I only read through half of The Book of the Moon, before I put it down. The dust jacket describes the author, Rick Stroud, as an acclaimed television director; but good directing has little to do with writing a book, and I think the author would have benefitted from stronger editorial direction.
I liked the first chapter on facts and figures, but I felt the text started to deteriorate soon thereafter. Some sections feel padded with extra facts, while others seem incomplete, especially some of the lists and timelines. For example, read this description of Johannes Kepler from page 78:
“Kepler was an astrologer, astronomer and mathematician. He worked for a time in Tycho Brahe’s observatory. Kepler’s most important work was his Epitome of Copernican Astronomy, in which he described his three laws of planetary motion. In 1615 his mother was tried and imprisoned for witchcraft. She was released after fifteen months.”
What do the last two sentences have to do with astronomy and the Moon? Nothing! Why should we even care about Kepler’s mother? Why not use some of that space to explain something about Kepler’s laws or what made them so important? If you only have a few sentences to describe a person or topic, make them count. Also, the portrait of Kepler following the description takes up over half the page, appearing much larger than the portraits of Nicolaus Copernicus and Galileo Galilei found earlier in the section. So with Kepler, we get more illustration than information.
The occasional pull-quotes in the text serve only to pad it; the text does not have the density or complexity to warrant using them. The pull-quotes appear too close to the original text, making them feel repetitive. The pages have wide outside margins, resulting in less actual information/text per page.
I finally gave up after reading the Chapter 3: Gods and Myths. The author glosses over some deities and offers misleading or erroneous information about others. Take this poorly written description of Thoth from page 126:
“Thoth is the god of the moon and wisdom. His images are to be found in sculpture, stone reliefs and wall paintings from 3000 BC to the end of Egyptian history in AD 400. Writing about him can be found in pyramid texts and coffin texts. He was born from the head of the god Seth. He is depicted variously as part human, part ibis; all ibis; or as a seated baboon. He wears a crown of a crescent moon surmounted by a moon disc. Generally benign, as the scribe of the gods he is responsible for entering the record of the souls who pass into the afterlife. He is the inventor of arts and science and the master of magic. If angered, he will decapitate the adversaries of truth and tear out their hearts.”
Where to start? The author takes the Pyramid Texts and the Coffin Texts out of context, ignoring the chronological import of these texts. The Egyptians generally considered Thoth as self-created and taking part in the formation of the universe, certainly not originating from Set. However, the last sentence surprised me the most, as none of the material I’ve read about Thoth mentions an angry, violent side of the god. While I do not doubt that a mythological basis for this manifestation could exist, the idea does not appear in any common mythological or archeological accounts of Thoth that I have encountered.
On the next page, another zinger concerning Hecate:
“She has been adopted by neo-pagans as the patron of witchcraft and evil, and her plants included hazel, black poplar and willow.”
None of the neo-pagans I know have adopted Hecate as the ‘patron of witchcraft and evil’. The author’s statement seems tainted with Judeo-Christian superstition that confuses darkness (an important aspect of Hecate) with evil.
I skimmed through the next chapter, Gardening and the Weather. The gardening section mostly describes Rudolf Steiner’s Biodynamics. The weather section gives a brief history of theories on if/how the moon affects our climate that ends around 1850 and then simply glosses over all modern attempts to answer the question as inconclusive. Surely meteorology and climatology have advanced sufficiently in the last 150 years to offer more evidence to consider! And here, I deemed the book not worth more investment of my time and attention and put it down. The rest of the book looks interesting, but not enough to endure issues with accuracy and layout. Very disappointing and not recommended.