Take a photo of a barcode or cover
cavalary's reviews
269 reviews
The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas
3.0
Yes, it's a classic, belonging to a different age... And showing once again why I stay away from them. What pretentious, convoluted, drawn out, pointless prose. What overly theatrical speech and behaviors. What obvious plots that all, as in the hero at first and the villains later, never suspect and unerringly fall for. For that matter, what dastardly, irredeemable villains, and what a hero whose only flaw at first is being too good, too noble, thinking too well of others. And what an almost complete lack of information about how it was all achieved, the time in between the escape and the plan actually being set in motion. That would have been much more interesting, but its place is taken by a sizable portion during which the book seems to just drift off.
Maybe those with a keen interest in the Parisian high society of the period would enjoy the style and all the exhaustive descriptions that overshadow and cast aside everything else. Those with a similar interest in that of Rome may even enjoy the part I see as taking all the book's flaws to an even higher level. Harder to see who might enjoy the talks between Valentine and Maximilian but, in general, some of those who know why the book was written may be willing to pardon the author for a lot, including for simply wanting to show off his interests and preferences. I, however, don't.
I recognize some objective literary value, can also appreciate that the hero loses that initial naivety and gains the necessary ruthlessness but also falls into the clutches of pride and vanity, no longer being flawless, and can find some enjoyable parts, and that the book as a whole does seem to get better after the "nocturnal interview", but don't care to look away even from something like the lack of explanations, or at least translations, for the occasional Latin sayings, much less all the major flaws making me lose track of these relatively rare relevant parts among all the filler. Or, to put it bluntly, the bullshit ending.
Note: Think I read this before, likely in my early teens, but I'm not sure how well I understood it back then if so and not much seemed familiar now. The fact that it would have been translated in Romanian then and it was translated in English now might have also prevented some mental links from forming but, either way, it's pretty much as if I read it the first time.
Maybe those with a keen interest in the Parisian high society of the period would enjoy the style and all the exhaustive descriptions that overshadow and cast aside everything else. Those with a similar interest in that of Rome may even enjoy the part I see as taking all the book's flaws to an even higher level. Harder to see who might enjoy the talks between Valentine and Maximilian but, in general, some of those who know why the book was written may be willing to pardon the author for a lot, including for simply wanting to show off his interests and preferences. I, however, don't.
I recognize some objective literary value, can also appreciate that the hero loses that initial naivety and gains the necessary ruthlessness but also falls into the clutches of pride and vanity, no longer being flawless, and can find some enjoyable parts, and that the book as a whole does seem to get better after the "nocturnal interview", but don't care to look away even from something like the lack of explanations, or at least translations, for the occasional Latin sayings, much less all the major flaws making me lose track of these relatively rare relevant parts among all the filler. Or, to put it bluntly, the bullshit ending.
Note: Think I read this before, likely in my early teens, but I'm not sure how well I understood it back then if so and not much seemed familiar now. The fact that it would have been translated in Romanian then and it was translated in English now might have also prevented some mental links from forming but, either way, it's pretty much as if I read it the first time.
Arcanum Unbounded: The Cosmere Collection by Brandon Sanderson
4.0
Sanderson states that the connection between his works is most notable in this collection, but the stories still stand on their own. And that’s mostly true, and a relief. Even if an epic of epics wouldn’t be too much in itself, I don’t and won’t care for some of his works and don’t want to need to read them to not feel lost when reading the others. I’ll just mention that the solar systems look rather implausible though.
The Emperor’s Soul, Mistborn: Secret History and Edgedancer would deserve their own reviews, but I won’t write them. So, very briefly, The Emperor’s Soul is an awesome piece, I’d say the best in the collection, showing understanding of people and art, making me care, read in one sitting and want more when I was done. Mistborn: Secret History explains much about [b:the original Mistborn trilogy|6604209|Mistborn Trilogy Boxed Set (Mistborn, #1-3)|Brandon Sanderson|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1257442247l/6604209._SX50_.jpg|6798109] and is a good piece in itself, but will confuse anyone not familiar with that trilogy and also has more to do with those connections. And I didn’t expect Edgedancer to be about Lift, but it fills in some Stormlight Archive blanks while being both humorous and, mainly towards the end, deep, though the switch, and the change in Lift, may be too sudden.
The Hope of Elantris is much weaker, simpler and without much depth, though I guess it does the intended job. And that also goes for The Eleventh Metal, which is basically an introduction to the Mistborn magic system, with a bit of backstory thrown in. I’d say that Allomancer Jak and the Pits of Eltania is just comic relief, the notes being indeed funny. I don’t care for graphic novels and had no use for that White Sands excerpt when the draft it’s based on was also included, and said draft was a more typical, somewhat rudimentary, short story. Shadows for Silence in the Forests of Hell was good enough for a short story but, lacking context, didn’t have much impact. Sixth of the Dusk was quite infuriating, more modern than the rest and containing more of what I call human filth.
The Emperor’s Soul, Mistborn: Secret History and Edgedancer would deserve their own reviews, but I won’t write them. So, very briefly, The Emperor’s Soul is an awesome piece, I’d say the best in the collection, showing understanding of people and art, making me care, read in one sitting and want more when I was done. Mistborn: Secret History explains much about [b:the original Mistborn trilogy|6604209|Mistborn Trilogy Boxed Set (Mistborn, #1-3)|Brandon Sanderson|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1257442247l/6604209._SX50_.jpg|6798109] and is a good piece in itself, but will confuse anyone not familiar with that trilogy and also has more to do with those connections. And I didn’t expect Edgedancer to be about Lift, but it fills in some Stormlight Archive blanks while being both humorous and, mainly towards the end, deep, though the switch, and the change in Lift, may be too sudden.
The Hope of Elantris is much weaker, simpler and without much depth, though I guess it does the intended job. And that also goes for The Eleventh Metal, which is basically an introduction to the Mistborn magic system, with a bit of backstory thrown in. I’d say that Allomancer Jak and the Pits of Eltania is just comic relief, the notes being indeed funny. I don’t care for graphic novels and had no use for that White Sands excerpt when the draft it’s based on was also included, and said draft was a more typical, somewhat rudimentary, short story. Shadows for Silence in the Forests of Hell was good enough for a short story but, lacking context, didn’t have much impact. Sixth of the Dusk was quite infuriating, more modern than the rest and containing more of what I call human filth.
Thief by Jane Glatt
2.0
Maybe the book itself isn't quite as unimaginative as its title, but it's not far either. It's easy to read and I could "see" what was going on, but that's likely less thanks to the writing and more because it's such a typical setting. The world and action are what you'd expect, the heroes are suitably heroic, with perhaps a bit of an exception for the lead character, the villains are suitably villainous, without being over the top but also without anything to make any element interesting. It's like a writer of perhaps passable skill but with pretty much no experience set her mind on checking the basic boxes for a fantasy series, or for the first book of one, in this particular case, without daring to even try to get to the more advanced parts of the list.
As a plain, basic, typical early effort, it can't really be said that it failed at anything. However, if it was to be published at all, it should have first gone through a massive editing process. And I'm not referring to typos, missing or misplaced words or punctuation problems, though there are some of those as well, but to how amateurish it all is. The writing is rather messy and the main problems are the structure, flow and story and character development. It's all rough, rushed, pretty much as plain and typical as you can get, without any actual tension, twists, surprises, bits of wisdom, touching moments or anything else that'd make it interesting, provoke an emotional response or otherwise make it memorable. I have read worse, and at least it's free, but it's the sort of early attempt that more accomplished authors either try to bury or, if it was rejected and they didn't self-publish back in the day, may only, and probably with some amount of embarrassment, get persuaded to release after they're sufficiently famous for the publishers to know that their fans will grab just about anything with their name on it.
As a plain, basic, typical early effort, it can't really be said that it failed at anything. However, if it was to be published at all, it should have first gone through a massive editing process. And I'm not referring to typos, missing or misplaced words or punctuation problems, though there are some of those as well, but to how amateurish it all is. The writing is rather messy and the main problems are the structure, flow and story and character development. It's all rough, rushed, pretty much as plain and typical as you can get, without any actual tension, twists, surprises, bits of wisdom, touching moments or anything else that'd make it interesting, provoke an emotional response or otherwise make it memorable. I have read worse, and at least it's free, but it's the sort of early attempt that more accomplished authors either try to bury or, if it was rejected and they didn't self-publish back in the day, may only, and probably with some amount of embarrassment, get persuaded to release after they're sufficiently famous for the publishers to know that their fans will grab just about anything with their name on it.
Seneca despre libertate by Lucius Annaeus Seneca
2.0
[EN: (RO below)]
Received this booklet after volunteering for something, even if there was some confusion and I arrived when the work was nearly done. It's a selection from the Moral Letters to Lucilius and I just went through it quickly, so I won't comment much. There's little point to comment on the writing of something that's some 2000 years old anyway, though I will say that I don't care for the epistolary style either, and it's quite rambling at times.
Still, it is a philosophical text, and while proper comments about philosophy require far more time and attention than I'm willing to offer this at the moment, the fact that it's an effort to turn someone into a Stoic does make me say that I find most of the main tenets of Stoicism quite infuriating. There are some good parts, definitely, and some that are mixed, but there are also contradictions and fundamental concepts that, as I already stated, I find quite infuriating and rotten, starting with the core concept that inner happiness is what matters and it should be generated and maintained regardless of what happens, that external events must be accepted as they are, not seen as good or bad and not allowed to affect that positive state of mind. That bears a striking resemblance to the crap pushed by the modern professional mental health field, which blames the victims for not grinning and bearing whatever is done to them or the less fortunate for wishing to have access to the benefits that society should be able to grant and therefore discourages or even condemns demanding improvement.
[RO:]
Am primit aceasta carticica pentru ca am fost voluntar la o actiune, chiar daca au fost ceva incurcaturi si am ajuns cand treaba era pe terminate. Este o selectie din Scrisori catre Lucilius si doar am trecut prin ea rapid, deci nu voi comenta prea mult. Nici nu prea are sens sa comentezi legat de o scriere care are vreo 2000 de ani, desi voi spune ca nici stilul epistolar nu ma incanta, si cam bate campii uneori.
Totusi, este un text filozofic, si daca niste comentarii serioase despre filozofie necesita mult mai mult timp si atentie decat sunt dispus sa ofer in acest moment, faptul ca acesta este un efort de a face din cineva un stoic ma face sa spun ca majoritatea principalelor concepte ale stoicismului mi se par destul de enervante. Sunt si unele parti bune, absolut, si unele care sunt si bune si rele, dar sunt si contradictii si concepte fundamentale care, asa cum am spus deja, mi se par destul de enervante si nenorocite, incepand cu conceptul de baza conform caruia fericirea interioara e cea care conteaza si ar trebui sa fie generata si intretinuta indiferent de ce se intampla, ca evenimentele externe trebuie acceptate asa cum sunt, nu vazute ca bune sau rele si fara a li se permite sa afecteze acea stare mentala pozitiva. Asta se aseamana izbitor cu rahaturile promovate insistent de profesionistii din domeniul sanatatii mentale moderne, care invinovatesc victimele pentru ca nu suporta cu zambetul pe buze orice li se intampla sau pe cei mai putin norocosi pentru ca-si doresc sa aiba acces la beneficiile pe care societatea ar trebui sa le poata oferi si astfel descurajeaza si chiar condamna cerintele de imbunatatire.
Received this booklet after volunteering for something, even if there was some confusion and I arrived when the work was nearly done. It's a selection from the Moral Letters to Lucilius and I just went through it quickly, so I won't comment much. There's little point to comment on the writing of something that's some 2000 years old anyway, though I will say that I don't care for the epistolary style either, and it's quite rambling at times.
Still, it is a philosophical text, and while proper comments about philosophy require far more time and attention than I'm willing to offer this at the moment, the fact that it's an effort to turn someone into a Stoic does make me say that I find most of the main tenets of Stoicism quite infuriating. There are some good parts, definitely, and some that are mixed, but there are also contradictions and fundamental concepts that, as I already stated, I find quite infuriating and rotten, starting with the core concept that inner happiness is what matters and it should be generated and maintained regardless of what happens, that external events must be accepted as they are, not seen as good or bad and not allowed to affect that positive state of mind. That bears a striking resemblance to the crap pushed by the modern professional mental health field, which blames the victims for not grinning and bearing whatever is done to them or the less fortunate for wishing to have access to the benefits that society should be able to grant and therefore discourages or even condemns demanding improvement.
[RO:]
Am primit aceasta carticica pentru ca am fost voluntar la o actiune, chiar daca au fost ceva incurcaturi si am ajuns cand treaba era pe terminate. Este o selectie din Scrisori catre Lucilius si doar am trecut prin ea rapid, deci nu voi comenta prea mult. Nici nu prea are sens sa comentezi legat de o scriere care are vreo 2000 de ani, desi voi spune ca nici stilul epistolar nu ma incanta, si cam bate campii uneori.
Totusi, este un text filozofic, si daca niste comentarii serioase despre filozofie necesita mult mai mult timp si atentie decat sunt dispus sa ofer in acest moment, faptul ca acesta este un efort de a face din cineva un stoic ma face sa spun ca majoritatea principalelor concepte ale stoicismului mi se par destul de enervante. Sunt si unele parti bune, absolut, si unele care sunt si bune si rele, dar sunt si contradictii si concepte fundamentale care, asa cum am spus deja, mi se par destul de enervante si nenorocite, incepand cu conceptul de baza conform caruia fericirea interioara e cea care conteaza si ar trebui sa fie generata si intretinuta indiferent de ce se intampla, ca evenimentele externe trebuie acceptate asa cum sunt, nu vazute ca bune sau rele si fara a li se permite sa afecteze acea stare mentala pozitiva. Asta se aseamana izbitor cu rahaturile promovate insistent de profesionistii din domeniul sanatatii mentale moderne, care invinovatesc victimele pentru ca nu suporta cu zambetul pe buze orice li se intampla sau pe cei mai putin norocosi pentru ca-si doresc sa aiba acces la beneficiile pe care societatea ar trebui sa le poata oferi si astfel descurajeaza si chiar condamna cerintele de imbunatatire.
Oathbringer by Brandon Sanderson
5.0
The handwriting on the illustrations in the mass market paperback edition is still hard to read, and page margins also sometimes make it hard to see the beginning or end of lines. And, while Shallan's sections still shine, the book's first part includes more of what I call human filth and is rather dull despite providing a crucial perspective. The action's slow, there's less depth and wisdom, and that's not even in order to remind readers of what happened before. Even those quotes at the start of chapters don't really say anything.
Moving forward, the interludes again offer brief but important views of other characters, locations and events. More importantly, parts two and three are absolutely brilliant. Thrilling action, revelations, character development, emotion, reasons to care and be involved, depth, wisdom, understanding, again tackling innumerable aspects of life and society. Most of all, however, it shows true understanding of people, and of the mind. How and why people crack, struggle to cope, fail and break, what may utterly destroy or, sometimes, at least partially, save them. The Bridge Four sections are extraordinary from this point of view, but there's much of it in others as well, Shallan's in particular, even more so when another character appears.
Part four returns to a much slower pace, worldbuilding and inner struggles, but also includes important details and revelations. That hesitant attempt at a love triangle doesn't really work, but little else matters when, after intermissions that are anything but, part five hits with the full force of storms and nightmares coming to life. It's a cinematic whirlwind of action culminating with that monster of a chapter 120, when the Thrill threatens to overwhelm even the reader. Maybe it's a bit too much, a bit forced, maybe falling apart at the seams, but maybe, and at least in part quite certainly, I just couldn't keep up and grasp it all, and either way I didn't care. And then, far from being anticlimactic, winding down, tying up loose ends and spelling out remaining questions and the path forward showed confidence and a solid plan.
Moving forward, the interludes again offer brief but important views of other characters, locations and events. More importantly, parts two and three are absolutely brilliant. Thrilling action, revelations, character development, emotion, reasons to care and be involved, depth, wisdom, understanding, again tackling innumerable aspects of life and society. Most of all, however, it shows true understanding of people, and of the mind. How and why people crack, struggle to cope, fail and break, what may utterly destroy or, sometimes, at least partially, save them. The Bridge Four sections are extraordinary from this point of view, but there's much of it in others as well, Shallan's in particular, even more so when another character appears.
Part four returns to a much slower pace, worldbuilding and inner struggles, but also includes important details and revelations. That hesitant attempt at a love triangle doesn't really work, but little else matters when, after intermissions that are anything but, part five hits with the full force of storms and nightmares coming to life. It's a cinematic whirlwind of action culminating with that monster of a chapter 120, when the Thrill threatens to overwhelm even the reader. Maybe it's a bit too much, a bit forced, maybe falling apart at the seams, but maybe, and at least in part quite certainly, I just couldn't keep up and grasp it all, and either way I didn't care. And then, far from being anticlimactic, winding down, tying up loose ends and spelling out remaining questions and the path forward showed confidence and a solid plan.
The House of Wael by Chris Avellone
2.0
It again feels rather like cheating to count this as a book I read, being so short, but more important is the fact that it's not meant to be read on its own. It's written in an odd style, intentionally confusing, hard to follow, lacking background information and constantly broken up by all those notes appearing even in the middle of sentences, including descriptions apparently pulled right out of the game that aren't suited for a book. That said, there are some interesting elements, at least enough to make the reader curious, and the discussion about Gods can be said to stand out and make some good points. And the comment about language is spot-on.
Shadows of Self by Brandon Sanderson
4.0
I’d still call this “light” Sanderson, and for that matter “light” Mistborn, if compared to [b:the original trilogy|6604209|Mistborn Trilogy Boxed Set (Mistborn, #1-3)|Brandon Sanderson|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1257442247l/6604209._SX50_.jpg|6798109]. There’s very little worldbuilding and it even misses that focus on the magic system found in [b:The Alloy of Law|12065807|The Alloy of Law (Mistborn, #4)|Brandon Sanderson|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1436912328l/12065807._SY75_.jpg|15035863], adding little and no longer going into details. In addition, Wax goes from the most developed and interesting character to perhaps the least so. He can definitely fight, making for a few thrilling scenes in a book that also has fewer such moments overall, but that’s pretty much all he is, the hand, the sword, the gun, whatever you prefer, Marasi, Wayne and maybe even one or two secondary characters having much more to offer.
That said, after a first part that quite clearly fits this “light” description, more and more social commentary makes its way through and much of what comes from Marasi in particular is definitely relevant if you think about recent and current events in our world as well, Marasi seeming to take over the spot of the most developed and interesting character this time around. There are interesting bits of a different nature coming from Wayne as well, though he otherwise remains too stereotypical and the fact that the main characters operate separately more often than not means that the way in which they fit and work together isn’t so relevant anymore, which hurts his “value” the most.
Though not at the level seen in The Alloy of Law, the antagonist again has an understandable motivation and makes some valid points, at least once they’re finally revealed, bringing some theological issues into debate as well. And the overall story stands well enough on its own but also seems to lead the way towards something much greater and deeper while at the same time connecting with the original trilogy. As such, if indeed intended as a “stepping stone”, it does a good job, also remaining enjoyable and, at least if seen through the lens of these “lighter” expectations, satisfying. Don’t expect reminders or much exposition, however, so those who forgot important details may need to refresh their memory.
That said, after a first part that quite clearly fits this “light” description, more and more social commentary makes its way through and much of what comes from Marasi in particular is definitely relevant if you think about recent and current events in our world as well, Marasi seeming to take over the spot of the most developed and interesting character this time around. There are interesting bits of a different nature coming from Wayne as well, though he otherwise remains too stereotypical and the fact that the main characters operate separately more often than not means that the way in which they fit and work together isn’t so relevant anymore, which hurts his “value” the most.
Though not at the level seen in The Alloy of Law, the antagonist again has an understandable motivation and makes some valid points, at least once they’re finally revealed, bringing some theological issues into debate as well. And the overall story stands well enough on its own but also seems to lead the way towards something much greater and deeper while at the same time connecting with the original trilogy. As such, if indeed intended as a “stepping stone”, it does a good job, also remaining enjoyable and, at least if seen through the lens of these “lighter” expectations, satisfying. Don’t expect reminders or much exposition, however, so those who forgot important details may need to refresh their memory.
Capitalul în secolul al XXI-lea by Thomas Piketty
3.0
[EN: (RO below)]
On a recommendation, this likely marks the start of a year or so of nonfiction, translated too, and it was far easier to read and less infuriating than I thought. Current Leftist views of economics are necessary, the first part explains well and the facts and figures and explanations, as well as some of the points made, remain positive aspects throughout. The attacks on economists, by an economist, were also rather refreshing, as was the statement that the current supposedly meritocratic justifications of inequality are worse than the past ones. And saying that refusing to deal with numbers, and I'll add also politics, rarely goes in favor of the poor is a good ending.
However, some parts are too technical, many of each chapter's, if not each part's, points could have been made in a handful of pages, much space which could have been better filled with some of the things strangely left in an on-line "annex" seeming wasted, and part four seems rather a train of thought, even a mind dump, just pushing one idea and going this way and that around it. But the main problem is that, while pointing out the inherent flaws of capitalism, it clearly states, and proves throughout, that it doesn't actually attack it, nor inequality in itself for that matter, instead aiming to just tweak systems that are inherently flawed and need replacing. It also focuses almost exclusively on the rich, barely mentioning the rest and the means of improving their situation. There are also indefensible stances, like repeatedly emphasizing the benefits of population growth, enough on its own for me to consider the author an opponent; continual, albeit weak, growth in general being seen as, well, possible; or repeatedly stating the positive effects of inflation, with too little attention paid to the devastating effects it can have on the savings and plans of regular people. Then again, what's clearly indefensible is that it starts by basically praising subjectivity even when it comes to such fundamental matters that define a society... And including conclusions in the introduction is not a good practice either.
[RO:]
La o recomandare, asta probabil marcheaza inceputul a aproximativ un an de nonfiction, si traduse, si a fost mult mai usor de citit si mai putin enervanta decat credeam. Viziunile economice de stanga din zilele noastre sunt necesare, prima parte explica bine si datele si cifrele si explicatiile, precum si unele dintre conceptele prezentate, raman aspecte pozitive pana la final. Si atacurile la adresa economistilor, din partea unui economist, au fost destul de binevenite, si la fel si declaratia ca justificarile asa-zis meritocratice din prezent ale inegalitatii sunt mai rele decat cele din trecut. Si a spune ca refuzul de a-ti bate capul cu cifre, si as adauga si cu politica, rareori e in interesul saracilor e o incheiere buna.
Insa, unele parti sunt prea tehnice, multe din ideile fiecarui capitol, daca nu fiecarei parti, ar fi putut fi exprimate in destul de putine pagini, mult spatiu care ar fi putut fi umplut mai bine cu unele dintre lucrurile in mod ciudat lasate intr-o "anexa" on-line parand irosit, iar partea a patra cam pare o insiruire de ganduri aruncate, doar sustinand fortat o idee si divagand in jurul ei. Dar principala problema este ca, desi prezinta defectele inerente ale capitalismului, spune clar, si dovedeste constant, ca nu il ataca, si de fapt nu ataca nici inegalitatea in sine, incercand doar sa aduca niste modificari unor sisteme care sunt inerent defecte si trebuie inlocuite. Si se concentreaza aproape exclusiv pe bogati, abia mentionandu-i pe ceilalti sau metodele de a le imbunatati situatia. Sunt si pozitii imposibil de aparat, ca sublinierea repetata a beneficiilor cresterii populatiei, suficient in sine ca sa-l consider pe autor un oponent; considerarea cresterii continue, chiar daca slabe, in general ca fiind, ei bine, posibila; sau prezentarea repetata a efectelor pozitive ale inflatiei, dand prea putina atentie efectelor devastatoare pe care le poate avea asupra economiilor si planurilor oamenilor de rand. De fapt, ce-i clar de neaparat e ca incepe practic laudand subiectivitatea chiar si in privinta unor astfel de teme fundamentale care definesc o societate... Si nici includerea concluziilor in introducere nu e o practica buna.
On a recommendation, this likely marks the start of a year or so of nonfiction, translated too, and it was far easier to read and less infuriating than I thought. Current Leftist views of economics are necessary, the first part explains well and the facts and figures and explanations, as well as some of the points made, remain positive aspects throughout. The attacks on economists, by an economist, were also rather refreshing, as was the statement that the current supposedly meritocratic justifications of inequality are worse than the past ones. And saying that refusing to deal with numbers, and I'll add also politics, rarely goes in favor of the poor is a good ending.
However, some parts are too technical, many of each chapter's, if not each part's, points could have been made in a handful of pages, much space which could have been better filled with some of the things strangely left in an on-line "annex" seeming wasted, and part four seems rather a train of thought, even a mind dump, just pushing one idea and going this way and that around it. But the main problem is that, while pointing out the inherent flaws of capitalism, it clearly states, and proves throughout, that it doesn't actually attack it, nor inequality in itself for that matter, instead aiming to just tweak systems that are inherently flawed and need replacing. It also focuses almost exclusively on the rich, barely mentioning the rest and the means of improving their situation. There are also indefensible stances, like repeatedly emphasizing the benefits of population growth, enough on its own for me to consider the author an opponent; continual, albeit weak, growth in general being seen as, well, possible; or repeatedly stating the positive effects of inflation, with too little attention paid to the devastating effects it can have on the savings and plans of regular people. Then again, what's clearly indefensible is that it starts by basically praising subjectivity even when it comes to such fundamental matters that define a society... And including conclusions in the introduction is not a good practice either.
[RO:]
La o recomandare, asta probabil marcheaza inceputul a aproximativ un an de nonfiction, si traduse, si a fost mult mai usor de citit si mai putin enervanta decat credeam. Viziunile economice de stanga din zilele noastre sunt necesare, prima parte explica bine si datele si cifrele si explicatiile, precum si unele dintre conceptele prezentate, raman aspecte pozitive pana la final. Si atacurile la adresa economistilor, din partea unui economist, au fost destul de binevenite, si la fel si declaratia ca justificarile asa-zis meritocratice din prezent ale inegalitatii sunt mai rele decat cele din trecut. Si a spune ca refuzul de a-ti bate capul cu cifre, si as adauga si cu politica, rareori e in interesul saracilor e o incheiere buna.
Insa, unele parti sunt prea tehnice, multe din ideile fiecarui capitol, daca nu fiecarei parti, ar fi putut fi exprimate in destul de putine pagini, mult spatiu care ar fi putut fi umplut mai bine cu unele dintre lucrurile in mod ciudat lasate intr-o "anexa" on-line parand irosit, iar partea a patra cam pare o insiruire de ganduri aruncate, doar sustinand fortat o idee si divagand in jurul ei. Dar principala problema este ca, desi prezinta defectele inerente ale capitalismului, spune clar, si dovedeste constant, ca nu il ataca, si de fapt nu ataca nici inegalitatea in sine, incercand doar sa aduca niste modificari unor sisteme care sunt inerent defecte si trebuie inlocuite. Si se concentreaza aproape exclusiv pe bogati, abia mentionandu-i pe ceilalti sau metodele de a le imbunatati situatia. Sunt si pozitii imposibil de aparat, ca sublinierea repetata a beneficiilor cresterii populatiei, suficient in sine ca sa-l consider pe autor un oponent; considerarea cresterii continue, chiar daca slabe, in general ca fiind, ei bine, posibila; sau prezentarea repetata a efectelor pozitive ale inflatiei, dand prea putina atentie efectelor devastatoare pe care le poate avea asupra economiilor si planurilor oamenilor de rand. De fapt, ce-i clar de neaparat e ca incepe practic laudand subiectivitatea chiar si in privinta unor astfel de teme fundamentale care definesc o societate... Si nici includerea concluziilor in introducere nu e o practica buna.
Shadowrun Returns Anthology by Dylan Birtolo, Phaedra Weldon, Tom Dowd, Jason Schmetzer, Jordan Weisman, Steven Kenson, J.M. Hardy, Jennifer Brozek, Russell Zimmerman, R.L. King, J.C. Hutchins, Malik Toms, Patrick Goodman
3.0
Read this not only without playing any of the games, but without any real knowledge of the Shadowrun universe in general, and what I can say after reading is that I'd rather keep it that way. Not that I wasn't already leaning against even trying the games, despite getting them for free, just because I had the pretty clear impression that the world they take place in is an awful one that I want no part of, but these stories confirmed it.
About the stories themselves... Well, they're short stories and I don't really care for short stories in general, and the awful world definitely doesn't help, plus that the first impression was poor because the beginning of the first one struck me as poorly written. And the last one seemed to me to be the weakest. However, the others, and even the first one once you get past the beginning, are generally written well enough, connect in some ways and are likely to mean much more to those who know and appreciate this universe. While too much seemed to revolve around the Union, I did rather like the story titled Cherry Bomb. On the other hand, Never Alone also seems to stand out in some ways, but that one's so creepy that I shy away from it.
About the stories themselves... Well, they're short stories and I don't really care for short stories in general, and the awful world definitely doesn't help, plus that the first impression was poor because the beginning of the first one struck me as poorly written. And the last one seemed to me to be the weakest. However, the others, and even the first one once you get past the beginning, are generally written well enough, connect in some ways and are likely to mean much more to those who know and appreciate this universe. While too much seemed to revolve around the Union, I did rather like the story titled Cherry Bomb. On the other hand, Never Alone also seems to stand out in some ways, but that one's so creepy that I shy away from it.
Pamantul nelocuibil by David Wallace-Wells
3.0
[EN: (RO below)]
Though “reality” did even “better”, considering how recent and yet already outdated the data is, it does a good job of pointing out how bad things are and how much worse they’re going to get, explaining thoroughly, spelling out both the urgency and the complexity of the situation. It also stresses that the disaster is of our own making and we can avoid it if only we’d make the effort, and also that the important changes are the large scale ones, laws, regulations, government intervention, while the pressure for individual lifestyle changes is more of a way for society as a whole to feel that it’s doing something while continuing to avoid the drastic and sometimes painful changes that are desperately necessary. And the inequality aspect is also pointed out, the less guilty and powerless suffering more while the more guilty and powerful can avoid the negative consequences for much longer and may even benefit.
I’m not sure what the target audience is, however. Maybe it’s an attempt to avoid the usual problem with any such work, only being picked up by those already interested and involved, but the author disqualifies himself in my eyes when he says he’s not an environmentalist, even showing disdain for environmentalists and activists in general, and continues along those lines, even stating that he’d choose economic growth despite knowing that nature pays the price and spelling out his single-mindedly, unapologetically anthropocentric stance, saying he’d agree with the loss of most of what’s generally considered nature if only humans could live well in such a world, only acting because that can’t happen. He even sees caring for other species as an excuse for not acting, or at least not in what he’d consider an efficient manner.
Otherwise, there are awfully many notes, and towards the end they also become descriptions and comments, which might have been better placed in the text itself. And, at least in this edition, the numbers for notes are oddly placed, and the months were clearly automatically translated in the notes, including in English titles and URLs and the word “may”.
[RO:]
Desi "realitatea" a facut-o si mai "bine", tinand cont de cat de recente dar deja depasite sunt informatiile, face o treaba buna in a arata cat de rea e situatia si cat de mult se va inrautati, explicand in detaliu, demonstrand atat urgenta cat si complexitatea situatiei. De asemenea subliniaza ca dezastrul e produs de noi si il putem evita daca am face efortul necesar, si ca schimbarile necesare sunt cele pe scara larga, legi, reglementari, interventia guvernelor, in timp ce presiunea de a face schimbari individuale ale stilului de viata e mai degraba o metoda ca societatea in ansamblu sa simta ca face ceva in timp ce continua sa evite schimbarile drastice si uneori dureroase care sunt atat de necesare. Si aspectul inegalitatii este de asemenea prezentat, cei mai putin vinovati si fara putere suferind mai mult in timp ce aceia care sunt mai vinovati si au mai multa putere pot evita consecintele negative mai mult timp si chiar pot avea beneficii.
Dar nu stiu care-i publicul tinta. Poate e o incercare de a evita problema obisnuita cu astfel de lucrari, parcurse doar de cei deja interesati si implicati, dar autorul se descalifica in ochii mei cand spune ca nu este un ecologist, chiar arata dispret fata de ecologisti si activisti in general, si continua pe aceasta linie, chiar spunand ca ar alege cresterea economica desi stie ca natura plateste pretul si exprimandu-si pozitia antropocentrica hotarata, fara scuze, spunand ca ar fi de acord cu pierderea celei mai mari parti a ceea ce se considera in general natura daca oamenii ar putea trai bine intr-o asemenea lume, actionand doar pentru ca asta nu se poate. Chiar vede grija purtata altor specii ca o scuza pentru a nu actiona, sau cel putin nu in ceea ce ar considera o maniera eficienta.
Altfel, sunt extrem de multe note, si spre final acestea devin descrieri si comentarii, care si-ar fi gasit mai bine locul in textul in sine. Si, cel putin in aceasta editie, numerele pentru note sunt pozitionate ciudat, si lunile au fost evident traduse automat in note, incluzand in titlurile in engleza si URL-uri si cuvantul “may”.
Though “reality” did even “better”, considering how recent and yet already outdated the data is, it does a good job of pointing out how bad things are and how much worse they’re going to get, explaining thoroughly, spelling out both the urgency and the complexity of the situation. It also stresses that the disaster is of our own making and we can avoid it if only we’d make the effort, and also that the important changes are the large scale ones, laws, regulations, government intervention, while the pressure for individual lifestyle changes is more of a way for society as a whole to feel that it’s doing something while continuing to avoid the drastic and sometimes painful changes that are desperately necessary. And the inequality aspect is also pointed out, the less guilty and powerless suffering more while the more guilty and powerful can avoid the negative consequences for much longer and may even benefit.
I’m not sure what the target audience is, however. Maybe it’s an attempt to avoid the usual problem with any such work, only being picked up by those already interested and involved, but the author disqualifies himself in my eyes when he says he’s not an environmentalist, even showing disdain for environmentalists and activists in general, and continues along those lines, even stating that he’d choose economic growth despite knowing that nature pays the price and spelling out his single-mindedly, unapologetically anthropocentric stance, saying he’d agree with the loss of most of what’s generally considered nature if only humans could live well in such a world, only acting because that can’t happen. He even sees caring for other species as an excuse for not acting, or at least not in what he’d consider an efficient manner.
Otherwise, there are awfully many notes, and towards the end they also become descriptions and comments, which might have been better placed in the text itself. And, at least in this edition, the numbers for notes are oddly placed, and the months were clearly automatically translated in the notes, including in English titles and URLs and the word “may”.
[RO:]
Desi "realitatea" a facut-o si mai "bine", tinand cont de cat de recente dar deja depasite sunt informatiile, face o treaba buna in a arata cat de rea e situatia si cat de mult se va inrautati, explicand in detaliu, demonstrand atat urgenta cat si complexitatea situatiei. De asemenea subliniaza ca dezastrul e produs de noi si il putem evita daca am face efortul necesar, si ca schimbarile necesare sunt cele pe scara larga, legi, reglementari, interventia guvernelor, in timp ce presiunea de a face schimbari individuale ale stilului de viata e mai degraba o metoda ca societatea in ansamblu sa simta ca face ceva in timp ce continua sa evite schimbarile drastice si uneori dureroase care sunt atat de necesare. Si aspectul inegalitatii este de asemenea prezentat, cei mai putin vinovati si fara putere suferind mai mult in timp ce aceia care sunt mai vinovati si au mai multa putere pot evita consecintele negative mai mult timp si chiar pot avea beneficii.
Dar nu stiu care-i publicul tinta. Poate e o incercare de a evita problema obisnuita cu astfel de lucrari, parcurse doar de cei deja interesati si implicati, dar autorul se descalifica in ochii mei cand spune ca nu este un ecologist, chiar arata dispret fata de ecologisti si activisti in general, si continua pe aceasta linie, chiar spunand ca ar alege cresterea economica desi stie ca natura plateste pretul si exprimandu-si pozitia antropocentrica hotarata, fara scuze, spunand ca ar fi de acord cu pierderea celei mai mari parti a ceea ce se considera in general natura daca oamenii ar putea trai bine intr-o asemenea lume, actionand doar pentru ca asta nu se poate. Chiar vede grija purtata altor specii ca o scuza pentru a nu actiona, sau cel putin nu in ceea ce ar considera o maniera eficienta.
Altfel, sunt extrem de multe note, si spre final acestea devin descrieri si comentarii, care si-ar fi gasit mai bine locul in textul in sine. Si, cel putin in aceasta editie, numerele pentru note sunt pozitionate ciudat, si lunile au fost evident traduse automat in note, incluzand in titlurile in engleza si URL-uri si cuvantul “may”.