Unofficial What are you Reading Thread?

[Richter]

The Stephen Mitchell.  Finished it last night, and now I'm chewing through the notes and commentary.

Today's office read is various essays by the Dalai Lama.

[Reeducation]

Guards! Guards! by Terry Pratchett.

[Cain]

Foucault, Freedom and Sovereignty by Sergei Prozorov (very good, must discuss this with you all later)
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L. Shirer
Alexander the Great: In his world by Carol G Thomas

[Manta Obscura]

The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L. Shirer

I read a chunk of that for my final Bachelor's thesis project. It's really good information, but a hell of a lot of it. The sections on the war crimes/crimes against humanity (and the tribunals against them) of Nazi scientists are especially interesting.

I'm curious, are you reading all three of those books at once for some type of writing project in which you connect them? It would be interesting to see the connections between Foucault, Alexander and the Third Reich.

[Cain]

I'm actually just reading for pleasure, although noting the connections could be interesting.

Shirer seems very interesting, and full of information, but I hear elements of his analysis (especially the idea that German history predestined the country with a totalitarian, anti-semitic government) are somewhat flawed, to say the least.  Still, he has a lot of first hand resources and documents to call upon, which more than makes up for any mistakes in his reasoning.

[Manta Obscura]

I'm actually just reading for pleasure, although noting the connections could be interesting.

Shirer seems very interesting, and full of information, but I hear elements of his analysis (especially the idea that German history predestined the country with a totalitarian, anti-semitic government) are somewhat flawed, to say the least.  Still, he has a lot of first hand resources and documents to call upon, which more than makes up for any mistakes in his reasoning.

Wow. I applaud your dedication, especially in reading just for pleasure. When I read just for pleasure, I tend to gravitate towards a lot of Cro-Magnon level lit although, I'll admit, I'm running out of excuses to do so now, what with all the e-book links that have been posted on here recently. At the very least I should pick up one of those David Icke books you mentioned in another thread, just for the lulz.

I had noticed with Shirer (and other intellectuals who do case studies of Reich III) that he subscribes to the "history is destiny" mentality. That seems to be the case with a lot of critics of various totalitarian, imperial or fascist regimes, seemingly moreso than any other type of state government. I cringe to think of all the half-baked treatises I had to read in my Philosophy and History Interplay classes which tried to connect the ravings of Caligula with the British imperial expansion. 

Anyway, you're right, at least Shirer includes some good sources and references, which is what the book is best for, IMO. Well that and the look of admiration/amorousness that it elicits from opposite-gendered History/Philosophy majors if they see you reading it in a university library. Given the right audience, Shirer and the Third Reich can be an excellent conversation starter or date motivator.

[Cain]

Well, I've read pretty much every Terry Pratchett, Robert Ludlum, JRR Tolkein, Robert Rankin etc book in existence, so really I have little choice in the matter!  Plus, I was, before I fell into politics, a history student, and always enjoyed history.  I have books on the Mongols, the Roman Empire, Renaissance Italy...I also studied Nazi Germany for two years, and consider it an area of particular expertise.  For some reason, probably the reason that teachers are smarter than politicians, the history of Nazi Germany is something that must be taught at schools here, and I was lucky enough to do it at A Level, where you actually get a taste of advanced historical methods.  In the aftermath of WWII, there was a particular paranoia that it "could happen here", and so they place a lot of emphasis on the rise of Hitler and the systems of control in Germany at the time.

There is a far easier link between British and Roman imperialism.  British upper class students studied Classical Literature.  I mean, if Homer isn't glorifying aggressive warfare, then no-one is.  And Tacitus, read by the wrong sort of personality (ie; the sort of one caused by incessant inbreeding and unjustied feelings of entitlement), well...

It seems to be a very good overview, as it were.  I'd really read more by Mason or Overy for deep analysis, but as to relating the events of what happened, I think few can be better than a journalist with his sort of access and first hand experience.

[Manta Obscura]

Well, I've read pretty much every Terry Pratchett, Robert Ludlum, JRR Tolkein, Robert Rankin etc book in existence, so really I have little choice in the matter!  Plus, I was, before I fell into politics, a history student, and always enjoyed history.  I have books on the Mongols, the Roman Empire, Renaissance Italy...I also studied Nazi Germany for two years, and consider it an area of particular expertise.  For some reason, probably the reason that teachers are smarter than politicians, the history of Nazi Germany is something that must be taught at schools here, and I was lucky enough to do it at A Level, where you actually get a taste of advanced historical methods.  In the aftermath of WWII, there was a particular paranoia that it "could happen here", and so they place a lot of emphasis on the rise of Hitler and the systems of control in Germany at the time.

There is a far easier link between British and Roman imperialism.  British upper class students studied Classical Literature.  I mean, if Homer isn't glorifying aggressive warfare, then no-one is.  And Tacitus, read by the wrong sort of personality (ie; the sort of one caused by incessant inbreeding and unjustied feelings of entitlement), well...

It seems to be a very good overview, as it were.  I'd really read more by Mason or Overy for deep analysis, but as to relating the events of what happened, I think few can be better than a journalist with his sort of access and first hand experience.

I had guessed from some of your posts that you were probably a history student at one time or another. Tangentially, it's interesting seeing the differences in educational background shape one's writing style.

We had a lot - and by a lot, I mean a shit ton - of exposure to Nazi Germany historical studies over here, too, except I think we whitewash the subject way too much (an unfortunate, almost criminal, aspect of American historical education). We got the whole "Rah rah rah, U.S. rocks, Nazis were all evil, every one of them!" message, or at least I did. Historical studies from 1776 through the Reagan administration are complete crap over here until you get to the collegiate level.

Example: the connections between Rome and British Imperialism. The sources that I was referring to, which I think were from one of the ancillary sources cited in Jackson J. Spielvogel's text on Nazi Germany, didn't have the intellectual fortitude to mention the impact of historical and philosophical literature on the British mindset. Instead, they tried to make wide-reaching, Rube Goldberg (sp?) domino-effect claims that Caligula/Nero/Diocletian's Policy X caused this, which caused that, which led to this, which led to that, ad infinitum until, voila! Direct causation. I sure as hell wish I could remember some of those causation-theory authors, if only to warn people away from them. I almost failed a few of my classes because I refused to read/believe/subscribe to the idea that vast historical milestones resulted from a single, butterfly-effect source, rather than being the coalescence of a variety of factors.

Wow . . . I got off on a bit of a rant there. Sorry about that.

Anywho, so as not to hijack or derail the conversation:

I'm now re-reading "Arcana Mundi" by an author whose name I can't recall at the moment. It's a really cool book that deals with how the Greeks and Romans practiced various aspects of magic/occultism, astrology, demonology, and alchemy.

[Cramulus]

I'm reading "The Minotaur Takes a Cigarette Break"


http://www.amazon.com/Minotaur-Takes-Cigarette-Break-Novel/dp/0312308922

It's fiction about the minotaur (the same one from greek legend, 5000 years later) living in the American South, working as a chef at a resteraunt. He's really lonely. It's a kind of sad book, but you end up really rooting for this pityable hulk.

The Minotaur is my favorite mythological character, and I've always enjoyed the juxtaposition of realism and the absurd. I am really enjoying this book.

[Mangrove]

Cram,

I can't remember the exact title of this book....it was 'the bear came over the mountain' or 'the bear came down from the mountain' (something like that). It was about a bear that could play the saxophone really well and left the wilds to move into the city and make it as a professional jazz player. I never read it but it sounds not unlike the Minotaur book.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I added "Memory" by Linda Nagata to my pile of books.

I will never finish any of them.

[Cain]

Blundering to Glory : Napoleon's Military Campaigns by Owen Connelly.

Probably the most obvious display of sour grapes ever.  Even in the introduction he acknowledges Napoleon was a military genius without equal at the time, which kind of undermines the whole thesis of the book,namely that Napoleon owed a lot more to luck and the incompetence of his enemies than anything else. 

[Cain]

Comandante Che: Guerrilla Soldier, Commander and Strategist 1956-1967 -

Basically a book about Che Guevara's contributions to guerrilla theory and practice.  Quite good.

Crepuscular Dawn by Paul Virilio and Sylvere Lotringer.  A book about warfare, architecture and time, mainly by the noted architect Paul Virilio.

[Sister_Gothique]

Well I gave up on Into The Looking Glass by Ringo a while back, due to it being a horrible read. I'm finding that I'm not a huge Ringo fan.

I finally got to finish the Transmet books (THANK YOU, ROGER! They were amazing!)

aaaannd now I'm continuing with the Black Company series (Glen Cook), this one being Shadows Linger. It was a bit harder to get into than the first. Whereas the first has the story presented from Croaker(the annalist/main character), the second switches off in a way I just don't find appealing....I understand it's to tie in/keep you informed about certain characters that broke off into a side-plot, but the manner in which they do it is a little off to me. I suppose we'll see. I loved the first one so much that I'll sure as hell give it a shot. At least it's not unbearable, like Ringo.

[Cain]

The Mind of the Terrorist - Jerrold Post

Started off well, with quite a bit of new information I did not know, but ended up doing the weary trail of the history of XYZ terrorist groups (well, a bit more than that.  I'll give him this much, with the PLO, ETA, the IRA, PKK, Tamil Tigers, Red Brigades, Red Army Faction, Shining Path, FARC, Hamas, Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda and lesser well known religious terrorists all getting a chapter, he is comprehensive).  Could have been better by focusing on the statements of such organizations, their structure, personalities and group psychology.  History is fun and all, but if you're going to call your book what you called it, well...

Also, David Liss - The Whiskey Rebels

Blurb time.  "Ethan Saunders, once among General Washington's most valued spies, now lives in disgrace, haunting the taverns of Philadelphia. An accusation of treason has long since cost him his reputation and his beloved fiance, Cynthia Pearson, but at his most desperate moment he is recruited for an unlikely task - finding Cynthia's missing husband. To help her, Saunders must serve his old enemy, Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton, who is engaged in a bitter power struggle with political rival Thomas Jefferson over the fragile young nation's first real financial institution: the Bank of the United States.

Meanwhile, Joan Maycott is a young woman married to another Revolutionary War veteran. With the new states unable to support their ex-soldiers, the Maycotts make a desperate gamble: trade the chance of future payment for the hope of a better life on the western Pennsylvania frontier. There, amid hardship and deprivation, they find unlikely friendship and a chance for prosperity with a new method of distilling whiskey. But on an isolated frontier, whiskey is more than a drink; it is currency and power, and the Maycotts' success attracts the brutal attention of men in Hamilton's orbit, men who threaten to destroy all Joan holds dear."