Comments on: And so the best book lists begin… http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2006/12/03/and-so-the-best-book-lists-begin/ Sinéad Gleeson's blog Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:36:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: Garreth http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2006/12/03/and-so-the-best-book-lists-begin/#comment-24077 Garreth Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:53:37 +0000 http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2006/12/03/and-so-the-best-book-lists-begin/#comment-24077 Not sure if The Sea by John Banville appeared this year or last year. I was underwhelmed by this novel. Too much searching for unusual words and sententious 'literary' sentences; blatantly studied effort to recreate the mood of a childhood past. Marcel Proust in A la Recherche did it better with his ponderous, rambling sentences somehow. Wonder what Banville's Dublin-based period detective mystery is like? Not sure if The Sea by John Banville appeared this year or last year. I was underwhelmed by this novel. Too much searching for unusual words and sententious ‘literary’ sentences; blatantly studied effort to recreate the mood of a childhood past. Marcel Proust in A la Recherche did it better with his ponderous, rambling sentences somehow. Wonder what Banville’s Dublin-based period detective mystery is like?

]]> By: dealga http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2006/12/03/and-so-the-best-book-lists-begin/#comment-23611 dealga Thu, 07 Dec 2006 10:11:48 +0000 http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2006/12/03/and-so-the-best-book-lists-begin/#comment-23611 For what it's worth The God Delusion is vastly overrated. Its good reviews seem to be by people who already had a bone to pick with religion and who are now just delighted to be armed with endless quotes to show the religious how they're wrong. The trouble with his book, I found, is that while his thesis is broadly right (that religions are potentially dangerous and profoundly irrational) he is regularly disingenuous with the facts. For example he says "Stalin was an atheist and Hitler probably wasn't, but even if he was… the bottom line is very simple. Individual atheists may do evil things but they don't do evil things in the name of atheism." Yet Stalin wiped out Russia's Orthodox priesthood, simply because they were Orthodox priests. Then there's "Why would anyone go to war for the sake of an absence of belief?" One justification for China invading Tibet was its priest-ridden backwardness under the Dalai Lama. The armies of the French Revolution didn't exactly march across Europe with the blessing of the Pope either. They're just examples. His science is sound but as soon as he moves into the realms of history, in particular, he botches his arguments totally. There's a section on suicide bombers & religion when it has, just this year, been ably proven that religious zealotry is not on its own sufficient to produce suicide bombers or even necessary. All in all a handy book if you want to win an argument with a simpleton - but that's about it! For what it’s worth The God Delusion is vastly overrated. Its good reviews seem to be by people who already had a bone to pick with religion and who are now just delighted to be armed with endless quotes to show the religious how they’re wrong.

The trouble with his book, I found, is that while his thesis is broadly right (that religions are potentially dangerous and profoundly irrational) he is regularly disingenuous with the facts. For example he says “Stalin was an atheist and Hitler probably wasn’t, but even if he was… the bottom line is very simple. Individual atheists may do evil things but they don’t do evil things in the name of atheism.” Yet Stalin wiped out Russia’s Orthodox priesthood, simply because they were Orthodox priests.

Then there’s “Why would anyone go to war for the sake of an absence of belief?” One justification for China invading Tibet was its priest-ridden backwardness under the Dalai Lama. The armies of the French Revolution didn’t exactly march across Europe with the blessing of the Pope either.

They’re just examples. His science is sound but as soon as he moves into the realms of history, in particular, he botches his arguments totally. There’s a section on suicide bombers & religion when it has, just this year, been ably proven that religious zealotry is not on its own sufficient to produce suicide bombers or even necessary.

All in all a handy book if you want to win an argument with a simpleton - but that’s about it!

]]> By: Alex http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2006/12/03/and-so-the-best-book-lists-begin/#comment-23559 Alex Wed, 06 Dec 2006 16:43:51 +0000 http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2006/12/03/and-so-the-best-book-lists-begin/#comment-23559 UnaRocks - I also liked Ariel Levy's book. While not exactly groundbreaking it was good to see all that information gathered together in one place. Have actually just started The Weight Of Numbers so looking forward to seeing how that works out. Sinead did you read Black Swan Green by David Mitchell? It was one of my faves from this year, as was Human Traces by Sebastian Faulks (out in paperback in 2006 I think) but I agree with you - a lot of my very favourite books from 2006 were actually quite old! Perhaps I should change my mind on those "1001..." list books? I am always gripped by a mutinous "who are you to bloody well tell me what to read/where to visit/what to look at" type rage when I see them! UnaRocks - I also liked Ariel Levy’s book. While not exactly groundbreaking it was good to see all that information gathered together in one place. Have actually just started The Weight Of Numbers so looking forward to seeing how that works out.

Sinead did you read Black Swan Green by David Mitchell? It was one of my faves from this year, as was Human Traces by Sebastian Faulks (out in paperback in 2006 I think) but I agree with you - a lot of my very favourite books from 2006 were actually quite old!

Perhaps I should change my mind on those “1001…” list books? I am always gripped by a mutinous “who are you to bloody well tell me what to read/where to visit/what to look at” type rage when I see them!

]]>