Category Archives: Books

Recent Reading

One of the advantages of having a light term is that I have time for pleasure reading and I’ve been trying to take advantage of it. Here are my latest reads.


Accelerando
Charles Stross

Stross writes hyperkinetic science fiction that crosses hard scifi with cyberpunk. Accelerando spans several galaxies, a number of states of consciousness, and much of the 21st century. The speed at which he tosses out new ideas obscures the character development somewhat, but there are so many neat things to think about that it almost doesn’t matter. Stross did a particularly good job of capturing a modern vision of the future. Accelerando still features aliens and space travel, but the driving technologies are artificial intelligence and nanotech. I particularly recommend the Accelerando technical companion as a reference for some of Stross’s more out-there ideas and in true cyberpunk style, the entire book is available online.


The Oxford Murders
Guillermo Martinez
Trans. by Sonia Soto

The Oxford Murders continues the recent trend of “scholarly thrillers” that The Da Vinci Code reignited (though I wouldn’t call that particular novel “scholarly”). The Oxford Murders follows an Argentine mathematics student during a visit to Oxford, England, where he becomes involved in solving a sequence of mysterious murders (how come my REUs never turned out like that?) While a perfectly good mystery, I wasn’t blown away by this particular book. Maybe I was expecting too much, but the mathematics theme seemed superfluous. I gather that the author has a degree in Math, and I certainly sympathize with the desire to write a thriller in which the hero is a mathematician, but I think that in the process of making it accessible, Martinez turned the math into pseudo-philosophy akin to Dan Brown’s “symbology.” I certainly didn’t expect advanced math, but it was kind of weird when all the mathematicians started running around making weighty claims about Pythagorean cults and whatnot. All in all, I would say The Oxford Murders was a pleasant, but ultimately forgettable, diversion.

Food Part 2: Corn and Agribusiness

It’s been a while since I last posted about food, but I have not forgotten about it, and I would still like to take some time to reflect on Michael Pollan’s book The Omnivore’s Dilemma. I was originally just going to write one post about the book, but I wasn’t getting very far, so I decided to post what I have on the first section of the book.

Throughout The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Pollan’s primary thesis is that we should be more conscious about what we eat where our food comes from. This seems to be a pretty unassailable position, but Pollan decides to a actually trace the history of four very different meals in order to probe the economic and ethical dimensions of eating in America. His first stop is McDonald’s, and this quickly leads him into a consideration of the complex role that corn plays in the agricultural economy. As a Nebraskan myself, it was no surprise to me that growing corn is big business, but I was surprised to learn just how omnipresent it is in our diets. Something like 60% of the items on the McDonald’s menu contain corn products, and even soft drinks are mostly corn. One natural question to this revelation is “so what?” Corn is vegetable, after all, and it doesn’t seem like it is such a terrible thing to eat.

To answer this question, Pollan follows a complex story of economics and agriculture to find out just how corn has changed what we eat. First of all, the rise of corn has steadily reduced the diversity of foods that we grow and eat. Modern corn has been genetically engineered for one thing – to pack as many calories into as little land as possible, and this leaves little room for issues such as sustainability or nutrition. We consume huge quantities of high-fructose corn syrup, for instance, but our intake of actual sugar has not decreased. By eating more and more processed foods, we are ceding our nutritional decisions to big corporations, and they just want us to eat (and buy) more.

The issues run deeper, however, when one considers the plight of the farmers who grow corn. Even though the price of corn has plummeted as supply has increased, it is one of the few crops subsidized by the government and the only way for many farmers to make a living is to grow as much as possible despite the demand. Pollan likes to call this an agricultural “monoculture,” and argues that it is bad for the land, for the farmers, and for us.

Pollan has certainly convinced me that corn is not the answer to our country’s eating problems, but I would have liked to see a little bit more scientific information on how this “monoculture” affects our health. Pollan sometimes seems to treat nutritionists as the enemy, and sometimes his reasoning is a bit holistic. He seems to take it on faith that natural is good and engineered is bad, and I think this is a bit short-sided. We certainly don’t have all the answers right now, but that doesn’t mean that science doesn’t have a lot to tell us about what we should eat.

No discussion of the ethics of agribusiness would be complete without a foray into the dark world of the slaughterhouse. Though Pollan was not allowed to visit any industrial facilities (for “security reasons”), he does travel to a ‘CAFO’ (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation) to see the living conditions of the livestock. The situation he finds is abysmal. The grounds are filthy and polluted, and the animals are treated strictly as products. Corn finds a place here too- cows don’t digest it naturally (They’re ruminants and eat grass), but it is plentiful, so farmers have concocted a combination of antibiotics that allow them to survive on corn. Though we have come to praise “corn fed beef”, the cows live their lives ill and bloated.

One of the questions that Pollan asks throughout the book is whether the conditions he finds are enough to warrant adopting vegetarianism. Though I can’t discuss his ultimate conclusion until I talk about the rest of the book, he certainly criticizes the “out of sight, out of mind” attitude that dominates so much of our environmental ethics. As with the additives to processed food, we need look at where our food comes and whether we approve.

To some extent it’s no surprise to hear about how bad conditions are in slaughterhouses or how much we should change our diets, but Pollan does present an elequent examination for the 21st century. I particularly like the fact that he does not come to the table with too many preconceived ideas. He is not a vegetarian or a nutrition-freak, and while these are certainly valid positions, it’s nice to see a book about food written by a ‘foodie’ who still manages to be critical of how we eat. Truth be told, I would have liked to see a bit more about nutrition in the book, but overall it did a good job of striking a balance.

Fahrenheit 451

Just finished reading Fahrenheit 451. It was selected for the Omaha Reads program, and I figured the least I could to was read the novel to show my support. It’s amazing how prescient Bradbury was in 1953. His vision of a society in which people exchange contemplation for a quick thrill seems quite similar to the MTV obessesed world we live in today. I am reminded of the study (pdf file) from a few months ago that found that fewer and fewer Americans are reading books. Clearly we are a long way from government sanctioned book burning, but the addictive and vapid television parlours of Fahrenheit 451 seem just around the corner. In fact, it strikes me that Bradbury’s dystopia is so frightening because it does not require the intervention of a totalitarian force. In Bradbury’s history, people stopped reading and writing books not because they were banned, but because there were other instantly gratifying means of entertainment. He also envisions a sort of political-correctness gone wild that allows only the dullest least offensive books to be published. These are not directives from above, but widespread movements supported by the majority of the population. It is difficult to imagine how one might prevent the formation of such a society when it is created within the context of a majority-rules democratic system. Perhaps it is a bit idealistic, but I suppose that just reading books like Fahrenheit 451 is a good start.

One quote I particularly liked: “‘I voted last election, same as everyone, and I laid it on the line for President Noble. I think he’s one of the nicest-looking men ever became president'” (96). — Sad, but unfortunately not always that far from the truth.

I think I’m going to continue the dystopian thing and read Brave New World next.

Books

Picked up my books for the term today. There’s always something a little bit thrilling about gathering together the volumes that will so dominate my life for the next ten weeks. By all rights the fact that I will spend countless hours pouring over each of 10 books should dampen that thrill, should inspire a revulsion for the often dry and always challenging works that define an education. But it does not. Rather I felt something like a kid at Christmas as I walked into the bookstore and through the rows of neatly stacked texts. Like just such an anxious child I made only as far as the student center before devouring my gifts, skimming through the pages that I will read through meticulously as the term progresses.

Wow, I am such a dork 🙂

Da Vinci Code

I’ve come the realization that I’m really not very good at informal writing, so I’m continuing my ‘book reviews’ in the hopes of improving. Check back later today or tomorrow for more on what I’ve actually been up to these last few days. Don’t hold your breath, it’s nothing too exciting.

Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code has made quite a stir lately. It has topped the best seller list for some time now, and the author has even been accused of plagiarism, which seems to be something a high-water mark for fiction these days (see Harry Potter). I’ve become rather fond of historical or “intellectual” thrillers lately, so when I had a chance to borrow the Da Vinci Code I jumped on the opportunity. Brown’s latest is a fast read, and despite its intellectual pretenses, it is readily accessible to anyone looking for lightweight but smart reading material

The protagonist of the novel, Robert Langdon, a Harvard symbologist who specials in pagan symbolism, unexpectedly finds himself at the center of a police investigation and a global conspiracy after he misses a meeting with Louvre curator Jacque Saunière. Langdon is aided by Parisian cryptography expert named Sophie, and the two of them must unravel the mystery of a two thousand year old secret that encompasses conservative Christianity, ancient secret societies, and even the Holy Grail.

Brown has obviously done his homework (well as much as one can when the subject in question is veiled in so many pseudo-mystical theories), but at its core the Da Vinci Code is a traditional thriller, and is falls prey to some of the traditional problems of that genre. The character development is somewhat weak, and though we learn quite a bit about Sophie and her relationship with her family, Brown does not flesh Langdon out, preferring another plot twist or suspenseful moment to an exploration of his protagonist’s personality. The plot also includes some standard clichés. The romantic interest works out exactly as expected, and some of Brown’s clues are rather blatant.

Those criticisms aside, the Da Vinci Code is a very entertaining novel. Brown may stick to fairly standard conventions, but he does them well, and his novel is not without unique qualities. The setting is well developed, and Brown brings to life the museums, castles, and churches in which the action takes place. Ultimately, the highest praise I can give the book is that I read it in three days. Da Vinci Code is exciting and fun, and that makes it worth a read in and of itself.