Tag: Non-Fiction Page 2 of 26

Nasty, Brutish, and Short (Audiobook) by Scott Hershovitz: Who Needs Calvin and Hobbes When We Have Rex and Hank?

Nasty, Brutish, and ShortNasty, Brutish, and Short:
Adventures in Philosophy with My Kids

by Scott Hershovitz

DETAILS:
Publisher: Penguin Audio
Publication Date: May 3, 2022
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 9 hrs., 31 min.
Read Date: September 21-25, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org Support Indie Bookstores

What’s Nasty, Brutish, and Short About?

The official description is:

Some of the best philosophers in the world gather in surprising places—preschools and playgrounds. They debate questions about metaphysics and morality, even though they’ve never heard the words and perhaps can’t even tie their shoes. They’re kids. And as Scott Hershovitz shows in this delightful debut, they’re astoundingly good philosophers.

Hershovitz has two young sons, Rex and Hank. From the time they could talk, he noticed that they raised philosophical questions and were determined to answer them. They re-created ancient arguments. And they advanced entirely new ones. That’s not unusual, Hershovitz says. Every kid is a philosopher.

Following an agenda set by Rex and Hank, Hershovitz takes us on a fun romp through classic and contemporary philosophy, powered by questions like, Does Hank have the right to drink soda? When is it okay to swear? and, Does the number six exist? Hershovitz and his boys take on more weighty issues too. They explore punishment, authority, sex, gender, race, the nature of truth and knowledge, and the existence of God. Along the way, they get help from professional philosophers, famous and obscure. And they show that all of us have a lot to learn from listening to kids—and thinking with them.

Hershovitz calls on us to support kids in their philosophical adventures. But more than that, he challenges us to join them so that we can become better, more discerning thinkers and recapture some of the wonder kids have at the world.

The book is broken down into three sections: “Making Sense of Morality” (covering ideas like Rights, Revenge, Punishment, Authority, and Language); “Making Sense of Ourselves” (surely non-controversial chapters covering “Sex, Gender, and Sports”; and “Race and Responsibility”); and “Making Sense of the World” (Knowledge, Truth, Mind, Infinity, and God—the easy bits of philosophy). While discussing these, Hershovitz will describe the idea(s) he’s focusing on—or the aspects of them, to be more specific; he’ll then illustrate them with questions from or discussions with his sons; give us a brief history of philosophy on the topic; and then his personal take on them. Usually with more input from his sons along the way.

How was the Narration?

Hershovitz was fantastic. If he gets tired of the whole professor/philosopher gig, he could have a new career in audiobook narration. I can only imagine that his classes are great to sit through.

He delivered the material that in the wrong hands could’ve come across as super-dry, or really jokey and kept it engaging, entertaining, and informative—with a little bit of the persuasiveness needed to keep someone listening to a book about philosophy.

I was quite impressed.

So, what did I think about Nasty, Brutish, and Short?

Oh, I have some serious issues with some of the philosophy here. The chapter on “God” (to the surprise of few who read this blog regularly) really bothered me—but it did underline the importance of Special Revelation to go with General Revelation.

The Conclusion, “How to Raise a Philosopher,” was fantastic. Truly some of the best parenting advice I’ve heard/read in ages (and I don’t even need that any more and I still found myself taking notes). For raising more than just philosophers.

Sure, I disagreed with some of his conclusions—but I loved hearing the way Hershovitz thought through the ideas he was proposing and/or discussing, the way he dealt with his kids and their questions, I appreciated the way he explained concepts both basic and complex in a way that non-philosophers could understand, and he managed to be entertaining all along. Some of his witticisms did cause me to react audibly. There’s a good deal of so-called common sense mixed in with the profound as well—always nice to see for a layman like myself.

This book is a strange alchemy of parenting advice (even if largely given by example rather than by precept), Philosophy 101, and humor. It works so well that it’s hard to explain. I can only hope there’s a sequel or three as Hank and Rex age.

All in all, I heartily recommend this for parents, people who want to get a start in philosophy but aren’t sure where (and don’t want to admit that to anyone), and others. The print version might be nice for easy reference, but the audiobook format is a real winner.


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.
Irresponsible Reader Pilcrow Icon

The Irresponsible Reader On…Self-Published Non-Fiction

(updated 7/26/23)
Self-Published Authors Appreciation Week

From the first moment that people did the strange thing of asking me to talk about their books on my blog, I’ve been impressed by the quality of a lot of what’s been published by authors going out on their own, taking all the risks, shouldering all the responsibility and doing all the work to get their words, their dreams, their blood, sweat, and tears. This should be celebrated—it’s definitely appreciated, as we’re trying to show this week.

In addition to the Q&As and Guest Posts I have this week, I’m also continuing my habit of highlighting the self-published works that I’ve blogged about over the last few years—just a sentence or two.  Hopefully, this’ll be enough to make you click on the link to the full post. Beyond that, it’d be great if I inspired you to add a few of these to your TBR. Also, be sure you check out the other posts over at the SPAAW Hub.

Today we’re going to be looking at Self-Published Non-Fiction—which are primarily memoirs at their core, it’s what the authors do with the memoirs that makes these really stand out. But there are a few other things, too.

bullet Life and Death Behind the Brick and Razor: Code Red Diamond by Isaac Alexis, MD—A prison doctor uses his experiences to give suggestions for a healthy/healthier life. (my post about it)
bullet How Not to Be an *SS: Essays on Becoming a Good & Safe Man by Andrew J. Bauman—Bauman calls men to an authentic, Biblical masculinity—one built on humility, kindness, and service. While offering concrete ways to set aside patterns of abuse and neglect. (my post about it)
bullet Kneading Journalism: Essays on baking bread and breaking down the news by Tony Ganzer—This is a collection of essays about the state of journalism, how people relate to and view the media we consume, and what the future may hold. Oh, and bread recipes, of course. It makes sense in context (and is a really great idea). (my post about it)
bullet No Problem, Mr. Walt: Building a Boat, Rebuilding a Life, & Discovering China by Walt Hackman—Hackman was one of the first self-published authors to reach out to me, and I’m so glad he did. A fascinating read about a man deciding to have an authentic Chinese junk built for him to use as a houseboat in California. (my post about it)
bullet Finding Hope in Hard Things: A Positive Take on Suffering by Pierce Taylor Hibbs—The central premise is that God uses the “hard things” in life to shape us into the people he wants us to be, and uses some of the hard things in his life as case studies to demonstrate how they were used so the reader is equipped to look at their own lives and see the purpose in their suffering. (my post about it)
bullet The Great Lie: What All of Hell Wants You to Keep Believing by Pierce Taylor Hibbs—Paired with Hibbs’ characteristic clear prose and gift with language and illustrations, Hibbs reminds the reader that God is always speaking to us, through both the Creation and His Word. (my post about it)
bullet In Divine Company by Pierce Taylor Hibbs—Pierce’s treatment of prayer focuses on the communicative nature of God and His image bearers and then nurturing that in our lives to improve our prayer. (my post about it)
bullet Struck Down but Not Destroyed: Living Faithfully with Anxiety by Pierce Taylor Hibbs—Drawing on what he’s learned from over 12 years of anxiety, Hibbs talks about learning to see what God’s purpose in the suffering is (anxiety disorders specifically, but easily transferable to other types), understanding that His hand is guiding all things—including our problems—so how do we in faith (without denying the suffering) rest in faith. (my post about it)
bullet And Drink I Did: One Man’s Story of Growing Through Recovery by Jay Keefe—It’s all there in the subtitle, Keefe tells about his OCD, his alcoholic days, his getting sober, and how he’s trying to help others since then. Powerful stuff. (my post about it)
bullet How to Take Over the World: Practical Schemes and Scientific Solutions for the Aspiring Supervillain by Ryan North—A tongue-in-cheek way to talk about some of the most advanced science around and how it can (and in some ways is) be used to destroy the world. (my post about it)
bullet The Genius’ Guide to Bad Writing by R.T. Slaywood, R.C. Martinez—A guide for the writer who is tired of success and wants to reclaim their lives from answering the siren call of fortune and fame that comes to every author. Slaywood and Martinez have a 10-Step program guaranteed to ruin a novel or two and stop a career dead in its spot. (my post about it)
bullet Uber Diva by Charles St. Anthony—a humorist writes a memoir of a Lyft/Uber driver mixed with a guide to starting/surviving/thriving as one in a tough market. St. Anthony also has a few other books out now that are probably worth a read. (my post about it)
bullet Flying Alone: A Memoir by Beth Ruggiero York—A female pilot’s memoir of her path from flight school to flying for TWA (now that I have a son learning to fly, some of her more harrowing experiences keep flashing through the back of my mind). (my post about it)

 


If you're a self-published author that I've featured on this blog and I didn't mention you in this post and should have. I'm sorry (unless you're this guy). Please drop me a line, and I'll fix this. I want to keep this regularly updated so I keep talking about Self-Published Authors.

Self-Published Authors Appreciation Week Footer

The 2023 Self-Published Authors Appreciation Week Logo was made by Witty and Sarcastic Book Club

The Worst We Can Find by Dale Sherman: MST3K: The Satellite of Love, The Bots, The Mads, The Movies and Everything Else

The Worst We Can FindThe Worst We Can Find:
MST3K, RiffTrax, and the History of Heckling at the Movies

by Dale Sherman

DETAILS:
Publisher: Applause Books
Publication Date: June 15, 2023
Format: Paperback
Length: 246 pg.
Read Date: June 27-29, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org Support Indie Bookstores

What’s The Worst We Can Find About?

This is one of those books where the sub-title tells you everything you need to know: “MST3K, RiffTrax, and the History of Heckling at the Movies.” The back of the book does give a fuller explanation:

Had you tuned in to the small television station KTMA on Thanksgiving Day, 1988, you would have been one of the few witnesses to pop culture history being made. On that day, viewers in and around St. Paul, Minnesota, were treated to a genuine oddity, in which a man and his robots, trapped within a defiantly DIY sci-fi set, cracked jokes while watching the terrible 1981 movie Invaders from the Deep. Although its origins may have been inauspicious, Mystery Science Theater 3000 captured the spirit of what had been a beloved pastime for generations of wags, wiseacres, and smart alecks, and would soon go on to inspire countless more.

The Worst We Can Find is a comprehensive history of and guide to MST3K and its various offshoots—including Rifftrax, Cinematic Titanic, and The Mads Are Back—whose lean crew of writers, performers, and puppeteers have now been making fun of movies for over thirty years. It investigates how “riffing” of films evolved, recounts the history of these programs, and considers how a practice guaranteed to annoy real-life fellow moviegoers grew into such a beloved, long-lasting franchise. As author Dale Sherman explains, creative heckling has been around forever—but MST3K and its progeny managed to redirect that art into a style that was both affectionate and cutting, winning the devotion of countless fans and aspiring riffers.

Sherman starts with some commentary on the history of what we now call “meta” and riffing in general—going back to Greek choruses. He then shows how movies started riffing/commenting on themselves (and each other).

He then focuses on MST3K itself—talking about Joel Hodgson’s background and the creation of the show. We actually get some good background on all the major players from the early years. He then describes the transitions in staff/cast as it moves from KTMA to Comedy Central to the movie (and, wow, what an effort to get that made) to SciFi and so on.

We then get a look at what the post-MST3K careers of the central figures look like and how riffing on movies has kept popping up in their lives (largely because people won’t let them stop) and how the show has come back from its ending a time or two.

My Sole Criticism

Sherman only cites previously available material—yes, he dug up a lot of things that many/most fans would never see, never think of looking for. But he doesn’t interview anyone himself, or provide anything outside a couple of personal memories that an industrious fan couldn’t have found on their own.

I don’t want to criticize what he did—it is no small feat to do what he did. And I’m so glad he did it—but the lack of original material keeps me from absolutely raving about this book.

So, what did I think about The Worst We Can Find?

Back when I talked about Scott Ryan’s Moonlighting: An Oral History, I’d said:

When I read a book about a television show, I want a few things—I want something to

    • make me want to rewatch the show
    • make me not really need to, because the book has helped me remember it in such a way that it’s not that necessary
    • give me a lot of behind-the-scenes information about the show
    • help me understand it better (not just information, but reflections on it—its legacy, cultural context, impact on television, et.)
    • Ideally, teach me something about the art and/or business of television (preferably both)
    • and if it can be fun (TV should be entertaining), that’s all the better.

Yeah, that seems like a lot to ask for from a book, but if I’m going to take the time to read a book instead of watching a behind-the-scenes show or listening to a panel discussion, I want bang for my buck—I don’t always get it (and know that going in), but I want it.

The Worst We Can Find delivered on all but the “make me not really need to” because there’s no way that someone could do that in a book form. I have watched some MST3K since then (more than I usually do because I’ve been inspired)—and some Rifftrax, too.

I don’t want ponderous, I don’t want slow. I don’t mind a lot of detail (in fact, I relish it), I don’t mind thoughtful (that’s why I read the book), but I want to be entertained. And Sherman delivered there. His chapter introductions were golden—worth at least half of the purchase price alone. I started to give a couple of examples, but why ruin it for you? So, I’ll be vague. I laughed aloud at Chapter 4’s introduction. Maybe all of them, but Chapter 4 was the point I stopped to make note of it.

I really appreciated the way Sherman pivoted in the last chapter to speak of “we” in reference to fans of the show, it’s clear throughout that he was one of us (there’s no way you do this work without that—or a bigger paycheck than he likely got for this book), but I appreciated the way he did it there.

The last paragraph was perfect, incidentally.

This was a great read, I learned a lot, I chuckled frequently, and I had a great time reminiscing about a favorite show. I think you will, too. I’d say is a must for MSTies. As I said, I can’t rave about it—but I can strongly encourage you to check it out. And keep circulating the tapes.


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.

Catch-Up Quick Takes: A Handful February and March Books

Celeste was right, and I don’t have to write about everything—but I have a hard time convincing myself of that. I’m far overdue on saying something about these six listens and one read. So, let’s do a little catch-up (if only so I can feel better about myself). As always, the point of these quick takes posts is to catch up on my “To Write About” stack—emphasizing pithiness, not thoroughness.


The Devotion of Suspect XThe Devotion of Suspect X

by Keigo Higashino, Alexander O. Smith (Translator), David Pittu (Narrator)

DETAILS:
Series: Detective Galileo, #1 (in English, anyway)
Publisher: Macmillan Audio
Publication Date: Feb 1, 2011 
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 9 hr., 2 min.
Read Date: March 7-9, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org!

(the official blurb)
A homicide detective consults with his friend, a genius and physicist about a tricky murder. His friend may be a college professor and not a detective, but there’s something about the way his mind works that helps Detective Kusanagi think better, and consulting his friend has worked in the past.

This is the murder of a seemingly odious man and it seems tied to his ex-wife, who’d been avoiding his abusive presence for years. Kusanagi can’t tie her to the killing, but there’s something going on that makes him want to. So he keeps investigating and then his pal gets involved, too.

This was a perfectly satisfying read, but I wasn’t as wowed by it as I expected to be. Sorry, Jeff, still appreciate the recommendation.

3 Stars

The Dead Will TellThe Dead Will Tell

by Linda Castillo, Kathleen McInerney (Narrator)

DETAILS:
Series: Kate Burkholder, #6
Publisher: Macmillan Audio
Publication Date: July 8, 2014
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 8 hrs., 37 min.
Read Date: March 10-14, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org!

(the official blurb)
A pair of apparent suicides gets Kate Burkholder to dive into their pasts, and she discovers a common tie—to a 35-year-old murder of an Amish family. This puts her in a race against time to discover what’s (or who has) caused their deaths now, and if she can stop anyone else from dying while maybe solving this old horror.

The cold-case nature of this is a nice change of pace, but at the end of the day, it’s a brutal crime against the Amish. I’d just like to see someone else in her community the victim of a crime.

That came out wrongly. But it’d be nice to let this community have even some fictional relief.
3 Stars

Profiles in IgnoranceProfiles in Ignorance:
How America’s Politicians Got Dumb and Dumber

by Andy Borowitz

DETAILS:
Publisher: Simon & Schuster Audio
Publication Date: September 13, 2022
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 8 hrs., 51 min.
Read Date: March 13-14, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org!

(the official blurb)
Borowitz traces how mass media and the political parties (particularly one) have worked to dumb down politics, the electorate, and our elected officials since Reagan’s initial run for governor and ending in the present. It’s insightful, it’s depressing, but it leaves a little room for hope.

I really wish he’d done a better job of making this bi-partisan. While he might be right that one party is guilty of more of what he’s talking about, I refuse to believe they’re alone—which makes this feel like too much of a partisan attack, rather than an exploration of the topic. Both have their place—I’d just have preferred a little more of the latter.

I initially assumed that this would be typical Borowitz humor—which I appreciate. But no, this was serious in intent and execution. Earnest Andy Borowitz is an interesting concept. A little humor crept in, but not much. I prefer him when he’s trying to be funny, but I’d read/listen to more like this from him, too.
3 Stars

Space: 1969Space: 1969

by Bill Oakley, starring Natasha Lyonne and too many others to list.

DETAILS:
Publisher: Audible Originals
Publication Date: 2022
Format: Audible Original
Length: 5 hr., 35 min.
Read Date: March 29, 2023

(the official blurb)
This is more like an audio play than a book (with all the clunky dialogue that implies). Oh well.

So the premise is that Kennedy survived the Dallas shooting and the space race kicked into overdrive—and by 1969, we have a Moon Colony and a space station. Nancy Kranich is a nurse on the station (with an interesting past), and is pretty miserable, oddly enough. Nancy stumbles into a conspiracy involving an intergalactic threat and former vice-president Nixon (a largely forgotten figure by this time).

Without Natasha Lyonne (and most of the voice cast), I don’t know if I’d have finished this. But because of Lyonne, I’d enjoy relistening to it. It was amusing and strange—feeling like a classic radio SF drama but with some really contemporary sensibilities. I’m not sure it’s the best of both of those worlds, but it was a fun combination.

3 Stars

Hunting Fiends for the Ill-EquippedHunting Fiends for the Ill-Equipped

by Annette Marie, Cris Dukehart (Narrator)

DETAILS:
Series: Guild Codex: Demonized, #3
Publisher: Tantor Audio
Publication Date: June 23, 2020
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 8 hrs., 28 min.
Read Date: February 1-2, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org!

(the official blurb)
I’m having trouble remembering just what happened in this one—that’s the case for the entire Demonized arc so far, it’s all one story (which is great for the series, a pain when you’re trying to say “this is the one where…”).

I did enjoy the overall plot of this one, but my favorite parts are where this series overlaps with the other series in The Guild Codex—and I found myself increasingly impatient with Robin as she was off doing her own thing.

I am really tired of the will-they-won’t-they between Zylas and Robin—which is really a how-long-can-Marie-stretch-this-out.

3 Stars

Finlay Donovan Jumps the GunFinlay Donovan Jumps the Gun

by Elle Cosimano, Angela Dawe (Narration)

DETAILS:
Series: Finlay Donovan, #3
Publisher: Macmillan Audio
Publication Date: January 31, 2023
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 8 hrs., 38 min.
Read Date: February 9-13, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org!

(the official blurb)
I am continuing to enjoy this series—but I’m not sure for how long. It’s getting harder and harder to accept the antics that Finlay and Vero get up to—and the way Finlay treats those around her. This book in particular stretched credulity. I fear that Cosimano is learning the wrong lessons from Evanovich.

I’d also like to see Finlay actually do some more parenting—it’s hard to sympathize with her plight when it comes to custody, etc. when she’s always handing off her children’s care to someone else (although, it does keep them safe).

Dawe’s narration is so good that I will put up with a little more zaniness. But without some changes to the series, I’m not sure how long I’ll stick around.
3 Stars

Anna and the Vampire PrinceAnna and the Vampire Prince

by Jeanne C. Stein

DETAILS:
Series: Anna Strong, #9.5
Publisher: Hex Publishers LLC
Publication Date: April 25, 2017
Format: Paperback
Length: 92
Read Date: February 17, 2023
Buy from Bookshop.org!

(the official blurb)
Anna’s in France dealing with her mother’s death, and her niece’s death is kidnapped. So she has to reach out to her local allies to try to rescue the girl.

The action bits were Stein at her best but the story felt rushed—but this was largely an excuse to revisit the characters, so it didn’t need to be too involved. As a bit of nostalgia, it was nice—but Stein did a good enough job wrapping up the series that I didn’t feel a giant need for something like this (as demonstrated by the fact that it took me 6 years to get around to reading it).

It was just fun enough to justify my time.
3 StarsThis post contains affiliate links. If you purchase from any of them, I will get a small commission at no additional cost to you. As always, my opinions are my own.

It’s Great to Suck at Something (Audiobook) by Karen Rinaldi: The Book Isn’t Quite Proof of the Title, But…

It's Great to Suck at SomethingIt’s Great to Suck at Something:
The Unexpected Joy of Wiping Out and What It Can Teach Us About Patience, Resilience, and the Stuff that Really Matters

by Karen Rinaldi

DETAILS:
Publisher: Simon & Schuster Audio
Publication Date: May 07, 2019
Format: Unabridged Audiobook
Length: 7 hrs., 15 min.
Read Date: June 12, 2023


What’s It’s Great to Suck at Something About?

The Publisher’s Description is:

When was the last time you tried something new? Something that won’t make you more productive, make you more money, or check anything off your to-do list? Something you’re really, really bad at, but that brought you joy?

Odds are, not recently. We live in a time of aspirational psychoses. We humblebrag about how hard we work and we prioritize productivity over happiness. Even kids don’t play for the sake of playing anymore: they’re building blocks to build the ideal college application. We’re told to be the best or nothing at all. We’re trapped in an epic and farcical quest for perfection and it’s all making us more anxious and depressed than ever.

This book provides the antidote. (It’s Great to) Suck at Something “shows how joy and growth come from risking failure and letting go of perfectionism” (The Wall Street Journal). Drawing on her personal experience sucking at surfing (a sport Karen Rinaldi’s dedicated nearly two decades of her life to doing without ever coming close to getting good at it) along with philosophy, literature, and the latest science, Rinaldi explores sucking as a lost art we must reclaim for our health and our sanity and helps us find the way to our own riotous suck-ability. Sucking at something rewires our brain in positive ways, helps us cultivate grit, and inspires us to find joy in the process, without obsessing about the destination. Ultimately, it gives you freedom: the freedom to suck without caring is revelatory.

My description would be—Rinaldi is a devoted surfer. That doesn’t mean that she’s a good one—she has witnesses and video evidence to back that up. But she doesn’t care—she still loves it. In fact, she’s learned a lot about herself—and probably about the way people tick—from being a lousy surfer, and now she has some good advice to share about being lousy at things (and continuing to do them). She weaves this advice with a semi-meandering recounting of her surfing career in the pages of this book.

A Quick Word About the Narration

Rinaldi’s narration on this was really good—I’d listen to her narrate another book easily. Maybe it’s easier because it’s her book and she knows the emotions she’s trying to evoke—but I’ve heard enough authors not know how to do that for me to really believe it.

So, what did I think about It’s Great to Suck at Something?

I should start by saying that I’m 100% on board with Rinaldi’s central thesis and think it’s something that more people need to embrace and practice. I just have problems with most of the rest of the book.

We’ve all been to those “meetings that could’ve been an email,” right?* As I was listening I kept thinking—this is a book that could’ve been an article. Maybe a series of them. Or a few blog posts. But it had no business being a book.

Of course, not at my current job. I’m talking exclusively about previous positions.

Or at least not this book. If this had been sold as a “memoir of a lousy but committed surfer with some advice you can apply to your own passions/hobbies.” It would’ve been fine. The book wasn’t about the benefits of sucking at things, it was about a big part of Rinaldi’s life, and through it she offered some observations on the human condition—some of which she can offer footnotes to.

The book really didn’t need the turn to spirituality it took toward the end. It was very out of place.

Trim the personal anecdotes to anecdotes/illustrations, amp up the advice (and the reasons for it) and you’ve got a decent, albeit shorter, book. But as it is, it’s hard for me to say that a reader or listener isn’t wasting their time.


2 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.

PUB DAY REPOST: 100 Places to See After You Die by Ken Jennings: The Tour Guide No One Wants, But Everyone Needs

100 Places to See After You Die100 Places to See After You Die:
A Travel Guide to the Afterlife

by Ken Jennings

DETAILS:
Publisher: Scribner Book Company
Publication Date: June 13, 2023
Format: eARC
Length: 304 pg.
Read Date: May 24-26, 2023


What’s 100 Places to See After You Die About?

Ken Jennings provides a handy tour guide through one hundred visions of the afterlife for the modern reader. Complete with tips on places to see, areas to avoid, local lingo, bits of trivia, dining tips, and so on, it’s just the kind of thing you’re going to want to peruse before you shuffle off this mortal coil, so you know where to go.

The book is broken down into: Mythology, Religion, Books, Movies, Music and Theater, and Miscellaneous. Then (alphabetically) Jennings looks at a variety of afterlife locales in each category.

For example, the Books section covers:

Aslan’s Country • The Bridge • The Cemetery • The Empyrean • The Five Lessons • Half-Life • The Inbetween • Inferno • The Kingdom • King’s Cross • Mansoul • The Null • Pandemonium • Paradiso • The Parish • Purgatorio • Riverworld • The Third Sphere • The Time Bubble • The Undying Lands • The Valley of the Shadow of Life*

* From Lewis’ The Chronicles of Narnia and The Great Divorce; O’Connor’s story “Revelation”; Saunders’ Lincoln in the Bardo; Milton’s Paradise Lost; Albom’s The Five People You Meet in Heaven; Dick’s Ubik; Sebold’s The Lovely Bones; Dante’s The Divine Comedy; Twain’s “Captain Stormfield’s Visit to Heaven”; Rowling’s Harry Potter; Moore’s Jerusalem; King’s Revival; O’Brien/O’Nolan’s The Third Policeman; Farmer’s Riverworld; Matheson’s What Dreams May Come; Oliver’s The Time Bubble; and Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings.

Jennings describes each place with wit, humor, Dad Jokes, puns, irreverence, and plenty of facts.

Dancing Through a Minefield

It’s one thing to talk about places like Valhalla, Hades, The Bad Place, Bill & Ted’s Bogus destination, or Futurama‘s Robot Hell in a light-hearted or flippant fashion. It’s an entirely different can of worms to discuss the LDS Three Kingdoms of Glory, Jannah, Jahannam, Ariel Toll Houses/Telonia, and so on—in the same tone.

I will not say that Jennings was able to fully succeed in discussing the afterlives described in some major religions in an unoffensive manner. Primarily because I’m not an adherent of any of the religions he discussed, so my tolerance for that is really high. Had he tackled something I believe in, I very well could’ve been at risk of insult.

That said, I think he did okay. Yes, he walks close to irreverent. But he maintains a decent degree of respect. The humor largely comes from the way he describes the beliefs not at the expense of an article of faith.

Still, some people might want to skip over a chapter or two if they’re worried about getting their toes stepped on. (but those people probably aren’t going to be reading this book in the first place)

A Few Highlights

Ohhh, there are just so many.

The Books section was my favorite—followed closely by Movies and Television—this is the kind of thing I blog about, think about, and so on, so it makes sense that those sections resonated with me most. The Books section, in particular, discussed portions of those works in ways I could really sink my teeth into.

But there were multiple highlights in each section—I learned a lot about D&D, I couldn’t help singing “Ghost Riders in the Sky” during that chapter, I think he pointed out a good plot hole in It’s a Wonderful Life (I don’t know, maybe he’s not the first), I loved the discussion of Bosch’s paintings, and so on.

The chapter on The Good Life was fantastic—a great systemization of the series’ take on the afterlife (and several characters). The chapter on Nirvana was sublime.

Books, movies, mythologies, songs, etc. that I’ve never heard of, much less, read/watched/listened to/studied were described in enough detail that I could appreciate those chapters and maybe even develop an interest in following up on.

Problems/Quibbles/Things That Didn’t Work for Me

Um. Hold on, I’ll think of something.

oh! Here’s a problem: the eARC came with the typical “don’t quote from this version until verified by the published edition” warning—but it was more pronounced than usual. I really want to use samples throughout this post, but I can’t. (and I wouldn’t have even without this warning, because I know things get tweaked in the final stages).

Actually, I do have a legitimate gripe. There are no footnotes—or even endnotes*—for anything that Jennings says. Most of what the book contains could fall into the category of “General Knowledge” (at least for people who know anything about The Good Place, Dante, or the religion of the Maori). But I wouldn’t have minded a point in the right direction to learn some more details, context, or background on many, many, many things Jennings wrote about.

* It’s been decades since I haven’t asked why a book uses endnotes when footnotes exist, and yet I’d have liked to have them in this book more than the nothing we got. That’s how much this bothers me.

I Can’t Help Pondering…

Given the argument of Planet Funny: How Comedy Took Over Our Culture by Ken Jennings, I wonder about his approach to the subject of the afterlife. Sure, even Planet Funny was frequently funny as it critiqued the overuse of humor in our culture, but for his next book to take this tone, seems to undercut the work.

Or maybe it just shows that even as he can look with clear eyes at some of the weaknesses of our culture, he’s part of it and is subject to the influences. It’s almost like he’s human.

So, what did I think about 100 Places to See After You Die?

This section is going to be shorter than usual because I think I’ve pretty much answered the question already.

From the “throwaway lines” to the big ideas, this was a delight from start to finish. I thoroughly enjoyed this approach to the subjects—quick hits that tell you the essentials and make you smile while telling them.

Jennings’ style is one I aspire to, and can’t say enough good things about.

I can’t think of a reason not to give this 5 Stars, but my gut tells me not to. So I’ll knock it down to 4 1/2 (which isn’t a big deal since Goodreads, NetGalley, etc. won’t let me use 1/2 stars, I’ll round up). It’s educational, it’s entertaining, and it’s thought-provoking. You can’t go wrong with this.

Disclaimer: I received this eARC from Scribner via NetGalley in exchange for this post and my honest opinion—thanks to both for this.


4 1/2 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.

REPOSTING JUST CUZ: Beyond Authority and Submission by Rachel Green Miller: Starting-Point for a Discussion the Conservative Church Should’ve Already Had

originally posted 10/27/19
I feel compelled to repeat the disclaimer I threw on a book last week—and I should probably throw this on a lot of theologically-oriented works. This is another one of those works that I feel really unqualified to discuss. So, know that this is from the perspective of an opinionated and semi-(formally)educated reader and occasional armchair theologian. Not the reflections of an ordained minister or professional theologian.

Beyond Authority and Submission

Beyond Authority and Submission: Women and Men in Marriage, Church, and Society

by Rachel Green Miller

Paperback, 259 pg.
P&R Publishing, 2019

Read: September 22-29, 2019

Contrary to what popular culture states, women and men are not from different planets. We’re complementarymore alike than different. Without denying the differences, we need to stop defining women as the polar opposite of men and vice versa. Such divisive definitions create and encourage unnecessary conflict and set up unrealistic and unbiblical expectations for how women and men should behave.

Paul frequently refers to fellow believersboth men and womenas co-laborers. The word he uses, sunergos, means “a companion in work.” As we will see in the next sections, co-laborer captures the sense of what we were created to be and what we are called to be in Christ.

I can’t get where this is controversialI’m definitely not the kind of guy to say “in this day and age” when it comes to this kind of thing, so please don’t hear me saying that. In any day and age where someone’s thinking is shaped more by the Bible than it is by the surrounding culture (either of the moment or by some version of a historical point of view). I don’t get where this is controversial. Sadly, it is. But as long as that’s Rachel Green Miller’s controlling thought (and I firmly believe it is), I’m on board with this book.

So I should say at the outset, I’ve appreciated Miller’s writing for years now and am very sympathetic to Miller’s general perspective on the issues she tackles in the book. I came into it expecting a useful and beneficial book for those wading through issues relating to the relation of the sexes to each other from a Christian worldviewand I got it. I didn’t expect a book to settle arguments, or a panacea to problems churches/ministries/individuals are having on this frontwhich is good, because she doesn’t try.

After setting the stage for what she wants to discuss in the book, Miller goes on a brief historical survey of views of men and women in the Greco-Roman World and Victorian Era (which she posits have more of an influence on conservative Christianity than we realize), and then she looks at First, Second and Third-Wave Feminism and how the Church has reacted to each. I think her book would be better served if this section were expanded and depended less on secondary sourcesbut given space limitations, I can live with it. From there she explores Biblical teaching on the Nature of Men and Women, how the two should relate in marriage, the Church, and society. In these chapters, she tries to show how current understandings are (too) frequently largely molded by a reaction to a political movement or values imported from a historical context (that needed Biblical reform). Each section here could be a book unto itselfand maybe should bebut Miller’s treatment is a good starting point for discussion.

If you see the book as thata starting point for conversation, with a lot of very helpful things to bear in mind, this is a very commendable and worthwhile read. If you’re thinking of it as definitive in any sense of the word (and I think Miller would warn against that herself), the book will not come close to living up to expectations.

Miller critiques both the foundation of the worldviews she disagrees withancient pagan cultures or recent/contemporary naturalistic views. Latter feminism, as well as godless patriarchal views, are her targetsas are the ways those presuppositions or their expressions are imported into the Church.

Where I think this book stumbles is in the positive case for what she believes. Miller is very clear on what she’s not trying to say (though many aren’t paying attention to this), she’s also clear on what she disagrees with (no one would deny this)but she’s too unclear about what she’d like people to think. I think I just did the same thing hereso I’m going to resort to metaphor. Most of what I talk about here is fiction, so I’m going to employ that for a minute. If Andy Carpenter, Eddie Flynn and Mickey Haller (various fictional defense attorneys) have taught me anything, it’s that while it’s all well and good for a defense attorney to poke holes in a prosecution’s case, what will really turn a jury around is a good alternative suspect, someone to blame, to hold accountable for whatever crime is in question. Miller’s done a great job in showing problems with the prosecution’s case, and we know she doesn’t want us to find her client guiltybut I don’t have anyone else to hold accountable/punish for the crime.

Now, the problems with that metaphor are plain enough, but I think my point is clear (clearer than I could’ve made it earlier). For what it’s worth, I think she’s dead to rights on what she’s not wanting to say, and by and large, she’s right on what she’s critiquing. I just wish I had a clearer notion of what she wants readers to think in a positive sense. Also, while I agree that we need to do more than talk about the relationship between the sexes in terms other than “authority” and “submission” we still need to have clear ideas about how those roles should function (if we’re going to understand the Bible), and Miller should have addressed that.

This book has, regrettablyyet not at all unsurprisinglykicked up a hornet’s nest of controversy. Sadly, it seems that most of the reviewers have dug into two hard-and-fast camps: the “this is a load of drivel that Miller and P&R should be ashamed about” camp on the one hand, and the “this is the greatest thing since the Institutes” camp on the other. Neither is even close to right. This is a good book (with clear flaws) and deserves to have its good points, flaws, and pushes to conversation discussed without vitriol. Sadly, I can’t see that happening, which is probably why books like this are needed.

Honestly, if we can’t deal charitably with each other on this kind of thing, how can we expect a lost and dying world to listen to us at all?

I know that more than a few reviewers have taken issue with the way that Miller treats some of the sources she’s citing and critiquingand there were a couple of times I wondered if she and I had read the same article/chapter/book, because I didn’t come away from it with the same ideas she did. At timesand more often than should be acceptableshe comes across as saying that “Writer X is problematic on these issues and therefore everything they’ve ever said about them is wrong.” I don’t think that’s her intention, but I do think that she gives that impression. But on the whole, I think there’s a lot of straining at gnats by her critics when it comes to her treatment of sources.

I think I’ve lost the thread a bit here. Such is the nature of the tempest in the conservative Christian teapot, that I can’t really think about the content of the book without thinking about the reaction to it. I wish I’d found/made the time to write about this book before I read about it. That’s on me.

Let me try to get back on track. I liked this book. It made me re-examine a lotand will probably continue to do so as I mull on what she has to say (and I’ll probably find a lot to disagree with ultimately, and a lot to agree withas it ought to be). How much of what I think about how women and men should interact with each other (in the home, Church and society) comes from Scripture and how much from the culture? How much of what I think it means to be a man or what it means to be a woman has more to do with Ancient Greek culture or the Victorians? (more than it should). The core of the message should be heard and weighed, and hopefully, after the hubbub has died down a bit, we can start to deal with it.

The Bible testifies to our unity. We don’t have one Bible for men and a different one for women. The armor of God isn’t just for men, and the fruit of the spirit doesn’t apply only to women. No, we have one Bible for us all, and most of the Bible’s commands apply to all of usmale or female, old or young, rich or poor, servant or master.

It’s important to emphasize that when God made humanity in His image, He did so by making a man and a woman. Women are as much made in the image of God as men are. Men don’t have more of God’s image because of their masculinity. We are equal in worth, but we’re not the same. We are different, but we are also interdependent. We were created to complement each other, and we need each other.

Tolle Lege.


4 Stars

A Few Quick Questions With…Tony Ganzer

Earlier today, I posted my two cents about Ganzer’s book, Kneading Journalism, and now I have the opportunity to share this Q&A with the author. The note at the beginning was just something I included for him, but I enjoyed his response enough that I thought I’d throw it in.

There’s an intimidation factor I hadn’t anticipated in asking questions to 1. a journalist and 2. a journalist about a book on journalism. Hopefully this is worth your time 🙂
I really appreciate you taking the time to read these essays and wanting to engage in dialogue. Hopefully the feelings of intimidation and hunger subside with some bread and good chatting!

Could you take a moment or two to introduce yourself to my readers? What set you on the path to writing this book, describe your path to publication, and so on?
For most of my career I have been a public media broadcaster, working for NPR stations in the US, and was previously a correspondent for an English-language service of the Swiss Broadcasting Corporation. I’ve been fortunate to have covered everything from tracing the Ricola production cycle from Alpine herb farm to cough drop, to the realities of Swiss gun culture. From the earliest experiences of “real world” journalism, though, I’ve been confronted with the juxtaposition of reality versus ideal. I wanted to tell sound-rich, character-filled stories all the time, but modern journalism is still very much a “feed the beast” apparatus all too often chasing minutiae and scandal. So more than 15 years ago I started writing short essays on my craft, and posting them on my website. I’d reflect on whether Glenn Beck being interviewed by Anderson Cooper on Glenn Beck’s show about Glenn Beck’s book was appropriate. Or I’d reflect on whether journalism as a craft is being practiced by other industries as a kind of “outsourcing” of journalism. These essays were part journal, part industry critique, and part lodestar to anchor me in my beliefs about what is good or bad about the industry. Journalists tend to be—and I’m speaking anecdotally and personally—a fairly cynical bunch, and in recent years I haven’t seen enough to salve that cynicism. The COVID period was strange on its own, but it goes well beyond that. Amid ever nastier political rhetoric about “the media,” amid disinformation campaigns, amid the continued deterioration of the journalism labor market, and amid personal and professional soul-searching, I looked for a way to more deeply preserve that “lodestar.” Given how important bread baking had become in my life—for food and mental health—I thought I had a unique enough idea, and after being hit by a car in March 2020 (a story for another Q&A!) I was even more determined to see it all the way to the end. I thought about the traditional publishing route, but decided to remain an independent publisher to make exactly the kind of essay collection I wanted, and to build publishing skills. I hired a talented illustrator, Nicole Falatic, and a newspaper editor friend, Brian Beesley, to keep me sharp. It just so happened that this project was wrapping up at the same time I decided to step away from daily news. I finished my MBA and found a job outside of journalism, and began a detox from push alerts. The book acts as a kind of a love letter to the brand of journalism I wanted to practice and I think we need especially now.

I think I missed your time at the UI’s Argonaut by a semester or two, but I enjoyed knowing there was a common-bond there. Something I’ve often wondered—does working on a student newspaper prepare you in any way for “real world” journalism?
To a degree, yes, if you have a well-structured program, and good advisers (which the UI does). The student newspaper, radio, and television could be seen as journalism with training wheels. You need to learn how to talk to people and to listen. You face ethical questions of what to report and how to frame stories. And something else people may not think about is how often nowadays student media are a first line of accountability and challenge to university administrations. Information can travel quickly on campus, and student reporters may be clued into big and small stories before they break into non-student press. One of my beats (areas of focus) while at the student paper was administration, which might sound boring, but it gave me a chance to build sources and explore budget issues. And sometimes big stories break on campus, even at the UI, requiring students to mature in their practice of the craft. After the FBI descended on campus, a colleague and I explored whether students’ rights were violated by interrogations. My experience in student media positioned me to be able to help tell that story then, and build experience that I applied once in the “real world.”

I thought the idea behind the “combination of baking and thoughts on the craft of journalism” was a stroke of brilliance—did that idea come to you fully-formed, or did you have to work your way to it?
Thank you for that—I know it’s definitely a niche combination! I had been tossing around the idea of combining my bread baking with my journalism for a while, but I didn’t know what it could be. I had been an assistant baker at a food co-op for a few months after college, but didn’t begin re-upping my bread skills seriously until 2018 as a stress reliever, and I thought maybe I could do a vlog following my progress. Being a radio guy, I’ve always felt weaker in video production and I like to learn through doing. So a vlog could help me improve in video (and early episodes show I needed practice!) while improving with bread as well. Now this is a bit of a random turn, but I had a chance online encounter with members of a passionate fandom for Korean megagroup BTS, which led to literally thousands of social media messages to me explaining the culture, philanthropy, and support network of their fandom. Long story short: for a time, I became a go-to resource for some people’s questions about journalism and the framing of stories. Usually this came after a writer was seen as misinterpreting the motivations or beliefs of this fandom. I asked whether some of these people would like me to try to demystify journalism and maybe throw in some bread baking, and there seemed to be some interest. So I began making vlogs showing my very amateur bread skills while I tried to explain something about journalism. Looking back at those breads…well, not all of them are pretty, but the project was more about personal progress (even through failure) and dialogue—if it’s not fully formed yet, well that’s part of it. Over time my breads improved, and I further refined my thinking about journalism. Eventually, I got to a point where I thought I could really elevate the concept with research and memoir, and the book was born.

You’ve traveled a lot as journalist—how would you say that journalists/journalism is regarded in other parts of the world? Either the work of foreign journalists or their fellow-citizens?
This is a tough question because I don’t want to generalize. There are nuances in every country to the relationship with the press. Most of my experience has been in the “West,” namely Europe and the US, in which there is more or less the understanding that quality journalism is valuable and that journalists should be serving the public. I say “more or less” because recent years have seen our common language and perceptions about journalism splinter into an unrecognizable battleground of semantic and ad hominem attacks. Even when speaking with people who are hostile toward “the media” I tended to be able to find space to dialogue with them on a person-to-person level. The desire to be heard and understood is the same in rural Ohio or Idaho as it was in a tea bar in Zurich with members of the Palestinian diaspora. But here are two observations: I will say that Germans, in my experience, were much better about news literacy than the US—that’s to say Germans typically knew about the top stories, and had read enough to form a fairly nuanced opinion about a range of issues. When living in Berlin I would often be on a morning train next to workers just getting off the night shift. These working-class guys would be drinking a beer at 7 or 8 in the morning, looking through the paper and having a great conversation on fiscal policy or foreign affairs. Maybe it was just my train, but that image stuck with me. Germany has faced populism and tabloid frenzies as other countries have, but I still considered their general news literacy very high. Second observation: it seems no matter where you are, people with power are generally accommodating to the press so long as they are not the target of a report. If a story can be used to further their goals—either noble or self-serving—they’ll be very helpful. It makes sense that someone would want their narrative to get the widest amplification possible, but when they actively obscure information, manipulate facts, or just lie, then the end product is at best incomplete and at worst propaganda. Even with journalists no longer playing the role of “gatekeepers” of information as in the past, the skills they should have are meant to help filter and counteract such manipulation…assuming they are truly independent of political favor or ideology.

You talk about the effect of having public officials calling the press an “enemy of the people.” Have things improved in the last year or two, or do you think it’s continuing?
Have things truly improved? No, I don’t think so. What’s happened—and this is just my opinion, of course—is we’ve entered a kind of ideological Cold War with our media. For the most part, the country has gone beyond just media echo chambers which reinforce perspectives or preconceptions. Increasingly we are living in parallel societies based on political, religious, cultural, or social identities in which we mostly hear information as being from “friend” or “foe.” These ideological ecosystems then work to defend the “friends” and defame the “foes,” reality be darned. Occasionally there are skirmishes and proxy wars fought on individual issues, or judicial or government nominees, or federal debt limits, but these events are just grist for the ideological mill working to perpetuate divisions. There are “neutral” players in the ecosystem. For news outlets, these may be the straight shooters just trying to document our times (a wire service like Reuters, for example) but they are often only paid attention to when they can fit the “friend” or “foe” role. The COVID pandemic showed the extent of the divisions, not just in discussions about state and federal response and economic aid (and potential misuse and/or fraud) but also in vaccines and medical advice. Many people died, it wasn’t clear how long the worst of the pandemic would last, and we needed an adult conversation about what we should do to protect ourselves and our posterity. Instead, the parallel societies did what they did best: partitioned reality and perception to accept information that was seen as coming from “friends” or “foes.”

To extend the Cold War analogy, what happens in the end? The opposing sides remain existential threats to a healthy democracy so long as dialogue is seen as a dirty word. It’s not about friends or foes, it’s about fellow citizens with their own perspectives which would add to a nuanced conversation. Is it easy? No. It is necessary? Yes. I try very hard to make personal connections with people when I speak to them for an interview or just in life. I’m not an idealogue, I’m not pushing a narrative—I’m just a guy investing time and energy in this interaction. Think of it as creating the Cold War “red phone” hotline to deescalate tensions. At the other end of the line wasn’t an ideology, it was a person.

Would you say you’re fairly optimistic or pessimistic about the next, say, 50 years of American journalism?
Wow, 50 years!? You think back 50 years from now, and we’re in the midst of the Watergate scandal, which many people see as the dawn of a new era for modern journalism. In the ultimate check on power at the highest levels, journalists proved their worth. A generation or two of journalists looked to emulate that check on power, even as the economics and tools of the trade vastly transformed journalism. Projecting 50 years beyond this point, I think there are a few things that are likely to happen:

  1. The ideological separations of our media will continue. The democratization of technology has allowed bloggers, podcasters, activists, malcontents, and everyone else to flood the world with niche perspectives, just as corporate and political media operations continue to further the “friend” and “foe” partitioning. We’re coming full circle to the partisan beginnings of the American press, and I don’t think it’s a good thing.
  2. Meanwhile, what we understand as “modern journalism”—well reported, nuanced, ethical—will continue to face financial pressures. Philanthropy will fund some operations for a time, as will corporations, but the net effect will be a smaller and smaller field of professionalized journalists. Work may be found behind subscriptions or paywalls or media bundles, meaning there will be further proliferation of free media of varying quality and perspectives, while the best stuff will be consumed by a shrinking number of citizens willing to pay for it.
  3. Because AI is all the rage right now, I do want to mention the potential for further evolution of robot writers. AI been used for years to create journalistic work, notably with financial news. If quarterly results stories are formatted the same way, every time, except for the numbers, then journalists can be freed up while the computers fill in news story mad libs, right? Further, AI could continue to scrape sentences and media from other websites to create for every user a personalized news report, with increasingly complex multimedia elements which may or may not be credible. I think AI-generated content will likely increase in an assistive capacity, for data crawling, visualizations, and perhaps even some basic writing. I think this technology has the potential to flood the mediascape with more and more questionable material, making it harder and harder for people to sniff out quality information. I’ve already pulled way back on my social media use (save for posting bread pictures) as a way to protect myself from “fake news.” This struggle will continue.

I hope we’ll see a renaissance of journalism, but the craft is on the backfoot.

We have to talk bread a bit—and frankly, as hungry as the book made me, I think I could go on for a while. Did you have to cut any recipients for space (or because you couldn’t think of an essay to pair them with)? What kind of feedback are you getting on including them? What’s your favorite to eat? Bake? (whether it’s in the book or not)
There’s a recipe for Swiss braided Zopf bread I came across years ago and I would’ve loved to include that because it’s an impressive bread (looks like a Challah) that makes a good gift. I also have a recipe for hot dog buns that I made into pull-apart dinner rolls that can be baked with Camembert. This may be controversial, but: bread recipes are pretty ubiquitous. The ingredients themselves have been more or less the same through the course of all bread history, so it’s the description and execution of the process which adds a personalized flavor. Those are two breads I left out because I didn’t want to force the concept too much—am I writing an essay because I think it should be written, or just because I have another bread to include? I also wanted the breads to be as accessible as possible. I’m not a bread sommelier, just a guy sharing what I’ve learned so far!

I think most of the response I’ve gotten so far has been about the bread, and not the essays! And that’s fine by me, because it means people took some time to at least try something new. But this concept of mixing bread and journalism has generally been well-received. It’s unusual, but taken seriously. And I do feel like I’ve been able to build a small community of bakers both new and experienced.

It’s tough to decide on a favorite bread. I think I like the Rosemary Asiago bread because it’s hard to screw up—cheese tends to be very forgiving on bread! I sometimes will make this bread into rose buns (sometimes called flower buns) which is a nice treat for the kids.

I’ve also just started exploring pain d’épices, which is just honey-based spice bread. I’ve not tweaked the recipe enough to consider it enough of my own, but it’s a good addition to the dessert arsenal alongside my Irish Gingerbread.

There’s a game we play around here, called “Online Bookstore Algorithm”. What are 3-5 books whose readers may like Kneading Journalism?
Oh—what a challenge!

Maybe Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell, since I take a unique track into the topic!

A Cook’s Tour: Global Adventures in Extreme Cuisines by Anthony Bourdain, even though it’s a different vibe, maybe someone would like a less-than-conventional take on food and stories.

And a recent book: maybe The Best Strangers in the World: Stories from a Life Spent Listening by Ari Shapiro. This memoir by NPR host Shapiro is a different kind of book, but still uses the lens of journalism to explore the world, as I tried to do.

What’s next for Anthony Ganzer, author? Do you have other books in you?
I would like to think I do. I’m not sure it will be the same kind of book (Kneading More Journalism? Kneading Journalism Harder?!) I’ve traveled so much in my life, and have talked to so many kinds of people, I feel like there is something to be said about lessons I’ve learned about myself through sometimes very personal moments with interviewees. I have a podcast where I use narrative journalism to explore issues of faith, and I thought they might eventually weave themselves into a book-appropriate format. Journalism tends to be a fairly non-religious industry, or at least that’s how it seems, so it could be a powerful lens to examine my reporting and my personal faith journey. It’s an idea at least!

Thanks for your time—and thanks for Kneading Journalism. I really enjoyed it, and hope it finds an audience.


Kneading Journalism by Tony Ganzer: Thoughts on Bread and the Press

Be sure to come back later this morning for a Q&A with the author!


Kneading JournalismKneading Journalism:
Essays on baking bread and
breaking down the news

by Tony Ganzer

DETAILS:
Publisher: Cherry Mountain Media
Publication Date: March 17, 2023
Format: eBook
Length: 166 pg.
Read Date: April 14-29, 2023


What’s Kneading Journalism About?

This book is centered on the idea of the kitchen table—a (perhaps mythological) place where people can sit down, have a meal, and discuss a wide range of issues with respect and frankness. What can be found in every culture on the globe on those tables as a staple—particularly when enjoying the company of someone outside your household? Bread.

Ganzer used to work in a bakery and has recently gotten serious about his breadmaking again. He brings bread into this collection in two important ways. First, he includes a recipe for a different kind of bread to accompany every essay. Secondly, he incorporates something about the enjoyment, projection, and/or history of a bread into the essay about journalism (this sounds like it’d take some stretching or forcing of the issue—but it doesn’t. Or Ganzer’s just so good that he can force it without it feeling that way).

Beyond that—the essays themselves are about the state of journalism/news media in the U.S. and in other countries around the world (not exhaustively, just where Ganzer has some experience), along with personal reflections on his career in journalism. Some of the topics he covers are: journalism education (and how it can help “consumers” as well as “producers”); Machiavelli and his relation to the media as well as contemporary equivalents; The Daily Show and similar “journalism cosplay”; and being a reporter in the middle of the Egyptian revolution.

Bread

I want to start by saying how much I love this way of organizing the essays and the motif of the bread.

I’m no expert, but the recipes (advertised as for any level of baker) do look easy enough and pretty tasty. I need to get around to trying them someday.

But more importantly, the way that Ganzer weaves the various breads and factoids about it (wow, Germans seem to love the stuff) into these essays is really commendable and helps hook the reader into the rest.

Journalism

Ganzer is an advocate for and believer in a certain type of journalism—one that cares more about informing citizens for the public good, not one that’s about reinforcing our own bias.

To say that he takes a dim view of most cable news would be an understatement. He’s also not crazy about the way that public figures are calling the press the enemy of the American people—and going out of their way to erode trust in the press. Since Watergate, American esteem of reporters has shifted, and over the last few years that shifting has sped up.

What Ganzer wants to reinvigorate is a respect for constructive journalism. Reminding the reader that reporters can—and should—serve a vital function in society. Particularly in a democracy.

He compares and contrasts, for example, the way the press has been viewed and used throughout history, as well as in other parts of the world—like Egypt and Germany.

I’m going to cut myself off here before I say too much about Ganzer’s arguments—he’ll do a much better job of it, and I don’t want to muddy the waters.

So, what did I think about Kneading Journalism?

This is a great read—challenging, but in a friendly, welcoming way. Thoughtful and thought-provoking without being combative or overly critical. Ganzer has a point of view—and makes no claim about lack of bias here—but isn’t pushing a partisan outlook, just a pro-responsible press outlook. Brief, but not insubstantial.

I enjoyed reading these essays and appreciated the insight and opinions. But I couldn’t stop with just reading—I spent time afterward thinking about the individual essays as well as the book as a whole. Both in terms of the content of the essays as well as in how to apply and evaluate what I read/watch.

I’m afraid this isn’t going to find the readership it deserves—but I hope it does find readers that the message resonates with and that they can at least spread the ideas and carry them into their own lives and media consumption. It’s something all Americans need to think about before it’s too late.

I encourage you to read and think about this. I’d grab a new book by Ganzer without much thought and would hope that there are other books like it out there for me to read, too.

Disclaimer: I received a copy of this book from the author in exchange for this post and my honest opinion.


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.

100 Places to See After You Die by Ken Jennings: The Tour Guide No One Wants, But Everyone Needs

100 Places to See After You Die100 Places to See After You Die:
A Travel Guide to the Afterlife

by Ken Jennings

DETAILS:
Publisher: Scribner Book Company
Publication Date: June 13, 2023
Format: eARC
Length: 304 pg.
Read Date: May 24-26, 2023


What’s 100 Places to See After You Die About?

Ken Jennings provides a handy tour guide through one hundred visions of the afterlife for the modern reader. Complete with tips on places to see, areas to avoid, local lingo, bits of trivia, dining tips, and so on, it’s just the kind of thing you’re going to want to peruse before you shuffle off this mortal coil, so you know where to go.

The book is broken down into: Mythology, Religion, Books, Movies, Music and Theater, and Miscellaneous. Then (alphabetically) Jennings looks at a variety of afterlife locales in each category.

For example, the Books section covers:

Aslan’s Country • The Bridge • The Cemetery • The Empyrean • The Five Lessons • Half-Life • The Inbetween • Inferno • The Kingdom • King’s Cross • Mansoul • The Null • Pandemonium • Paradiso • The Parish • Purgatorio • Riverworld • The Third Sphere • The Time Bubble • The Undying Lands • The Valley of the Shadow of Life*

* From Lewis’ The Chronicles of Narnia and The Great Divorce; O’Connor’s story “Revelation”; Saunders’ Lincoln in the Bardo; Milton’s Paradise Lost; Albom’s The Five People You Meet in Heaven; Dick’s Ubik; Sebold’s The Lovely Bones; Dante’s The Divine Comedy; Twain’s “Captain Stormfield’s Visit to Heaven”; Rowling’s Harry Potter; Moore’s Jerusalem; King’s Revival; O’Brien/O’Nolan’s The Third Policeman; Farmer’s Riverworld; Matheson’s What Dreams May Come; Oliver’s The Time Bubble; and Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings.

Jennings describes each place with wit, humor, Dad Jokes, puns, irreverence, and plenty of facts.

Dancing Through a Minefield

It’s one thing to talk about places like Valhalla, Hades, The Bad Place, Bill & Ted’s Bogus destination, or Futurama‘s Robot Hell in a light-hearted or flippant fashion. It’s an entirely different can of worms to discuss the LDS Three Kingdoms of Glory, Jannah, Jahannam, Ariel Toll Houses/Telonia, and so on—in the same tone.

I will not say that Jennings was able to fully succeed in discussing the afterlives described in some major religions in an unoffensive manner. Primarily because I’m not an adherent of any of the religions he discussed, so my tolerance for that is really high. Had he tackled something I believe in, I very well could’ve been at risk of insult.

That said, I think he did okay. Yes, he walks close to irreverent. But he maintains a decent degree of respect. The humor largely comes from the way he describes the beliefs not at the expense of an article of faith.

Still, some people might want to skip over a chapter or two if they’re worried about getting their toes stepped on. (but those people probably aren’t going to be reading this book in the first place)

A Few Highlights

Ohhh, there are just so many.

The Books section was my favorite—followed closely by Movies and Television—this is the kind of thing I blog about, think about, and so on, so it makes sense that those sections resonated with me most. The Books section, in particular, discussed portions of those works in ways I could really sink my teeth into.

But there were multiple highlights in each section—I learned a lot about D&D, I couldn’t help singing “Ghost Riders in the Sky” during that chapter, I think he pointed out a good plot hole in It’s a Wonderful Life (I don’t know, maybe he’s not the first), I loved the discussion of Bosch’s paintings, and so on.

The chapter on The Good Life was fantastic—a great systematization of the series’ take on the afterlife (and several characters). The chapter on Nirvana was sublime.

Books, movies, mythologies, songs, etc. that I’ve never heard of, much less, read/watched/listened to/studied were described in enough detail that I could appreciate those chapters and maybe even develop an interest in following up on.

Problems/Quibbles/Things That Didn’t Work for Me

Um. Hold on, I’ll think of something.

oh! Here’s a problem: the eARC came with the typical “don’t quote from this version until verified by the published edition” warning—but it was more pronounced than usual. I really want to use samples throughout this post, but I can’t. (and I wouldn’t have even without this warning, because I know things get tweaked in the final stages).

Actually, I do have a legitimate gripe. There are no footnotes—or even endnotes*—for anything that Jennings says. Most of what the book contains could fall into the category of “General Knowledge” (at least for people who know anything about The Good Place, Dante, or the religion of the Maori). But I wouldn’t have minded a point in the right direction to learn some more details, context, or background on many, many, many things Jennings wrote about.

* It’s been decades since I haven’t asked why a book uses endnotes when footnotes exist, and yet I’d have liked to have them in this book more than the nothing we got. That’s how much this bothers me.

I Can’t Help Pondering…

Given the argument of Planet Funny: How Comedy Took Over Our Culture by Ken Jennings, I wonder about his approach to the subject of the afterlife. Sure, even Planet Funny was frequently funny as it critiqued the overuse of humor in our culture, but for his next book to take this tone, seems to undercut the work.

Or maybe it just shows that even as he can look with clear eyes at some of the weaknesses of our culture, he’s part of it and is subject to the influences. It’s almost like he’s human.

So, what did I think about 100 Places to See After You Die?

This section is going to be shorter than usual because I think I’ve pretty much answered the question already.

From the “throwaway lines” to the big ideas, this was a delight from start to finish. I thoroughly enjoyed this approach to the subjects—quick hits that tell you the essentials and make you smile while telling them.

Jennings’ style is one I aspire to, and can’t say enough good things about.

I can’t think of a reason not to give this 5 Stars, but my gut tells me not to. So I’ll knock it down to 4 1/2 (which isn’t a big deal since Goodreads, NetGalley, etc. won’t let me use 1/2 stars, I’ll round up). It’s educational, it’s entertaining, and it’s thought-provoking. You can’t go wrong with this.

Disclaimer: I received this eARC from Scribner via NetGalley in exchange for this post and my honest opinion—thanks to both for this.


4 1/2 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.

Page 2 of 26

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén