I just finished reading two books while reading a third one in bits and pieces. They are:
The Ethical Assassin by David Liss.
He takes a few standard genres:
- Murder/Drugs corruption story
- Average guy caught up in larger than life events beyond his control
- Young man coming of age
and somehow whips it up into a better than average read. As the title suggests, he works in a few opinions that don't normally get included in your average mystery novel. I've no doubt that some people will hate this and find that it detracts from a fun story, but I found the juxtaposition amusing, and a conclusion about one of the reasons that society has prisons a little startling.
Normally I suggest going to Amazon to get a better idea of what a book is about, but I can't in this case. The reviews, especially the editor's review from the Washington Post's Book World gives too much away. Even the author's web site gives too much of the plot away.
Old Man's War by John Scalzi
Good sci-fi by an author with a heck of an imagination. The storyline includes cloning with upgrades for being a better soldier: smartblood, built in personal computer/cell phone (BrainPal) and green skin (the chlorophyll supplies supplemental energy). Its an old man's war because earth citizens have the option to sign up when they are 75 in exchange for a new body.
Usually sci-fi with novel ideas suffers as far as characterization and story line goes. That's true for this book also, but IMHO its still worth reading. Besides not everyone wants to read War and Peace, and even if you do sometimes you still just want a quick fun read. I intend to read the author's other books also.
The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins
This is the one I’m reading in bits and pieces. I'm reading it while I'm waiting for my turn at The God Delusion, which I have on hold at the public library.
It’s the first time I read Dawkins. I am in awe of his wonderful ability to explain. I like the way he builds on what we already know, and uses it to raise his reader to the next level of understanding.
I am at the very beginning of his book and I just finished reading his comparison of our visual sense to the bat's elocution sense. He explained that when we see, we are using an inner model (mostly colors) which interprets a subset of the electromagnetic waves (the visible light bandwidth) and that this is not actually the same thing as the physical properties of the electromagnetic waves themselves. He theorizes that the bat's subjective experience of elocution (which works with a different subset of the electromagnetic waves) could be similar to our subjective experience of seeing. He explains it much better of course! I think the book is worth reading just for that alone, and I look forward to discovering what else he has to say.
My only critiscm (so far) is that Dawkins doesn't use footnotes in this book. Normally I don't read non-fiction books that don't include them, but I'm making an exception for him.
