Jan

27

Opinions and a Letter

Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

I have not yet mentioned the 2010 Tournament of Books because I had to wait until I wasn’t totally and completely humiliated.  When the short list came out a little while ago, I was sure I’d do well.  I felt like I’d had a good reading year, especially as far as 2009 published books went.  With The Children’s Book, Sag Harbor, The Little Stranger, and others, surely I would be in the clear.  But no.  Not one of them–some of the best books I read last year–made the short list.  All of them would have made excellent contenders, so I admit to being annoyed.

I can’t tell if the short list is weighted in favor of smaller books, as it often is.  Many of them I knew hardly anything about.  I know it’s good to get the little guy in there, but if you’re going to include the big guy, too, couldn’t we have gone with Sarah Waters over Richard Russo or Barbara Kingsolver?  And isn’t it like illegal to have a big book-club-ish book on there like The Help?

Anyway.  Now I can say I have officially read 1, yes count it, 1 book on the short list.  It is Logicomix: An Epic Search for Truth, which was the easiest one to try first.  At the library, #1 on the reserve list, and it’s a graphic novel, which makes for a quicker read, if a different one.  I used to read a lot more graphic novels than I do now, I would like to change that and this book reminded me why.  I liked Logicomix quite a lot.  The graphic novel format worked in some ways, in others it kept the story a bit more stilted than I would have liked.  The book is about logicians, and focuses on Bertrand Russell as the narrator through early 20th century progress in math and logic.

The illustrated format allows for a lot of help in explaining some of the stranger and more complicated issues, and when you do see just how technical and crazy the symbology is, their approach makes a lot of sense.  The other thing I thought they did well was their overall arc.  They actually show the authors explaining the story to their logic/math consultant, complete with explanations and debates on their themes and issues.  It really allows you to see things in a more thorough light, and lets the authors throw critiques at themselves before you can.

My one complaint was that the connection between logic and life is one of their overall ideas but gets little actual attention.  I wanted more connections in their arguments a lot of the time.  This may be because I teach a form of logic on a regular basis but have no formal training in it.  It’s also interesting looking back at these developments–the massive shift in thinking that occurs over the course of the story puts math and logic in their current position, which I found to be fairly rational and obvious even though it was very novel.  It makes me wonder how much of the changes have infiltrated into our daily thinking and how much of it is just my particular frame of mind.

The book did give me motivation to read my nonfiction book on the Enigma machines from WWII, which apparently was one of the first big applications of logic.

I have 1 more shortlist book on the Kindle waiting to be read, 3 on hold at the library, and 1 in paperback waiting to be read.  Beyond that, who’s to say.  There are some I’d like to read but would have to buy because they’re not at the library–the major flaw in a system that promotes books from smaller publishers.  And there are plenty I’m not really interested in.  I can say I’m not as interested in this year’s tournament as last year.  McCann and Mantel (I’m only #4 on the list for Mantel!!) are the two big heavyweights and I haven’t read either book yet so I’m not sure where I’ll fall.

In other reading news, I have run out of library books.  !!!!  This is particularly shocking because I had so very many only a little while ago.  I finally got to two that had been sitting around patiently waiting for me to finish The Quincunx.  First there was Bury Me Deep by Megan Abbott, a noir-ish book set in the 30’s and based loosely on a real incident.  The mystery blog I read had been singing its praises so regularly that I finally caved, even though it didn’t look like my style.  I did like it.  The plot was very old potboiler kind of stuff, a bit reminiscent of James M. Cain, but sexier and a bit looser in style.  I think I am going to try and find some of her older stuff, which seems to be in the same vein.

Then there was In the Drink by Kate Christensen.  If I were to write that book a letter, it would go something like this.

Dear In the Drink,

I do not remember where I saw Kate Christensen’s name, but I do remember that I picked you out of all her books as the one to read first.  I don’t know what I was thinking at the time because as I looked you over I realized that you contain almost every annoying book quality I hate.  You are set in New York in the 90’s, you follow a young apparently-smart-but-not-smart-enough-to-get-it-together 20-something, you involve a quirky job, you involve quirky characters, your protagonist is a drunk, the protagonist’s mother is a strict Freudian psychologist, etc.  I almost did not pick you up.  But then I ran out of books.  Lucky for you, Kate Christensen is a good writer if not my favorite in terms of plot or subject choices.  And often her wit felt like more than her narrator was capable of, but I will forgive her.  I made it through with only a few periods of annoyance, and it was actually a nice quick jaunt.  So thanks.  Though I’m not really sorry about anything I said about you.  Maybe I will read another one of her books.

Oh, and I am worried I am just not that interested in John Irving’s new book.  He is getting all literary on me in the early chapters and I am not sure I have the patience.  Also, I cannot find my copy of Zeitoun!  Tragedy!


Comments

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Speak your mind