Bossypants - Tina Fey

Bossypants 

by 

Tina Fey

Though I had no particular intention to do so, I have ended up reading two autobiographies by American female comics (Comedienne sounds like it belongs in a Victorian Drawing Room). As an avid reader and fan of this blog, you already know what I thought of Sarah Silverman's effort. It's a little unfair to compare the two, as Fey is a writer and actress primarily, whereas Silverman comes from more of a stand-up background.

As seems to be the case with every famous comic in America, Fey is a Saturday Night Live alumnus. This programme has near mythical status amongst US-comics, but I've never hugely warmed to it. Bits and pieces of it are good, but in general I think comedy programmes lose something by insisting on being live. I just don't see the benefits.

Anyway, to the book. Fey is a funny and generous person - or at least she writes like one. She is never stingy with praise of others, and self-depreciating when it comes to herself. There are great big lumps of her life missing - presumably done by her editors. It's possibly a shame as her early life seems just as interesting as when she becomes famous. Her description of her dad, who she idolises makes me want to meet him. Sadly for someone as collaborative as Fey, there's very little in the way of juicy gossip or hanging people out to dry. Even Sarah Palin (Arguably the making of Fey) turns out to be a nice person when they meet each other.

The book is really only for those who are fans of her work or enthusiasts of the American comedy scene. I suppose I'm both of those things and as such found it an easy and quick read. I wish I could be more effusive with my language, but it was a good book, it made me smile, and thats it.

Under The Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader - Bradley K. Martin

Under The Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader

by

Bradley K. Martin

Most of us have some curiosity about North Korea - what life is like there, what the Kim family are like and how the country came to be one of the most isolated and frankly, odd countries on the planet. I have to confess to not knowing a lot about the region before this book. I couldn't even have told you why or how the Korean War started. 

Before the review though, comes a confession - I didn't read all of this book. I wouldn't say I gave up, because I do intend to come back and finish it, but the damn thing is HUGE. I was reading it on my Kindle, so I had no idea how big it was - after reading it for a week, and seeing I had only read 10% of it, I assumed  my Kindle was mistaken, and somehow there was 500 blank pages at the end which skewed the percentage. I was wrong, it's enormous. It took me a little over 3 weeks to read half of it, and I'm a pretty fast reader. So my advice to you, dear reader is that you should only take this on if you are REALLY interested in the subject.

Major credit has to be given to Bradley Martin. It must be very difficult to get details or do any sort of research on such a secretive country. Most of what he has, has come from defectors, or from North Korean allies: Russia & China. 

So, a quick run through of North Korean History. 

Kil-Il Sung, motivated by Japanese colonisation threw his lot in with China and Russia in a guerilla war to oust the Japanese, thus becoming an opportunist Communist. At the end of WWII the Russians and Americans kicked the Japanese out of Korea, but couldn't agree on the whos or whats of running the country. A line was drawn and their puppets ruled a piece each (Kim in the north and Rhee in the south).

After the US pulled out, Kim thought he'd be able to invade and run the whole country. Russia told him not to, but he did anyway. He nearly succeeded, but then also nearly got completely wiped out until the Chinese came to his aid, and both sides ended up back where they started, behind the line. It's been like that ever since.

Kim originally put in place quite a few economic plans and ideas that were successful and raised the standard of living quite a bit in the North. For the first 15 year of his rule, North Korea was more prosperous and successful than the South. In the end though, the need to hold on to power overruled everything else, and he refused all help, disagreement and alternative opinion, causing the country to slide into economic ruin.

Obviously, there is a huge amount more to it than that (about 1000 pages more). The power transfer to Kim Jong Il and so on, but as I say, it's a huge book and I feel I have as much North Korean knowledge in my head as I can possibly manage.

God Is Not Great - Christopher Hitchens

God is Not Great

by 

Christopher Hitchens

Before his untimely death last year, Christopher Hitchens was regarded as one half of the Twin Threat of 'New Athiesm' - the other half being Richard Dawkins. Dawkins is an arch rationalist - scientific, thorough and angry. He has a great talent in being able to wind people up - regardless of what he has to say. Hitchens has a slightly different approach - equally thorough but more like a fireside chat rather than an angry lecture -  Hitchens was a journalist rather than a scientist. 

The question really with books by Hitchens, Dawkins or anyone else of a similar bent is: "what's the point?" - those who are believers almost certainly won't read this book, or if they do, they won't change their mind. I suppose there might be those who are wavering or on the edge, and might read this, looking for a final bit of convincing. To be honest though, religious faith doesn't rely on proof, facts or evidence. It boils down to faith - choosing to believe in the absence of evidence. For me, I suppose its nice to know that other people feel the same way I do. Having grown up in a country where over 90% of the population were Catholic (though 75% of those only go to mass because they're afraid of their mammies), it's still refreshing to me now to hear a logical, realistic alternative point of view. 

So, what's in the book then? Well, Hitchens systematically goes through each major faith: Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Judaism, Buddhism, Shintoism, Mormonism (is it called Mormonism?) and Jehovah's Witness(ism?), their history, how their current beliefs came to be, and neatly skewers each one. I think the Sikh's can wipe their brows in relief - they seemed to escape. Maybe Hitchens was like me in that he had an irrational liking for Sikhs - I just automatically assume any Sikh man I see is going to be really nice. I also like that they can bring their knives into Olympic venues - I may convert. Anyway, no one is spared in this analysis - such apparent saints as Mother Theresa, The Dalai Lama and Mohandas Gandhi all go under the microscope, and come out less clean. He is unstinting in his criticism - not holding back on anyone or anything, even for fear of being the victim of a fatwa. The only halfway religious figure who comes out of it well is Dr Martin Luther King. The breadth of this knowledge - or the quality of his research are impressive. To fully understand any of the major religions, you need to have a very good knowledge of history and politics, and Hitchens scores very highly in these areas. 

Once he has dealt with the major faiths, he moves on to the major arguments put to atheists by the faithful: "Without religion, there would be no morality", "Religion is a force for good" and the old chestnut "more evil and deaths have been caused by Godless leaders like Hitler, than by any religions or religious leaders". The first of these points is the easiet to disprove - it's not like the cells of the world are filled with the irreligious - the most corrupt country I have experienced: Nigeria, is also the most religious I have experienced. The second point is one of those to be permanently debated - depending on which side of the argument you are on. The third argument was for me, the most interesting part of the book. Hitchens takes a long look at the role the Catholic Church played in openly supporting Mussolini and Franco - and though some priests initially  opposed Hitler, in the end they had his back too - so much so, they were complicit in getting many high ranking Nazi officers out of Europe and into South America at the end of WWII. He also looks at the religious devotion of the Japanese people and military during this period - their leader was regarded as a god, after all.

Hitchens also looks at countries like North Korea, where religion (and pretty much everything else) is banned. The accusation is that when religion is removed, you are left with this horrible country - is often used to justify religion as a force for good. However as we are told that Kim Jong Il and Kim Il Sung are able to walk on water, shoot animals with arrows from 500 yards and perform various other miracles - it seems that one religion has been replaced with another.

Anyway, as I alluded to earlier - I'm not sure if this book will change your mind, unless you're looking to have your mind changed, and it will further convince those who are already convinced

2 Books - 1 Small Update. Blame my Kindle

I Blame My Kindle - a 2 book mini-review.

"Stuff White People Like" - Christian Lander

"Seeing Further" - edited by Bill Bryson

You see? This is what you happens when you get a Kindle. It's the book equivalent of an MP3 player. With a cassette, or even with a CD player, you were more inclined to listen to a whole album the whole way through, and give it a couple of listens before you abandoned it. With MP3 players, your whole album collection is on shuffle, and if you're like me, there are songs on there you have never listened to. So it is with the Kindle - I have about 200 books on there and the temptation to skip around, especially if the book I'm currently reading is a bit tricky, is always there. 

So, the book I'm officially reading, I'm still reading and hopefully I'll review that next week. Hopefully. Despite it being an interesting read, I couldn't help but stray off course not once, but twice. Hence the 2 book mini review you now see in front of you.

So - 'Stuff White People Like' was a very funny website (it still exits, it just hasn't been updated in over 2 years). It pokes fun about, well - about stuff white people like. More specifically it pokes fun at the white liberal middle-class (me, then). Each week - it picked a different topic: Having Black Friends, Picking Their Own Fruit, Banksy, Ironic Tattoos, Mad Men, Yoga etc etc, and took the piss out of it. It was pretty funny, mostly because it was an accurate dart through the heart of pretentious hipster trendies. I fully confess to liking a lot of the topics in here: The Onion, Being On Time, Microbrewery Beer etc. As a book, it just doesn't work as well. The only reason for this is that it feels a bit samey if you more than 3 or 4 in a row. As such, it makes for a very good 'toilet reader', and that isn't damning with faint praise - toilet reading is a very underrated experience. Maybe 'Reading on the toilet' will be in Book #2 of the series. 

'Seeing Further' threw me off guard. This was mostly because my Kindle said it was a Bill Bryson book, and if you cast your view up into the top right hand corner of this blog to see the cover, you'll see a great big red 'Bill Bryson', and above it, a teeny-tiny "edited by". So, the first chapter is a highly enjoyable Bill Bryson style romp through the history of the Royal Society. If you liked 'A Short History of Nearly Everything', you'll enjoy this too. However, thereafter you'll find individual chapters written by assorted historians, scientists and authors. I confess to not knowing who most of them are - with the exceptions of Margaret Atwood and Richard Dawkins (he does Science too!). The problem is, that none of them write as well as Bryson, who has an everyman approach to science, which for me, makes it highly accessible.

There's no doubt the Royal Society (basically the inventors of modern science) are deserving of a stellar book celebrating its life and times, and of course there's no reason it all has to be easy-reading and easy to understand. It's just going to be one of those books, like Stuff White People Like, that I won't be reading in one go - it'll be chapters here and there I think. Too big to tackle on the toilet I should think - even for me. 

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

by Seth Grahame-Smith

Legend has it that a small US publisher called Quirk had the idea for a tongue in cheek mash-up book called "Pride & Prejudice & Zombies", and enlisted a young freelancer called Seth Grahame-Smith to write it. The book proved to be a huge success and has spawned a whole host of copycats (Sense & Sensibility & Seamonsters, Jane Slayre). As for Grahame-Smith (SGS), he took a leaf from Quirk's book, and he got himself a deal on practically just a book title. That title was Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter - it too sold by the bucket load, and as most of you know has been made into a (modestly successful) movie too. 

I think it would be very easy to write a very bad version of this book - or this sort of book in general (There's a Queen Victoria: Demon Slayer, you know). Fortunately, SGS is a pretty decent writer, generating sympathy, and making the whole thing feel...well...realistic. SGS starts off being visited by a mysterious stranger who presents him with the lost diaries of Lincoln himself - from which SGS pieces together the 'real' story of Lincoln. 

I confess to not being up to speed on my American Civil War history, or my knowledge of Lincoln in general. I suspect that if you did have this knowledge, the book would tickle you much more. As it was, there was enough here to keep me going - the Vampire Hunting is used sparingly, and there is far more politics and actual history going on in here. 

The basic conceit is that the Vampires came over from the old world and looked upon slaves as an easy method of getting access to blood with no questions asked. They get ambitions to control more than just the slaves - and in their way is a vampire hating politician from the North, and voilà! civil war ensues.

SGS seems to have a knack for being good at a 2-line book pitch, as I like the sound of his new book: Unholy Night (the 3 wise men are actually thieves, they stumble upon Jesus's manger and end up defending the holy family against a night of terrors). There's nothing in here that's going to keep Phillip Roth awake at night, but because it's so deadpan and serious, it doesn't come across as try-hard - you just accept the premise that young Abe hunted vampires and get on it with it. Good fun

A Year of Living Biblically: AJ Jacobs

The Year of Living Biblically

by AJ Jacobs

So, 'Stunt Journalism' then. You know the sort of thing - one man tries to do something wacky for a while: Morgan Spurlock eats only McDonalds, Danny Wallace says 'yes' to everything for a year, you get the drift. That was my original thought when I heard of this book. Esquire journalist AJ Jacobs decides to spend a year of his life trying to follow the rules of the bible. As a 'secular Jew', the easy and obvious thing for Jacobs to do would have been to point out all the inconsistencies ("the stuff that contradicts the other stuff" - Ned Flanders) and all the people who believe in them. It makes for a better book that he tries and succeeds to do more with it.

Jacobs is a self-confessed agnostic - but he admirably enters into this enterprise with openness. If he is going to try to follow the Bible for a year, then the most difficult thing to do is to actually make yourself 'believe'. There are plenty of quirky rules that Jacobs delights in trying to follow - not shaving for a year and taking on a 'slave', for example. However, what the book is really about is trying to examine what the bible means to people, and what was behind the original rule making in the first place. 

Jacobs speaks to a huge amount of Biblical experts and consults a huge amount of books in his quest. His thank-you list and his bibliography at the end of the book are both enormous -which I suppose is not surprising when studying the most popular book in the world. Jacobs makes a point of speaking to an extremely wide range of people - pointing out that the Bible means nearly as much in the Jewish faith as it does in the Christian one. 

There is definitely a schism between those who believe the New Testament makes much of the Old Testament unnecessary, and those who take the entire thing as equally important. This is something even the most casual observer is aware of. However, what I wasn't aware of was just how many different opinions and interpretations of the Bible there are. Estimates say there are between 3000 and 7000 different bibles. That's not different interpretations, that published bibles with different words - extra bits added in or left out. 

There is not one rule or law that isn't in dispute amongst bible followers - even "thou shalt not kill" has a number of different translations and interpretations. It's also a mistake to assume all fundamentalists believe the same thing: there are gay fundamentalists, socialist fundamentalists (Red Letter Christians). There's a number of different schools of thought even within Creationists. Catholics, Protestants and Jews don't even agree on what should be in the Bible. Jacobs doesn't point this out to make fun of the Bible, but to observe it is practically impossible to follow certain rules, when no-one can agree what that rule means. 

There is a lot of Jacobs' personal life in the book - his wife and child - and their attempts to have more children (the Bible may or may not have something to say about IVF - Catholics don't like it but Jews do). This is possibly where the book falls down - Jacobs is the amiable bumbling man, while his wife is the uptight sensible one - just like a Judd Apatow film, or in fact a Morgan Spurlock film/Danny Wallace book. His attempts to explain why he can't touch or sit in the same seat as his menstruating wife are pretty funny though. 

He is at his best when he talking to the numerous theologists and believers about their version of what the Bible means. He is open and non-judgemental - and takes seriously his attempts to at least try and believe what they believe. 

The Bedwetter - Sarah Silverman

The Bedwetter - Sarah Silverman

There's probably a fairly large amount of people in Ireland and the  UK who have no idea who Sarah Silverman is. There is probably no-one under 50 in the US and Canada who don't know who she is. Of those who do know her, I imagine she is a 'love her/hate her' type of comic. I imagine this means that the target audience round these parts is pretty small. It stands to reason that the better you know someone, the more you are likely to enjoy their autobiography. I've been aware of Silverman for some time, but I've never seen her TV show. I suppose I'm as much aware of her notoriety as I am of her material.

Known for her spiky and extremely frank stand-up and TV shows - she's also appeared in a number of movies - I remember her from School of Rock primarily but I did a quick check of her TV and film appearances on IMDB, and she has actually appeared in a fairly large number of shows - most appearances are fairly obvious: The Simpsons, Futurama, Saturday Night Live, Entourage and Larry Sanders. 


It's while talking about her adventures in making shows and films that Silverman is at her most entertaining. She makes the comment that for a female comic wanting to appear in movies - there are only 3 different characters available: The bitchy ex-wife, The lead character's c*nty girlfriend before he finds out what love can really be; or the quirky best friend who exists to convey information to the audience ("but you're a lawyer and he loves you!"). She adds that if you are lucky, you get to play the lead in a comedy where you get to be the uptight shrill one who tells the man to stop acting like a child. Silverman adds that she has played all of these parts and has a stack of similar scripts lined up beside her as she types. 

It occurred to me that whenever I've seen a photo of Silverman, she's nearly always pulling a silly face, or doing something 'goofy' - whether she is doing a 'sexy' shoot for Maxim or appearing on the red carpet at a premiere, she is mugging, or grabbing her crotch or something. This book is kind of like that - whenever it seems like there is a danger of things getting too serious, or us getting to look into her psyche - she makes jokes about urine, farting or being Jewish (lots and lots of mentions about being Jewish). In her early life, she was a chronic bedwetter, and suffered pretty severely from depression. It seems her parents and family were pretty supportive of her throughout this - and she realised that the humiliation of being a teenage bedwetter was about as bad as it could get, and dying on stage as a stand-up was really nothing to be afraid of.

There are parts of the book that feel padded out - the foreword, which is normally written by someone else, is written by Silverman and is pretty indulgent, as the the 'middleword' in (you guessed it) the middle of the book and a bit written about Silverman by 'God'. It's a shame because when she does talk about her family, the creative process or struggling with censorship, she comes across as humane, likeable and genuine. I think really though, to really get anything out of the book,  you would need to be aware of not only Silverman, but her peers (Louis CK, Al Franken) and a fair chunk of her material (I've not seen her TV show, or her film: Jesus is Magic).


So basically, this is a useless review. If you like her and her material, you'll probably like this. If you don't, you probably won't. You have probably figured this out all by yourself. Still, there are some excellent autobiographies by comics out there (Tina Fey, Steve Martin), and it's a shame this isn't quite up there. 

Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell

"Outliers" by Malcolm Gladwell

Malcolm Gladwell is a writer who enjoys taking a sideways look at issues and beliefs that are universally held and asking if we are really correct in our beliefs. His most famous book: 'The Tipping Point' looked at what causes things to change from something quite normal to something suddenly popular and successful. 'Blink' examined the role that making snap and subconscious decisions played in our lives. Though there is generally a lot of research featured in his books - they are not science books - containing as much in the way of anecdotes as hard and fast facts.


Gladwell is firmly an apolitical figure - he doesn't have an agenda or a desire to puncture anyone's beliefs or to prove anyone wrong. You get the impression he is genuinely curious and is doing the research for his own interest - he would probably do it regardless of whether he was writing a book or not.

Outliers (one that appears to deviate markedly from other members of the sample in which it occurs) follows a similar thread to his previous books by taking a look at success - what's behind it, what isn't behind it, and whether 'talent' as we know it, really exists at all. Without giving the whole book away, Gladwell seems to suggest that the idea of a self made man (or woman) simply does not exist. It is impossible to lift yourself out of the mire on sheer will/talent/intelligence alone - those who have become successful or lauded as geniuses have got there on a combination of hard work, a good support network (both social and cultural) and no small slice of good fortune (mostly being in the right place at the right time). 

This book seems mostly focused on his American audience - many of his examples are based in the US, and some of his anecdotes are a little too sugar coated for a more cynical audience. However, I suppose the fact that many Americans like to see their country as a place where you can make if you simply work hard enough - means it is the country that Gladwell needs to set straight more than any other.

His most interesting and discussed point in this book is the '10,000 hour theory': Anyone who is regarded as a Genius will have had at least 10,000 hours of practise before they achieved the height of their profession (Mozart, The Beatles, Bill Gates etc.). He suggests, that as long as it's developmental practise, then this theory is pretty much guaranteed (though success and genius are not hand in hand). It is something also discussed in Matthew Syed's book: Bounce - which looks at what creates sporting success. Syed agrees with Gladwell - and cites examples of Kenyan distance runners, who start off early on by running to school every day. It's a smack in the face for those who believe that talent is inherited or that people are born with it - and a comfort to those who believe in hard work, and lots of it.

I broadly agree with what Gladwell has to say in the book - and that's possibly the only annoying thing with it -he seems to think that he is really going against the grain and will be causing great consternation and argument by what he has to say. At one point he makes the argument for the oldest children in primary school classes having a major influence on their progress from then on - particularly in sports (though it is applicable in academics too). This is something I remember the missus talking about years and years ago.

Nonetheless there is plenty of food for thought in here - there will probably be at least one well made argument that goes against what you had until now, presumed to be true. For that alone, it's worth a look.

To Kill A Mockingbird / To Use A Kindle

To Kill A Mockingbird

Apparently you may have heard of this book. I can't believe I've never read it before now. Everyone I know has read it and has told me they would loan me their copy, but it never happened, so now I've gone and got my own - thanks for nothing everyone else! 

Anyway,  I was given a Kindle as a Fathers Day present, and I decided I should start off by reading something worthwhile. However, I'm not entirely sure I need to review or give my opinion about this book. I mean, what do I have to add to one of the most widely read and respected books of the 20th Century?

Maybe I should use this review to give my thoughts on the use of a Kindle. Like a great many people, I was of the opinion that 'nothing beats a book - that feeling of cracking open the spine and leafing through the pages'. I always thought a Kindle would be useful if you travelled a lot, or if you, as I once did - spent 2 years in a small town in Nigeria with not a lot else to do. Though I wasn't pining for a Kindle - I am a gadget fan, and once this opportunity was offered to me, I couldn't turn it down.

So, how does it compare to reading a book? Pretty well actually. The screen reads exactly like a page of a book - regardless of the angle of view and how sunny it is. If, like me, you end up reading a book on a train while standing - being able to hold the 'book' and turn the pages with one hand is pretty useful. There are lots of other handy gadgets, including a dictionary option for when you're reading clever books. - and many other things I'll probably never get round to messing about with. The only downside I can see is that I have about 150 books lined up, and I find it difficult to stick to one book when I know there's 149 others I want to get to. I did manage to read To Kill a Mockingbird straight through, but since then I'm on 2 books at the same time.

I think my missus is happy that we wont have to find more storage space for all my books - but I do still have about 25 paper books still left unread.... when will I get to them?

So, To Kill A Mockingbird is ace. I think I pretty much knew the story and had heard the names Atticus Finch and Boo Radley long before last week. If you've never read it, you really should - it's not a difficult read - and covers racism, tolerance, prejudice, decency and not judging a book by it's cover. You probably know that because you read it when you were 15, but my English teacher made us read an awful book called "Men Withering" instead, which is like sitting inside licking stamps, when all your friends are outside playing football. Dont read Men Withering - not even on a Kindle

Zombie: An Anthology of the Undead - edited by Christopher Golden

Zombie: An Anthology of the Undead

Edited by Christopher Golden

Ok, ok I know. A collection of Zombie short stories. Look, I've read Dostoevsky, Melville, Joyce & Dickens. I enjoy Steinbeck, Hemmingway and Austen. But I like Zombies too. I was embarrassed enough reading this on the train (the Kindle can't come soon enough). Get over it. 

Anyway, the other interesting thing here is that I dont often read short stories or collections of them. I find that you're just getting into the characters and situation, and then the thing ends. They often read like first chapters of a novel rather than a complete story. I also find that when I finish a book, I need a day or two of not reading anything heavy before I'm ready to start the next one - tough to do when you're trying to get through 450 pages of 20 page stories. 

At the back of this book, we get a little biopic of all the writers. I would seem a lot of them are well known - maybe if you're really into your horror or sci-fi you know them, but the only writer I knew was Max Brooks (who wrote the excellent World War Z). I think I've maybe heard of Tad Williams too? (anyone?).

I really really enjoy a good (or bad) Zombie film, but I was wondering if there was really room for 25 new spins on the Zombie mythology.  Was I proved wrong? Sort of. Mostly. I suppose if you tell the story well, you don't necessarily need to create a whole new paradigm.

There were quite a few of "life after the Zombie apocalypse" stories - one of which: "Family Business" by Johnathan Maberry was good enough to make me want to read more of his work - a man is hired by the living to seek out undead family members and kill them permanently.

There was stuff that was pretty clever - 'Lazarus' by John Connolly suggested that when Jesus brought Lazarus back to life, he came back as a member of the undead.'Second Wind' by John Carey had the hero as a millionaire businessman, who arranged to reanimate after his death, so he could continue amassing his fortune - death was no match for ambition, and 'What Maisie Knew' had zombies being used as home help, manual labourers and sex toys.

There was plenty of stuff that was forgettable too - Max Brook's effort felt like a left out chapter from World  War Z, 'Kids and Their Toys' by James A. Moore felt like Stand By Me with a zombie thrown in. There was also a story where a local tough guy kills a pool hustler in front of some local kids, which didn't seem to have any zombies in it at all - unless I was missing something.

Overall I would say that if Jodi Picoult or Thomas Pynchon is your normal read, then this probably isn't going to change your mind. However if you have a liking for the work of George A Romero - you could do a lot worse than this. 

The Sisters Brothers

The Sisters Brothers

By

Patrick DeWitt

Sometimes, reading a book is just like listening to someone telling you a story. Someone who has skill in story telling - they have warmth, humour and know how to pace it. With these books, reading them feels like no work at all. So it is with 'The Sisters Brothers'.

Set in gold rush era America - the book follows the story of Eli and Charlie Sisters - hired killers and brothers -  as they travel across America in pursuit of their target - the wonderfully named: Herman Kermitt Warm.. 

As with a lot of good books, its not the outcome of their journey that is the main thing, but their experience on the way. The story is narrated by Eli - the younger, softer and more philosophical of the two. In my head, Eli's voice sounded something like Nicholas Cage's voice in Raising Arizona, a friendly, curious and slightly simple fellow. He tells us of the brothers bickering relationship, how they came to be in this line of work, Charlie's weakness for Brandy and Eli's own longing to be out of the murder business for something far simpler. 

While Charlie finds comfort in Brandy, accumulating wealth, and being the most feared man in the west, Eli contemplates the wonderful invention of toothbrushing, gives his money to anyone who will treat him kindly, and sticks by his slow and troublesome horse: Tub, when he should have gotten rid of it some time ago. The brothers come across a wide range of eccentric characters - giving the book a feeling that it  might have been written by the Coen Brothers. There's that mix of black humour, strange characters, philosophy and cold blooded murder.

I can certainly see the influence of things like Charles Portiss' True Grit and Deadwood through the book  - both of these are very good things. I flew through the 300+ pages of this in about 5 days. Can't recommend it highly enough. 

The Player of Games

The Player of Games

By Iain M Banks

It feels strange to review this book. After all, it was first published 24 years ago. It means my opinion is even less relevant than usual. You would imagine that most people who were going to read it, have already done so.

However, I got my copy as part of World Book Night (http://www.worldbooknight.org/) - a scheme designed to encourage people to read. I signed up to be a 'giver' and listed TPoG as my 3rd choice book (The Book Thief and The Time Travellers Wife btw). I was duly selected as a giver, and was told I could hand out 24 copies of my it to whomever I wanted to. 

TPoG was the only book on the list that I hadn't read, but still wanted to - so my reasons for picking it weren't entirely altruistic. I've never really enjoyed Science Fiction novels (yes I've read Neuromancer, yes I've read Enders Game etc etc), despite enjoying Sci-Fi in films and comics. However, I've read most of Iain Banks's fiction output and I remain a big fan of his work. He adds the 'M' to his name to distinguish his Sci-Fi from his plain old 'Fi'. 

So to the book. TPoG takes place in a futuristic human society called 'The Culture'. A place where both humans and computers are considered sentient - where the need for money has long gone and living to survive is a thing of the past. People can devote themselves to travel, learning and other lofty pursuits. Within this safe environment - highly intelligent people can find themselves easily bored. So it proves with Jernau Gurgeh - one of the finest game players in the entire Culture -master of any form of strategy game in existence. 

In a bungled attempt to cheat and ensure a spectacular win, Gurgeh finds himself blackmailed and encouraged to help 'Special Circumstances' (the part of The Culture that deals with difficult situations) investigate a newly discovered Alien species called The Empire of Azad. The entire Azad culture revolves around a hugely complex game (also called Azad) - and a persons success in playing it dictates their social standing. The Culture are keen for Gurgeh to learn and play the game in an attempt to find out more about the potentially troublesome Empire.  

It's hard to go into too much more detail without giving away the story and much of what makes the book engrossing. Aside from doing an excellent job in creating not one, but two new societies and explaining how they work, Banks also manages to build tension around the playing of games that we don't know and don't understand (there is no attempt to explain the full rules of any of the games mentioned). Gurgeh starts off as a slightly arrogant and unsympathetic character, but you can't help cheering him on as the book develops. 

This story is as much about politics, psychology, power and ideologies as it is about anything particularly 'science fiction-y'. If you can accept or enjoy the futuristic setting, then there's a lot to be enjoyed here. 

What's the next best 'culture' novel then?

Starbucked - By Taylor Clark

Starbucked - A Double Tall Tale of Caffeine, Commerce & Culture

By Taylor Clark

In general I am wary of corporate biographies. Mostly because it is very difficult to write a balanced account. They are either written by a 'visionary' CEO or by someone with an axe to grind. Starbucks is one of those corporations that either produces huge loyalty or huge hatred. I have to confess that I am not a fan and try to avoid them when I can, but I also have to confess that I do like the odd Frappucino every now and then. 

The book is split into 2 parts. The first looks at how Starbucks went from nothing to a multinational Goliath in seemingly no time at all, and the second looks at all the issues people have with them (expensive, ubiquitous, no fair-trade coffee, poor employers) and asks if these issues stand up to scrutiny. This division works well - you could nearly read them as 2 separate books - Clark works hard to provide background, and a human element throughout the book - making it surprisingly easy to read. 

Clark tells us that following WWII in America - instant coffee was king. Fresh ground coffee when it was used was of a very poor standard, and so it remained until the 1970's when the desire for more natural and organic foods reared its head up. A Dutch immigrant called Alfred Peet set up shop in San Francisco, and schooled 3 young graduates in the finer arts of coffee roasting - with these skills: Baldwin, Siegl and Bowker (there was never a 'Starbuck' - that was from Moby Dick - they had actually considered "Pequod" as a name first) set up Starbucks with the intention of selling fresh ground coffee for people to make at home. 

Their business proved a small success in the Seattle area, and they began selling paraphernalia to help with home coffee making. In the mid 80's a keen salesman called Howard Schulz wanted to investigate why a small company was buying so much of his organisations coffee equipment. He was so taken with Starbucks that he wanted in. Following a Damascene moment in an Italian espresso bar, he tried to persuade his partners to make Starbucks a cafe as well as a retailer. They weren't interested, so Schulz set up his own cafe chain: Il Giornale - with the intention of mimicking Italian cafes. 

In the end, Schulz bought out his 3 partners, and made all his (and their) shops: Starbucks. Since then, Schulz has pretty much been the sole driving force behind their expansion (15,000 stores and counting). What you have to admire about Schulz and his business plan was that he persuaded a country that wasn't crazy about coffee to pay $4 a cup for it. He then did it throughout the rest of the world - countries like China and Japan which have never really drunk coffee and don't really drink milk are converts just like everywhere else, and all the shops look the same and are precision designed - there's not a thing in the shop that is there by accident. 

In this first half of the book, there are plenty of interesting titbits - things that didn't work (Lifestyle magazine: "Joe", for example), and things that people thought wouldn't work but really did (Frappucinos). Clark offers up a number of suggestions as to why Starbucks has become so popular - it offers a "3rd place" - somewhere that isn't work or home, it offers genuinely good coffee (or at least it used to), it's coffee is so dark roasted that it has a very high caffeine content - ensuring return visits, it has no real competitor, and it has a scarily effective method of rolling out shops and product. These days he suggests the quality of the coffee and barista are gone, and you are left with a uniformly 'pretty good' drink and a place to sit for a while. People take comfort in the familiar, and outside the US - people want a taste of Americana and maybe even think it brings a touch of sophistication to their town ("we're such a backwater - we don't even have a Starbucks"). 

In the second half of the book - things get a little more scatter-shot. Clark addresses some of the issues people have with Starbucks:

•  They treat employees badly - partially true, though it could be argued they are treated better than their peers in McDonald's. They are rabidly anti-union, but offer better perks and benefits than your average Mcjob. 

• By not going 100% Fair Trade they are helping keep coffee growers in poverty - partially true also. Clark correctly points out that Starbucks are only responsible for about 2% of the worlds coffee purchases (look to Nestle, Kraft etc. for the big boys) and that Starbucks place a premium on good coffee - sometimes paying more than the going Fair Trade rate. However, this premium rate is going to the plantation owner only  -with no obligation to improve labour conditions. Even if they are only 2% of the total market, they are probably the most influential presence in the coffee world today. 

• Their mass saturation technique squeezes out all competition out of towns and cities. This was something Naomi Klein talked about in 'No Logo'. Clark argues that what has happened is that Starbucks inadvertently  increased the demand for good coffee in good cafes - meaning there are more independent coffee shops in America (sorry, no stats outside of the US) than ever before. One smaller chain (Tullys) even suggests they see where Starbucks are opening and then open up nearby - with the reasoning that Starbucks has picked that location after careful study and analysis. I would be interested to see if this was the case worldwide. Certainly in London and Dublin, there are more cafes now than there was 20 years ago. 

• By opening the same shop everywhere they are contributing to making the world a big generic shopping mall. This is a matter of opinion really. McDonald's has the same charge too. People always have the option to go somewhere else (unless you are in an airport). On my work journey, there are 3 Starbucks I could go to - but there are about 20 other places I can get coffee from too

I wanted this book to be a finely honed precision attack on all that was wrong with Starbucks, and as far as that goes, I was disappointed. It is balanced throughout - sometimes to the point where Clark gives Schulz and Starbucks them too much credit - though he never falls for the "we are connecting communities" horseshit. He also doesn't try to come up with definitive reasons for why they are successful - he just offers a few well researched possibilities and wonders how they can continue their claim of offering gourmet coffee as they continue to expand. 

By the by - I wanted to mention this, but didn't know where to put it. Clark spends some time interviewing the late Dr Ernesto Illy and comes to the conclusion that Illy is probably the best coffee in the world (at least in terms of generally available coffee). Shame it's not Fair Trade either....

Smile or Die: How Positive Thinking Fooled America & The World

Barbara Ehrenreich

About 10 years ago, I read a book by Barbara Ehrenreich, called: 'Nickel & Dimed'. In it, Ehrenreich attempted to live as a minimum wage worker in America - in a number of different jobs, to see how feasible it was to survive on it (after all - that's the purpose of a minimum wage, to be a living wage, right?). Of course, it was practically impossible - but her method of approach and her style of writing - sympathetic, calm and even ultimately made her investigation and her arguments all the more compelling. As she primarily exists in America and most of her writing is based there, I hadn't really heard of her since. Turns out, she's written a total of 16 books - mostly about questioning commonly accepted wisdom and beliefs - my kind of writer then. 

Anyway, Smile or Die is about the idea that being positive is not actually of any huge benefit to your life. Actually, its about more than that - it's about a 'culture of positivity' that replaces the rational questioning of things, with blind faith, smoke &  mirrors and misdirection. 

Reading the initial first few chapters, it struck me that this was going to be an exceptionally grumpy and mean spirited book. After all, what was wrong with adopting a positive outlook? Surely with all other things being equal, a positive outlook is better than a negative one? Of course, Ehrenreich isn't talking about replacing positivity with negativity - rather she would prefer to replace it with rationalism - ask questions, seek out the answers and if you feel like being pissed off at the end - then be pissed off.

The real targets of her book are those who have made a large amount of money from telling us all we should be positive - and implying that the bad things in our life are the result of our negative thoughts. She skewers these targets chapter by chapter - starting with the pseudo medical "heal yourself through positive thoughts" field populated by people like Deepak Chopra. There is one heartbreaking piece from a woman dying of cancer who had written to Chopra - Chopra suggests she had failed over overcome her cancer because of 'toxic thoughts'.

After that - she goes for the corporate cheerleaders, who are hired to run seminars like "why getting fired is really an opportunity for success" (I'm paraphrasing) - people like Tony Robbins. Ehrenreich argues that in an era when job security and meaning have disappeared, companies turn to 'positive speakers' to make their employees/ex-employees feel that any mishaps in their life and career are down to their negativity. Don't question things, dont be a moaner - just smile, agree, be positive and accept your reduced salary, security and rights. This would all be ok if by being super positive and using positive visual imagery was a successful way of climbing the corporate ladder - but as we know the difference between a CEO's salary and the average workman has only widened in the last 20 years. Less and less people are getting to the top - those at the top are getting proportionately richer - and the poor are being told it's their fault and to be thankful for what they've got.

The last area Ehrenreich really goes for was an area that is sort of new to me - a sort of "positive thinking Christianity". In America, churches that espouse positive Christianity - are becoming more an more popular. These churches don't deal with issues raised in the bible, or matters of morality - instead they talk about how Jesus wants you to be rich, and how by praying and "showing your faith" (donating money), you will have that Lexus, you will get that promotion, as long as you don't allow negativity into your life. These Churches often don't have crucifixes or any significant Christian imagery, instead they have waterfalls, globes and other neutral symbols. While not being hugely popular in Europe (yet), my time in Nigeria showed me that this form of Christianity is probably the dominant form there. I was invited to a New Year 'claiming' ceremony where people were encouraged to urge the Lord to send them a Jeep Cherokee or whatever. These people had so little money, and were being told that if they gave that money to the church, and used positive reinforcement, that surely wealth and riches would be theirs. The Pastors leave the churches in a fleet of Jeeps. If that's not exploitative, I dont know what is.

The final important distinction Ehrenreich is keen to make is the difference between 'positivity' and happiness. Being happy and having meaning and a sense of control in your life are the things that will genuinely help you - they can stave off mental illness, increase life span, reduce recovery times from illness and so on. Pretending to be positive and happy when you're not really that way will end up making you worse.

Good book - just not a bundle of chuckles!

Tiny Sunbirds Far Away - Christie Watson

Tiny Sunbirds Far Away by Christie Watson

Back to fiction for me then. I was drawn to this book mostly because it's set entirely in Nigeria, and is (nearly) entirely about Nigerians, but is written by an English woman. Though Christie Watson is married to a Nigerian, she has never lived there full time. As someone who spent 5 years there, I was curious to see how she managed - would her voice be as authentic as say Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie or Helon Habila? Should it matter either way? As it happens, in terms of authenticity, I thought she did stunningly well - but I would love to know the opinion of some Nigerians, to see what they think.

The story itself is of a family - living in relative comfort and security in Lagos, until a paternal indiscretion sees the mother and 2 children: Ezikiel and Blessing moving back to the mothers home town near Warri - in the oil-plagued & trouble wracked Nigerian Delta.

The story itself is narrated through the eyes of 12 year old blessing - the baby of the family. This is a clever device, as like most 12 year olds, Blessing doesn't fully observe or comprehend everything that is around her - meaning that we, the reader are left to figure things out and are kept guessing. We share Blessing's indignation at her family's drop in status, and her horror at their loss of plush living conditions, in return for basic village life and all that it brings.

Blessings new family are a peculiar bunch to her: a headstrong grandfather who has delusions of grandeur about his status and abilities - who has alienated the village around him by his conversion to Islam; a grouchy plain-speaking grandmother, a driver who has so many children, they are impossible to count, and a second wife for his Grandfather - a loud bushgirl called Celestine.

Her surroundings are peculiar too - a village blighted by oil, both metaphorically and physically. A combination of old superstitions and modern guerilla warfare. This is the thing the book handles best - it would be easy to marvel at the magic and mysticism of traditional life and beliefs - Watson clearly has a lot of time for the traditional Nigerian way of life - but she is also aware of the harsh realities her protagnosts face and isn't afraid to talk about Environmental polution, female genital mutilation, and the huge gender inequalities that still exist in modern day Nigeria.

As the book goes on, and Blessing gets more comfortable in her environment, we get to see the other characters fleshed out more - and have sympathy or at least empathy for everyone involved. The one issue I would have with the book is the ending - something that always seems to be an issue for me with books. This one has mulptiple endings - as if Watson either didn't want to let go of the book, or didn't know how to. I could kind of see the ending coming a fair bit in advance (or one of the endings), which took a little tension away for me - but a particular scene towards the end, involving all the women of the village made up for the otherwise scrappy aspect to the last 50 pages.

I may have made the book sound like a tough, or a bleak read, but it isn't. It's full of humour, well written characters. I would say there is nothing particularly original in here, but if you enjoyed Half of a Yellow Sun or Purple Hibiscus, then this would be right up your street.

"Here Comes Trouble" by Michael Moore

Here Comes Trouble - Stories From My Life

by Michael Moore

Most people already have an opinion on Michael Moore. For those on the right, he's a figure of hate, a polemicist of the worst kind. Many on the left agree with most of his politics, but doubt some of the methods he employs to get his point across. 

This book is unlikely to win over those who have no time for him now. It's not quite an autobiography - more a series of short stories based on times in his life. One has to assume some poetic licence is taken, as he is able to remember verbatim conversations he had when he was 8 years old. 

If we are to take all his stories at face value, Moore appears to have lived the worlds most liberal life. Getting lost in the US Senate as a child - he is rescued by Bobby Kennedy who helps him find his mother. His favourite teacher was a black woman, a close friend nearly died due to a back-street abortion, he did a dry run into Canada in case he needed to avoid the draft, and he was kicked out of seminary for 'asking too many questions'. 

Moore has undoubtedly lead a more interesting and exciting life than most. Aged 18 he became the youngest person in America elected to public office when he successfully ran for a school board governor position - successfully getting rid of a sadistic and violent vice-principal.  He set up and ran his own newspaper aged 20 - which ran for 6 years. He fell into documentary making when he helped some local film-makers blag their way into a neo-nazi rally, and he also blagged his way into a 3 day meeting in Mexico which was arranging the outsourcing of jobs from the US to Mexico. He's got balls, no doubt about it.

What is bothersome about this book and (for me) about Moore in general is his "aw shucks - who me?" shtick. He talks at length at the amount of hate mail and death threats he gets and acts surprised that there are people out there who feel that way. Who knew?? This faux-humble routine sees him name drop interactions with John Lennon, Richard Nixon, Ronald & Nancy Regan and countless others. He also appears to credit himself with ending institutional racism through writing an essay and is able to deliver powerful speeches on disability rights (School valedictorian speech) off the top of his head. Or maybe that's just how he remembers it.

Freddie Mercury - The Definite Biography: Lesley Ann Jones

Freddie Mercury - The Definitive Biography

by Lesley-Ann Jones

Doing a Queen or Freddie biography is a tricky thing. They were notoriously private - and Freddie was especially protective of his privacy and was conscious of protecting his friends and family from the media glare. There's also the fact that, y'know - Freddie has been dead for 20 years. How much new information can you come up with? In fact, since his death, there's been quite a number of Queen/Freddie biographies ( I know, because Jones references about 10 of them herself) and this book isn't the first to suggest it is the 'definitive' one. 

Having said that, I've never actually read any of the previous books - and I have been a Queen fan for most of my life. There's actually not much I know about Queen on a personal level, so I was very keen to give it a go. 

Lesley Ann Jones was the 'Rock Correspondent' for the Daily Mail back when newspapers actually paid people to be Rock Correspondents and back when working for the Daily Mail wasn't quite as embarrassing and reprehensible as it might be today. 

I think if you want to claim that your version is the definitive, you need to get hold of people who haven't spoken to biographers before, or to people who were very close to Queen and to Freddie. Jones only half succeeds here. She speaks at length to long time Queen manager: Jim Beach, 5th member of Queen: Spike Edney and various other producers, managers and lovers - including Barbara Valentin (one of the 2 women that Freddie was apparently sexually active with) and Jim Hutton who was his partner for the last 10 years of his life. Crucially though, she gets nothing new from May, Taylor or Deacon, nothing from Mary Austin - his long time companion/girlfriend and quotes from people like Elton John, George Michael and Bob Geldof are taken from books and magazines (can it really be that hard to get Bob Geldof to talk for 10 minutes?). Instead we get Rick Wakeman and Dave Clarke. 

In general, its a curious though mostly interesting book. It feels very uneven in terms of areas that she chooses to go into detail about, and those she doesn't. I guess you have to use the information you have. 

For example, there's very little at all about the creative process or studio work behind any of Queen's or Freddies albums. There's about 3 pages out of 350 covering the writing, making and releasing of "A Kind of Magic", "The Miracle" and "Innuendo", whereas Freddie's nightclubbing and partying antics in New York get acres of space. Obviously being a wild party animal was part of the attraction and interest in Freddie, but he was actually primarily a musician - something that seems to come a distant second in this book. 

One of the main themes in the book is Freddie's struggle with his sexuality. His families faith and culture were disapproving of homosexuality - and from a young age, he was dispatched off to boarding school - making him desperate for his parents love and therefore not wanting to shame them. For all of his adult life he seems to want to be heterosexual, but quite plainly isn't - finally becoming more comfortable with it in later life. There is a suggestion that because he had low self esteem and was ashamed of his sexuality, he was never really careful about who he slept with and never really had self-preservation in mind. 

For me, the most interesting part of the book is around Live Aid - undoubtedly Queen's finest moment. They were an extremely hard working and organised band - they were one of the few acts to rehearse their Live Aid performance, and once of the few to bring their own sound engineer to manage their 20 minute slot - this is the sort of info I could have done with more of. 

"The Radleys" by Matt Haig

I seem to be falling into a pattern with my reading habits. It's either factual (popular science, economics, sociology) or it's horror. It's like the 17 year old Stephen King fan in me is fighting with the old man youth worker I am now. 

Anyway, this is another one of those 'clever twist on the vampire mythology' books that I seem to be a sucker for (pun intended).

The Radleys are a seemingly ordinary family living in a nice pleasant middle-class village. The parents try desperately to fit in with their peers through dinner parties, book groups and listening to Radio 4. Their teenage children are angsty misfits who are bullied, uncomfortable with opposite sex and dabble in poetry and veganism. So, just like every other family, right? Except of course, the Radleys are vampires - albeit Abstaining vampires.

In this mythology, it is possible for a vampire to survive by abstaining - those who have a conscience about killing to live, can choose to abstain. They'll spend the rest of their lives like an addict craving their next hit, they'll be weak and their lifespans will be terribly shortened - in other words, they'll be like most normal humans (or 'unbloods'). The sun doesn't kill them, but brings them out in a rash, and crucifixes do nothing. Garlic and stakes are still to be avoided though.

There are 2 things going on in this book. There is the story, and there is the METAPHOR. I use capitals deliberately.

The story is amusing and very easy to read - Haig writes very small chapters, making it easy to whizz through. He seems to have particular empathy with the teenage Radley children, giving them most of the emotional issues and danger. There are some clever bits - a specialist police force who negotiate with the vampire hirearchy on who they can arrest or not, and the constant referring to of who was a vampire through history (Hendrix, Byron etc).

Then there is the METAPHOR. Maybe I'm being unkind in suggesting it's a little heavy handed - I'm guessing he wasn't really trying to make a cutting social satire. But hey, no-one really feels like they fit in - we're all outsiders when you think about it, yeah? Especially teenagers - they all feel like outcasts. Uh-huh. I did enjoy the concept of an abstaining teenage vampire choosing to become vegan in an effort to stop animals running away from her though.

I believe the rights to it have been purchased by Alfonso Cuaron - who directed 'Children of Men' and one of the Harry Potter movies, and I imagine it'll make a fun film or mini tv series. I also note that when it was originally released, it was done so as adult fiction, but it's being repackaged as a 'young adult' novel now. I'm glad the copy I have has the 'adult' cover on it, so I don't feel like a nonce.

'Chavs: The Demonization of The Working Class' - by Owen Jones

For my third book this year, I've gone back to my more regular territory of factual books. If you write popular science, politics or economics, then I'm your man. If your view point is "questioning what is currently the norm", then I'm doubly your man.

 'Chavs' fits nicely into both of these pigeon-holes. It starts by asking the questions "why has it become ok to make 'chav' jokes - to mock people who are poorer than us"? Of course the response to this question is that Chavs are not the working class, but a particular type of troublemaking, dole claiming, drinking, dog fighting, Burberry wearing 'underclass'. The sort of people who don't want to work - exist on benefits, get pregnant when they are 15, get arrested and ASBO'd all the time.

What has happened in the last 30 years, Jones argues, is that the stereotypical chav image has now become seen as the 'norm'. A huge percentage of today's print and broadcast journalists come from middle and upper class backgrounds, so very few of them have any sort of perspective about working class life.

Jones says that in past generations - being working class was at least respected. Entire towns and communities were working class. Being working class meant having a trade - working in a mine, a factory and so on. Since the decline of British industry - starting in the 70's, these trades and with them the communities, have gone. They have been replaced by lower paid and less secure jobs. There is far less dignity or security in working in a call centre, than working on a Ford assembly line or even down a mine.

In fact, the concept of 'Chavs' (either a Roma Gypsy word or short of Council Housed and Vermin) is just the jumping off point - and the real subject of the book is the decline of the working class in the last 30 years. Though The Tories get most of the blame for this, New (and Old) Labour don't get away very easily either.

Jones is at his best when he using an impressive array of verifiable independent facts and statistics. He points out that Benefits cheats get a huge amount of press and attention - costing £1bn in lost revenue. He counters by observing the amount of Benefits that could be claimed each year, but are not, totals £17bn, and the governments own figures for revenue lost by tax evasion and avoidance is £70bn. It's also interesting to note that despite many newspapers screaming about benefits cheats - about 7000 people get prosecuted for it every year - a pretty small amount.

I don't agree with everything Jones has to say - he loses his way when he moves from facts into opinion. He suggests that programmes like Little Britain (Vicky Pollard) and Harry Enfield (The Slobs),
did their bit to demonise the working class, but both programmes also slagged off wealthy idiots too. He comes close to talking complete nonsense when suggesting that back in the 1990s, you couldn't move for working class bands like Oasis and the Verve (forgetting poshos like Radiohead and Blur) but these days it was all middle class like Coldplay and Keane. Leaving aside that it's been about 8 years since Keane dented the charts, popular acts continue to be a mix of the classes - off the top of my head: Plan B, Adele, Dizzee Rascal and The Arctic Monkeys are all what could be termed 'working class'.

The other main issue I have with the book is that though it is divided up into chapters, I don't really get the feeling that each chapter has a different narrative. It's mostly the same thing in each chapter. It feels like a really long essay, and though there are huge chunks of it that are very interesting and worth reading, you forget so much of it, and you forget where the interesting bit you wanted to go back to, was.

What it succeeded in doing for me - was highlighting the fact that overwhelmingly, the coverage that working class people get these days, is negative. The vast majority of people in poverty actually do have a job. The vast majority of those who don't have one, would like one. We need to concentrate a lot less on the minority of feckless criminals at the bottom, and much more the feckless criminals at the top.

To quote Jones: "it used to be that a figure of 1m unemployed people was the fault of the government. Somewhere along the way, it's become the fault of the unemployed".

'Harbour' by John Ajvide Lindqvist

So, onto my second book of the year. Actually, I started it in 2011, but it's taken me bloody ages to read. Not because I thought it was rubbish or anything, but trying to read a big novel over Christmas is nigh on impossible.

So, for background flavour - this is my 3rd Linqvist book. He is best known for "Let The Right One In", which has been made into a movie (twice). LTROI was a very clever and pretty unique spin on the Vampire myth. It was more a coming of age story than anything else. After reading that, I read 'Handling The Undead'. If describing LTROI as a vampire book was underselling it, then I'll equally undersell HTU by calling it a zombie book - but again, it was more to do with how humans deal with death and loss than anything else.

So, to 'Harbour'. A 5 year old girl completely vanishes on a small Swedish island, and her distraught father can't accept that she is gone - stumbling around trying to find the truth. I'm not a writer or a journalist, so I fear I will struggle to boil down the next 600 odd pages into a paragraph or 2 of review.

Suffice to say it involves old secrets, the sea demanding sacrifices, conjuring tricks, loss, and of course evil water zombies who speak entirely in Morrisey lyrics.

Did I like it? Yes - but only sort of. I felt it was about 150 pages too long. Another review I read, suggested that this book came out too soon as he was becoming more popular, and would have benefitted from a few more rewrites. Like 'Handling The Undead', I thought the ending didn't quite work either.

'The Good Man Jesus & The Scoundrel Christ' by Phillip Pullman

I wasn't sure what to expect from this book. I knew Pullman from his 'Dark Materials' trilogy - one of those stories written in theory for young adults, but actually read by people of all ages - including me.

With those books, Pullman had achieved success in so far as he had written fantasy books that I actually read and enjoyed. Though I enjoy fantasy and sci-fi films and TV shows, I rarely enjoy them as novels. I had also never read anything that Pullman had written for adults.

Anyway, one of the themes of the 'Dark Materials' books was how organised religion perverts individual faith and belief for its own end. Since rising to fame with these books, Pullman has become a well-known voice for "new athiesim" - Generally not as strident as a Dawkins or a Hitchens, but outspoken nontheless.

So, all of this was the background I had going into this book. The basic idea is that Pullman has written an alternative version of the life and times of Jesus Christ. On the surface, his conceit is that Mary had 2 sons: Jesus & Christ. Jesus was a normal child who became a popular evangelist and man of the people. Christ was a quiet studious and devout child who became the documentarian of Jesus's life.

Of course, what it is really about is how personal faith is different to organised religion, how history and truth are very different things, how stories change each time they are told and how circumstances can turn people into something they are not.

Pullman's real skill here is writing a book that has something in it for both believers and athiests. I imagine if you are an enthusiastic member of an organised religion there are things you can take offence at, but if your belief system is more open or personal, then there is a lot to chew on here. Despite being an Athiest, Pullman never mocks those that do believe, but he does poke and prod and asks difficult questions.

All of this makes the book sound like it is a heavy treatise on belief and spirituality. It's actually a very easy read. You will probably know most of the story already, and if you are like me, then you'll enjoy the deviations that Pullman takes from the better known version. There are of course, far more than 4 Gospels in existence, and Pullman writes as if he is just writing another version of the Gospel.

I'm guessing that most of the people who have read this book will have been confirmed athiests - which is a shame as perhaps the real target audience is those who 'sort of' believe.

Anyway, as my first book of 2012, I can't recommend it highly enough.