Reader Participation!
Dear Reader: I can’t decide which book I should attempt to tackle next. After polishing off the wonderfulness that was Shteyngart’s The Russian Debutante’s Handbook on Saturday—it was so good, I might even attempt to review it—I’ve got three daunting non-fiction works that have been sitting in my to-do pile for some time. If you have a choice amongst the three, leave a comment telling me the book that you believe I should tackle first.
[I mock these types of entreaties when they're made on message boards ... and yet, I've become what I hate. Typical!]




I vote for “Flow…”, because being able to pronounce the author’s name at dinner parties will impress the ladies.
November 27th, 2005 at 21:05Brad, while this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, you’re weird, dude.
November 27th, 2005 at 21:09God’s Politics sounds the most interesting to me simply based on the titles.
November 27th, 2005 at 22:02I’d say “Flow”. Psychology is more interesting to read about than politics – the latter kind of book, from my recent experience, is always either obvious, or idiotic, or way-too-depressing, depending on whether it’s written by well-meaning naive guy, a liberal moron or a realist.
Then again, i’m on my second month of trying to finish Battlefield Earth while on the subway to/from work (done irregularly in between reading economics stuff).
If you ythink that Travolta’s movie sucked, you don’t have a first clue till you read the book and realize just how MUCH is sucked. Heck, compared to that atrocity of a movie, Clancy-based flicks are pillars of faithfulness to the original text.
-DVK
–
December 14th, 2005 at 02:22RAH and LRH once bet who could create the most convincing religion. RAH’s entry was “Stranger in a Strange Land”
Oh, the Wallis is sure to be a bit hackneyed in places, but it’s important to me that I read it.
That said, I’ll actually be reading none of these between now and the end of the year. We’ll see what I pick up in January …
December 14th, 2005 at 07:41