Search
Gardens and Gardeners of the Ancient World: History, Myth and Archaeology
Book
A beautifully illustrated book tracing the beginning of gardening and garden history, from Ancient...
The House of Odysseus
9.0
Rate It
Book
From the author of the critically acclaimed Ithaca - A Sunday Times Historical Fiction Book of the...
Historical fiction Greek mythology
Rachel King (13 KP) rated A Short History of Myth in Books
Feb 11, 2019
For such a short book, I developed quite a strong opinion about the text while reading it. I have been curious about Armstrong's writings for a long time, but this is the first attempt I have made at actually reading anything by her. I have always been a fan of ancient mythology, such as Greek and Egyptian, so this seemed like an easy choice.
In seven chapters, Armstrong takes a simplified stroll through history, focusing on the concept of myth and its impact on civilization. All throughout the book, she attempts to support her claim that a person can believe in myths without believing that the myths are actually true, and that the failure of modern society is by not following her specific edict. While this notion strikes me as absurd, I keep reading because, hey, it's a short book.
While I know only bits and pieces about many of the world's religions, I do know both the history and the holy book of my religion, Christianity. It becomes apparent to me early in the text that she is masking her opinions and interpretations of this religion as actual fact, so I can only imagine how she misconstrues other religions.
Her citations were lacking to me, with many claims going unsupported, others only partially supported, such as citation #84 and #30, and some citations simply not even applying to the specified text, such as citation #87. In citation #55, she claims that the Bible contains a Creation myth in which God brings the world into being by killing a sea monster, but one of the four verses she cites make no reference to anything of the sort (Job 3:12), and the other three (Isaiah 27:1, Job 26:13, Psalm 74:14) that do mention a leviathan cannot be interpreted that way when read in context. Isaiah is describing the end of days, while Job merely says that God created the serpent, and the verse in Psalm is within the context of a song about God rescuing the Hebrews from Egyptian slavery -- no relevancy to Creation. She makes the claim that Paul "was not much interested in Jesus's teachings, which he rarely quotes, or in the events of his earthly life." This claim is easily disproved by examining how Paul's words line up with Jesus's in John 5:21 vs. 1 Corinthians 15:22, Matthew 6:25 vs. Philippians 4:6, and many other passages.
While going through the citations, I got the feeling that the author depended on secondary sources for her information without actually studying the original source of her information. The book struck me as highly opinionated, vague, and too general for the topic being addressed. I have no doubt that there are better and more thorough books available on the topic of myth. I do not believe that I will be reading any more of Armstrong's works in the future.
In seven chapters, Armstrong takes a simplified stroll through history, focusing on the concept of myth and its impact on civilization. All throughout the book, she attempts to support her claim that a person can believe in myths without believing that the myths are actually true, and that the failure of modern society is by not following her specific edict. While this notion strikes me as absurd, I keep reading because, hey, it's a short book.
While I know only bits and pieces about many of the world's religions, I do know both the history and the holy book of my religion, Christianity. It becomes apparent to me early in the text that she is masking her opinions and interpretations of this religion as actual fact, so I can only imagine how she misconstrues other religions.
Her citations were lacking to me, with many claims going unsupported, others only partially supported, such as citation #84 and #30, and some citations simply not even applying to the specified text, such as citation #87. In citation #55, she claims that the Bible contains a Creation myth in which God brings the world into being by killing a sea monster, but one of the four verses she cites make no reference to anything of the sort (Job 3:12), and the other three (Isaiah 27:1, Job 26:13, Psalm 74:14) that do mention a leviathan cannot be interpreted that way when read in context. Isaiah is describing the end of days, while Job merely says that God created the serpent, and the verse in Psalm is within the context of a song about God rescuing the Hebrews from Egyptian slavery -- no relevancy to Creation. She makes the claim that Paul "was not much interested in Jesus's teachings, which he rarely quotes, or in the events of his earthly life." This claim is easily disproved by examining how Paul's words line up with Jesus's in John 5:21 vs. 1 Corinthians 15:22, Matthew 6:25 vs. Philippians 4:6, and many other passages.
While going through the citations, I got the feeling that the author depended on secondary sources for her information without actually studying the original source of her information. The book struck me as highly opinionated, vague, and too general for the topic being addressed. I have no doubt that there are better and more thorough books available on the topic of myth. I do not believe that I will be reading any more of Armstrong's works in the future.
I am I Between Worlds and Between Shadows
Book
During the last decade, the work of Greek-born artist Kalliopi Lemos exposed the wounding of human...
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated Atlantis (Jack Howard, #1) in Books
Nov 8, 2019
Books where Atlantis is assumed to have been fact are nothing new, and quite a few adventure thrillers use it as the springboard for their plots. This is hardly suprising as it is a widely known myth and a handy way of drawing the reader in.
This book takes a slightly different approach, at least initially. His archaologist hero Jack Howard finds out about an ancient text that sheds more light on the story of the sunken civilization. Gibbins then does a good job of deconstructing the myths using real evidence of Egyptian, Minoan and Greek archaeology and rebuilding into a hypothesis which leads Howard on a quest to discover the source of the myth. I really enjoyed this part of the book, the author's knowledge in this area shows in some deft explanations.
However once on the trail of Atlantis a villainous adversary appears and this is the point where the book struggles as it tries to marry an interesting and plausible story of historical investigation and a thriller. Unfortunately I didn't think this worked as the book couldn't work out what it was anymore and the change between styles was very uneaven. There is a particular segment where the heroes are being pursued into the inner sanctum of Atlantis with all haste - and then spend a long time investigating the wonders of the frescos and artefacts they find within.
To my mind Gibbins is a good writer when what he is writing about is the archaeology and historical references. This novel didn't need the added threat of the villain and it just cheapened the deal. It's not exactly a bad book, just a bit confused about its identity. Howard himself is also a confused character, being essentially a charismatic history buff he has no problem being a hard-nosed killer and also seems to shrug off potential danger to his friends and colleagues without a thought.
I read The Tiger Warrior a little while ago and enjoyed that more simply because that book concentrated on the history and the archaeology with the threats being realistic and relevant to the plot.
The unevenness in this work can perhaps be forgiven as a first novel. As the Tiger Warrior showed Gibbins does have the potential for a good book if the ingredients are right. Unfortunately this isn't it.
This book takes a slightly different approach, at least initially. His archaologist hero Jack Howard finds out about an ancient text that sheds more light on the story of the sunken civilization. Gibbins then does a good job of deconstructing the myths using real evidence of Egyptian, Minoan and Greek archaeology and rebuilding into a hypothesis which leads Howard on a quest to discover the source of the myth. I really enjoyed this part of the book, the author's knowledge in this area shows in some deft explanations.
However once on the trail of Atlantis a villainous adversary appears and this is the point where the book struggles as it tries to marry an interesting and plausible story of historical investigation and a thriller. Unfortunately I didn't think this worked as the book couldn't work out what it was anymore and the change between styles was very uneaven. There is a particular segment where the heroes are being pursued into the inner sanctum of Atlantis with all haste - and then spend a long time investigating the wonders of the frescos and artefacts they find within.
To my mind Gibbins is a good writer when what he is writing about is the archaeology and historical references. This novel didn't need the added threat of the villain and it just cheapened the deal. It's not exactly a bad book, just a bit confused about its identity. Howard himself is also a confused character, being essentially a charismatic history buff he has no problem being a hard-nosed killer and also seems to shrug off potential danger to his friends and colleagues without a thought.
I read The Tiger Warrior a little while ago and enjoyed that more simply because that book concentrated on the history and the archaeology with the threats being realistic and relevant to the plot.
The unevenness in this work can perhaps be forgiven as a first novel. As the Tiger Warrior showed Gibbins does have the potential for a good book if the ingredients are right. Unfortunately this isn't it.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated This Poison Heart in Books
Jul 8, 2021
Wonderful and captivating YA fantasy
Briseis knows she has a rare gift--with just a touch, she can grow plants. But this gift also attracts attention. So when she inherits an estate in rural New York from a relative, Briseis and her moms see this as a chance to get away and perhaps learn to control her power. Upon arriving at her new home, Briseis finds it to be beautiful--and mysterious. The property is filled with secret gardens and the house itself with notes and clues about her family's past. Then the local townsfolk start showing up at Briseis' doorstep, and she realizes the house once served as an apothecary. Briseis has an uncanny knack for whipping up the healing potions everyone desires, but the more she investigates, she realizes there is a darker side to the house and its powers. One that could have dangerous consequences for Briseis and her entire family.
"I was pretty sure that growing a poisonous bush in the park wasn't what they had in mind for how I should spend my summer."
This was a completely awesome book! The story is totally engrossing. There are poisonous plants, secret gardens, Greek mythology, and a gothic vibe--what's not to love? Briseis is an amazing character. She's strong, brave, and tough; she's also bisexual and loved unconditionally by her two moms, Mom and Mo. The book offers such a great family dynamic, with an excellent attitude toward adoption. It's no big deal that Bri is bi or that she has two Moms--it's just a fact of life. How I appreciate that in a YA book.
"'Did I--did I inherit the Addams Family Mansion?'"
I've read several books lately with Greek mythology and didn't care for them, but this one broke the mold. The stories are woven in perfectly and add to the plot flawlessly. The story is completely captivating and I loved all the strong women in it. It's also part mystery, part myth, which adds to the page-turning aspect. (Be forewarned, this is book #1, so this ends on a bit of a cliffhanger.)
Overall, cannot recommend this book enough. It's a unique and mesmerizing fantasy. The fact that it's so queer inclusive is lovely. I'll be impatiently waiting for book #2. 4.5 stars.
"I was pretty sure that growing a poisonous bush in the park wasn't what they had in mind for how I should spend my summer."
This was a completely awesome book! The story is totally engrossing. There are poisonous plants, secret gardens, Greek mythology, and a gothic vibe--what's not to love? Briseis is an amazing character. She's strong, brave, and tough; she's also bisexual and loved unconditionally by her two moms, Mom and Mo. The book offers such a great family dynamic, with an excellent attitude toward adoption. It's no big deal that Bri is bi or that she has two Moms--it's just a fact of life. How I appreciate that in a YA book.
"'Did I--did I inherit the Addams Family Mansion?'"
I've read several books lately with Greek mythology and didn't care for them, but this one broke the mold. The stories are woven in perfectly and add to the plot flawlessly. The story is completely captivating and I loved all the strong women in it. It's also part mystery, part myth, which adds to the page-turning aspect. (Be forewarned, this is book #1, so this ends on a bit of a cliffhanger.)
Overall, cannot recommend this book enough. It's a unique and mesmerizing fantasy. The fact that it's so queer inclusive is lovely. I'll be impatiently waiting for book #2. 4.5 stars.
Kyera (8 KP) rated The Star-Touched Queen (The Star-Touched Queen, #1) in Books
Feb 1, 2018
The Star-Touched Queen is a little slow to start, but once it finds a groove the story will draw you in and you won't want to put it down. The writing style is very poetic and descriptive, which is absolutely gorgeous but can sometimes slow down the story. Those pacing issues continue throughout the story. Sometimes the book flows well and you find yourself reading through chapters in no time, while other times the writing or plot trips you up and slows down the story.
I was very intrigued by the premise of the story, as not only does it include elements of Indian folklore but it is a re-telling of the Hades and Persephone myth. As a huge fan of Greek mythology, that was the aspect of the story that I was most excited to experience. Amar and Maya are our Hades and Persephone, although it is a unique story and you don't feel like you're reading a re-telling.
As strange as it seems, my favourite character was actually the demon horse Kamala. Although she could be really creepy when she salivated over eating people, she could be funny and made some of the scenes for me. Although I liked Amar, Maya and the other supporting characters I didn't relate strongly to any of them so it made me less invested in the book. I wish I did like them more because I would have loved to have stronger feelings about this gorgeous book.
Overall, I really enjoyed reading this book and would recommend it - but it didn't make any strong or lasting impact on me. Readers who are fans of flowery prose and very descriptive writing will enjoy Roshani Chokshi's writing style, but if you are a fan of more simple sentences you might have difficultly getting through this book.
I was very intrigued by the premise of the story, as not only does it include elements of Indian folklore but it is a re-telling of the Hades and Persephone myth. As a huge fan of Greek mythology, that was the aspect of the story that I was most excited to experience. Amar and Maya are our Hades and Persephone, although it is a unique story and you don't feel like you're reading a re-telling.
As strange as it seems, my favourite character was actually the demon horse Kamala. Although she could be really creepy when she salivated over eating people, she could be funny and made some of the scenes for me. Although I liked Amar, Maya and the other supporting characters I didn't relate strongly to any of them so it made me less invested in the book. I wish I did like them more because I would have loved to have stronger feelings about this gorgeous book.
Overall, I really enjoyed reading this book and would recommend it - but it didn't make any strong or lasting impact on me. Readers who are fans of flowery prose and very descriptive writing will enjoy Roshani Chokshi's writing style, but if you are a fan of more simple sentences you might have difficultly getting through this book.
The Women of Troy
9.0
Rate It
Book
Following her bestselling, critically acclaimed The Silence of the Girls, Pat Barker continues her...
Mythology Greek Mythology Folk Tales Myths and Fairy Tales
Deconstructing Gurdjieff: Biography of a Spiritual Magician
Book
In November 1949, architect Frank Lloyd Wright announced the death of "the greatest man in the...
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Aquaman (2018) in Movies
Jun 8, 2019
"war is coming to the surface"
Aquaman is absolutely a disciple of the superhero formula we've seen used, reused and recycled over the past couple decades...but its formula done right. There's an inherent lunacy to a hero like Aquaman; his myth is built upon a lost Atlantean culture that's simultaneously advanced technologically and heavily influenced by ancient Greek mythology, and his powers included near-Superman levels of strength and invulnerability existing alongside an ability to communicate with marine life. This makes approaching his story from a gritty, realistic perspective damn near impossible.
Instead Wan and the writers behind Aquaman intelligently focus on world-building and following the tried-and-true "heroic journey"; complete with initial rejection of a prophesied role, slow but steady immersion into said role's culture, recognition of the need for growth and change, and eventual assumption of role. It's been seen before and it'll be seen again. But what propels Aquaman ahead of other films like it is the energy that Wan imbues it with. It's goofy without undermining the sincerity of Arthur's journey. It's fast-paced and simple-minded without sacrificing the weight and universality of this particular hero's myth. It's loud and colorful and *full* of CGI everything without reducing itself to an over-commercialized, artless heap of nothingness.
It's a big-ass blockbuster with personality. Momoa has charisma to spare; he owns the physicality and irreverence of this new imagining of the king of the ocean perfectly. Amber Heard is sexy and badass as Mera; something of a victim of a forced romance but also a compelling and strong protagonist in her own right. Patrick Wilson as Oceanmaster (call me....Oceanmaster) is given enough screen-time to develop that he's more than a punching bag for Aquaman; but actually a character with ambitions and a defined, fleshed-out purpose. The origin segment is tightly done and more than enough to set the stage for what is to come. And probably the strongest aspect of this picture, the costuming and world-building, is off the charts. Similar to the enduring fantasy films that precede this (LOTR, Star Wars, Avatar for a few examples) the undersea kingdoms are a place I want to return to. They aren't just my world dressed up with CGI and the occasional costuming flourish; they're entirely foreign and endlessly inventive. Probably a solid third of the film is simply Aquaman, and the audience, being told about this world and shown it by Mera. While that may not be artistically prestigious strategy for engaging audiences, it entertains and fascinates on a "turn off your brain and look at those pretty colors" sort of way. There's a simple glee in seeing sharks ridden like horses or an octopus pounding a war-time set of drums.
I always offer the disclaimer when writing about nerdy films that I love which is this: I am a nerd. While I wasn't particularly attached to Aquaman growing up; his journey, the nature of this sort of film and the cinematic universe he will be growing into are fundamentally important to me, and I like to embrace that bias rather than keep it in check with reduced ratings or "objective" analysis. Whether it be a giant, confusing and chaotic battle between underwater armies or the horrifying descent into "the trench"; you'll always find me looking up at the screen like a little kid. Or moments like Arthur meeting Mera and confronting is past, or taking upon the role of king while wielding the trident; I just love that sort of stuff. I'm a sucker for these beats and this formula; and all signs point to this continuing. So while I may like it more than most; I'd mostly like to say Aquaman still distinguishes itself as a particularly goofy, sprawling, mythic, and metal experience that deserved to be seen on the big-screen, and to be celebrated as the fantasy film it is. It's a great time, and a nice addition to the DC film franchise.
Instead Wan and the writers behind Aquaman intelligently focus on world-building and following the tried-and-true "heroic journey"; complete with initial rejection of a prophesied role, slow but steady immersion into said role's culture, recognition of the need for growth and change, and eventual assumption of role. It's been seen before and it'll be seen again. But what propels Aquaman ahead of other films like it is the energy that Wan imbues it with. It's goofy without undermining the sincerity of Arthur's journey. It's fast-paced and simple-minded without sacrificing the weight and universality of this particular hero's myth. It's loud and colorful and *full* of CGI everything without reducing itself to an over-commercialized, artless heap of nothingness.
It's a big-ass blockbuster with personality. Momoa has charisma to spare; he owns the physicality and irreverence of this new imagining of the king of the ocean perfectly. Amber Heard is sexy and badass as Mera; something of a victim of a forced romance but also a compelling and strong protagonist in her own right. Patrick Wilson as Oceanmaster (call me....Oceanmaster) is given enough screen-time to develop that he's more than a punching bag for Aquaman; but actually a character with ambitions and a defined, fleshed-out purpose. The origin segment is tightly done and more than enough to set the stage for what is to come. And probably the strongest aspect of this picture, the costuming and world-building, is off the charts. Similar to the enduring fantasy films that precede this (LOTR, Star Wars, Avatar for a few examples) the undersea kingdoms are a place I want to return to. They aren't just my world dressed up with CGI and the occasional costuming flourish; they're entirely foreign and endlessly inventive. Probably a solid third of the film is simply Aquaman, and the audience, being told about this world and shown it by Mera. While that may not be artistically prestigious strategy for engaging audiences, it entertains and fascinates on a "turn off your brain and look at those pretty colors" sort of way. There's a simple glee in seeing sharks ridden like horses or an octopus pounding a war-time set of drums.
I always offer the disclaimer when writing about nerdy films that I love which is this: I am a nerd. While I wasn't particularly attached to Aquaman growing up; his journey, the nature of this sort of film and the cinematic universe he will be growing into are fundamentally important to me, and I like to embrace that bias rather than keep it in check with reduced ratings or "objective" analysis. Whether it be a giant, confusing and chaotic battle between underwater armies or the horrifying descent into "the trench"; you'll always find me looking up at the screen like a little kid. Or moments like Arthur meeting Mera and confronting is past, or taking upon the role of king while wielding the trident; I just love that sort of stuff. I'm a sucker for these beats and this formula; and all signs point to this continuing. So while I may like it more than most; I'd mostly like to say Aquaman still distinguishes itself as a particularly goofy, sprawling, mythic, and metal experience that deserved to be seen on the big-screen, and to be celebrated as the fantasy film it is. It's a great time, and a nice addition to the DC film franchise.