Books: catching up

I kept meaning to post these.

24. Full Speed by Janet Evanovich and Charlotte Hughes

This book really drove home for me the idea that Evanovich has a formula she uses. It's a completely different series from her Stephanie Plum novels, yet if you were to substitute "Stephanie" for the main character's name, and "Ranger" for the romantic lead, it would be hard to tell it from a Plum novel.

I gave this a lot of wiggle room because it's the 5th book in the series but the only one I've read, so I assume there's some background info I'm missing. I''m not sure I'll bother with the rest of the series, but it made for a decent in-flight popcorn book.

25. The Wordy Shipmates by Sarah Vowell

I had to stop reading this for a while because I found it a little difficult-- Sarah's style is pretty chatty, but she uses a lot of quotations from 18th century Puritans, which were considerably harder to read. Overall, it was interesting, though I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who isn't a history buff.

26. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring by J.R.R. Tolkien

I confess. I managed to make it this far into my life without reading LotR. You may take away my Geek Cred now, if you like. I *tried* to read it about 15 years ago, and couldn't slog my way through the first couple of chapters. But I adore the movies, and I thought that perhaps reading the book might be easier now that I know what's going on. It was easier, and I'll probably continue on and read the other books as well, but I still think that Tolkien is too bloody wordy, and takes forever to get to his point.

Also? Now that I've read it, I can confidently say that Everett is wrong about Tom Bombadil being important. That hour+ that I had to spend listening to him rant on and on about how they left Tom out of the movie? I want it back.

I was somewhat surprised when the book ended with Boromir still alive. (If that's a spoiler for you by now, then you weren't going to watch the movie anyway.) Once I thought about it, I realized that the movie needed a strong ending with a good hook to get people to see the next one, but I still feel slightly ... I dunno. Off-kilter, I suppose.

Books: catching up

I kept meaning to post these.

24. Full Speed by Janet Evanovich and Charlotte Hughes

This book really drove home for me the idea that Evanovich has a formula she uses. It's a completely different series from her Stephanie Plum novels, yet if you were to substitute "Stephanie" for the main character's name, and "Ranger" for the romantic lead, it would be hard to tell it from a Plum novel.

I gave this a lot of wiggle room because it's the 5th book in the series but the only one I've read, so I assume there's some background info I'm missing. I''m not sure I'll bother with the rest of the series, but it made for a decent in-flight popcorn book.

25. The Wordy Shipmates by Sarah Vowell

I had to stop reading this for a while because I found it a little difficult-- Sarah's style is pretty chatty, but she uses a lot of quotations from 18th century Puritans, which were considerably harder to read. Overall, it was interesting, though I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who isn't a history buff.

26. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring by J.R.R. Tolkien

I confess. I managed to make it this far into my life without reading LotR. You may take away my Geek Cred now, if you like. I *tried* to read it about 15 years ago, and couldn't slog my way through the first couple of chapters. But I adore the movies, and I thought that perhaps reading the book might be easier now that I know what's going on. It was easier, and I'll probably continue on and read the other books as well, but I still think that Tolkien is too bloody wordy, and takes forever to get to his point.

Also? Now that I've read it, I can confidently say that Everett is wrong about Tom Bombadil being important. That hour+ that I had to spend listening to him rant on and on about how they left Tom out of the movie? I want it back.

I was somewhat surprised when the book ended with Boromir still alive. (If that's a spoiler for you by now, then you weren't going to watch the movie anyway.) Once I thought about it, I realized that the movie needed a strong ending with a good hook to get people to see the next one, but I still feel slightly ... I dunno. Off-kilter, I suppose.

Helpful tip for travelers

I thought Chase Bank was everywhere. They are not, in fact, in Pennsylvania. Looks like the turnpike will come with a foreign ATM surcharge.

Helpful tip for travelers

I thought Chase Bank was everywhere. They are not, in fact, in Pennsylvania. Looks like the turnpike will come with a foreign ATM surcharge.

The problem with media personalities

If you've made your name by talking about how awful X is, you always have to talk about how awful X is. Even if X turns out to be amazing. Once you've decided to build your empire out of "X is awful and destroying everything we hold dear," you'll lose credibility if you acknowledge that X might not be awful. You're pandering to an audience that believes X is awful, and the only thing they won't tolerate from you is being told that they're wrong.

The reverse is also true. If you've built your empire up on the idea that Y is wonderful, you've committed yourself to singing the praises of Y, even if Y is later found to have killed billions of people.

A couple of days ago, Glenn Beck released a new book. This is what he said the next day:

And I want to tell you that, um…our books are ALWAYS #1. And I find it REALLY fascinating, FASCINATING, that if you go to Amazon.com, Broke is number THREE. And the two books that are ahead of it — one is Keith Richards' Life, which is getting a TON of — you know, that's everywhere.

But this is a book about, you know, how he snorted his father's ashes, after death ... So that… 'culture of death.' And it’s an escape into the past, of, you know, the Woodstock stuff.

And then, the #1 book — TODAY, at least — is Machine of Death. And it's a — collected stories about, you know, people who know how they're gonna die. Haowww!

So you have DEATH — I know it's called Life, but what a life it is, really! It's a culture of death! OR, 'How do we restore ourselves?'

These are the — this is the left, I think, speaking. This is the left. You want to talk about where we're headed? We're headed towards a culture of death. A culture that, um, celebrates the things that have destroyed us. Not that the Rolling Stones have destroyed us — I mean, you can't always get what you want. You know what I'm saying? Brown sugar. I have no idea what that means.

The thing is, it's not the left. It's not the right, either. It's a rock star who has survived decades of chemical intoxication in a world where drug overdoses are probably* the most common cause of celebrity death, and who embodies the youth of the baby boomers-- of course his book is going to sell well. You could release the government's laws regarding the sale of cabbage, but slap Keith Richards' name on it, and it would sell like hot cakes. For the other book, it's a co-ordinated push by a group of fans specifically designed to get Machine of Death to the top of the Amazon bestseller list for a single day. That's not the left either, that's just an understanding of new technology.

But Beck built his legacy by blaming the left, and therefore everything bad, or even just unusual, that happens to him must be the fault of the left. By the end of it, even he seems unsure of his reasoning, but he's still got to put it out there.

The real problem is that people believe these media personalities, and try to see the entire world in black and white. It's not always the fault of the left. It's not always the fault of the right. Big business is both good and bad. Taxes are both good and bad. Health care is both good and bad. Trying to pretend that everything can be lumped into one of two categories - Good [insert heavenly choir here] and Evil [insert fire and brimstone here] - is ridiculous and dangerous.

In case you're curious: Beck's quote sparked this, but this isn't restricted to just him. It applies to pretty much everyone on Fox News and MSNBC, for starters.

* There's probably statistics available, but I'm too lazy to go find them. Hence the "probably"

The problem with media personalities

If you've made your name by talking about how awful X is, you always have to talk about how awful X is. Even if X turns out to be amazing. Once you've decided to build your empire out of "X is awful and destroying everything we hold dear," you'll lose credibility if you acknowledge that X might not be awful. You're pandering to an audience that believes X is awful, and the only thing they won't tolerate from you is being told that they're wrong.

The reverse is also true. If you've built your empire up on the idea that Y is wonderful, you've committed yourself to singing the praises of Y, even if Y is later found to have killed billions of people.

A couple of days ago, Glenn Beck released a new book. This is what he said the next day:

And I want to tell you that, um…our books are ALWAYS #1. And I find it REALLY fascinating, FASCINATING, that if you go to Amazon.com, Broke is number THREE. And the two books that are ahead of it — one is Keith Richards' Life, which is getting a TON of — you know, that's everywhere.

But this is a book about, you know, how he snorted his father's ashes, after death ... So that… 'culture of death.' And it’s an escape into the past, of, you know, the Woodstock stuff.

And then, the #1 book — TODAY, at least — is Machine of Death. And it's a — collected stories about, you know, people who know how they're gonna die. Haowww!

So you have DEATH — I know it's called Life, but what a life it is, really! It's a culture of death! OR, 'How do we restore ourselves?'

These are the — this is the left, I think, speaking. This is the left. You want to talk about where we're headed? We're headed towards a culture of death. A culture that, um, celebrates the things that have destroyed us. Not that the Rolling Stones have destroyed us — I mean, you can't always get what you want. You know what I'm saying? Brown sugar. I have no idea what that means.

The thing is, it's not the left. It's not the right, either. It's a rock star who has survived decades of chemical intoxication in a world where drug overdoses are probably* the most common cause of celebrity death, and who embodies the youth of the baby boomers-- of course his book is going to sell well. You could release the government's laws regarding the sale of cabbage, but slap Keith Richards' name on it, and it would sell like hot cakes. For the other book, it's a co-ordinated push by a group of fans specifically designed to get Machine of Death to the top of the Amazon bestseller list for a single day. That's not the left either, that's just an understanding of new technology.

But Beck built his legacy by blaming the left, and therefore everything bad, or even just unusual, that happens to him must be the fault of the left. By the end of it, even he seems unsure of his reasoning, but he's still got to put it out there.

The real problem is that people believe these media personalities, and try to see the entire world in black and white. It's not always the fault of the left. It's not always the fault of the right. Big business is both good and bad. Taxes are both good and bad. Health care is both good and bad. Trying to pretend that everything can be lumped into one of two categories - Good [insert heavenly choir here] and Evil [insert fire and brimstone here] - is ridiculous and dangerous.

In case you're curious: Beck's quote sparked this, but this isn't restricted to just him. It applies to pretty much everyone on Fox News and MSNBC, for starters.

* There's probably statistics available, but I'm too lazy to go find them. Hence the "probably"