![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
plutherusThough I've been spending most of my time trying to get computers ready to send to Sierra Leone and India (![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
rhonan: your hard drive is heading to Africa soon!) I thought I'd mention some of the books I've been reading lately:
I finally finished, thanks to long disk-loads, The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Crusades, a fun overview of the classic Crusades. Well-written, with details and humor. The section on Saladin was lacking, but only because I was specifically interested in him more so than the rest. I'm gonna have to find a good source specifically about him. It's a good overview of the whole thing, without a whole lot of depth, but I still learned a lot I didn't already know, especially the earlier Crusades, and the later rise of the Mamelukes, especially Baibars (one of Saladin's successors, and an even more successful general). Part of a series ("The Complete Idiot's Guide to...") but despite the name isn't juvenile or lacking substance. I'd recommend it for someone who isn't a medieval scholar.
I'm still near the beginning of The City in History, a gift fromlaiadapila, completely the opposite from the "Idiot's Guide" books in accessibility, still a fascinating read so far about the whole history of cities, how they came to be, and why, and how they've changed culture and entered mythology from the beginning to modern days.
Agent of Chaos, which31seel recommended to me twice, for different reasons, and eventually bought for me. Still about 2/3 of the way though, it's been sitting idle for a couple of weeks now. Overtly about a rebellion in a highly controlled and surveilled society. Through viewing the thoughts of the main character we are led to believe he really is as stupid as the leaders of the Hegemony he's fighting against keep saying he is. The resistance keeps focussing on huge suicidal demonstrations where they blow things up or assassinate important leaders, without any of the underlying infrastructure necessary to win people over to their side. Since they barely recruit, and keep blowing themselves up along with their enemy, the number of the rebels are shrinking rapidly. But the book isn't really about that so much as about human motivations and how easy selfdom is to manipulate or just squash.
Speaking of rebellion, I also recently finished The Noble Saboteurs a non-fiction book about the resistance movements throughout WWII Europe. Yes, it wasn't just the French, every country occupied by the Nazis (including Germany) had active resistance movements. Unfortunately written for a more juvenile audience, it tended to oversimplify a bit, and is lacking some of the more detailed information I was hoping for, though a lot can be gathered between the lines. I'll post more about this one later. (I was taking notes.)
On loan fromlaiadapila and _heretic's son, T, is the "Children's Classic" book of Robin Hood. Not sure when it was originally written, but if it was considered a classic in 1923 when this edition was published, it must have been a while back. The Robin Hood of the book is a little different than the one I'm more used to (though in the illustrations, he looks a lot like Errol Flynn, who made his movie 14 years later). This one is an orphaned peasant boy, who runs into some trouble on his way to find the Sheriff of Nottingham to plead entry into his foresters. With a quick temper, his self-control is somewhat lacking, which is the cause of much of his troubles, along with the brutal oppression of the Sheriff. I'm about halfway through, and so far he hasn't been doing any giving to the poor (though there's been quite a bit of robbing from the rich). His main motivation seems to be simply to carve out his own realm where he can rule separate from the King (who so far has not been mentioned by name, only "The King". Robin speaks of his allegiance to him, but so far hasn't actually shown any. All sorts of fun violence. The classic scenes are there, including his meeting with Little John while crossing a narrow bridge (and is, of course, soundly thrashed by him in a scene where, in half a dozen remakes of the movie only Kevin Costner dared change the ending of it to make Robin Hood the victor). His meeting with Friar Tuck is a little different, where he sets out to humiliate him by forcing him to carry him across a river, then gets pissed off and tries to kill him with his longbow when Tuck turns the tables, only closing to swordpoint after running out of arrows due to the Friar's superior dexterity and skill with the buckler.
I, Robot, which I re-read recently, as the release of a completely unrelated movie by the same name got me thinking about it. I love what Asimov did in this book, which mostly focuses on computer systems so advanced and increased in complexity that they can be said to have their own psychology. Asimov manages to avoid the traps most later writers dealing with intelligent robots fall into, of making the machines simply humans in metal. Asimov's robots have their own wants, desires, and motivations, which are completely separate from those of their creators, who control them. (And, unlike most robot stories, we never end up losing control of our creations, nor do they particularly want us all dead for any reason). Robopsychology in his short stories is a fascinating field, dealing with a completely inhuman, alien, mindset. These stories, along with the Foundation Trilogy, show why Asimov is one of the giants of the field, despite a lot of his lighter stuff (Lucky Starr, and the later Foundation novels) and his infamous ego.
Oh, yeah, and Retief, that I picked up at Norwescon in April, and got about halfway through since then. A collection of short stories, it's just plain fun adventure, about an interstellar diplomat. He never gets credit, and hardly ever gets the promotion, but in the end always gets the treaty (and usually the girl).
rhonan: your hard drive is heading to Africa soon!) I thought I'd mention some of the books I've been reading lately:I finally finished, thanks to long disk-loads, The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Crusades, a fun overview of the classic Crusades. Well-written, with details and humor. The section on Saladin was lacking, but only because I was specifically interested in him more so than the rest. I'm gonna have to find a good source specifically about him. It's a good overview of the whole thing, without a whole lot of depth, but I still learned a lot I didn't already know, especially the earlier Crusades, and the later rise of the Mamelukes, especially Baibars (one of Saladin's successors, and an even more successful general). Part of a series ("The Complete Idiot's Guide to...") but despite the name isn't juvenile or lacking substance. I'd recommend it for someone who isn't a medieval scholar.
I'm still near the beginning of The City in History, a gift from
laiadapila, completely the opposite from the "Idiot's Guide" books in accessibility, still a fascinating read so far about the whole history of cities, how they came to be, and why, and how they've changed culture and entered mythology from the beginning to modern days.Agent of Chaos, which
31seel recommended to me twice, for different reasons, and eventually bought for me. Still about 2/3 of the way though, it's been sitting idle for a couple of weeks now. Overtly about a rebellion in a highly controlled and surveilled society. Through viewing the thoughts of the main character we are led to believe he really is as stupid as the leaders of the Hegemony he's fighting against keep saying he is. The resistance keeps focussing on huge suicidal demonstrations where they blow things up or assassinate important leaders, without any of the underlying infrastructure necessary to win people over to their side. Since they barely recruit, and keep blowing themselves up along with their enemy, the number of the rebels are shrinking rapidly. But the book isn't really about that so much as about human motivations and how easy selfdom is to manipulate or just squash.Speaking of rebellion, I also recently finished The Noble Saboteurs a non-fiction book about the resistance movements throughout WWII Europe. Yes, it wasn't just the French, every country occupied by the Nazis (including Germany) had active resistance movements. Unfortunately written for a more juvenile audience, it tended to oversimplify a bit, and is lacking some of the more detailed information I was hoping for, though a lot can be gathered between the lines. I'll post more about this one later. (I was taking notes.)
On loan from
laiadapila and _heretic's son, T, is the "Children's Classic" book of Robin Hood. Not sure when it was originally written, but if it was considered a classic in 1923 when this edition was published, it must have been a while back. The Robin Hood of the book is a little different than the one I'm more used to (though in the illustrations, he looks a lot like Errol Flynn, who made his movie 14 years later). This one is an orphaned peasant boy, who runs into some trouble on his way to find the Sheriff of Nottingham to plead entry into his foresters. With a quick temper, his self-control is somewhat lacking, which is the cause of much of his troubles, along with the brutal oppression of the Sheriff. I'm about halfway through, and so far he hasn't been doing any giving to the poor (though there's been quite a bit of robbing from the rich). His main motivation seems to be simply to carve out his own realm where he can rule separate from the King (who so far has not been mentioned by name, only "The King". Robin speaks of his allegiance to him, but so far hasn't actually shown any. All sorts of fun violence. The classic scenes are there, including his meeting with Little John while crossing a narrow bridge (and is, of course, soundly thrashed by him in a scene where, in half a dozen remakes of the movie only Kevin Costner dared change the ending of it to make Robin Hood the victor). His meeting with Friar Tuck is a little different, where he sets out to humiliate him by forcing him to carry him across a river, then gets pissed off and tries to kill him with his longbow when Tuck turns the tables, only closing to swordpoint after running out of arrows due to the Friar's superior dexterity and skill with the buckler. I, Robot, which I re-read recently, as the release of a completely unrelated movie by the same name got me thinking about it. I love what Asimov did in this book, which mostly focuses on computer systems so advanced and increased in complexity that they can be said to have their own psychology. Asimov manages to avoid the traps most later writers dealing with intelligent robots fall into, of making the machines simply humans in metal. Asimov's robots have their own wants, desires, and motivations, which are completely separate from those of their creators, who control them. (And, unlike most robot stories, we never end up losing control of our creations, nor do they particularly want us all dead for any reason). Robopsychology in his short stories is a fascinating field, dealing with a completely inhuman, alien, mindset. These stories, along with the Foundation Trilogy, show why Asimov is one of the giants of the field, despite a lot of his lighter stuff (Lucky Starr, and the later Foundation novels) and his infamous ego.
Oh, yeah, and Retief, that I picked up at Norwescon in April, and got about halfway through since then. A collection of short stories, it's just plain fun adventure, about an interstellar diplomat. He never gets credit, and hardly ever gets the promotion, but in the end always gets the treaty (and usually the girl).
