Mating Rituals of the North American WASP - Lauren Lipton
This book lodged itself so firmly in my head, I had to buy it used, and to spend stolen moments here and there reading it again, falling a little bit in love. Thanks Lauren Lipton :)
Monday, September 26, 2011
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Hey A's
Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game - Michael Lewis (W.W. Norton & Co., 2003)
In 2002, I lived in Berkeley. And somewhere along the line, I became an A's fan. Probably because they had this unreal winning streak, setting MLB records. I was at 2 or 3 of the games in that streak. And baseball was fun.
I've been wanting to read this book for awhile. I've picked up enough here and there to know that by using statistics in a different way, Billy Beane had upended all the typical rules about what you needed for a successful team. And could do it on the cheap. Coooooooooool.
Somehow, it never occurred to me that the book covered the same season that I remembered so well. But then, suddenly it did. And it wasn't just names like Miguel Tejada, Eric Chavez, and Mark Mulder (yum!) that were popping up. All the people I forgot: Dye, Scott Hatteberg, Chad Bradford of the craaaaaazy pitch, etc etc etc. Oh, and Nick Swisher, who joined the A's after I left for the East Coast. Ah, sigh.
So honestly, the chapter about the game where they went for the MLB record.... that was my favorite part of the book. I was at that game. It was one of the most wild sports experiences I've ever had. It rivals the hockey stuff even. Just.... oh, it was amazing. And I bet it's fun to read about even if you aren't reliving it. :)
The book itself is fascinating too. Lewis explains Beane & DePodesta's strategy essentially like this: what's most important is ability to avoid making outs. Look for players who are good at that - focus on the stats that really matter. Find the ones who are good at that who are undervalued for some reason, and snap them up. Generally these people don't "look" like baseball players, so are discounted. And thus, your 2002 Oakland Athletics.
Of course, the A's haven't been much to look at in awhile, and I'm curious about how one would analyze Beane's tenure now. Lewis is an admirer, or was in 2002-03. I want to hear more about now (perhaps I should actually go look and see what he's written).
And yet, I say Lewis is an admirer, but he may not be entirely sold, and here was his comment to Beane that stood out, even amidst all the (lovely lovely) statistics: "Every player is different. Every player must be viewed as a special case. the sample size is always one" (p. 248).
In 2002, I lived in Berkeley. And somewhere along the line, I became an A's fan. Probably because they had this unreal winning streak, setting MLB records. I was at 2 or 3 of the games in that streak. And baseball was fun.
I've been wanting to read this book for awhile. I've picked up enough here and there to know that by using statistics in a different way, Billy Beane had upended all the typical rules about what you needed for a successful team. And could do it on the cheap. Coooooooooool.
Somehow, it never occurred to me that the book covered the same season that I remembered so well. But then, suddenly it did. And it wasn't just names like Miguel Tejada, Eric Chavez, and Mark Mulder (yum!) that were popping up. All the people I forgot: Dye, Scott Hatteberg, Chad Bradford of the craaaaaazy pitch, etc etc etc. Oh, and Nick Swisher, who joined the A's after I left for the East Coast. Ah, sigh.
So honestly, the chapter about the game where they went for the MLB record.... that was my favorite part of the book. I was at that game. It was one of the most wild sports experiences I've ever had. It rivals the hockey stuff even. Just.... oh, it was amazing. And I bet it's fun to read about even if you aren't reliving it. :)
The book itself is fascinating too. Lewis explains Beane & DePodesta's strategy essentially like this: what's most important is ability to avoid making outs. Look for players who are good at that - focus on the stats that really matter. Find the ones who are good at that who are undervalued for some reason, and snap them up. Generally these people don't "look" like baseball players, so are discounted. And thus, your 2002 Oakland Athletics.
Of course, the A's haven't been much to look at in awhile, and I'm curious about how one would analyze Beane's tenure now. Lewis is an admirer, or was in 2002-03. I want to hear more about now (perhaps I should actually go look and see what he's written).
And yet, I say Lewis is an admirer, but he may not be entirely sold, and here was his comment to Beane that stood out, even amidst all the (lovely lovely) statistics: "Every player is different. Every player must be viewed as a special case. the sample size is always one" (p. 248).
Friday, September 09, 2011
How to become a bestselling novelist
The Glamorous (Double) Life of Isabel Bookbinder - Holly McQueen (Washington Square Press, 2008)
I really shouldn't complain, b/c this book made me laugh a lot. (It's always fun when the baristas look over at you wondering what's so funny.) And it has a cute twist. And the requisite Daniel/Mark Darcy triangle. However, I don't feel like we get to know our romantic male lead nearly well enough, and we probably should.
More importantly, who are you, Isabel??? Her antics and total inability to understand almost anything led me from chuckling to wanting to bang my head on the table. I kept waiting for some sort of personal growth, or something... but if it existed, I missed it. I probably felt this especially keenly having just left Ellie from The Last Letter from your Lover.
Lots of intriguing characters though, and I think McQueen has a lot of space to play around with the eccentric mother secretly pursuing a bizarre dream, the disapproving father, the friend who has everything together except for a totally unreasonable crush (I wanted more of this storyline!). This is her first novel, and I'll be curious to see how her next ones develop.
I really shouldn't complain, b/c this book made me laugh a lot. (It's always fun when the baristas look over at you wondering what's so funny.) And it has a cute twist. And the requisite Daniel/Mark Darcy triangle. However, I don't feel like we get to know our romantic male lead nearly well enough, and we probably should.
More importantly, who are you, Isabel??? Her antics and total inability to understand almost anything led me from chuckling to wanting to bang my head on the table. I kept waiting for some sort of personal growth, or something... but if it existed, I missed it. I probably felt this especially keenly having just left Ellie from The Last Letter from your Lover.
Lots of intriguing characters though, and I think McQueen has a lot of space to play around with the eccentric mother secretly pursuing a bizarre dream, the disapproving father, the friend who has everything together except for a totally unreasonable crush (I wanted more of this storyline!). This is her first novel, and I'll be curious to see how her next ones develop.
Monday, September 05, 2011
A little bit of magic
Howl's Moving Castle - Diana Wynne Jones (Greenwillow Books, 1986)
First of all, the book is pretty different from the Hayao Miyazaki film (which I want to go back and watch again). So you should probably make sure you come across both of them, else you'll be missing out.
This was a book club selection (I finally made it to a meeting!) and received positive-to-mixed reviews from the members. There was some frustration with the abruptness of the ending, and uncertainty about whether Howl was actually a romantic dude.
But first, plot. Sophie has resigned herself to a dull life taking over the family hat shop when a witch's curse turns her into a 90 year old crone and she leaves home to ... well, that's not very clear. But she soon finds herself in the walking castle of Wizard Howl, where she and his fire demon agree to a deal: he'll lift her spell if she can free him from the contract binding him to the castle hearth.
And then adventures go from there. Howl is a dandy rather than an evil eater-of-hearts, everyone seems to have more magical power than they think, and Wales circa 1986 makes an appearance even among the towns in this fantasy land.
I am slightly embarrassed to say that Sophie reminded me very much of Bella Swan (Wow, I barely blogged about Twilight at all. I must have been ashamed) and if Stephenie Meyer didn't use Sophie Hatter as inspiration, both authors were at least trying to do the same thing. Which is? Sophie & Bella don't see their own power. Sophie believes she is plain and destined for a plain life; Bella is plain and awkward and surrounded by creatures far more beautiful and powerful. And yet, the problem throughout is that they don't see themselves clearly; they don't recognize their own beauty and strength. It's a difficult task to carry off, and both books have problems, but the trope is one of the things I like most about YA fiction.
First of all, the book is pretty different from the Hayao Miyazaki film (which I want to go back and watch again). So you should probably make sure you come across both of them, else you'll be missing out.
This was a book club selection (I finally made it to a meeting!) and received positive-to-mixed reviews from the members. There was some frustration with the abruptness of the ending, and uncertainty about whether Howl was actually a romantic dude.
But first, plot. Sophie has resigned herself to a dull life taking over the family hat shop when a witch's curse turns her into a 90 year old crone and she leaves home to ... well, that's not very clear. But she soon finds herself in the walking castle of Wizard Howl, where she and his fire demon agree to a deal: he'll lift her spell if she can free him from the contract binding him to the castle hearth.
And then adventures go from there. Howl is a dandy rather than an evil eater-of-hearts, everyone seems to have more magical power than they think, and Wales circa 1986 makes an appearance even among the towns in this fantasy land.
I am slightly embarrassed to say that Sophie reminded me very much of Bella Swan (Wow, I barely blogged about Twilight at all. I must have been ashamed) and if Stephenie Meyer didn't use Sophie Hatter as inspiration, both authors were at least trying to do the same thing. Which is? Sophie & Bella don't see their own power. Sophie believes she is plain and destined for a plain life; Bella is plain and awkward and surrounded by creatures far more beautiful and powerful. And yet, the problem throughout is that they don't see themselves clearly; they don't recognize their own beauty and strength. It's a difficult task to carry off, and both books have problems, but the trope is one of the things I like most about YA fiction.
As Time Goes By
The Last Letter from your Lover - Jojo Moyes (Viking, 2011)
One of the reasons I feel blessed to be a reader is for the feeling you get when you come across a book that makes you so pleased to be reading it. It may be romantic, or exciting, or heartwarming, or tear-jerking. But whatever it is, you are glad that the book exists, and that you exist and are able to read it.
All of which is a rather over-the-top way to say that I really loved this book. I am all about the British romances, apparently.
Story, in brief: in October 1960, Jennifer Stirling wakes up in a hospital, her memory essentially gone. She tries to return to upper-class life with a husband she feels is a stranger ... and then finds a letter. She had been having an affair, and now much begin a mad search to determine the identity of her lover, the trajectory of their love, and what her husband and friends may have known.
Interspersed are flashbacks just a few months, to when she met the man behind the letters, all from his point of view. How he found himself desperately in love with someone who should have been only a conquest. And then time moves forward.
And then time moves dramatically forward, to 2003. Ellie, a reporter whose own "all-consuming" love affair threatens to wreak havoc on her career, finds a cache of these letters. For reasons both professional and personal, she sets out to discover what became of Jennifer & B.
The earlier story is the more compelling, and I wouldn't blame any reader who wanted to take Ellie and shake her for being just like any other British chick lit heroine. But that is unkind, and not entirely true. (And also kind of okay, b/c this reader loves [most] British chick lit.) And Moyes does two things that I adore. The first is making a romantic hero of the librarian. (Thank you!) The second is entwining the two stories such that the resolutions of each are entirely bound up in one another.
If I only read novels like this, I'd be pretty darn close to perfectly content.
One of the reasons I feel blessed to be a reader is for the feeling you get when you come across a book that makes you so pleased to be reading it. It may be romantic, or exciting, or heartwarming, or tear-jerking. But whatever it is, you are glad that the book exists, and that you exist and are able to read it.
All of which is a rather over-the-top way to say that I really loved this book. I am all about the British romances, apparently.
Story, in brief: in October 1960, Jennifer Stirling wakes up in a hospital, her memory essentially gone. She tries to return to upper-class life with a husband she feels is a stranger ... and then finds a letter. She had been having an affair, and now much begin a mad search to determine the identity of her lover, the trajectory of their love, and what her husband and friends may have known.
Interspersed are flashbacks just a few months, to when she met the man behind the letters, all from his point of view. How he found himself desperately in love with someone who should have been only a conquest. And then time moves forward.
And then time moves dramatically forward, to 2003. Ellie, a reporter whose own "all-consuming" love affair threatens to wreak havoc on her career, finds a cache of these letters. For reasons both professional and personal, she sets out to discover what became of Jennifer & B.
The earlier story is the more compelling, and I wouldn't blame any reader who wanted to take Ellie and shake her for being just like any other British chick lit heroine. But that is unkind, and not entirely true. (And also kind of okay, b/c this reader loves [most] British chick lit.) And Moyes does two things that I adore. The first is making a romantic hero of the librarian. (Thank you!) The second is entwining the two stories such that the resolutions of each are entirely bound up in one another.
If I only read novels like this, I'd be pretty darn close to perfectly content.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
