Disclosure: Naeem Inayatullah was my professor and continues to be a mentor and friend. That's what made me pick the book up. But it's not what made mDisclosure: Naeem Inayatullah was my professor and continues to be a mentor and friend. That's what made me pick the book up. But it's not what made me read it multiple times, and send copies to a dozen friends.
This book is essential for anyone who believes that there must be a different way - not just for teaching (I am not a teacher), but for relating to other humans in any interaction where there is a power dynamic. As a musician, I'm regularly in interactions where the power is either with the audience (who want me to perform for and entertain them) or with me (who is the "star" for the moment) ... both dynamics are exhausting. As a parent, I regularly find myself in these teacherly moments described in the book. When the opening lines of the book undermine the entire nature of these relational moments, we realize how transactional they've become. What else could there be? In contrast to the author Robert Greene's basic premise (that all conflict must result in domination by one side or the other), Naeem asks, what if the encounter itself (and not what comes of it) is the important part?
The entire format of the book - it's laid out in curated collections of vignettes - creates the experience of an encounter with the author's story and family, with his ideas, and even his students and colleagues through the years, not to mention that it feels like the result of the author encountering himself in his own methods. It contains innumerable mind-blowing insights: some infuriating, some tear-inducing, some confusing and obtuse, and some that made me laugh out loud, and each unique to my relationship/encounter with the work. The margins of my copy are littered with notes as I talked back to Naeem and lived in the encounter of reading it. There is vulnerability, anger, joy, awe, and humility.
No two people will read this book the same way or have the same experience of it. Even if you hate it, it will still be a success because you or me liking this book is not what matters. What does it shake loose in us to read it? What of our own nature does it reflect to us? What does it excavate from our own history and education? (For a small example, I was shocked to discover my own deeply-held beliefs about the respect a teacher automatically deserves through reading the vignettes where students acted entitled and dominating towards the author. I spent time sitting with this and traced its positive and negative impacts through my history and present.)
As another review said below, the books asks us to consider that the power may already be with/in us to know what we need to know. (Of course this is not meant to imply we inherently know the atomic mass of Mercury. The book is focused on learning that challenges (or upholds) our foundational sense of self/society/history etc.) What if our curiosity in our encounter with one another can draw that out better than an authority figure? And what if it's better to work together to investigate than to (try to) pull each other across the rift between us?
"Teaching is impossible. Learning is unlikely. Encounter is the remainder." I've already started putting it into imperfect practice in my musical and parenting life, and as I said, I've sent a dozen copies of this book to friends and family....more
Legitimately feel bad for this guy. What a sad world he lives in! Enemies everywhere. It makes me wonder whether he has any personal relationships: a Legitimately feel bad for this guy. What a sad world he lives in! Enemies everywhere. It makes me wonder whether he has any personal relationships: a partner, children, others that he feels a deep relational safety with?? I'm guessing not. He talks about gaining the greatest power in life, and in the next sentence says "armed with that knowledge you could make them tumble into traps and destroy them." ...more
Incredible book. While it does not go intro tremendous depth at every turn (that would require a dozen volumes of this book, as its generous citationsIncredible book. While it does not go intro tremendous depth at every turn (that would require a dozen volumes of this book, as its generous citations imply) it does something no book I've read yet has done: it creates a continuous through-line between body systems, ecological systems, social & political systems, colonization, and indigenous wisdom. (I think of Wilson's attempt in "Consilience" - he missed the social and political connections and undermined ancient wisdom from the get-go.)
There is of course always more to say on these topics, but the connections are the point of the book and they are the heart of it, and the effect of this work is tremendous. The ask of the book is for us to see that not only are all these systems interconnected but also that the wisdom to understand and live within this interconnectedness has been with us (and not only ignored but also demeaned and purposefully destroyed) in Indigenous cultures and societies the world over. It's a call back to what we know and how we can know it is true. It never claims to be an answer to the world's problems, in fact I love the self-consciousness of the writers who engage in the work themselves on a personal level towards the end of the book.
Don't expect it to answer all your worries about the world - expect it to help you develop better questions for how we all move forward....more
I get it. War is shocking and horrible. There's no way any book or movie could ever come close but Trumbo tries here. However, because all it sees is I get it. War is shocking and horrible. There's no way any book or movie could ever come close but Trumbo tries here. However, because all it sees is the horror, I think it feels hollow and flat. One of the worst things about war, to my understanding, is that it actually isn't horror all the time. People feel happiness in war, and they feel pleasure in war. They might feel at home in war. (See Sara Novic's amazing short story, "Notes From A War Torn Childhood" and Chris Hedges' nonfiction book "War Is A Force That Gives Us Meaning") And after the war, soldiers and victims may be plagued and tormented by these facts as well as the horrors they've seen. ...more
This is an incredible novel about the aftermath of war. There are so many thousands of books written about war, combat, and the destruction it brings This is an incredible novel about the aftermath of war. There are so many thousands of books written about war, combat, and the destruction it brings in its immediate path. This book was like looking at the ripples at the outer edge of a lake and following them back in time to their source. Along the way we fall in love with even the most troubled characters, such that when we arrive at the tragedies that define them, we are already deeply involved in their humanity. Without giving anything away, I'll say that this kind of work to build and deepen complexity seems like the antidote to our current polarized climate. The seeds of creation and destruction are the same.
Khan's writing is engrossing, beautiful, heartbreaking, and inviting. Most of all I fell in love with Sajida and the indelible (in all senses) Noor. Long after I've put the book down I think of them. ...more
This was educational in many ways, however as soon as I got to the chapter on Midway and the author never once mentioned that we dropped two nuclear bThis was educational in many ways, however as soon as I got to the chapter on Midway and the author never once mentioned that we dropped two nuclear bombs on Japan, I lost confidence in the rest of his writing. What else was he conveniently leaving out of the other stories in order to support his central thesis (that western warfare is rooted in ancient Greece)? My copy of this book is now unusable for others as its margins are full of questioning, challenging and outrage (with a smattering from a previous reader as well).
That being said, I did find it a useful tool for deepening my understanding of some of the essential elements of warfare through time - particularly the part about "total annihilation of the enemy" which is now so commonplace and expected that it was a shock even to me (anti-war) that it was a new concept as recently as ancient Greece.
One word and concept notably lacking from this and essentially defining western war (and potentially ruining Russia in its invasion of Ukraine at the present moment): logistics. He does discuss the "boots on the ground" and "materi茅l" but they are not presented as a unified concept that makes/breaks past or contemporary war.
All in all Hanson is an incredibly knowledgable and intelligent writer who clearly has an agenda and crafts his "history" to defend it. ...more
While researching war literature and non-fiction, I've read close to 100 books on war in the last two years. In all of them, I've read nothing like thWhile researching war literature and non-fiction, I've read close to 100 books on war in the last two years. In all of them, I've read nothing like this book. It astonishes me that it is so rarely remembered, rarely mentioned or discussed. I didn't find it on any "best books about war" lists I've scoured and from which created my booklists. In fact I found it randomly on a 25 cent sale sidewalk-bookshelf and decided to give it a try.
Piercy immaculately researched this book - I checked her historical facts. She is also an astonishingly gifted writer - writing with ten completely different literary voices for each of her characters. Each one has its own world with its own logic, which is occasionally seen through the logic of another character's perspective when their storylines intersect. Not only are the stories engrossing, they are enlightening. They go far beyond the war itself and give as comprehensive a picture as I've ever read or heard of what it was like to live at the margins (and front) of WWII, and the ugliness of our own country at that time, often glossed over by now.
Representationally, all of her characters are presumably white and/or Jewish, so it is narrow in that sense. However, considering it was written in 1987 I was astonished by its representation of its female characters and realistically wide spectrum of gender-expression, experiences, desires, interests, and thought-patterns. It's not surprising that a woman would be able to write women characters well, but it is surprising that a book covers as much ground as this one in creating those dimensions. Her talent is virtuosic.
Additionally, though I have never been in combat, based on what I've read in other literature/non-fiction written by those who WERE in combat, it seems she did great justice to that experience as well. (I'd be interested to hear from any other who served in or were civilians during WWII in the Pacific theatre. Please feel free to reach out to me if this fits you or your family.)
The book is an investment in time (at 768 pages) and emotionally energy (I deeply cared about these characters) that left me longing for more at its end.
ok, like I just wrote in a comment . . . this is probably one of those books that you have to read at a particular moment in your life.
for me I was 1ok, like I just wrote in a comment . . . this is probably one of those books that you have to read at a particular moment in your life.
for me I was 15, had just run away from home and was in utter despair that the entire world was as mean, strict and narrow-minded as my peers seemed to be at that time. I longed for a friend, I longed for a sense of the world being more than what was drowning me.
the friend who put this book in my hands also gave me Blind Melon's first album - and together these two items may have literally saved my life.
Bach's writing is simplistic, yes. it is almost childlike, yes. But there is for me an enduring wisdom to it. the seagull is obviously a very simplistic metaphor for a human, but in reality, particularly from where I was at the time, the idea of the "flock" just doing as it was told and spending all its time eating, shitting and talking about other gulls was not far off from my experience.
as that 15 year old wandering soul, I connected - not with the gull - but with the sense that there had to be more to life and that the pursuit of perfection was not in vain. this book was like a child's story that assured me that my sense of things was not off-base. and I'm not kidding when I say that I felt that Jonathan Livingston Seagull was my first friend....more
I was incredibly reluctant to read this book for many reasons, mostly because it was a "popular" book and every woman in my life was telling me to reaI was incredibly reluctant to read this book for many reasons, mostly because it was a "popular" book and every woman in my life was telling me to read it. But when one of those women put it in my hands with a card telling me to read it, I finally did (many months ago now).
And reluctant though I was at first I did really enjoy this book. It was transparent, vulnerable, emotional, and yet incredibly self-aware. Gilbert tore open the inner workings of her heart and mind and yet never begged anything from the reader - not pity or compassion - which is not to say I didn't feel these things while I was reading the book, but for the most part I felt them for the parts of myself that were connecting with the parts of herself.
I know some people found one or another section slow, over-detailed, boring, or uneventful, but because when I read the book I was dealing with what seemed to be a life-shattering-end-of-relationship scenario, I met her on that bathroom floor in the opening pages and was able to walk every step with her on the journey. From self-indulgence, to self-discipline and finally to the calming that comes with knowing one's self.
I wish I could remember a more pointed comment about this book, because I'm sure there were things that I had critiques of, but the enduring memory of it is one of power and peacefulness. So that's worth 4 stars for me :)...more
So after a titillating Book 2, I raced forward to this book and found an even deeper satisfaction.
It was in this book that Asimov starts explBook 3.
So after a titillating Book 2, I raced forward to this book and found an even deeper satisfaction.
It was in this book that Asimov starts exploring the questions about whether we are our own masters, and whether we care, and whether we would fight against the master if it was a known/destroyable master?
The dichotomy is obvious: The First Foundation needs the Second Foundation in order to stay on track - particularly after the Mule had created such massive divergence from the Plan. The Second Foundation needs the First Foundation to be the physical body of the next Empire.
But as long as the First Empire KNOWS the Second one exists, these questions of "am I my own master?" plague the First Foundationers. Asimov - a well known atheist, and founder of the Humanist Society - really drives this question home. Even though as the reader, there is a tendency to sympathize with the need for the Second Foundation to exist, Asimov continues to let his First Foundationers insist that this is not right, that it is unsettling, and that it is something worth not only questioning but taking action against.
Didn't like: the precocious little girl who is really brilliant is talked about by her father and a strange man as needing to be put in line; and her brilliance is eventually explained as being implanted. Come on Isaac ! ...more
Okay . . . this is where it started getting really interesting.
So my review may contain spoilers . . . warning . . . As I said in the review of FoundaOkay . . . this is where it started getting really interesting.
So my review may contain spoilers . . . warning . . . As I said in the review of Foundation (1), I was a *little* bored by the formulaic style of the episodes. In this book we start getting into the really good stuff.
The ideas that Asimov presents in the first book and in the first part of this book set up the idea that predictions about human behavior can be made when looking at large groups (in this case in the 6 trillion people range) that can fairly accurately describe the course of events. With the knowledge of those predictions, actions can be taken to manipulate certain outcomes. The theory also posits that the course of history cannot be changed by any one individual within that group except under extraordinary circumstances, circumstances that cannot be predicted by the psycho-historic model.
So here we get the unpredicted, extraordinary exception to our rule (The Mule) and start to really see the genius of Asimov's mind. We watch the exception unfold through (mainly) dialog and analysis of scientific and science-fictional discourse. Though there are moments when the prose leaves something to be desired, it was in this book that I really warmed up to Asimov's forward-moving and logical style, because this is where I started to see his process - the exploration of the nature of human behavior, relationships (not romantic, thank god, a thing science-fiction writers are encouraged never to do), and the awe-inspiring infinity of possibilities within even our own known framework of ideas.
Also I like this book because a woman plays an important and powerful role in it. Not going to pretend that doesn't matter to me.
Definitely setting a lot of things up and in retrospect my review will be different than if I'd reviewed it before moving on to tOk Foundation 1 . . .
Definitely setting a lot of things up and in retrospect my review will be different than if I'd reviewed it before moving on to the next book . . however I HAD to move right on, a fact which probably speaks well as a review.
Liked: the introduction of the ideas of psycho-history; the faux-footnotes and chapter headers explaining different characters and historical events as if from the Encyclopedia Galactica (the book created by characters in the story); the entire concept of the Galactic Empire falling to pieces and one group of people stepping into action to minimize the "barbarous" period between the fall of the old & rise of a new empire, based on the ideas of "psycho-history"
Didn't Like: the lack of women involved in far-future scenarios (are we to believe that misogyny lives on? that women are still stupid and can't do math?); the episodes in this book were somewhat formulaic, if interesting: intro of players - intro of crisis - conflict of players - triumph over crisis (Asimov's intro explains that he was trying to ensure that the audience remained on edge so the publisher would demand more episodes)...more
Loading...
