"Civil War Blunders" by Clint Johnson

I've re-read the first chapter of Naked Lunch three times so far... This is my "right-before-bed-reading" book right now, possibly the worst choice ever. I'm not sure what to make of it, I know most of the back story, how he was in morroco, strung out and having sex with little boys...

You're right in a way though Jet, without Ginsberg Naked Lunch wouldnt exist, he picked Burroughs off his semi-concious ass and got Naked Lunch published (and publishable...). So you're not entirely wrong

On my plane ride later this month im going to read Ubik by Phil K Dick, last summer I read Ken Kesey's Sometimes A Great Notion, which i liked much more than One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest.

Ubik is an amazing read - one of his best.

Just started Reefer Madness about the underground economy of sex, drugs and cheap labour. It's by the guy who wrote Fast Food Nation and so far it's good.

Milk It sucked, by the way. Big surprise, huh?

I happily just tore through the latest paperback by George Pelecanos called Soul Circus. Always eagerly anticipated.

Everything else is slow, still parsing the Groucho bio. Also borrowed a copy of Holy Blood, Holy Grail by messrs. Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln.
This book, which claims to be "one of the more controversial books of the 20th Century" is about the history of the Templars etc., and some say the basis for the popular DaVinci Code.

I read the DaVinci Code, cause I'm a sucker for conspiracy theory. It was pretty well written, but read a second book by Dan Brown and you'll already know the flow of the plot.

This Holy Blood, Holy Grail is essentially a research project that tries to take every historical recorded mention of "secret societies" and "massive disappeared treasure lore" and "Holy Grail-like Crusades lore" and knit it into something resembling a theory. I think that theory is ultimately along the lines of

Jesus married Magdalene and had kids and their bloodline descendents ended up in France and called themselves Merovingians and formed a secret society of material wealth rejecting knights who crusaded to Jerusalem and supposedly found Solomon's treasure and used it to form the basis of modern banking and became extremely wealthy landowners all over Europe until the Catholic Church decided that they wanted their power back and turned against them and then all of their wealth disappeared and was either found in France in the early 1900's, or has been buried on Oak Island etc.

At least that's as far as I've gotten. Again I'm a sucker for conspiracy, especially that which has to do with Catholic information control (spurred on in early life by The Name of the Rose book/movie and Tom Robbins' Another Roadside Attraction).

That being said, this book reads like stale toast with dirt on it. Information and hundreds of dates and hundreds of interconnected names. It's a trial to boil it down to the salient hypotheses.

Did you ever start something that you knew you wanted to read or learn more about, and you were about 160 pages into it and found yourself still waiting to kick in?

This is a classic example. I think it is worth it.

Oh yeah, and the whole reason that I started to post this time was to say that I heartily endorse the whole of Philip K. Dick's top shelf books and stories. And, unfortunately, there is a distinction.

Ubik is excellent, and if you haven't already read A Scanner Darkly then be sure to read it before Richard Linklater "waking-life's" it on the big screen, defining and destroying it forever.

'Guns, Germs and Steel' by Jared Diamond is a nice quick read on some of the broader points of cultural anthropolgy.

'Trout Fishing in America' by Richard Braughtigan is probably one of the best uses of the english language.

I'm halfway through 'Paper Lion' by George Plimpton. if you have a 'problem' with football, like I do, this is a nice way to ease out of the season (cause the pro-bowl is unwatchable).
-chris

Just started Fortress Of Solitude by Jonathan Lethem. It's pretty amazing how he can change styles from book to book. This one is nothing like Motherless Brooklyn (which is one of the funniest books I've ever read). It's more like Jonathan Franzen (The Corrections, one of the best of the new fiction).

Oh, and

Mr. Chimp wrote:Also borrowed a copy of Holy Blood, Holy Grail by messrs. Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln.
This book, which claims to be "one of the more controversial books of the 20th Century" is about the history of the Templars etc., and some say the basis for the popular DaVinci Code.

There was an article in a recent New York Times that called most of this book fiction. I've never heard of it, but it sounded like some people were buying into it as mostly fact.

Dylan wrote:Oh, and

Mr. Chimp wrote:Also borrowed a copy of Holy Blood, Holy Grail by messrs. Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln.
This book, which claims to be "one of the more controversial books of the 20th Century" is about the history of the Templars etc., and some say the basis for the popular DaVinci Code.

There was an article in a recent New York Times that called most of this book fiction. I've never heard of it, but it sounded like some people were buying into it as mostly fact.

Man, this book sure is a slow read. Fiction is one big supposition, whereas this book is minor suppositions retread over and over and over and over.

In good news, I just finished reading "House of Leaves" by Mark Z. Danielewski. Has anyone read this? Recommended.

_city of the century_ by donald miller. thorough, entertaining history of chicago. there's a hilarious story early on about this guy, 'long john' something, who was a founding father. after he died, his 'headstone' had to be brought into town on two railroad cars. sixty-foot tall granite obelisk.

_terror and liberalism_ by paul berman. maybe this is a reflection of how little i know, but i feel like berman is pulling back a curtain with this book. i read things in here and think 'that's obvious,' before i realize i've never really heard anybody say them before.

basic point: totalitarianism is totalitarianism is totalitarianism, be it aryan or russian or italian or islamic. he thinks the west's real connection to modern terrorism is not primarily in flagrantly global and offensive capitalism or occasional oppression. he sees the west influencing terrorism primarily in two ways, providing both something to push against and inspire:

the acceptance of multiple viewpoints and lifestyles as part of a liberal approach to society (a force to oppose)

and the death-cult totalitarianism that fueled both world wars and their subsequent cousins (a force to inspire).

it is more complicated than that, but there's the nutshell version. he touches on cultural indulgence of attitudes that feed these impulses--i've always had a knee-jerk hatred of romanticization of death in art, and he gives me some good reasons to continue feeling that way.

berman makes a beautiful distinction between liberal attitudes and the self-limiting appeal of submission. it has usefulness beyond a discussion of terrorism--it neatly describes some political differences close to home as well.

again, though: that is all nutshell nutshell nutshell. if you want to know what he thinks for reals, read the book!