Comments on books I have read
Below are some short reviews that I have written about books that I have read. Since I started in November 2009 there are many books of which I would like to write, but I guess I need to go back to them first.
Books that I have started reading and I will review one day:
- Les identités meurtrières by Amin Maalouf (1998)
- Homage to Catalonia by George Orwell (1938)
- Guns, germs and steel: The fates of human societies by Jared Diamond (1997)
- The panda's thumb: More reflections in Natural History by Stephen Jay Gould (1980)
- International perspectives on social justice in mathematics education by Bharath Sriraman (2007)
- Five-minute mathematics by Ehrhard Behrends (2008)
The particle play by John Polkinghorne (1979)
I read this book in November and December 2009. The author explains the history of particle physics, from the 30s (time of the discovery of some very basic particles like the electron) until the end on the 70s, when the book was written. Therefore, all the development of particle physics through the unification of forces until the appearance and proliferation of quarks. It is done in a very didactical way, easy to follow even if one is not familiar with the topic. It does get messy and complicated, but the topic is like that... one interesting point, which I have not investigated, is the predicions (made about thirty years ago) about what the more powerful accelerators could bring about.
The premise of the book, to which the title refers, is to picture the particles as actors on a stage, their interactions as the plot; fortunately it is just an entertaining device which does not distract the reader. I recommend the book to anyone who is curious about the topic and knows some basics in physics, like what is an electron, a proton and a neutron (if you don't know this, you may find the topic too difficult). Review written on January 28th, 2010.
The shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism by Naomi Klein (2007)
Keywords: Capitalism
I read this book in October and November 2009. Since I started it, I could hardly stop until I finished. It tells the story of how free-market capitalism has advanced greatly due to taking advantage of great shocks that have momentarily halted the ability of people to react to the changes that they would not allow otherwise. The book describes the rise of the Milton ideology and its implementation in many places: Chile, Argentina and other countries in Latin America; Thatcher's UK; Poland's revolution; South Africa's end of apartheid; China and the South Asian region; Russia at the end of the Soviet Union; the USA's homeland enterprise business; Iraq; Sri Lanka after the 2004 tsunami; New Orleans after Katrina; Israel. Each case is described in lots of detail, and, as I like, with many references to sources containing detailed information. The book punches quite a shock to the reader. The conclusion is optimistic in any case: after some time, the shock wears off, as we can see in the people-oriented governments that rose in Latin America in the last decade. All in all, a book that I recommend strongly. Review written on November 8th, 2009.
The decline of the American empire: And the rise of China as a global power by John Chuckman (2007)
I started reading this book in 2008, lost it for some time, and came back to it in the end of 2009. The title says it all. I can point out two basic ideas of the book: first, that economics is at the core of social change. Second, that China now is not very different from America, Britain and others some decades ago or at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. About economy's role in history, I don't have arguments to offer, but I didn't like the emphasis that he put on it, and how changes in the economic system were the engine of democracy (I may not be getting it right here). But he illustrates the second point with many historical examples, which shed light on the superficial knowledge that we may have on how things really were decades or a few centuries ago; I found those comparisons very interesting. All in all, I enjoyed it and found it interesting, although I don't agree with part of the author's vision, and I would have liked him to cite some sources. Review written in November 2009.
