|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Jun 15, 2017 2:35:25 GMT
Machiavelli's The Prince. Tell me what you think. It's been a couple of years since I read it, but it was the most interesting nonfiction book I've read, hands down. I probably couldn't debate the finer points, but it's a fun book to discuss. |
|
tobias
Full Member
Posts: 823 
Likes: 393
|
Post by tobias on Jun 15, 2017 21:17:04 GMT
Machiavelli's The Prince. Tell me what you think. It's been a couple of years since I read it, but it was the most interesting nonfiction book I've read, hands down. I probably couldn't debate the finer points, but it's a fun book to discuss. Liked it a lot (just finished today). It's very unusual for such a prime work of philosophy to be so "worldy" (for lack of a better word). It didn't really conclude on its points (it has the plea to Leo X at the end about unifying Italy and ridding it of barbary but that's a practical conclusion, not one on his worldview) and worked very much on Macchiavelli's own observations and his knowledge of history. But that's excactly why I thought it was refreshing because it still manages to set forth interesting ideas but in a non-orthodox way. Apart from a few central quotes (mostly towards the beginning and the end of the book) there are no absolute convictions which leaves a lot of room to interpret what you read for yourself (transfering it to present day politics and ones personal life is really interesting). I also loved the allusions to history and all of the case studies as they did give a lot of insight and informed one about the historical context. I fear that I know much more about early 16th century italian politics than would ever be benefitial to me though. The reason why this book is still so relevant is perhaps excactly because it's not about politics today where you easily become burried in assumptions about some unshakable system and take things for given that really aren't (human rights for instance). It tracks what politics is really about: power. How 'bout you? |
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Jun 16, 2017 2:43:37 GMT
Tell me what you think. It's been a couple of years since I read it, but it was the most interesting nonfiction book I've read, hands down. I probably couldn't debate the finer points, but it's a fun book to discuss. Liked it a lot (just finished today). It's very unusual for such a prime work of philosophy to be so "worldy" (for lack of a better word). It didn't really conclude on its points (it has the plea to Leo X at the end about unifying Italy and ridding it of barbary but that's a practical conclusion, not one on his worldview) and worked very much on Macchiavelli's own observations and his knowledge of history. But that's excactly why I thought it was refreshing because it still manages to set forth interesting ideas but in a non-orthodox way. Apart from a few central quotes (mostly towards the beginning and the end of the book) there are no absolute convictions which leaves a lot of room to interpret what you read for yourself (transfering it to present day politics and ones personal life is really interesting). I also loved the allusions to history and all of the case studies as they did give a lot of insight and informed one about the historical context. I fear that I know much more about early 16th century italian politics than would ever be benefitial to me though. The reason why this book is still so relevant is perhaps excactly because it's not about politics today where you easily become burried in assumptions about some unshakable system and take things for given that really aren't (human rights for instance). It tracks what politics is really about: power. How 'bout you? As I said, it has been years. But I found Machiavelli's positions on how to win -- and more importantly, maintain -- power to be very interesting, and that's what keeps in my mind. Machiavelli's views on invading forces and how they will be viewed by the locals is something that American politicians and military leaders really should consult more often. I know a used book store a few blocks away that specializes in military strategy/history of all periods, I should go pick up a copy there. |
|
|
|
Post by bob-coppola on Jun 18, 2017 22:55:22 GMT
Stephen King's Revival and Truman Capote's In Cold Blood, I can never read just one thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on Jun 21, 2017 20:14:47 GMT
 Do not read this. It has nothing of interest for any of you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2017 17:17:43 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 14:24:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by idioticbunny on Jun 27, 2017 16:24:58 GMT
Currently reading "It" and I can't believe it's taken me so long. Only 150 pages in, roughly, and I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes my favorite book (then again, I take forever to finish books, so I haven't read many).
|
|
|
|
Post by moonman157 on Jun 28, 2017 0:56:52 GMT
David Lynch: The Man From Another Place by Dennis Lim
|
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jul 12, 2017 18:00:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by FrancescoAbides on Jul 12, 2017 20:39:53 GMT
Inherent Vice, by Thomas Pynchon
What...the...fuck?
Why didn´t I read this before?
|
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Jul 12, 2017 22:44:02 GMT
DeepArcher His debut "Goodbye, Columbus" is fantastic (well, the title story is and the rest of them range from good to great). Two of his much later novels, "Indignation" and "Nemesis" are also great places to help get yourself into the guy more.
|
|
|
|
Post by moonman157 on Jul 13, 2017 0:09:13 GMT
DeepArcher His debut "Goodbye, Columbus" is fantastic (well, the title story is and the rest of them range from good to great). Two of his much later novels, "Indignation" and "Nemesis" are also great places to help get yourself into the guy more. I haven't read much Roth but I'll second Goodbye Columbus and add that Sabbath's Theater is one of the best books I've ever read. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2017 19:37:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Jul 14, 2017 19:09:47 GMT
American Pastoral So far this is just  . Can't believe this is the first time I'm reading Roth. His writing, while a bit meandering, is fucking immaculate. For those who have read his stuff, please recommend me more of this. I like Roths style as well. In American Pastoral he drifts off a bit too much and often in my opinion though. Not to say it's not a good book, I like it a lot, but I wouldn't call it great. My favorite of the four I've read of Roth is The Human Stain. Very good topic, very good thoughts, the same great style as in American Pastoral. Also like Nemesis a lot, which is much shorter though. But a very fine little book. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Jul 14, 2017 19:12:19 GMT
Started "The Idiot" by Dostoyevsky today. That was a really great book. My favorite Dostoyevsky so far. I don't had much time to read lately (or watch movies), but now started Jose Saramagos "O Homem Duplicado" ("The Double") and so far it's fantastic. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jul 15, 2017 2:13:16 GMT
Glory for Me, Mackinlay Kantor's blank verse novel that was adapted into the brilliant Best Picture winner The Best Years of Our Lives.
|
|
|
|
Post by HELENA MARIA on Jul 15, 2017 23:02:15 GMT
Paula Hawkins ' INTO TO THE WATER
|
|
|
|
Post by cheesecake on Jul 20, 2017 14:41:09 GMT
"The Crying of Lot 49" by Thomas Pynchon.
|
|
ibbi
Based
"Batman's a scientist"
Posts: 4,886
Likes: 4,408
|
Post by ibbi on Jul 20, 2017 19:32:44 GMT
Wicked  |
|
|
|
Post by pickpocket on Jul 21, 2017 1:57:05 GMT
Giovanni's Room, James Baldwin
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Jul 21, 2017 4:05:44 GMT
The Autobiography of Malcolm X
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Jul 22, 2017 17:26:38 GMT
Read "Sous les vents de Neptune" by Fred Vargas. Another fine work which leads me to include her among the best contemporary crime novelists now. Well, not quite on the same level as Michael Connelly, Ian Rankin, Jo Nesbo and the late Henning Mankell, but in the second tier.
Now reading the first part of J.M. Coetzees somewhat biographical work: "Boyhood".
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Jul 26, 2017 14:56:57 GMT
Now reading the first part of J.M. Coetzees somewhat biographical work: "Boyhood". Followed it with the second part "Youth" and now began "Summertime", the third and final part. |
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jul 30, 2017 22:47:05 GMT
 I'm about halfway through. This is decent so far. I wasn't big on the first hundred pages or so, my biggest problem being the fact that our narrator knows a world before the extreme subjugation, which certainly isn't a flaw in its own right, but the choice proves to be rather detrimental with the way it's emphasized. For much of the book, it feels like every other line is, "So-and-so used to be goood, now so-and-so is baaad". It not only makes the reading experience somewhat bothersome, but it's also just so painfully unsubtle. The actual hardships of this universe would be far more impactful if we realized the differences ourselves, and didn't have every little detail spelled out for us. I also would be far more interested in a protagonist who actually didn't live in the world before this system was put into place, as that would open-up many fascinating nuances for characterization with a woman who knows that she doesn't exist out of love, but out of a cruel and loathsome system. That sort of identity crisis would make for a far more interesting read. Not to mention, it would aid some of the chronology problems by having this set a bit further along in the future (it makes little sense that Offred is clearly still a young woman in the present, but was nonetheless into her adulthood before shit hit the fan, and yet still exists within a seemingly well-established system). The book has progressively improved as I've worked through many of its redundancies, as some of the characters are becoming more than mere names and presences, and there's actually a narrative forming (not that novels with little focus on narrative inherently bother me, but this one is far better when it has a story to tell than when it becomes swallowed up in the nostalgia and memory of the main character). Also, anyone who considers this story to be "prophetic" or "relevant" (a comment which I have seen often) must be extremely cynical and have a wildly disillusioned view of gender relations in the present. That's not at all a criticism of the concept itself, which I do find interesting. But perceiving that this incredibly extremist version of the world could exist in so near a future in our world is somewhat baffling. Perhaps I have too much faith in humanity, but I highly, highly doubt that our immediate response to this situation would be *this* cruel. |
|
