I wasn't a 70's child, in fact I was barely an 80's child, but due to parents who loved music, I got a grounding in the artists that this book is about... Spanning the late 60's to the early 80's, Hotel California walks through the trials and tribulations of the artists situated in the Los Angeles Canyons districts.
While I thought it would be more shocking, I mean what did artists do in the 70's but take loads of drugs and have a good time? but this was an exploration into the real lifestyle of these people.
From Joni Mitchell, to the Eagles, to Crosby, Stills and Nash (with and without Neil Young) to the Eagles, the story feels like you're suddenly amongst a group of mates that get wasted together, share the lives, their loves, their insecurities, and also their music.
Hearing stories about The Troubadour (the club where most of them played at some stage of their careers) transported me there, feeling the sweat and muck come off the stage, watching the successes come and go, watching the addictions to various substances waste talent away...
While the most shocking aspect of this book was more about what a WANKER Davd Geffen is, each chapter beautifully interweaves each musicians fame and dependence without becoming contrived or face. While I felt slightly sdad at each chapter, as dealing with ego sounds like such a struggle, as well as the changing American way, and almost the demise of american folk music.
While a lot of the names and artists flew over my head, I really enjoyed this book - I felt it was well written, full of intersting anecdotes, snippets of a life and time that I only ever read about...
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Guns Germs and Steel
I like non-fiction books, I guess it's because I have a thirst for knowledge, but also a dire need to join a pub quiz team - so the more general knowledge I've got, the better player I'll be... At least that or finally win at the family "Trivial Pursuit" game. So with that I always pick up random books at the book shop, I might have heard of them, maybe seen them reviewed, and sometimes it's just a matter of picking up something that just "looks interesting"...
And as such with this book. Anything that proposes to be a "short history for the last 13,000 years" interests me!
Bascially explaining why society has evolved the way it has due to (as the title says) guns, germs and steel, it goes back to the way the world has been colonised, and the effect of colonising societies on others (such as the spanish effect on the native americans).
The base theory offered is as follows (from wikipedia) "In our earliest societies humans lived as hunter-gatherers. The first step towards civilization is the move from hunter-gatherer to agriculture with the domestication and farming of wild crops and animals. Agricultural production leads to food surpluses and this in turn supports sedentary societies, rapid population growth, and specialization of labor. Large societies tend to develop ruling classes and supporting bureaucracies, which leads in turn to the organization of empires. Although agriculture arose in several parts of the world, Eurasia gained an early advantage due to the availability of suitable plant and animal species for domestication. In particular, Mesopotamia had by far the best collection of plants and animals suitable for domestication, and Europe adopted Mesopotamia's animals, plants, and agricultural techniques."
blahblah...
Going through the different options for the different societies in regards to the domestication of animals, crops, and why eurasia seemed to dominate all cultures, I still felt that this book missed out on several key points.
I guess the whole book felt like it was trying to justify the inevitability of Europe taking over all cultures. I was disappointed at the lack of focus on the great things that nomadic cultures produce (such as Aboriginal culture) and really got the feel from the book that cultures were "less evolved" which of course had a negative connotation.
Overall an interesting read, however I would like to think that society evolved with more of a focus on culture and initiative rather than putting it all down to the ease of animal domestication and the ability to grow crops...
And as such with this book. Anything that proposes to be a "short history for the last 13,000 years" interests me!
Bascially explaining why society has evolved the way it has due to (as the title says) guns, germs and steel, it goes back to the way the world has been colonised, and the effect of colonising societies on others (such as the spanish effect on the native americans).
The base theory offered is as follows (from wikipedia) "In our earliest societies humans lived as hunter-gatherers. The first step towards civilization is the move from hunter-gatherer to agriculture with the domestication and farming of wild crops and animals. Agricultural production leads to food surpluses and this in turn supports sedentary societies, rapid population growth, and specialization of labor. Large societies tend to develop ruling classes and supporting bureaucracies, which leads in turn to the organization of empires. Although agriculture arose in several parts of the world, Eurasia gained an early advantage due to the availability of suitable plant and animal species for domestication. In particular, Mesopotamia had by far the best collection of plants and animals suitable for domestication, and Europe adopted Mesopotamia's animals, plants, and agricultural techniques."
blahblah...
Going through the different options for the different societies in regards to the domestication of animals, crops, and why eurasia seemed to dominate all cultures, I still felt that this book missed out on several key points.
I guess the whole book felt like it was trying to justify the inevitability of Europe taking over all cultures. I was disappointed at the lack of focus on the great things that nomadic cultures produce (such as Aboriginal culture) and really got the feel from the book that cultures were "less evolved" which of course had a negative connotation.
Overall an interesting read, however I would like to think that society evolved with more of a focus on culture and initiative rather than putting it all down to the ease of animal domestication and the ability to grow crops...
Saturday, June 16, 2007
Accordian Crimes, Annie Proulx
Something has always attracted me to Annie Proulx' novels. There is a bleakness to them, it's not that they are depressing per se (well, they are...) but it's more to it than that. A darkness, a dirtiness, almost sinful. I looked forward to reading this novel with a dark glee - hoping for interesting tales that I could sink my teeth into secretly in bed each night.
Sadly I was midly disappointed with this novel. Each chapter is it's own story of migrants in America, each finding the mysterious green accordian, and we watch a snippet of their dark, sometimes sordid lives. With each scene is set with a different character and their surrounding families - throughout different areas of America. We follow the accordian and migrants from Italy to New York, the Midwest (in the hands of Germans), Texas (Mexicans), Maine/Canada (French), Louisiana (black slaves from Nantes) and Chicago (Poles) each with a different story to tell, a different subset of society they hate, and why they themselves are hated.
Because of the general undercurrent of dispair throughout the novel, I found myself not wanting to read it, as it was one dark tale after another, with rarely anything positive happening. Or even if it did, (such as the Polish couple winning an accordian playing and singing competition) it was seduced by a dark side and darker elements that would slowly wear away at each snippet of goodness.
The prose is lyrical, with incredible use of metaphor, every city that each chapter focussed on became more realistic, with sights and sounds vividly and richly described, I felt almost transported to each place.
I really felt that there wasn't enough content and background to each story, but because each story needed to have enough impact in but a few short pages each sotry becomes angrier and more frustrated at each situation, but almost mocks itself in a sardonic way. Not quite brutal as say Bret Easton Ellis's 'Less than zero', more like Stephen King's 'Dolores Claiborne'.
I don't think I'd read this novel again primarily because it was so dark, I definitely enjoyed 'Shipping News' and 'That old ace in the hole' much more.
Sadly I was midly disappointed with this novel. Each chapter is it's own story of migrants in America, each finding the mysterious green accordian, and we watch a snippet of their dark, sometimes sordid lives. With each scene is set with a different character and their surrounding families - throughout different areas of America. We follow the accordian and migrants from Italy to New York, the Midwest (in the hands of Germans), Texas (Mexicans), Maine/Canada (French), Louisiana (black slaves from Nantes) and Chicago (Poles) each with a different story to tell, a different subset of society they hate, and why they themselves are hated.
Because of the general undercurrent of dispair throughout the novel, I found myself not wanting to read it, as it was one dark tale after another, with rarely anything positive happening. Or even if it did, (such as the Polish couple winning an accordian playing and singing competition) it was seduced by a dark side and darker elements that would slowly wear away at each snippet of goodness.
The prose is lyrical, with incredible use of metaphor, every city that each chapter focussed on became more realistic, with sights and sounds vividly and richly described, I felt almost transported to each place.
I really felt that there wasn't enough content and background to each story, but because each story needed to have enough impact in but a few short pages each sotry becomes angrier and more frustrated at each situation, but almost mocks itself in a sardonic way. Not quite brutal as say Bret Easton Ellis's 'Less than zero', more like Stephen King's 'Dolores Claiborne'.
I don't think I'd read this novel again primarily because it was so dark, I definitely enjoyed 'Shipping News' and 'That old ace in the hole' much more.
Sunday, June 3, 2007
The Satanic Verses, Salman Rushdie
After reading about all the controversy surrounding this novel, I have been trying to locate a copy for years. When I spotted this sitting on the shelf of my favourite second hand book shop I was nearly frothing at the mouth to get it home and started!
I have read a couple of Salman Rushdie novels before, and really enjoy the lyrical narrative. There is something about the way he puts things, the use of metaphor, that just floats my boat! (Either that - or it just makes me feel more intelligent for reading it...) Quote from publishers weekly says "Rushdie's fanciful language is as concentrated and overwhelming as a paisley pattern" which pretty much sums it up.
Admittedly - I found this novel quite difficult to grasp. Much like War and Peace with name similarity and culture confusion, I did spend some time reading about "people" and feeling confused about exactly who they were, but persevered and ended up really enjoying this novel.
I should have read more about what the satanic verses really were before starting - not wanting to spoil the book, I left the reasarch till the end - it did however make things a lot clearer. A lot of the muslim/indian culture in-jokes sailed well over my head, but I was grasped by this unusual novel. With references of England and India, and almost an allegory about the continued struggle for India to find itself and the how young british indians see the world in a completely different light as well, the novel is firstly a book about people, and secondly a well-crafted story referencing the actual 'Satanic Verses' inspired by the life of mahammud.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses
The novel is centrally about two characters, who after falling from an exploding plane, land back to earth and become reborn, one as the arch angel "Gibreel" and the other as a devil. The book follows their transformation and piecing their lives back together.
While complex in content - it is STILL a good read - and I would recommend to anyone who has the time and sit relaxing over the beautiful prose and imagery of this novel.
I have read a couple of Salman Rushdie novels before, and really enjoy the lyrical narrative. There is something about the way he puts things, the use of metaphor, that just floats my boat! (Either that - or it just makes me feel more intelligent for reading it...) Quote from publishers weekly says "Rushdie's fanciful language is as concentrated and overwhelming as a paisley pattern" which pretty much sums it up.
Admittedly - I found this novel quite difficult to grasp. Much like War and Peace with name similarity and culture confusion, I did spend some time reading about "people" and feeling confused about exactly who they were, but persevered and ended up really enjoying this novel.
I should have read more about what the satanic verses really were before starting - not wanting to spoil the book, I left the reasarch till the end - it did however make things a lot clearer. A lot of the muslim/indian culture in-jokes sailed well over my head, but I was grasped by this unusual novel. With references of England and India, and almost an allegory about the continued struggle for India to find itself and the how young british indians see the world in a completely different light as well, the novel is firstly a book about people, and secondly a well-crafted story referencing the actual 'Satanic Verses' inspired by the life of mahammud.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses
The novel is centrally about two characters, who after falling from an exploding plane, land back to earth and become reborn, one as the arch angel "Gibreel" and the other as a devil. The book follows their transformation and piecing their lives back together.
While complex in content - it is STILL a good read - and I would recommend to anyone who has the time and sit relaxing over the beautiful prose and imagery of this novel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
