My brother has years of experience and training in management and has built a successful business. I asked him what management book he recommended andMy brother has years of experience and training in management and has built a successful business. I asked him what management book he recommended and this is it. Recommended if you want to build an enjoyable work community....more
I read this book on accident--pulled it from a top 10 list somewhere, misread the title thinking it was a book on actual art.
Many ideas to make dull wI read this book on accident--pulled it from a top 10 list somewhere, misread the title thinking it was a book on actual art.
Many ideas to make dull work meetings less dull (and possibly good) and make your social parties more fun. I have been implementing it to help make the lifeless work meetings I run less dull and more beneficial to my team....more
"Theater of Envy" is my introduction to Girard, mimetic desire, the scapegoat mechanism, and so on.
I lack the expertis Quite interesting. High praise.
"Theater of Envy" is my introduction to Girard, mimetic desire, the scapegoat mechanism, and so on.
I lack the expertise to comment on the validity of Girard--he builds off of common observations. The whole is interesting and makes sense-although Girard often is caught up in the universality of this theory (all desire is mimetic) and a need for acceptance from his peers.
The book is very well put together. Girard does an excellent job of leading the string of thought. I often found myself 'thinking ahead' to a point he would later establish or wondering about an observation to which he would immediately provide an answer. Regarding the Shakespeare, Girard makes a compelling case built clearly from Shakespeare's own words. Often in criticism, the criticism is a complex explanation of the 'deeper' text. Here, however, it is Shakespeare providing clear statements in support of Girard's theories-almost stunning in how clearly and solidly Girard finds support in Shakespeare.
At times, especially in the 'lesser' plays and comedies, Shakespeare's plots can take cheap turns or feel a bit clunky. Girard contends that at least in some of these cases, the cheap turn is clue that Shakespeare has a second 'deeper' plot in play that is more sound than the surface. A curious point, almost to obsession, is his insistence that critics have a psychological blindness to mimetic desire and the mimetic cycle. I don't know what to make of that--I lack the expertise in Shakespeare and psychology, anthropology and so forth to adequately evaluate Girard. The chapters on The Winter's Tale are super. He makes a good case and this book is one of the coolest things I have read....more
"Most likely you're wrong, even if you think others are likely to be even more wrong than you are..."
Worth a read if you at all like to think and talk"Most likely you're wrong, even if you think others are likely to be even more wrong than you are..."
Worth a read if you at all like to think and talk politics, morals, philosophy, what's best for humanity, etc., especially worth a read if you think that your politics are more sophisticated and correct than everyone around you. To that point:
"...the chance that we are right on the specifics...is still not very high... The best you can do is to pick what you think is right at 1.05% certainty, rather than siding with what you think is right at 1.03%. Most likely you are wrong, even if others are likely to be even more wrong than you are, and thus your attitude should be correspondingly modest in the epistemic sense."
The premise is that, for humanity, economic growth is good -- is good because it produces Wealth Plus, that is, wealth, actual goods, plus a higher quality of life for more people -- more leisure time, preserved environmental amenities, more people living life to the fullest. The focus isn't so much on individual activities but choices made as a society:
What can we do to maximize growth? [a libertarian concern] What can we do to make our civilization more stable? [a conservative concern] How should we handle the environment? [a liberal concern]
And these choices should be constrained by a concern for human rights in pursuit long term economic growth.
What may be a little unsatisfying, in the end, is that Cowen argues that what we should do is live our lives to the happiest, fullest that we can and vote and support big policies that favor sustained, long term economic growth. People hundreds of years from now will thank your for it.
'Conversations with Tyler' is a great interview/podcast series; Marginal Revolution (with Alex Taborrok) is a regular read. This book presents plenty of interesting ideas, conundrums, etc.--though I found it more than a little messy and adrift around 80% of the way in. It recovers and ends well. Appendix B discusses Parfit's Repugnant Conclusion in some detail. Recommended.
I bought a hard copy--Stripe Press put out a nice book, though Cowen could have done better with the cover art. Hopefully the proceeds will do Yonas well and his business will prosper....more
I would have found this less appealing (and Wikipedia more useful) had I not read it on the heels of The Confessions of Rousseau. Regarding liberty, pI would have found this less appealing (and Wikipedia more useful) had I not read it on the heels of The Confessions of Rousseau. Regarding liberty, power, etc., both arrived at the same spot by very different avenues. I am sure that even after Mill accepted that his logical view was lacking, he could never respect Rousseau's intuition and lack of rigorous formal thought. As Mill seems to have read everything, I am sure he read Rousseau and though I expected Mill to at least mention Rousseau's contributions, I am not too surprised that he did not.
Two points of interest. 1, Mill's mental break (or mental breakdown?) with strict logic and utilitarianism and his acceptance of the intuition or art of Wordsworth and Coleridge et al. into his formal system of thought. 2, The similarities of Mill and Rousseau. Both precocious readers (one by choice, one by force), the intuitive thinker vs the highly trained and formal thinker and so forth is interesting enough but that both found themselves in need of explaining the scandalous rumors regarding their romantic lives is something else.
Rousseau is so very open about every last detail that if anything was left unsaid, it was with a nod and a wink toward the blank to be filled. Mill reveals nothing. As if his friendship with Harriet Taylor, visiting her for years, traveling with alone with her and so on was just a beneficial friendship and their marriage after her husband died was more out of mutual admiration and professional convenience than romance. Good heavens, even if nothing physically actually happened, if they remained chaste enough for a Scorsese period romance, even if Mill was an actual robot, would it have been too much to admit, "I adored her for decades (decades!), begged her to leave her husband and when he unexpectedly died, my heart rejoiced!" Instead, he drones on (as much as one could in so short a book) about forgotten politics of 19th century Britain and how important her opinion was in developing his work....more
"I have resolved on an enterprise which has no precedent, and which, once complete, will have no imitator."
Oh, Rousseau, when he isn't telling the who"I have resolved on an enterprise which has no precedent, and which, once complete, will have no imitator."
Oh, Rousseau, when he isn't telling the whole truth it is because he is blind to it. The first half is fantastic. The second not as interesting, though it turns compelling as he spirals on, his idealism building for him a trap and the bed of a fool all at once.
"No sooner did I recognize from our first familiarities the value of her charms and caress than, fearing to lose the fruit prematurely, I tried to make haste and pluck it. Suddenly, instead of the fire that devoured me, I felt a deathly cold flow through my veins; my legs trembled; I sat down on the point of fainting, and wept like a child."...more
"Reasoning can take us to almost any conclusion we want to reach, because we ask 'Can I believe it?' when we want to believe something, but 'Must I be"Reasoning can take us to almost any conclusion we want to reach, because we ask 'Can I believe it?' when we want to believe something, but 'Must I believe it?' when we don't want to believe. The answer is almost always yes to the first question and no to the second."
I find these topics quite interesting and quite depressing.
The writing in this isn't the best -- too round about at times and some points may not have enough support for inclusion in a book like this; otherwise, the material is compelling and the subject matter is worth it. I look forward to seeing what he does with this twenty years from now.
"Like rats that cannot stop pressing a button, partisans may simply be unable to stop believing weird things...Extreme partisanship my be literally addictive."...more
"Odd as it may seem, I am my remembering self, and the experiencing self, who does most of my living, is like a stranger to me."
No question, I placed "Odd as it may seem, I am my remembering self, and the experiencing self, who does most of my living, is like a stranger to me."
No question, I placed more comments in the margins of this book than any other book I've read. One of the books with the very rare distinction of being a book everyone should read (or have training in it--some suitable for high school and a thorough college course)....more
One of the most interesting books I've read. The war tales are tedious after a while, but it is interesting the way the po"a possession for all time."
One of the most interesting books I've read. The war tales are tedious after a while, but it is interesting the way the powers are, they way they push their business and how little things change. The similarities with the cold war have been noted; I am fascinated with Alcibiadies and the similarity with Donald Trump. Were there ever figures who cared more about themselves and who so thoroughly had everyone fooled? Recommended.
The Landmark edition is superb (hardcover--reviews at Amazon report the softcover has the ability to rapidly fall apart). The appendices are nice. Many maps, almost always within a few pages ahead of the reference. Great footnotes. If your bookshelf does not have this edition of this book, your bookshelf is lacking.
"...they were angry with the orators who had joined in promoting the expedition, just as if they had not themselves voted it..."
Why bother with a book about the 1981 Spanish coup d'état? Before reading Javier Cercas everything I knew about modern Spain I learned froHigh praise.
Why bother with a book about the 1981 Spanish coup d'état? Before reading Javier Cercas everything I knew about modern Spain I learned from Chevy Chase and Garrett Morris: “Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead!” Only a little bit is the book about Spain and a little bit is it about the push for democracy. More than a little bit is it about a coup d'état and being about one coup d'état it may be about all of them. Certainly having read the book I feel a better acquainted with what needs to happen for one to be possible and with the coup in Egypt playing out as I read the book, it may have been different pieces and places but it looks like the same game of chess.
The book brought two questions I have not resolved. Cercas asks outright: can one be a successful politician without betrayal and dishonesty and lies? Has every successful politician sold a part of their soul to the devil? (And a side question, in politics at least, does the end justify the means? Backed by Weber he answers that question in the affirmative.) Don’t we all complain of the dishonesty of politicians (always the other guy or girl, not our guy or girl) quickly forgetting that our most favored broke promises, cut corners, tricked and connived?
The second question, coming as an American and the fervor with which we hail the Founding Fathers, the second question developed as I read the book: great men, at least, great men of politics, did they take the right action because they saw that the action itself was beneficial to society, or was it simply fortuitous that a decision made out of self interest was in harmony with the interests of a lasting public good? Are some people intrinsically good men and women who acted to benefit society and others not so much good men but very good politicians who, in serving themselves fortuitously helped everyone else?
It’s a very good book, well written, well told. The book is not an easy breezy read, neither is it difficult and thick. It is written with repetitive phrases and long sentences that bend around and around, spiraling ever closer to the truth without ever arriving. It is a good style, well fitted to the material and Anne McLean deserves accolades for a smooth translation into English....more
"Men forgot hat and coat, and ran into the streets and wandered about, apparently anxious only to be near somebody else, but shocked and bewildered."
A"Men forgot hat and coat, and ran into the streets and wandered about, apparently anxious only to be near somebody else, but shocked and bewildered."
A good read and wonderfully interesting. We get a spin of political intrigue, insanity, frantic invention and a brush with the King of Brazil. The passage covering Garfield's final journey to Elberon delivered surprise and awe. It is a travesty that when people hear the name "Garfield" they think of that lousy cat....more
…The kind of things we look at in our dreams When altars seem to lift a swirl of incense (We are all, of course, the hosts of images.)
The big deal here …The kind of things we look at in our dreams When altars seem to lift a swirl of incense (We are all, of course, the hosts of images.)
The big deal here isn’t quite so much the content as the quality of the delivery. You can get all the nice ideas about atoms and guesses as to this and that, storms, volcanoes, fertility, contraception, etc. elsewhere and bits of it might be curious and interesting but most of it would be quite forgettable. The reason this book is still around is that it is fantastically well written. The quality of the verse was praised by Cicero, Virgil, and Ovid (elaborated in The Swerve: How the World Became Modern). The content can be quite dull at times (particularly Books V and VI) and I found myself somehow quite pleased anyway. There is something simply engaging about the style and manner of Lucretius (I had a similar response to Robert Burton).
Poetry readers will find, at the very least, the dedication to Venus that opens Book I worth their time; beyond that I recommend all of Books I and IV. Books II and III are similar in interest, style aside. I have the non-rhyming verse translation of Rolfe Humphries and would not recommend prose over it. Dryden opted for rhyming verse in translating a few excerpts; of the little I sampled, some I found inspired, some, not.
After first encountering ancient atomism in Burton’s The Anatomy of Melancholy, I wondered whether Democritus, Epicurus and so on were really that clever or merely lucky. Surely, with the ancients offering any number of ideas as to the nature of the things, by chance someone would be correct about something (though nobody at the time would have had any way of knowing it). Lucretius is wrong quite a lot; he gets a few things very nicely right. Atoms cannot be created or destroyed; they are innumerable; the different elements have unique properties and it is in how they combine that matters. Reasoning out from atoms, he argues that just as our planet was formed from atoms swerving together, the same process occurred throughout the universe for countless other worlds (and so stating that the earth was not the center of the universe). He even makes assertions surprisingly close to Darwin’s natural selection and though he is quite wrong on genetics, makes a key point on evolution.
Even when he was wrong, in some cases he may have had the concept right. Regarding the sense of taste, of course sweet flavors are not due to round, smooth atoms whereas bitter or savory flavors are due to rough and sharp atoms. But the shape of molecules is a factor and a strong argument can be made that he was right in concept (without the modern discoveries of atomic charge, molecular polarity, and so forth, he lacked the wherewithal to be correct in the details). The atomists may have started from a lucky place and their motivations, rather than pure reason, may have led them, at times, to reach “correct” conclusions. Nevertheless, they were quite clever and deserve some credit beyond luck.
Another thing we do is fool ourselves, Become the dupes of logic which derives Giant conclusions out of pygmy clues....more
Interesting throughout, from the merely curious to the fascinating. Jumping off the Book of Revelation, he hops across time and the importance of the Interesting throughout, from the merely curious to the fascinating. Jumping off the Book of Revelation, he hops across time and the importance of the end in making sense of things. (As with The Genesis of Secrecy: On the Interpretation of Narrative, Kermode provides refreshing insight on the Bible, though he doesn't devote as much space to it here.) He somehow cites and quotes just about everyone from antiquity on up, though he gives much space to Wallace Stevens (I suspect his book on Stevens probably is worth the time).
The first chapter, titled "The End," is recommended.
"Time cannot be faced as coarse and actual, as a repository of the contingent; one humanizes it by orderly fictions of beginning and end."...more
“This for the most part is the humour of us all, to be discontent, miserable, and most unhappy, as we think at least; and show me him that is not so, “This for the most part is the humour of us all, to be discontent, miserable, and most unhappy, as we think at least; and show me him that is not so, or that ever was otherwise.”
Quite, quite interesting. “The Anatomy of Melancholy” goes quite beyond the titled gloominess to spread melancholy onto a compendium of human conditions, complete with symptoms, prognostics and the various cures ever known in the western world. Witches, humours, charms, angels, purgatives (for both or either end), spells, etc., both lawful and unlawful are not neglected. The true circumstances of a woman who took a bear for her husband, what became of their children, etc., are included. It is now apparent that Robert Burton, anticipating the advent of the World Wide Web, set down a first draft of the internet in 1620. It is unfortunate that he was not able to comment on Paxil, Wellbutrin, Zoloft, Abilify, etc.
Skip or skim the first 33 pages or so of the introduction, “Democritus Jr. to the Reader;” it goes long and doesn’t pick up until Hippocrates pays a visit to Democritus. Love-Melancholy ran better than expected. Religious Melancholy was other than hoped and the sections on Despair not as rich as the rest of the book, a bit of a let down after everything else, but what should one expect from Despair? The “Digression of Air” in volume II is fantastic.
My edition was published by New York Review Books Classics. It resembles a brick somewhat more than a paperback book, though the cover does have a picture of a skull and an hourglass to let you know that it is, indeed, a book. The unwieldy size and weight make it inconvenient for reading at the bus stop or on the bus, or during your lunch break, or sitting down in a comfortable chair. It would be nice had they published it in three individual volumes instead of packing three volumes into one. Perhaps the New York Review Books Classics was low on card stock and could not supply covers for three separate volumes. If you are open to doing violence to books, one could apply an X-Acto knife to the spine and turn the single volume into three volumes and I suppose you could acquire the proper textile and glue and card stock to properly convert the dissected book into three proper volumes. It is printed on stout paper, perhaps out of necessity, as the heaviness of the book may bring harm to the thinner, flimsier papers in common use.
New York Review Books Classics was kind enough to translate most of the Latin. Rumor around the campfire is, Burton wanted to put the whole thing in Latin. The original publisher disagreed and Burton responded by directly quoting as much Latin as possible. It’s a lot. New York Review Books Classics neglected to translate a few extensive passages from the Latin, possibly due to sensibilities of the reader or perhaps the translator, as these passages cover material that may not be appropriate for dinnertime conversation or other conversation unsuitable for the unusual and extreme things people may do.
Sixty percent of the way through the third volume I discovered that a glossary was included. Unfortunately, I was almost finished and the glossary does not include fifty percent of the words you will want to look up; ninety-five percent of the glossary you will not need. As glossaries go, this does not receive high marks.
“Hope, ye unhappy ones; ye happy ones, fear.”...more
Sarrasine is great and should be read. Barthes is Barthes and this dismantling of Sarrasine is simultaneously cool and painful -- one of those hills ySarrasine is great and should be read. Barthes is Barthes and this dismantling of Sarrasine is simultaneously cool and painful -- one of those hills you only climb once....more
Any idiot can find the flaws in a work of art. Setting a name to what is good is the real challenge.
I'm a fan of Kermode's The Genesis of Secrecy: On Any idiot can find the flaws in a work of art. Setting a name to what is good is the real challenge.
I'm a fan of Kermode's The Genesis of Secrecy: On the Interpretation of Narrative covering the role of enigma in narrative. Here he sets out to show how the language of Shakespeare moved from traditional rhetoric to a new style, eloquent and easy in complexity and obscurity.
Not for the expert or the beginner, this is aimed at a readers who have at least some familiarity with the dramatist. I imagine experts would find much of this too glossy and too familiar to be thoroughly engaging. Kermode has a simple, familiar writing style that I find a welcome break from the overly wrought and dense logging in some literary criticism.
The first section covers the early and middle plays, highlighting the transition as Shakespeare developed the 'mature' style employed for the later plays. The second section is a series of essays on each of the 'mature' plays. Some of these are better than others and some have more of an academic interest. At times he seemed to lose his way, given over to summarizing and cataloging minutia (particularly the case with the disappointing essay on Hamlet).
The first section is very worth reading. I gave high marks to the chapters on Measure for Measure, Macbeth, The Winter's Tale, and The Tempest. The chapter on Pericles is interesting for it's discussion on narrative elements that feature in subsequent plays....more
If you are going to do yourself the favor of reading Proust, also do your self the favor of taking this along for the ride.
Edit I decided to read this If you are going to do yourself the favor of reading Proust, also do your self the favor of taking this along for the ride.
Edit I decided to read this straight through, a few pages at time. I had been occasionally flipping to an entry, and reading the whole thing through is gold. Even if you haven't read Proust, it is a personal tour through art given by someone who filled their life with it. If you have read Proust, Paintings in Proust is a beautiful way to revisit the work, notice more directly what Proust says about art, how it is in his thoughts and life.
Incidentally, I read Let's See at the same time, with Schjeldahl writing of his admiration for some of the artists and works a century after Proust -- quite nice...more
Loading...
