Quick plug for a friend's book, but I promise, I wouldn't do this if it wasn't worth sharing.
After I'd been reading her blog for at least a year, Megan Lyons became perhaps the first blog person I met in real life. I invited her to boot camp with me one day, and years later, we still see each other at 5:30 a.m. a few days per week. As frequently happens with someone you talk to consistently in such a vulnerable state (early, no makeup, sweating), it was easy to connect and she quickly became a friend. Anyway, she has her first book going on sale today!
Here are two links where it is available:
http://www.thelyonsshare.org/starthere/
http://www.amazon.com/Start-Here-Diet-Free-Ultimate-Happiness/dp/0986133205/
I've gotten to read it already. My thoughts:
It's a good book that distills a lot of research and theories about health into concise and practical tips. It's well-researched, but reads conversationally and in a straight-forward manner. It's clearly targeted toward people who are starting a journey toward getting healthier, but I feel like I've been on the "healthier" path for nearly a decade, and I felt like there were a lot of points I was able to take away from the book as well. Suddenly, I'm looking at sugar grams on labels now. And I'm standing at work more frequently. These were things I certainly knew were smart before, but the book has inspired me to actually DO them. I'm thinking more about vegetable variety. I've been great about getting more than my share of veggies every day, but at the same time, every single day I think I eat beets, spinach, kale, peas and carrots. This book reminded me that I'd benefit from subbing those out for different veggies, giving me different nutrients (and the magical things she calls phytonutrients), at least on occasion, even if those 5 veggies stay in pretty regular rotation. Husband and I have been doing a "grateful list" of 3 things each before bed for some time, but I'm making a point to think about it more during the day now. I feel like there are lots of aspects of the book that resonated with me. As with most blogs I read and most healthy people I know, Megan advocates a healthy lifestyle over any type of "diet." So the suggestions she makes have a goal of being simple and sustainable habits. I would say it's a quick read, but at the same time, I'm certain I will continue to re-read parts of it.
Highly recommended, so if you're interested, please check it out. There's a kindle version available (I don't actually have a kindle, but I was able to read the kindle version on my computer), and of course a paperback version. Plus, of course if you buy it, I expect that there's some good karma for supporting a good person who deserves success!
Showing posts with label reading. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reading. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 13, 2016
Wednesday, April 1, 2015
2014 Reading
Another year where I want to keep track of what I read. Rough goal: 7500 pages, at least half should be fiction. Unfortunately, I think I stopped keeping track at some point (but the first one on this list took fo-evah to read, so maybe this really is the full list). I was just working on my 2015 list, and I figured I might as well pull this one together and share it.
My number one recommendation was a re-read: Flyboys.
Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power, by Steve Coll. Nonfiction, about 700 pages. Very interesting. About ExxonMobile, the largest and most powerful private company in the country. Mostly recent history, from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill (which I remember hearing about! it was early in my worldly/political consciousness), through the Deepwater Horizon spill in 2012. Lee Raymond was quite the character and makes the book so interesting. Fairly slow going for me, mostly because I wanted to soak in a lot of the details.
Dear Life, by Alice Munro. Fiction, about 325 pages. A collection of short stories. I didn't take good notes on my thoughts. I wonder if I even finished it? I have a vague recollection that I liked it though, so I think I finished. I remember several of the characters from stories, well-developed, great fiction.
The End of Men (and the Rise of Women), by Hanna Rosin. Nonfiction, 325 pages. Started strong, but it went downhill. My husband agreed, after I begged him to read it (particularly as he has a son who isn't exactly a go-getter (though he is wonderful and happy, which I think is more important)). The point of the book is largely about how women are outpacing men by many of the traditional markers of success (education and career largely), but there's still the whole wage gap thing. It focuses largely on a lack of ambition among young men. I really wanted to love the book, because it's such an interesting subject, but this wasn't it.
Gods of Guilt, by Michael Connelly. Fiction, about 400 pages. Connelly has two primary series, the Bosch series, about an LA detective, and the Haller series, a LA lawyer who is Bosch's half-brother. My husband has basically a man-crush on Bosch, to the extent that's possible with a solely fictional character that until Feb. 2015 had never even been made into a TV show. Well, this was a Haller book. My husband likes this series less, and I agree, though I still like it a whole lot. Quick read, another murder case.
Let's Explore Diabetes with Owls, by David Sedaris. Fiction, about 275 pages. A few laughs, but I'm starting to think I just don't like his writing that much, which is a bummer, because the first book of his I read (Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim) was so funny. Recounting childhood memories, and opining on other issues, telling stories, etc. Not up my alley really. But a quick read.
Hostage, by Elie Weisel. Fiction, about 225 pages. A fictional story about an American Jewish story-teller who lives in New York and is kidnapped by an Arab and an Italian who are attempting to negotiate the release of several Palestinians in exchange for Shaltiel. An interesting book, enjoyable read. Highly recommended.
My number one recommendation was a re-read: Flyboys.
Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power, by Steve Coll. Nonfiction, about 700 pages. Very interesting. About ExxonMobile, the largest and most powerful private company in the country. Mostly recent history, from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill (which I remember hearing about! it was early in my worldly/political consciousness), through the Deepwater Horizon spill in 2012. Lee Raymond was quite the character and makes the book so interesting. Fairly slow going for me, mostly because I wanted to soak in a lot of the details.
Dear Life, by Alice Munro. Fiction, about 325 pages. A collection of short stories. I didn't take good notes on my thoughts. I wonder if I even finished it? I have a vague recollection that I liked it though, so I think I finished. I remember several of the characters from stories, well-developed, great fiction.
The End of Men (and the Rise of Women), by Hanna Rosin. Nonfiction, 325 pages. Started strong, but it went downhill. My husband agreed, after I begged him to read it (particularly as he has a son who isn't exactly a go-getter (though he is wonderful and happy, which I think is more important)). The point of the book is largely about how women are outpacing men by many of the traditional markers of success (education and career largely), but there's still the whole wage gap thing. It focuses largely on a lack of ambition among young men. I really wanted to love the book, because it's such an interesting subject, but this wasn't it.
Gods of Guilt, by Michael Connelly. Fiction, about 400 pages. Connelly has two primary series, the Bosch series, about an LA detective, and the Haller series, a LA lawyer who is Bosch's half-brother. My husband has basically a man-crush on Bosch, to the extent that's possible with a solely fictional character that until Feb. 2015 had never even been made into a TV show. Well, this was a Haller book. My husband likes this series less, and I agree, though I still like it a whole lot. Quick read, another murder case.
Let's Explore Diabetes with Owls, by David Sedaris. Fiction, about 275 pages. A few laughs, but I'm starting to think I just don't like his writing that much, which is a bummer, because the first book of his I read (Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim) was so funny. Recounting childhood memories, and opining on other issues, telling stories, etc. Not up my alley really. But a quick read.
Hostage, by Elie Weisel. Fiction, about 225 pages. A fictional story about an American Jewish story-teller who lives in New York and is kidnapped by an Arab and an Italian who are attempting to negotiate the release of several Palestinians in exchange for Shaltiel. An interesting book, enjoyable read. Highly recommended.
Flyboys, by James Bradley. Nonfiction, about 335 pages. A relatively rare re-read. Favorite line of the book: "When Perry's Black Ships revealed the impotence of the Tokugawa regime, 'the Japanese had discarded their feudal Shogunate ... cast them off like worn-out garments after almost right centuries of exalted existence.'" The story of the Air Force's role in the Pacific theater. I never get tired of books like this and Bradley does a good job of looking at the complex history leading up to the war, and portraying the perspective from both sides. Highly recommended to all. While parts are very hard to read (for me, the napalm attack descriptions), I feel like it's our duty as young (okay, young-ish for me) Americans to learn about WWII and ensure it never happens again.
Double Cross, the True Story of the D-Day Spies, by Ben Macintyre. Nonfiction, about 400 pages. The story of German spies who were turned into double agents, which was critical to preventing Nazi anticipation of the landings at Normandy, and to instead, have them expect the invasion elsewhere. I thought it was pretty good, a story I didn't know much about already. But overall, it wouldn't be on my list of the top 20 WWII books. I had some trouble keeping everyone and their roles straight. But lots of character. My favorite passage: "'My heart is in very bad condition. My doctor, who is my biggest friend, said that it is too much alcohol, tobacco, and sin. The only remedy which I have found sufficient up until now was milk and chocolates. Please send $100 worth of any kind of chocolate you can think of. I don't mind what they are, I am taking them as medicine. Please send me at the same time $100 of nylons, in 9, 9.5, and 10. Don't think I'm promiscuous.' Ren did not believe Popov's claim of a medical chocolate emergency. The chocolates are intended to delight the interiors of those same exteriors which he wishes to decorate with stockings." Runner-up for favorite quote: "While waiting for a transfer to London as a refugee, the Marquis took up residence in a Madrid brothel where he spent spent four days and four nights, finally emerging exhausted and happy, but with a nasty dose of venereal crabs." Those spies were definitely characters!
Second Wind: One Woman's Midlife Quest to Run Seven Marathons on Seven Continents, by Cami Ostman. Non-fiction, about 300 pages. Received as a birthday gift a few years ago from the woman with whom I started my marathon journey (a dear friend, mother to my god-son, co-book-club founder, etc.). The author comes through a divorce and starts running, eventually deciding to run a marathon on each continent. If that whole Beijing marathon fiasco hadn't happened for me, maybe I would have considered this goal myself. The book grew on me, but overall, I didn't love it, as much as I love travel and marathons. What I didn't like about it was the self-centeredness that echoed of Eat, Pray, Love to me (which is one of my most-hated books of all time). Running is certainly different things to different people, but she was just so caught up in herself and her own happiness that it was a little sad for me.
Over a Thousand Hills I Walk With You, by Hanna Jansen. Nonfiction, about 325 pages. This was a book club pick and I enjoyed it. It's the story of a young Rwandan girl's life in the early 90s, then her experience during the genocide (fleeing, seeing her family killed, fleeing further), and a few bits about her life afterward, living in Germany with a relative. It calls to mind books like The Diary of Anne Frank and Zlata's Diary. I've been interested in Rwanda for a long time. Little known fact, when the trials started and the internet was still relatively new to me, I started printing stories about each conviction that I read about -- and um, I still kind of do (though there aren't any lately, the whole reconcilation thing). It was one of those things I felt I need to keep a record of. My favorite book about the Rwandan genocide is We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will be Killed With Our Families: Stories from Rwanda, by Philip Gourevitch. This (Over a Thousand Hills) would be good particularly for older kids, young adults. Quick read.
What I Was Doing While You Were Breeding, a Memoir, by Kristin Newman. Nonfiction, about 300 pages. This was recommended to me by my husband, who heard about it on NPR. I desperately wanted to love this book, given that a.) I love to travel, b.) I have no children, and c.) I was still single at 30 (I'd just started dating my husband). But yeah, it just didn't resonate. It's a thirty-something woman's travel memoir, largely about trips she took and guys she hooked up with on vacation. It was interesting to think about the difference between a vacation romance and someone you'd date at home, she's completely right, it's a wholly different standard. While I did tons of overseas traveling before I met my husband, both solo and with friends, I never quite got into vacation romances the way she did. I guess it's because I don't tend to stay in the same spot more than a week. While she doesn't spend much time on the subject, it's true that there's a total double standard regarding women's sexuality, and I appreciate that she told her honest tale and wrote that she would not be "slut-shamed" out of doing so. I really wanted her to end up with Father Juan, this vacation romance from Argentina that she saw more than once, but in my limited vacation romance experience, she's correct that even if you go back, it's never quite the same (there was a particular guy when I studied abroad in Italy who called me his "anima" (soul) and I was convinced for some time, he was right, but yeah, after seeing him a few more times in the following 5 years, um, no).
Into the Wild, by Jon Krakauer. Non-fiction, about 225 pages. How had I never read this before? It's an account of Christopher McCandless (aka Alexander Supertramp)'s decision to abandon the confines of a traditional life and hitchhike cross country to Alaska, where he went alone into the wilderness and set up camp in an abandoned school bus. I'm not entirely sure why there is such fascination with this story (seriously, why would there be any tabloid fascination?), but it's certainly a good book and a quick read.
Totals based on the listed books:
3900 pages of nonfiction.
1225 pages of fiction.
Not even close to my goal on fiction. Oops. I should have done less non-fiction, but I was short on my page count either way.
Double Cross, the True Story of the D-Day Spies, by Ben Macintyre. Nonfiction, about 400 pages. The story of German spies who were turned into double agents, which was critical to preventing Nazi anticipation of the landings at Normandy, and to instead, have them expect the invasion elsewhere. I thought it was pretty good, a story I didn't know much about already. But overall, it wouldn't be on my list of the top 20 WWII books. I had some trouble keeping everyone and their roles straight. But lots of character. My favorite passage: "'My heart is in very bad condition. My doctor, who is my biggest friend, said that it is too much alcohol, tobacco, and sin. The only remedy which I have found sufficient up until now was milk and chocolates. Please send $100 worth of any kind of chocolate you can think of. I don't mind what they are, I am taking them as medicine. Please send me at the same time $100 of nylons, in 9, 9.5, and 10. Don't think I'm promiscuous.' Ren did not believe Popov's claim of a medical chocolate emergency. The chocolates are intended to delight the interiors of those same exteriors which he wishes to decorate with stockings." Runner-up for favorite quote: "While waiting for a transfer to London as a refugee, the Marquis took up residence in a Madrid brothel where he spent spent four days and four nights, finally emerging exhausted and happy, but with a nasty dose of venereal crabs." Those spies were definitely characters!
Second Wind: One Woman's Midlife Quest to Run Seven Marathons on Seven Continents, by Cami Ostman. Non-fiction, about 300 pages. Received as a birthday gift a few years ago from the woman with whom I started my marathon journey (a dear friend, mother to my god-son, co-book-club founder, etc.). The author comes through a divorce and starts running, eventually deciding to run a marathon on each continent. If that whole Beijing marathon fiasco hadn't happened for me, maybe I would have considered this goal myself. The book grew on me, but overall, I didn't love it, as much as I love travel and marathons. What I didn't like about it was the self-centeredness that echoed of Eat, Pray, Love to me (which is one of my most-hated books of all time). Running is certainly different things to different people, but she was just so caught up in herself and her own happiness that it was a little sad for me.
Over a Thousand Hills I Walk With You, by Hanna Jansen. Nonfiction, about 325 pages. This was a book club pick and I enjoyed it. It's the story of a young Rwandan girl's life in the early 90s, then her experience during the genocide (fleeing, seeing her family killed, fleeing further), and a few bits about her life afterward, living in Germany with a relative. It calls to mind books like The Diary of Anne Frank and Zlata's Diary. I've been interested in Rwanda for a long time. Little known fact, when the trials started and the internet was still relatively new to me, I started printing stories about each conviction that I read about -- and um, I still kind of do (though there aren't any lately, the whole reconcilation thing). It was one of those things I felt I need to keep a record of. My favorite book about the Rwandan genocide is We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will be Killed With Our Families: Stories from Rwanda, by Philip Gourevitch. This (Over a Thousand Hills) would be good particularly for older kids, young adults. Quick read.
What I Was Doing While You Were Breeding, a Memoir, by Kristin Newman. Nonfiction, about 300 pages. This was recommended to me by my husband, who heard about it on NPR. I desperately wanted to love this book, given that a.) I love to travel, b.) I have no children, and c.) I was still single at 30 (I'd just started dating my husband). But yeah, it just didn't resonate. It's a thirty-something woman's travel memoir, largely about trips she took and guys she hooked up with on vacation. It was interesting to think about the difference between a vacation romance and someone you'd date at home, she's completely right, it's a wholly different standard. While I did tons of overseas traveling before I met my husband, both solo and with friends, I never quite got into vacation romances the way she did. I guess it's because I don't tend to stay in the same spot more than a week. While she doesn't spend much time on the subject, it's true that there's a total double standard regarding women's sexuality, and I appreciate that she told her honest tale and wrote that she would not be "slut-shamed" out of doing so. I really wanted her to end up with Father Juan, this vacation romance from Argentina that she saw more than once, but in my limited vacation romance experience, she's correct that even if you go back, it's never quite the same (there was a particular guy when I studied abroad in Italy who called me his "anima" (soul) and I was convinced for some time, he was right, but yeah, after seeing him a few more times in the following 5 years, um, no).
Into the Wild, by Jon Krakauer. Non-fiction, about 225 pages. How had I never read this before? It's an account of Christopher McCandless (aka Alexander Supertramp)'s decision to abandon the confines of a traditional life and hitchhike cross country to Alaska, where he went alone into the wilderness and set up camp in an abandoned school bus. I'm not entirely sure why there is such fascination with this story (seriously, why would there be any tabloid fascination?), but it's certainly a good book and a quick read.
Totals based on the listed books:
3900 pages of nonfiction.
1225 pages of fiction.
Not even close to my goal on fiction. Oops. I should have done less non-fiction, but I was short on my page count either way.
Thursday, June 26, 2014
Reading selections
You can tell a lot about someone from the books they keep, right?
Well, here in Pittsburgh, we are staying with one of my husband's brothers and his wife and their bookcase is interesting and quite different from ours.
Haha, yeah, so different. Oh well, as long as we don't talk about politics or killing animals (well, I don't think he really kills most of them, but actually, isn't it worse to hurt them by hooking their mouths, depriving them of water, and then throwing them back?), it's all good!
Actually, we're having tons of fun here. There is an amazing running trail (Montour Trail) that goes right near their house, so all 4 of us went this morning for about an hour. The weather was insanely perfect -- humid, but cool (low 60s?), overcast but not raining, and the scenery was lovely -- so green and lush. It was a slight incline on the way out, and downhill on the way back. One of the best parts was watching my heartrate on the way back -- sailing slightly downhill going faster than marathon pace and seeing my heartrate significantly lower than it is when it's 15 degrees warmer at home.
Also, I think we want to live in a retirement community. Now if possible, but apparently they don't take you unless one spouse is over 65. Thank goodness my husband is older than me. Not even 20 years to wait now. So many lectures, puzzles, movies, discussion groups, etc. It's a shame that only one of my in-laws seems to be taking advantage of it, but to each his/her own I suppose.
Tonight after dinner in the dining hall, we are all going to a lecture on the causes of WWII!
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Reading and Running
A quick post to share a link (courtesy of Hungry Runner Girl). An overlap of two of my favorites -- running and reading.
Here's a link to an article called 9 books every runner should read:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/20/best-running-books-runner-should-read_n_4810498.html
I've read a lot of running books, so I was surprised I've only read three of them on this list:
Born to Run (which I reviewed here (the barefoot aspect) and here (the vegetarian aspect)),
Running and Being (a book I'd guess almost every runner has read), and
What I Talk About When I Talk About Running (Murakami being an author of interest outside the running context as well).
Guess I'll have to make plans to read the others!
Have you read any/all of them? Any recommendations on where I should start?
Here's a link to an article called 9 books every runner should read:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/20/best-running-books-runner-should-read_n_4810498.html
I've read a lot of running books, so I was surprised I've only read three of them on this list:
Born to Run (which I reviewed here (the barefoot aspect) and here (the vegetarian aspect)),
Running and Being (a book I'd guess almost every runner has read), and
What I Talk About When I Talk About Running (Murakami being an author of interest outside the running context as well).
Guess I'll have to make plans to read the others!
Have you read any/all of them? Any recommendations on where I should start?
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
2013 Reading
In 2012, I resolved to read 20 books. I ended up finishing only 19, but it totaled out at about 4000 pages of nonfiction and 3300 pages of fiction.
So in 2013, rather than counting the number of books, I decided to try to count pages. My goal was 7500 pages and at least 50% nonfiction.
How did I do? Well, counting as complete the two books at the end of this list that are more than half-way finished, I read a total of 6825 pages, which broke down into 3800 pages of nonfiction and 3025 pages of fiction. It was a total of 18 books (11 nonfiction, 7 fiction).
I'm okay with falling short of my goal. One of the books listed below (Joseph Anton) pretty much sucked all the reading life out of me for a while. And I met my goal for reading nonfiction, which I think was important.
Book of the year for me was Lean In (review below).
Here's what I read in 2013 and my thoughts:
Liberty Defined: 50 Essential Issues That Affect Our Freedom by Ron Paul. Nonfiction, about 350 pages. Ugh. An alphabetical list of Ron Paul's thoughts on pretty much everything. Abortion, bipartisanship, campaign finance reform, etc. If you think, oh, 26 topics, that won't be so bad, let me add that there were sometimes multiple topics for a single letter. So C was not just campaign finance reform, but also capital punishment. I solely read this because my husband read it, thought parts of it were interesting, and wanted me to read it so we could discuss. I have less time to read in 2013, and I likely shouldn't have had this book on the list based on that "reason to read." Parts of it were definitely interesting, and I couldn't agree with him more, but a vast majority of it was also so contrary to my opinion (I'm actually less of a libertarian than I would have guessed). Different viewpoints are always good I suppose. I do feel like I'm smarter for having read it, which is one of my objectives in reading. Not sure why but I got it in my head that it would be funny if the book ended with an entry under Z for zombies, but instead he went out on Zionism. Bummer. That was actually a big let-down when I somehow let myself get psyched up about zombies.
Hearts in Atlantis by Stephen King. Fiction, 650 pages. Not what I expected. I hadn't read any Stephen King in a long time, but I loved his books pre-college. This one, not so much. It was an odd story that started in the 60s with a group of three friends and then glimpses of their lives and overlapping connections over the rest of their lives. Maybe I haven't read enough Stephen King, but this wasn't what I expected as typical Stephen King, and I didn't like it that much.
The Black Box by Michael Connelly. Fiction, about 425 pages. I primarily read Michael Connelly books because he is by far my husband's favorite author. I enjoy them a lot as well, and this one was no exception. This one is about a Danish reporter killed during the LA riots in 1992, and her murder remains unsolved. 20 years later, the LAPD wants to reexamine the open homicides from the riots, including this one, and see if some of them can be closed, not including this one.
Thunderstruck by Eric Larson. Nonfiction, about 475 pages. About a murder in England in the early 1900s committed apparently by Hawley Crippen, and the invention and development of wireless telegraphy by Guglielmo Marconi. I'm not sure why the author's name didn't register for me on this one, but it is the same author who wrote Devil in the White City, about some murders that happened during the Chicago World's Fair in 1904. It even mentions that on the front cover. But you know, I missed it. It wasn't until I was about halfway through that I thought the tone sounded familiar and made the connection. I preferred Devil in the White City, which I had to read for book club. This one was okay, but not spectacular.
Squirrel Seeks Chipmunk by David Sedaris. Fiction, about 175 pages (but small ones). A few chuckles but not my favorite by him. Generally, a bunch of very short stories about animals who exhibit human personality characteristics. The title story is about a chipmunk dating a squirrel and how the chipmunk's family objects. There's one about a dog who is married to another dog in the same household, but is taken by the owner for breeding and reasons that it's work, not adultery, but then finds a dog that he likes and therefore "works" extra hard. Since most the stories seem to have some moral, I found many to be fairly depressing. Overall, fairly unimpressive, not recommended.
The Lost and Forgotten Languages of Shanghai by Ruiyan Xu. Fiction, about 350 pages. This one was particularly fun since last year I'd tried to learn some Chinese and had gotten to visit Shanghai. It's a story about a Chinese man who is married with a young child. He grew up in the US, but moved to China when he was 10 and forgot most of his English. When he is injured in an explosion, he is diagnosed with bilingual Broca's aphasia, which means in his case, he has lost his ability to speak or read Chinese (though he understands it), and can only communicate (and then with difficulty both due to the aphasia and due to the fact he only knew some English) haltingly in English. A doctor from the US is brought in to help him attempt to recover his Chinese. The doctor character was insanely irritating and stereotypical, but the book was good despite her.
Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead by Sheryl Sandberg. Nonfiction, about 175 pages. This book got a lot of press in 2013 and was my choice for book club. I ended up loving it. Sex and gender issues have always been interesting to me, particularly the pay gap, and particularly about differences between the sexes in high-earning fields. Of course there are so many factors in the pay gap, starting early with how parents and teachers treat children of opposite sexes, and then self-selection choices throughout life, frequently driving women to choose lower earning professions in general, as well as antiquated stereotypes about sex roles in the home (raising children, doing work related to the household). I may be unique in that many of my married female friends are the primary breadwinner in their relationships (keep in mind, a lot of my friends are other attorneys). So when it's not a dual-attorney couple (I have plenty of them among my friends too), when they have children, their husbands stay home. Several of my best friends with kids (including my godson's parents) have the husband doing most of the child-rearing. While we don't have kids, I'm a big stickler for equal contributions in terms of time to running our household since we both work full-time. Fortunately, my husband is on board with that -- I think I'd be miserable married to someone who expected me to do the bulk of the household stuff just because I'm female. In fact, I never would have married that guy! But the book has made me think a lot about these interesting issues. And one of the books less central points about the importance of mentor relationships at work has really sunk in with me. While my direct supervisor is male, since I finished this book, I've made more of an effort to ask him career direction advice, and I want to continue to do that. The importance of having a mentor, etc.
Joseph Anton: A Memoir by Salman Rushdie. Nonfiction, about 650 pages. What a book. Not sure even what to say about it. If you've ever watched Friends and remember the book of grievances, I bet this book will trigger a flashback. In many ways, Rushdie/Anton came across as egomaniacal and self-absorbed. It's the story of his life after The Satanic Verses was published and the fatwah or death warrant was issued. Joseph Anton was the pseudonym under which he lived in fear of his life. Of course it's an interesting story, particularly when you think about the importance of freedom of speech, religious freedom, and the role of literature in the world. And the first few years of living under the fatwah was interesting, but then it all got to be too much. There was a lot of recapping all the press about him (did I mention he came acorss as very self-absorbed?), a list of all the awards he's received, reiterating everything he's ever heard praising him or his books. He just struck me as very full of himself. For anyone who watches The Bachelor, he was kind of a fame whore -- actually, I think there are probably fewer than 100 people in the world who both watch The Bachelor regularly and have read Joseph Anton. Haha. I'm unique! Anyway, he's a big name dropper. And he seemed very old when he was essentially just making a list of people he knew/knows who had gotten cancer. I know several older people who occasionally do that -- just a big list of all the people with cancer. Anyway, I did not like Joseph Anton at all. I can't believe I stuck with it for that many pages. BUT... I've never read The Satanic Verses (as he explains it, there truly never was any anti-Muslim intent), and I've never read Haroun and the Sea of Stories, two of Rushdie's books that Joseph Anton made me want to read.
Bossypants by Tina Fey. Nonfiction, about 275 pages. I liked it more than I thought I would. The nuances of being a woman in comedy, or any comedian attempting to get a break, aren't things I'd ever really considered. And I don't watch 30 Rock, but I certainly enjoyed some of Fey's SNL sketches. Best line of the book (in reference to dating within your workplace): "Remember, when you work in what is basically a cage that you're not allowed to leave, your choices are limited to what strolls by."
Olive Kitteridge by Elizabeth Strout. Fiction, about 275 pages. A collection of short stories, all with the character of Olive Kitteridge, a woman approximately in her 60s, in the story in some way. This was a book club selection. It was good, but not one that I'll go back to read again.
The Onion's Book of Known Knowledge. Fiction, about 250 pages. Awful. My second "alphabetical list" book of the year and perhaps an even bigger flop. I think a total of 4 of the entries made me laugh out loud: 401k, Socrates, Table, and Toast (hmm, 3 of the 4 were late in the book, maybe it started to grow on me?). Because I read The Onion loyally weekly for YEARS, I expected so much more. Seriously, there have been several stories on the Onion that I still reference about a decade after I read them (adding the fifth blade to the razor is perhaps my favorite). And I own (and love) another Onion book, Our Dumb Century (I actually have it within arm's reach in my office). But this one just bombed in my opinon. Ugh. Give me back my life. I can't believe I bothered to finish it, but I will say it was quick.
So in 2013, rather than counting the number of books, I decided to try to count pages. My goal was 7500 pages and at least 50% nonfiction.
How did I do? Well, counting as complete the two books at the end of this list that are more than half-way finished, I read a total of 6825 pages, which broke down into 3800 pages of nonfiction and 3025 pages of fiction. It was a total of 18 books (11 nonfiction, 7 fiction).
I'm okay with falling short of my goal. One of the books listed below (Joseph Anton) pretty much sucked all the reading life out of me for a while. And I met my goal for reading nonfiction, which I think was important.
Book of the year for me was Lean In (review below).
Here's what I read in 2013 and my thoughts:
Liberty Defined: 50 Essential Issues That Affect Our Freedom by Ron Paul. Nonfiction, about 350 pages. Ugh. An alphabetical list of Ron Paul's thoughts on pretty much everything. Abortion, bipartisanship, campaign finance reform, etc. If you think, oh, 26 topics, that won't be so bad, let me add that there were sometimes multiple topics for a single letter. So C was not just campaign finance reform, but also capital punishment. I solely read this because my husband read it, thought parts of it were interesting, and wanted me to read it so we could discuss. I have less time to read in 2013, and I likely shouldn't have had this book on the list based on that "reason to read." Parts of it were definitely interesting, and I couldn't agree with him more, but a vast majority of it was also so contrary to my opinion (I'm actually less of a libertarian than I would have guessed). Different viewpoints are always good I suppose. I do feel like I'm smarter for having read it, which is one of my objectives in reading. Not sure why but I got it in my head that it would be funny if the book ended with an entry under Z for zombies, but instead he went out on Zionism. Bummer. That was actually a big let-down when I somehow let myself get psyched up about zombies.
Hearts in Atlantis by Stephen King. Fiction, 650 pages. Not what I expected. I hadn't read any Stephen King in a long time, but I loved his books pre-college. This one, not so much. It was an odd story that started in the 60s with a group of three friends and then glimpses of their lives and overlapping connections over the rest of their lives. Maybe I haven't read enough Stephen King, but this wasn't what I expected as typical Stephen King, and I didn't like it that much.
The Black Box by Michael Connelly. Fiction, about 425 pages. I primarily read Michael Connelly books because he is by far my husband's favorite author. I enjoy them a lot as well, and this one was no exception. This one is about a Danish reporter killed during the LA riots in 1992, and her murder remains unsolved. 20 years later, the LAPD wants to reexamine the open homicides from the riots, including this one, and see if some of them can be closed, not including this one.
Thunderstruck by Eric Larson. Nonfiction, about 475 pages. About a murder in England in the early 1900s committed apparently by Hawley Crippen, and the invention and development of wireless telegraphy by Guglielmo Marconi. I'm not sure why the author's name didn't register for me on this one, but it is the same author who wrote Devil in the White City, about some murders that happened during the Chicago World's Fair in 1904. It even mentions that on the front cover. But you know, I missed it. It wasn't until I was about halfway through that I thought the tone sounded familiar and made the connection. I preferred Devil in the White City, which I had to read for book club. This one was okay, but not spectacular.
Squirrel Seeks Chipmunk by David Sedaris. Fiction, about 175 pages (but small ones). A few chuckles but not my favorite by him. Generally, a bunch of very short stories about animals who exhibit human personality characteristics. The title story is about a chipmunk dating a squirrel and how the chipmunk's family objects. There's one about a dog who is married to another dog in the same household, but is taken by the owner for breeding and reasons that it's work, not adultery, but then finds a dog that he likes and therefore "works" extra hard. Since most the stories seem to have some moral, I found many to be fairly depressing. Overall, fairly unimpressive, not recommended.
The Lost and Forgotten Languages of Shanghai by Ruiyan Xu. Fiction, about 350 pages. This one was particularly fun since last year I'd tried to learn some Chinese and had gotten to visit Shanghai. It's a story about a Chinese man who is married with a young child. He grew up in the US, but moved to China when he was 10 and forgot most of his English. When he is injured in an explosion, he is diagnosed with bilingual Broca's aphasia, which means in his case, he has lost his ability to speak or read Chinese (though he understands it), and can only communicate (and then with difficulty both due to the aphasia and due to the fact he only knew some English) haltingly in English. A doctor from the US is brought in to help him attempt to recover his Chinese. The doctor character was insanely irritating and stereotypical, but the book was good despite her.
Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead by Sheryl Sandberg. Nonfiction, about 175 pages. This book got a lot of press in 2013 and was my choice for book club. I ended up loving it. Sex and gender issues have always been interesting to me, particularly the pay gap, and particularly about differences between the sexes in high-earning fields. Of course there are so many factors in the pay gap, starting early with how parents and teachers treat children of opposite sexes, and then self-selection choices throughout life, frequently driving women to choose lower earning professions in general, as well as antiquated stereotypes about sex roles in the home (raising children, doing work related to the household). I may be unique in that many of my married female friends are the primary breadwinner in their relationships (keep in mind, a lot of my friends are other attorneys). So when it's not a dual-attorney couple (I have plenty of them among my friends too), when they have children, their husbands stay home. Several of my best friends with kids (including my godson's parents) have the husband doing most of the child-rearing. While we don't have kids, I'm a big stickler for equal contributions in terms of time to running our household since we both work full-time. Fortunately, my husband is on board with that -- I think I'd be miserable married to someone who expected me to do the bulk of the household stuff just because I'm female. In fact, I never would have married that guy! But the book has made me think a lot about these interesting issues. And one of the books less central points about the importance of mentor relationships at work has really sunk in with me. While my direct supervisor is male, since I finished this book, I've made more of an effort to ask him career direction advice, and I want to continue to do that. The importance of having a mentor, etc.
Joseph Anton: A Memoir by Salman Rushdie. Nonfiction, about 650 pages. What a book. Not sure even what to say about it. If you've ever watched Friends and remember the book of grievances, I bet this book will trigger a flashback. In many ways, Rushdie/Anton came across as egomaniacal and self-absorbed. It's the story of his life after The Satanic Verses was published and the fatwah or death warrant was issued. Joseph Anton was the pseudonym under which he lived in fear of his life. Of course it's an interesting story, particularly when you think about the importance of freedom of speech, religious freedom, and the role of literature in the world. And the first few years of living under the fatwah was interesting, but then it all got to be too much. There was a lot of recapping all the press about him (did I mention he came acorss as very self-absorbed?), a list of all the awards he's received, reiterating everything he's ever heard praising him or his books. He just struck me as very full of himself. For anyone who watches The Bachelor, he was kind of a fame whore -- actually, I think there are probably fewer than 100 people in the world who both watch The Bachelor regularly and have read Joseph Anton. Haha. I'm unique! Anyway, he's a big name dropper. And he seemed very old when he was essentially just making a list of people he knew/knows who had gotten cancer. I know several older people who occasionally do that -- just a big list of all the people with cancer. Anyway, I did not like Joseph Anton at all. I can't believe I stuck with it for that many pages. BUT... I've never read The Satanic Verses (as he explains it, there truly never was any anti-Muslim intent), and I've never read Haroun and the Sea of Stories, two of Rushdie's books that Joseph Anton made me want to read.
Bossypants by Tina Fey. Nonfiction, about 275 pages. I liked it more than I thought I would. The nuances of being a woman in comedy, or any comedian attempting to get a break, aren't things I'd ever really considered. And I don't watch 30 Rock, but I certainly enjoyed some of Fey's SNL sketches. Best line of the book (in reference to dating within your workplace): "Remember, when you work in what is basically a cage that you're not allowed to leave, your choices are limited to what strolls by."
Olive Kitteridge by Elizabeth Strout. Fiction, about 275 pages. A collection of short stories, all with the character of Olive Kitteridge, a woman approximately in her 60s, in the story in some way. This was a book club selection. It was good, but not one that I'll go back to read again.
The Onion's Book of Known Knowledge. Fiction, about 250 pages. Awful. My second "alphabetical list" book of the year and perhaps an even bigger flop. I think a total of 4 of the entries made me laugh out loud: 401k, Socrates, Table, and Toast (hmm, 3 of the 4 were late in the book, maybe it started to grow on me?). Because I read The Onion loyally weekly for YEARS, I expected so much more. Seriously, there have been several stories on the Onion that I still reference about a decade after I read them (adding the fifth blade to the razor is perhaps my favorite). And I own (and love) another Onion book, Our Dumb Century (I actually have it within arm's reach in my office). But this one just bombed in my opinon. Ugh. Give me back my life. I can't believe I bothered to finish it, but I will say it was quick.
Easy Company Soldier by Don Malarkey. Nonfiction, about 300 pages. Several men involved in Easy Company have written their stories, and this was just as good as the others I've read. While he seemed to be bragging at times, he certainly deserves to! Currahee, Normandy, Bastogne. I don't think it's the best of the first-hand accounts, but it's worth reading and always good to hear another person's take on the war of the (last) century.
Running with the Kenyans: Discovering the Secrets of the Fastest People on Earth by Adharanand Finn. Nonfiction, about 300 pages. A strong but recreational runner (38 minute 10k if I remember correctly) decides to move with his family (wife and little kids) to Kenya to see if he can get to the bottom of why Kenya produces many of the best runners in the world. While the common belief (at least among non-runners) of it being genetic has been discounted, it's very interesting as he considers the many other plausible explanations (and he does go through genetics as well). Barefoot running, eating ugali, the importance of rest, training v. racing paces, the derth of other profitable options, the elevation, . This isn't the kind of book you'd read in hopes of learning the secrets, but there were several take-aways that I found interesting and can apply to my own running. While Finn lives in Kenya, he travels, he meets many former winners, current elites, and future winners, and he puts together a racing team to compete in a marathon. And yes, his own times improve too. I also enjoyed the non-running aspect regarding life in Kenya. It's my favorite place in Africa though I haven't travelled much there, but I'd love to go back. He doesn't include many pictures (basically one at the beginning of each chapter); I wished there were more.
Night Film by M Priezl. Fiction, about 600 pages. Read almost all of this in Italy while we were on vacation because I wanted to leave it for hubby's counsin who speaks English. Book was bizarre, but pretty good for a mindless read.
This Land Is Their Land by Barbara Ehrenreich. Nonfiction, about 250 pages. Typical Ehrenreich, which meant I liked it. About wealth inequality in America. So good that I made my husband read it too. While we consider ourselves to be certainly financially comfortable, we're definitely not close to the uber-rich, and I found it interesting to make myself think about what this wealth gap means for the poorest of the poor. Not a comfortable book to read, but of course that's what means more people should read it. But of course as a "have" there were some things in the book I'd argue weren't true, but it made me think and her point is quite valid.
The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood by James Gleick. Nonfiction, about 550 pages. Both interesting and dry at the same time. It draws on lots of different subjects -- particularly (in order of emphasis based on my reading): English, math, computer science, science, foreign language. The book made me google things like "why is the alphabet in the order it is?" (and really, why??? why can't it be X, E, A, K, P, D...?), and "what is the least integer not nameable in fewer than nineteen syllables?" (Berry's paradox -- because "the least integer not nameable in fewer than nineteen syllables" is 111,777, but technically, the phrase describing it, "the least integer not nameable in fewer than nineteen syllables" is only 18 syllables!). Overall, I liked it, but that's because I'm a nerd. I'm not sure to whom I'd actually recommend this book.
And I have two books that are presently "in progress" that I am counting toward my total as being finished (though there is a chance I'm giving up on Crazy Rich):
Crazy Rich: Power, Scandal, and Tragedy Inside the Johnson & Johnson Dynasty by
Dear Life by Alice Munro. Fiction, about 300 pages. This was a book club selection of short stories. Overall, pretty sad. Not my favorite book by her. It pinpoints moments where people's lives change, generally for the worse.
Running with the Kenyans: Discovering the Secrets of the Fastest People on Earth by Adharanand Finn. Nonfiction, about 300 pages. A strong but recreational runner (38 minute 10k if I remember correctly) decides to move with his family (wife and little kids) to Kenya to see if he can get to the bottom of why Kenya produces many of the best runners in the world. While the common belief (at least among non-runners) of it being genetic has been discounted, it's very interesting as he considers the many other plausible explanations (and he does go through genetics as well). Barefoot running, eating ugali, the importance of rest, training v. racing paces, the derth of other profitable options, the elevation, . This isn't the kind of book you'd read in hopes of learning the secrets, but there were several take-aways that I found interesting and can apply to my own running. While Finn lives in Kenya, he travels, he meets many former winners, current elites, and future winners, and he puts together a racing team to compete in a marathon. And yes, his own times improve too. I also enjoyed the non-running aspect regarding life in Kenya. It's my favorite place in Africa though I haven't travelled much there, but I'd love to go back. He doesn't include many pictures (basically one at the beginning of each chapter); I wished there were more.
Night Film by M Priezl. Fiction, about 600 pages. Read almost all of this in Italy while we were on vacation because I wanted to leave it for hubby's counsin who speaks English. Book was bizarre, but pretty good for a mindless read.
This Land Is Their Land by Barbara Ehrenreich. Nonfiction, about 250 pages. Typical Ehrenreich, which meant I liked it. About wealth inequality in America. So good that I made my husband read it too. While we consider ourselves to be certainly financially comfortable, we're definitely not close to the uber-rich, and I found it interesting to make myself think about what this wealth gap means for the poorest of the poor. Not a comfortable book to read, but of course that's what means more people should read it. But of course as a "have" there were some things in the book I'd argue weren't true, but it made me think and her point is quite valid.
The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood by James Gleick. Nonfiction, about 550 pages. Both interesting and dry at the same time. It draws on lots of different subjects -- particularly (in order of emphasis based on my reading): English, math, computer science, science, foreign language. The book made me google things like "why is the alphabet in the order it is?" (and really, why??? why can't it be X, E, A, K, P, D...?), and "what is the least integer not nameable in fewer than nineteen syllables?" (Berry's paradox -- because "the least integer not nameable in fewer than nineteen syllables" is 111,777, but technically, the phrase describing it, "the least integer not nameable in fewer than nineteen syllables" is only 18 syllables!). Overall, I liked it, but that's because I'm a nerd. I'm not sure to whom I'd actually recommend this book.
And I have two books that are presently "in progress" that I am counting toward my total as being finished (though there is a chance I'm giving up on Crazy Rich):
Crazy Rich: Power, Scandal, and Tragedy Inside the Johnson & Johnson Dynasty by
Dear Life by Alice Munro. Fiction, about 300 pages. This was a book club selection of short stories. Overall, pretty sad. Not my favorite book by her. It pinpoints moments where people's lives change, generally for the worse.
Friday, January 11, 2013
2012 Reading Conclusion
Having resolved to read more and record what I read, here is my list for roughly the second half of 2012. If you're interested, here is a link to the list from the first half of the year.
Eclipse by Stephenie Meyer. Fiction of course. This is the third book in the Twilight series and I liked it pretty well. Not great literature, but an interesting 600 pages so next I'll read the fourth book. Wonder how many there are...
The Tipping Point: how little things can make a big difference by Malcolm Gladwell. Ugh. Nonfiction, about 300 agonizing pages. Thought this would be good because I liked Freakonomics a few years ago, but this book was pretty painful. It seemed like lots of numbers and examples, but it never really got to the point. Definitely not recommended in general. It made a few points that I'd kind of recognize in everyday life, but not the best use of my time. Still wondering why I bothered to finish it, usually I give up if I'm not enjoying a book, but I kept waiting for this one to get better.
Seven Years in Tibet by Heinrich Harrer. Non-fiction, about 370 pages, about an Austrian POW in India during WWII who escapes (multiple times actually, he gets recaptured) and flees to Tibet where he lives for ... wait for it ... seven years! This is one of those all-time-great books, makes it onto a lot of lists, and somehow I'd never read it. The underlying currents of racism and sexism are interesting, but not atypical of the time. Harrer for example talks about women "not making a big fuss of giving birth," repeatedly boasts of being the first European to do something there (climb a mountain) (but no explanation as to why it matters that he's the first white man...), and even comments on things like Tibetan children being "not inferior". One of the funnier quotes, "Of course, one cannot compare the productivity of Tibetan workers with that of Europeans." But for what it is, fleeing the war, meeting the Dalai Lama, living in Tibet, it was an absolutely amazing book. Highly recommended.
The Survivors Club (the secrets and science that could save your life) by Ben Sherwood. Nonfiction about 400 pages but goes by quickly. Fun book about random disaster survival. Mountain lion attacks to Holocaust concentration camps, and pretty much everything in between. My big take-aways were to always follow the safety briefing on a plane, to actually say out loud how many rows away I am from the nearest exit on a plane, and to figure out the evacuation plan from any hotel room.
Packing the Court. LOOONG. by James MacGregor Burns. Nonfiction, technically only 330ish pages, but feels much longer, about the history of the Supreme Court and its landmark decisions. It pretty much starts with Washington choosing the first Justices, covers Marbury, covers almost all the other notable decisions since (and some that didn't strike me as notable), talks about various changes (or attempted changes) to the number of Justices, almost each appointment to the bench, and even covered the nomination of Harriet Miers (what a joke -- I was appalled that Bush would nominate an SMU grad for the Supreme Court -- I may sound like a conservative here, but really, it's just me as a lawyer saying that someone who went to a school that is barely in the top 25 has no business on the Court) and the decision of Bush v. Gore and its impact.
The Racketeer by John Grisham. Fiction, about 340 pages. As with most of his books, a very quick and enjoyable read. This one is about an attorney in prison on RICO charges (which he claims were bogus) and his scheme to get a Rule 35 release. I think I read the whole thing in less than 2 weeks, and since I seem to have very little time to read on the average day, that's pretty quick for me.
The Confession by John Grisham. Fiction, about 525 pages. Quick and enjoyable, a desperate attempt to finish another book before the end of the year (to hit my resolution of 20). About an inmate who confesses to murder, and is sent to death row, and then someone else comes forward and confesses to the crime to a priest before the inmate is executed. Read most of this over Christmas vacation.
If I had to rank the second half of 2012 books in order, it would be:
Seven Years in Tibet
The Confession
The Survivor's Club
And my ranking from the first half of 2012 was:
Lost on Planet China
The Happiness Project
Retribution
The Drop
So if I had to combine the two and do a single ranking of all the books I read in 2012, it would be:
I actually fell a bit short of my goal of reading 20 books, I think I came in at 19, but I keep thinking there was one I read over the summer or early fall but forgot to list (maybe something about running?). Anyway, I think this totals up to just over 4000 pages of nonfiction, and about 3300 pages of fiction. Not bad! My mind is stronger for the 4000 nonfiction pages, and perhaps more imaginative for the 3300 pages.
I decided not to make a 2013 resolution about a specific number of books since I don't want to encourage myself to read quick books that don't improve my life or mind at all. But maybe I'll aim for 7500 pages, at least 50% non-fiction? Either way, not an official resolution.
Eclipse by Stephenie Meyer. Fiction of course. This is the third book in the Twilight series and I liked it pretty well. Not great literature, but an interesting 600 pages so next I'll read the fourth book. Wonder how many there are...
The Tipping Point: how little things can make a big difference by Malcolm Gladwell. Ugh. Nonfiction, about 300 agonizing pages. Thought this would be good because I liked Freakonomics a few years ago, but this book was pretty painful. It seemed like lots of numbers and examples, but it never really got to the point. Definitely not recommended in general. It made a few points that I'd kind of recognize in everyday life, but not the best use of my time. Still wondering why I bothered to finish it, usually I give up if I'm not enjoying a book, but I kept waiting for this one to get better.
Seven Years in Tibet by Heinrich Harrer. Non-fiction, about 370 pages, about an Austrian POW in India during WWII who escapes (multiple times actually, he gets recaptured) and flees to Tibet where he lives for ... wait for it ... seven years! This is one of those all-time-great books, makes it onto a lot of lists, and somehow I'd never read it. The underlying currents of racism and sexism are interesting, but not atypical of the time. Harrer for example talks about women "not making a big fuss of giving birth," repeatedly boasts of being the first European to do something there (climb a mountain) (but no explanation as to why it matters that he's the first white man...), and even comments on things like Tibetan children being "not inferior". One of the funnier quotes, "Of course, one cannot compare the productivity of Tibetan workers with that of Europeans." But for what it is, fleeing the war, meeting the Dalai Lama, living in Tibet, it was an absolutely amazing book. Highly recommended.
The Survivors Club (the secrets and science that could save your life) by Ben Sherwood. Nonfiction about 400 pages but goes by quickly. Fun book about random disaster survival. Mountain lion attacks to Holocaust concentration camps, and pretty much everything in between. My big take-aways were to always follow the safety briefing on a plane, to actually say out loud how many rows away I am from the nearest exit on a plane, and to figure out the evacuation plan from any hotel room.
Packing the Court. LOOONG. by James MacGregor Burns. Nonfiction, technically only 330ish pages, but feels much longer, about the history of the Supreme Court and its landmark decisions. It pretty much starts with Washington choosing the first Justices, covers Marbury, covers almost all the other notable decisions since (and some that didn't strike me as notable), talks about various changes (or attempted changes) to the number of Justices, almost each appointment to the bench, and even covered the nomination of Harriet Miers (what a joke -- I was appalled that Bush would nominate an SMU grad for the Supreme Court -- I may sound like a conservative here, but really, it's just me as a lawyer saying that someone who went to a school that is barely in the top 25 has no business on the Court) and the decision of Bush v. Gore and its impact.
The Racketeer by John Grisham. Fiction, about 340 pages. As with most of his books, a very quick and enjoyable read. This one is about an attorney in prison on RICO charges (which he claims were bogus) and his scheme to get a Rule 35 release. I think I read the whole thing in less than 2 weeks, and since I seem to have very little time to read on the average day, that's pretty quick for me.
The Confession by John Grisham. Fiction, about 525 pages. Quick and enjoyable, a desperate attempt to finish another book before the end of the year (to hit my resolution of 20). About an inmate who confesses to murder, and is sent to death row, and then someone else comes forward and confesses to the crime to a priest before the inmate is executed. Read most of this over Christmas vacation.
If I had to rank the second half of 2012 books in order, it would be:
Seven Years in Tibet
The Confession
The Survivor's Club
And my ranking from the first half of 2012 was:
Lost on Planet China
The Happiness Project
Retribution
The Drop
So if I had to combine the two and do a single ranking of all the books I read in 2012, it would be:
Lost on Planet China
The Happiness Project
Seven Years in Tibet
Retribution
I actually fell a bit short of my goal of reading 20 books, I think I came in at 19, but I keep thinking there was one I read over the summer or early fall but forgot to list (maybe something about running?). Anyway, I think this totals up to just over 4000 pages of nonfiction, and about 3300 pages of fiction. Not bad! My mind is stronger for the 4000 nonfiction pages, and perhaps more imaginative for the 3300 pages.
I decided not to make a 2013 resolution about a specific number of books since I don't want to encourage myself to read quick books that don't improve my life or mind at all. But maybe I'll aim for 7500 pages, at least 50% non-fiction? Either way, not an official resolution.
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
2012 Reading
Since one of my resolutions was not only to read more, but to keep track of what I read, here's what I've finished so far this year (along with brief thoughts on each):
The Man Who Loved China [The Fantastic Story of the Eccentric Scientist Who Unlocked the Mysteries of the Middle Kingdom], by Simon Winchester. The story of Joseph Needham. Nonfiction, just over 300 pages. I enjoyed it and it made me more excited in some ways about going to China this year, but also made me wish I'd gone right out of high school. It's changing so much, I wish there were a way to visit older China too.
The Drop by Michael Connelly. Fiction in the series about Harry Bosch, an LAPD Detective. I never used to read this series until I started living with my husband and he LOVES this series of books. He convinced me to read the whole series, and now we both read any new release (usually about one per year). If you're looking for a good crime series, I'd recommend you start at the beginning of this one. The Drop was pretty good.
Ursula Under by Ingrid Hill. Misleading to say it's a book club pick, but it was... in September 2011. I bought it then but didn't get into the book. But it was good enough I wanted to finish, it just took a very long time. Fiction, about 475 pages. It's slow going, very descriptive, but an insanely interesting theory. A little girl falls into an abandoned mining well in modern times, and then the story goes back and forth to her and her parents now, and random ancestors. People from the middle ages, someone in about the third century, the random rapes, loves, births, deaths, brushes with death, lost dreams, chance encounters, etc. that all lead to this girl being born. And it was fun to see how her parents' ancestors paths crossed, and makes the world seem small overall. One example was how a distant relative of the girl's mother went on an archeology trip and found the bones of a descendent of the girl's father, but of course no one knew of that connection. Hard to say if I'd recommend this book or not, given how slow it was, but overall, I really liked it.
The Unthinkable: Who Survives When Disaster Strikes and Why, by Amanda Ripley. Non-fiction and quite interesting. It definitely makes you think about preparing for a disaster. Not just buying water to have at home, but reading the plane information card on every flight, practicing actual evacuation, etc. She focused a lot on crises where some people survived and some didn't, and looking at human factors that contribute to that. Among the disasters discussed were Katrina, 9-11, various other plane crashes, a supper club fire, shootings like Columbine, tsunami, and crowd crushes of people (like at the Hajj in Saudi Arabia, where it has happened multiple times, including one incident that killed over 300 people in 2006). Very, very interesting read.
Retribution: the Battle for Japan 1944-1945 by Max Hastings. Non-fiction, about 650 pages (so you'd better love WWII!). Lots of MacArthur bashing, but overall, a very balanced view of the end of the war in the Pacific. Most of the major battles aren't covered in depth because they're so well-covered in so many other books, but overall, a very comprehensive book. Interestingly, as with his similar book addressing the end of the war in Europe, Armaggedon, he works hard to include research and accounts both from the Allies and the Axis powers, there are lots of accounts by Japanese soldiers included in this book, as well as Japanese war theory. But the book uses the word desultory a lot. Like more than in any other book. So if that will drive you crazy, skip this book. But otherwise, I'd highly, highly recommend it, particulary if you feel like you already have read a lot of Pacific Theater books.
The Beekeeper's Apprentice by Laurie King. A book club selection. Fictional book about Sherlock Holmes taking on his apprentice Mary Russell and their first cases together. Quick read, fairly enjoyable, not my typical choice, and not a series I'll pick up to finish.
The Happiness Project by Gretchen Rubin. Non-fiction, 12 months of resolutions designed to boost her happiness. Author notably already had good life. Spouse with potential health issue on the horizon but well-off, no abuse, healthy kids, etc. Reminded me a little in bad ways of Eat, Pray, Love (oh my life is so hard, poor me, let's be more self-centered rather than thinking about any real problems), but in many ways, I loved it. Reminded me of several habits I should work on, particularly in terms of home organization, marital communication, and expanding horizons. Possibly resulted in some life changes (for the better) and one I'd recommend to anyone. A book club choice.
The Billionaire's Vinegar by Benjamin Wallace. Another book club selection. A nonfiction book about the mystery surrounding the world's most expensive bottle of wine. It was sold in 1985 at an auction at Christie's, purportedly owned by Thomas Jefferson, a 1787 Lafite Bordeaux. I learned a lot about wine in general, and rare old wines in particular, so quite interesting in that regard. The book was just under 300 pages, not counting end notes, so a pretty quick read. Enjoyable.
Drop Dead Healthy, by A.J. Jacobs. Book club selection. About 350 pages, not counting appendices. The author spends about 2 years focusing on improving his health in various ways -- from things like wearing noise-canceling headphones, to "running" his errands, to trying different diets. I enjoyed the book and it was a VERY quick read -- it helped that many of the chapters were short, and they were each on a discrete topic. It seemed I chuckled out loud at a minimum of once per chapter. I wish I'd taken some notes on some of the habits that I wanted to implement. This may be a book I skim again when I get it back (loaned out to a fellow book club member first, then going to my bro next).
Orange is the New Black: My Year in a Women's Prison, by Piper Kerman. MY book club selection. Non-fiction, about 300 pages. About a woman who knows and hangs with some drug dealers, then carries a suitcase with cash through customs without declaring it, cleans up her life and seems exactly like someone we could all be friends with, and then 10 years later, is arrested for her role in that drug trade conspiracy. She decides to plead out (offering testimony against others), and is sentenced to 15 months in Danbury. A bit stereotypical and condescending at times -- and in some ways it just rings a little false/artificial, hard to explain. But at the same time, if I were a professional author, sentenced to time in jail, I'd want to look at it like an anthropologist too -- to try to keep that distance to get through the time.
Lost on Planet China: The Strange and True Story of One Man's Attempt to Understand the World's Most Mystifying Nation, or How He Became Comfortable Eating Live Squid, by J. Martin Troost. [Note, there's also the same book with an alternate title, Lost on Planet China: One Man's Attempt to Understand the World's Most Mystifying Nation.] Hilarious non-fiction, about 400 pages, about his months exploring China as a foreigner. It's braced me for a lot regarding the food, the shopping, the scams, the confusion, the lack of English, the lack of lines, Chinese culture, etc. And it was just so funny. I'm planning to check out some other titles by the same author -- basically the highest praise I can give an author.
The Scarecrow by Michael Connelly. Fiction, but not in the Harry Bosch series I referenced above. Quite a page-turner for me. I was very tempted to blow off many important things (like work and sleep) to finish the book, and I think it is a testament to my patience and restraint that I am attempting to strengthen through things like yoga to note that it took me a couple weeks to finish this book. About a reporter investigating a murder. Don't want to say much more so I don't spoil it. Several overlap with characters who also appear in the Bosch books.
If I had to go in order of preference, it would be something like this:
Lost on Planet China
The Happiness Project
Retribution
The Drop
The Man Who Loved China [The Fantastic Story of the Eccentric Scientist Who Unlocked the Mysteries of the Middle Kingdom], by Simon Winchester. The story of Joseph Needham. Nonfiction, just over 300 pages. I enjoyed it and it made me more excited in some ways about going to China this year, but also made me wish I'd gone right out of high school. It's changing so much, I wish there were a way to visit older China too.
The Drop by Michael Connelly. Fiction in the series about Harry Bosch, an LAPD Detective. I never used to read this series until I started living with my husband and he LOVES this series of books. He convinced me to read the whole series, and now we both read any new release (usually about one per year). If you're looking for a good crime series, I'd recommend you start at the beginning of this one. The Drop was pretty good.
Ursula Under by Ingrid Hill. Misleading to say it's a book club pick, but it was... in September 2011. I bought it then but didn't get into the book. But it was good enough I wanted to finish, it just took a very long time. Fiction, about 475 pages. It's slow going, very descriptive, but an insanely interesting theory. A little girl falls into an abandoned mining well in modern times, and then the story goes back and forth to her and her parents now, and random ancestors. People from the middle ages, someone in about the third century, the random rapes, loves, births, deaths, brushes with death, lost dreams, chance encounters, etc. that all lead to this girl being born. And it was fun to see how her parents' ancestors paths crossed, and makes the world seem small overall. One example was how a distant relative of the girl's mother went on an archeology trip and found the bones of a descendent of the girl's father, but of course no one knew of that connection. Hard to say if I'd recommend this book or not, given how slow it was, but overall, I really liked it.
The Unthinkable: Who Survives When Disaster Strikes and Why, by Amanda Ripley. Non-fiction and quite interesting. It definitely makes you think about preparing for a disaster. Not just buying water to have at home, but reading the plane information card on every flight, practicing actual evacuation, etc. She focused a lot on crises where some people survived and some didn't, and looking at human factors that contribute to that. Among the disasters discussed were Katrina, 9-11, various other plane crashes, a supper club fire, shootings like Columbine, tsunami, and crowd crushes of people (like at the Hajj in Saudi Arabia, where it has happened multiple times, including one incident that killed over 300 people in 2006). Very, very interesting read.
Retribution: the Battle for Japan 1944-1945 by Max Hastings. Non-fiction, about 650 pages (so you'd better love WWII!). Lots of MacArthur bashing, but overall, a very balanced view of the end of the war in the Pacific. Most of the major battles aren't covered in depth because they're so well-covered in so many other books, but overall, a very comprehensive book. Interestingly, as with his similar book addressing the end of the war in Europe, Armaggedon, he works hard to include research and accounts both from the Allies and the Axis powers, there are lots of accounts by Japanese soldiers included in this book, as well as Japanese war theory. But the book uses the word desultory a lot. Like more than in any other book. So if that will drive you crazy, skip this book. But otherwise, I'd highly, highly recommend it, particulary if you feel like you already have read a lot of Pacific Theater books.
The Beekeeper's Apprentice by Laurie King. A book club selection. Fictional book about Sherlock Holmes taking on his apprentice Mary Russell and their first cases together. Quick read, fairly enjoyable, not my typical choice, and not a series I'll pick up to finish.
The Happiness Project by Gretchen Rubin. Non-fiction, 12 months of resolutions designed to boost her happiness. Author notably already had good life. Spouse with potential health issue on the horizon but well-off, no abuse, healthy kids, etc. Reminded me a little in bad ways of Eat, Pray, Love (oh my life is so hard, poor me, let's be more self-centered rather than thinking about any real problems), but in many ways, I loved it. Reminded me of several habits I should work on, particularly in terms of home organization, marital communication, and expanding horizons. Possibly resulted in some life changes (for the better) and one I'd recommend to anyone. A book club choice.
The Billionaire's Vinegar by Benjamin Wallace. Another book club selection. A nonfiction book about the mystery surrounding the world's most expensive bottle of wine. It was sold in 1985 at an auction at Christie's, purportedly owned by Thomas Jefferson, a 1787 Lafite Bordeaux. I learned a lot about wine in general, and rare old wines in particular, so quite interesting in that regard. The book was just under 300 pages, not counting end notes, so a pretty quick read. Enjoyable.
Drop Dead Healthy, by A.J. Jacobs. Book club selection. About 350 pages, not counting appendices. The author spends about 2 years focusing on improving his health in various ways -- from things like wearing noise-canceling headphones, to "running" his errands, to trying different diets. I enjoyed the book and it was a VERY quick read -- it helped that many of the chapters were short, and they were each on a discrete topic. It seemed I chuckled out loud at a minimum of once per chapter. I wish I'd taken some notes on some of the habits that I wanted to implement. This may be a book I skim again when I get it back (loaned out to a fellow book club member first, then going to my bro next).
Orange is the New Black: My Year in a Women's Prison, by Piper Kerman. MY book club selection. Non-fiction, about 300 pages. About a woman who knows and hangs with some drug dealers, then carries a suitcase with cash through customs without declaring it, cleans up her life and seems exactly like someone we could all be friends with, and then 10 years later, is arrested for her role in that drug trade conspiracy. She decides to plead out (offering testimony against others), and is sentenced to 15 months in Danbury. A bit stereotypical and condescending at times -- and in some ways it just rings a little false/artificial, hard to explain. But at the same time, if I were a professional author, sentenced to time in jail, I'd want to look at it like an anthropologist too -- to try to keep that distance to get through the time.
Lost on Planet China: The Strange and True Story of One Man's Attempt to Understand the World's Most Mystifying Nation, or How He Became Comfortable Eating Live Squid, by J. Martin Troost. [Note, there's also the same book with an alternate title, Lost on Planet China: One Man's Attempt to Understand the World's Most Mystifying Nation.] Hilarious non-fiction, about 400 pages, about his months exploring China as a foreigner. It's braced me for a lot regarding the food, the shopping, the scams, the confusion, the lack of English, the lack of lines, Chinese culture, etc. And it was just so funny. I'm planning to check out some other titles by the same author -- basically the highest praise I can give an author.
The Scarecrow by Michael Connelly. Fiction, but not in the Harry Bosch series I referenced above. Quite a page-turner for me. I was very tempted to blow off many important things (like work and sleep) to finish the book, and I think it is a testament to my patience and restraint that I am attempting to strengthen through things like yoga to note that it took me a couple weeks to finish this book. About a reporter investigating a murder. Don't want to say much more so I don't spoil it. Several overlap with characters who also appear in the Bosch books.
If I had to go in order of preference, it would be something like this:
Lost on Planet China
The Happiness Project
Retribution
The Drop
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
WEVerb11: Read
For the month of December, I’ll be participating in #WEverb11. Each day gives a new prompt, each of which is a chance to reflect and look forward.
I've always been interested in WWII and have read tons and tons of non-fiction books on the subject, particularly Pacific Theatre books. But the different thing about this book was the running aspect. That was an interesting hook and of course makes you think about the war and the resulting lost opportunities, lives lost and broken, etc.
I don't want to say too much about it because I hate when people tell me too much about a book I haven't read, but it's the story of a runner who enlists at the start of WWII and ends up as a POW. Some people avoid reading much nonfiction because they imagine it like a textbook (not to say I don't like textbook type books), but this isn't one. It's like reading someone's life story, with factual background attached and bits pulled together from related life stories.
I have been in a book club for nearly a decade. Mostly female attorneys, with maybe a couple non-lawyers but who are lawyer spouses where we worked with the husband but liked the wife. Anyway, we each choose the book to read for the month we host, and Unbroken was my pick this year. They're fairly used to my choosing WWII non-fiction about half the time (books I remember picking are Escape from the Deep (yes, another book about the Tang, but much better than most!, by Kershaw, one of my faves), Ghost Soldiers (one of my fave books of all time), and The Zookeeper's Wife (war in Europe)), but I will say that this one was one of the biggest hits.
I think reading a lot of history, particularly war books, gives a valuable perspective to thinking about modern values and struggles. It never fails to shock me how little understanding of history a vast majority of people have. WWII just happens to be my primary area of interest, though I think I have a long list of secondary areas!
Unbroken. My advice: read it if you haven't. Highly recommended. After all, it's my pick of the year, and I read a lot!
#13: Read. What article or book changed your outlook on an issue or life?I'm not sure this technically fits as changing my outlook on an issue or life, but I'm going to have to choose Unbroken by Laura Hillenbrand.
Contributed by Melinda [www.palindromeathome.com]
I've always been interested in WWII and have read tons and tons of non-fiction books on the subject, particularly Pacific Theatre books. But the different thing about this book was the running aspect. That was an interesting hook and of course makes you think about the war and the resulting lost opportunities, lives lost and broken, etc.
I don't want to say too much about it because I hate when people tell me too much about a book I haven't read, but it's the story of a runner who enlists at the start of WWII and ends up as a POW. Some people avoid reading much nonfiction because they imagine it like a textbook (not to say I don't like textbook type books), but this isn't one. It's like reading someone's life story, with factual background attached and bits pulled together from related life stories.
I have been in a book club for nearly a decade. Mostly female attorneys, with maybe a couple non-lawyers but who are lawyer spouses where we worked with the husband but liked the wife. Anyway, we each choose the book to read for the month we host, and Unbroken was my pick this year. They're fairly used to my choosing WWII non-fiction about half the time (books I remember picking are Escape from the Deep (yes, another book about the Tang, but much better than most!, by Kershaw, one of my faves), Ghost Soldiers (one of my fave books of all time), and The Zookeeper's Wife (war in Europe)), but I will say that this one was one of the biggest hits.
I think reading a lot of history, particularly war books, gives a valuable perspective to thinking about modern values and struggles. It never fails to shock me how little understanding of history a vast majority of people have. WWII just happens to be my primary area of interest, though I think I have a long list of secondary areas!
Unbroken. My advice: read it if you haven't. Highly recommended. After all, it's my pick of the year, and I read a lot!
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
New Book Club
So a few weeks ago, we kind of agreed to join a new book club. Everyone got to weigh in a bit on our first selection, and it's a little different from most book clubs in that we meet more than once a month (current plan is about every 2-3 weeks), but we only read a chapter or so for each meeting.
This is the description we got of what we chose, Gomorra, which is also a movie -- very violent I think.
4) Roberto Saviano, Gomorra
The book describes the clandestine particulars of the business of the Camorra, a powerful Neapolitan mafia-like organization. In this book Saviano employs prose and news-reporting style to narrate the story of the Camorra, exposing its territory and business connections. Since 2006, following the publication of the book, Saviano has been threatened by several Neapolitan “godfathers”. The Italian Minister of the Interior has granted him a permanent police escort, but he's often attacked by politicians of Berlusconi's government. Also, his escort has been questioned. As of December 2008, the book has sold almost 4 million copies worldwide.
But somehow, with all the puzzle craziness, time got away from me and I didn't have time to read for our first meeting. Ooh, that's right, here's the finished puzzle. I think we're going to break it apart soon, but I'm just enjoying looking at it for a few days.
And hubby has been working like crazy lately, so he didn't get to read the first 30 pages either. So we went, ordered and ate dinner, and listened. But the good news is that it was a lot of language practice for us to just be at the discussion (it's an Italian book club), and better yet, the book apparently is something you can read piecemeal -- each chapter stands alone, so we'll be able to pick up with chapter 2 (entitled Angelina Jolie) and go from there. I read so slowly in Italian. I go back and forth between trying to just plow through it without using a dictionary, but then sometimes I worry I'm missing something key or just not getting it, so I go to the dictionary. And then next thing I know, I'm looking up at least one word per sentence and it takes 5 minutes to read a line of text...
But I'm going to be prepared for the next meeting. Without a puzzle to keep me busy, I'll try to do some Italian reading at night. One of my resolutions this year was to speak Italian at home, and we've completely sucked at that one, so at least this will help toward that. I need to do a resolution check-in soon. It's way past halfway through the year, and I haven't been very focused on them, so this might be a good time to try to recommit.
This is the description we got of what we chose, Gomorra, which is also a movie -- very violent I think.
4) Roberto Saviano, Gomorra
The book describes the clandestine particulars of the business of the Camorra, a powerful Neapolitan mafia-like organization. In this book Saviano employs prose and news-reporting style to narrate the story of the Camorra, exposing its territory and business connections. Since 2006, following the publication of the book, Saviano has been threatened by several Neapolitan “godfathers”. The Italian Minister of the Interior has granted him a permanent police escort, but he's often attacked by politicians of Berlusconi's government. Also, his escort has been questioned. As of December 2008, the book has sold almost 4 million copies worldwide.
But somehow, with all the puzzle craziness, time got away from me and I didn't have time to read for our first meeting. Ooh, that's right, here's the finished puzzle. I think we're going to break it apart soon, but I'm just enjoying looking at it for a few days.
And hubby has been working like crazy lately, so he didn't get to read the first 30 pages either. So we went, ordered and ate dinner, and listened. But the good news is that it was a lot of language practice for us to just be at the discussion (it's an Italian book club), and better yet, the book apparently is something you can read piecemeal -- each chapter stands alone, so we'll be able to pick up with chapter 2 (entitled Angelina Jolie) and go from there. I read so slowly in Italian. I go back and forth between trying to just plow through it without using a dictionary, but then sometimes I worry I'm missing something key or just not getting it, so I go to the dictionary. And then next thing I know, I'm looking up at least one word per sentence and it takes 5 minutes to read a line of text...
But I'm going to be prepared for the next meeting. Without a puzzle to keep me busy, I'll try to do some Italian reading at night. One of my resolutions this year was to speak Italian at home, and we've completely sucked at that one, so at least this will help toward that. I need to do a resolution check-in soon. It's way past halfway through the year, and I haven't been very focused on them, so this might be a good time to try to recommit.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Book Review: Lords of Finance
When you hear the name George Harrison, if you’d rather have someone other than a musician be the first person who comes to mind (thinking instead of the head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York), I have a book recommendation for you. A short review of a book I finished a few months ago but finally got around to writing about: Lords of Finance, The Bankers Who Broke the World, by Liaquat Ahamed.
Great read. Pulitzer Prize Winner. The stories of the 4 men who led the central banks of the U.S. (Benjamin Strong mostly, then Harrison), England (Montagu Norman), Germany (Hjalmar Schacht) and France (Emile Moreau) as the countries tried to reconstruct the world economy after WWI, considered the Dawes Plan and eventually moved from the gold standard. Essentially the decade or so before the Great Depression began. It goes so far beyond the basics everyone learns about reparations/reconstruction, the Depression, interest rates, the international monetary system, inflation, and the role of the central banks. The book is particularly interesting to read now in light of the current global economic climate and the wealth of misunderstanding of history that abounds. It works both to reassure me that the alarmists have no real concept of what "bad" is, but it also scares me that things are setting up similarly to the alignment that led to Hitler's rise. If any of that doesn't sound interesting, it's my fault – the book is anything but boring!
This book was a compelling read. There was so much extraneous detail that the characters came to life and it didn’t feel like a dry economic history text. Here’s one example, about the 1927 meeting of the 4 big central bankers:
“Norman dominated the proceedings, seated at one end of the conference room in a fan-backed oriental chair. In spite of the warm weather, he insisted on wearing his velvet-collared cape, which only added to the picturesque figure he evoked. He made it clear that his gold reserves were critically low. Any further erosion would force him to put up rates. The link between the pound and gold was seriously in peril.” Hahahahaha! Suck it, Bank of England! There are later references in the book too to Norman wearing his cloak, like when he was questioned by the select committee in 1930 and was described by Keynes as looking like "an artist, sitting with his cloak round him hunched up, saying, 'I can't remember,' thus evading all questions."]
That’s just a taste. The best way to show some of the detail that makes the book so captivating may be to share a few paragraphs. I tried to pick a couple themes: facial hair and homosexuality.
I looooooved the facial hair comments.
“As the stresses of raising money for the war mounted, tensions between the Bank and the government escalated, finally coming to a head in 1917. The governor was then Walter Cunliffe, a tall barrel-chested, John Bull sort of character who sported an imposing walrus mustache, was a renowned big game hunter, and looked more like a gentleman farmer than a City grandee. Over the years, he had become increasingly autocratic and erratic in his judgments and had developed an exaggerated sense of his own importance as the governor to the point of insisting that his status required him to deal with the government through the prime minister alone, not even through the chancellor of the exchequer.”
[The walrus comes out again later -- when Schacht is tried by the Americans at Nuremberg, he is described as glaring "like an angry walrus" throughout the proceedings. Do walruses glare? I guess I haven't spent enough time in that part of the zoo...]
“Few people were surprised that with this sort of pedigree, Montagu Norman should end up at the Bank. Nevertheless, when he joined in 1915, he had had only a short and not particularly illustrious career as a merchant banker and was not very well known in the City.” Wait for it, here comes perhaps my favorite line of the ENTIRE BOOK: “In his first few weeks, Lord Cunliffe, then governor, was heard to remark, ‘There goes that queer-looking fish with the ginger beard again. Do you know who he is? I keep seeing him creep about this place like a lost soul with nothing better to do.’”
I love it! The queer-looking fish with the ginger beard. The descriptions made these figures from the past come alive again!
And just to make it into a nice, even facial hair trilogy, here’s another gem:
“Von Havenstein, a lawyer by training, did not have the same background but was universally acknowledged to be one of the most dedicated, upstanding, and loyal officials in the entire Reich. With his piercing eyes, long and luxuriant, well-waxed whiskers, and pointed beard, he looked like the impresario of a Victorian music hall.”
And it goes beyond facial hair to actual head-placement:
“‘In appearance [Norman] recalls the early Victorian statesman,’ it went on, ‘Aristocratic in manner and temperament … his Shakesperian type of head sets well upon his tall, silent and dignified figure.”
And there are several pince-nez references, a sure sign of a good book!
“Looking ‘grave’ and ‘gesturing idly with his pince-nez as he spoke,’ he began by announcing, ‘There has been a little distress selling on the Stock Exchange.’” [Keep in mind, this was on Oct. 23, 1929!]
“Tardieu, with his bejeweled pince-nez and his gold cigarette holder, his boulevardier taste in silk hats and fancy waist-coats, his fondness for raffish company, his involvement before the age of thirty-five in at least two financial scandals, was the embodiment of all that the British despised about French politicians.”
Besides the vivid facial hair descriptions, there also may have been an underlying current of homosexuality, or at least my husband thought so (I enjoyed this book enough that I got him to read it). A few examples:
“On the stormy Atlantic crossing, which took twice as long as normal because of rough seas, gale-force winds, and fog, Baldwin and Norman became fast friends. Norman was usually suspicious of politicians, claiming somewhat disingenuously to have no political views himself – he bragged that he had never voted. The stolid uncharismatic Baldwin was the quintessential nonpolitician. They would remain lifelong friends, sharing a common taste for the pleasures of silence, of country walks and string quartets.”
“After Norman’s three trips to the United States in 1921 and 1922, they did not see each other again for almost eighteen months. Falling ill once more, Strong had to take a leave of absence for most of 1923. Thereafter, they agreed to meet at least twice a year, alternating generally between Europe in the summer and New York in the winter. They wrote to each other every few weeks – a combination of financial gossip and views about economic policy. Despite their closeness, they usually addressed each other, in the quaintly formal style of the day, as ‘Dear Strong,’ or ‘Dear Norman,’ although letting their hair down on occasion with ‘Dear Strongy,’ ‘Dear Old Man,’ or ‘Dear old [sic] Monty.’ They furnished each other with advice, often revealing confidential details to which even their own colleagues were not privy. Occasionally they scolded each other. When Norman operated too much on his own and failed to consult his own directors, Strong admonished him, ‘You are a dear queer old duck and one of my duties seems to be to lecture you now and then.’”
“Strong and Norman in particular spent hours ‘closeted together.’”
“They [Strong and Norman] often ribbed each other affectionately. On one occasion, Norman, who had just returned from a visit to Strong in New York and discovered that he had packed one of Strong’s jackets by mistake, wrote: ‘Dear Ben, Since I wrote on the steamer, a further crime has been discovered. The second evening I was home, as usual I changed clothes in the evening and on going downstairs discovered myself in the disguise of a gentleman, if not a dude! This was due to velvet jacket of good style, fit and finish: In other words, Ben, I can only look respectable with the help of your wardrobe!’”
Oh, one more: "A small, sallow, birdlike man with a close-cropped mustache, Hatry was so flamboyant it was said the he even had the bottoms of his shoes polished."
“While the American delegates [to the World Economic Conference in 1933] may not have matched these luminaries in prestige, they made up for it in colorfulness, Senator Pittman [Nevada] in particular providing great fodder for scandalmongers. At an official reception at Windsor Castle, he broke with all social convention by wearing his raincoat and a pair of bright yellow bulbous-toed shoes while being presented to King George V and Queen Mary, greeting them with the salutation, ‘King, I’m glad to meet you. And you too Queen.’ He was usually drunk but even then amazed everyone by his ability to spit tobacco juice into a spittoon from a great distance with remarkable accuracy. One night he was discovered by floor waiters at Claridges sitting stark naked in the sink of the hotel pantry, pretending to be a statue in a fountain. Another night, he amused himself by shooting out the streetlamps on Upper Brook Street with his pistol.”
I don’t think any of them were actually gay, and there were better examples in the book that might suggest that they were, but I can’t remember them, but it was just a different era. Well, some were gay, like WAlter Funk, who replaced Schacht under Hitler as minister of the economy -- he was "an alcoholic homosexual." Anyway, I think it's just that the drama of the time was high. One of my fave examples:
“The leader of the French delegation, Prime Minister Herriot, by background a historian more at home in the Left Bank literary salons of Paris than laboring over financial minutiae in a conference room, came to the negotiating table radically unprepared and found himself outfoxed at every turn. A passionate and emotional intellectual, he injected a certain operatic quality into the proceedings by more than once publicly bursting into tears of frustration.” Can you imagine being in that meeting to negotiate the Dawes Plan??!! Awkward! “At one point, Herriot and his minister of war, General Charles Nollet, got into such a long altercation at an evening meeting at 10 Downing Street that MacDonald [PM] declared an adjournment and went to bed. Even then, the two Frenchmen continued to harangue each other as they left the building, and stood screaming insults at each other in the middle of Downing Street.” That, I can imagine.
The book isn't all just descriptive details, there are also lots of analogies:
"For some reason Nomran thought the Fed could pierce the bubble with a surgical incision that would bring it back to earth without harming the economy. It was a completely absurd idea. Monetary policy does not work like a scalpel but more like a sledgehammer."
But really, the detail just makes the book more fun to read. The events themselves are captivating. Reading about the standoff between Hoover and Roosevelt as to who would be the one to close the banks. The drama of abandoning the gold standard: “As his friend Baldwin put it indelicately, ‘Going off the gold standard was for [Norman] as though a daughter should lose her virginity.’” How’s that for a hook?!!
Either way, whether historical economics is a subject in which you already feel well-versed, or whether you know that you don’t know enough about it, I highly recommend this book. Those Pulitzer Prize voters know what they’re doing! When you add in things like the dances being done by “the bright young things who set the pace for London society,” “the jog-trot, the vampire, the camel-walk, the shimmy, and most infamous of all, the Charleston,” it’s a book that is a joy to read.
Great read. Pulitzer Prize Winner. The stories of the 4 men who led the central banks of the U.S. (Benjamin Strong mostly, then Harrison), England (Montagu Norman), Germany (Hjalmar Schacht) and France (Emile Moreau) as the countries tried to reconstruct the world economy after WWI, considered the Dawes Plan and eventually moved from the gold standard. Essentially the decade or so before the Great Depression began. It goes so far beyond the basics everyone learns about reparations/reconstruction, the Depression, interest rates, the international monetary system, inflation, and the role of the central banks. The book is particularly interesting to read now in light of the current global economic climate and the wealth of misunderstanding of history that abounds. It works both to reassure me that the alarmists have no real concept of what "bad" is, but it also scares me that things are setting up similarly to the alignment that led to Hitler's rise. If any of that doesn't sound interesting, it's my fault – the book is anything but boring!
This book was a compelling read. There was so much extraneous detail that the characters came to life and it didn’t feel like a dry economic history text. Here’s one example, about the 1927 meeting of the 4 big central bankers:
“Norman dominated the proceedings, seated at one end of the conference room in a fan-backed oriental chair. In spite of the warm weather, he insisted on wearing his velvet-collared cape, which only added to the picturesque figure he evoked. He made it clear that his gold reserves were critically low. Any further erosion would force him to put up rates. The link between the pound and gold was seriously in peril.” Hahahahaha! Suck it, Bank of England! There are later references in the book too to Norman wearing his cloak, like when he was questioned by the select committee in 1930 and was described by Keynes as looking like "an artist, sitting with his cloak round him hunched up, saying, 'I can't remember,' thus evading all questions."]
That’s just a taste. The best way to show some of the detail that makes the book so captivating may be to share a few paragraphs. I tried to pick a couple themes: facial hair and homosexuality.
I looooooved the facial hair comments.
“As the stresses of raising money for the war mounted, tensions between the Bank and the government escalated, finally coming to a head in 1917. The governor was then Walter Cunliffe, a tall barrel-chested, John Bull sort of character who sported an imposing walrus mustache, was a renowned big game hunter, and looked more like a gentleman farmer than a City grandee. Over the years, he had become increasingly autocratic and erratic in his judgments and had developed an exaggerated sense of his own importance as the governor to the point of insisting that his status required him to deal with the government through the prime minister alone, not even through the chancellor of the exchequer.”
[The walrus comes out again later -- when Schacht is tried by the Americans at Nuremberg, he is described as glaring "like an angry walrus" throughout the proceedings. Do walruses glare? I guess I haven't spent enough time in that part of the zoo...]
“Few people were surprised that with this sort of pedigree, Montagu Norman should end up at the Bank. Nevertheless, when he joined in 1915, he had had only a short and not particularly illustrious career as a merchant banker and was not very well known in the City.” Wait for it, here comes perhaps my favorite line of the ENTIRE BOOK: “In his first few weeks, Lord Cunliffe, then governor, was heard to remark, ‘There goes that queer-looking fish with the ginger beard again. Do you know who he is? I keep seeing him creep about this place like a lost soul with nothing better to do.’”
I love it! The queer-looking fish with the ginger beard. The descriptions made these figures from the past come alive again!
And just to make it into a nice, even facial hair trilogy, here’s another gem:
“Von Havenstein, a lawyer by training, did not have the same background but was universally acknowledged to be one of the most dedicated, upstanding, and loyal officials in the entire Reich. With his piercing eyes, long and luxuriant, well-waxed whiskers, and pointed beard, he looked like the impresario of a Victorian music hall.”
And it goes beyond facial hair to actual head-placement:
“‘In appearance [Norman] recalls the early Victorian statesman,’ it went on, ‘Aristocratic in manner and temperament … his Shakesperian type of head sets well upon his tall, silent and dignified figure.”
And there are several pince-nez references, a sure sign of a good book!
“Looking ‘grave’ and ‘gesturing idly with his pince-nez as he spoke,’ he began by announcing, ‘There has been a little distress selling on the Stock Exchange.’” [Keep in mind, this was on Oct. 23, 1929!]
“Tardieu, with his bejeweled pince-nez and his gold cigarette holder, his boulevardier taste in silk hats and fancy waist-coats, his fondness for raffish company, his involvement before the age of thirty-five in at least two financial scandals, was the embodiment of all that the British despised about French politicians.”
Besides the vivid facial hair descriptions, there also may have been an underlying current of homosexuality, or at least my husband thought so (I enjoyed this book enough that I got him to read it). A few examples:
“On the stormy Atlantic crossing, which took twice as long as normal because of rough seas, gale-force winds, and fog, Baldwin and Norman became fast friends. Norman was usually suspicious of politicians, claiming somewhat disingenuously to have no political views himself – he bragged that he had never voted. The stolid uncharismatic Baldwin was the quintessential nonpolitician. They would remain lifelong friends, sharing a common taste for the pleasures of silence, of country walks and string quartets.”
“After Norman’s three trips to the United States in 1921 and 1922, they did not see each other again for almost eighteen months. Falling ill once more, Strong had to take a leave of absence for most of 1923. Thereafter, they agreed to meet at least twice a year, alternating generally between Europe in the summer and New York in the winter. They wrote to each other every few weeks – a combination of financial gossip and views about economic policy. Despite their closeness, they usually addressed each other, in the quaintly formal style of the day, as ‘Dear Strong,’ or ‘Dear Norman,’ although letting their hair down on occasion with ‘Dear Strongy,’ ‘Dear Old Man,’ or ‘Dear old [sic] Monty.’ They furnished each other with advice, often revealing confidential details to which even their own colleagues were not privy. Occasionally they scolded each other. When Norman operated too much on his own and failed to consult his own directors, Strong admonished him, ‘You are a dear queer old duck and one of my duties seems to be to lecture you now and then.’”
“Strong and Norman in particular spent hours ‘closeted together.’”
“They [Strong and Norman] often ribbed each other affectionately. On one occasion, Norman, who had just returned from a visit to Strong in New York and discovered that he had packed one of Strong’s jackets by mistake, wrote: ‘Dear Ben, Since I wrote on the steamer, a further crime has been discovered. The second evening I was home, as usual I changed clothes in the evening and on going downstairs discovered myself in the disguise of a gentleman, if not a dude! This was due to velvet jacket of good style, fit and finish: In other words, Ben, I can only look respectable with the help of your wardrobe!’”
Oh, one more: "A small, sallow, birdlike man with a close-cropped mustache, Hatry was so flamboyant it was said the he even had the bottoms of his shoes polished."
“While the American delegates [to the World Economic Conference in 1933] may not have matched these luminaries in prestige, they made up for it in colorfulness, Senator Pittman [Nevada] in particular providing great fodder for scandalmongers. At an official reception at Windsor Castle, he broke with all social convention by wearing his raincoat and a pair of bright yellow bulbous-toed shoes while being presented to King George V and Queen Mary, greeting them with the salutation, ‘King, I’m glad to meet you. And you too Queen.’ He was usually drunk but even then amazed everyone by his ability to spit tobacco juice into a spittoon from a great distance with remarkable accuracy. One night he was discovered by floor waiters at Claridges sitting stark naked in the sink of the hotel pantry, pretending to be a statue in a fountain. Another night, he amused himself by shooting out the streetlamps on Upper Brook Street with his pistol.”
I don’t think any of them were actually gay, and there were better examples in the book that might suggest that they were, but I can’t remember them, but it was just a different era. Well, some were gay, like WAlter Funk, who replaced Schacht under Hitler as minister of the economy -- he was "an alcoholic homosexual." Anyway, I think it's just that the drama of the time was high. One of my fave examples:
“The leader of the French delegation, Prime Minister Herriot, by background a historian more at home in the Left Bank literary salons of Paris than laboring over financial minutiae in a conference room, came to the negotiating table radically unprepared and found himself outfoxed at every turn. A passionate and emotional intellectual, he injected a certain operatic quality into the proceedings by more than once publicly bursting into tears of frustration.” Can you imagine being in that meeting to negotiate the Dawes Plan??!! Awkward! “At one point, Herriot and his minister of war, General Charles Nollet, got into such a long altercation at an evening meeting at 10 Downing Street that MacDonald [PM] declared an adjournment and went to bed. Even then, the two Frenchmen continued to harangue each other as they left the building, and stood screaming insults at each other in the middle of Downing Street.” That, I can imagine.
The book isn't all just descriptive details, there are also lots of analogies:
"For some reason Nomran thought the Fed could pierce the bubble with a surgical incision that would bring it back to earth without harming the economy. It was a completely absurd idea. Monetary policy does not work like a scalpel but more like a sledgehammer."
But really, the detail just makes the book more fun to read. The events themselves are captivating. Reading about the standoff between Hoover and Roosevelt as to who would be the one to close the banks. The drama of abandoning the gold standard: “As his friend Baldwin put it indelicately, ‘Going off the gold standard was for [Norman] as though a daughter should lose her virginity.’” How’s that for a hook?!!
Either way, whether historical economics is a subject in which you already feel well-versed, or whether you know that you don’t know enough about it, I highly recommend this book. Those Pulitzer Prize voters know what they’re doing! When you add in things like the dances being done by “the bright young things who set the pace for London society,” “the jog-trot, the vampire, the camel-walk, the shimmy, and most infamous of all, the Charleston,” it’s a book that is a joy to read.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Born to Run: Vegetarian Runners
I already posted my thoughts about the barefoot running discussion of Born to Run by Christopher McDougall, but the other subject in the book (discussed in much less detail) that really interested me was the vegetarian diet. I think I commented before that I saw the entire book to be mostly about ultra and trail running, and much less about being barefoot or being vegetarian or anything like that. I also was amused by how McDougall rips on the egos of some ultra runners who he sees as self-promoters. Anyway, the vegetarian portion of the book was of special interest to me.
As I've explained, I've been a vegetarian since 2001 but made the switch for moral reasons instead of any health reasons.
Things I remember from the book: McDougall says that a vegetarian diet has "worked for history's greatest runners," and mentions how one great present-day ultrarunner decided to adopt it based on looking at results first, science later.
There's discussion about how that guy cut down white flour and sugar, and cut out all animal products. He was warned he'd be weaker, wouldn't recover between workouts, and would get stress fractures and anemia. But he was eating more high-quality nutrients, getting maximum nutrition from a low number of calories. In my mind, anyone eating more high-quality nutrients, whether it involves dead animals or not, is going to be stronger than someone eating garbage. And another odd aspect of the book was the discussion about two of the ultra runners (Jenn and Billy) who tend to drink lots of beer and not worry about nutrition, but still post rockin' times.
Anyway, McDougall talks about how these great runners (vegetarians) get maximum nutrition from a lower number of calories, meaning that their bodies don't have to process the extra bulk. He also mentioned how a vegetarian diet has all the amino acids and can be digested faster. Again, no cites or anything to support this, but seems logical and correct.
One point McDougall made was that "one in seven cancer deaths is caused by excess body fat" and he makes the deduction that if you cut the fat, you cut your cancer risk. Just reading that as a lawyer makes me wonder. How is it logical to conclude that less fat equals less cancer RISK, when the stat on which it is based relates to cancer DEATH? The same goes with McDougall's stat that heavier people are more likely to die from ten types of cancer. Well, first, I'd rather just not get cancer in the first place. And second, what about the other x hundred types of cancer? It just doesn't seem like compelling reasoning to me. Sure, there are plenty of reasons to aim for a healthy weight. And sure, there's plenty of research suggesting that a vegan diet is healthier and reduces cancer risk, but at the same time, it's clearly not for everyone and of course there's also research indicating the opposite I'm sure.
I think most of life is trade-offs. If you want to qualify for Boston, you have to sacrifice some time to train, time during which you could do something else if you weren't training. If you want to be happily married to the man of your dreams, you're going to have to live with his imperfections -- even if they're minor, having to put down the toilet seat is something you might have to do to have the awesome companionship. If you want to eat something really unhealthy all the time, you might have to adjust the rest of what you eat, exercise more, or gain weight. One of the most beneficial things I learned in baby lawyer training involved an exercise in time management. The guy told us to make a grid showing things we have to do v. things we choose to do v. things we'd like to do. After the grids were made, the bottom line came out that there is only one thing we have to do: sleep. If you don't choose to sleep, your body will sleep involuntarily. Everything else, eating, paying bills, billing hours, watching your kids, making your bed, exercising, is a choice. And much of what we choose to do, driving in cars, raising our heart rates with exercise, eating animal products, involves risk, but we're free to decide if it's worth the risk.
Would I move from being a vegetarian to being a vegan if I could guarantee I wouldn't get cancer? I don't know. If I had a huge family history of cancer, it might make that choice more likely. Or if I didn't love cheese. But I think McDougall's discussion of vegetarianism should be recast as a discussion of veganism, or at least near-veganism.
It's hard for me to have an opinion really on the book's vegetarian discussion. Again, anecdotal data is never super-reliable, and the book doesn't seem to worry about that (with regard to barefoot running or a vegetarian diet, but that's not the book's purpose (it's not a journal article), so that's okay). I would guess eating any healthy diet is going to be better than eating any unhealthy diet, regardless of whether there's meat in either diet.
I would guess the best thing you can do for your running is to be a healthy eater. Of course, I think the best thing you can do for your soul is to be a vegetarian! But realistically, I doubt there's a huge difference in performance between vegetarians and omnivores. If there was, I think we'd know it. Runner's World wouldn't feature recipes including meat if all the people winning marathons were vegetarians. And all the people competing to win marathons would probably also go vegetarian to get that extra edge (if it exists). It's the same logic I have for the barefoot running discussion -- if it's so great and makes runners so much more successful, why isn't the elite group of runners comprised solely of barefoot vegetarians? Bottom line is that different things work for different people, and some trade-offs are worth it and some aren't.
I didn't start running until after I became a vegetarian, but I was a very unhealthy vegetarian when I first started running. My running improved the most when three major things happened. First, I started cross-training, which meant I built more muscle and lost some fat. My weight didn't change very much but my body shape did. My running times got substantially better. Second, about a year later, I became a healthy vegetarian. And third, right after becoming a healthy vegetarian (cause and effect!), I lost some weight. My times have continued to improve, but I can't compare my running to when I ate meat, so it's impossible to say if I would further improve or get worse.
So my point is that McDougall's vegetarian discussion is too anecdotal for my liking, but I think being vegetarian works best for me -- primarily mentally/emotionally, but likely also physically.
As I've explained, I've been a vegetarian since 2001 but made the switch for moral reasons instead of any health reasons.
Things I remember from the book: McDougall says that a vegetarian diet has "worked for history's greatest runners," and mentions how one great present-day ultrarunner decided to adopt it based on looking at results first, science later.
There's discussion about how that guy cut down white flour and sugar, and cut out all animal products. He was warned he'd be weaker, wouldn't recover between workouts, and would get stress fractures and anemia. But he was eating more high-quality nutrients, getting maximum nutrition from a low number of calories. In my mind, anyone eating more high-quality nutrients, whether it involves dead animals or not, is going to be stronger than someone eating garbage. And another odd aspect of the book was the discussion about two of the ultra runners (Jenn and Billy) who tend to drink lots of beer and not worry about nutrition, but still post rockin' times.
Anyway, McDougall talks about how these great runners (vegetarians) get maximum nutrition from a lower number of calories, meaning that their bodies don't have to process the extra bulk. He also mentioned how a vegetarian diet has all the amino acids and can be digested faster. Again, no cites or anything to support this, but seems logical and correct.
One point McDougall made was that "one in seven cancer deaths is caused by excess body fat" and he makes the deduction that if you cut the fat, you cut your cancer risk. Just reading that as a lawyer makes me wonder. How is it logical to conclude that less fat equals less cancer RISK, when the stat on which it is based relates to cancer DEATH? The same goes with McDougall's stat that heavier people are more likely to die from ten types of cancer. Well, first, I'd rather just not get cancer in the first place. And second, what about the other x hundred types of cancer? It just doesn't seem like compelling reasoning to me. Sure, there are plenty of reasons to aim for a healthy weight. And sure, there's plenty of research suggesting that a vegan diet is healthier and reduces cancer risk, but at the same time, it's clearly not for everyone and of course there's also research indicating the opposite I'm sure.
I think most of life is trade-offs. If you want to qualify for Boston, you have to sacrifice some time to train, time during which you could do something else if you weren't training. If you want to be happily married to the man of your dreams, you're going to have to live with his imperfections -- even if they're minor, having to put down the toilet seat is something you might have to do to have the awesome companionship. If you want to eat something really unhealthy all the time, you might have to adjust the rest of what you eat, exercise more, or gain weight. One of the most beneficial things I learned in baby lawyer training involved an exercise in time management. The guy told us to make a grid showing things we have to do v. things we choose to do v. things we'd like to do. After the grids were made, the bottom line came out that there is only one thing we have to do: sleep. If you don't choose to sleep, your body will sleep involuntarily. Everything else, eating, paying bills, billing hours, watching your kids, making your bed, exercising, is a choice. And much of what we choose to do, driving in cars, raising our heart rates with exercise, eating animal products, involves risk, but we're free to decide if it's worth the risk.
Would I move from being a vegetarian to being a vegan if I could guarantee I wouldn't get cancer? I don't know. If I had a huge family history of cancer, it might make that choice more likely. Or if I didn't love cheese. But I think McDougall's discussion of vegetarianism should be recast as a discussion of veganism, or at least near-veganism.
It's hard for me to have an opinion really on the book's vegetarian discussion. Again, anecdotal data is never super-reliable, and the book doesn't seem to worry about that (with regard to barefoot running or a vegetarian diet, but that's not the book's purpose (it's not a journal article), so that's okay). I would guess eating any healthy diet is going to be better than eating any unhealthy diet, regardless of whether there's meat in either diet.
I would guess the best thing you can do for your running is to be a healthy eater. Of course, I think the best thing you can do for your soul is to be a vegetarian! But realistically, I doubt there's a huge difference in performance between vegetarians and omnivores. If there was, I think we'd know it. Runner's World wouldn't feature recipes including meat if all the people winning marathons were vegetarians. And all the people competing to win marathons would probably also go vegetarian to get that extra edge (if it exists). It's the same logic I have for the barefoot running discussion -- if it's so great and makes runners so much more successful, why isn't the elite group of runners comprised solely of barefoot vegetarians? Bottom line is that different things work for different people, and some trade-offs are worth it and some aren't.
I didn't start running until after I became a vegetarian, but I was a very unhealthy vegetarian when I first started running. My running improved the most when three major things happened. First, I started cross-training, which meant I built more muscle and lost some fat. My weight didn't change very much but my body shape did. My running times got substantially better. Second, about a year later, I became a healthy vegetarian. And third, right after becoming a healthy vegetarian (cause and effect!), I lost some weight. My times have continued to improve, but I can't compare my running to when I ate meat, so it's impossible to say if I would further improve or get worse.
So my point is that McDougall's vegetarian discussion is too anecdotal for my liking, but I think being vegetarian works best for me -- primarily mentally/emotionally, but likely also physically.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Born to Run Review: Barefoot Running
When I went home for Christmas, I started reading Born to Run by Christopher McDougall, which I've posted about before here (along with some of my other current reads at the time). I posted a brief overview of it there. Going in, I kind of knew it was a book kind of about barefoot running, but as of Chapter 22 (where I was when I last posted about it (at that last link)), there really hadn't been much of anything said about it. Yes, it was clear that the people in this Indian tribe don't wear running shoes, but it focused more on their remarkable endurance rather than anything specific about what they wore on their feet.
Well, apparently I was right on the cusp of the big barefoot discussion (though to me, it wasn't the overwhelming theme of the book). There's lots of stuff about how we weren't born wearing shoes and how well our feet and bodies adapt to running long distances over uneven terrain. He mentions that humans are "the only tailless running biped." It was interesting but I'm not converted. I've never tried running barefoot (or with Vibrams), but I don't think it's really an option for me for several reasons.
First, I run with a group and follow the group routes (which I do not choose) and those are run 100% on streets or paved trails, so running in the grass (which is how barefoot running should be done apparently, there's no claim we were born to run barefoot on asphalt and concrete) is not a workable option for me. I suppose there are some places I could run in the grass or on the dirt right next to the running trail, but I'm guessing I'd step in dog $hit within a mile -- both the lake and the trail that have grassy areas next to the path where people run are popular dog-walking spots. To run in the grass alongside the dark streets where I run would invite more dog $hit, or sprinkler heads, or newspapers, or curbs, and about a million other perils -- just no idea really how or where I'd do it most of the time.
Second, I don't seem to be particularly injury prone while wearing shoes. The author says running shoes work well for people with good form but make people with poor form have even worse form, primarily in the sense of heel strike. I definitely do not have good form, but I'm not a horrible heel-striker either most of the time. I've definitely had a few years where I've had injuries, but very few have put me out-of-commission for very long, some (like the sprained ankles) would have happened with or without shoes, and I don't think I've had more injuries than a normal runner. There are always an ongoing series of tight muscles, aches and pains, and I feel like maybe 1/3 of the time, something is nagging a bit and I watch it to see if it turns into an actual injury (and try to ice and stretch if it's isolated), but for the most part, it never does. I think that comes with running. I could certainly sit on my couch pain-free, but that would lead to another series of problems. Running doesn't seem to beat me up too much. My chronology of injuries impacting my running (first comprehensive list I've maybe made ever of these):
Fourth, the "more natural" theory doesn't really matter to me. We're not born wearing clothes, but I put them on when I'm cold. I also tend to think these elites who primarily grow up running without shoes according to the book would choose to wear shoes in races just for sponsorships or some other unspecified reason. Like if Kenyans run barefoot growing up, why do some of those same Kenyans now choose to wear shoes to race? Honestly, I put a lot of credence in the fact that so many people wear running shoes. All the data used in the book about random programs or people here or there who don't wear shoes aren't statistically significant when looking at the big picture -- track meets all over the country at various levels, marathons all over the country, etc. Maybe if I ran in the outback on soft grass, barefoot would be the way to go, but for places and events that I run, I don't see those who are most successful choosing to forgo shoes. And I really think they would if that minimized their injuries or could make them get faster.
Fifth, I value the comfort of running shoes. The author basically admits that running shoes make bad form more comfortable and it feels like you're running on cushions. I don't like pain, and I don't want running to be painful. Even if my shoes encourage my poor form, it doesn't seem to be hurting me. I finished a 15k in July (the day I got the flat tire) and in my finish line photos, I was right next to a guy who was running in Vibrams. We'd talked a bit over the last mile and I could tell how much he was hurting. Well, looking at the photos, his form was absolutely atrocious and he's pretty much grimacing with every step. I'm not certain at all that he would not have been in pain if he'd been in shoes, but I am pretty certain I'd be hurting too if my feet were slapping the pavement the way his were.
And finally, I'm not convinced barefoot runners really have fewer injuries. I've yet to run with someone who completes an entire marathon training season injury-free not wearing shoes.
So I'll keep my shoes on. I'll replace them whenever I think it's needed. I'll probably still chuckle at how silly the barefoot shoes look (but I'm sure others chuckle at my mismatched outfits, my bad form, whatever). But I'm certainly not one to give advice to anyone else -- if barefoot shoes seem to work for you, go for it! I'm very live-and-let-live about that stuff and it has no impact on me, so I couldn't care less. But I think for right now, shoes are the right choice for me. Who's to say whether that will still be true a few years from now, but for now, shoes have been good and are working well for me.
As for the Born to Run discussion of my thoughts on the book's point about why a vegetarian diet has worked best for history's greatest runners (as a vegetarian runner, the subject is near and dear to my heart), I'll do a separate post on that hopefully in the next couple days.
Well, apparently I was right on the cusp of the big barefoot discussion (though to me, it wasn't the overwhelming theme of the book). There's lots of stuff about how we weren't born wearing shoes and how well our feet and bodies adapt to running long distances over uneven terrain. He mentions that humans are "the only tailless running biped." It was interesting but I'm not converted. I've never tried running barefoot (or with Vibrams), but I don't think it's really an option for me for several reasons.
First, I run with a group and follow the group routes (which I do not choose) and those are run 100% on streets or paved trails, so running in the grass (which is how barefoot running should be done apparently, there's no claim we were born to run barefoot on asphalt and concrete) is not a workable option for me. I suppose there are some places I could run in the grass or on the dirt right next to the running trail, but I'm guessing I'd step in dog $hit within a mile -- both the lake and the trail that have grassy areas next to the path where people run are popular dog-walking spots. To run in the grass alongside the dark streets where I run would invite more dog $hit, or sprinkler heads, or newspapers, or curbs, and about a million other perils -- just no idea really how or where I'd do it most of the time.
Second, I don't seem to be particularly injury prone while wearing shoes. The author says running shoes work well for people with good form but make people with poor form have even worse form, primarily in the sense of heel strike. I definitely do not have good form, but I'm not a horrible heel-striker either most of the time. I've definitely had a few years where I've had injuries, but very few have put me out-of-commission for very long, some (like the sprained ankles) would have happened with or without shoes, and I don't think I've had more injuries than a normal runner. There are always an ongoing series of tight muscles, aches and pains, and I feel like maybe 1/3 of the time, something is nagging a bit and I watch it to see if it turns into an actual injury (and try to ice and stretch if it's isolated), but for the most part, it never does. I think that comes with running. I could certainly sit on my couch pain-free, but that would lead to another series of problems. Running doesn't seem to beat me up too much. My chronology of injuries impacting my running (first comprehensive list I've maybe made ever of these):
- In 05, I pulled a groin/hamstring muscle (not while running) less than a month before the NY marathon (but I was still able to run it). Far and away the most serious injury I've ever had. I ran NY, ran a couple more disastrous races before the end of the year, and then did not walk normally for months. Running was out of the question. Got back into it in the spring of 06, and was completely healed by then. But seriously, several months of zero running (and minimal walking) was necessary. The most amusing part of this, I met my now in-laws for the first time in January 2006. I was still injured but never discussed with them. When I met them for the second time (months later, after I'd healed), my now mother-in-law exclaimed that she'd thought I was disabled! Oh my. It was definitely a bad time for my running!
- In 07, I strained my upper gastrocnemius (a calf muscle) about a week before Chicago (still able to run it), but was fine shortly afterward. My doc wanted me to wear a calf compression sleeve thing during the race, but I'd only run about 3 or so marathons by that point and I was too nervous about trying anything new on race day, so I declined. A week or so off after the marathon was all I needed to recover.
- In 08, I tripped on a pothole and sprained an ankle mildly. On crutches for a day, running again about a week later. Felt like it was easily strained when I stepped at a weird ankle for a couple months, but it didn't get seriously injured again.
- In 09, I had some pain on the outside of one of my feet and my doc told me it was my peroneus longus tendon that was inflamed (he recommended orthotics, I never got them, it went away on its own and I also got new shoes around that time).
- At the very end of 09 (12/29), I fell (at the SAME intersection as in 08, but a different part of it) again and sprained my other ankle pretty severely. Crutches for several days, insane swelling. No running at all until 1/11/10 (did a long walk on 1/10 to make sure it would hold up).
- In 10, it was the plantar's (see below). Also resolved, all while wearing shoes.
- Also in 10, I wiped out at work (fell down the stairs) and twisted my ankle, but it was mild and I was running two days later. I was wearing flats at the time, but blame my overloaded arms and not watching my step.
Fourth, the "more natural" theory doesn't really matter to me. We're not born wearing clothes, but I put them on when I'm cold. I also tend to think these elites who primarily grow up running without shoes according to the book would choose to wear shoes in races just for sponsorships or some other unspecified reason. Like if Kenyans run barefoot growing up, why do some of those same Kenyans now choose to wear shoes to race? Honestly, I put a lot of credence in the fact that so many people wear running shoes. All the data used in the book about random programs or people here or there who don't wear shoes aren't statistically significant when looking at the big picture -- track meets all over the country at various levels, marathons all over the country, etc. Maybe if I ran in the outback on soft grass, barefoot would be the way to go, but for places and events that I run, I don't see those who are most successful choosing to forgo shoes. And I really think they would if that minimized their injuries or could make them get faster.
Fifth, I value the comfort of running shoes. The author basically admits that running shoes make bad form more comfortable and it feels like you're running on cushions. I don't like pain, and I don't want running to be painful. Even if my shoes encourage my poor form, it doesn't seem to be hurting me. I finished a 15k in July (the day I got the flat tire) and in my finish line photos, I was right next to a guy who was running in Vibrams. We'd talked a bit over the last mile and I could tell how much he was hurting. Well, looking at the photos, his form was absolutely atrocious and he's pretty much grimacing with every step. I'm not certain at all that he would not have been in pain if he'd been in shoes, but I am pretty certain I'd be hurting too if my feet were slapping the pavement the way his were.
And finally, I'm not convinced barefoot runners really have fewer injuries. I've yet to run with someone who completes an entire marathon training season injury-free not wearing shoes.
So I'll keep my shoes on. I'll replace them whenever I think it's needed. I'll probably still chuckle at how silly the barefoot shoes look (but I'm sure others chuckle at my mismatched outfits, my bad form, whatever). But I'm certainly not one to give advice to anyone else -- if barefoot shoes seem to work for you, go for it! I'm very live-and-let-live about that stuff and it has no impact on me, so I couldn't care less. But I think for right now, shoes are the right choice for me. Who's to say whether that will still be true a few years from now, but for now, shoes have been good and are working well for me.
As for the Born to Run discussion of my thoughts on the book's point about why a vegetarian diet has worked best for history's greatest runners (as a vegetarian runner, the subject is near and dear to my heart), I'll do a separate post on that hopefully in the next couple days.
Monday, December 27, 2010
Reading List
Made it back to Dallas and already miss things I'd forgotten that I missed about home. The trip was so wonderful. I have several Reverb posts in the works and will probably just publish them as I finish them, like Bella does, instead of doing one long post with several. I'm hung up on the one doing a letter to myself in 5 years, which is fun but time-consuming!
I can't post much about running. I did 8 treadmill miles at my brother's gym on Monday last week. Then 9.3 at my folks' gym on Wed., then 8.1 at their gym on Thurs, and I got a blister on the arch of my right foot, and that put an end to the running (though I was going to take off on Fri and Sat anyway). But yesterday instead of running, I just did some biking and then some lazy exercises and weights over the course of a couple hours at the gym -- don't think I even broke a sweat.
The blister happened because I was wearing old shoes. Hubby and I decided at one point to leave older running shoes at houses that we frequently visit. The shoes I have up north are great for a few miles, but don't hold up well with some more miles over a few days. I could feel the blister starting to form on my foot, so I called it quits on Thursday on the treadmill. When I got home, I was afraid to look at it -- bigger than I expected, about nickel-sized. I put a blister band-aid on it and haven't taken it off yet. It's on my right foot at the part of the arch nearing my toes. It doesn't hurt anymore, but I've laid off the running just to be safe.
The work-out part of being home was fun. I was at the gym each of the four days I went for more than 2 hours each time. I'll admit that on two of the days, I spent an hour on the bike each day and that barely counted as working out. I had a book I was reading and wanted to finish it, so I just set the bike at level 6 and pedalled leisurely, usually my rpms seemed to be in the low 60s. But when I got timed out by the bike after an hour on Thursday, I had less than 3 pages left of my book, so I kind of stood by the bike, leaning over the book on the seat and stretching. Reading and working out was a very fun change of pace for me!
So I thought it might be fun to post about what I'm reading or just finished over break (one I had to read, two I choose to read):
Catching Fire by Suzanne Collins. Had to read for book club and found out on the plane that it was the second book in a trilogy, and of course I haven't read the first. The book is kind of teen-fiction style and it was a quick and interesting read, but I felt somewhat lost and then was disappointed by the ending (basically, if I want closure, I'll have to read the third book). It's set in the future and is the story about this young woman who has to fight in something like a survival Olympics to the death.
Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World by Liaquat Ahamed. My choice and I'm only about 1/3 of the way into it. Very interesting! It's described as an economic history (non-fiction), so far largely about what led to the failures of the European central banking systems in the early 1900s and the perils of the gold standard. Pretty much can't wait to get back to reading it!
Born to Run: A Hidden Tribe, Superathletes, and the Greatest Race the World Has Never Seen by Christopher McDougall. Another fun non-fiction book. About the author's quest to resolve his own foot pain by studying the Tarahumara Indians and their ultra-running success. Includes some stories about races like the Leadville 100, where the Tarahumara competed, and then a race set up by the "Caballo Blanco" to pit the Tarahumara against elite ultra-runners on the Tarahumara's home turf.
So those are the pages I'm currently turning.
I can't post much about running. I did 8 treadmill miles at my brother's gym on Monday last week. Then 9.3 at my folks' gym on Wed., then 8.1 at their gym on Thurs, and I got a blister on the arch of my right foot, and that put an end to the running (though I was going to take off on Fri and Sat anyway). But yesterday instead of running, I just did some biking and then some lazy exercises and weights over the course of a couple hours at the gym -- don't think I even broke a sweat.
The blister happened because I was wearing old shoes. Hubby and I decided at one point to leave older running shoes at houses that we frequently visit. The shoes I have up north are great for a few miles, but don't hold up well with some more miles over a few days. I could feel the blister starting to form on my foot, so I called it quits on Thursday on the treadmill. When I got home, I was afraid to look at it -- bigger than I expected, about nickel-sized. I put a blister band-aid on it and haven't taken it off yet. It's on my right foot at the part of the arch nearing my toes. It doesn't hurt anymore, but I've laid off the running just to be safe.
The work-out part of being home was fun. I was at the gym each of the four days I went for more than 2 hours each time. I'll admit that on two of the days, I spent an hour on the bike each day and that barely counted as working out. I had a book I was reading and wanted to finish it, so I just set the bike at level 6 and pedalled leisurely, usually my rpms seemed to be in the low 60s. But when I got timed out by the bike after an hour on Thursday, I had less than 3 pages left of my book, so I kind of stood by the bike, leaning over the book on the seat and stretching. Reading and working out was a very fun change of pace for me!
So I thought it might be fun to post about what I'm reading or just finished over break (one I had to read, two I choose to read):
Catching Fire by Suzanne Collins. Had to read for book club and found out on the plane that it was the second book in a trilogy, and of course I haven't read the first. The book is kind of teen-fiction style and it was a quick and interesting read, but I felt somewhat lost and then was disappointed by the ending (basically, if I want closure, I'll have to read the third book). It's set in the future and is the story about this young woman who has to fight in something like a survival Olympics to the death.
Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World by Liaquat Ahamed. My choice and I'm only about 1/3 of the way into it. Very interesting! It's described as an economic history (non-fiction), so far largely about what led to the failures of the European central banking systems in the early 1900s and the perils of the gold standard. Pretty much can't wait to get back to reading it!
Born to Run: A Hidden Tribe, Superathletes, and the Greatest Race the World Has Never Seen by Christopher McDougall. Another fun non-fiction book. About the author's quest to resolve his own foot pain by studying the Tarahumara Indians and their ultra-running success. Includes some stories about races like the Leadville 100, where the Tarahumara competed, and then a race set up by the "Caballo Blanco" to pit the Tarahumara against elite ultra-runners on the Tarahumara's home turf.
So those are the pages I'm currently turning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)