Clearly written, succinct, logical, and the sociological focus on individual women and their stories made it extra interesting. I couldn't have asked...moreClearly written, succinct, logical, and the sociological focus on individual women and their stories made it extra interesting. I couldn't have asked for more from a book I read for school. I would highly recommend it if you're looking for a book about the 1996 welfare reform or if you're interested in welfare politics and the lives of welfare mothers in general. (less)
3.5 stars. Clear arguments, plenty of supporting evidence, and an interesting thesis. The historical and political arguments are a bit hard to take se...more3.5 stars. Clear arguments, plenty of supporting evidence, and an interesting thesis. The historical and political arguments are a bit hard to take seriously, since they are outside of the authors' economic backgrounds, but generally this book is easily readable and would be useful for research or if you're looking for an academic book about why the United States didn't develop a strong welfare state.(less)
I was all set to give this book four stars, until I came across this sentence: "Sometimes, like Adam Goeth (portrayed vividly in Schindler's List by T...moreI was all set to give this book four stars, until I came across this sentence: "Sometimes, like Adam Goeth (portrayed vividly in Schindler's List by Thomas Keneally)...guards began to enjoy their work" (412). First of all, she's referring to Amon, not Adam, Goeth. Secondly, the book was called Schindler's Ark, not Schindler's List (apparently it was released in America as Schindler's List, so I'm a little more forgiving of that, but I still think it would have been more responsible to refer to it by its original title). Now, this isn't a big error, and it's not even really relevant to her argument. However, lazy little mistakes like this really bother me because they make me wonder how many other little mistakes are in the book that I didn't notice. So I took a star off, because now I'm questioning the book's credibility.
Other than that, it's pretty easy to read, it's interesting, and it's decently organized. I took off the other star because there were times when the chronology was a little unclear (especially because she organized it thematically rather than chronologically) and there were a few times when her point was a little confusing or convoluted. Generally, though, I enjoyed the book. I read it for a school paper, but I would have read it on my own eventually anyways, because I like the subject matter and it was quite readable. (less)
More along the lines of 2.5 stars, but I bumped it up because of its shortness and relative clarity. Kedourie's arguments are interesting and not enti...moreMore along the lines of 2.5 stars, but I bumped it up because of its shortness and relative clarity. Kedourie's arguments are interesting and not entirely unconvincing, but his conception of nationalism is so narrow and place specific that I honestly find it mostly irrelevant to understanding modern nationalism (or even the nationalism present when he was writing the book in the 1960s. It's interesting, but I don't know that I think it deserves its status as a seminal work on Nationalism. (less)
I was really excited to read this book when I found out it was assigned for one of my classes. I was disappointed. I found it more annoying than anyth...moreI was really excited to read this book when I found out it was assigned for one of my classes. I was disappointed. I found it more annoying than anything else.
1) Structurally, it was a mess. He has chapter titles that ostensibly correlate with the subject of each section, but he'll stick to that topic for about a page and a half before going back to rambling on about whatever the hell he felt like writing about. It's really annoying and the disorganization made the book seem even more self-indulgent.
2) He makes such new, compelling arguments as "war is bad" and "the media's portrayal of battle is not accurate" and "nationalism is more created than it is based on historical reality." What fascinating and original insights! Sigh. He writes as if he's somehow peeling back the curtain to reveal some brand new profound truth, but there's nothing truly new or thought provoking here. It just felt like he was preaching to the choir.
3) His writing style and many of his attitudes seemed rather patronizing and simplistic to me. Particularly with his discussions on nationalism...I just think it's easy for him, from his cushy position as a privileged, educated man from a stable, secure, rich country, to treat nationalism as a foolish, primitive thing. It can be those things. But I think it would be more interesting if he actually made an attempt to understand why these identities have become so important and why nationalism can resonate so strongly with people rather than just dismissing them as stupid and irrational and fanatic and emotional.
4) I disliked his references to Shakespeare and ancient Greek and Roman epics. I appreciate that he was trying to bring a sense of historical context into his discussion of our attitudes towards war, but it just felt kind of random and pretentious.
I just didn't enjoy this book. It wasn't particularly original, the writing was sloppy, and I felt like I was being lectured at rather than feeling engaged and challenged. (less)
I love the way Morton structured the book, following some of the most famous names in Vienna throughout a short time frame. It really brought the city...moreI love the way Morton structured the book, following some of the most famous names in Vienna throughout a short time frame. It really brought the city to life and explored the conditions that led to the political and social turmoil of the early twentieth century. His style of rich narrative storytelling rather than straightforward, "objective" history writing made his subjects seem more human and made his book much more readable.
It did get a bit dull in parts, but generally I enjoyed it. I'm looking forward to reading his similar book, Thunder at Twilight.(less)
Two self-absorbed superficial buttheads dated each other and then wrote books about it. And now I'm conflicted. Because on one hand, I wish they had n...moreTwo self-absorbed superficial buttheads dated each other and then wrote books about it. And now I'm conflicted. Because on one hand, I wish they had never met each other, so that neither of them would have ever gotten book deals. And the world would be better off. But on the other hand, I'm almost tempted to be glad that they found each other, because they kind of deserve one another. (Warning: this is going to be a long-ass , bitter review.)
I don't think I've ever had such a negative reaction to an author before. And I'm one of those people who get irrationally angry at authors who write books I don't like. I don't know how Winston managed to portray herself as such an obnoxious human being. The worst part is, I think she was trying to be honest and relateable. Well, I'll believe she was honest, but I didn't relate to her at all, and I hope you didn't, either.
1) I was under the impression this was supposed to be a sort of comedy essay book. Because, you know, it's labeled as "non-fiction/HUMOR" on the back cover. Also because Winston writes for one of the funniest and most creative TV shows on right now, Community. But Winston is just not funny. Potentially funny things sort of happen to her but something about her style kills any chance at humor. And I'm not usually one to complain about a book not being funny, because comedy is really subjective, but Winston kept going on about how funny and witty she was. Nope.
2) She is such a whiner. She complains about everything. I understand we all have our weak moments, and obviously she has psychological issues she needs to deal with, but honestly. She'd be like, "I didn't like this guy and he annoyed me and treated me badly and made me pay the bills and called me fat and didn't like my cats and also I don't really think he's funny or attractive or interesting and we don't get along at all...so we dated for a year." COME ON. Either end the relationship or keep dating the asshole, but don't moan about it like you've got no choice and the universe just has a grudge against you. She just wallows in her own shit decisions. Also, she has a wildly successful writing career, writing for some of the most critically successful shows of the past few years. She interned at the White House for Clinton. She travels a lot. Her parents, while apparently not terribly supportive of her career, supported her quite a lot when she asked (actually, demanded) 1600 dollars from them so she could move to a new place, even though she was like in her mid-twenties. She now lives in a nice house that she can afford on her own. And yet she doesn't seem to care about any of that, because she doesn't have a boyfriend. ARE YOU KIDDING ME.
3) She's hypocritical. She was inspired to write the book after being deeply hurt by the personal details of her in "Kyle's" (really Chad's) book. So she writes her own. Fair enough. But then she includes some pretty mean details about her other ex-boyfriends. After bemoaning how awful it was that her ex included her in his book. Urgh. She also complains a bit about LA standards of appearance for women, but frequently makes unkind (and unnecessary) comments about random minor characters' appearances. She ends the book with an acceptance of her singleness (how very original...) but throughout the book treats single people like pathetic losers who have resigned themselves to an unsatisfying shell of a life.
4) She just behaves like a crazy, immature, petty, clingy, selfish brat. After she and Kyle broke up, they lived together for a month (weird and unhealthy, but whatever), and she would pull from her creepy "Kyle Box" cards that he'd gotten her and shout things at him like "Remember when you wrote 'You are the most amazing girl I have ever met?' I hate you, you selfish mother-fucker!" Is she FIVE? I know people get upset during break-ups, but yikes. She is like every "crazy girlfriend" stereotype rolled into one. She's just as bad as every guy she dates. It's not funny, it's not relateable. It's annoying and pathetic.
5) Stop calling Kyle to reflect on your relationship. Stop imagining what your lives would have been like. Stop talking about how you thought you would marry him. Just stop. I know it's hard. But stop. He is a massive dick. I'm sick of hearing about Kyle. So stop.
6) So many baths. Not funny, just creepy.
7) I don't give a crap about her stupid cats. And she described her cat Emmett as "handsome" about a thousand times. Christ.
Don't read this book. Watch Community instead. I have no idea how someone so obnoxious can help produce something so fantastic. Just how? How?(less)
This is popular psychology nonfiction, not scientific literature. If you're looking for serious, thorough, nuanced academic and scientific research, l...moreThis is popular psychology nonfiction, not scientific literature. If you're looking for serious, thorough, nuanced academic and scientific research, look elsewhere.
But if you want an interesting, broad, readable book about introversion, you probably won't find a better one than Quiet. It's super interesting and engaging--I finished it in a day and a half. If you're an introvert (which, let's face it, most people reading this probably are), you'll feel quite validated by the anecdotes and studies she includes. Every other page I was nodding my head and smiling at the examples she included, doing the whole "yup, yup, felt that before, why yes I have hidden in bathrooms to avoid overwhelming interaction, ew parties, yay books" thing. Perhaps she is overly laudatory of introverts' skills and advantages, but maybe it's necessary to be a little overly positive to counteract the prevailing message that introverts are weird useless loners who waste their own talent by not overcoming their dumb fears.
In terms of actual information, there were some really interesting tidbits. Plenty of interesting quotations from/about introverts, and I found the stuff about Harvard Business School totally fascinating, and more than a little alarming--one HBS professor hit the nail on the head about HBS's methods: "the risk with our students is that they're very good at getting their way. But that doesn't mean they're going the right way." Yikes.
The only part I didn't like was the part comparing Asian cultural values about introversion to American ideals of extroversion. It was a nice argument against the "natural" dominance of extroverts, but all the same, general cultural stereotypes and value judgments get a little uncomfortable.
I don't know what to say about this book. It was stunning, and heartbreaking, and funny, and sad, and terrifying, and painful, and moving, and so much...moreI don't know what to say about this book. It was stunning, and heartbreaking, and funny, and sad, and terrifying, and painful, and moving, and so much more. I got so absorbed in the stories of these neighborhood kids and their families that I was scared to read the epilogue because I didn't want to find out--though I knew I would--that some of them hadn't made it, that they'd died or fallen to the crime or the drugs that they swore they'd stay away from. And I was saddened, too, to see that (view spoiler)[DeAndre McCullough died in August of this year of an overdose. But he made it to 35, and that's not nothing, considering he wasn't planning on making it much past 20. And Tyreeka has a master's and made herself a career at a downtown hospital. (hide spoiler)] It's a hard book to read, but such an important one.
I only took a star off because I didn't care for many of the editorial inserts when the authors gave their own opinions on urban drug culture. Some of them were useful and interesting--the historical background on how the urban drug markets developed was fascinating, and I did like the paragraph about how outsiders think it would never happen to them, that they would somehow rise above through sheer hard work and determination--but many of them seemed repetitive, overwritten, cynical, and arrogant. They are only a few pages long and pop up only about every fifty pages, but still. The corner speaks for itself; I don't need Mr. Simon and Mr. Burns telling me what it all means. But I do so appreciate that they took the time to write this book and that they wrote it with such respect and honesty.
Please read this book. Don't be fooled by its length or the bleakness of its subject matter: it is so readable and such an important part of the American story.
Craploads of information, decently readable, would be excellent for research or background information on black politics in the rural south 1830-1900....moreCraploads of information, decently readable, would be excellent for research or background information on black politics in the rural south 1830-1900. That said, it's long and gets quite tedious, and it can be quite repetitive at times.
The research is brilliant and thorough, it's certainly an accomplished work, but reading it is not particularly enjoyable. (less)
An important subject, and I particularly liked that Jeffrey focused on ordinary women and their role in the abolition movement. It was usually pretty...moreAn important subject, and I particularly liked that Jeffrey focused on ordinary women and their role in the abolition movement. It was usually pretty clear and readable. That said, there were parts where the organization seemed a little off and the argument seemed to wander a bit. I would recommend it for research (which is what I used it for), but not for personal reading, unless you have a very strong interest in the subject.(less)
Read it for school. The subject is interesting, and for an academic text, it's decently readable, but it does get quite repetitive and wordy at points...moreRead it for school. The subject is interesting, and for an academic text, it's decently readable, but it does get quite repetitive and wordy at points. I would recommend it for research or academic purposes but probably not for personal reading.(less)
Read it for my class on international migration. It's a really good resource if you need information on immigration policy in France, Britain, and the...moreRead it for my class on international migration. It's a really good resource if you need information on immigration policy in France, Britain, and the United States. It's clear and thorough. But my version (second edition) had a couple typos, and I wouldn't recommend it for anything other than research. (less)
It's a really interesting book, I had quite a good time going through it considering it was assigned material for class. It is an academic and analyti...moreIt's a really interesting book, I had quite a good time going through it considering it was assigned material for class. It is an academic and analytic book, so it tends to get into theory and use obnoxious academic-speak, which can get a little tiresome. And while Glymph's analysis was interesting and, I think, well-supported by her arguments, I do wish there had been more focus on the primary sources and less of her interpretation. The actual words of the black and white women were SO interesting; I wish there had been more of their stories.
Anyways, I enjoyed the book, but it's academic and analytic enough that I wouldn't recommend it for pleasure reading unless you have a serious interest in the subject.(less)
Interesting and readable, but it's mostly just the typical crime tales: robberies, murders, prostitutes, and so on. I feel like I've heard these stori...moreInteresting and readable, but it's mostly just the typical crime tales: robberies, murders, prostitutes, and so on. I feel like I've heard these stories dozens of times. I wish someone would write about the women of the Mafia/gang scene/etc.: I wonder what their lives are like and how they see themselves, but no one ever seems to write about them, except as a peripheral note in a guy's story. I guess maybe the closest I've seen to someone exploring a woman's story is in the first season of The Wire, when Shardene had her own small arc as D'Angelo's girlfriend who ended up turning informant to the cops. Anyways, I digress.
It's an interesting book, but it's nothing too surprising. I'm still glad I read it, but don't expect it to blow you away or anything.(less)
This is a short memoir written by 2nd Lieutenant Ruth Haskell, an Army nurse who served overseas in North Africa during the first stages of World War...moreThis is a short memoir written by 2nd Lieutenant Ruth Haskell, an Army nurse who served overseas in North Africa during the first stages of World War II.
I had to add this to Goodreads because no one else has read it, apparently. I'm not surprised - I got my copy from the library and it still has the original card catalog card in the cover, and the last marked date on it is from 1976.
I checked it out because I love WWII overseas army nurses - they are the coolest people and hardly anyone knows about them. This book was referenced in another, much more comprehensive nonfic I read about front-line nurses (it's called And If I Perish). This memoir was simply written, very basic, and almost adorably dated. But it's one of very few primary accounts of Army nurses, which makes it pretty awesome in my eyes. If you have a moderate interest in the subject - or if you need research on the subject - I would probably recommend this book. (less)
I love behavioral economics. I remember that all I could think in my high school Intro to Macroeconomics class was that it was a nice set of ideas tha...moreI love behavioral economics. I remember that all I could think in my high school Intro to Macroeconomics class was that it was a nice set of ideas that never took into account actual human behavior. So I was excited to read this, because, hey, it's a popular science book that has the potential to answer all those lingering doubts I still have from my (very limited) exposure to economics.
But it turns out this book is heavy on the popular and awfully light on the science. Almost all of the experiments done were done in small numbers with a volunteer group of college students - usually from Ivy League or otherwise highly selective, expensive colleges. Okay, that's fine. But then he would extrapolate his results to apply to the general public or Americans as a whole. It's not that I think his conclusions are wrong (most of them are probably right or close to it), but his sample population is ridiculously specific - very bright or very rich kids in their late teens and early twenties. For the arousal study he based it off an experiment with heterosexual college-age males. Huh? You can't do a study based on a very small minority of the population and then say that it represents the behavior of all humans. My guess is that Ariely knows of a lot of studies that corroborate his (rather casual and somewhat unscientific) experiments, but he didn't include them in this book, so as much as I generally agreed with his ideas, I wasn't convinced by his evidence.
It's an interesting read, and it does a good job of dispelling The Market as this mythical all-knowing source of Truth and Goodness in favor of a more realistic idea of markets as at least somewhat flawed and irrational, just like the humans who create them. It's an easy and quick read, and I'm not sorry that I read it. But in terms of the actual science, I was very underwhelmed.(less)
Such an interesting read, especially if you like animals and animal science (which I do!). It's very readable, although it gets a little tedious towar...moreSuch an interesting read, especially if you like animals and animal science (which I do!). It's very readable, although it gets a little tedious towards the end. I would actually give this 3.5 stars, but I rounded up. It's a little bit disorganized and jumpy, and could probably be organized better. Generally, though, if you like animal science and are interested in animal behavior, I would recommend this book.(less)
I decided to take a break from being girlishly bad at math and reading people's minds with my lady empathizing skills to read this book, and I sure am...moreI decided to take a break from being girlishly bad at math and reading people's minds with my lady empathizing skills to read this book, and I sure am glad I did. Because it is hilarious. And fascinating. Cordelia Fine goes through all the old lines that I'm sure you've heard a thousand times (I know I have): that men's brains are just better at building stuff and making money while women are just natural nurturers, they just want to nurture the shit out of everything, because FEELINGS. Anyways, she takes a closer look at all these claims and experiments and disputes just about every one of them with scientific criticism. And she does it in a way that is sarcastic and witty and readable and interesting.
This book mainly focuses on white, middle- to upper-class gender construction and brain research, which makes sense, because most claims about brain sex differences are based on middle- to upper-class white folks. It would be interesting, however, if she wrote a sequel with a wider focus. And occasionally the scientific terms get a tad bit overwhelming, but if you want a readable academic book about neurosexism, you aren't going to find a better, more interesting, more readable book.
This book should be on the bestseller list. Everyone should read this. This should be in the waiting room of every maternity ward and in the break room of every public school. I am so glad that I stumbled across this gem of a book, and I can't recommend it highly enough. It's funny and substantive, and that is about the rarest a combination there is. (less)
This should be a 3.5 star rating for me, but I’m rounding up because I think it’s an important book on a sadly still very, very relevant issue. The bo...moreThis should be a 3.5 star rating for me, but I’m rounding up because I think it’s an important book on a sadly still very, very relevant issue. The book gets a little dry with the political history of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, but I really loved the way it framed the issue through the stories of these two individuals, Dalia and Bashir. It does a really nice job of debunking some of the more pervasive myths about Palestinian history that an American or Israeli reader might be familiar with – for example, that (quite false) notion that all Palestinians voluntarily left their homes – while still giving vital context to the Israeli issues and point-of-view.
It’s a frustrating read, because it is such a daunting issue with so little room for compromise and cooperation. (This is slightly unrelated, but some other reader left a review picking up on this and wrote that “maybe Dalia and Bashir should just chill out and become a bit more fun.” Seriously?! Yeah, sure they’re embroiled in a conflict which has left thousands homeless and hundreds of innocent civilians dead, but come on guys, lighten up! Having a homeland is cool, but so is Bananagrams! But then, this is from a review that suggests that the Palestinians be like the Native Americans, since “Hello, Native Americans are opening casinos laughing at white Americans as they hand over their money.” What an innovative solution, but then, I don’t know if Native Americans are the shining example of living in equal opportunity with a former oppressor nation, since American Indian communities are still struggling with the legacy of Removal, reflected in their high poverty rates, rampant alcoholism, high mortality, low high school graduation rates, and high teen pregnancy rates. Sorry for this whole rant, and I know it’s kind of really off topic, but that review really pissed me off. I don’t know if she’s trying to be funny or what, but I really hate when people make “Native Americans have it so easy” comments. It’s just so fucking insensitive.)
Anyways, back on subject. The book can be dry in places, it’s a bit of a slog to get through some parts, but the way the conflict is viewed through the personal stories of an individual from each side really makes it interesting and valuable. I would recommend you read this book if you have an interest in the subject. And if you want a broader view of the conflict that focuses on the social aspect, I would strongly recommend “Wounded Spirits in a Promised Land,” which is also excellent and wonderfully unbiased. (less)
I think I'm in love with Andrew Carroll. I LOVE old letters, I love American history, and I especially love war histories told on a personal level. On...moreI think I'm in love with Andrew Carroll. I LOVE old letters, I love American history, and I especially love war histories told on a personal level. On top of it all, Carroll dedicated this book to the American women who experienced war both from the home and from the front lines, and who were primarily responsible for keeping the letters and the memories safe so that those stories would be remembered. American history with a focus on women during war? I think I just died and went to heaven.
Anyways, this is a wonderful collection. I especially enjoyed the WWII chapter, but all were fascinating and Carroll does such a great job of including letters from diverse sources. You can either peruse the collection and read the ones that sound most interesting, or you can do like I did and just read it cover-to-cover. It's actually quite an emotional experience, reading these letters: you start to read a letter and it's funny or sweet or earnest and you find yourself hoping that at the end there won't be a little italicized note at the bottom stating that the author had been killed in action just after writing it. And when you do get to the end and you do find that the author was killed, your heart kind of sinks a little. The letters are funny and sad and hopeful and desperate and poignant and wonderfully mundane and earnest and detached and all of them put a human, personal face on war.
I really enjoyed this book, and if you have any interest in the subject, I would strongly recommend this book. (less)
Such a lovely and inspiring collection of letters, and Carroll is so brilliant at prefacing them with very short, succinct introductions. I also reall...moreSuch a lovely and inspiring collection of letters, and Carroll is so brilliant at prefacing them with very short, succinct introductions. I also really appreciate that Carroll included letters from ALL types of Americans - white, black, Latino, Asian, men, women, rich, poor, Northern, Southern, conservative, liberal, etc. I took off a star because he could have included a few more from women, but generally he was really excellent about including letters from diverse writers.
It's a wonderful collection, and if you have any interest in American history or letters, I would strongly recommend this book. I took a chance and bought it (usually I rent books from the library), and I'm so glad I did. Next I'll be reading Carroll's other book, War Letters...I'm excited for it!(less)
THERE ARE SO MANY F*-#KING TYPOS IN THIS BOOK. Apologies for the profanity, but dear Lord, who edited this thing?! Paragraphs split in the middle of a...moreTHERE ARE SO MANY F*-#KING TYPOS IN THIS BOOK. Apologies for the profanity, but dear Lord, who edited this thing?! Paragraphs split in the middle of a sentence, misspellings, random commas, missing capital letters....someone was clearly asleep at the wheel in proofreading this thing. Beyond just typos, there was also a lot of bad or confusing phrasing and awkward sentences that really brought down the level of the book, stylistically. So one star off for some poor writing.
The other star I took off because, especially toward the end of the book, the author interjected his opinion a little too much, which just didn't seem appropriate to the type of book this was. He also sometimes tried to be poetic or make a point and exaggerated actual historical fact when doing it, which bothered me. For example, introducing the chapter on the September 11th attacks, he wrote about how little Americans cared about the flag prior to 9/11: "Strange now to remember how we used to take the America flag [yes, that's not my typo, my edition of the book has it as the "america flag"...] for granted during the Cold war. It was omnipresent--even planted on the moon--but never truly appreciated as a banner of unity....[the flag] offered no dazzle or meaning. It was a blase symbol that life in the United States was business as usual." And then he goes on to talk about how much meaning the flag gained after 9/11. Um, what? Sure, the flag was imbued with a lot of extra sentiment and meaning after the attacks, but I think the idea that the flag basically meant nothing to Americans before the attacks is ridiculous. Quite a few of our most iconic national images feature the flag (raising the flag at Iwo Jima, the moon landing) and our national anthem is ALL about the flag ("oh say does that star-spangled banner yet wave/o'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?"). I thought that was bad history and bad writing. That, plus the fact that the author sometimes made opinionated judgments about certain presidents and policies, made me take off another star.
But this was a pretty great summary of American foreign policy in the twentieth century. It's concise, it includes a ton of information, and generally it is decently balanced and objective in its conclusions. It's a very readable book once you get past the typos. I would definitely recommend it to anyone who doesn't know much about American foreign policy. It's a great overview, and I don't regret reading it.(less)
Read it for school. The subject is really interesting but the writer is really repetitive. I kept reading a paragraph and getting distracted, thinking...moreRead it for school. The subject is really interesting but the writer is really repetitive. I kept reading a paragraph and getting distracted, thinking, "didn't I read this same paragraph like a few pages ago?" Additionally, I do feel that the author is kind of biased and did this project to validate her own experiences in the movements, and I do feel that the text favored the white perspective. And perhaps this is just my own thing, but I was kind of bored by the narrow focus on the white socialist feminist movement. It just seemed like such a small subset of the more meaningful larger picture.
I wonder if there isn't a better written, more comprehensive book on the subject. I didn't hate this book and I think it's an important topic, but I didn't love reading it and I wouldn't have read it outside of school.(less)
Really simple, fascinating book. It's about 80 pages of text with background on Dorothea Lange and the history of Japanese internment, and then the re...moreReally simple, fascinating book. It's about 80 pages of text with background on Dorothea Lange and the history of Japanese internment, and then the rest is photographs. The info is concise and interesting, and the photographs are stunning.
I usually return books bought for school at the end of the class, but I think I'll keep this one. It's definitely worth checking out if you have any interest in American 20th century history or in Dorothea Lange and documentary photography.(less)
It's so duuuulllllllll. Sorry, I had to read it for class, and it took me so long to get through the readings. The info and the analysis is good and t...moreIt's so duuuulllllllll. Sorry, I had to read it for class, and it took me so long to get through the readings. The info and the analysis is good and thorough and fairly researched and explained, but I wouldn't recommend it for anything other than school/research.(less)
Read it for my Women in Islam class. I love my teacher and her classes themselves are always super interesting, but the readings she assigns are so du...moreRead it for my Women in Islam class. I love my teacher and her classes themselves are always super interesting, but the readings she assigns are so dull and dry. This book was no exception.
It's just a bunch of quotes from the Qur'an and hadiths that relate to/deal with women. The selections themselves seem a little bit random and are given without any context. The little context that there is comes in the form of footnotes, of which there are MANY, and they're all in the back of the book, so you constantly have to flip back and forth to read a sentence, then look up the footnote, then flip back, and so on. It's so annoying. He really should have formatted the footnotes to be on the bottom of the pages instead of at the end.
So yeah, wouldn't recommend. There's some interesting stuff in this book, but the format is so annoying and the info is so random that it hardly seems worth it.(less)
I read it for school, and it was surprisingly enjoyable. You really get to know the people of this tiny, fascinating little village. It's like getting...moreI read it for school, and it was surprisingly enjoyable. You really get to know the people of this tiny, fascinating little village. It's like getting to know all their little rivalries and all the town gossip and stuff, and plus there's a lot of historical information and context. The author clearly loves and respects this town, and he seems to know EVERYTHING about everyone in it.
But it does get rather tedious after about 250 pages. And it is sometimes hard to keep the people/characters apart or to understand the chronological events that actually happened during the Inquisition at Montaillou. And now I'm going to have to write two papers on it, which I'm not looking forward to.
I would recommend it if you have a strong interest in the subject or if you are doing research and you think it would be relevant. I wouldn't necessarily recommend it for personal, fun reading.(less)
Interesting and to-the-point, but it was sometimes a little short on textual evidence. It did tend to feel a little too apologist and biased, but I su...moreInteresting and to-the-point, but it was sometimes a little short on textual evidence. It did tend to feel a little too apologist and biased, but I suppose that's unavoidable when discussing religion and interpretations of sacred texts. We all get out of it what we want to get out of it, and so on.
Anyways, I read it for school and it wasn't too dreadful, but I wouldn't recommend it for personal reading unless you're really, really into the subject.(less)
Who designed the cover for this book? I hate it. It looks like those horrifically dull graphics they used to put on the cases for software in the '90s...moreWho designed the cover for this book? I hate it. It looks like those horrifically dull graphics they used to put on the cases for software in the '90s. I get what they're trying to do, but I still think they could have done a better job on the cover design.
Anyway, on to the important stuff. This book was (mostly) easy to follow, even for someone with little knowledge about mortgages and capital and derivatives and other such financial stuff. If you've followed the financial crisis or watched movies like Inside Job, not much of this information will surprise you, but the authors really do a good job of going back to the start of the problem and following it from there.
It's a fascinating book, and it'll make you really mad that none of the people so clearly responsible for the bad deals and wildly unethical practices ever went to jail (instead, they get to leave with their millions of dollars in bonuses). It also does a good job of clearing up misconceptions about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
My only problems with this book were that there were a few typos, and it does tend to get a little technical and dull at parts. And of course the problem with these books published so soon after the crisis is that there are a lot of loose ends and some of the information is outdated already. But if you want to know more about the financial crisis, I would recommend giving this book a read. (less)
Loading...
