Guide to Digital Photography

If you clicked on this from your blog reader thing (yes, that's what I call mine) because you thought it was a clever title and wondered what book I would be reviewing, well...I have some good news and some bad news. 

The good news is I have a very funny quote for you from the book. Wait for it...

The bad news is this is a review of The Nikon Guide to Digital Photography with the D40 Digital Camera. 

Here's the quote in case you don't want to get to the end:

When operating the viewfinder diopter control with your eye to the viewfinder, care should be taken not to put your finger in your eye accidentally. 

Thank you Nikon!  I don't know what I would do without your sage advice. 

The above quote appears not once, but twice in this dry read of a book.  And without that quote, I don't think I could have made it through the rest of the book.  "Why?" you ask did I read this.  Because we just had a beautiful (I can say that, right?) baby and I would like to be able to take better pictures of her.  In my quest for beautiful pictures I came across a blog series from October of last year about getting better photos.  I have not completed the series, but the first assignment was to read the owner's manual for my camera. 

The result?  I know very little more about shooting better pictures than I did when I started, but I do have a working knowledge of each tiny part of my machine.  Sadly, I did not understand half the stuff they talked about.  This left me with the feeling that I should take a professional photog course at the the local community college; but as a new mom, I think I will work my way through the blog series instead. 

Here's hoping I take some better shots in the future.   Oh, and although my fellow photog blogger recommends reading the owner's manual - I can't recommend it the way I would other books.  Maybe you could do a drinking game for every time the manual writer wrote a "this is common sense and you, reader would be an idiot to do what I just told you not to do but I am covering my butt for the legal department" sentence.  Yeah, that would make it more fun. 

Rating: 3 out of 7, but only because it is tabbed (I like a sense of order in my owner's manuals).

-L

Most people, whether they are into music or not, have heard the catchy tunes of Buddy Holly at some point in their lives.  They remain an influence on many artists of varied genres even today.  His untimely death (with other promising musicians) is often referred to as the Day the Music Died.  But for the musicians, songwritters, and artists of his hometown, the music never stopped.  This is the topic of my latest read: Fire in the Water, Earth in the Air: Legends of West Texas Music.  The book is a compilation of interviews with twenty-five artists who came from or drifted into and were influenced by Lubbock, Texas - the home of Buddy Holly. 
My interest in this book is based on my lifelong love of some of these very artists: Joe Ely, Butch Hancock, and Terry Allen.  But it is amazing just how many artists are from the flatland that makes up Lubbock's landscape.  Although I have never spent any time in Lubbock, I feel I know the story: small town hoping to be something bigger, but never qutie making it.  All the trappings of the Bible belt: a church on every corner and bars on the outskirts of town.  The struggle to find something to pass the time, to make a way out of town, and the sense of home that draws you back when you leave. 
The legacy of Buddy Holly went almost completely unnoticed by the citizens of Lubbock (until the Chamber found out it was a moneymaking venture) and many of the artists of Lubbock have gone mostly unnoticed by mainstream anything.  Nonetheless, that is just how most of them would want it.  They do it for the love of music, not to make money.  I am so happy that Chris Oglesby took the time to record some of these stories. 
If you are uninitiated in the music of West Texas (or Texas in general), this book is a great starting point.
Rating: 6 of 7
-L

I Laughed out Loud

A couple weeks ago, I posted a request to our lovely readers for suggestions on funny books.  I was in a rut and I thought a good laugh would do.  I received a lot of feedback - some laughable, some insightful.   The top suggestion was something about a Guide to the Galaxy.  I was thinking it was probably not for me, but we went to the bookstore to check it out anyway.  On the way to locating the book, another book caught my eye.  Undaunted, we went to the Guide and -D read the leaf for me.  I tuned out about two sentences in.  It is not a book for me - I just don't think I will "get it."  The point is to cry from laughter, not from boredom.  Sorry, lovers of the Guide - maybe some day.

 The book I spotted on my way to the Guide was The Bible of Unspeakable Truths  by Greg Gutfeld.  Listen up those who are unacquainted and I will acquaint you. It all started a few years ago at 12AM.  I turned on my TV to find a short, somewhat portly man speaking heinous things while his repulsive sidekick, a hot FOX news lady, and a CIA operative watched.  This Gregalogue (it's a monologue with Greg) introduced me to what would become a household staple around here.  Sadly, last month, we decided to cut our ties to the extended world by getting rid of our cable, so Greg is no longer a household staple (oddly, enough this dovetailed quite nicely with my need of a humorous book, coincidence? ithinknot).   We no longer get to hear the misadventures of a post-operative, houseboy enthusiast and his preoperative, questionably coiffed sidekick. 

Naturally, when I spotted Greg's roundish face on my way to the guide, I immediately thought, "This is what I need!"...and it was.  This book is basically a collection of Gregalogues so it does not really find a cohesive theme...unless you consider his love of underground rooms, houseboys named Pablo, and fastidious research(of books not yet written) a theme.  It is more a book you read bits of at a time because his Gregalogues can be quite short (sometimes even one sentence).  There are some truths in here, some head scratchers and some overshares.  But, overall, it is like watching an episode of Red Eye, which I find cathartic.  Greg really seems to want to connect with his readers.  He even invites them to join him for various events (usually in a park, scantily clad, with only a birthmark as his true source of identification).   He wants his readers to be well-fed.  Thus, he includes what looks like a great recipe for lemon bars.  I had never considered the inclusion of a prostitute, but that might add a little something.  Oh, and he cares about his readers' safety.  His argument for guns is quite cogent. 

Overall, this book is a treat.   And for you, a treat:


Rating: 5.5 out of 7
-L

American Creation

So, I fully realize that this will not be one of the most popular posts on this blog; but I am an unabashed history buff, so bear with me. 

My most recent read was American Creation by Joseph J. Ellis.  Of course Ellis is the famous historian and author of Founding Brothers.  I haven't read Founding Brothers, but I may put it on the list for a much later read.  American Creation follows the major events of the American Revolution period (defined as the years of 1775-1803).  Thus the book is not what anyone would call exhaustive.  Rather, it skims the surface of the revolution, touching down on of the year 1776, the winter at Valley Forge, the Treaty of Paris, the Federalist/Anti-Federalist fights, and the Louisiana Purchase. 

From the outset, Ellis bothered me as a historian and a history writer.  In the prologue, he points out that our history has been boiled down to a fairy story of good vs. evil, heroes vs. villians.  That we have created demigods of the founders, the facades of which have only recently begun to crumble as historians have chipped away at the legends to reveal truth.  As such he introduces the reader to Douglass Adair, Gordon Wood, and Bernard Bailyn (as well as himself) - historians who have decided to analyze the mindset of the founders (through the extensive written records) to draw conclusions about their motivation, the impetus for their participation, and (to some degree) their success.  He argues these historians' various points of view "contribute to a discernably adult conversation about the sources and causes of the American founding as a significant political triumph." 

What bothers me about this is the psycho-analysis approach to history writing.  It smacks of judgment and not fact-telling.  As the reader later discovers in the book, Ellis uses the last half of the points of focus as a none-too-subtle attack on the character of Thomas Jefferson.  This approach to history writing leans heavily on hindsight as the "judge" instead of a just the facts ma'am approach I prefer.  Perhaps, it is easier to begin judging the subjects of one's  history when one is fully immersed in the time period. so to speak.  It is not the lack of facts and stories Ellis suffers, it is the over-abundance.  He has so reanimated these characters in his mind, it is almost as if he is living alongside them.  Thus the attacks Hamilton throws at Jefferson, are almost audibly followed by a hearty "here! here!" by Ellis. 

This type of history writing also feels disconnected.  The reader just gets to the "good stuff" and is snapped back to present day by the mention of "hindsight being 20/20" and lessons on what impact the events of the revolution had on the later American narrative.  I would have preferred a simple story-telling narrative, with any footnotes to history properly footnoted (I think that is why they call them that). 

Overall, interesting read.  Not a reread.

Rating: 3.5 out of 7

-L

Author Unknown

The dilemma of most anonymous writers is that they crave attention without being identified, but "recognition" is a word that cuts both ways.

This week's read came from the bookshelves and until I was half-way through it, I did not realize it was my husband's book and he had read it.  It, surprisingly, appeared unread.  Nonetheless, this book is fascinating (and, thanks to clever book opening techniques, still appears unread). 

Author Unknown: Tales of a Literary Detective by Don Foster is the account of the first literary attribution expert: how he came into the field, and some of the literary who-wrote-its he has unveiled.  It is a little plodding through the preface and the first chapter, but really takes off when discussing modern day mysteries.  This man has worked in every possible genre of literature: poetic (Shakespearean, no less), political, terrorist, down-right weird, and of course Clausian (Santa, that is). 

One of the most interesting aspects of this book is the how of the process.  He discusses, with specificity, the methods of discovering the author of a Questioned Document (i.e. one that is "anonymous").  The author's use of diction, structure, punctuation, and literary allusion are the main tricks of his trade.  While he described this process, I considered my own use of these elements of style.  I will most likely never write under anonymity, but if I do, I can only imagine I would be considerably easy to figure out.  The way a writer writes is indeed a sort of fingerprint.  No two authors are alike.  Foster, of course, is also able to spot forgeries, so don't go trying to change just for the purpose of not being found out.  Joe Klein of Newsweek found out the hard way when Foster outed him as the author of Primary Colors. 

In the trenches of literary detective work, Foster has outed a long-dead eulogizer, a transgender-impersonating murderer, a reclusive author, skillful liars, and smarmy lawyers.  It seems no one is safe from the detective's tools.  Thankfully, he has used his talent for good, helping police investigators and FBI analysts determine the authors of various writing samples.  This book is a great read for those who love thinking about the written word. 

Rating: 5.5 of 7

-L

Jesus Manifesto: Thoughts

The Jesus Manifesto: Restoring the Supremacy and Sovereignty of Jesus Christ.  Sounds like a great title to me (minus the whole manifesto thing - smacks of something I don't agree with - communism).  However, the devil is in the details on this one.  As I began to unwrap what the authors meant by the supremacy and sovereignty of Christ, I began to notice some discouraging things.  Then my discouragement turned to disagreement, then to disdain.  I really hate to say it, but this one is not worth the paper it is printed on.  It will not make it to a spot on the bookshelves. 

A little harsh you may think.  Well, if you do, I advise you to stop reading now.  If that bothered you, you really are not going to like what comes next. 

Buckle up, as I unpack the book.  I will attempt to categorize my thoughts, but things may bleed into one another.  My apologies:

1.  Context, context, context. Any child of God who is a student of the Word (sad that there is a category of God's children who are not students of the word), discovers very quickly the principles of interpretation of Scripture.  The foremost in this is that context rules the interpretation.  God did not speak any verse of the Bible into a vacuum.  Rather, He knit together the Word of God into a beautiful tapestry of His Glory.  As such, we, as students, cannot get around the fact that each verse is part of a greater whole.  Thus, the first problem with the Manifesto is taking MANY passages referenced out of context.  As a Berean, I am one of those people who read a "Christian" book with a Bible sitting next to me.  I look up almost all of the passages mentioned, to make sure I understand them fully in the context.  This is the best way to figure out "whether these things are so."  I can count up the ones that jumped out to me enough to note them and I need two hands.  Two hands!  This shows me it is not a mere mistake on one passage of Scripture, but an effort to distort the very words of God to fit a philosophy of man.  Here are the "worst" offenders:

From Genesis to Revelation, the forces of evil have disputed God's right to have a home on this earth. But from the beginning, God has wanted a "house" - a place where He could rest and "presence" Himself.

They then reference Isaiah 66:1. Open your Bible to Isaiah 66 and tell me if you get the idea that God needs anything from man. No, he desires nothing of the sort, rather He regards "him who is humble and contrite of spirit, and who trembles at My word." At what? At His word - this is the most important thing to God. And who is the Word made flesh? Christ. So, who are we to tremble before? Only Christ.

In a word, Jesus is heaven's passion and occupation.

Really, what about Isaiah 6 and Revelation 4?  What about that little thing God said about not sharing His glory with any other?  In truth, God is the focus of heaven; God, represented by Him who sits on the throne and the Lamb who is among the seven Spirits before the throne.  The book seeks to exalt Christ to the detriment of the other members of the Trinity.  I am all for the exaltation of God, His attributes, His actions, His glory, His revelation, His Word, but I am not going to divide God up into three boxes, two small ones for the Holy Spirit and God and one great, big one for Jesus.  Jesus came that He might glorify the Father.  The Holy Spirit came that He might glorify Jesus.  It seems they are all working for the same goal...glory.

You will never know the depths of Christ on your own. It matters not how intelligent, gifted, or spiritual you may be. It takes a functioning body to know Him fully. And it takes a functioning body to display his fullness. Paul made this clear in Ephesians that we come to know the width, length, depth, and height of Christ 'with all the saints.' It's only by being vitally and organically connected with other members of the body in a living way that we experience the fullness of God.

The problem with this is that they think the saints are the mediating source of knowledge. The "with all the saints" here in Ephesians refers to the saints who have believed in Christ (throughout all time). Consider that OT believers are referred to as "saints" all the way back to Daniel's time; each of these believers came to the full realization of the magnitude of God's love. Also, in this context, Paul refers to the inner man. He is referring to the personal relationship man has with Christ, not the corporate relationship of Christ to His church.  Also, in this context, Paul is speaking of the love of Christ, not the fullness of God.  What Paul prays for is an understanding of God's love that carries out in the life of a believer as a worthy walk (chapters 4-6 of Ephesians).

2. Sorry, Wrong Number: In the places where context was not at best questionable, and at worst misleading, the authors of this book simply got it wrong.  It is shocking that two men could read the same passage of Scripture, reference it a number of times in their book and both get it wrong.  The temptation of Christ is referenced in the book a few times.  Here are some highlights:

Israel was tempted in the wilderness for forty years.  Jesus was tempted in the wilderness for forty days.  In fact, the same temptations that Israel experienced in the wilderness were repeated when Christ was in the wilderness.  To combat them, Jesus quoted the words of Moses to satan. Interestingly, they were the exact same words that Moses gave to Israel when she was tempted. 

The references here are Deuteronomy 8:3; 6:13, 16.  Sorry, wrong number.  Each of these verses explicitly bring to remembrance another time where the Lord tested Israel.  Deuteronomy is the summation of the Law, it is the grand review before the great final exam.  These are the last words Moses speaks to the people of God.  They are commands, not admonitions. 

Then, later in the book:

The Holy One's public ministry began only after He faced and outfaced three temptations. The most tantalizing of the three was the temptation to turn the kingdom of God into a political program. Jesus shook off the lure of political theology by stiff-arming it with these words: "My kingdom is not of this world."

Sorry, wrong number: Jesus did not say these words to Satan during the temptation in the wilderness.  In fact, He said them much later in his ministry, almost at the end, when he was speaking to Pilate (John 18:36).  You may think that this is nit-picking, but there is a problem with smashing the word of God together to make it fit something you want it to say.   Oh, but then there is the little problem that Satan's temptations had nothing to with turning Christ's ministry into a political program. It seems to me that is a modern interpretation of the first century opposition to Christ.

3. What about the Holy Spirit?  As I was reading, I started wondering where the Holy Spirit fits into this Manifesto.  But the authors promised a more complete discussion of the Holy Spirit and the Father in chapter 10.  Still, as I continued to read, I grew more and more concerned.  There was in chapter 3 a biography of you, written by God, that was actually the biography of Christ (I am not making this up), but it did not mention the Holy Spirit, except to say, "You must grow, mature, and develop in My Spirit, and, "My [God's] object and the object of the Spirit is to make My beloved Son everything."  The biography spans 13 pages and mentions the Holy Spirit twice.  Hmmm....interesting that what Christ spent chapters in John (14-16) disclosing to the disciples, warrants only a small footnote in the biography of the believer.  There is no explanation that without the power of the Spirit we can do nothing.  No mention that the Spirit is our Helper to guide us into all truth and take what is Christ's and disclose it to us. No mention that the Spirit abides in the life of a believer and will be with us forever.  Such a life changing presence in the life of a child of God and yet, barely a footnote. 
When I finally got to Chapter 10, I found much more of the same: a mere page and a half description of the Trinity and a reference to another book to find out more.

4.  Implantation vs. Indwelling.  With such problems found in chapter 3 regarding the near absence of the Holy Spirit, it is no surprise that chapter 4 finds us further off the track.  Here, the authors begin to discuss the life of Christ in the believer.  Without mentioning the Holy Spirit as the power, we find that:
So instead of having the Spirit of God dwelling in us and empowering us, we are incarnations of Christ.  I don't know how I feel about the implications of this statement.

The good news is as scary as it is good.  It is safe to be "like" Jesus; it is scary to "be" and "do" Jesus...Likewise a Christian should not mean, but be.  Be what?  The living Christ for a dying world.  But to "be" is to give up control and ownership and to share life with the Word made flesh, the very image of the invisible God. The truth is that if we all fully understood what it means that the very being of God wants to take residence in us and share our life, we would all be reluctant incarnations.

5.  What happened to the Scriptures?  Late in the book, we find out the reason for all this confusion regarding context, chapters and verses, and the Holy Spirit.  The authors don't believe the Word of God is what it says it is. 

The Bible is not reader-indifferent or history-independent. Each age draws new insights from the Scriptures based on what that age brings to it. This means that revelation is always veiled in mystery. We bring it to our culture, our history, our gaze, and our glasses. The fundamentalist idea that the text has only one meaning is of relatively recent invention.

And:

We have learned a lot from different perspectives of Jesus: feminist theology, creation theology, process theology, liberation theology, narrative theology, postliberal theology, emergent theology.

All there is to say in regard to this is God does not agree.  Please see 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 1 Peter 1:20-25 and 2 Peter 1:19-21.  I could go on regarding the warnings against preaching anything contrary to what the Word says.

6. Bethany: A Home for Christ? The authors of this book, not wanting to leave any stone unturned on the shocking assertions field, discussed at great length the significance of the city of Bethany in the life of Christ.  They spent an entire chapter on it and presented it as a microcosm or a shadow of the church.  The problems I had with this discussion are many, but this is the most important one:
Christ didn't go to Bethany because he wanted a place to call home. He went to Bethany because it was a predetermined place to show the glory of the Father on His road to the cross. There were works in Bethany God had planned for Him to do. And because He was obedient (to the point of death), He fulfilled His mission in Bethany.

This is what Bethany symbolizes - a home for Christ...Bethany is the place where Jesus was utterly welcome.  In contrast to everywhere else He went, Jesus was completely and gladly received in Bethany. 

In fact, he was only welcome in Martha and Mary's home. At least we know the disciples were a little concerned about travelling in that area. In John 11: 8, they said of the proposed trip to Bethany, "Rabbi, the Jews were just now seeking to stone You, and you are going there again?" When was the last time you found a welcoming committee outfitted with welcoming stones?
Besides all these things, did anyone notice that Christ already has a home?  He mentions it a few times during His ministry.  It is called Heaven.  He came from there, where the Father dwells.  He planned on going back. He did not need a home on earth, for He had a much greater one in Heaven.


Whew....that was a long one.  All that to say, I believe to my very core that these teachings are detrimental to the church.  It is out of a love for the brethren that I point these things out.  I urge you to seek the answers to the questions raised in the Word of God.  I urge you to consider that Christ is preeminent (along with the "rest" of God) and that Christ is the Word made flesh.  To diminish the very Word of God is to cut down the Risen Lord.

Rating: 0 out of 7.

-L

I am Conservative Culture!

Let's just start off by saying that I was very surprised by this book. When I first read about it I thought that this could be a good read. When it arrived in the mail, I turned to the leaf and the first sentence stunned me. It read, "The main Hardball host Chris Matthews calls "the legendary R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr." has done it again. OH NO, they duped me into reading a book based off of some soft not-so-really conservative preaching that *Neo Conservatism Lives* (the asterisks are there to pretend that's being flashed on-and-off in bright lights - maybe a little big band music playing in the background). 


At that point, I had to put down After the Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery and wonder how I was going to get through this. And with a few sighs I started to read through R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr.'s latest work and was incredibly surprised at how much I agreed with his view on real conservative thought. This is not a book that harangues the decades of conservative culture growth, but one that brings everything that is great and not-so-great to the table. As a young conservative of 30 I didn't know about the roots that were put down for the American conservative. We are an inclusive bunch that desires the greatness of American values, or American Exceptionalism. Emmett does a great job of giving the history of the culture and some of the great intellectuals that have placed their stamp on it.


It's wasn't all roses though. After the Hangover doesn't start off as well as I would prefer. Tyrrell Jr. does talk about his other books throughout the first chapter and that wasn't that interesting to me. But after that this book is tough to put down. That's saying a lot considering that it's political non-fiction and I usually read fantasy. I'm not so sure a Liberal would read this and agree with everything that the author states, but it hits home for me. In fact, the best chapter is the last chapter. He lays out the reforms necessary for America to become prosperous, and to root it's foundation in firm principles. If you just read this last chapter, you'd be missing out on the rest of a great book, but at least you would have a coherent look at how great of a country we can be.


-D


Rating: 8 of 10! Thoroughly enjoyed it and would recommend to anyone willing to look a little deeper into the conservative mind. 


Note: I think I'm supposed to mention that I received this book for free from BookSneeze. I would spend money on this book though. It deserves a space in my library, and I hope that I can someday point to it and tell someone that our government decided to implement conservative ideas and that is why we're prosperous today. 

Crazy Love

I have been slowly working my way through Crazy Love: Overwhelmed by a Relentless God over the last week or so.  The book describes a Christian life that is crazy to the world, but inspired by a crazy love from God.  I used to go to Francis Chan's church and always enjoyed the way he taught his sermons with passion, with realism, and with a fervent heart set on waking up the congregants to their complacency.  This book is the outflow of Chan's ministry to his local community.  It challenges the believer and the lukewarm to wake up and take the words of Christ seriously, to consider thier lives in light of the Word of God. 

As you can see these are things you really ought to read for yourselves, instead of me distilling them down for you.  But I will share one of the things that impacted me most while reading: a new perspective of stress and worry.  Here's a small note:

Basically, these two behaviors communicate that it's ok to sin and not trust God because the stuff in my life is somehow exceptional. Both worry and stress reek of arrogance. They declare our tendency to forget that we are forgiven , that our lives here are brief, that we are headed to a place where we won't be lonely, afraid, or hurt ever again, and that in the context of God's strength, our problems are small indeed. 

He goes on to give one of his great parables to expand on this thought, but what this says is what is at the heart of this book. It tells of the greatness of our God, the greatness of His love for us, and what most Christians give Him in return (half-hearted, faith-failing 15 minutes of devotion). 

Overall, the book is a great read, even for the Christian who already has it "figured out."  If you find this Christian, please point him out to me, I would like to see what that really looks like.

Rating: 5.5 out of 7

-L  

Politics and President's Day Read

"If the incompetent and corrupt politicians would only follow the example of their ancestors, enter a herd of swine, run down some steep bank and drown themselves in the sea, there would be some hope of saving the country."

I was almost halfway through the latest book when I realized it is February and my book choice was appropriate for several reasons.
1. President's Day
2. Abraham Lincoln's B-day.
3. The present state of politics/war in America.

This week's book was Tried By War by James M. McPherson. It purports to detail Abe Lincoln as Commander in Chief. I think it ends up being a chronicle of the battles of the civil war and the correspondence between the various generals and Lincoln. This does not seem to detail the various books Abe read in his "crash course" in military strategy, nor his supposed precedence shattering interpretation/approach to the constitutional vagary of "Commander in Chief." Overall, I think I was expecting something different. It was, however, a good, if not incredibly detailed, overview of the civil war from a "fresh" perspective (I use that term loosely, if not sarcastically).

The best thing about the book was the above quote, stated by Gen. Henry W. Halleck, for whom, it seemed, hypocrisy knew no bounds, in that regard. The frustrating thing about reading about the civil war from the perspective of someone pulling for the North, is the constant political games that must be played in Washington. These games were not new in Lincoln's day and are not beneficially altered by the passage of 150 years. Sadly, the war was almost lost a number of times by the sheer political maneuvering of a few generals, rather than a single-minded focus on bringing the fight to the enemy and defeating the rebellion as soon as possible (Lincoln’s strategy, by the way). Every time I read about Gen. McClellan I want to go all papal court on him and start googling his burial plot. He should have been brought up on charges of treason and shot, but, as always, politics saved him. AHHH!

Lincoln remains the hero of presidents, as he always does. He won the war, he saved the Union, he is to be praised. What does not get noticed, is his unsteady hand in the area of human resources. He often played the political games of the day, keeping at best, inefficient and at worst, treasonous men in positions of power. It reminded me of an interview I heard whilst reading this book regarding Reagan. It seems he had someone on his staff who was so incompetent that Reagan refused to fire him because he felt sorry for him and said something to the effect of, “we can’t let him go, no one would hire him.” In my humble opinion, in government, there is no room for the undesirables. No one is perfect, but constant tomfoolery in the White House is unacceptable.
Rating: 3
Side note: Lincoln book that received a 7: Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns Goodwin

-L

Angela's Ashes

My covert book group and I are supposed to read Angela's Ashes, by Frank McCourt, so I thought this was a great week to get my assignment done.  Here are my thoughts:
The critic who stated on the back of the book that this book was a joy to read was woefully mistaken.  This was in no way a joy to read.  The pain of losing sibling after sibling, sheer hunger to the point of starvation, hospitalization including almost complete isolation, and a descent into sin are not the things of joy.  At least to this critic.  Does this mean I did not like the book?  No not really.  Rather it means I was sobered and mostly saddened by McCourt's tale.  I think there are incidents from this book that will haunt me for many years. 
The only thing which provided much of the "comic relief" was the treatment the boy Frankie receives at the hands of the Catholic Church.  This was an interesting insight into the Irish Catholic Church...eye opening.  I found myself shocked at some of the things they believe and how sad it is that they have an entire series of generations who walked through life seeing only the greed and corruption of the one organization that should have been a source of help and hope for the needy.
I did find myself rooting for Frankie, who was different to the citizens of Limerick because he had an inate intelligence which would eventually carry him away from poverty.  He was different than so much of Limerick, but he was so much the same.  Making excuses for sin and seeking absolution from a sinful and greedy church.  You could tell early on from the book that he was not long for Limerick. 

Note to Drew:  Should we do a rating system for the books we read?

L