[GardenGnome]

Reading Ambercrombie's The Blade Itself. It has it's ups and downs. Lots of silly fantasy cliches, but what to expect? However, one very "I'd-throw-away-the-book-if-it-wasn't-for-the-fact-that-I'm-on-the-airport-bus-and-the-man-next-to-me-looks-like-he'd-be-shocked-and-certainly-not-amused" moment (see spoiler). Still, I like it.

Spoiler

When Jezal decides to do his best after all - just to show those that didn't believe him in him that he could. Je gods.

[rlfcl]

re-reading Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States"

fantastic book.

[GardenGnome]

Allow me to be more than a little dubious. Now, I haven't read the work myself, but I've heard people complain about it. Then again, I'm nearly a communist myself, so I guess we have the reason there.

[Wiggles]

rlfcl;174810 said:

re-reading Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States"

fantastic book.

Wordzzz

I just finished that about 2-3 days ago.

[rlfcl]

Word, Wiggles, Word

GardenGnome;174814 said:

Allow me to be more than a little dubious. Now, I haven't read the work myself, but I've heard people complain about it. Then again, I'm nearly a communist myself, so I guess we have the reason there.

Quote

"The treatment of heroes (ie Columbus) and their victims (the Arawaks) - the quiet acceptance of conquest and murder in the name of progress - is only one aspect of a certain approach to history, in which the past is told from the point of view of governments, conquerors, diplomats, leaders. It is as if they ... represent the nation as a whole. The pretense is that there really is such a thing as "The United States", subject to occasional conflicts, but fundamentally a community of people with common interests ...

My viewpoint, in telling the history of the United States, is different: that we must not accept the memory of states as our own. Nations are not communities and never have been. The histoyr of any country, presented as the history of a family, conceals fierce conflicts of interest (sometimes exploding, most often repressed) between conquerors and conquered, masters and slaves, capitalists and workers, dominators and dominated in race and sex. And in such a world of conflict, a world of victims and executioners, it is the job of thinking people, as Albert Camus suggested, to not be on the side of the executioners.

Thus, in that inevitable taking of sides which comes from selection and emphasis in history, i prefer to try and tell the story of the discovery of American from the viewpoint of the Arawak Indians, of the Constitution from the standpoint of the slaves, of Andrew Jackson as seen by the Cherokees, Of the Civil War as seen by the New York Irish ... the rise of industrialism as seen by the women of the Lowell textile mills ... the first world war as seen by socialists ... The New Deal as seen by blacks in harlem, the postwar American empire as seen by peons in Latin America ...

Still, in understanding the complexities, this book will be skeptical of governments and their attemps, through politics and culture, to ensnare ordinary people in a giant web of nationhood pretending to a common interest. I will not try to overlook the cruelties that victims inflict upon each other as they are jammed together in the boxcars of the system. i dont want to romanticize them. But i do remember a statement i once read: "the cry of the poor is not always just, but if you don't listen to it, you will never know what justice is".

I dont want to invent victories for the people's movements. But to think that history -writing must aim simply to recapitulate the failures that dominate the past is to make historians collaborators in an endless cycle of defeat. if history is to be creative, to anticipate the possible future without denying the past, it shoudl, I beleive ... disclose those hidden episodes of the past when, even if in brief flashes, people showed their ability to resist, to join together, to occasionally win

i dunno, passes my socialist metal detector.

[Darkwatch]

Tacitus

[The Archivist]

Hello all,

I just finished reading a Science Fiction/Historical Fiction/Fantasy piece by S.M. Stirling called Dies the Fire. I must admit the historian in my stood up and cheered. The premise is what would happen to modern society if physics changed so that electricity and explosive compression and decompression were a bit out of whack. In other words, no power, nor guns/explosives. Delightful reading for the lovers of modern swordplay.

Cheers.

[Hume]

Im close to finishing of Soldiers of God
A book on the Afghan resistance against the communist's and soviets in the late 1980's.

Also reading The KGB and the world, Quite interesting so far and a bit of a heavy read to I must say.

Lasty there is The Fifth head of Cerebrus by Gene Wolfe. As usual he hasn't failed to disappoint so far.

All of them are fairly decent too.

[Thelomen Toblerone]

Thunderball by Ian Fleming.

Just read all the Bond books up to this one, what an outrageously racist, sexist bastard Fleming was. The character of Bond is ethically a complete wanker, he sleeps with married women, mentions striking women in jest, believes Koreans to be below apes in the mammalian heirarchy, and is thankful British people dont have to grow up with the "colour problem, like they do in America."

On top of that, as an author Fleming is poor, he wastes huge chunks of time in small books describing breakfast in minute detail, the history of a racecourse, and other things that not only contribute slightly less than sod all to the plot, but are boring as fuck too. However, the actual stories are great, so I continue to read. Plus they were all bought for me for Xmas by my friend's mum so I'd feel rude if I left them to collect dust.

[Astra]

Finished Hearts in Atlantisand started The Dark Tower VII! by Stephen King, finally
Hearts in Atlantis was a very unusual book for King, except Low Men in Yellow coats. Still liked the book. Inexplicable but I like his style.

[Wiggles]

Thelomen Toblerone;175047 said:

Thunderball by Ian Fleming.

Just read all the Bond books up to this one, what an outrageously racist, sexist bastard Fleming was. The character of Bond is ethically a complete wanker, he sleeps with married women, mentions striking women in jest, believes Koreans to be below apes in the mammalian heirarchy, and is thankful British people dont have to grow up with the "colour problem, like they do in America."

On top of that, as an author Fleming is poor, he wastes huge chunks of time in small books describing breakfast in minute detail, the history of a racecourse, and other things that not only contribute slightly less than sod all to the plot, but are boring as fuck too. However, the actual stories are great, so I continue to read. Plus they were all bought for me for Xmas by my friend's mum so I'd feel rude if I left them to collect dust.

God, all of those reasons are why the books are (probably) still GREAAAAAAAAT

[Tiste Simeon]

Reading Romanitas by Sophia McDougall. I like the concept, and the characters are well crafted. Dunno if I am really enjoying it at the moment, though... When I have got more into it I will write more (probably...)

[pat5150]

Hi there,

Joel Shepherd's scifi debut, Crossover, took me by complete surprise last fall. To say that I wasn't expecting to enjoy the novel to such a degree would be quite an understatement. Crossover ended up in my Top 10 of 2006, so I had high hopes for its sequel, Breakaway.

At times a political thriller and at times an action-packed scifi yarn, Breakaway makes for a very satisfying read. My sole complaint would have to do with the relative lack of closure at the end. Okay, so sue me for not wanting to wait to see what happens next!

The Pyr logo continues to be associated with quality reads!

Check the blog for the full review. . .

Patrick

[Morgoth]

just finished a re-read of Faust pt.1, and am now at the begining of Faust pt.2

[Sir Thursday]

I've just received copies of Joe Abercrombie's Before They Are Hanged and Greg Keyes' The Blood Knight, so I'll dive into those as soon as I've finished Mary Gentle's 1610: A Sundial in a Grave.


Sir Thursday

[Dr Trouble]

Whats 1610: A Sundial in a Grave. like? I always see it but shy away.

Just finished Gene Wolfe's "Soldier in the Mist" And can't wait to get the next two books, if i can find them! I think amazon is goingto be my saviour.

[Sir Thursday]

Trouble;177732 said:

Whats 1610: A Sundial in a Grave. like? I always see it but shy away.

Just finished Gene Wolfe's "Soldier in the Mist" And can't wait to get the next two books, if i can find them! I think amazon is goingto be my saviour.

I quite like it...some weird kinky stuff, but otherwise it reads in a similar sort of vein to The Three Musketeers with precogs. I'm not a huge fan of the protagonist, but at the same time it's a pretty good read. Not as good as Ash: A Secret History, but still worth reading. I'd recommend it.


Sir Thursday

[Morgoth]

If I were to order Gene Wolf books for the book store, which one should they be?

[Dr Trouble]

Morgoth;177735 said:

If I were to order Gene Wolf books for the book store, which one should they be?

Man, all of them.

I read his Book of The New Sun series first,
* The Shadow of the Torturer
* The Claw of the Conciliator
* The Sword of the Lictor
* The Citadel of the Autarch

I'd recommend that as it introduced and made me really like his books. Its a hard read though.

I like all of his books equally so find it hard to recommend one above the other. The easiest one to read in my opinion and still a fantastic book is Soldier of the Mist. So it depends what you like. others might no more then me.

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Gene_Wolfe

[caladanbrood]

You can get the Book of the New Sun in 2 parts now, in the Fantasy Masterworks series - cheaper:)