main |
software |
keyboard |
music |
personal |
missives |
books |
Santa Cruz is pretty quiet, so I've been catching up on my reading. Here are some brief reviews of books I've read recently.
I picked this up after seeing the newly restored film print. This turn-of-the-19th-century novel is a beautifully dizzying series of interleaved stories, and stories within stories, recounted verbally by the characters that appear in them. The stories touch a huge number of subjects -- math, science, philosophy, religion, sex, marriage, etc. -- with interesting perspectives at every turn. The larger context of the story is a conflict between Islamic and Christian values.
It is interesting to contrast the book with the film. The largest differences (besides significant editing to keep it below three hours) are in the portrayals of certain characters. The main character of the movie is much less compelling than he is in the book. The geometer of the movie is much more compelling. While in the book he is distracted to the point of folly, in the movie the geometer appears capable, personable, and wise.
I wonder if this reflects a general change in attitudes about scientists, or merely the personal inclinations of the film maker and the author. Apparently Potocki was an adventurer of sorts, like the main character. Film making is ultimately a fairly technical, and thus nerdy occupation.
Elsewhere on the web you will find this book heralded as The Worst Science Fiction Novel Ever. (This site has since disappeared).
I beg to differ. This is the funniest book I've read in years! The characters are pathetic -- stereotypes of stereotypes. Descriptive passages are loaded with hilariously strained (or wholly broken) metaphors. The science makes no pretense of plausibility, and the plot has a Kafka-esque meta-literature feel (e.g. the story begins with the ultimate tragedy).
The book is a lampoon of the science fiction genre, and particularly targets Lucifer's Hammer, by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle, following the outline of that book quite closely.
I wish to publically thank Matt Briggs
(author of the previously mentioned web page) for bringing this treasure to my
attention, and Amazon.com's out-of-print service for dredging up a copy for me.
There are wonderful insights in this book, about nature and our role in it. More thoughtful than idealistic. Perhaps most interesting is his account of his struggling with the concept of a "weed". He begins with the notion that "weed" is an artificial construct made by people with a bias against certain plants. This idea doesn't survive experience, however, and he develops more insightful definitions in the book. The results are relevant not only to his back yard gardening, but to our relationship with nature in general.
Beware of his confusion about Einstein and the nature of photosynthesis,
however. This seem to be a common misunderstanding among folk who only
peripherally read about science: thermonuclear reactions are not occurring in
your garden. More plainly, plants don't grow by converting energy (sunlight) to
mass. They use energy to rearrange mass (which they collect from air and
water).