The Fellowship of the Ring (The Lord of the Rings #1) by JRR Tolkien – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in the darkeness bind them

In ancient times the Rings of Power were crafted by the Elven-smiths, and Sauron, The Dark Lord, forged the One Ring, filling it with his own power so that he could rule all others. But the One Ring was taken from him, and though he sought it throughout Middle-earth, it remained lost to him. After many ages it fell into the hands of Bilbo Baggins, as told in The Hobbit.

In a sleepy village in the Shire, young Frodo Baggins finds himself faced with an immense task, as his elderly cousin Bilbo entrusts the Ring to his care. Frodo must leave his home and make a perilous journey across Middle-earth to the Cracks of Doom, there to destroy the Ring and foil the Dark Lord in his evil purpose.’

The Fellowship of the Ring is the first book in The Lord of the Rings trilogy from JRR Tolkien. This is perhaps one of the most well-known books that I have read so far; being one of the most sold books in the world and also having highly successful film adaptations. I had loved the films as a teenager and wanted to get to reading the books someday. So, in this review, I would evaluate if it was worth reading the book.

The story happens in the world built by the earth, Middle-Earth, inhabited by various different species – being the hobbits, elves, men, dwarves, orcs, etc. The story begins with Bilbo Baggins celebrating his birthday in The Shire (the village of the hobbits) and leaves his possessions to his beloved nephew Frodo, including a ring with special powers. Frodo is visited by Gandalf the wizard, and is told of the evil powers of the ring; previously possessed by Sauron, the ruler of the land of Mordor. Frodo is joined in this mission by his gardener and close friend, Samwise, along with two other friends from the Shire, Merry and Pippin. The rest of the story is about their adventure and their path towards destroying this evil ring or as they say in the book, the one ring to rule them all.

This was a book that I wanted to like, a book that I had been meaning to read for a long time, it was a film that I enjoyed as a teenager, enjoyed the games that were from the universe, etc. However, the key word phrase here is that I wanted to like but I could not bring myself to like this book despite my best efforts. To start with, the narration was drab and often flat, providing no nuance to the characters and the manner in which they expressed themselves at various points. This was a standard young adult novel where each character had a clear identification of who was good or who was evil and there were hardly any layers to the personality of any of the characters.

There were aspects that could have made the book interesting, such as the distrust between the dwarves and the elves, and how they make do with that, but then, the ‘Fellowship’ is closely knit (something unusual for a group created on the spot by an elven lord, with only notable exception being the character of Boromoir who had shown some levels of dissent).

One could praise the writer for the detailed world that he has built and how this has inspired several other fantasy novel writers, whom I have personally enjoyed, but with that said, this book was a travelogue in a world that I was not interested in. There was nothing more to it than a bunch of people walking together, complaining about the weather, describing the surroundings, and moving from a point to another point. What was expressed in this particular book could have been expressed in a third of its size without losing the essential content of it.

While this book contains the features of a standard young adult novel, unfortunately, it is not a very easy read for a teenager either. Thus, I am unsure of whom it appeals to (no wonder this often features in the list of books people ‘pretend to have read’).

 To summarise this book, I would say that it is a boring travelogue featuring drab characters happening in a world that I am not interested in. On that note, I award the book a rating of three on ten.

Rating – 3/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

About Looking by John Berger – Book Review

Publisher’s write-up:

‘As a novelist, essayist, and cultural historian, John Berger is a writer of dazzling eloquence and arresting insight whose work amounts to a subtle, powerful critique of the canons of our civilization. In About Looking he explores our role as observers to reveal new layers of meaning in what we see. How do the animals we look at in zoos remind us of a relationship between man and beast all but lost in the twentieth century? What is it about looking at war photographs that doubles their already potent violence? How do the nudes of Rodin betray the threats to his authority and potency posed by clay and flesh? And how does solitude inform the art of Giacometti? In asking these and other questions, Berger alters the vision of anyone who reads his work.’

About Looking is a collection of essays by the Booker Prize winning novelist and art critic, John Berger. Most of these essays were published in the 60s and 70s which include the author’s take on interpretations of various art forms including photography, and the starting essay which was on the evolving relationship human beings have had and are still having with animals.

The author not only tries to make this a long technical summary of evaluating artists like Francis Bacon or Jean-François Millet but also brings in his political views into these essays such as the impacts of capitalism and how we tend to depoliticse events like war. This could please readers who are aligned with his politics and at the same time, alienate those who do not. I felt the first two essays were the most thought provoking and powerful, especially the way he explored how animals’ overtime have been marginalised and have now been reduced to mere relics such as in children’s toys, metaphors or in zoos. As aforementioned, the impact (or lack thereof) of the devastating photos of the Vietnam war was explored very well by the author in one of the essays.

However, the author frontloaded the best two essays and the rest were more difficult to understand, getting a tad too technical on artistic movements and various different styles. Initially, there were illustrations for the works of art that the author discussed but in the subsequent essays, I felt the author assumed the reader knew the works of art that he was describing – and beyond two or three essays, I did not have the patience to google every artist and work of art mentioned in the book.

The first few essays satisfy a general audience, and for a work of non-fiction, it is important to know who the intended audience is and unfortunately, the latter half is not for the general audience. I understand that the writer is British who lived a large part of his life in France, and thus, works of art from these two places are extensively discussed but considering his extensive knowledge on the subject, I would have liked to read an essay about artistic movements / artists in the other parts of the world.

To conclude, some of the essays, especially in the first half of the book were thought provoking and interesting. The latter half could be very interesting if you have deep knowledge in the subject that the author is discussing, but if not, you would be as lost as I was.

If the book had stopped with the two brilliant essays the author had started with, this book could have had a much higher rating, but considering the incomprehensible latter half, I would award the book a rating of four on ten.

Rating – 4/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

Why Fish Don’t Exist by Lulu Miller – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘David Starr Jordan was a taxonomist, a man possessed with bringing order to the natural world. In time, he would be credited with discovering nearly a fifth of the fish known to humans in this day. But the more of the hidden blueprint of life he uncovered, the harder the universe seemed to try to thwart him. His specimen collections were demolished by lightning, by fire, and eventually by the 1906 San Francisco earthquake – which sent more than a thousand of his discoveries, house in fragile glass jars, plummeting to the floor. In an instant, his life’s work was shattered.

Many might have given up, given in to despair. But Jordan? He surveyed the wreckage at his feet, found the first fish he recognized, and confidently began to rebuild his collection. And this time, he introduced one clever innovation that he believed would at last protect his work against the chaos of the world.

When NPR reporter Lulu Miller first heard this anecdote in passing, she took Jordan for a fool – a cautionary tale in hubris, or denial. But as her own life slowly unraveled, she began to wonder about him. Perhaps he was a model for how to go on when all seemed lost. What she would unearth about his life would transform her understanding of history, morality, and the world beneath her feet.

Part biography, part memoir, part scientific adventure, Why Fish Don’t Exist reads like a fable about how to persevere in a world where chaos will always prevail.’

Why Fish Don’t Exist; as mentioned above in one of the longest write-ups I have read for such a small book, is a book from the NPR reporter Lulu Miller on David Starr Jordan, a taxonomist who was also the first Chancellor of the Stanford University in California, US.

The book starts by simultaneously describing her own personal crisis and then introducing David Starr Jordan, a man born during the mid-19^th century in the state of New York, who was highly interesting in observing an understanding nature during his childhood. Considering the author’s personal crisis, she wanted to seek inspiration from the life of David Starr Jordan, whom despite his circumstances, had immense levels of confidence and on the face of any crisis, looked for a solution to make the solution better. However, the more she learned about him, the more she learned of a dark side to his personality and the consequences of his actions.

I was initially apprehensive about the book considering I had heard of David Jordan, who was the first Chancellor of Stanford University and also an early proponent of eugenics. However, these fears did not last long as the writer explored all sides to him and it did not lead to unnecessary levels of glorification and in fact, quite the opposite.

The book did seem directionless in the initial phases and left me confused if the objective was to talk about herself or if this was a biography of David Starr Jordan. Portraying him as someone beating the odds did not sit well with me considering he seemed very successful at quite a young age. But as it went, I enjoyed reading the book, especially the latter half, where we learn a lot of dark aspects which most are unaware of – like the forced sterilisation programmes that were carried out in the United States inspired by scientists like Jordan.

The author also brought about her disillusionment over David Jordan very well, considering his work often involved exploiting the locals in Japan or Polynesia without giving them credit for the ‘discovery’ of the fish, a murder allegation against him, etc.

The ending justified the title and was also powerful as the author figures her own way to deal with her personal crisis. And I need to mention here that I loved the illustrations by Kate Samworth at the beginning of every chapter.

On that note, I would say that the book was an enjoyable read – has a beautiful cover and good illustrations, to add to the reading experience. Would recommend it as a light read (which deals with a lot of heavy topics) and on that note, I would award the book a rating of seven on ten.

Rating – 7/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

Bullshit Jobs by David Graeber – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘In the early twentieth century, people prophesied that technology would see us all working fifteen-hour weeks and driving flying cars. Instead, something curious happened. Not only have the flying cars not materialised, but average working hours have increased rather than decreased. And now, across the developed world, three-quarters of all jobs are in services, finance or admin: jobs that don't seem to contribute anything to society. In Bullshit Jobs, David Graeber explores how this phenomenon - one more associated with the Soviet Union, but which capitalism was supposed to eliminate - has happened. In doing so, he looks at how, rather than producing anything, work has become an end in itself; the way such work maintains the current broken system of finance capital; and, finally, how we can get out of it.

This book is for anyone whose heart has sunk at the sight of a whiteboard, who believes 'workshops' should only be for making things, or who just suspects that there might be a better way to run our world.’

Bullshit Jobs was a book written by the anthropologist David Graeber based on the testimonials he had received for an essay he had written regarding the phenomenon of bullshit jobs. The author estimates that around 40-50% of the jobs in the world are pointless and builds a case for his position.

The author structured the book in the following manner – the author’s hypothesis (occasionally backed by data or a famous real incidents), followed by a testimonial confirming his own hypothesis from one of his readers and then, draws a conclusion based on this testimonial. The author’s manner of expressing some of the terms, was rather indiscreet, which some might even consider pejorative to certain jobs – but I guess that was also the author’s intention, to draw attention to the phenomenon.

The positive thing about the book is that it made me think – about the phenomenon of bullshit jobs. A lot of work that is done could perhaps be pointless and we do not necessarily need a 40-hour working week. The author tries to use Keynes’ prediction as his justification where the latter had predicted that it in days to come, owing to technological improvements, we might need to work only 15 hours a week. In that sense, the author tries to draw attention to the fundamental flaw in the society where self-worth has been tied to work and the effort put in, even if that effort is not required (and the author describes this to be a form of sadomasochism). The necessity to work long hours when it might not be required is an important discussion to have.

With that said, relying entirely on testimonials to substantiate his theory is flimsy and in a lot of instances, the author seems to have profound hatred towards some of the professions which he seemed to have want to manifest in this book (like corporate lawyers – and for his information, I know of many corporate lawyers who are passionate and genuinely believe they are creating a difference, running contrary to the author’s hypothesis on them). In many cases, the people might hate the jobs that they are doing, may feel that it is redundant and is also possible that these jobs add no value to the society – but these facts are not enough to conclude that the job is redundant. In his own example, there was an example where a supervisor felt that their job was pointless as their team was perfectly capable of carrying out their functions without being supervised, but the moment the process fails, that is when a supervisor is required to monitor and correct the same (and till there is such a failure, it is possible that the supervisor does not do any actual work). Same is the case for those who fix bugs in a software and other defects in other professions whom the author pejoratively names ‘duct-tapers’.

In most cases, what the author took were extreme examples, and drew conclusions that were too strong for the underlying facts that the author used to build the case (most of them were based on a specific YouGov poll). While the premise was interesting, this could have remained an essay instead of being a full-fledged book, I was disappointed with the first half of the book, but the latter half salvaged it for me.

As I said earlier, this book is interesting to the extent that it could be the basis to have a lot of conversations that we ought to have, as to how work environment and society at large are to be structured in the future. I was uncomfortable with the kind of language used by the author, but that was perhaps expected from the very title of the book. This book could be read as a long essay and we may use it to build our own thoughts on the subject and ignore much of the author’s conclusions.

On that note, I would award the book a rating of six on ten.

Rating – 6/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

At Night All Blood is Black (Frère d’âme) by David Diop – Book Review

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Alfa and Mademba are two of the many Senegalese soldiers fighting in the Great War. Together they climb dutifully out of their trenches to attack France's German enemies whenever the whistle blows, until Mademba is wounded, and dies in a shell hole with his belly torn open.

Without his more-than-brother, Alfa is alone and lost amidst the savagery of the conflict. He devotes himself to the war, to violence and death, but soon begins to frighten even his own comrades in arms. How far will Alfa go to make amends to his dead friend?

At Night All Blood is Black is a hypnotic, heartbreaking rendering of a mind hurtling towards madness.’

Note: I read the book in French – review in French – cliquez ici

At Night All Blood is Black is a historical novel written by David Diop. The story is set during the times of the First World War and revolves around Alfa Ndiaye, a Senegalese rifleman in the French army, who has had a deeply disturbing experience in the battlefield.

The story starts with the death of Mademba Diop under gruesome circumstances, the person whom Alfa calls as someone who is more than a brother to him (hence the French title – which translates to soul brother). While he was mortally injured, Mademba requested Alfa to end his suffering and kill him, which Alfa could not bring himself to do. Since this incident, Alfa became desperate for revenge against the ‘blue-eyed enemy’ and recreated the scene of Mademba’s death by cruelly executing the ‘blue-eyed’ enemy soldiers. His own camp and his captain were worried about Alfa’s actions and wanted to remove him from combat roles.

It was an excellent premise, and I loved the narration style of the author wherein, Alfa recalled the past several times to the reader, but this was done in connection with the events that were currently happening in his life and thus it could still be considered a linear narration. At the outset, he describes his trench and his camp, and also the expectations they had of the African soldiers: which was to behave like ‘savages’ to intimidate the enemy, for that is exactly their perception of them. He also brought out the disconnect between the French and the Africans in the trench, sometimes with a bit of black comedy, wherein a soldier screams saying that he had understood the reason why he needed to die, and that was for his family pension.

The reason for the extreme behaviour of Alfa would be diagnosed as a case of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) these days. He was considered as an outcast by both the French and the African soldiers, the latter who believed that Alfa was a djëmm (Wolof for devil) – I loved these references in Wolof, be it the beliefs, superstitions, or the folktales.

My favourite part was Alfa recalling the story of his family – in a small village in Senegal called Gandiol, where we learn the traditions and social norms of the village, the ongoing ‘politics’, and risks and also their relations with neighbouring ethnicities. It was during this part that the friendship between Mademba and Alfa is brought out in full, and also their contrasting personalities, wherein Mademba was the intellectual who could even speak French and Alfa was the typical brash strongman.

I would have liked if there was more to the book as I was enthralled by the part of the story in West Africa and would have loved to have had more of it. Alfa is a complex character, with whom we can sympathise but may not particularly like and it was this layered aspect of his that I enjoyed.

To conclude, I would say that is an excellent read and I award the book a rating of eight on ten.

Rating – 8/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie – Book Review

 

People are unpredictable and most often, those who do well in life are those who know how to deal with people. This is perhaps one of the earliest books written on the subject by the writer and lecturer, Dale Carnegie, on How to Win Friends and Influence People. The skills could be useful for anyone and especially given my personality traits (overly introverted), I thought this could be a useful book.

The book is split into four parts and in each of these parts, the author preaches various ‘principles’ to influence people or gain their trust. Some of these principles include ‘do not criticise’, ‘do not argue’, ‘give a hearty praise’, etc. and all of these are supported by anecdotes from his personal life, people around him or historical personalities (he often referred to letters by Abraham Lincoln or George Washington).

Much as this book is popular and seems to have helped many people, I did not personally find this useful. Some of the principles where the author encourages empathy and urges us to see things from the other person’s perspective before coming to criticise are commendable and could be incorporated by everyone. However, this book is not about gaining meaningful friendships but being an effective salesperson and that seems to be the primary target of the author. Most of his examples are of how someone won a deal or sold a product or received a larger share of an inheritance of the lasting sorts.

My worry about the advice given in this book is that following these techniques verbatim could have an adverse effect on one’s mental health. While they could help in gaining influence, this would be retained so long as you behave this in the manner specified throughout the relationship and the book does not have a word on standing up for yourself or fulfilling your needs. I reckon if a person spends their whole lives trying to please other people in the quest for influence, at some point you would reach your breaking point on your needs never being met.

I was uncomfortable with the author celebrating people such as Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee as distinguished persons of repute in his example (both who were prominent members of the Confederacy in the US Civil War, the side that fought to have the right to ‘own slaves’). I gather that the version I had was revised, with a lot of earlier racist connotations being edited or removed – the publisher should have done enough to remove these references.

To conclude, this book is not useful – if you have a product or service to sell, please read this book. If you wish to have friends in life, this book is not going to help in that, especially on the long run. On that note, I would award the book a rating of three on ten.

Rating – 3/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

The Origins of Political Order by Francis Fukuyama – Book Review

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Nations are not trapped by their pasts, but events that happened hundreds or even thousands of years ago continue to exert huge influence on present-day politics. If we are to understand the politics that we now take for granted, we need to understand its origins.

Francis Fukuyama examines the paths that different societies have taken to reach their current forms of political order. This book starts with the very beginning of mankind and comes right up to the eve of the French and American revolutions, spanning such diverse disciplines as economics, anthropology and geography. The Origins of Political Order is a magisterial study on the emergence of mankind as a political animal, by one of the most eminent political thinkers writing today.’

When we look at political structures around the world, we would have several questions. Why do certain countries seem to be authoritarian for long periods of time in their history? Why are some regions politically unstable, whereas others have maintained liberal democracies for centuries? In this book, Professor Francis Fukuyama explains how political systems emerged in various parts of the world – from pre-historic times till the French Revolution.

The regions that the author discusses include China, India, Europe, the Middle East and to a limited extent, Latin America. The US is often touched upon, but the scope of the book ends at the French Revolution and thus, there is not much to cover about the US in this volume. The author explores how societies were initially organised tribally – which tended to be egalitarian and from there, multiple places have had different approaches to build institutions and the challenges that the community would face during this process. Political order has three components according to the author, being state building, rule of law and establishing accountability of the government.

The main points argued by the author is that the success or failure of a state is not often defined by resources that they have at their disposal or the battles won but the institutions that are built. To build on these – the author brings about several examples, the most profound being the ones centred around England – how they developed a strong state as compared to a weaker absolutist state in France and Spain. It was interesting that many of the references that the author had were books that I had read earlier, like Machiavelli’s Prince or Sun Tzu’s The Art of War.

I was initially sceptical about this book over the neutrality of the author’s perspective considering his political leanings, having served in the Reagan administration and being a founder of what I consider a very toxic ideology – neoconservatism. To be fair to him, the author has distanced himself from these ideals and the Republican Party during the 21^st Century. But I would say that this book is neutral and does not aim at putting forth a particular manner of administration or ideology as superior to the other.

If politics and history interest you, this book provides a good insight to both of them. There are people who often believe that several government institutions are redundant; this book can provide with examples as to why those are necessary for effective state building and also why having an all-powerful authority at the top is not viable and if achieved, has hardly been good for the state.

This book could deter hyper nationalists / jingoists when their respective nation is evaluated and that their past was not all that glorious but then, I do not expect them to pick up a book of this kind. I might have liked a more dedicated section on Japan and their largely isolationist policy till the 20^th Century; and how they built such a state.

On the whole, I would say that considering my personal interests on both politics and history, I found this book very insightful. If you have similar interests, you would like this book too. This author has done enough to get me interested in the second volume and I shall be reading it soon. On that note, I award the book a rating of eight on ten.

Rating – 8/10

Have a nice day,

Andy