Your review of Lost Girls was the best I have read. I was about to write one, and saw yours, and could really only add one sentence. Thanks for the good work!

posted by Arctic-Stranger at 1:19 pm (EST) on May 12, 2008

Hi, I just went to enter my review of Cultural Amnesia and read the existing reviews first. I didn't feel I could compete with yours and also saw no need to. I thought yours said most of what needed saying. In my review I just added a personal take on the work. Thanks for your review,

Robert

posted by rdurick at 12:26 am (EST) on Mar 7, 2008

I don't know how much Lao you're going to be able to learn in that short a time, but I presume you'll get (or have already gotten) the Lonely Planet Lao Phrasebook, which looks like a useful little book. I've got Lao for Beginners by Tatsuo Hohino and Russell Marcus, which is pretty decent for such an obscure language and seems to still be in print. Marcus's English-Lao/Lao-English Dictionary is also pretty good.

posted by languagehat at 8:47 am (EST) on Feb 26, 2008

Hi! Yes, same LH (as far as I know, I'm the one and only). All the Laos books are good in their various ways, but all (as you probably noticed) are quite old -- the Meeker is from 1959 and the others from the '60s -- since I'm more interested in the history than the current situation. But of course there's Lonely Planet for up-to-the-minute info. Anyway, Meeker is a fun read with some great photos, but the guy was a CARE representative with empathy and curiosity, not a scholar, so bear that in mind. Dommen was a UPI reporter with a lot of experience in the area and good insight into the diplomatic and political stuff; Toye was a military man who did a lot of historical research and compiled an impressive bibliography; the Adams/McCoy book is a great collection of articles on the history of the country and of US involvement with it from a leftie perspective (intro by Chomsky). I envy you your chance to go there -- it's a fascinating country and from what I gather even a few decades of communism haven't managed to wreck it. Have a great trip, and if you have any further questions don't hesitate to ask!

posted by languagehat at 9:31 pm (EST) on Feb 25, 2008

Hi, Warwick,
You have an intriguing pseudonym or alias.
I've read and enjoyed your 13 reviews, and second your opinion of Clive James, (a very under-rated guy imo). Can't say I share your high regard for Karen Armstrong, however; the comment "fundamentalism is just a reaction to the secularism of modern life" reads almost like a REVERSE of the truth. Like you, "I hope as many people as possible read it" [her book(s)] but I hope they don't consider it / them "important" (as you put it). Sheesh!
Reckon you're more astute about John Gray, though his nihilism seems apparent, surely, from the first book he wrote, never mind this one. I would add "ditto Anthony Burgess" (for what it's worth).
Norwich, as you say, is fascinating, Hoban also. And Gardner is always worthwhile (though I'd nominate Mickelsson's Ghosts as his best effort). Coelho (how does one pronounce that name?) is totally forgetable; though marginally better than Jostein Gaarder wouldn't you agree? How do these dummies get published? Hell, who wants to waste time trawling through Richard Dawkins or Sir David Rottenborough when they could be reading Peter S Beagle Jr or Wind in the Willows? You Brits have a weird sense of seriousness.
Only yesterday, I picked up (and bought) Zafon's "Shadow of the Wind" coz I liked the jacket blurb (a disgracefully bad habit of mine), but it felt sort of 'entertaining' as I weighed it in my hand, and I'd hate to be badly disappointed. Would you care to elaborate on why you didn't exactly adore it?
I'd be obliged and welcome judicious guidance.
Hope you don't mind me adding you to my "interesting libraries"
TTFN.
R.

posted by reuchlin at 11:08 am (EST) on Sep 25, 2007