Consider a book-Books worth reading

  Why did I read this? It was on Jordan Peterson's reading list and I've liked most of them on his list. Why didn't I like it? Maybe because I accidentally got the dramatized (for radio) version. In a nutshell, I found the protagonist competent (something to admire) but also brash (something to repel). What's the difference? In novels brash people succeed through luck, competent people succeed through, skill, grit, cunning, etc. Moreover, he seemed entirely bereft of a moral compass. Other than that, I'm not sure what moral lesson I could take away. Overall I found the production moderately entertaining, not thought-provoking, and generally uninspiring. I'll give it a few months, find the novel, give it a listen, and update accordingly.

  This is one of Steinbeck's classics, I think partially because its about a 2-hour read, compared to east of Eden or grapes of wrath (~15),. It's not all that hard to get through or even make a movie about. There are several themes in this book worth exploring, as well as plenty of allusions that will keep you on your toes. Just as a teaser, the opening sean is of Lenny and George drinking water from a pond. Lenny slurps it from the water, George scoops with his hands, sound familiar? (Judges 7:6) The first theme, that I found deeply compelling was heaven. Throughout the story Steinbeck describes a kind of heaven , the details vary, but it's generally owning your own parcel of land and working it with loved ones. (compare to Candide conclusions). This vision does motivate them, but it also makes the present bearable, it's an idea of hope, something to daydream about and distract from the loneliness and pain of the moment. I really enjoyed this theme in the book. The ot

  I'm developing quite a love of Russian authors. This one was a deeply interesting story, though, in classic fashion, it drags on longer than I feel is necessary. Refreshingly, the title describes the subject matter of the book quite well. It's a novel that explores the dynamics of crime and punishment. In many ways, it's the inverse of Victor Hugo's tale of Jean Valjean and Javert. Dostoevsky explores the mind of the criminal, the motivation in crime, the state of suffering humanity, the impact of social ties, and the relentless hand of conscience. It's not a straightforward tale at all. Half of the quotes that could be drawn from the book are deeply cynical, reflecting stopping points on the way to greater understanding. In trying to understand how to commit a crime, the protagonist utters “When reason fails, the devil helps!” and he means it until he finishes unraveling the thought 100 pages later. I've taken the liberty of stitching together a few quotes th

  This is a short story. I believe the total run time is about 1.5 hours depending on your speed. It's not the best book I've ever read, but word for word, it's one of the most efficient injections of inspiration and thought-provoking material I've read this year. I won't bore you with a summary (which couldn't do it justice) nor will I pontificate with my analysis. But let me just highlight my three favorite points from the book. Grit. This is essentially a story about Grit. The Old Man (you never do learn his name) is a persistent fighter. You feel his pain, feel what he had to overcome the sweetness of victory and the exhaustion and meaning of defeat, but most of all the love of the fight. “But man is not made for defeat," he said. "A man can be destroyed but not defeated.” The hunter's relationship. This one sounds weird on paper, but the book does a good job describing the relationship between the hunted and the hunter. It's something I

  I didn't know who the author was when I selected this piece, and I think that helped me approach it more objectively. Sasse is a US republican senator, but breaks party lines and criticizes trump (for my Utah audience) in a Romneyesque fashion. The book isn't political, but its message seeks to address, what seems to me, the core of the division in the country. the first three chapters of the book explain the problem, American young adults lack Virtu (My word, not his, something like roman manliness, but more just adultiness). Sasse outlines evidence of the problem and briefly highlights the impact of the problem and briefly touches on a failed solution to the problem, schools.  The next six chapters deal with proposed solutions to the problems; There were three that really jumped out to me.  1. Consume less —“...there is almost nothing more important we can do for our young than convince them that production is more satisfying than consumption.” The idea isn't new, of co

I listened to Cain speak on my undergraduate campus as a freshman. All the self-proclaimed introverts on campus were thrilled about a chance to be highlighted as tortured geniuses. I was unsure if I fit in this category but if asked would have identified as introverted. I think if you were to have taken a poll, 95% of us would have identified as introverts immediately post forum. Her ideas were intriguing partially because of the intellectual dissonance that hummed through conversation circles after her departure. With 20/20 hindsight, I can now say that the allure she offered was essentially Gladwellian (my readers will by now be familiar with my thoughts on Malcolm Gladwell ). In a nutshell, she presents interesting research combined with more interesting anecdotes and then draws extraordinarily shaky conclusions. To be fair, I think Cain is both well-intentioned and exceptionally bright. I could go on about how badly she mischaracterizes Dale Carnegie or how she ignores all evidence

Of all the new authors I've read this year, Zweig might be my favorite. Not because he's convincing or even because I agree with him on controversial issues, but because he offers a completely new way of looking at the world.  The world of yesterday is an artistic memoir that made me want to weep. In many ways, he's the flip side contemporary to famous world war authors like Lewis and Frankle . He offers the artist's balm to the horror of the order-obsessed third riech. He rubbed shoulders with Sigmund Freud, Theodor Herzl (Author of the Jewish state), and Richard Strauss. He's able to comment on the 20th-century transition of Europe in a way few can.  His perspective on the cultural, artistic and moral revolutions/devolutions is particularly worthwhile, but his most endearing trait is his ability to see worthwhile truth all around. When describing one minor author he wrote "when he was wrong, he was wrong in the most interesting ways". This is precisely h