What's your favorite book?

[Red Bird]

Dick Francis: (The one who died had.) Even though all his stories had a different "Hero" and cast, all his stories involvedthe horse racing scene in England. He was outstanding in character developement..he did good people! Along with an interesting main plot.
Now, him I liked.

[liverbird]

Not a great book but I just read "The Plot against America" by Phillip Roth. Part imagined history, part remembrance of a vanished world, it is splendidly written.

[usscouse]

Got some good news today from England, not here.

My sig used to be: "You are who you pretend to be." Kurt Vonnegut Jnr

Now he's written a new book at the age of 83 (There's hope for me yet!)
Guess he's not a fan of GWB.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4724314.stm

[Twenty26Six]

Got some good news today from England, not here.

My sig used to be: "You are who you pretend to be." Kurt Vonnegut Jnr

Now he's written a new book at the age of 83 (There's hope for me yet!)
Guess he's not a fan of GWB.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4724314.stm

The old coot has gotten a bit [too] cynical, yea?

[liverbird]

Got some good news today from England, not here.

My sig used to be: "You are who you pretend to be." Kurt Vonnegut Jnr

Now he's written a new book at the age of 83 (There's hope for me yet!)
Guess he's not a fan of GWB.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4724314.stm

Cat's Cradle is my Vonnegut fave.

[usscouse]

The old coot has gotten a bit [too] cynical, yea?
I don't understand the question....:)


I think one needs a "healthy" dose of cynisism to counter the spin and outright lies they're (Them) feeding the public daily.

[Twenty26Six]

I don't understand the question....:)


I think one needs a "healthy" dose of cynisism to counter the spin and outright lies they're (Them) feeding the public daily.

Well, when you're rambling on about how you wish you were dead, yadda yadda. Sounds too much like whining.

[liverbird]

Am reading 1776 by David McCollough. Good popular synthesis on the first year of our war to rid ourselves of foreign hereditary dictators.:eek:

[usscouse]

Am reading 1776 by David McCollough. Good popular synthesis on the first year of our war to rid ourselves of foreign hereditary dictators.:eek:Some people just don't know their place. English colonialists under English law........

Look at us now as we come 2 hundred and a few years later, close to the turn of a full circle.
King George W rules, takes away our hard earned freedoms, taxes the lower earners to give to the rich.
Uses military force on his own subjects and sends a crusade to the promised land.
We've come a long way baby..:rolleyes: [end of rant]

Let's know what the book is like. I enjoyed his "John Adams" even though it should have been titled "St. John of Adams."

[DeGregorus]

Tough one. I don't know if I could pick a favorite. There are some I read over & over though. Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess.
I'm picky about mysteries. I'll read stuff by Ian Rankin and Tony Hillerman.
Hillerman's good about weaving Navajo mythology into his stories.

If you find a copy of Muriel Spark's ghost stories, do read. The term ghost story should be used liberally here.

For non fiction: "J.R.R. Tolkein and C.S. Lewis, the story of a friendship" by Collin Duriez. The two really encouraged each others writing.
And surprise, surprise, it was Tolkein who aided in Lewis's conversion from agnositicsm to Christianity.

[liverbird]

Some people just don't know their place. English colonialists under English law........

Look at us now as we come 2 hundred and a few years later, close to the turn of a full circle.
King George W rules, takes away our hard earned freedoms, taxes the lower earners to give to the rich.
Uses military force on his own subjects and sends a crusade to the promised land.
We've come a long way baby..:rolleyes: [end of rant]

Let's know what the book is like. I enjoyed his "John Adams" even though it should have been titled "St. John of Adams."

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Benjamin Franklin

They knew what they were fighting for, unfortunately too many of us have forgotten!

[Twenty26Six]

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Benjamin Franklin

They knew what they were fighting for, unfortunately too many of us have forgotten!

I agree with that sentiment, but frankly convictions are much easier to rationalize, understand and fight for... when you are white, educated and at least middle class. The above means nothing for anyone that wasn't born into a developed country.

I don't mean this as disrespect to your statements, but one needs to understand the "evolution" of North America is down more to great timing and money than it is great "revolutionary" thought.

Sorry OT :o , bash me via PM if necessary.

[liverbird]

I agree with that sentiment, but frankly convictions are much easier to rationalize, understand and fight for... when you are white, educated and at least middle class. The above means nothing for anyone that wasn't born into a developed country.

I don't mean this as disrespect to your statements, but one needs to understand the "evolution" of North America is down more to great timing and money than it is great "revolutionary" thought.

Sorry OT :o , bash me via PM if necessary.

No. The people who led the American Revolution were white men, many of whom were perfectly comfortable treating other men as chattel, some even used women held in bondage as sexual releases.All of them would not have thought of women as having the capacity to think for themselves. However, in those convictions they weren't any different than ruling elites of men in Asian or African societies in the 18th century of the Christian era.

It wasn't a matter of timing so much as having a lot of natural resources that were easily stolen from those who had them, combined with a temperate climate and an evolving receptivity to labor sources different then themselves that made North america. The founders did have "enlightened" ideas about natural law, liberty for citizens as they defined citizens, and a representative republic that were forward looking for that period.

But yes they certainly weren't saints, or "enlightened" by our current standards.

[Twenty26Six]

I mean timing in the sense that throughout most of the 17th/18th centuries in Europe there was a great turning of attention to philosophy as applied to government. The enlightenment played a huge part. Bayle, Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau all contributed ideas through text that without a doubt had to have inspired the American intellectual elite.

That's the thing, I know they weren't Saints. But in a broader context [seen from studying revolution, even up to the 20th century] you see that the masses are usually pawns for the disgruntled upper-middle class to manipulate into action.

I assume then and now about the same percentage of the population could clearly sit down and understand all of the concepts involved in the Revolution.

But you just can't rule out great timing. I don't want to go into all the factors but to think that American agency was the supreme force is, I think wrong. We got a lot of help from others, as well as circumstance.

Since this is a book thread and I have taken us into the Off-Topic Forest, I'll recommend I book I am about to investigate if I can find anything on it today.

The Historical and Critical Dictionary by Pierre Bayle (1697)

[liverbird]

I mean timing in the sense that throughout most of the 17th/18th centuries in Europe there was a great turning of attention to philosophy as applied to government. The enlightenment played a huge part. Bayle, Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau all contributed ideas through text that without a doubt had to have inspired the American intellectual elite.

That's the thing, I know they weren't Saints. But in a broader context [seen from studying revolution, even up to the 20th century] you see that the masses are usually pawns for the disgruntled upper-middle class to manipulate into action.

I assume then and now about the same percentage of the population could clearly sit down and understand all of the concepts involved in the Revolution.

But you just can't rule out great timing. I don't want to go into all the factors but to think that American agency was the supreme force is, I think wrong. We got a lot of help from others, as well as circumstance.

Since this is a book thread and I have taken us into the Off-Topic Forest, I'll recommend I book I am about to investigate if I can find anything on it today.

The Historical and Critical Dictionary by Pierre Bayle (1697)

Whether its revolution or reaction the masses are always simply pawns in the game of the ruling elite. That is the story of organized society beyond the simple hunting bands of nomads.

Of course, all of the ideas espoused by the Founders of the american republic can be traced to previous thinkers -- predominantly from England and France. Having slaves to do all your work really helps one to keep up with your reading.

Certainly, we had help from France and Spain who were not motivated by altruism or a desire to help establish a representative Republic in North America but rather by the opportunity to stick it to the "Auld Enemy" after losing the 7 Years War.

Finally, all of history is a matter of serendipity. The what ifs leap out at you as do the if onlys.

[usscouse]

Whether its revolution or reaction the masses are always simply pawns in the game of the ruling elite. That is the story of organized society beyond the simple hunting bands of nomads.

Of course, all of the ideas espoused by the Founders of the american republic can be traced to previous thinkers -- predominantly from England and France. Having slaves to do all your work really helps one to keep up with your reading.

Certainly, we had help from France and Spain who were not motivated by altruism or a desire to help establish a representative Republic in North America but rather by the opportunity to stick it to the "Auld Enemy" after losing the 7 Years War.

Finally, all of history is a matter of serendipity. The what ifs leap out at you as do the if onlys.Don't forget that there was a lot of sympathy for the rebel cause in England. One of the most outspoken was the Earl of Sandwich. Yes the man who gave his name to the Sandwich Isles, that later became Hawaii. (and the steak buttie..!) He had huge business interests in this country and an Independent America suited him, and other rich buggers in England.

As you pointed out, without the distactions of "work," TV and all, these people had time to read the classics...in ancient Greek. Today not many people read in their native language.
I had fun reading a translated Herodidous, Capain Whidbey's favourite book as he searched for the NW passage and mapped the Puget Sound.

[quentinc]

1984.

[Twenty26Six]

1984.

Made me ashamed to think I forgot how much I loved reading Brave New World by Aldous Huxley for the first time.

[liverbird]

Don't forget that there was a lot of sympathy for the rebel cause in England. One of the most outspoken was the Earl of Sandwich. Yes the man who gave his name to the Sandwich Isles, that later became Hawaii. (and the steak buttie..!) He had huge business interests in this country and an Independent America suited him, and other rich buggers in England.

As you pointed out, without the distactions of "work," TV and all, these people had time to read the classics...in ancient Greek. Today not many people read in their native language.
I had fun reading a translated Herodidous, Capain Whidbey's favourite book as he searched for the NW passage and mapped the Puget Sound.

Yes it was a vastly unpopular war in England and it was a disaster in result.

[zpjohnstone]

If I could only read one book the rest of my life it would be "If on a Winter's Night a Traveler" by Italo Calvino, but I would prefer Faulkner's complete ouvre.