Skip to main content

Good reads of 2009

I haven't made a list like this in a while, and I believe I discussed most of these on the blog as I finished them, but I thought I'd make a handy short-hand list for you and me. These are only in the order I read them and do not indicate any preference.

The Open Door * Frederica Mathewes-Green
The Children of Hurin * J.R.R. Tolkien
The Omnivore's Dilemma * Michael Pollan
Agrarianism and the Good Society: Land, Culture, Conflict, and Hope * Eric T. Freyfogle
Wonderful Fool * Shusaku Endo
Up the Rouge: Paddling Detroit's Hidden River * Joel Thurtell and Patricia Beck
Johnny Cash and the Great American Contradiction: Christianity and the Battle for the Soul of a Nation * Rodney Clapp

(I started the following in December, but I haven't finished them--so far they are excellent: Love and Hate in Jamestown * David A. Price and The Picture of Dorian Gray * Oscar Wilde)

Try one of these--let me know.

Comments

Sean said…
Michael Pollan was really good on the Daily Show a few days back.
Scot said…
That's where you get all your information from--The Daily Show--isn't it, Sean. Isn't it?
Sean said…
That's ridiculous. I watch the Colbert Report too...
Anonymous said…
Your blog keeps getting better and better! Your older articles are not as good as newer ones you have a lot more creativity and originality now keep it up!
Scot said…
Gosh, I just love anonymous, algorithmic-generated praise. It makes me feel so tingly.
Anonymous said…
very useful post. I would love to follow you on twitter. By the way, did anyone learn that some chinese hacker had hacked twitter yesterday again.

Popular posts from this blog

Worth Quoting

There are but three social arrangements which can replace Capitalism: Slavery, Socialism, and Property.                                                                                                 --Hilaire Belloc                                                                                                The Servile State

Independent Women?

      During breakfast today I was reading an excerpt from a play in The New York Times Magazine (I know, I was a day behind and read Saturday's edition yesterday) entitled Rust .  The play, written by a professor at Grand Valley State University, here in Michigan, is a nonfiction drama about the closing of a GM plant in Wyoming, MI.  The play itself sounds interesting and I enjoyed the excerpt, but what caught my eye was something a character said.  The character is "Academic" and plays a historian and guide to the playwright, also a character.  He is explaining the rise of the automobile factories and the effect of the car on American culture.  He says, "Women became independent, they go from producers of food and clothing to consumers of food and clothing."  This was meant as an earnest, praiseworthy point.     I would counter with "How far we've fallen."  To say that a woman (or a man) is independent because she has moved from producer to cons