BOOKISHGAL

I may write more about this when I’m finished the book, but I recently picked up The Know-It-All , by A.J. Jacobs, to read again. I got it about three years ago, when everyone on the Table Talk forum seemed to be reading it very enthusiastically. The subtitle is, “One Man’s Humble Quest to Become the Smartest Person in the World,” and of course that refers to the project of the book: for Jacobs to read the entire Encyclopaedia Brittanica in a year.

I absolutely loved the book, first time around, and this re-read is just repeating the pleasure. As before, I’m enjoying some of Jacobs’ generalizations as he goes along, such as the fact that, at least up to the E’s, there seems to be a slight trend of writing about ancient naked warriors. And today, reading on the bus, I was tickled by the list he made of the ten best ways to get your own entry in the Encyclopaedia Brittanica. So I thought I’d reproduce them here, for your edification and amusement. (Actually, for each gender there are really just nine ways.)

1. Get beheaded.
2. Explore the Arctic. (”If you travel anywhere north of Banff, you’ll get a careful look from the Brittanica editorial committee.”)
3. Write some poems.
4. Become a botanist. (”Scandinavian ones seem particularly popular.”)
5. Get yourself involved in commedia dell’arte. (”The Brittanica’s obsession with the Italian 18th-century comedies borders on the unhealthy.”)
6. Win the Nobel Prize.
7. Get castrated (men only). (”If you’re really committed, the word ‘eunuch’ is a good thing to have on your resume.”)
8. Design a font.
9. Become a mistress to a monarch (ladies only).
10. Become a liturgical vestment. (”…since every garment ever worn by a religious figure gets a nice picture, I thought I’d throw it in, just in case.”)

And we’re only in the E’s. More great knowledge to come!

(List taken from A.J. Jacobs, The Know-It-All. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2004. pp.88-89.)

________________________________________

******************************

******************************

René Descartes was sure his new method of thinking about things wouldn’t cause much problem for the church; at least that’s what he said. But once he separated the mind from the body, all hell (in the church’s eyes anyway) broke loose.

This history - coming down to us in a 350-year long battle that continues to rage - is chronicled by Russell Shorto, in his Descartes’ Bones: A Skeletal History of the Conflict Between Faith and Reason. And this history has in fact been illustrated by the very fate of Descartes’ own remains, as they were frequently dug up, evaluated, and reburied.

Shorto describes Descartes’ project - to strip away everything he could doubt until he found an undoubtable bedrock of fact upon which to build real knowledge - as a shift in thinking so major that the western world view has a Before Descartes and an After Descartes divide.

Before Descartes, knowledge came from unsupported assumptions about the world, based on faith in decrees from some authority. That authority, in Descartes’ time, was the church, which taught a biblical world view with a bit of Aristotle mixed in. But the French philosopher realized that all of that teaching could be doubted, and he replaced that authority with the one thing he discovered that he couldn’t doubt: that he was a “thinking thing.” If thinking was going on, there was something doing it, and to try to deny that fact would actually prove it instead, since something would have to think about it in order to deny it. Hence, his famous summation: “I think, therefore I am,” or the Latin, “Cogito, ergo sum.”

Once Descartes had that solid fact, he could again build outward, adding knowledge as he went. And from this beginning, the modern scientific method was born, and our multitude of scientific knowledge resulted. This world view even played a role in politics, helping to justify both the American and French revolutions, as ruling authority was cast off and political power was said to reside in the individual.

But you have to give the church credit: despite the philosopher’s assurances, the religious institution knew perfectly well that Descartes’ work took authority out of the divine realm and put it in the mind of the human being, who would now demand evidence and proof of things. In fact, this method of knowledge separated the mind from the body altogether (some kind of incorporeal mind being capable of analyzing and acting on the physical world), creating the “mind/body problem” that philosophers have wrestled with ever since.

Indeed, even the church, in its various modern manifestations, now must rely on the same methods and thought processes as its opponents, as it continues to battle for the primacy of faith. And it is faced with the ironic fact that it now has to fight against the reunion of the mind and body, since modern materialists now want to unite the mind with the body (i.e. the brain), and remove the need for a transcendent soul altogether.

Shorto traces the history of all these developments by following the fate of Descartes’ bones. As they were frequently dug up and reburied (the location depending on whether the church or the Revolution held sway at the time), people took bits of the bones for themselves. Affording them the same kind of honour given to religious relics, these people hallowed Descartes as a sort of secular saint of reason. And when trying, on more than one occasion, to decide if the skull possessed by the French Academy of Sciences really belonged to the philosopher, the members used all the scientific methods of evaluation that had been developed to that point. So Descartes himself became not only the founder of the method, but one of its objects as well.

Russell Shorto weaves the history of modern thought with the history of Descartes’ bones in an informative, easy to read way, explaining how our current battles of “faith versus reason” are the replaying of a conflict that has gone on for more than three centuries. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in this conflict, or just in the history of western thought in general.

(If you’d like to hear Shorto himself describe the book, watch this Amazon video.)

________________________________________

******************************

******************************

Indigo Books and Music may be a Canadian bookstore chain, but it’s putting out feelers into the United States now too, through a new ebook service called “Shortcovers.”

It launched today, at a brand new Shortcovers website (under the slogan, “Find Your Next Great Read”). According to yesterday’s Globe and Mail, in the article entitled “Indigo launches e-book service,” the new service imitates the successful iTunes model of music downloads. It begins with 50,000 available books, shortly to be followed by all “big name” magazines and newspapers. And then there will be even more books, including a large percentage of Canadian content, which unfortunately is sadly lacking at the moment.

Indigo is both a bricks-and-mortar book store chain, with more than 200 stores in Canada, and an online bookseller, whose internet selling is similar to that of Amazon. Amazon itself also has an ebook service, but its books can only be downloaded and read on the Kindle. Indigo’s offerings, on the other hand, can be downloaded on the Blackberry Storm, Apple iPhone, Apple iPod touch, and Google’s Android mobile application. Furthermore, you can just download them onto your computer and read them there if you like. So there’s a lot more flexibility with this service than with the Kindle, or with Sony’s similar stand-alone book reader.

What is almost equally exciting about Shortcovers is that it will also feature 200,000 free sample chapters, perhaps even more. They could be from existing books, but self-published and unpublished writers will also be able to submit a chapter from their novel, or even an article. These can be placed on the site for free, with or without ads, or for a $0.99 fee.

The cost of book downloads is going to range from $4.99 to $19.99, or individual chapters can be bought for $0.99. The Globe and Mail article is presumably using Canadian dollar figures, being a Canadian national newspaper, so the U.S. amount will be slightly less than that, at least at the current exchange rate.

This service won’t preclude continuing to buy hard copy versions of the books, either. Anyone who wants one can order one through the service, and in the U.S. the order will be filled by Barnes & Noble, while Indigo and its sister stores in Canada will handle Canadian orders.

It’s going to be interesting to see if this wider, more flexible model will force both Amazon and Sony to open up and relinquish their attempts to become the sole ebook readers. My bet would be yes.

________________________________________

******************************

******************************

Hurray, it’s Wednesday, and another chance to explore some new words discovered in the course of my reading, this past week.

These are from Descartes’ Bones: A Skeletal History of the Conflict Between Faith and Reason, by Russell Shorto. They’re rather medical, since they involve the efforts to determine whether the skull in the possession of the Academy of Sciences in France was in fact the genuine skull of philosopher Rene Descartes.

1) superciliary - of or pertaining to the eyebrow; situated on the frontal bone at the level of the eyebrow. (And perhaps this would explain someone’s “supercilious stare”? Someone is raising the eyebrows at someone else? It seems to me that that would still need to be combined with looking down one’s nose, though, because eyebrow-raising alone doesn’t convey quite the disdain or contempt implied by “supercilious.”)

2) naso-alveolar - oh boy, this is funny. This is what I get from Dictionary.com, from the Merriam-Webster’s Medical Dictionary: “of, relating to, or affecting the nose and one or more of the alveoli of the maxilla.” There ya go. Clear now?? (”alveola” - a small cavity, cell, or pit on the surface of an organ. “maxilla” -  a jaw or jawbone, especially the upper) All right, that helps. So “naso-alveolar” is something that affects the nose and some cavity in the upper jaw. Was that so hard to describe, Merriam-Webster??

So those are my words for the week. If you have any Wondrous Words, leave them or a link to them in the Comments, and be sure to leave a link at the originating blog, Bermudaonion’s Weblog . Happy reading!

________________________________________

******************************

******************************

It’s that time of the week again! (she sang)

The time when we take the book we’re currently reading, let it fall open to a random page, and choose two “teaser” sentences  between lines 7 and 12 on that page, and write them out to share them with our readers. We also share the title of the book, so that if the readers find these teasers interesting, they can go find the book too.

So here goes with this week’s book. And as always, no spoilers!

Today’s two sentences:

In her long interview with the first journalist, the one she probably trusted because he was going to tell the story from her point of view, she said she only killed those people because they had abused her. That’s not what the guy said in the newspaper, though.

Those are from page 137 of The Glister , by John Burnside.

And since the book fell to a page well past where I’m currently reading, I don’t have a clue what that’s about. So my teaser sentences have made me intrigued enough to keep reading too. Isn’t this fun?

(This is another of the advance reading copies that Lisa sent me, from Minds Alive on the Shelves, a week or two ago. I’ll be posting a review of it here, shortly after I’m finished, and after I post the review of last week’s Tuesday Teaser, which was also an advance copy that Lisa sent me.)

So now! Go post a link to your teaser here if you like, and be sure to go to Should Be Reading , and post it there as well. Happy reading!

________________________________________

******************************

******************************

Another pleasant Sunday, to catch up with what my bookish friends have been up to this past week. I hope everyone’s enjoyed their weekend so far.

Flitting on Fiction has discovered the Canadian author, Jane Urquhart , and now makes me regret that I haven’t yet done the same. But keep reading to previous posts for the week, and you’ll find some fascinating discussions, such as the one where Flit wonders who among her readers re-reads their books? Since I’m a major re-reader, of course I had to post a comment.

Sandra at Fresh Ink Books describes her Library Loot — the books she got out of the library recently — and now I think maybe I should head to the library myself and check out some Jane Urquhart books. Nice timely reminder for me!

Lisa at Minds Alive on the Shelves is having her time consumed by work lately, but she did manage to do another “Wondrous Words Wednesday” post (that new meme that some of us have started participating in). One of her new words: Callypigian. Which contrasts with Steatopygian. And looking at the definitions of both, I’d have to say that I fall into the latter rather than the former category.

Marcia at The Printed Page has been occupied with “By the Chapter,” which is where she and at least one co-host read a book and write about it each day on their blogs. They just finished The Eyre Affair by Jasper Fforde this week

Over at Weekly Geeks , their project for the week is to imagine what you’d ask if you could interview one of your favourite literary characters. Then you post about it and post a link to your post, on their blog, and go and discover other people’s interviews.

If I weren’t so strapped for time, I’d really love to do this one. I’d want to interview Francis Crawford, from the Lymond Chronicles by Dorothy Dunnett. Except I’m so sure I’d be hugely intimidated by him, and wouldn’t be able to open my mouth. Maybe I should interview him by email.

And that’s it for today. Things seem to be either a bit low key for many of us, or else so busy we’ve been taken away from the books a bit more than we’d like. But this is another week, and they’re always waiting for us.

Have a good week!

________________________________________

******************************

******************************

I’m so totally stealing this from Nicola at Alpha Heroes, who posted about the same thing today (though I bet she’ll forgive me). Like Nicola, I participate in a large discussion forum of which Mary Elizabeth Williams is the moderator. And I, too, have always appreciated how Mary Beth put up with us all when we got a little raucous, and has tried to deal as equably and fairly as she possibly could. I’ve known her, on that forum, for ten years now. (It will be ten years on March 7, as it happens.)

And now she’s written a book called Gimme Shelter. I knew she was writing it, though I didn’t know what it was about. Now I discover that it’s about her three-year quest to find affordable housing in New York City. Yegods! I’ve only visited a couple of times (and loved the place madly), but I can only imagine the difficulties and horrors of trying to find some place you can afford in New York, especially when you’ve got kids.

Knowing Mary Beth, I know it’s going to be very funny as well as insightful, and I can’t wait to read it! I’ve seen her writing, and I love her take on things. So I’m recommending the book immediately.

Read it. You’ll have a great time.

________________________________________

******************************

******************************

I’m following Tor Books on Twitter, and noticed something interesting today. At their Art Department blog they’ve got notification of a new DVD that’s just become available, in which science fiction/fantasy illustrator Dan Dos Santos does a book cover demo, using one of Tor’s books as his model. The DVD must have a lot of technical detail in it, since it’s five hours long. (It’s available both as a DVD or a download at his site, for US $50.)

This is a fun convergence of the various media. Twitter linking to the blog, linking to Des Santos’s site, where you can click to go to the photo of the book cover, or to the YouTube trailer for the DVD, or to PayPal to order the DVD.

All while sitting with the book (Warbreaker , by Brandon Sanderson) — and cover illustration — in your hand. Or at least, after June 9th, when the book is actually released for sale.

The lines are blurring between physical and online products and life. Fascinating.

And check out the trailer below. That is some talent, I tell ya.

________________________________________

******************************

******************************

Happy Wednesday! Yes, she said, checking the clock, I see that it’s still Wednesday. So I can still post my Wondrous Words. This weekly meme is graciously hosted by Bermuda Onion , so go have a look at her words, and those of people who post theirs in the comments. And feel free to leave yours here as well.

I’m like a lot of my friends: I have to look pretty hard to find words I don’t know. (See, for example, Lisa’s comments in her Minds Alive on the Shelves post today.) And I know I found one or two almost a week ago, in the latest book I’m reading. I must start walking around with a wee notepad and pen on a string around my neck, so I can make note of these things!

But I do have a phrase and one word, from Descartes’ Bones (which as I say, I will be reviewing once I’m finished). These are in fact words I know, but which require some explanation, and I’m sure they will be new to a number of people. So they’re going to count.

1. teleological taxonomy - what a mouthful! “Teleology” is essentially to describe something according to the purpose it serves. When something is “teleological,” it’s not random, but happens or exists with a purpose in mind. And “taxonomy” is the dividing up or classification of living beings (or beings that used to be alive but are now extinct).

So “teleological taxonomy,” devised originally by Aristotle and later adopted when European scientists were just starting to classify the things in the world, was a system that divided living beings according to a purposeful climb from simple to complex — which coincided nicely with the medieval Christian view that all simple things were created with the purpose of serving the more complex beings on the next highest rung of the Great Chain of Being.

Later scientists abandoned this approach, and started classifying animals and plants simply based on physical characteristics and their functions. (e.g. animals with an internal skeletal system would be in the same large group, and animals with an external skeletal support would be in a different one)

As it says in Descartes’ Bones:

The system that was still largely in effect in the early nineteenth century was the ‘teleological taxonomy’ created by Aristotle and refined by the scholastic philosophers…Teleology refers to an end of ultimate purpose, and typically means a religious purpose, as in God’s plan. Aristotle’s orientation of knowledge was teleological, which made it easy for the scholastics to adapt it to conform with a Christian view of creation, so that as the chain of life forms proceeded from the simplest organisms to more complex ones it also reflected a spiritual hierarchy. (p. 145)

2. ruminant - My thought about this word was, “Doesn’t it have something to do with chewing or eating? And aren’t there cows involved?”

As my Student’s Oxford Canadian Dictionary says: “an animal that chews the cud regurgitated from its rumen, e.g. a cow.” And fortunately, “rumen” was defined just before that: “the first stomach of a ruminant, in which food, esp. cellulose, is partly digested by bacteria.”

Mmm, tasty. But an animal that brings food back up to keep chewing it, from kind of a spare stomach like that — is a ruminant.

Descartes’ Bones is describing how Georges Cuvier helped promote and refine the new biological descriptive system that divided living creatures into Kingdom, Class, Order, Genus, Species, and so on. The author gives an amusing anecdote that shows how precise these divisions could be, and demonstrates one characteristic of a “ruminant” that automatically implies another:

So when we “ruminate” on something, we are mulling it over thoroughly and not making any hasty decisions. And we may come back to it several times while we think it over, before we’re done with the matter.

A perhaps apocryphal story has some of Cuvier’s students wrapping one of their number in a cowhide and challenging him to identify the beast. As the master entered the room and moved toward it the student cried, ‘Cuvier, I am the devil, I’ve come to eat you!’ Whereupon Cuvier is supposed to have replied something to the effect of, ‘Don’t be ridiculous. You have a divided hoof, therefore you eat grain.’” (p. 146)

________________________________________

******************************

******************************

I haven’t done this in a while, so let’s have another go at the Tuesday Teaser. This is where you grab the book you’re currently reading, and let it fall open to a random page.

Then you find two “teaser” sentences between lines 7 and 12 on that page, and share them. You also share the title of the book, so that if the “teaser” sentences intrigue someone, they can find the book.

And remember: no spoilers!

So here are my two sentences for today:

“He thus gave the periodic table — and the landscape of chemistry — the look that it has today.

Immediately following this burst of effort he suffered a nervous breakdown.”

These are from an advance copy of Descartes’ Bones: A Skeletal History of the Conflict Between Faith and Reason, by Russel Shorto. It’s a copy forwarded to me for review by Lisa at Minds Alive on the Shelves. It’s the kind of book that’s right up my alley, so I’m really enjoying it.

Now. Please leave a comment here, if you like, with a link to your own Tuesday Teaser, but most especially, leave one at the Should be Reading blog, the host of the Tuesday Teasers.

________________________________________

******************************

******************************