The Year Without Summer: 1816 (William and Nicholas Klingaman)

As many people know, I actually have two Bachelor degrees--one in history, the other one in literary studies (aka literature). And both of my degrees are generalist degrees; the University of Colorado at Denver is not set up to specialize one's degree (not that I didn't end up with some areas that were more well-known than others). Therefore, I feel that I am the perfect person to review the book, The Year Without Summer: 1816 and the Volcano That Darkened the World and Changed History (William K. Klingaman & Nicholas P. Klingaman).

The book starts off with an account of the April 5, 1815 volcanic eruption of Mount Tambora. It is an event that even knowing something of modern meteorology (it was something of a childhood hobby) that I would not immediately associate with the effect on the weather that it caused. And at the time, no one alive had a clue what caused the strange weather that occurred the following summer with cold temperatures, strange rain and snow patterns, followed by vast crop failures; this led to people praying for better weather--if it was to happen today, I would imagine some of the same wild theories that were put forth in 1816 to be dusted off and put forth despite modern science.

In 1816, many of the people that one encounters in Revolutionary History (both American and French) were alive and writing their impressions of the year. So were many of the writers one encounters in Gothic and English literary studies (ex. Jane Austen). In fact, reading this book brings another layer to Frankenstein, a book that I had to read four times during the course of my literature program--I would like to argue that some of the weather that one encounters in that book was actually based on the strange weather of 1816; if nothing else, it caused Mary Shelley to stay inside a lot, something that tends to force writers to work on their craft.

Due to the wideness of my studies, I can see how Klingaman could argue that the events of 1816 had long term effects on politics (for instance, in emigration, and attitudes and governmental policies dealing with poverty). But the long term effects tend not to be well-spelled out by the authors--I am not sure that someone who wasn't exposed to the strange mixture of classes I endured will be able to see the long term effects. Still if one is actually interested in the era, hopefully one can fill in the blanks.

This book quotes heavily from primary sources, and the bibliography is excellent; I was able to easily follow up on something that I became curious about while reading the book. I wish that the book had an index; if I ever have to use the book to support one of my wild theories (either in history or literature), I fear that I might have to re-read the entire book--not that would be a problem, it is just not something you want to have to do while fulfilling your Masters program. (Yes, I know that the Masters program is supposed to be a lot of reading; but considering how much is already piled on one's desk walking in, one wants to have indexes handy.)

In places, I will admit that I was not completely invested in finishing the book, or remembering what it said--it is a history book, of course, it gets dull if you do not already know the players involved. Between the lack of an index and those spots, this book should get only four stars; but the overview of a single year (a little about 1815 and 1817) was generally interesting enough that as soon as my wallet recovers, I suspect that I am going to hunt down other books by William Klingaman--therefore, I am going to give it the full five stars.

[This review was based on an Advance Reader Copy that I won in a Goodreads contest.]

A Dictionary of Linguistic Absurdities (ChamberProof)

I got this (A Dictionary of Linguistic Absurdities--by ChamberProof?) on a free day, and honestly even then it might have been overpriced. While I normally like silly dictionary style books, this one seems to be repeating the same blue jokes over and over again. And I do mean blue jokes. There is also the fact that quite a few of them depend upon you knowing British politics to understand, which I don't. My advice is to give this one a miss. It gets a whole one star out of the five.

If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans (Ann Coulter)

Perhaps one of the most hated Republicans in the country, Ann Coulter is a best selling writer, columnist and political pundit. "If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans" is her sixth book, a compilation of quotes from her columns, other books and interviews. If you ever wondered what the fuss over Ann Coulter is about, this book is a good place to start.

Coulter, who writes a weekly column for Universal Press Syndicate, which can be read online at her website, is opinionated, Christian, conservative, and very witty. It is the last trait that probably gets liberals so upset with her. As she notes in her introduction to the book, for the last decade liberals have been foaming at the mouth about her comments.

No democrat is safe from her comments; Nancy Pelosi "a look of perpetual surprise," Hillary Clinton "had firsthand experience in one of [the worst presidential administrations of all time]," and Obama "[is the perfect democratic presidential candidate,] he's black and white and has a Muslim, atheist, and Christian background," have all been victims of her barbs. This is probably why they dislike her so much.

Another reason for so much of the vitriol aimed at her is that some people can not tell when she is joking. While she is not in the same legion as the 18th century French philosopher and political satirist Voltaire (who was in danger of losing his head for his comments), I suspect that no one who misunderstands his jokes will get hers either.

Republicans are not safe from her either: John McCain "Weakness: About half of his policy positions," Mitt Romney "Weakness: Belongs to a peculiar quasi-Christian church, the Masons." Her general opinion of Republicans in politics seems to be that they spend more time being afraid of liberals than actually doing their job.

She points fun at herself too. "I am the illegal alien of commentary. I will do the jokes that no one else will do," she noted on the O'Reilly Factor.

And it is not just individuals that feel the bite of her tongue. Whole classes of people have been the subject of her comments. Her comments about airline security can be viewed harsh and an insult against Muslims; but considering the fact that I foresee the day that we all have to travel naked, I can not say that she is absolutely wrong. The problem with her humor is that it is designed to make you think, something that causes the brain to ache. Yes, noting that Muslims have been responsible for airline terrorism upsets people, but Coulter has the truth on her side; it is just too bad that a few bad apples have spoilt the entire bushel, a point that she seems to completely ignore.

After reading this book, I understand the loathing that many feel towards her. But I also have to admire her wit and reasoning. I can not say that she is completely wrong. Nor can I say that she is just a hack; I found myself admiring her vocabulary and use of language.

I recommend this book for those who do not have time to wade though all her writing looking for gems. It is a good overview of the menace that she can be if you are a liberal, and thought provoking if you are a conservative.

Ann Coulter, "If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans." New York: Crown Forum (2007).

[This review originally appeared on Associated Content (Yahoo Voices) on 1/3/2008. The copy used was brought and paid for by me.]