The end of the year is approaching, which means that Top Ten lists are everywhere. List-making is one of my favorite activities, so I am going to do my own Top Ten list, of the best books I read this year. Most of these were not actually published this year, so the list has no real link to 2007, but that’s OK. Here they are, in no particular order:
Fiction:
“The Inheritance of Loss,” by Kiran Desai
A sad but lovely story of life in rural India (and the lives of Indian immigrants in the U.S.).
“The Voyage of the Narwhal,” by Andrea Barrett
The story of an ill-fated trip to explore the Arctic circle.
“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,” by J.K. Rowling
The best possible ending to the series.
“Suite Francaise,” by Irene Nemirovsky
A very poignant and beautifully written story of life in Nazi-occupied France.
“The Road,” by Cormac McCarthy
Compelling and grim portrayal of a fictional but entirely believable post-apocalyptic world.
Nonfiction:
“Moneyball,” by Michael Lewis
You might not think that a book devoted to the dealings of the Oakland A’s front office would be all that fascinating. You are WRONG.
“Eat, Pray, Love,” by Elizabeth Gilbert
This book made me want to follow in Gilbert’s footsteps as she traveled to Italy, India and Indonesia.
“My Life in France,” by Julia Child and Alex Prud’homme
A lovely account of Child’s life.
“Endurance: Shackleton’s Incredible Voyage,” by Alfred Lansing
A real life adventure story that kept me entranced, even though I already knew how it ended.
“A Walk in the Woods,” by Bill Bryson
A hilarious account of Bryson’s attempt to walk the Appalachian Trail.
Here’s to many more good reads in 2008!
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Under ground
“Beneath the Metropolis,” by Alex Marshall, is an excellent book for anyone who has wondered what lies below the city streets they are walking on. Each chapter features a different city, including New York, Chicago, Mexico City, Paris, Rome, Cairo and about a dozen others. I learned an awful lot about public transportation, sewer and water supply issues, but I will spare you a rundown of everything :)
Some of the highlights:
* Paris did not become such a beautiful and well-organized city by accident. A city planner named Baron Georges Haussmann was responsible for designing most of the city’s wide boulevards and building its first sewer system (in the 1850s), which is still in use and apparently is a great tourist attraction. At the time, some Parisians thought Haussmann wielded too much power, but the success of his vision (and envy of other cities) is proof that centralized city planning IS a good thing.
* Everyone knows that Venice is sinking, but that city’s problems are nothing compared to Mexico City’s. In the fourteenth century, the Aztecs chose the city’s location based on an auspicious sign from the gods. Unfortunately the site is swampy and 7,250 feet above sea level, which makes it difficult to pump water into the city. And, so much water has been drained from underneath the city that it is sinking at an alarming rate (30 feet in the last century). Some sections are sinking faster than others, so the famous National Cathedral is listing to one side and some houses are now below street level.
* In Rome, several subway construction projects have been delayed or halted altogether because so many ancient ruins are buried under the city. Seems they can’t drill anywhere without encountering something of historical import.
The book has a lot of interesting tidbits and is wonderfully illustrated, but one problem with it is the large number of typos/factual errors. The most egregious was the statement that Fenway Park opened in 1932… unforgivable! :)
This is my sixth and final book for the “Armchair Travel Reading Challenge.” I finished just in time!
Some of the highlights:
* Paris did not become such a beautiful and well-organized city by accident. A city planner named Baron Georges Haussmann was responsible for designing most of the city’s wide boulevards and building its first sewer system (in the 1850s), which is still in use and apparently is a great tourist attraction. At the time, some Parisians thought Haussmann wielded too much power, but the success of his vision (and envy of other cities) is proof that centralized city planning IS a good thing.
* Everyone knows that Venice is sinking, but that city’s problems are nothing compared to Mexico City’s. In the fourteenth century, the Aztecs chose the city’s location based on an auspicious sign from the gods. Unfortunately the site is swampy and 7,250 feet above sea level, which makes it difficult to pump water into the city. And, so much water has been drained from underneath the city that it is sinking at an alarming rate (30 feet in the last century). Some sections are sinking faster than others, so the famous National Cathedral is listing to one side and some houses are now below street level.
* In Rome, several subway construction projects have been delayed or halted altogether because so many ancient ruins are buried under the city. Seems they can’t drill anywhere without encountering something of historical import.
The book has a lot of interesting tidbits and is wonderfully illustrated, but one problem with it is the large number of typos/factual errors. The most egregious was the statement that Fenway Park opened in 1932… unforgivable! :)
This is my sixth and final book for the “Armchair Travel Reading Challenge.” I finished just in time!
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Christmas bounty
I usually get a lot of books for Christmas, but I think this year set an all-time record. Check out this pile:
Plus a couple of cookbooks:
This should keep me busy (reading and cooking) well into 2008!
Plus a couple of cookbooks:
This should keep me busy (reading and cooking) well into 2008!
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Oops
This has never happened to me before: I was so absorbed in the book I was reading on the T this morning that I completely missed my stop. I didn’t even realize the train had gone over the Charles River until I looked up and saw that we were pulling into Central Square (one stop past where I normally get off). Fortunately Central is still within walking distance of where I work. The book that had me so enthralled was “Middlesex,” by Jeffrey Eugenides. I know, I am the last person on the planet who hasn’t read it, especially after my nemesis picked it for her book club. Oh well, better late than never. But from now on, I will need to be more careful when reading it on the T!
Thursday, December 13, 2007
"Ship Fever"
I recently finished “Ship Fever,” a collection of short stories by Andrea Barrett. One of the things I like about Barrett is that her stories usually have scientific and/or historical plot elements. (The other book of hers that I’ve read, “Voyage of the Narwhal,” deals with a 19th-century naturalist who goes on an expedition to the Arctic Circle.)
Stories included in “Ship Fever” focus on a doctor who volunteers to treat Irish cholera victims fleeing to Canada to escape from the potato famine, two Englishwomen who try to disprove a commonly-held belief about swallows, the final days in the life of Carl Linnaeus, and a love affair between two science teachers.
But the stories are not just about science. Barrett deftly weaves the science into compelling tales of relationships and adventures, so you don’t feel like you’re reading a dry scientific text—far from it. I don’t often read short stories, but I enjoyed these and plan to read more of her work.
“Ship Fever” won the National Book Award in 1996, so I am counting it towards the “Book Awards Reading Challenge.” This is my fifth one, so I’m doing pretty well. I’ve been trying to do one a month, and I need to read seven more by the end of June 2008. Plenty of time….
Stories included in “Ship Fever” focus on a doctor who volunteers to treat Irish cholera victims fleeing to Canada to escape from the potato famine, two Englishwomen who try to disprove a commonly-held belief about swallows, the final days in the life of Carl Linnaeus, and a love affair between two science teachers.
But the stories are not just about science. Barrett deftly weaves the science into compelling tales of relationships and adventures, so you don’t feel like you’re reading a dry scientific text—far from it. I don’t often read short stories, but I enjoyed these and plan to read more of her work.
“Ship Fever” won the National Book Award in 1996, so I am counting it towards the “Book Awards Reading Challenge.” This is my fifth one, so I’m doing pretty well. I’ve been trying to do one a month, and I need to read seven more by the end of June 2008. Plenty of time….
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Post Apocalypse Now
OK, I may be getting carried away with all this postapocalyptic reading—I really need to find some more cheerful books! I just finished “The World Without Us,” by Alan Weisman, which is a scientific look at what would happen to Earth if humans just suddenly disappeared (assuming no nuclear fallout or asteroid-induced blocking of the sun, etc.). Think a virus that only infects humans and is 100 percent deadly.
Anyway, let’s grant Weisman those assumptions. What would happen to the world we left behind? Well, it turns out in some ways the planet would be much better off without us, and in some ways, much worse.
First, the positives: Some endangered species would retake and thrive in their former habitats. Deforested areas would regrow, and, of course, we would stop producing greenhouse gases.
Some not so good things: No one would be around to warn animals and the intelligent primates who might eventually evolve to replace us to stay away from nuclear waste storage sites. Nuclear reactors would eventually melt down without human monitoring, and oil refineries would catch fire and burn for years.
One of the book’s most alarming chapters featured plastics. Basically, every bit of plastic that has ever been manufactured (more than one billion tons) will remain on Earth, clogging waterways and choking animal and plant life, forever. That’s FOREVER. In a section of the Pacific Ocean called the North Pacific Tropical Gyre, an eddy the size of Texas draws in a never-ending stream of plastic. It’s choked with six-pack rings, sandwich bags and plastic grocery bags, and it will accumulate more as long as we continue producing plastic. Reading that chapter led to what I call my “plastic bag epiphany,” where I finally committed to taking reusable bags to the grocery store. (They are fantastic—you can fit so much more into them, so you don’t end up carrying 12 plastic bags, each containing two items.) I know it doesn’t help much in the grand scheme of things, but it’s something…
In the final chapter, Weisman offers what I think is, in theory at least, a fantastic solution to our environmental woes. He recommends that every woman able to bear children be limited to only one child. The current world population is about 6.5 billion and is projected to grow to a completely unmanageable 9 billion by 2050. If this measure went into effect immediately, population would drop to 5.5 billion at mid-century and 1.6 billion (19th-century levels ) by 2100. I admit the idea is a bit impractical (though China has had some success with it), but it just might be better than the alternative—finding out what happens when nearly 10 billion people are competing for the shrinking livable habitats on Earth.
Anyway, let’s grant Weisman those assumptions. What would happen to the world we left behind? Well, it turns out in some ways the planet would be much better off without us, and in some ways, much worse.
First, the positives: Some endangered species would retake and thrive in their former habitats. Deforested areas would regrow, and, of course, we would stop producing greenhouse gases.
Some not so good things: No one would be around to warn animals and the intelligent primates who might eventually evolve to replace us to stay away from nuclear waste storage sites. Nuclear reactors would eventually melt down without human monitoring, and oil refineries would catch fire and burn for years.
One of the book’s most alarming chapters featured plastics. Basically, every bit of plastic that has ever been manufactured (more than one billion tons) will remain on Earth, clogging waterways and choking animal and plant life, forever. That’s FOREVER. In a section of the Pacific Ocean called the North Pacific Tropical Gyre, an eddy the size of Texas draws in a never-ending stream of plastic. It’s choked with six-pack rings, sandwich bags and plastic grocery bags, and it will accumulate more as long as we continue producing plastic. Reading that chapter led to what I call my “plastic bag epiphany,” where I finally committed to taking reusable bags to the grocery store. (They are fantastic—you can fit so much more into them, so you don’t end up carrying 12 plastic bags, each containing two items.) I know it doesn’t help much in the grand scheme of things, but it’s something…
In the final chapter, Weisman offers what I think is, in theory at least, a fantastic solution to our environmental woes. He recommends that every woman able to bear children be limited to only one child. The current world population is about 6.5 billion and is projected to grow to a completely unmanageable 9 billion by 2050. If this measure went into effect immediately, population would drop to 5.5 billion at mid-century and 1.6 billion (19th-century levels ) by 2100. I admit the idea is a bit impractical (though China has had some success with it), but it just might be better than the alternative—finding out what happens when nearly 10 billion people are competing for the shrinking livable habitats on Earth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)