Category: History Page 1 of 4

Zwingli the Pastor: A Life in Conflict by Stephen Brett Eccher: A Look at The Reformer’s Most Important Work

Zwingli the PastorZwingli the Pastor:
A Life in Conflict

by Stephen Brett Eccher

DETAILS:
Publisher:  Lexham Press
Publication Date: March 20, 2024
Format: eARC
Length: 288 pg.
Read Date: February 25-March 10, 2024
Buy from Bookshop.org Support Indie Bookstores

What’s Zwingli the Pastor About?

Of the first-generation—or Magisterial—reformers, Huldrych/Ulrich Zwingli is probably the least known today—and a lot of what carries his name popularly isn’t necessarily reflective of his actual positions. From what I’ve heard, there’s somewhat of a resurgence of interest and scholarship in Zwingli. Stephen Brett Eccher brings us this introduction to the reformer as part of that.

This is not a biography of Zwingli, nor is it an in-depth examination of his theological insights and writing. As the title suggests, it’s a look at his pastoral work. His life was defined by conflict, and that’s true as well for his ministry.

After a quick overview of his life, including his pastoral work pre-Zurich, Eccher looks at Zwingli’s pastorate topically rather than chronologically. His focus wasn’t on changing the Church throughout the world, or making history (although he did both)—Zwingli’s focus was ministering to the people of Zurich in the pulpit, in their homes, in sickness, and in rapidly changing times.

Disagreeing with Zwingli

I’m not going to argue that an author writing a book about someone else needs to be in lockstep with him (or how could anyone ever write a book about anyone?). But if you disagree with your subject on significant points (and I think this is more true when it comes to theological points than otherwise), you need to exercise care in describing the subject’s positions you differ with—and those people who differed with him. I think Eccher tried, but he could’ve been more successful at it.

The book is critical of Zwingli—in both his actions and teachings—and Eccher handled that well.* It was when (for example) he would describe Zurich’s Anabaptists as they began to disagree with Zwingli, that he stumbled. He never came out and said, “they were right to separate from him over this,” but the tone suggested both that on point X they were obviously correct and it’s not even worth discussing how they were. Even if he did circle back to point X in a few pages or chapters to discuss it properly, it didn’t seem to me that he really gave Zwingli a fair shake on these points, and just assumed that the Anabaptists (or whoever) were correct and that readers already agreed with Eccher (and didn’t necessarily describe Zwingli’s position to the extent he maybe should’ve).

* Largely, anyway. There are a few sentences that I’d like to challenge Eccher to explain/defend. But I’m not going to get lost in the weeds here.

Not knowing that many details about Zwingli on some of these points, I could be wrong about this. Perhaps Eccher didn’t get into details and nuances because they aren’t present on these points of difference. But it didn’t seem like that to me—and I’m just trying to describe my reaction to the text as a reader.

The Structure of the Chapters

Given everything that Eccher sets out to accomplish (and largely succeeds in doing so), this is a pretty short book*. And I’d imagine that Eccher would want to feature some tight writing to facilitate him meeting his agenda. But he doesn’t, each chapter** starts with an introduction set in contemporary Zurich (or somewhere else in Switzerland), and then he comes to a point leading into the chapter.

* It’s listed at 288 pages, in my electronic version, only 65% of the book makes up the text, the rest is bibliography, indices, etc. Which makes this a very short—but dense—read.
** There might be an exception or two to this, but the point stands. And those exceptions will be very similar.

Then it feels like he backs up to set the historical stage, talk about some of the development in Zwingli’s life/thought/ministry before getting to that introductory point, developing it, and then reaching some kind of conclusion.

I’m not doing the best job of describing the structure, but that’s the gist of it. I think it would’ve been far more economical to cut everything before the point where Eccher backs up and sets the historical stage. I don’t think the glances at contemporary Zurich, etc. added anything to the book beyond word/page count. They didn’t detract from anything, but if they added anything I missed it.

And I’m not sure that we needed the brief introductory summary of the chapter’s point, either. At best, they meant you knew where each chapter was heading (if you couldn’t guess from the chapter title)—at worst, I think they took some of the punch of the points away, because you were waiting for them to show up.

This could just be me. It wouldn’t surprise me a whole lot to find that most readers appreciate one or both of these devices (obviously Eccher and his editor(s) liked them). But by the second time I saw him use them, I got a little tired of it—and it needled me every subsequent time.

Five Theses

Eccher completes the book with “Five Theses on Zwingli.” These are summaries of aspects of his thinking/teaching and Eccher’s reflection of them as a whole. His greatest criticisms of the Reformer are presented and explained here. (and frankly, it’s here that Eccher annoyed me more than elsewhere) I would’ve liked each thesis to have been given more space and more development—50-100% more space each, I think it would’ve made them stronger.

That said, this kind of wrap-up/conclusion is a great way to structure the book and complete the examination of Zwingli. I heartily appreciated it.

So, what did I think about Zwingli the Pastor?

Let me start this section by stressing that the above sections described minor things that niggled at me while I read—they are by no means major complaints or shortcomings. But it just takes a while longer to describe something like that than to pay a compliment. And I have several compliments to offer.

For example, the chapters on Zwingli’s ministry during the time of plague—and the devastating impact it had on his life—and his marriage were very strong. The description of the infamous Affair of the Sausages, the lead-up to it, and the fallout from it was another strong point. Eccher went to great pains to show the influence of others—historic and contemporary to Zwingli—on his thinking and actions. As much as people talk about Erasmus’ influence on Luther (largely Luther reacting against Erasmus), it was good to see Erasmus’ influence bearing such positive fruit in Zwingli (much to Erasmus’ woe, I’m sure) up to the point where the two split. Actually, I’m going to cut myself off here before I just start listing the Table of Contents (I could). I do wish we’d gotten a little more describing the circumstances of his death—that portion of the book felt rushed.

One strength of this book is that it avoided the temptation to turn Zwingli into a 21st-century type of Evangelical, or someone who agreed with the author in almost every way. So often when reading a book about a lesser-known figure in church history, you can get the feeling that the author is saying “outside of this little quirk or that, mostly because of their place in history; this guy is just like me.” Eccher doesn’t say that—he seems to admire a lot about Zwingli, but he’s by no mean prone to hero worship or whitewashing any perceived shortcoming.

Going into this book I had only a rudimentary familiarity with Huldrych/Ulrich Zwingli, and while I’ve often thought about addressing that, I hadn’t. This book hasn’t given me a complete and exhaustive look at him by any means—and wouldn’t claim that. But it’s a great, broad introduction to his work and thought. I feel equipped now to go out and read some of his works, and other books about particular aspects of his theology, having this book give me the overall lay of the land.

I encourage others who are looking for a place to start with this often overlooked Reformer to give this a read. If only so it can spur you to further reading and investigation—like I think it has for me—but you’ll know where to dig in.

Disclaimer: I received a copy of this book from Lexham Press via NetGalley—thanks to both for this.


4 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.
Irresponsible Reader Pilcrow Icon

PUB DAY REPOST: The Body’s Keepers (Audiobook) by Paul L. Kimmel, M.D., Lane Hakel (Narrator): The Social History I Didn’t Realize I Needed

The Body's KeepersThe Body’s Keepers:
A Social History of Kidney
Failure and Its Treatments

by Paul L. Kimmel, M.D., Lane Hakel (Narrator)

DETAILS:
Publisher: Dreamscape Media
Publication Date: March 12, 2024
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 17 hrs., 59 min. 
Read Date: Fevruary 27-March 5, 2024
Buy from Bookshop.org Support Indie Bookstores

What’s The Body’s Keepers About?

I feel underqualified to try to describe this book, and you’ll see why here in a sentence or two. So, I’m just going to paste what the Publisher’s Site says: (yes, I typically would cite the audiobook publisher here, but the print edition’s publisher gives more details)

A remarkable account of the kidney and the scientific, medical, and health evolution tied to our understanding of it.

The kidney is an extraordinary organ – in many ways the regulator, the metronome, the keeper of the human body’s delicate equilibrium. On a given day, minute by minute, it purifies the body of toxins it encounters from diet, climate, activity, and injury. It allows us to be and to move in the world. And yet most of us know so very little about these extraordinary vessels nestled in our bodies – and indeed millions of us only really learn about them when they stop working. Nearly a million Americans every year have end stage kidney disease, about 37 million have some form of chronic kidney disease. And it is an incredibly common universe of challenge and ailment that, until relatively recently, would simply kill those afflicted with it.

Renowned nephrologist Dr. Paul Kimmel takes us on an eye-opening journey through the history of kidney disease, dialysis, and transplantation. Drawing on both his extensive research and decades of experience in the field, he explains the development of treatments, technologies, and medical practices that have advanced the care of patients with kidney disease. Kimmel illuminates the impact of medical advances on the lives of those suffering from this debilitating disease and offers a clear understanding of the challenges that remain.

The Body’s Keepers also reveals the inequities and injustices at the heart of America’s healthcare system. Filled with case studies, personal histories, and first-hand accounts, the book reveals the shocking truth about the exploitation of vulnerable populations in the pursuit of profit. Kimmel examines how disparities in access to care have led to life-threatening consequences for many Americans. He also looks at the ways in which the medical industry has profited from the suffering of others, and how the path to health equity is still far from being realized. With unflinching honesty and a passionate commitment to social justice, his book is an essential read for anyone looking to understand the complexities of modern healthcare.

What Did I Think About the Narration?

With all due respect to Dr. Kimmel, this could very easily have been a dry-as-dust book. Yes, there’s occasionally some wit and some passion in the text–Kimmel’s personality does come through. Lane Hakel makes sure that shines through. He maintains the appropriate tone and seriousness to the subject, but with simple and subtle changes in inflection and so on to help maintain the listener’s engagement.

If nothing else, Hakel helped me pronounce a few terms and medication names that I’ve always stumbled on (or heard multiple ways).

I’m not saying that Hakel made this a joy to listen to, or that it was entertaining in the same way that, say, Luke Daniels makes a book–nor should it have been. But he keeps the listening experience accessible and interesting–even when the text seems just to be a list of names and acronyms. (which doesn’t happen often, but, occasionally it seems like it).

My Interest in the Book

So, I saw this on Netgalley the day after my son’s first dialysis treatment. And I clicked the request button as quickly as I could. I’ve talked in this space a little about his kidney transplant a few years ago. But what I know about kidney disease and the treatment of it doesn’t amount to much–and it’s very focused. So the opportunity to learn more–particularly in a history, was more than appealing.

Sure, I was discouraged a bit right off when one of the first things that Kimmel says is that he won’t be discussing the kidney disease my son had. But, he spent a lot of time talking about End Stage Renal Disease and transplants. So that more than made up for the skipped subject. And even the topics that didn’t directly have anything to do with my son were interesting to listen to. Because really, at the end of the day, the more medicine learns about various treatments for one area of kidney disease/treatment, the better off all patients are.

So, what did I think about The Body’s Keepers?

Can a non-medical professional read/listen to this and profit from this book? Absolutely. Are we the target audience? I don’t think so–well, those interested in the overlap of politics/economics/prejudices and medical treatments are definitely part of the target audience. So it’s not just the kind of book for M.D. after their name. But it’s not written for the person browsing a bookstore/library shelf for their weekend read, either.

This is an 18-hour listen, and it’s not the easiest listen, either–both because of the subject matter and the thoroughness with which Kimmel discusses things. Folks who are just idly curious are probably not going to make it through this book. But those who have a connection to the topic–because of their profession or professional interests, because (like me) they are or know someone going through these things, or because they’re invested in the social aspects and things like equitable access to care, or some other connection–will make it through this book and be glad for it.

For those who are interested in this subject, this is a fascinating book and a good audiobook experience. I do think I may end up getting the print edition just to make looking up a point or two easier. But for non-reference use? The audiobook is a good way to go.

I learned a lot, I have to say. The historical development of nephrology is fascinating. For such a young science the advances made are truly astounding (for example, when you hear how they made the first “artificial kidney”–the precursor to a dialysis machine, your mind will be boggled). The origins of the treatment of kidney diseases and injuries really start because of the World Wars and now kidney transplants happen all the time (not often enough for those on a transplant list for years), dialysis is routine, and the medical research is very promising to improve and innovate both.

Yes, the impacts of race, sex, income, and so on when it comes to access to and varieties of treatment are dismaying and befuddling (and on those providing the treatment). But the book suggests there’s every reason to be hopeful for the future, and that progress has been made. Easy for this white guy to say, but that was my takeaway from Kimmel. And, as in this post, I’m talking about this as a listening experience rather than commenting on the society that is depicted–the shortcomings of the system (especially in the U.S.) contrasted to the successes make for a more engaging narrative.

I should add that in the early chapters while doctors and researchers were still figuring out how to treat various kidney ailments, the symptoms and treatments (and failure rates), were strong reminders of how correct I was in choosing academic and career paths that took me far away from medicine. Some of that was rough for me (and no, I will not watch any documentary Dr. Kimmel decides to make in the future). People of stronger constitutions will not be bothered.

I’m really glad I listened to this, and encourage those interested to give it a try. It’s not a book for everyone, but for the right people will appreciate this.

Disclaimer: I received a copy of this book from North Star Editions via NetGalley–thanks to both for this.


4 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.
Irresponsible Reader Pilcrow Icon

The Body’s Keepers (Audiobook) by Paul L. Kimmel, M.D., Lane Hakel (Narrator): The Social History I Didn’t Realize I Needed

The Body's KeepersThe Body’s Keepers:
A Social History of Kidney
Failure and Its Treatments

by Paul L. Kimmel, M.D., Lane Hakel (Narrator)

DETAILS:
Publisher: Dreamscape Media
Publication Date: March 12, 2024
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 17 hrs., 59 min. 
Read Date: Fevruary 27-March 5, 2024
Buy from Bookshop.org Support Indie Bookstores

What’s The Body’s Keepers About?

I feel underqualified to try to describe this book, and you’ll see why here in a sentence or two. So, I’m just going to paste what the Publisher’s Site says: (yes, I typically would cite the audiobook publisher here, but the print edition’s publisher gives more details)

A remarkable account of the kidney and the scientific, medical, and health evolution tied to our understanding of it.

The kidney is an extraordinary organ – in many ways the regulator, the metronome, the keeper of the human body’s delicate equilibrium. On a given day, minute by minute, it purifies the body of toxins it encounters from diet, climate, activity, and injury. It allows us to be and to move in the world. And yet most of us know so very little about these extraordinary vessels nestled in our bodies – and indeed millions of us only really learn about them when they stop working. Nearly a million Americans every year have end stage kidney disease, about 37 million have some form of chronic kidney disease. And it is an incredibly common universe of challenge and ailment that, until relatively recently, would simply kill those afflicted with it.

Renowned nephrologist Dr. Paul Kimmel takes us on an eye-opening journey through the history of kidney disease, dialysis, and transplantation. Drawing on both his extensive research and decades of experience in the field, he explains the development of treatments, technologies, and medical practices that have advanced the care of patients with kidney disease. Kimmel illuminates the impact of medical advances on the lives of those suffering from this debilitating disease and offers a clear understanding of the challenges that remain.

The Body’s Keepers also reveals the inequities and injustices at the heart of America’s healthcare system. Filled with case studies, personal histories, and first-hand accounts, the book reveals the shocking truth about the exploitation of vulnerable populations in the pursuit of profit. Kimmel examines how disparities in access to care have led to life-threatening consequences for many Americans. He also looks at the ways in which the medical industry has profited from the suffering of others, and how the path to health equity is still far from being realized. With unflinching honesty and a passionate commitment to social justice, his book is an essential read for anyone looking to understand the complexities of modern healthcare.

What Did I Think About the Narration?

With all due respect to Dr. Kimmel, this could very easily have been a dry-as-dust book. Yes, there’s occasionally some wit and some passion in the text–Kimmel’s personality does come through. Lane Hakel makes sure that shines through. He maintains the appropriate tone and seriousness to the subject, but with simple and subtle changes in inflection and so on to help maintain the listener’s engagement.

If nothing else, Hakel helped me pronounce a few terms and medication names that I’ve always stumbled on (or heard multiple ways).

I’m not saying that Hakel made this a joy to listen to, or that it was entertaining in the same way that, say, Luke Daniels makes a book–nor should it have been. But he keeps the listening experience accessible and interesting–even when the text seems just to be a list of names and acronyms. (which doesn’t happen often, but, occasionally it seems like it).

My Interest in the Book

So, I saw this on Netgalley the day after my son’s first dialysis treatment. And I clicked the request button as quickly as I could. I’ve talked in this space a little about his kidney transplant a few years ago. But what I know about kidney disease and the treatment of it doesn’t amount to much–and it’s very focused. So the opportunity to learn more–particularly in a history, was more than appealing.

Sure, I was discouraged a bit right off when one of the first things that Kimmel says is that he won’t be discussing the kidney disease my son had. But, he spent a lot of time talking about End Stage Renal Disease and transplants. So that more than made up for the skipped subject. And even the topics that didn’t directly have anything to do with my son were interesting to listen to. Because really, at the end of the day, the more medicine learns about various treatments for one area of kidney disease/treatment, the better off all patients are.

So, what did I think about The Body’s Keepers?

Can a non-medical professional read/listen to this and profit from this book? Absolutely. Are we the target audience? I don’t think so–well, those interested in the overlap of politics/economics/prejudices and medical treatments are definitely part of the target audience. So it’s not just the kind of book for M.D. after their name. But it’s not written for the person browsing a bookstore/library shelf for their weekend read, either.

This is an 18-hour listen, and it’s not the easiest listen, either–both because of the subject matter and the thoroughness with which Kimmel discusses things. Folks who are just idly curious are probably not going to make it through this book. But those who have a connection to the topic–because of their profession or professional interests, because (like me) they are or know someone going through these things, or because they’re invested in the social aspects and things like equitable access to care, or some other connection–will make it through this book and be glad for it.

For those who are interested in this subject, this is a fascinating book and a good audiobook experience. I do think I may end up getting the print edition just to make looking up a point or two easier. But for non-reference use? The audiobook is a good way to go.

I learned a lot, I have to say. The historical development of nephrology is fascinating. For such a young science the advances made are truly astounding (for example, when you hear how they made the first “artificial kidney”–the precursor to a dialysis machine, your mind will be boggled). The origins of the treatment of kidney diseases and injuries really start because of the World Wars and now kidney transplants happen all the time (not often enough for those on a transplant list for years), dialysis is routine, and the medical research is very promising to improve and innovate both.

Yes, the impacts of race, sex, income, and so on when it comes to access to and varieties of treatment are dismaying and befuddling (and on those providing the treatment). But the book suggests there’s every reason to be hopeful for the future, and that progress has been made. Easy for this white guy to say, but that was my takeaway from Kimmel. And, as in this post, I’m talking about this as a listening experience rather than commenting on the society that is depicted–the shortcomings of the system (especially in the U.S.) contrasted to the successes make for a more engaging narrative.

I should add that in the early chapters while doctors and researchers were still figuring out how to treat various kidney ailments, the symptoms and treatments (and failure rates), were strong reminders of how correct I was in choosing academic and career paths that took me far away from medicine. Some of that was rough for me (and no, I will not watch any documentary Dr. Kimmel decides to make in the future). People of stronger constitutions will not be bothered.

I’m really glad I listened to this, and encourage those interested to give it a try. It’s not a book for everyone, but for the right people will appreciate this.

Disclaimer: I received a copy of this book from North Star Editions via NetGalley–thanks to both for this.


4 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.
Irresponsible Reader Pilcrow Icon

PUB DAY REPOST: Grandpappy’s Corner: Saint Valentine the Kindhearted by Ned Bustard: …Violets are Blue, I Liked this Book, and You Will, Too.

Grandpappy's Corner Logo Saint Valentine the Kindhearted

Saint Valentine the Kindhearted:
The History and Legends of
God’s Brave and Loving Servant

Written and Illustrated by Ned Bustard

DETAILS: 
Publisher: IVP Kids
Publication Date: January 16, 2024
Format: eARC
Length: 32 pgs.
Read Date: October 5, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org Support Indie Bookstores

What’s Saint Valentine the Kindhearted About?

Why do we call our celebration of love on February 14th (St.) Valentine’s Day? Why do we use February 14th, for that matter?

Ned Bustard brings us another picture book Biography to teach young readers about Valentine, who was martyred under Claudius on February 14.

Granted, we don’t know a lot about Valentine and his work, but we have enough to fill this book (and, as I recall from wordier historical treatments, not much more). We get a touch of his early life, a look at his ministry (and the Roman culture), a notable miracle that’s ascribed to him, and a bit about the events leading to his martyrdom. All told in a child-appropriate rhyme.

Let’s Talk about the Art for a Minute

Bustard’s cartoon-y art is as great here as it was in his Saint Patrick the Forgiver. The thing that stands out to me is his inking. (at least that’s what we called it back when I was really into comics and talked about the art, hopefully, it still counts). The way he uses bold lines around his character’s faces/bodies (particularly Valentine’s), really makes them pop off the page and almost look like wooden puppets. (that’s the best I can do as far as describing the pictures)

He’s also able to convey a certain amount of unpleasantness and threat with Roman soldiers without changing the overall feel of the story and its appropriateness for young readers.

Now, in the Patrick book, he worked in a lot of Celtic knots and whatnot to give it a more Irish feel. Here he goes for a lot of differently colored hearts all over the pages. It didn’t even occur to me while reading the book to pay attention to that—it fit the overall Feb. 14th vibe. I should’ve known better—thankfully, he explained it in “A Note from the Author,” so when I read this with the Grandcritter I can seem more knowledgeable. He works in these hearts in different colors to represent the four types of love (eros, storge, philia, and agape) from ancient Greek thought (and a pretty good book by C.S. Lewis), showing how Valentine displayed and interacted with these types of love in various episodes in the book.

You can check out the Publisher’s site for a glimpse at the art and layout as a preview. This will probably give you a better idea than anything I tried to convey.

How is it to Read Aloud?

It’s a nice little bit of rhyming text, and starting off with “Roses are red,” as often as he does, you’re going to get right into the rhythm reflexively, which is a nice touch. Some of the rhymes feel like a stretch to me*, but when you’ve got a good head of steam going as you read you probably won’t notice.

* “ago” and “van Gogh”, really? Also, that only works if you use the American pronunciation—sorry, British readers.

So, what did I think about Saint Valentine the Kindhearted?

I enjoyed this. I do wish we had more history to draw from for Bustard to use here (and, well, other historians writing for older audiences, too), just to fill out some of the details reliably. But this is a good introduction to the figure that’s had such a cultural impact so that even younger readers can know there’s basis to the celebration beyond chalky candies and silly drawings.

I don’t have a lot to say about this beyond that. It’s a fun read for the little folks, it has details and layers that older readers can appreciate and use to talk about bigger ideas with the little ones, too. Color me impressed yet again by Bustard and I’m eager to see what holiday/figure he picks next. Anyone trying to bring Early Church figures to the attention of the pre-K crowd deserves some applause and I’m happy to keep giving it, while gladly recommending you jump on board.

Disclaimer: I received this eARC from InterVarsity Press via NetGalley in exchange for this post—thanks to both for this.


3.5 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.
Grandpappy Icon

Grandpappy’s Corner: Saint Nicholas the Giftgiver by Ned Bustard: The Making of a Legend

Yeah, this is a quick return to this author. But after the post a couple of weeks ago, I had to give this one a shot, too. And it seemed fitting to tackle it now. I’ll get back to “grown up books” next week, D.V.


Grandpappy's Corner Logo

Saint Nicholas the Giftgiver:
The History and Legends
of the Real Santa Claus

Written and Illustrated by Ned Bustard

DETAILS: 
Publisher: IVP Kids
Publication Date: October 12, 2021
Format: Hardcover
Length: 29 pg.
Read Date: December 17, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org Support Indie Bookstores

What’s Saint Nicholas the Giftgiver About?

This is all in the title and subtitle, really. This is a Picture Book Biography of Saint Nicholas, covering both the history we have and some of the legends that arose about him to the point he became our Santa Claus.

He covers the life of Nicholas from birth to death pretty well—working in Diocletian’s persecution and how Nicholas was freed by Constantine, a hint of the Arian Controversy, and Nicholas’ work overall—including some of the legends that grew about him during his lifetime (that probably had a basis in truth).

Then he turns to the stories that have grown up about Nicholas as he transformed into Santa Claus with the magical reindeer—with Bustard trying to tie in even that idea of Nicholas to the work of the Savior. How successful he was I’ll leave to the reader to decide.

The Slap

No, I’m not talking about a certain actor at the Oscars in 2022. I’m talking about the legendary time that Nicholas struck (in some form) Arius at Nicea. Bustard skipped it. The most he said was:

he did all he could
to stop that bad pries.

Now, I was curious to see how he’d address it—if only because I think it’d be a real attention grabber for the target audience. But it’s probably wise to skip it, you don’t want to encourage younger readers to start assaulting people.

But c’mon, if you heard that some kid had been inspired by a Picture Book to slap a kid in Sunday School who kept giving bad answers—you’d laugh. You’d feel bad and repent after, but you’d laugh. I’m getting off the point, though.

Let’s Talk about the Art for a Minute

First, I really liked the way he made Nicholas have the skin tone of someone who was from Türkiye. Especially as white as Santa is usually depicted (and certain news programs insist on), that was a refreshing choice.

The use of mice throughout was a nice touch (and is explained in Bustard’s author’s note). But the best part was the subtle transformation of his clothing and appearance throughout to more and more look like a figure worthy of being an illustration alongside Clement Clarke Moore.

Basically, everything I’d say about the art is what I said when I talked about his Saint Valentine the Kindhearted book two weeks ago. Feel free to go check that.

There are a couple of Second-Commandment violations that naturally trouble me. But they don’t call attention to themselves and can be glossed over if that’s how you’d like to proceed. I’m honestly not sure if I’ll do that, or consign this one to the “we don’t read that one” pile.

How is it to Read Aloud?

A couple of the rhymes are…well, let’s go with imaginative. I will admit I stumbled on a them as I read it to the Grandcritter. But…other than that, it was fun.

There’s some decent rhythm to it, and the sweetness of a lot of it comes out better when you read aloud. Or maybe that was just me. Anyway, it works really well as a read-aloud.

So, what did I think about Saint Nicholas the Giftgiver?

I liked this—I do think Bustard improved his writing with his next two books, but the promise is there. Some lines—several lines—are great and made me smile. As I said before, the art is great. The two together make this a winner.

For me, I’d have appreciated it more if he’d given us a little more history and a little less explanation of the legend around Nicholas. But I’m not sure he’d have been able to do as nice of a job explaining the legend as he did had he devoted less time to it.

Which does make me think—given the age of the audience for this book, it’s a little risky to wade into anything about Santa Claus for some people. I think he handled that as well as he could, and readers who don’t understand everything about Santa the way that grown-ups do should be okay.

I do have a couple of misgivings about this book, but I’m maybe thinking about this more than I should. I don’t think so, but I imagine others will tell me I am. It’s good enough to think about getting and reading—just know that of the three books that Bustard has written so far, it’s the least successful.


3 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.
Grandpappy Icon

Alexandra Petri’s US History: Important American Documents (I Made Up): A Mixed Bag That Features Plenty of Tasty Treats

Alexandra Petri's US History: Important American DocumentsAlexandra Petri’s US History:
Important American Documents
(I Made Up)

by Alexandra Petri

DETAILS:
Publisher: W. W. Norton & Company
Publication Date: April 11, 2023
Format: Hardcover
Length: 324 pg.
Read Date: December 8-14, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org Support Indie Bookstores

What’s The Inside Cover Flap of Alexandra Petri’s US History Say?

A witty, absurdist satire of the last 500 years, Alexandra Petri’s US History is the fake textbook you never knew you needed!

As a columnist for the Washington Post, Alexandra Petri has watched in real time as those who didn’t learn from history have been forced to repeat it. And repeat it. And repeat it. If we repeat history one more time, we’re going to fail! Maybe it’s time for a new textbook.

Alexandra Petri’s US History contains a lost (invented!) history of America. (A history for people disappointed that the only president whose weird sex letters we have is Warren G. Harding.) Petri’s “historical fan fiction” draws on real events and completely absurd fabrications to create a laugh-out-loud, irreverent takedown of our nation’s complicated past.

On Petri’s deranged timeline, John and Abigail Adams try sexting, the March sisters from Little Women are sixty feet tall, and Susan Sontag goes to summer camp. Nearly eighty short, hilarious pieces span centuries of American history and culture. Ayn Rand rewrites The Little Engine That Could. Nikola Tesla’s friends stage an intervention when he falls in love with a pigeon. The characters from Sesame Street invade Normandy. And Mark Twain—who famously said reports of his death had been greatly exaggerated—offers a detailed account of his undeath, in which he becomes a zombie.

What did I think about Alexandra Petri’s US History?

There are 76 pieces in this collection–not all are going to be winners. The odds against that are just too great. The tricky thing is (obviously) the ones I consider winners aren’t necessarily going to be the ones that you identify as winners–that’s probably because you have more refined tastes than me. I’m okay with that (and you should be, too). But I assumed that going in, so the question is: are there enough that you’re going to find funny to make reading all of them (or at least starting all of them before occasionally deciding to move on) worth it?

Absolutely.

Some of these start strong and then peter out–like some Saturday Night Live sketches. Some start strong and build from there. Some are duds from the beginning. And a few (to go back to SNL) leave you wanting Matt Foley to yell about the van down by the river one or two more times.

A few of the pieces that had me laughing were:

  • the spider in a certain Northhampton church who took umbrage at some of Edwards’ imagery
  • a poem about the other guy who rode the night Paul Revere did, but his name is hard to rhyme
  • a conversation about writing the song that became the tune for The Star-Spangled Banner
  • an abridgment of The Scarlett Letter
  • the man who bought his wife yellow wallpaper trying to get a refund
  • what would Gatsby have been like if Hemingway wrote it?
  • someone from Sun-Made trying to get Lorraine Hansbury to strike up a partnership
  • Build-a-Bear’s attempt to commemorate 9/11

I really could’ve gone on there, but I think between that and the above quotation, you get an idea. I could’ve come up with a similar list of ones that didn’t work for me–but why bother?

If any of the above topics/ideas seem like something you’d enjoy, you’re likely to have fun with over half of this book. When Petri is funny, she’s hilarious. When she’s not…well, there are words on the page that you can definitely read. Her highs are so high and her lows are…still above sea level. I don’t think anything was “bad” here, just some pieces that I really didn’t care for.

I’m glad I read this. You’ll probably be, too. I do recommend this, as long as you go in with open eyes.


3 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.
Irresponsible Reader Pilcrow Icon

Grandpappy’s Corner: Saint Valentine the Kindhearted by Ned Bustard: …Violets are Blue, I Liked this Book, and You Will, Too.

Grandpappy's Corner Logo Saint Valentine the Kindhearted

Saint Valentine the Kindhearted:
The History and Legends of
God’s Brave and Loving Servant

Written and Illustrated by Ned Bustard

DETAILS: 
Publisher: IVP Kids
Publication Date: January 16, 2024
Format: eARC
Length: 32 pgs.
Read Date: October 5, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org Support Indie Bookstores

What’s Saint Valentine the Kindhearted About?

Why do we call our celebration of love on February 14th (St.) Valentine’s Day? Why do we use February 14th, for that matter?

Ned Bustard brings us another picture book Biography to teach young readers about Valentine, who was martyred under Claudius on February 14.

Granted, we don’t know a lot about Valentine and his work, but we have enough to fill this book (and, as I recall from wordier historical treatments, not much more). We get a touch of his early life, a look at his ministry (and the Roman culture), a notable miracle that’s ascribed to him, and a bit about the events leading to his martyrdom. All told in a child-appropriate rhyme.

Let’s Talk about the Art for a Minute

Bustard’s cartoon-y art is as great here as it was in his Saint Patrick the Forgiver. The thing that stands out to me is his inking. (at least that’s what we called it back when I was really into comics and talked about the art, hopefully, it still counts). The way he uses bold lines around his character’s faces/bodies (particularly Valentine’s), really makes them pop off the page and almost look like wooden puppets. (that’s the best I can do as far as describing the pictures)

He’s also able to convey a certain amount of unpleasantness and threat with Roman soldiers without changing the overall feel of the story and its appropriateness for young readers.

Now, in the Patrick book, he worked in a lot of Celtic knots and whatnot to give it a more Irish feel. Here he goes for a lot of differently colored hearts all over the pages. It didn’t even occur to me while reading the book to pay attention to that—it fit the overall Feb. 14th vibe. I should’ve known better—thankfully, he explained it in “A Note from the Author,” so when I read this with the Grandcritter I can seem more knowledgeable. He works in these hearts in different colors to represent the four types of love (eros, storge, philia, and agape) from ancient Greek thought (and a pretty good book by C.S. Lewis), showing how Valentine displayed and interacted with these types of love in various episodes in the book.

You can check out the Publisher’s site for a glimpse at the art and layout as a preview. This will probably give you a better idea than anything I tried to convey.

How is it to Read Aloud?

It’s a nice little bit of rhyming text, and starting off with “Roses are red,” as often as he does, you’re going to get right into the rhythm reflexively, which is a nice touch. Some of the rhymes feel like a stretch to me*, but when you’ve got a good head of steam going as you read you probably won’t notice.

* “ago” and “van Gogh”, really? Also, that only works if you use the American pronunciation—sorry, British readers.

So, what did I think about Saint Valentine the Kindhearted?

I enjoyed this. I do wish we had more history to draw from for Bustard to use here (and, well, other historians writing for older audiences, too), just to fill out some of the details reliably. But this is a good introduction to the figure that’s had such a cultural impact so that even younger readers can know there’s basis to the celebration beyond chalky candies and silly drawings.

I don’t have a lot to say about this beyond that. It’s a fun read for the little folks, it has details and layers that older readers can appreciate and use to talk about bigger ideas with the little ones, too. Color me impressed yet again by Bustard and I’m eager to see what holiday/figure he picks next. Anyone trying to bring Early Church figures to the attention of the pre-K crowd deserves some applause and I’m happy to keep giving it, while gladly recommending you jump on board.

Disclaimer: I received this eARC from InterVarsity Press via NetGalley in exchange for this post—thanks to both for this.


3.5 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.
Grandpappy Icon

Who Chose the Gospels?: Probing the Great Gospel Conspiracy by C. E. Hill: Robert Langdon Might Have Been on the Wrong Track (shocking, I know)

Who Chose the Gospels?Who Chose the Gospels?:
Probing the Great Gospel Conspiracy

by C. E. Hill

DETAILS:
Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA
Publication Date: April 7, 2012
Format: Paperback
Length: 247 pg.
Read Date: September 10-24, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org Support Indie Bookstores

All this presents a rather sticky problem. Recall that in Professor Ehrman’s political interpretation of church history it isn’t until the fourth century that the ‘orthodox’ party finally ‘sealed its victory over all of its opponents’, At that time ‘it rewrote the history of the engagement’, claiming that its views were passed down from Jesus’ apostles. And yet here is Irenaeus, nearly two centuries earlier, already ‘rewriting history’ long before the victory was sealed. At a time when, many prominent scholars insist, the issue was still very much in doubt, Irenaeus writes as if the church had been nurtured by these four Gospels from the time of the apostles.

The problem with Irenaeus is that he simply wrecks the popular paradigm. His views about the emerging New Testament canon, and about the four Gospels in particular, are simply too well-developed, too mature, to fit the scheme that many have invested themselves in today. As a second-century Christian author who argued that there are, and can only be, four legitimate Gospels—because they alone teach the truth about Jesus and because they alone had been handed down in the church from the time of the apostles—Irenaeus lies like a fallen Redwood in the path of those who would see the choice of the four Gospels as a late and politically motivated manoeuvre of the fourth century.

How do you solve a problem like Irenaeus?

What’s Who Chose the Gospels? About?

That last question in the quotation would work pretty well as an alternate title for the book—how do you solve a problem like Iraneaus? Or, more to the point, how do you ignore his (early date) recognition of only 4 gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—despite what we’re told about the state of gospel availability and canonization by so many today.

Hill examines some of the time frames, uses, content, and provenance of some of the so-called competitor gospels (i.e., those that never were considered canonical) to compare them to both the canonical gospels and those early figures of the Church we see discussing the gospels. But primarily, Hill is concerned with the use of and testimony regarding the canonical gospels—and the evidence regarding their use by the Church and when it started. The overwhelming bulk of the book is focused there.

So, we may now ask, how did the Christian church, apparent drowning in a sea of Gospels, finally end up with only four? The educated reader of today may already have come to the conch. sion that the story was attended with a good bit of bullying intrigue, and skullduggery. Many perhaps picture councils of bad-tempered bishops voting on which books to include in the Bible one minute, and voting to execute heretics the next. As now widely believed, in any case, that the four canonical Gospels emerged into prominence only fairly late from a long and drawnout battle within early Christianity, a battle finally won in the fourth century after the establishment of the church by Constantine the Great. While academics might not, as Teabing does Dan Brown’s novel, attribute the collation of the Bible to ‘pagan emperor Constantine’, many even in the academic community insist that the question of which Gospels the church ought to endorse was still up for grabs in the fourth century.

He also looks a little bit at contemporary theories (both academic and popular) about the development of the canon—insofar as it focuses on the Gospels. He finds it wanting, and somewhat self-contradictory—and talks about that, too. But even as he does so, it’s not the main focus of the book—which is, as said earlier, the four gospels and how the second (and possibly first) century church regarded them, and how that changed (and mostly didn’t change) in the two centuries following.

The Tone of the Book

You probably can’t read it in the image above, but that top blurb is from D.A. Carson and it says, “Not many books that are so informed are such a pleasure to read.” I really didn’t pay much attention to it—and just figured he meant something about how nice it is to have such an informative read or something like that. If for no other reason, it was from Oxford University Press, who are not known for fun reads. I was super duper wrong.

This was a blast to read. Seriously, I had a lot of fun.

Not—and I want to stress, not—because he’s making jokes, being silly, or outrageous or anything like that. There’s just something about Hill’s style. He’s charming (seemingly effortlessly), not in a way that calls attention to itself, but it’s there—a little mild sarcasm, some wordplay, some other bits of humor along the way—but it’s nothing I can point to, and say “there it is!” But time after time while reading this, I found myself grinning for no apparent reason.

That’s just his style—the subject is serious, and frankly, pretty dry. But Hill keeps it from being dry without tuning down the seriousness of both the positive case he’s trying to build and the criticisms he makes toward the other side(s).

So, what did I think about Who Chose the Gospels??

In short, we have no evidence that the church ever sat down collectively or as individual churches and composed criteria for judging which Gospels (or other literature) it thought best suited its needs. On the contrary, the key realization which best explains our inability to find an ultimate ‘chooser’, which best explains why the church didn’t take the easy way out with some kind of singular Gospel and why it never cobbled together a set of criteria to apply to all the Gospel candidates, is that the church essentially did not believe it had a choice in the matter! The question ‘why did you choose these Gospels?’ would not have made sense to many Christians in the second century, for the question assumes that the church, or someone in it, had the authority to make the choice. To many, it would be like the question, ‘why did you choose your parents?

A few other books/chapters that I’ve read on the subject talk about the conclusions Hill draws, and refer to some of the evidence, but Hill’s the first one I’ve read who’s actually “shown the work,” as my math teachers/professors would say. His answers match other scholars, but I can actually see how he got them. For that alone, I enjoyed reading this book and profited from it.

Add in his style? Oh, buddy—now we’re cooking with fire.

Hill is careful and thorough, acknowledging challenges to his position about the emergence of the fourfold Gospel to the place it holds today. But he’s consistent in showing how those challenges don’t have the weight and merit that so many in our culture assume they do. Not to keep picking on it—but the authors/editors of Church History in Plain Language should spend time with this book and others like it before they finish the Sixth Edition—it would really help out with its particularly weak chapter on the Canon.

I think the concluding chapter could’ve been beefed up a little bit. Maybe after a few more readings, I can figure out what it was missing—I just felt it was weak here and there. Or another reading or two will show me that I could’ve paid better attention this time (entirely likely).

Regardless, Who Wrote the Gospels? is a book well worth time and attention—and it’ll repay both.


5 Stars

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.
Irresponsible Reader Pilcrow Icon

Church History in Plain Language, Fifth Edition by Bruce Shelley, Revision Editor Marshall Shelley: Gets Too Much Wrong

Church History in Plain LanguageChurch History in Plain Language, Fifth Edition

by Bruce L. Shelley, Revision Editor: Marshall Shelley

DETAILS:
Publisher: Zondervan Academic
Publication Date: July 13, 2021
Format: E-book
Length: 624 pg.
Read Date: March 27-May 23, 2023


What’s Church History in Plain Language About?

From the Publisher’s website:

Bruce Shelley’s classic history of the church brings the story of global Christianity into the twenty-first century. Like a skilled screenwriter, Shelley begins each chapter with three elements: characters, setting, plot. Taking readers from the early centuries of the church up through the modern era he tells his readers a story of actual people, in a particular situation, taking action or being acted upon, provides a window into the circumstances and historical context, and from there develops the story of a major period or theme of Christian history. Covering recent events, this book also:

  • Details the rapid growth of evangelical and Pentecostal Christianity in the southern hemisphere
  • Addresses the decline in traditional mainline denominations
  • Examines the influence of technology on the spread of the gospel
  • Discusses how Christianity intersects with other religions in countries all over the world

For this fifth edition, Marshall Shelley brought together a team of historians, historical theologians, and editors to revise and update this father’s classic text. The new edition adds important stories of the development of Christianity in Asia, India, and Africa, both in the early church as well as in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. It also highlights the stories of women and non-Europeans who significantly influenced the development of Christianity but whose contributions are often overlooked in previous overviews of church history.

This concise book provides an easy-to-read guide to church history with intellectual substance. The new edition of Church History in Plain Language promises to set a new standard for readable church history.

Bad History

This book is just filled with errors—or questionable statements. The one that threw me for a loop was the description of the Council of Nicea, when the text cites the Nicene Creed (325) saying that this is the one that was agreed upon there. But what is cited is the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed (from 381) with the Filioque clause (from 1014). Humbug.

The section on Calvin was a mess. In a discussion, I summed up the section on English Puritans as, “Tell me you’ve never read the Puritans without saying you’ve never read the Puritans.” It’s one thing for Max Weber or H.L. Mencken to mischaracterize them, it’s something else for fellow believers to do it.

And the Crusades? They’re given a tiny amount of space (I’ll be generous and say 6 pages…1 percent of the total work), and the explanation of them is half-hearted at best. Given that people of several faiths (and those without faith) still use the Crusades to evaluate Christianity and the way it interacts with the rest of the world, the reader is not well served that they’re given short shrift.

And I’m no historian—I’m a hobbyist at best when it comes to a couple of time periods in Church History. If I can find problems like that—off of one reading—how many more are there? (this is not an exhaustive list of the problems I noted, just some of the more glaring ones—and ones that I’m more confident in).

The Problem of Perspective

The perspective of this book comes from all over the place. Whatever Shelley did in revising this, he didn’t edit it enough so that the perspective is unified. That’d be okay if each chapter/part of a chapter was identified by a particular contributor. Chapter X is by Y, from such-and-such School/Background. Chapter A is by B, from this other Church. Then you could understand where divergent voices are coming from and understand some of the prejudices (as much or as little as they’re tried to be eliminated).

But here, it’s presented as one voice—when it clearly isn’t—and the perspective isn’t identified. So we get this section with a heavy Anabaptist sympathy, another section with some latent Modalism, some Dispensationalism, and so on.

I just kept getting whiplash as I’d read, where was this coming from?

So, what did I think about Church History in Plain Language?

For a few weeks, I’d been leaning toward giving this 2 Stars (but hoping something would make me change my mind so I could give it at least 3). At least the scope of this work should cause me to give it the benefit of the doubt.

But…I just can’t do that. If you can’t get something so basic as the history and content of the Nicene Creed right, it’s a problem. This is a history book, you should, you know…get the history right. I’ve got other examples—but this is sufficient. If you can’t get the big things like this right, why should I trust you in the lesser?

A bigger problem is being as casual about Christology as this is. If you’re going to be writing a book of Church History, you should get the essentials right. Again, I have other examples—but why? And again, if you’re not trustworthy here, why should I trust you elsewhere?

Now, I’ve been intending on reading this book since I was in college—it was probably the Second Edition that my roommate had on his shelf (but who knows, maybe it was the first). But I hadn’t gotten around to it. I really wish I had read it then, so I’d know how much of the weaknesses of this edition were characteristic of Bruce L. Shelley and how much comes from his son and his collaborators in this mess.

It’s a history book—at most, it should interest and educate a reader—it should not make the reader upset, much less angry. And I got angry multiple times.

At the end of the day, this was a waste of 600+ pages and a whole lot of my time. Avoid this.


1 Star

This post contains an affiliate link. If you purchase from it, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, the opinions expressed are my own.

My Favorite Non-Fiction Books of 2021

Favorite Non-Fiction 2021
My 2021 Wrap up continues and now we’re on to the Non-Fiction list. While I liked a number of works that didn’t make this list, I felt strange calling them a “favorite.” So, we have 6 instead of the nigh-obligatory 10 (Hartford had two books on the list, but I wouldn’t let someone else do that on another list, so I trimmed one from this). Like last year, I was surprised that I’d given so many of these 3 or 3 1/2 stars. But these are the ones that stuck with me through the year; the ones I cited in conversation; that I thought about when reading something else or watching something on TV. Really, that’s what’s important, right?

As always, I only put books that I’ve read for the first time on this list. I don’t return to NF books (outside of looking up things for one or three points), but occasionally I do—for example, The Pleasures of Reading in an Age of Distraction by Alan Jacobs would get a permanent spot on this list, were it not for this rule.

(in alphabetical order by author)

Blood and TreasureBlood and Treasure: Daniel Boone and the Fight for America’s First Frontier

by Bob Drury and Tom Clavin

My original post
This book de-mythologized—and then re-mythologized (to a point) Daniel Boone, who ended up being more interesting (and more human) than I anticipated. Some of the writing was fantastic and you could forget you were reading history (there were other parts that were so dry it could be nothing else). The book looks at both Boone and the Fight for the Frontier—against Indians, French, and the English. It’s the kind of history book that convinces me that I should read more history—not to better myself, just because it’s worthwhile.

3.5 Stars

A Dream About Lightning BugsA Dream About Lightning Bugs: A Life of Music and Cheap Lessons

by Ben Folds

I haven’t written a post about this book yet, so it’s hard for me to try to give a thumbnail here. I enjoyed getting to know Folds a bit better—warts and all (and he’s not afraid to bring up some of the warts). Where this book really impressed me was when he talked about music—performing, creating, listening, what it means to a listener/performer. I’ve already returned to some of that material to reread—I’m not a musician, but I appreciate someone that thoughtful about it. It’s inspirational.

Also, his stuff about Shatner is just great.

3.5 Stars

The Data Detective: Ten Easy Rules to Make Sense of StatisticsThe Data Detective: Ten Easy Rules to Make Sense of Statistics

by Tim Harford

My original post
This is one of those books I should go back and re-read, taking copious notes to help me internalize the points. We’re subject to people at work, on the news, online, and from the government throwing numbers, statistics, and “studies show” so often that it can be overwhelming. So much so that many people blindly accept everything they’re told from that formula, or doubt it all. Hartford’s point is that we should be skeptical, but to use that skepticism to dig out the real meaning behind the study/statistic and then use it for our advantage as a voter, citizen, employee, or person (or all of the above). Crystal clear writing, easily applicable, and more useful than most books on related subjects.

Actually, I think I just convinced myself to re-read it soon.

3 Stars

Nine Nasty WordsNine Nasty Words: English in the Gutter: Then, Now, and Forever

by John McWhorter

My original post
I’m a sucker for an entertaining look at language, and that’s what McWhorter delivered here. While I try to eschew the use of profanity, we’re surrounded by it so much more than we likely realize, so I might as well learn more about it, right? This was a solid look at the background and development of these “Big 9” words—in particular, I enjoyed McWhorter’s demonstration of how the words function as various parts of speech, as well as the varying nuances of meaning.

3 Stars

You'll Never Believe What Happened to LaceyYou’ll Never Believe What Happened to Lacey: Crazy Stories about Racism

by Amber Ruffin, Lacey Lamar

My original post
I talked about this in my favorite audiobook post, too, never fear—this’ll be the last time I bring it up this week.

Early on, Ruffin writes:

Twice a week, I get a text from my sister that says, “Can you talk?” It’s my favorite because I know I’m about to be transported to a place that exists in real life and fantasy: the place where coworkers will put their whole hand in your hair, talking ’bout “It’s fluffy like a dog.” I realize this sounds terrible, but it’s like watching Dateline. You can’t believe it was the GIRLFRIEND who killed the HUSBAND! It’s the edge of reality. Technically, it happens, but it is barely plausible. Excited, I steal away to the elevator banks at work and listen to Lacey tell me a new horror story. It’s fantastic. As I stand there, mouth agape, listening to some new fresh hell, I am always struck by the fact that these stories will only exist in this phone call. Some will go on to become stories once the topic turns to “racist people at work” one night when Lacey is hanging out with her friends, but she’ll forget most of them because of the sheer volume. The. Sheer. Volume.

That’s what this book is, a distillation of that volume. A compilation of the best/worst of those stories. They are tragic. They are sobering. They are frequently pretty funny. But only in the way they’re told. Lamar and Ruffin share these stories with an air of “you have to laugh or you’ll cry.” The kind of resigned laughter when you realize that your situation isn’t going to get better any time soon, so you might as well find the pleasure in it. A lot of this is hard to listen to/read—but it’s usually worth it. There’s also a decent level of “a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down” running throughout this.

4 Stars

Moonlighting: An Oral HistoryMoonlighting: An Oral History

by Scott Ryan

My original post
It’s probably the most fun I’ve had with a book this year. Somehow, Ryan’s able to capture a little bit of the flavor of the show while getting into the history. Moonlighting was a revolutionary show, and he is able to talk to just about every significant figure involved in the creation and production of it for this history. He chronicles the ups, downs, and all-around zaniness. There are deep-dives on important episodes and or tricky scenes, as well as broader looks at themes, storylines, characters, etc. It’s easy to forget just how magical this show was, but spending some time with Ryan will remind viewers of a certain age of just what a ground-breaking, oft-controversial, and entertaining series it was.

5 Stars

Page 1 of 4

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén