologic concept of "deep time"- discovering the age of the earth by examining the sedimentary layers.
Steno was a Danish scientist who originally went into anatomy. His brilliant lectures demolished Decartes' theories on the brain, and paved the way for new understandings of anatomy. His interest in fossils was sparked by a shark's head that he was using for one of his lectures. The "tongue stones" in the shark's mouth looked remarkably similar to the ones that he had seen in rocks. At the time, most people thought that fossils literally grew inside rocks, through "plastic forces of nature." (The scientific world had not yet outgrown Aristotle's physics.) Steno argued that the fossils could not possibly grow inside rocks, because they weren't distorted the way that objects that actually did grow inside rocks were. He eventually came to the conclusion that the seashell fossils inside the mountains were the result of the ocean once covering entire areas, and that sediments, in which fossils were trapped, layered on top of each other. Steno's discovery made Bishop Ussher's creation date of 4004 BC untenable, since it would have taken the seas far longer to recede than Noah's flood was supposed to have lasted. This book is highly recommended for anyone who is interested in the history of scientific discovery, and how someone's curiosity can change the way people think about the world. | ||
 | Bloody Sunday | |
| "Sunday, Bloody Sunday" | 2008-01-31 |
| Paul Greengrass, who brought us the powerful and controversial "United 93," made a stunning film about the events that transpired on January 30, 1972 in Londonderry. Greengrass presents the film in a documentary fashion, giving the impression that you are observing the events as they take place. On that day, the Civil Rights Movement, led by MP Ivan Cooper, were determined to march in spite of an official ban on all such gatherings. The Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association fought against many abuses of power on the part of the Northern Ireland administration, but the core issue was the abolition of Operation Demetrius, or internment. Basically, British soldiers could arrest and intern those suspected of being paramilitary groups without charge or trial.
Cooper, who came from a rural Protestant background, wanted only a peaceful march. He urged IRA members not to bring weapons to the march, and advised youth who were harassed by soldiers to "just walk away." Unfortunately, due to high-levels of IRA/British soldier clashes, the "Paras" (1st Battalion of the British Parachute Regiment) were out in force. In addition, despite Cooper's pleas to the contrary, armed "Provos" (members of the Provisional Irish Republican Army) were present. It's still not clear how it began, but shots were fired, and the Paras killed 14 unarmed marchers and wounded several others. The film clearly implies that the British shot first, though that's something that may never be determined with certainty. Shortly after the events of Bloody Sunday, the British government convened an inquiry known as the Widgery Inquiry. It absolved all the British soldiers of responsibility. In response to political pressure, Tony Blair launched the Saville Inquiry, which as of now has yet to release a report. In the final part of the film, with Ivan Cooper and other Civil Rights leaders speaking at a press conference after the events, Cooper says: "I'd like to say to the British government- you know what you've done, don't you? You've destroyed the Civil Rights Movement. Tonight, young men will be lining up to join the IRA, and you will reap a whirlwind." His words proved to be prophetic. Had Bloody Sunday not happened, it's likely that the Civil Rights Movement could have achieved what the Good Friday and St. Andrews Agreements are now achieving. The acting and direction in this movie are top-noptch. Even though the viewer knows what's going to happen, one feels a certain amount of suspense. The interment issue has an eerily contemporary ring to it, and this film shows the dangers of a militarized police force. The two featurettes on the DVD are quite informative as well. In sum, this movie is highly recommended, both for history fans and those who want to use the lessons of history to change the future. | ||
 | Bloody Sunday | |
| "Sunday, Bloody Sunday" | 2008-01-31 |
| Paul Greengrass, who brought us the powerful and controversial "United 93," made a stunning film about the events that transpired on January 30, 1972 in Londonderry. Greengrass presents the film in a documentary fashion, giving the impression that you are observing the events as they take place. On that day, the Civil Rights Movement, led by MP Ivan Cooper, were determined to march in spite of an official ban on all such gatherings. The Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association fought against many abuses of power on the part of the Northern Ireland administration, but the core issue was the abolition of Operation Demetrius, or internment. Basically, British soldiers could arrest and intern those suspected of being paramilitary groups without charge or trial.
Cooper, who came from a rural Protestant background, wanted only a peaceful march. He urged IRA members not to bring weapons to the march, and advised youth who were harassed by soldiers to "just walk away." Unfortunately, due to high-levels of IRA/British soldier clashes, the "Paras" (1st Battalion of the British Parachute Regiment) were out in force. In addition, despite Cooper's pleas to the contrary, armed "Provos" (members of the Provisional Irish Republican Army) were present. It's still not clear how it began, but shots were fired, and the Paras killed 14 unarmed marchers and wounded several others. The film clearly implies that the British shot first, though that's something that may never be determined with certainty. Shortly after the events of Bloody Sunday, the British government convened an inquiry known as the Widgery Inquiry. It absolved all the British soldiers of responsibility. In response to political pressure, Tony Blair launched the Saville Inquiry, which as of now has yet to release a report. In the final part of the film, with Ivan Cooper and other Civil Rights leaders speaking at a press conference after the events, Cooper says: "I'd like to say to the British government- you know what you've done, don't you? You've destroyed the Civil Rights Movement. Tonight, young men will be lining up to join the IRA, and you will reap a whirlwind." His words proved to be prophetic. Had Bloody Sunday not happened, it's likely that the Civil Rights Movement could have achieved what the Good Friday and St. Andrews Agreements are now achieving. The acting and direction in this movie are top-noptch. Even though the viewer knows what's going to happen, one feels a certain amount of suspense. The interment issue has an eerily contemporary ring to it, and this film shows the dangers of a militarized police force. The two featurettes on the DVD are quite informative as well. In sum, this movie is highly recommended, both for history fans and those who want to use the lessons of history to change the future. | ||
 | The Divine Comedy | |
| "This is the Edition to Own" | 2008-01-18 |
| What can one say about the Divine Comedy? It's one of the greatest epic poems, and influenced literature immensely. Though it was forgotten for a while, 19th century Romantic poets "re-discovered" it; James Joyce, T.S. Eliot, and Samuel Becket are among those who were in debt to the work. Further, the Divine Comedy has made a huge impact on popular culture and imagination. First, the image that the vast majority of people have of hell; of a place under the earth with red demons and fiery pits where sinners are tortured, largely comes from Dante. In addition, we have seen references to the Divine Comedy all around us in popular culture- references in books (Anne Rice, T.S. Eliot, Larry Niven), music (Nirvana, Mark Hoppus, Zao), and art (Eugène Delacroix, Gustave Dore, Salvador Dali)- and these are just a few. If you read the book, you will have an excellent foundation for understanding literature and popular culture.
Now why do I say that this is the edition to own? Three reasons. First, because John Ciardi's poetic translation is beautiful; there's a reason that his translation is the most commonly used in schools. Second, since Divine Comedy is a single work, it makes sense to have all 3 parts in one volume, which this edition does. Third, the footnotes and introductory summaries before each canto will help the reader immensely. The only thing missing from this edition is Gustave Dore's brilliant illustrations (though I believe they're available in a separate book). Don't be intimidated by the length of the book. If you commit yourself to a small amount- say, reading 3 cantos a day- then you will get through it easily. And it will be well worth the effort. | ||
| © 2009 GoSale.com (S1) |