Book Lists : Your best and worst reads of 2021

[madrano]

Delightful, Annie. You must have had a great reading year!

[madrano]

Welcome, Muhammad. What have you been reading lately? I'm immersed in Firekeeper's Daughter--Angeline Boulley.

[Alias Reader]

Muhammad wrote: "hi"

Welcome !

[Tamara]

Haha, Madrano! I like the 'made-up reason'.

With Australian history, it's not offending facts that are surprising (unless, of course, you follow that way of looking at things, which is very popular currently), but that so much that is interesting and noble and amazing actually did happen. In school, we learnt about the traditional things, some of which would have been more interesting if taught in different ways (i.e. the content), but it was just so dry. I felt disappointed and embarrassed - like we had such a boring history, plus some Aboriginal 'Dreamtime' stories. Not like the swashbuckling history of the U.S., for example.

So, as an adult, I've discovered that, in fact, there are wonderful, good, exciting, courageous, etc. stories/events/people which all contributed to a history I now feel proud of and happy to be the beneficiary/descendant of.

Every nation has difficulties in its past; less savoury characters, and mistakes. Just like every life. The main thing is learning from them, and striving for the good to be what remains. It's also a lot to do with perspective - the interpretation of historical events and characters is so fraught with judgement and emotion and ideology. Facts get distorted, legends become taken as facts, one perspective becomes the only correct interpretation, even when there are people with very different experiences and perspectives.

So the book I read last year was good, not only for its easy-to-read style and approach and its inclusion of many interesting facts/events/people, but also its presentation and discussion of these things in as much context as is possible for things which happened so long ago, and for many of which we have actually no records, but hearsay has become accepted for some of these. For others, legends have grown up around them, but the reality is somewhat different. So I really appreciated something so much less emotionally and politically-fraught, but just fairly presented.

[madrano]

Tamara wrote: "Facts get distorted, legends become taken as facts, one perspective becomes the only correct interpretation, even when there are people with very different experiences and perspectives...."

For me, this is what was missing in history as we grew up. In retrospect, i felt a bit as though we'd been fed propaganda. What i really wanted was a broader spectrum for many issues upon our nation/beliefs were founded. It's only by reading nonfiction as an adult that i realized how we have been taught and how narrow the approach was.

Most likely, though, school days would have entailed longer hours and many more weeks to do be more inclusive. Figuring out what to shave and what to share must have been a challenge for those with open minds. Still, personally, i wouldn't have felt as misled had i felt a balance.

Your final sentence, Tamara, sums it up. Even today as i read history, this is what i want. Save the drama and politics, just share what is known fairly.

I smiled at your swashbuckling US history comment. It seemed to me that as we traveled around the world, the biggest misconception of us is that of the "Wild West". Those images ignore the tribes, who had to suffer for those scenarios to become history/legend. What i like about reading history as an adult is the attempt to balance what we learned as fact--that there were people, even within the government, who were sympathetic toward tribes, believing treaties should be honored, as an example.

Presently there seems to be an attempt to correct that image, but there also seems to be people who object to finding out another side. If people read beyond their schooling, into adulthood, i might feel differently. However, in our nation, at least, not many read history once it's no longer required, so old facts remain embedded. In my opinion, i hasten to add. I'm aware there are those who disagree. :-)

[Tamara]

Hey Madrano. When I say 'swashbuckling' for US history, I mean the way it was settled, the Revolutionary War, and the making of the constitution. The stories and people all sound more passionate, daring, etc. I don't mean, so much, literally swashbuckling 😎. I know the 'Wild West' image is mostly created by films and books. Although it was pretty wild in places - as it was here, but somewhat differently.

It's just that we had a quite different settlement pattern. More sedate and measured, and over a shorter period of time. Less so, hundreds of different private groups, and more so, a unified approach. Generally. There were lots of different groups, but it was quite ordered, in comparison. I think they were usually better-prepared, too - there was a bit more known about the land, and the British government was more involved with the settlement process than with North America (the beginning couple of hundred years of North America's settlement). People came here for some similar reasons, like general and religious freedom (such as my German ancestors who went to South Australia), including land to farm and just space, but were less averse to government involvement from Britain - perhaps because that involvement was more benign for the Australian experiment. I guess they'd learnt from their mistakes 🙂.
But we definitely have our crazy stories!

I've seen/heard rather a bit about the Native American tribes when seeing or reading about the US history. It seems to be woven in inseparably with the settlers' stories. I also appreciate the balancing, as an adult, of what is often otherwise presented as good/evil; bad group/good group; oppressors/oppressed. Life's really not like that - it's all nuanced. I guess looking at something as 'history' can mean giving things a broad sweep, and events or processes or people then can come across as simplistically good/bad/whatever. But learning about the details makes it, usually, much less simple and 2D. Or 1D. Which is what makes it relatable, and human, and able to learn from.

[madrano]

Tamara, i see what you mean by "swashbuckling" and agree. I hadn't thought of it in those terms but immediately understood what you meant. There was daring exhibited even in the most mundane of moments--passing secrets with laundry, eavesdropping, and such are quite dramatic in their silent way.

Your point about what must have been gained from learning from mistakes with other colonies is well taken. The more dramatic is not necessarily the best for the citizens and when well approached, is superior. Fewer deaths, for one.

It took me a long time to realize that what i was reading in history books wasn't the final word. It would have behooved educators to make that clear early on, imo. I believe this primarily because once one learns there was a lack of veracity, much more is questioned. And that's a pity.

[madrano]

Petra wrote: "Here are my best and worst books.
Worst (all 2-star):
I had no 1-star books this year.

Moon of the Crusted Snow - I wanted to like this one. It had all the elements of an exciting read. But it wasn't....."

When Petra shared this opinion last year, i was sorry to learn her thoughts but i also posted that i might give it a try because the setting (upper Canada, on an Indigenous Reserve) sounded good. She didn't mention, and i'd forgotten from Alias's previous posts about it in a couple of books available list, that it was post-apocalyptic. And i added that since it was also short, i'd give it a whirl.

Which i did. In the end, i liked Waubgeshig Rice's Moon of the Crusted Snow. As i wrote, i'd forgotten the post-apocalypse theme, so the first several chapters i was thinking along a totally different line, which heightened my pleasure. In the first quarter of the novel, readers are introduced to members of the Anishinaabe community, particularly one family--Evan and Nicole Whitesky, who have two young children.

Once they figure out what's happening, we understand this will be a communal effort to withstand the circumstances. It was neat to read about efforts the tribal council took to assure all members had enough fuel and food. And more.

I liked it better than Petra. Indeed, i actually read it completely yesterday. Frankly, that seldom happens to me but i was caught up in the lives of the young family and the treatment of others.

When we see books in different light, it's neat to think about how one piece of literature can be taking readers on dissimilar paths. Thanks to Petra for her honest comments.

[Alias Reader]

madrano wrote: ", i actually read it completely yesterday. Frankly, that seldom happens to me but i was caught up in the lives of the young family and the treatment of others.

When we see books in different light, it's neat to think about how one piece of literature can be taking readers on dissimilar paths. Thanks to Petra for her honest comments...."

Absolutely ! If we all thought the same, what would be the point of even posting.

You must have been really taken in to read it in one day !

[madrano]

I know! Honestly, it surprised me that i was most reluctant to put the book down.