(no subject)
Feb. 15th, 2009 09:12 pmSo, volumewise, I don't read a lot of nonfiction. Part of this is that I tend to reread a lot. I have books I go back to all the time. Anything by Tamora Pierce, anything by Bujold, David Weber's (early) Honor Harrington books, Steven Brust's Jhereg books. I don't think there is a book that falls in those categories that I have not read at least a half-dozen times, and there are some (First Test, by Pierce; A Civil Campaign, by Bujold; On Basilisk Station, by Weber) that I have read over 20 times easily. I do the same with audiobooks: as I type this, I am listening to Meg Cabot's Jinx, and I can practically recite the novel from frequent repetitions.
But I do that with popcorn books: books I can blast through without much trouble, books with lively stories and not much thought required to keep up. Nonfiction is not often like that.
With nonfiction, I tend to start a book, read for a while, then get distracted by, "Hey, look, a post office; I haven't read Going Postal in a while," or "Man, I wonder if this scene in Memory could be read THIS way: I should try a reread to see!" And then I read that book, and then another, and then another. Eventually, I remember my nonfiction project, and return to it.
I started my current nonfiction read, David McCullough's John Adams, back in mid-late January. I'm around 2/3 of the way through now, I think. I'm in 1792, at the end of Washington's first term.
I'm finding it very interesting, although I can't focus exclusively on it for very long. What prompted this post originally is my observation that I learn about my own politics by reading biographies of politicians. It's not necessarily that I learn about where I stand, but the intensity of my beliefs becomes clearer by the way I react to learning things about these political figures.
For instance, I always knew I favored education and money for education. But every time this book talks about Adams's passion for education, and his belief that education is the single most important responsibility of a society that wants to succeed, my heart warms to him. THERE, I tell myself, is a guy with his PRIORITIES straight.
Also, I kind of hate Thomas Jefferson at this point. I think I will need to read a book more skewed to him after I am done with this, to see if it repairs my opinion of him.
Anyway. Random ramblings.
But I do that with popcorn books: books I can blast through without much trouble, books with lively stories and not much thought required to keep up. Nonfiction is not often like that.
With nonfiction, I tend to start a book, read for a while, then get distracted by, "Hey, look, a post office; I haven't read Going Postal in a while," or "Man, I wonder if this scene in Memory could be read THIS way: I should try a reread to see!" And then I read that book, and then another, and then another. Eventually, I remember my nonfiction project, and return to it.
I started my current nonfiction read, David McCullough's John Adams, back in mid-late January. I'm around 2/3 of the way through now, I think. I'm in 1792, at the end of Washington's first term.
I'm finding it very interesting, although I can't focus exclusively on it for very long. What prompted this post originally is my observation that I learn about my own politics by reading biographies of politicians. It's not necessarily that I learn about where I stand, but the intensity of my beliefs becomes clearer by the way I react to learning things about these political figures.
For instance, I always knew I favored education and money for education. But every time this book talks about Adams's passion for education, and his belief that education is the single most important responsibility of a society that wants to succeed, my heart warms to him. THERE, I tell myself, is a guy with his PRIORITIES straight.
Also, I kind of hate Thomas Jefferson at this point. I think I will need to read a book more skewed to him after I am done with this, to see if it repairs my opinion of him.
Anyway. Random ramblings.