Mega Thread The book thread.

[John]

(Guns, Germs and Steel)

I saw it too. IIRC a 3 parter on ABC or SBS a few years ago.

And I found this.



I will stick with the book for now. 140 odd pages in and must say very interesting.

 

[John]

Publishers outlets are useful places to pick up cheap books. The vast majority of the outlets have the inevitable lashings of unknown pulp and cook books but if one looks hard enough there is always the gems hidden away on the non fiction shelves. With that I have been able to grab several of the "A Brief History of..." series from Robinson Publishing. They are as low as $4.99 in price and never over $10. I have read a couple so far and they tend to be good primers and in some cases exceptional.

The following is in the exceptional category.



The vast majority of the public that are not that particularly interested in History tend to know about Henry VIII through popular media etc. This is not about the infamous king but has an emphasis on "The Tudor Age". Jasper Ridley has written a first class brief history of everything from the times. How people dressed through to their crimes and playtime. Even food and furniture gets discussed. As far as short and sharp social history goes this is as good as its gets. If you see this in a publishers outlet, cheap in a book shop etc I strongly recommend this very entertaining book that is more than just a primer to the age but a treasure chest of information.

 

[samFFC]

Exceptionally detailed. Fascinating read.

 

[chargers 09]

And I found this.



I will stick with the book for now. 140 odd pages in and must say very interesting.

Ordered Guns, Germs and Steel the other day and it jut arrived in the mail. Is it quite Basic?

 

[John]

Ordered Guns, Germs and Steel the other day and it jut arrived in the mail. Is it quite Basic?

I have a better idea. You read the first couple of chapters and then let me know what you think. I am genuinely interested in your opinion.

 

[chargers 09]

I have a better idea. You read the first couple of chapters and then let me know what you think. I am genuinely interested in your opinion.

Alright I'll be getting into it either tonight or tommorow.

 

[alchemy333]

Ended up finding a secondhand copy of Shirer's book, as well as a collection of Histories by Herodotus. The second one will come in extremely handy for future study.
Love a good book bargain!

 

[John]

I enjoyed this book. One of those that could be delved into as the mood took. Each chapter more written as an essay on the specific "kingdom". For a bit of less than a dry read it more than hits the spot as entertainment. Some would not be happy with the book title, hardly kingdoms at times, Eire is a prime example but that should not in general detract from the book. Some may not like the songs and poems interspersed throughout but again it is more a book aimed at entertaining and readable lay history. I do like the writing style of Davies. As much as I enjoy dry academic tomes generally there is nothing wrong with writing for the layman. A nice read and I will delve further into the authors work one day.

 

[skilts]

I have recently read two books by Roland Perry, Monash: The outsider who won a war, and, Pacific 360: Australia's battle for survival in WW II. He has also written The Changi Brownlow and about the Australian Light Horse, but I've not read those. He writes in a most engaging fashion and unlike those journalists who pretend to be historians, he does research of his own, rather than just regurgitating that of others. Statement of vested interest here: Due to a common interest we share, about the Pacific war and Monash, I arranged a lunch with Roland about a month ago, and I found him to be a genuine and erudite fellow. His biography of Bradman is the yardstick by which other cricket books should be measured. His uncannily accurate mimicry of Bradman's voice was hilarious. The unrecognisable food and neglectful service at the highly-regarded St Kilda eatery we attended were hideous, by the way.

 

[iluvparis]

Still one of the best books I've read to this day is The Death of Yugoslavia, based on the BBC series of the same name which tracks the break up and destruction of Yugosvlavia from Tito's death all the way through until the Kosovo war in the late 90s.

Initially read it because I never really knew who the good guys or the bad guys were in the Yugoslav Wars. Cracking (and at times sad) read about how a federation can completely disintegrate and the hands of nationalism.[/b][/b]

 

[iluvparis]

Have also read GG&S - excellent book with a very nice well pieced together theory.

Does get a bit bogged down a bit in the part of the book where he discusses the evolution of domesticated grains (zzzzzzzz) but apart from that is a good read. Would reccomend to armchair historians.

 

[John]

"The best work of modern history I have ever read" says A N Wilson on the cover. The cover praise is gushing as we get "masterpiece" from Oliver Kamm and "at last the story can be told" by Orlando Figes. I have to say that I have come out of this book extremely disappointed and for many reasons.

The best work of modern history is as ridiculous a comment and as to Masterpiece? Evans Reich trilogy just kills this book for the sheer brilliance of the telling of the subject as opposed to a limited focus on 3 nations and a constant dose of wide eyed polemic mixed in. As to the story being finaly being told the story has been told countless times? If it was all new why the extensive bibliography?

There is no denying the appalling struggles with totalitarian communist regimes that the masses were forced to endure in the eastern parts of Europe after the fall of Nazi Germany. The vast humanity that had endured Nazi suffering deserved better but that does not make this history book any better for it's wide eyed and bushy tailed presentation. Lets take the chapter on Ethnic Cleansing as an example. Russian soldiers treated the German civilians appallingly no doubt but the author seems shocked at times. Why? Had not the Germans just committed atrocity after atrocity on Russian civilians, not only with the gun but by starvation and many other means? Did the author expect some charity? How naive!

The many examples of badly written prose is for me rather astonishing. Lets take this statement about travel. "According to the Interior Ministry statistics, only 9,360 crossed the border for any reason in 1951, of whom only 1,980 were travelling to capitalist countries" Well yes. We are reading about a country ravished by WW2 that not too far forward is a poverty stricken totalitarian regime with controls over the populace. But what we get a couple of aghast 'only's as if the then Polish government was going to conform to modern western freedom of travel.

The final chapter, Revolutions, finishes with a polemic on everyone being wrong. That is not a writing on history at all and is out of place as to what the chapter should have been about. And as to the Epilogue I just wonder the point. I wanted history, not another polemic aimed at a modern reader who still seems to think that there is a red menace out there. I mean do others who have praised this book really in their heart feel that the eastern European countries were particularly liberal prior to Nazi and Communist takeovers after 1939 as implied by the author? Free trade does not by itself make Poland, to use as an example, a liberal nation prior to 1939. It was a dictatorship.

This book is as big a failure as I have read in a long time. The gushing praise just had me salivating but I was left wanting. There must be better books on this subject than this, a book that to me is just a journalistic pursuit aimed at making a western audience reading the Murdoch Press and watching Fox News somehow think that their very way of life is till under attack. This is my first Anne Applebaum book. I would read her again if I knew there was more focus on the subject. Anyone else read her and if so what would you recommend?

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Still one of the best books I've read to this day is The Death of Yugoslavia, based on the BBC series of the same name which tracks the break up and destruction of Yugosvlavia from Tito's death all the way through until the Kosovo war in the late 90s.

Initially read it because I never really knew who the good guys or the bad guys were in the Yugoslav Wars. Cracking (and at times sad) read about how a federation can completely disintegrate and the hands of nationalism.[/b][/b]

A tricky subject, with many differing narratives. I'll acknowledge my confusion on the topic, and am keen to read a definitive account of that period. Will check this one out

 

[iluvparis]

"The best work of modern history I have ever read" says A N Wilson on the cover. The cover praise is gushing as we get "masterpiece" from Oliver Kamm and "at last the story can be told" by Orlando Figes. I have to say that I have come out of this book extremely disappointed and for many reasons.

The best work of modern history is as ridiculous a comment and as to Masterpiece? Evans Reich trilogy just kills this book for the sheer brilliance of the telling of the subject as opposed to a limited focus on 3 nations and a constant dose of wide eyed polemic mixed in. As to the story being finaly being told the story has been told countless times? If it was all new why the extensive bibliography?

There is no denying the appalling struggles with totalitarian communist regimes that the masses were forced to endure in the eastern parts of Europe after the fall of Nazi Germany. The vast humanity that had endured Nazi suffering deserved better but that does not make this history book any better for it's wide eyed and bushy tailed presentation. Lets take the chapter on Ethnic Cleansing as an example. Russian soldiers treated the German civilians appallingly no doubt but the author seems shocked at times. Why? Had not the Germans just committed atrocity after atrocity on Russian civilians, not only with the gun but by starvation and many other means? Did the author expect some charity? How naive!

The many examples of badly written prose is for me rather astonishing. Lets take this statement about travel. "According to the Interior Ministry statistics, only 9,360 crossed the border for any reason in 1951, of whom only 1,980 were travelling to capitalist countries" Well yes. We are reading about a country ravished by WW2 that not too far forward is a poverty stricken totalitarian regime with controls over the populace. But what we get a couple of aghast 'only's as if the then Polish government was going to conform to modern western freedom of travel.

The final chapter, Revolutions, finishes with a polemic on everyone being wrong. That is not a writing on history at all and is out of place as to what the chapter should have been about. And as to the Epilogue I just wonder the point. I wanted history, not another polemic aimed at a modern reader who still seems to think that there is a red menace out there. I mean do others who have praised this book really in their heart feel that the eastern European countries were particularly liberal prior to Nazi and Communist takeovers after 1939 as implied by the author? Free trade does not by itself make Poland, to use as an example, a liberal nation prior to 1939. It was a dictatorship.

This book is as big a failure as I have read in a long time. The gushing praise just had me salivating but I was left wanting. There must be better books on this subject than this, a book that to me is just a journalistic pursuit aimed at making a western audience reading the Murdoch Press and watching Fox News somehow think that their very way of life is till under attack. This is my first Anne Applebaum book. I would read her again if I knew there was more focus on the subject. Anyone else read her and if so what would you recommend?

Have this at home but yet to read. Her book on The Gulags is a rare book I have started but never finished, and from your summary it sounds like I will struggle to get through this one as well. You just have to accept that she writes from a completely anti-Russian bias - so most of the praise is probably from US types still worried about the Red Menace.

 

[John]

Have this at home but yet to read. Her book on The Gulags is a rare book I have started but never finished, and from your summary it sounds like I will struggle to get through this one as well. You just have to accept that she writes from a completely anti-Russian bias - so most of the praise is probably from US types still worried about the Red Menace.

Thanks for the reply and based on it I will give her a miss.

 

[John]

[

In the end I have found this book a bit difficult to write about. It is very interesting as it has gone into areas that I have never really considered. Would I have given thought that the abilty to domesticate plants and animals was a consideration when thinking of the continental differences between the east west axis of Eurasia compared to the north south divide in both the Americas and Africa?

I suppose in the end this is a book that is more based on the environment of peoples over the last 13,000 years and their opportunities to use that environment they just happened to be born into. Interestingly the book gives little consideration to capitalism as a factor in some parts of human kinds march to modern prosperity. I suppose that each individual can make of that what they will in terms of how they view their history. In the end a touch long but a minor quibble. I will read more for the author eventually.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

I have a particularly severe hardboiled crime fiction jones (feel free to visit http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...uble-crosses-the-crime-fiction-thread.826389/. Doesn't get a lot of traffic - m'self included - too busy readin' or goofin' off on the SRP board). However, when clean and in recovery, will generally read history which helps ease the withdrawal.

Best I've read for a long time is:

Tells the story of the first Anglo-Afghan war 1839 - 1842. Lord Auckland, the GG of India, feared a Russian attack on Hindustan and wanted to buttress their northwest territory with alliances (The one-eyed sikh ruler Ranjit Singh being a particularly powerful ally). Despite solid intelligence from the dashing Scotsman, Alexander Burns recommending a treaty with Dost Mohammad Khan, the Emir of Kabul and an ethnic Pashtun of the Barakzai clan, this was ignored by the arrogant Auckland. Instead the Brits supported the deposed ruler, Shah Shuja Durrani, the deposed ruler of the Sadozai line (who had an interesting history with the Barakzai, from blood feuds to shaky, distrustful alliances) who'd been living in India for 3 decades, with the occasional, unsuccessful attempts at regaining his throne.

The "Army of The Indus" marched virtually unopposed into Afghanistan with 58,000 people, 30,000 camels (300 for the wine alone) and a pack of foxhounds for hunting. As the occupation became entrenched, the brits withdrew sections of the force in prep for the opium wars in China. Discontent brewed in the local populace due to british stupidity, arrogance and lack of knowledge of those they ruled.

The call went out for jihad and the disparate clans of the region joined forces to repel the invaders. Military incompetence failed to quell the Kabul uprising, the brits negotiated a withdrawal, under the promise that they'd be free from harm. Absolute dickheads. It was winter and the army, almost to a man was slaughtered on the retreat.

Several years later, the"Army of Retribution" passed through the same areas, littered with rotting corpses of british and Indian sepoys. The sepoys copped it brutally. Those that weren't killed had their clothes taken from them, hence the advancing army would find piles of bodies, huddled together for warmth. The bazaars and markets were full of disabled and limbless sepoys begging in the street.

Dalrymple is an engaging master storyteller. He breathes life into the multitude of characters in the book and his research is impeccable, accessing sources from Afghan, Persian and punjabi accounts that have not previously been available in english.

The parallels with the recent misadventure in that country are striking.

Highly recommend this, an absolute page-turner.

I went straight out and purchased the equally brilliant:

 

[blackcat]

digging back into JFW Infinite Jest for the second time, picking up somethings and realising how much it has influenced me.

JFW FTW whiskey foxtrot tango medusala genius bojo will now boycott hashtags until Chief, he of unmatched wisdom pays royalties

 

[blackcat]

Just got through 50 odd pages this morning and much food for thought. A populist style of writing, nothing wrong with that when talking to laymen like me, that flows well. Obviously I am not going to be able to be much a critic as this is an area I am not that au fait with. My fav History book review site has an interesting critique on it.

http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/51

got panned by anthropologists...

Morris has some credentials. but lets see how his tome backs up in 70 yrs sans edit
Why the West Rules--for Now: The Patterns of History, and What They Reveal About the Future

 

[John]

got panned by anthropologists...

Morris has some credentials. but lets see how his tome backs up in 70 yrs sans edit
Why the West Rules--for Now: The Patterns of History, and What They Reveal About the Future

I am obviously unable to comment on the rights or wrongs of the book and would have to take anthropologists word for it. The link I posted was reasonably positive though that was from a devoted History revue site. Have you read Morris' book? If so how do they compare?

As to your previous post mate I have to be honest that is all Double Dutch to me. That may sadly say more about me I suppose.

 

[John]

Thanks. Top reviews and now marked to read eventually. For a more modern tome on Afghanistan have you read Taliban Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia by Ahmed Rashid? If not I do recommend it.

 

[blackcat]

I am obviously unable to comment on the rights or wrongs of the book and would have to take anthropologists word for it. The link I posted was reasonably positive though that was from a devoted History revue site. Have you read Morris' book? If so how do they compare?

As to your previous post mate I have to be honest that is all Double Dutch to me. That may sadly say more about me I suppose.

he was out here on a book tour. i have it, not read it as yet. the talk was good tho, and that is more idjit than even a cliffs notes version, but a rung above wiki. non-fiction non my thing usually, so this has been delayed and delayed. he has good credentails amd was here for the writers festival and book soiree junket soiree. these thick tomes will fester on my shelf until i get inspiration and boredom at other book

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Thanks. Top reviews and now marked to read eventually. For a more modern tome on Afghanistan have you read Taliban Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia by Ahmed Rashid? If not I do recommend it.

Thanks John, will definitely check it out

 

[medusala]

digging back into JFW Infinite Jest for the second time, picking up somethings and realising how much it has influenced me.

JFW FTW whiskey foxtrot tango medusala genius bojo will now boycott hashtags until Chief, he of unmatched wisdom pays royalties

Saw this in bookshop the other day. Thought you may be interested.

 

[iluvparis]

got panned by anthropologists...

Morris has some credentials. but lets see how his tome backs up in 70 yrs sans edit
Why the West Rules--for Now: The Patterns of History, and What They Reveal About the Future

Also have this waiting on my bookshelf.