The Power of Compassion by The Dalai Lama - Book Review

Publisher's write-up:

'Many people have asked the Dalai Lama to address the current difficulties facing humanity. In these talks given in London, he speaks about a wide range of issues including Bosnia, racial hatred, gender and environmental protection.

Modern life is so full of confusion and suffering that people need the courage to face their anger and hatred in order to transform their lives and relationships.

The Dalai Lama describes in a clear and simple style how to love and die well and how to bring wisdom and compassion into our everyday lives.'

I bought this book at a place where it ought to be bought, a calm Buddhist temple as I've a habit of taking books as souvenirs to conclude my trip. Anyway, the Dalai Lama is one of the spiritual leaders whom I respect despite my own personal views on the subject; for his relentless struggle towards the Tibetan cause and more importantly, for being one of the more forward thinking people in his field and in this very book, he asserted that one can't reach too far in the path the enlightenment by means of blind faith, contrary to what I have heard from many in the same field.

This book is a collection of lectures, on how to show compassion, how to accept death gracefully, among other similar topics and the last part of the book is a Q&A session documented. To be very honest, I really wanted to like the book, but then, I was far from impressed with this book and in fact, I found his delivery to be rather dull. Moreover, this book cannot be read by someone who is not acquainted with Buddhist practices and philosophies, although I am not completely in the dark with regard to the same considering a lot of similarities with the religion I was raised in (being Hinduism, though, I quit religion long ago) but then, there were several instances where I was totally lost. I do appreciate that he tried to appeal to people like myself, adding a caveat after any reference to re-birth or other related religious concepts that 'even for non-believers...' but then, those arguments proposed weren't totally convincing.

Moreover, I guess my scepticism is also owing to my complete ideological differences with one of the strongest concepts that he was riding on, throughout the lecture, as to not show attachment but show compassion. While I agree with the latter part, I believe it is inherent human nature to show attachment to people whom you regard and love while you could still be compassionate towards the society at large and no convincing arguments were made as to how these two are mutually exclusive and moreover, I am of the very strong belief that a state of trance reached through detachment and giving up on desires is merely an illusionary happiness and I for one would prefer to be sad in the real world than exercising that option.

Anyway, enough with my own personal ideas because, whenever I get deeper into the same, I very frequently get a remark stating, 'you can't take such a narrow view on philosophy' - let me for argument's sake agree with this, but then, in this very book, one highly ridiculous statement was made:

'I find it a bit difficult to apply this principle of compassion to the field of economics. But economists are human beings and of course they also need human affection, without which they'd suffer. However, if you think only of profit, irrespective of the cause of consequences, then drug dealers are not wrong, because from the economic viewpoint, they are also making tremendous profits.'

- page 73 and 74

I don't know if he was just trying to be funny which I doubt considering the otherwise serious nature of his lecture, he has narrowed down an entire subject to ONE school of thought, being positive economics and as per his view, I guess Alfred Marshall was fine with money making through drugs; I mean, going by Voltaire, I do defend his right to believe in that idea and defend his right to profess that in a speech (and it'd apply for my thoughts on philosophy too) but then, nevertheless, this was a ridiculous remark to make and from that moment on, I stopped taking the contents of this book very seriously.

This could seriously be a case of a right book landing in the wrong hands and I still feel this could be enjoyed by those who wish to understand and learn about Buddhist philosophies but then, the review being typed by the same hands that held the right book, the review is inevitably going to be bad, and thus, my rating for the book shall be a four on ten.

Rating - 4/10

Have a nice day,

Andy

Vicious Vikings by Terry Deary - Book Review

Publisher's write-up:

'Why some vicious Vikings had names like Fat-thighs, Oaf and Stinking? How to build a vicious Viking longboat? Which vicious Viking god dressed up as a woman? Discover all the foul facts about the Vicious Vikings - all the gore and more!'

Vicious Vikings is an instalment in the Horrible Histories series by Terry Deary. This novella contains the features of every other book in the series and I shall repeat them for the sake my readers who have either not read a horrible histories novella or a review of mine of a book from this series. The series aims at kindling interest in history by bringing out interesting facts about mundane topics that you've in your history textbooks in school through interesting illustrations and quizzes and the societal norms during the period covered.

Based on what I have said, this book was no different from the others and had every feature of a book in the series, with illustrations elaborating the lifestyle of the Vikings during the period, validating / invalidating the myths or stereotypes as the case may be (the horned helmets, for instance) and yes, at the end of the day, gives the reader an idea about the lifestyle of Vikings, their practices, their conquests and whether they were really as gory as they are portrayed to be.

While commenting on the book, I am really unsure as to whether I am being too harsh on my judgement because of the fact that I have grown up; considering how I used to love these books as a child, however, I wasn't all that impressed with this particular book in the series, mainly because, I read this book as a history enthusiast and not a school kid bored of reading his textbooks.

To start with, I felt that it was a lot less to do with facts and more to do with myths and legends regarding the Vikings and I really don't know the validity of some of the stories that are in the book considering how the author himself continually dismisses the authenticity of most Viking stories known to us, as most of them have been written based on vague sources post the Gutenberg era.

The second aspect I felt was the fact that I was really unsure whether the author was trying to write a book on the Vikings or on Vikings in Britain as most of it involved Viking lifestyle in Kent, Dublin, etc and the names of Harold Godwinson and Harold Hardrada, implying that the focus was largely on Britain, even though, I am not saying it was entirely so, but very clearly, the Nordic countries were mentioned far less number of times than Britain. Moreover, there was even a small chapter on Saxons and how gory the Saxons were, which left me wondering as to whether I am reading a book on Vikings.

However, at the end of the day, this book satisfies the objective of any Horrible Histories Book is normally expected to satisfy (I was satisfied to the extent that my long pending question on why someone was named 'Bluetooth' was resolved, after all), being, an illustrated light read of a serious topic and is still an excellent book to carry around to kill boredom in a short train journey or flight. So yeah, barring the excessive focus on Britain, I still feel it is a reasonable read, however, I shall not absolve the book of the same, and hence, I shall not give a rating of six (certifying it is good) and hence, restrict it to a fence sitting rating of five.

Rating - 5/10

Have a nice day,

Andy

The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins - Book Review

Publisher's write-up:

'The God Delusion caused a sensation when it was published in 2006. Within weeks it became the most hotly debated topic, with Dawkins himself branded as either saint or sinner for presenting his hard-hitting, impassioned rebuttal of religion of all types.

His argument could hardly be more topical. While Europe is becoming increasingly secularized, the rise of religious fundamentalism, whether in the Middle East or Middle America, is dramatically and dangerously dividing opinion around the world. In America, and elsewhere, a vigorous dispute between 'intelligent design' and Darwinism is seriously undermining and restricting the teaching of science. In many countries religious dogma from medieval times still serves to abuse basic human rights such as women's and gay rights. And all from a belief in a God whose existence lacks evidence of any kind.

Dawkins attacks God in all his forms. He eviscerates the major arguments for religion and demonstrates the supreme improbability of a supreme being. He shows how religion fuels war, foments bigotry and abuses children.

The God Delusion is a brilliantly argued, fascinating polemic that will be required reading for anyone interested in this most emotional and important subject.'

The God Delusion is a non-fiction work by the British evolutionary biologist, Richard Dawkins. This book is often termed as a book which every atheist should read, and by that, I was 'bound by my duty' to read it. I have listened to a lot of speeches delivered by Dawkins in the past, when I was maturing as an atheist and I had never read a book of his and the prospect of reading one, made me really excited.

In this book, Dawkins nearly covers every aspect, to make his case against god and religion starting from explaining the hypothesis of god, validating the arguments for existence, then moving on to arguments against god based on science, the undue respect given by the society to religion, etc. Throughout this book, I found a lot of his thoughts very interesting and the pencil in my hand had a lot of work while reading this book, making notes.

For starters, I believe the book was very well structured, making a very elaborate case as to why god is a delusion, starting with explaining the hypothesis of god, root of religion, how it is harming the society and the children, among various others. It followed a proper structure, always, starting with the hypothesis and then moving on to the argument against the same. Moreover, this not being a literary work, the writing was in very simple English, which is ideal considering he is trying to appeal to the masses than literature enthusiasts and I would considering it very well written, considering the target and the content. The book was filled with witty quotes supporting his case, across various eminent thinkers among various others, to quote one of them from George Bernard Shaw  - 'the fact that a believer is happier than a sceptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality of happiness, and by no means a necessity of life.'

Moreover, some of the concepts he brought out in defence of his case was very interesting, such as how the concept of god is a worship of gaps, wherein it is merely used as a gap to the answers which science is yet to find an answer which we tend to worship. However, the most interesting concept he brought out, in my opinion was that of moral zeitgeist (intellectual fashion or dominant school of thought that typifies and influences the culture of a particular period in time) wherein, he brings out how what was considered liberal back then maybe considered cruel by today's standards (based on what I read in the book, Lincoln would've passed off as a hardcore racist in today's world) and how people overlook the zeitgeist for the sake of religion. For elaborating this, he brings out the story from a religious book where characters were replaced with a Chinese setting, a majority who approved of the actions of the one in the religious book, rejected those of the Chinese General (the alternate for Joshua in the survey) thereby bringing out the harm of religion, where people are willing to overlook what they'd otherwise reject if it has the backing of a religion. I'd stop my spoilers here, if I reveal any further, I'd take the essence of reading off the reader defeating the purpose of the review.

But there is one particular idea of Dawkins that I reject, where he states that atheist should proudly state that they're atheists and congregate; well, in my opinion, that is downright absurd as it just ends up forming another cult in a name other than that of religion, which otherwise isn't different from what you're making a case against. Personally, I have no hesitation in admitting my atheism but I am not a big fan of forming clubs for this and buying key chains to show my allegiance as, if I do that, I am just becoming a part of another cult. For instance, there is no congregation of people who dislike golf and similarly, there is no reason for there to be a congregation of people who reject god or religion or both. Moreover, I am not a person with a science background and yes, I can understand Darwin's theory and the theory of the selfish gene in a nutshell but there were segments where he went too deep into it, which is where I found it difficult to understand.

That apart, I'd however reject other criticism I normally find about this book that he ignores various other religions and focuses mainly on Christianity as, the reason for him quitting religion was because he couldn't agree with Christianity and at the same time, it is absurd to expect someone to read books of a hundred odd religions to reject the hypothesis.

On the whole, I would say that it was a very worthy read, worth the time, worth the length of the book, this book could be recommended to everyone even though I guess, nobody is going to change their belief because of reading a book; it is only a conscious decision that comes from within out of convictions, at the most, an atheist can get her / his conviction stronger and a religious person would be thinking of more ways to hit out at this book.

Coming to the issue of rating the book, I'd give the book a rating of eight on ten, upon consideration of whatever I have stated, weighing the way the author has brilliantly put forth the scientific and logical arguments he has put forth towards his case, making it a worthy read.

Rating - 8/10

Have a nice day,

Andy

Hamlet by William Shakespeare - Book Review

Publisher's write-up:

'Hamlet, one of the great tragedies of William Shakespeare, is woven around a simple plot of murder and revenge. It tells the story of Prince Hamlet's vengeance against his uncle Claudius, who had not only murdered his father, the previous king, but also had succeeded his throne and married Hamlet's mother, Gertrude.

Set in Denmark, the play captures the mixed feelings of grief and sense of rage in Hamlet as he goes about his mission. What really forms the centre of the plot is the real and feigned madness that Hamlet exhibits when he's overwhelmed by a dilemma whether to kill or not to kill his uncle'

Hamlet, a book that I had always wanted to read, since a lot of movies and books that I love claim to draw its inspiration from Hamlet and I had always wanted to read the original work. Hamlet is a story featuring the Prince of Denmark, whose father has been killed by his own uncle to take the throne and to make matters worse, has married the widowed queen, his mother. Hamlet comes to know from the ghost of his father that the murder was carried out by his uncle and the prince is desperate to get his revenge.

I felt that Shakespeare had a very deep story, running along multiple lines, a prince in dilemma, a romantic sub plot, a kingdom under threat, a family feud among others, the story had several aspects to it and I liked the diversity to it. And I have this to say that Shakespeare had a very good story for a play to be enacted and considering the various stories that have come subsequent to the play that have drawn inspiration have been so pleasurable to watch / read.

With that said, I felt that the script is worthy of being a play but certainly not being read and in my opinion, the unabridged version that I read had very poor delivery of content (judge me a philistine, I don't care). I am not going to get into the intelligibility part of it, the author is hardly to be blamed for having lived in the sixteenth century but what I had a problem was the fact that all I had with me was a dump of dialogues with no description as to how they were delivering them, what was the setting or the background on which they were doing, which makes me come back to the point that I was making, that it was a script made brilliant by the actors and the director of the play and not by Shakespeare himself.

Moreover, when you're just given a bunch of dialogues with nothing to fill in between, it also becomes a little difficult to comprehend for the reader and what really helped me understand it was only because of my exposure to stories that came subsequently inspired by this play. Another problem I faced as a reader by just having a dump of dialogues was that I was attached to no character in particular and could barely connect with any of them, except for Hamlet to an extent; while a tragic play such as this is meant to trigger the emotions of the reader, this script to the play did nothing of that sort to me.

To conclude, I would say that it was a brilliant story, but it is not meant to be read as a book, at least in the totally unabridged form that I read it in. I'd sit on the fence when it comes to rating this book, with a five on ten, only because of the good story, but for which I would have given only a three.

Rating - 5/10

Have a nice day,

Andy

The Reluctant Fundamentalist by Mohsin Hamid – Book Review

Publisher’s write-up:

‘At a Lahore café, a bearded man converses with an American stranger. He recounts his unusual tale: of how he once embraced the Western dream – and a Western woman – and how both betrayed him. And as dusk deepens to dark, the significance of this seemingly chance meeting becomes abundantly clear…’

Lately, I’ve wanted to read some good Pakistani writing (the previous being The Death of Sheherzad) since most of modern Indian writing seems to be of the same genre (editing ancient works and presenting the same in a different way). So, I stumbled upon this book while randomly browsing in a bookstore and I found the synopsis to be quite interesting and also, till I saw the cover of this book, I had no idea that there was a film based on this. Anyway, this is the background as to how I picked up this book and I’d come to the review without any further digression.

The story features Changez, a young Pakistani graduate from Princeton, who is narrating his experiences in US to an American stranger at a café in Lahore. The protagonist is from a well off family in Pakistan and gets into a well-paying job in a Wall Street firm. He falls in love with one of his college mates, Erica, and is also considered a high performer in his job. It looked like nothing could go wrong in his American dream and looked well set to assimilate into the American society, but just then, 9/11 happens, his lover goes mentally unstable over her dead ex-boyfriend and Changez is in full dilemma – he is part of the same society that is likely to invade his home any time.

The best part about this book, in my opinion was the narration; it felt as though Changez was talking to me, the reader. It is literally narrated in the perspective that someone is actively talking to you and not like how they show in movies, where somebody starts an old story and it comes back to reality only when the story is over. Moreover, the protagonist’s dilemma was brought out very well, by the author where at one end, he is fully defending the American actions as to how the flaw of an innocent being persecuted can happen in any country and at the other end, he is unable to let go off the fact that people at home are worried that they could be invaded anytime. Moreover, I felt the balance was really good, between his professional life, personal life and also how the events unfolded after 9/11 and the 2001 Indian Parliament attack leading to the eventual stand-off between the two countries. Also, if you’re imaginative enough and you have an eye for finding imagery, you can find a lot in this like how the relationship between Erica and Changez could be seen like the shaky relationship between US and Pakistan, where, US does love Pakistan, for various reasons, but has its own expectations and won’t budge till it is satisfied (similar to how she expected him to be like her ex). There are several others apart from these in this novel and I don’t wish to spoil them in my review.

However, my problem with this book is, there were two things that attracted me into buying this book, the first being the title and the second being the synopsis. Yes, I agree that he was reluctant and was caught in a dilemma but he was anything but a fundamentalist. In fact, he was highly secular and had actually fit into the American society perfectly and nobody would’ve noticed the difference if not for the colour of his skin and his name. When I first read 'The Reluctant Fundamentalist', I expected someone with the personality of Maajid Nawaz but then, as aforementioned, Changez was altogether different. Moreover, the number of times the word ‘Muslim’ or ‘Islam’ is mentioned in the book I believe is countable with your ten fingers and thereby, the cover page with the crescent, yet again is very highly misleading. The second part is, that it talked about the betrayal by both, the West and the Western Woman whereas, if at all there was anything, he betrayed himself, owing to his dilemma and he already knew what he was getting into, when he got into the relationship, that despite the death of her boyfriend, she still loves him and eventually plunges into depression because of that – she never left him owing to some selfish pursuits. I agree that the latter is something the author could hardly be blamed for, giving the benefit of doubt that it is from the publisher, but the title, the author certainly is responsible.

I liked the way the author ended the novel leaving it open ended and the reader can imagine it in anyway it suits them and yeah, Changez was a really lovable character so, I naturally assumed an ending suiting how I saw the characters in the novel but you, as a reader, can end it in any way you want to. Moreover, for someone from the larger side of the Radcliffe line, it would be interesting to notice how there is little difference between the two sides, how someone who goes abroad from either sides behave the same way, how both sides feel threatened at home by the other side and of course, the fact that the only difference between the two sides is in fact, just the Radcliffe line.

While I would have really liked to give this book a better rating, I would have to say that the title deceived me too much and I’d stop with saying that it was a good story and give a standard rating of six.

Rating – 6/10

Have a nice day,

Andy

The Death of Sheherzad by Intizar Husain – Book Review

Publisher’s write-up:

‘A man scours the town he left fifty years ago for some little evidence of past joys. Javed, who’s returned to Lahore from East Pakistan, won’t speak of what he witnessed ‘there’. An old woman boards a train full of dead ancestors in her dreams. A sage who cannot control his anger must seek out a butcher for redemption. Mahaban, home of the monkeys once, is now a city full of human beings. Sheherzad, who once told Emperor Shaharyar a thousand-and-one stories, is now an old woman who has forgotten her yarns of fantasy.’

The book, titled as The Death of Sheherzad is a collection of fifteen short stories (with the title being one such short story in the book) written in Urdu by Intizar Husain, translated by Rakshanda Jalil. We’re always told never to judge a book by its cover, but that is exactly what I did in this case, I wanted to explore the literature of the neighbouring Pakistan, the write-up of the publisher seemed interesting and of course, the cover of the book looked pretty and I couldn’t resist buying the book after coming to know that this nominated for the Man Booker International Prize, 2013. But the question would always arise; did my risk of merely judging a book by its cover pay off?

Without a second thought, I’d answer yes, although, the very fact that I’m answering yes to this question only indicates that I’ve changed a lot, as a reader for one, the stories in the book are very, very abstract and at the same time, were on some very deep topics, like the partition, the idea of destiny and one of the stories really had a very interesting take on the India-Pakistan ‘nuclear powered state’ race. However, I really enjoyed the space provided by the author to the author to the reader to arrive at conclusions on the stories and the message he tries to convey, because, as much as they’re abstract, the endings are also at times, abrupt. The imagery, the subtlety in his writing, allowed me to create interesting visuals in my mind especially in some of the stories like Reserved Seat, Dream and Reality and of course, The Death of Sheherzad. The collection of stories also displayed the diverse interests of Intizar Husain, writing on topics such as the partition, the Bangladesh Liberation War, then moving on to philosophical topics such as destiny, certain stories based on Koranic anecdotes, such as The Wall (tongue of Yajooj and Majooj) and Dream and Reality(Ubayd’s governorship of Kufa and Basra) and also one from the Jataka Tales even though I’d score that down on originality as I had the exact same story in my 9^th class Sanskrit book during school.

The only drawback I felt was that every story had the same macabre setting, despite the diversity of topics and eventually, it became very predictable as to how the story was going to end and what the author was coming to. Moreover, this book certainly is not meant for readers across all genres, including my own self two years back who loved to read only fast paced mysteries or thrillers.

However, I’d say in the end that this is an excellent book with a very nice collection of short stories; this has made me even more interested in a lot of other, longer works of Husain. If you are someone who enjoys drawing your own conclusions out of stories, this book is meant for you.

Rating – 7/10

Have a nice day,

Andy

Animal Farm by George Orwell - Book Review

George Orwell, for me was quite a household name considering how, I've always taken a very active interest in politics from a very young age, especially the politics during cold war and had particular interest in Soviet Union and the politics former Soviet States and hence, this was a name that I kept coming across, especially the two books, 1984 and Animal Farm. So, I was going on a short trip and I thought I could take a nice book for a journey and a 'light political satire' seemed very appealing and hence, I packed Animal Farm into my bag without any second thoughts.

It starts with an old pig in the farm of an English farmer named Jones, called Major, inspiring the other animals to start a revolution to come out his clutches and establish a kingdom where all animals are equal, all resources are shared equally, etc. Akin to the Bolshevik revolution, they could overthrow Jones very easily, however, the problems started after driving out Jones. Major had passed away and the same was led by two pigs named Snowball and Napoleon, both of whom had significant ideological differences, however, came together to draft the seven commandments of the newly founded Animal Farm. However, Napoleon eventually taking control driving Snowball out of the farm (similar to the murder of Leon Trotsky and the eventual rise of Stalin). 

Napoleon, in my opinion, fit into the role of Stalin very well and the eventual changes in the Animal Farm was brought out very well, similar to the gradual decay of Soviet Union in the real world. However, I felt Snowball could hardly fit into Trotsky's role nor could Mrs. Jones fit into the role of Alexandra. Moreover, I felt that the writing was too flat and when you're alluding to a historic / political incident through a supposed fairy tale, I believe the writing should be filled sarcasm or at least, some blunt humour. A serious, political novel with a fairy tale involved along with animals as characters seems to be a wrong combination in every way. 

I guess, my fault was that I expected too much out of this book, considering how, this had been a book that I had heard of, a lot, as a classic and was in my shelf for quite a long time. The author was alluding to the Russian revolution and the eventual running of the Soviet Union along with the oppression by Stalin but then, while I could understand that, the author gave no hints towards the same in time, without this sense of immortality, this, in my opinion could well become a very sad fairy tale. However, I'd say one thing that it served my purpose of being a light read during travel, and I'd certainly try out 1984, his more popular work (well, it is on my shelf, so duty bound to read it some day). 

As for the rating, I would not say that the story individually was unreadable as I make it sound, but it certainly wasn't the political satire that you'd normally expect. I'd sit on the fence regarding rating this and give it a five on ten. 

Rating - 5/10

Have a nice day,
Andy