Search
Search results
Hazel (1853 KP) rated God: A Human History in Books
Nov 5, 2017
An Ambiguous History
I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
Where did religion come from? This is the question Reza Aslan, a scholar of religions, attempts to answer in his latest publication, God: A Human History. To date, Aslan has tackled subjects such as the life of Jesus of Nazareth, and the origins, evolution and future of Islam. In this book, the author journeys back to the earliest evidence of human existence and, using a mix of resources, theories and investigations, tries to determine how our ancestors conceived the idea of gods and souls. Maintaining the idea that the majority of humans think of God as a divine version of ourselves, Aslan also looks at the way our perception of life after death has altered due to the changes in our governments and cultures.
Reza Aslan claims that he, a Muslim-devout-Christian-convert-turned-Sufi, is neither trying to prove or disprove the existence of God or gods. Instead, he is providing readers with a thorough history of religion with a strong suggestion that we, as believers, have fashioned God in our image, and not the other way around.
Insisting that belief systems are inherited from each previous generation, Aslan takes a look at ancient cave drawings where he, and many other theorists, surmise that a form of religion was already well underway. Lack of written word results in a lot of speculation and hypothesis as to what these, usually animal-like, drawings represent, however, many have come to the conclusion that early humans had some form of animistic belief system.
Although not a dig at religion, after all, the author is religious himself, the following chapters bring in to question the authenticity of past and present beliefs. With reference to various psychologists, Aslan poses the theory that ancient humans may have misinterpreted dreams as evidence of a spirit realm. With no one qualified to clarify the things they did not understand, anything without a clear explanation may have been attributed to a god or gods.
As the author describes how religious ideas may have developed from these primitive beliefs to the fully detailed faiths of today, he labels the human race as anthropocentric creatures that have based their religions on human traits and emotions. By reporting in this way, it comes across that the past ideas of the soul, spiritual realms, gods and so forth could not possibly be true, yet, as the final chapters suggest, Aslan is still adamant about the existence of God.
Aslan’s narrative speeds up, finally reaching the recognizable religions of today. Beginning with the Israelites, enslaved by the Egyptians, the author explains, using biblical references, how the first successful monotheistic religion came about. However, researchers have studied the early Bible texts and are inconclusive as to whether the God worshipped by the Jews was the only divine being or whether there were others of a similar standing.
Next, Aslan explores Christianity, posing more questions than he solves, for example, is God one or is God three (i.e. the Holy Trinity)? He defines and compares the definitions of monotheism and pantheism, eventually bringing in Islam and the development of Sufism, which he is not afraid of admitting he agrees with.
God: A Human History is disappointingly short, ending with the feeble conclusion that humans are born with the ability to be convinced of the existence of a divine being and the soul, but it is our own choice to decide whether or not to believe in them. The remaining third of the book is an abundance of notes on the texts, bibliographical references, and Reza Aslan’s personal opinions about the ideas and theories mentioned in his history of religion.
Although an extensive history on the origins of religion, God: A Human History leaves readers none the wiser as to whether their belief is founded in truth or whether it is something that has evolved over time due to lack of understanding about the world. Granted, it was not the aim of the book to prove or disprove the existence of God, however, it may unintentionally sow seeds of doubt or, potentially, anger devout believers. However, there is no attempt at persuading readers to believe one thing or another, thus making it suitable for people of all religion and none.
Where did religion come from? This is the question Reza Aslan, a scholar of religions, attempts to answer in his latest publication, God: A Human History. To date, Aslan has tackled subjects such as the life of Jesus of Nazareth, and the origins, evolution and future of Islam. In this book, the author journeys back to the earliest evidence of human existence and, using a mix of resources, theories and investigations, tries to determine how our ancestors conceived the idea of gods and souls. Maintaining the idea that the majority of humans think of God as a divine version of ourselves, Aslan also looks at the way our perception of life after death has altered due to the changes in our governments and cultures.
Reza Aslan claims that he, a Muslim-devout-Christian-convert-turned-Sufi, is neither trying to prove or disprove the existence of God or gods. Instead, he is providing readers with a thorough history of religion with a strong suggestion that we, as believers, have fashioned God in our image, and not the other way around.
Insisting that belief systems are inherited from each previous generation, Aslan takes a look at ancient cave drawings where he, and many other theorists, surmise that a form of religion was already well underway. Lack of written word results in a lot of speculation and hypothesis as to what these, usually animal-like, drawings represent, however, many have come to the conclusion that early humans had some form of animistic belief system.
Although not a dig at religion, after all, the author is religious himself, the following chapters bring in to question the authenticity of past and present beliefs. With reference to various psychologists, Aslan poses the theory that ancient humans may have misinterpreted dreams as evidence of a spirit realm. With no one qualified to clarify the things they did not understand, anything without a clear explanation may have been attributed to a god or gods.
As the author describes how religious ideas may have developed from these primitive beliefs to the fully detailed faiths of today, he labels the human race as anthropocentric creatures that have based their religions on human traits and emotions. By reporting in this way, it comes across that the past ideas of the soul, spiritual realms, gods and so forth could not possibly be true, yet, as the final chapters suggest, Aslan is still adamant about the existence of God.
Aslan’s narrative speeds up, finally reaching the recognizable religions of today. Beginning with the Israelites, enslaved by the Egyptians, the author explains, using biblical references, how the first successful monotheistic religion came about. However, researchers have studied the early Bible texts and are inconclusive as to whether the God worshipped by the Jews was the only divine being or whether there were others of a similar standing.
Next, Aslan explores Christianity, posing more questions than he solves, for example, is God one or is God three (i.e. the Holy Trinity)? He defines and compares the definitions of monotheism and pantheism, eventually bringing in Islam and the development of Sufism, which he is not afraid of admitting he agrees with.
God: A Human History is disappointingly short, ending with the feeble conclusion that humans are born with the ability to be convinced of the existence of a divine being and the soul, but it is our own choice to decide whether or not to believe in them. The remaining third of the book is an abundance of notes on the texts, bibliographical references, and Reza Aslan’s personal opinions about the ideas and theories mentioned in his history of religion.
Although an extensive history on the origins of religion, God: A Human History leaves readers none the wiser as to whether their belief is founded in truth or whether it is something that has evolved over time due to lack of understanding about the world. Granted, it was not the aim of the book to prove or disprove the existence of God, however, it may unintentionally sow seeds of doubt or, potentially, anger devout believers. However, there is no attempt at persuading readers to believe one thing or another, thus making it suitable for people of all religion and none.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated God: A Human History in Books
Dec 7, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.
</i>
Where did religion come from? This is the question Reza Aslan, a scholar of religions, attempts to answer in his latest publication, <i>God: A Human History.</i> To date, Aslan has tackled subjects such as the life of Jesus of Nazareth, and the origins, evolution and future of Islam. In this book, the author journeys back to the earliest evidence of human existence and, using a mix of resources, theories and investigations, tries to determine how our ancestors conceived the idea of gods and souls. Maintaining the idea that the majority of humans think of God as a divine version of ourselves, Aslan also looks at the way our perception of life after death has altered due to the changes in our governments and cultures.
Reza Aslan claims that he, a Muslim-devout-Christian-convert-turned-Sufi, is neither trying to prove or disprove the existence of God or gods. Instead, he is providing readers with a thorough history of religion with a strong suggestion that we, as believers, have fashioned God in our image, and not the other way around.
Insisting that belief systems are inherited from each previous generation, Aslan takes a look at ancient cave drawings where he, and many other theorists, surmise that a form of religion was already well underway. Lack of written word results in a lot of speculation and hypothesis as to what these, usually animal-like, drawings represent, however, many have come to the conclusion that early humans had some form of animistic belief system.
Although not a dig at religion, after all, the author is religious himself, the following chapters bring in to question the authenticity of past and present beliefs. With reference to various psychologists, Aslan poses the theory that ancient humans may have misinterpreted dreams as evidence of a spirit realm. With no one qualified to clarify the things they did not understand, anything without a clear explanation may have been attributed to a god or gods.
As the author describes how religious ideas may have developed from these primitive beliefs to the fully detailed faiths of today, he labels the human race as anthropocentric creatures that have based their religions on human traits and emotions. By reporting in this way, it comes across that the past ideas of the soul, spiritual realms, gods and so forth could not possibly be true, yet, as the final chapters suggest, Aslan is still adamant about the existence of God.
Aslan’s narrative speeds up, finally reaching the recognizable religions of today. Beginning with the Israelites, enslaved by the Egyptians, the author explains, using biblical references, how the first successful monotheistic religion came about. However, researchers have studied the early Bible texts and are inconclusive as to whether the God worshipped by the Jews was the only divine being or whether there were others of a similar standing.
Next, Aslan explores Christianity, posing more questions than he solves, for example, is God one or is God three (i.e. the Holy Trinity)? He defines and compares the definitions of monotheism and pantheism, eventually bringing in Islam and the development of Sufism, which he is not afraid of admitting he agrees with.
<i>God: A Human History </i>is disappointingly short, ending with the feeble conclusion that humans are born with the ability to be convinced of the existence of a divine being and the soul, but it is our own choice to decide whether or not to believe in them. The remaining third of the book is an abundance of notes on the texts, bibliographical references, and Reza Aslan’s personal opinions about the ideas and theories mentioned in his history of religion.
Although an extensive history on the origins of religion, <i>God: A Human History </i>leaves readers none the wiser as to whether their belief is founded in truth or whether it is something that has evolved over time due to lack of understanding about the world. Granted, it was not the aim of the book to prove or disprove the existence of God, however, it may unintentionally sow seeds of doubt or, potentially, anger devout believers. However, there is no attempt at persuading readers to believe one thing or another, thus making it suitable for people of all religion and none.
</i>
Where did religion come from? This is the question Reza Aslan, a scholar of religions, attempts to answer in his latest publication, <i>God: A Human History.</i> To date, Aslan has tackled subjects such as the life of Jesus of Nazareth, and the origins, evolution and future of Islam. In this book, the author journeys back to the earliest evidence of human existence and, using a mix of resources, theories and investigations, tries to determine how our ancestors conceived the idea of gods and souls. Maintaining the idea that the majority of humans think of God as a divine version of ourselves, Aslan also looks at the way our perception of life after death has altered due to the changes in our governments and cultures.
Reza Aslan claims that he, a Muslim-devout-Christian-convert-turned-Sufi, is neither trying to prove or disprove the existence of God or gods. Instead, he is providing readers with a thorough history of religion with a strong suggestion that we, as believers, have fashioned God in our image, and not the other way around.
Insisting that belief systems are inherited from each previous generation, Aslan takes a look at ancient cave drawings where he, and many other theorists, surmise that a form of religion was already well underway. Lack of written word results in a lot of speculation and hypothesis as to what these, usually animal-like, drawings represent, however, many have come to the conclusion that early humans had some form of animistic belief system.
Although not a dig at religion, after all, the author is religious himself, the following chapters bring in to question the authenticity of past and present beliefs. With reference to various psychologists, Aslan poses the theory that ancient humans may have misinterpreted dreams as evidence of a spirit realm. With no one qualified to clarify the things they did not understand, anything without a clear explanation may have been attributed to a god or gods.
As the author describes how religious ideas may have developed from these primitive beliefs to the fully detailed faiths of today, he labels the human race as anthropocentric creatures that have based their religions on human traits and emotions. By reporting in this way, it comes across that the past ideas of the soul, spiritual realms, gods and so forth could not possibly be true, yet, as the final chapters suggest, Aslan is still adamant about the existence of God.
Aslan’s narrative speeds up, finally reaching the recognizable religions of today. Beginning with the Israelites, enslaved by the Egyptians, the author explains, using biblical references, how the first successful monotheistic religion came about. However, researchers have studied the early Bible texts and are inconclusive as to whether the God worshipped by the Jews was the only divine being or whether there were others of a similar standing.
Next, Aslan explores Christianity, posing more questions than he solves, for example, is God one or is God three (i.e. the Holy Trinity)? He defines and compares the definitions of monotheism and pantheism, eventually bringing in Islam and the development of Sufism, which he is not afraid of admitting he agrees with.
<i>God: A Human History </i>is disappointingly short, ending with the feeble conclusion that humans are born with the ability to be convinced of the existence of a divine being and the soul, but it is our own choice to decide whether or not to believe in them. The remaining third of the book is an abundance of notes on the texts, bibliographical references, and Reza Aslan’s personal opinions about the ideas and theories mentioned in his history of religion.
Although an extensive history on the origins of religion, <i>God: A Human History </i>leaves readers none the wiser as to whether their belief is founded in truth or whether it is something that has evolved over time due to lack of understanding about the world. Granted, it was not the aim of the book to prove or disprove the existence of God, however, it may unintentionally sow seeds of doubt or, potentially, anger devout believers. However, there is no attempt at persuading readers to believe one thing or another, thus making it suitable for people of all religion and none.
Ali A (76 KP) rated How It All Blew Up in Books
Sep 8, 2020
How it All Blew Up is about Amir, a closeted, eighteen-year-old. He always knew it would be hard to come out to his Muslim family, so he hasn't. When some bullies find out and blackmail him, Amir gets scared, skips graduation, and fleas to Rome. He gets taken in by a group of new friends and he spends his summer having late nights where he can feel like himself. Until his old life comes back knocking. Now, Amir is telling the whole story, with the entire truth, to a U.S. Customs officer as his family has just been detained. Can Amir get his hard-won freedom back?
I went into this book thinking it would be a storyline I don't really see: representation of a queer Muslim in YA... I didn't really get that. Islam plays no part in this story - Amir openly admits his family isn't that religious. When asked if his parents would disapprove of him being gay, he replied:
"Yes and no. Our culture is pretty conservative, even if you're not religious."
It also went into this huge countdown leading up to what happened on the airplane and why the family is detained and when we get there... it just felt like it fell short of what it could have been. I also just didn't care much for the main character, he never really clicked with me and I honestly don't know why but I found myself rolling my eyes at a lot of his choices and reasonings.
The whole story also felt very unrealistic to me. How on Earth does an eighteen-year-old make enough money editing Wikipedia pages to get to Rome, get his own apartment, and live there a whole month? There were so many side characters that would be mentioned in passing for only a page and then never heard from again? Amir's high school boyfriend we get built up to be this whole thing, for him to just toss him aside. We had all these supposed close relationships (Amir and his sister were supposedly super close??) but everything felt surface level and not flushed out. There's an entire scene in the novel, that I won't get into because of spoilers, but it just felt wrong and had no real build up to the entire scenario besides small side remarks.
The only character I really even cared for was Amir's sister, Soraya. She was only thirteen, but she was a firecracker just waiting to be messed with. She cared for her brother, regardless of anything.
I did enjoy the back and forth of the interrogation rooms and what happened as it made it a super fast read. Apart from that though, I think the story fell short of what it could have been.
*Thank you Bookish First and Penguin Teen for a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
I went into this book thinking it would be a storyline I don't really see: representation of a queer Muslim in YA... I didn't really get that. Islam plays no part in this story - Amir openly admits his family isn't that religious. When asked if his parents would disapprove of him being gay, he replied:
"Yes and no. Our culture is pretty conservative, even if you're not religious."
It also went into this huge countdown leading up to what happened on the airplane and why the family is detained and when we get there... it just felt like it fell short of what it could have been. I also just didn't care much for the main character, he never really clicked with me and I honestly don't know why but I found myself rolling my eyes at a lot of his choices and reasonings.
The whole story also felt very unrealistic to me. How on Earth does an eighteen-year-old make enough money editing Wikipedia pages to get to Rome, get his own apartment, and live there a whole month? There were so many side characters that would be mentioned in passing for only a page and then never heard from again? Amir's high school boyfriend we get built up to be this whole thing, for him to just toss him aside. We had all these supposed close relationships (Amir and his sister were supposedly super close??) but everything felt surface level and not flushed out. There's an entire scene in the novel, that I won't get into because of spoilers, but it just felt wrong and had no real build up to the entire scenario besides small side remarks.
The only character I really even cared for was Amir's sister, Soraya. She was only thirteen, but she was a firecracker just waiting to be messed with. She cared for her brother, regardless of anything.
I did enjoy the back and forth of the interrogation rooms and what happened as it made it a super fast read. Apart from that though, I think the story fell short of what it could have been.
*Thank you Bookish First and Penguin Teen for a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated Return to the Little Coffee Shop of Kabul (The Little Coffee Shop of Kabul #2) in Books
Dec 14, 2018
<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>
Five years since the publication of her fictional debut, fans of Deoborah Rodriguez will be pleased to know they can finally get their hands on the sequel: Return to the <i>Little Coffee Shop of Kabul</i>. In the first book (<i>The Little Coffee Shop of Kabul</i>) we are introduced to Sunny, a 38-year-old American, who has set up a coffee shop in the heart of Afghanistan. Now she has returned to the US, after the unfortunate death of her boyfriend, to a house on an island she did not really want. Meanwhile, her coffee shop struggles to continue in the hands of her Afghan friends.
The narrative alternates between the USA and Afghanistan, keeping the reader informed of two completely different scenarios. Sunny is dealing with the loss of Jack and her conflicted feelings over whether she should stay and live Jack’s dream lifestyle or return to her beloved Kabul. On the other hand, Yazmina and the others reveal to the reader how difficult and dangerous life is for the Afghanistan natives, especially for the women who have very little rights.
As well as the original characters, there are a number of new names introduced to the story. In Afghanistan a young girl is trying to escape an arranged marriage to an evil, rich man – something that has disastrous consequences for herself and her newfound friends. On the other side of the world, Layla, Yazmina’s sister, is experiencing Western culture living with Sunny, and is shocked at how friendly men and women are with each other.
Another new face to add to the mix is Kat, a young woman who escaped to America as a child and has turned her back on the traditions of Islam and the Afghan culture. Despite her growing friendship with Layla, she refuses to agree with Layla’s beliefs, particularly in regards to the <i>hijab</i>. Neither girl’s opinion is more valid than the other however, as they have both had completely different upbringings. Kat has spent the better part of her life relishing in the freedom of Western culture, whereas Layla finds comfort in her traditions.
<i>Return to the Little Coffee Shop of Kabul </i>contains a couple of powerful messages. Firstly, as Sunny realizes, you need to be thankful for what you have got and not assume that going back to a lifestyle you used to follow would be the same as it once was. On the flip side, the Muslim family in Kabul begins to learn that they do not have to put up with the strict, unfairness in the treatment of women, and can strive to do something about it.
It is not necessary to have read the previous book, as there is enough character description and history mentioned within the narrative for new readers to be able to follow along. It is also suitable for book groups as it contains a series of reading group questions at the end of the novel.
Despite its upsetting scenes,<i> Return to the Little Coffee Shop of Kabul </i>is essentially a happy book. The character Sunny, definitely lives up to her name; there is no over emphasis on any of the negative situations she or her friends find themselves in. In a world where it would be easy to fall into despair, Rodriguez has written a story with a positive outlook on life and hope for the future.
Five years since the publication of her fictional debut, fans of Deoborah Rodriguez will be pleased to know they can finally get their hands on the sequel: Return to the <i>Little Coffee Shop of Kabul</i>. In the first book (<i>The Little Coffee Shop of Kabul</i>) we are introduced to Sunny, a 38-year-old American, who has set up a coffee shop in the heart of Afghanistan. Now she has returned to the US, after the unfortunate death of her boyfriend, to a house on an island she did not really want. Meanwhile, her coffee shop struggles to continue in the hands of her Afghan friends.
The narrative alternates between the USA and Afghanistan, keeping the reader informed of two completely different scenarios. Sunny is dealing with the loss of Jack and her conflicted feelings over whether she should stay and live Jack’s dream lifestyle or return to her beloved Kabul. On the other hand, Yazmina and the others reveal to the reader how difficult and dangerous life is for the Afghanistan natives, especially for the women who have very little rights.
As well as the original characters, there are a number of new names introduced to the story. In Afghanistan a young girl is trying to escape an arranged marriage to an evil, rich man – something that has disastrous consequences for herself and her newfound friends. On the other side of the world, Layla, Yazmina’s sister, is experiencing Western culture living with Sunny, and is shocked at how friendly men and women are with each other.
Another new face to add to the mix is Kat, a young woman who escaped to America as a child and has turned her back on the traditions of Islam and the Afghan culture. Despite her growing friendship with Layla, she refuses to agree with Layla’s beliefs, particularly in regards to the <i>hijab</i>. Neither girl’s opinion is more valid than the other however, as they have both had completely different upbringings. Kat has spent the better part of her life relishing in the freedom of Western culture, whereas Layla finds comfort in her traditions.
<i>Return to the Little Coffee Shop of Kabul </i>contains a couple of powerful messages. Firstly, as Sunny realizes, you need to be thankful for what you have got and not assume that going back to a lifestyle you used to follow would be the same as it once was. On the flip side, the Muslim family in Kabul begins to learn that they do not have to put up with the strict, unfairness in the treatment of women, and can strive to do something about it.
It is not necessary to have read the previous book, as there is enough character description and history mentioned within the narrative for new readers to be able to follow along. It is also suitable for book groups as it contains a series of reading group questions at the end of the novel.
Despite its upsetting scenes,<i> Return to the Little Coffee Shop of Kabul </i>is essentially a happy book. The character Sunny, definitely lives up to her name; there is no over emphasis on any of the negative situations she or her friends find themselves in. In a world where it would be easy to fall into despair, Rodriguez has written a story with a positive outlook on life and hope for the future.
Lenard (726 KP) rated One Night in Miami (2020) in Movies
Jan 9, 2021
One Night in Miami is from start to finish a frank examination on responsibility and acceptance. On February 25, 1964, four friends who happened to highly visible black men, Malcolm X, Cassius Clay, Sam Cooke, and Jim Brown, met in a hotel room after Cassius surprised the world in winning the heavyweight championship. But, before we get to that night, we are introduced to each man at a crossroads. Malcolm X is breaking away from the Nation of Islam after witnessing the corruption of its leadership. His actions would lead some members to view him as a direct threat. Cassius Clay is a great boxer, but his focus is waning. His brash style is alienating the audience and he has opinions about the way his brothers are being treated in the country. Sam Cooke is recognized as a great voice, but still not respected in the "white" world where success is gauged. He is looking for a way to crossover without betraying his roots. Jim Brown is the greatest football player, but even in his hometown he is still seen as inferior socially. In this dramatized version of the events of that night, each man must come to terms with the path he has chosen and the path forward.
Like another recent film, the path is a choice between making changes within the system, like Sam Cooke and Jim Brown have attempted, or to change the system from the outside, like Malcolm and Clay. Both paths have their advantages, and both are also deadly. Within a year, both Malcolm and Cooke would be dead. The movie based on a play finds ways from each character to learn from the others by pairing them off in various combinations (Malcolm-Cooke, Brown-Clay, Cooke-Clay, Malcolm-Brown, Malcolm-Clay, Cooke-Brown). The main antagonism takes place between Cooke and Malcolm. Cooke sees Malcolm as a militant who is creating sowing seeds of fear in the eyes of "America" and Malcolm sees Cooke as a Stepin Fetchit with a huge amount of talent wasted playing by the rules. Cooke shows Malcolm that he is quietly taking control while Malcolm gives Cooke the spark to sing for civil rights for the less fortunate members of black society. Malcolm also begins to see how his actions have hurt his brothers by grouping all members of one race together similar to the way whites do not distinguish between black individuals. The movie never shies away from shading each hero with flaws.
Malcolm may be paranoid as evidenced by a couple scenes where he sees people on his trail who may or may not be real. Under a lot of pressure to break from his organization, Malcolm sees his staff betraying him to the feds who have been investigating him since he first started speaking. The whole subplot humanizes a man who many view as dangerous to the world. Jim Brown is also seen as a hero to most. He broke records and is about to conquer the film industry. Maybe they are using him, but he is using them to shine a light on the inequality of the races.
Lastly, one scene in the movie is a highlight. It is not in Miami, but in Boston. It shows how one man can turn a riot into a celebration of joy. With the main road blocked, a man of great talent can turn adversity into victory using his wits and his voice.
Like another recent film, the path is a choice between making changes within the system, like Sam Cooke and Jim Brown have attempted, or to change the system from the outside, like Malcolm and Clay. Both paths have their advantages, and both are also deadly. Within a year, both Malcolm and Cooke would be dead. The movie based on a play finds ways from each character to learn from the others by pairing them off in various combinations (Malcolm-Cooke, Brown-Clay, Cooke-Clay, Malcolm-Brown, Malcolm-Clay, Cooke-Brown). The main antagonism takes place between Cooke and Malcolm. Cooke sees Malcolm as a militant who is creating sowing seeds of fear in the eyes of "America" and Malcolm sees Cooke as a Stepin Fetchit with a huge amount of talent wasted playing by the rules. Cooke shows Malcolm that he is quietly taking control while Malcolm gives Cooke the spark to sing for civil rights for the less fortunate members of black society. Malcolm also begins to see how his actions have hurt his brothers by grouping all members of one race together similar to the way whites do not distinguish between black individuals. The movie never shies away from shading each hero with flaws.
Malcolm may be paranoid as evidenced by a couple scenes where he sees people on his trail who may or may not be real. Under a lot of pressure to break from his organization, Malcolm sees his staff betraying him to the feds who have been investigating him since he first started speaking. The whole subplot humanizes a man who many view as dangerous to the world. Jim Brown is also seen as a hero to most. He broke records and is about to conquer the film industry. Maybe they are using him, but he is using them to shine a light on the inequality of the races.
Lastly, one scene in the movie is a highlight. It is not in Miami, but in Boston. It shows how one man can turn a riot into a celebration of joy. With the main road blocked, a man of great talent can turn adversity into victory using his wits and his voice.
Jamie (131 KP) rated And I Darken (The Conqueror's Saga #1) in Books
Jul 15, 2017
Well developed characters with complex relationships (1 more)
Engaging story
What if Vlad the Impaler was a girl? An engrossing historical dark fantasy
I was surprised to find that the story had two main characters, Lada and her younger brother Radu. The story is told from their alternating points of view from childhood up to early adulthood. The siblings are sent from their homeland as hostages to the sultan to ensure their father’s loyalty. The story follows the siblings through their journey of self discovery as their fates become entangled with Mehmed II, the virtuous son of the sultan with dreams of conquest.
Lada is fierce even from a young age, a vicious child that is often described as being ugly. She is abrasive and domineering with an intense hunger to claim and rule over what she views as hers. She is frustrated by the limitations placed on her for being a woman, craving power and freedom given to her brother for the simple fact that he is a man. Lada wrestles with her femininity, at some times rejecting it entirely and at other times trying to accept herself and her needs as a woman. She idolizes her father and later the janissaries, wanting desperately to be recognized and accepted. Lada seeks to return home to her mother Wallachia, her birthright.
In stark contrast to Lada, he is sensitive and beautiful. As a child he cried easily and like his sister he also desperately sought affection and acceptance from others. Beginning with their father, their nursemaid, Lada, and eventually Mehmed. While Lada seeks power through brute strength Radu finds a means to his ends through manipulation, using his attractiveness to gain the respect and trust of the people around him. Radu finds his home in Islam and the empire under the watchful eye of the father, the Sultan.
The parallels between Lada and Radu are a subversion of the classical gendered stereotypes placed on men and women. The bonds between Lada, Radu, and Mehmed were incredibly complex and toxic for all involved. The book doesn’t shy away at all from the hideous aspects of love and jealousy and gives an honest and intimate portrayal of the characters as they stumble into adulthood.
This book is loosely based on three very real historical figures: Vlad the Impaler, Radu the Fair, and Mehmed II. Despite this, the book is in no way to be considered to be historically factual, as noted by the author. Lada’s gender change aside there is definitely many pieces of history that are changed deliberately to make room not only for a new romance but also for a more neutral portrayal of the character. This is definitely a medieval fantasy and alternate history book which I’m quite frankly fine with and was able to enjoy just the same. The setting and characters were fairly convincing for the time period and appreciated the research and detail that was put into the book to make it at least believable.
I expected a little more war and battle in this book but there was actually next to none. There was much more focus on the political aspects of the story which I think was alright considering the ages of the main characters. I do expect to see more combat in the next book though, so maybe Lada will actually be the brutal warrior princess she was destined to be.
Despite my mild complaints about the historical aspects of this book I thoroughly enjoyed myself reading it. I was initially intimidated by the page count for this book but found myself flying through the pages. And I Darken is masterfully written and really polished compared to a lot of YA literature. Definitely one of my favorites and I am absolutely ecstatic to continue the series.
Lada is fierce even from a young age, a vicious child that is often described as being ugly. She is abrasive and domineering with an intense hunger to claim and rule over what she views as hers. She is frustrated by the limitations placed on her for being a woman, craving power and freedom given to her brother for the simple fact that he is a man. Lada wrestles with her femininity, at some times rejecting it entirely and at other times trying to accept herself and her needs as a woman. She idolizes her father and later the janissaries, wanting desperately to be recognized and accepted. Lada seeks to return home to her mother Wallachia, her birthright.
In stark contrast to Lada, he is sensitive and beautiful. As a child he cried easily and like his sister he also desperately sought affection and acceptance from others. Beginning with their father, their nursemaid, Lada, and eventually Mehmed. While Lada seeks power through brute strength Radu finds a means to his ends through manipulation, using his attractiveness to gain the respect and trust of the people around him. Radu finds his home in Islam and the empire under the watchful eye of the father, the Sultan.
The parallels between Lada and Radu are a subversion of the classical gendered stereotypes placed on men and women. The bonds between Lada, Radu, and Mehmed were incredibly complex and toxic for all involved. The book doesn’t shy away at all from the hideous aspects of love and jealousy and gives an honest and intimate portrayal of the characters as they stumble into adulthood.
This book is loosely based on three very real historical figures: Vlad the Impaler, Radu the Fair, and Mehmed II. Despite this, the book is in no way to be considered to be historically factual, as noted by the author. Lada’s gender change aside there is definitely many pieces of history that are changed deliberately to make room not only for a new romance but also for a more neutral portrayal of the character. This is definitely a medieval fantasy and alternate history book which I’m quite frankly fine with and was able to enjoy just the same. The setting and characters were fairly convincing for the time period and appreciated the research and detail that was put into the book to make it at least believable.
I expected a little more war and battle in this book but there was actually next to none. There was much more focus on the political aspects of the story which I think was alright considering the ages of the main characters. I do expect to see more combat in the next book though, so maybe Lada will actually be the brutal warrior princess she was destined to be.
Despite my mild complaints about the historical aspects of this book I thoroughly enjoyed myself reading it. I was initially intimidated by the page count for this book but found myself flying through the pages. And I Darken is masterfully written and really polished compared to a lot of YA literature. Definitely one of my favorites and I am absolutely ecstatic to continue the series.
Louise (64 KP) rated And I Darken (The Conqueror's Saga #1) in Books
Jul 2, 2018
First I would like to say a massive thank you to Goodreads as I won myself a copy on one of their giveaways( Aren’t they great!)
And I Darken is a new Historical fiction/Re-telling of Vlad the Impaler but gender swapped. Goodreads have it listed as being a fantasy, but there is no magic or any paranormal goings on whatsoever…glad we got that cleared up.
Our story follows Ladislav (Lada) and Radu Dragwyla the descendants of Vlad Dracul, Prince of Wallachia. Vlad is a vile human being and uses his own children for bargaining with the Ottoman Empire, there lives are at risk if he does not keep to the treaties terms. Living in the Ottoman Empire is risky for Lada and Radu, Lada could easily be married off to some suitor for allegiance or killed whichever is easier for the Sultan. Running the grounds they bump into a young boy the same age as them, only to find that he is the Sultan’s son Mehmed. Mehmed is a lonely boy with only his tutors for company so he befriends them both and shares all his education and time with them, which in turn takes them out of the spotlight.
Lada is a very strong character, she is a force to be reckoned with. She is brutal,fierce and just a total badass throughout the book. Being born a woman is one almighty struggle to be taken seriously in the 1400’s. She knows that she is the rightful heir of Wallachia at the young age of 11. She wants to impress her father with her fighting skills and there is a point when she thinks she has, but the only thoughts her father has is marrying her off to a suitor and being a dutiful wife. Lada is very family orientated and has a very unique relationship with her brother Radu but she will never show any emotion as this is a sign of weakness and she is perceived as a cold-hearted bitch.
Radu was always a disappointment to his father, weak,cowardly and clinging to his nursemaids side infuriated Vlad. Radu was the more emotional of siblings, even though he was not great at fighting he had a devious and cunning mind that made him equally as dangerous as Lada.
My feelings towards the characters changed a lot throughout the book at first I thought Lada was just a psychotic child but realised she is trying to prove herself as being fierce. Radu he was very sweet throughout the book and always wanted his sister to just open up and tell him she loved him and for him to tell her his secrets and feelings. The main point is that they are flawed and this is what makes characters great.
Mehmed just annoyed me and he got in the way of Lada’s plans.
The book does contain romance, a love triangle where no one expresses their love for anyone as they are too scared of the consequences or that it will stop them from their goals in life. So the romance is frustrating to say the least.
This book has a lot of political intrigue,so be prepared for wars,treaties,soldiers and their ranks. This is Historical fiction but as in the author’s notes at the end it is not accurate and a lot is made up. Religion is also touched upon, mostly Islam with Christianity but it’s not too in your face or info dumping. The book is nearly 500 pages long! I felt it could have been shorter. I enjoyed the relationship between Radu and Lada,it was a very different set-up from what we are used to. This did take me a little longer to read as in places it was very slow and I found myself getting bored.
This book covers themes such as sibling rivalry, relationships, families, romance, feminism, sexism and politics
<img src="https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1476160834l/22817331.jpg"; width="120" height="180"/>
Now I Rise is the second installment of the And I Darken saga which is due to be released in June 2017 which I will be reading as I am interested in what is going to happen next with Lada.
Overall I rated this 3.5 out of 5 stars
And I Darken is a new Historical fiction/Re-telling of Vlad the Impaler but gender swapped. Goodreads have it listed as being a fantasy, but there is no magic or any paranormal goings on whatsoever…glad we got that cleared up.
Our story follows Ladislav (Lada) and Radu Dragwyla the descendants of Vlad Dracul, Prince of Wallachia. Vlad is a vile human being and uses his own children for bargaining with the Ottoman Empire, there lives are at risk if he does not keep to the treaties terms. Living in the Ottoman Empire is risky for Lada and Radu, Lada could easily be married off to some suitor for allegiance or killed whichever is easier for the Sultan. Running the grounds they bump into a young boy the same age as them, only to find that he is the Sultan’s son Mehmed. Mehmed is a lonely boy with only his tutors for company so he befriends them both and shares all his education and time with them, which in turn takes them out of the spotlight.
Lada is a very strong character, she is a force to be reckoned with. She is brutal,fierce and just a total badass throughout the book. Being born a woman is one almighty struggle to be taken seriously in the 1400’s. She knows that she is the rightful heir of Wallachia at the young age of 11. She wants to impress her father with her fighting skills and there is a point when she thinks she has, but the only thoughts her father has is marrying her off to a suitor and being a dutiful wife. Lada is very family orientated and has a very unique relationship with her brother Radu but she will never show any emotion as this is a sign of weakness and she is perceived as a cold-hearted bitch.
Radu was always a disappointment to his father, weak,cowardly and clinging to his nursemaids side infuriated Vlad. Radu was the more emotional of siblings, even though he was not great at fighting he had a devious and cunning mind that made him equally as dangerous as Lada.
My feelings towards the characters changed a lot throughout the book at first I thought Lada was just a psychotic child but realised she is trying to prove herself as being fierce. Radu he was very sweet throughout the book and always wanted his sister to just open up and tell him she loved him and for him to tell her his secrets and feelings. The main point is that they are flawed and this is what makes characters great.
Mehmed just annoyed me and he got in the way of Lada’s plans.
The book does contain romance, a love triangle where no one expresses their love for anyone as they are too scared of the consequences or that it will stop them from their goals in life. So the romance is frustrating to say the least.
This book has a lot of political intrigue,so be prepared for wars,treaties,soldiers and their ranks. This is Historical fiction but as in the author’s notes at the end it is not accurate and a lot is made up. Religion is also touched upon, mostly Islam with Christianity but it’s not too in your face or info dumping. The book is nearly 500 pages long! I felt it could have been shorter. I enjoyed the relationship between Radu and Lada,it was a very different set-up from what we are used to. This did take me a little longer to read as in places it was very slow and I found myself getting bored.
This book covers themes such as sibling rivalry, relationships, families, romance, feminism, sexism and politics
<img src="https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1476160834l/22817331.jpg"; width="120" height="180"/>
Now I Rise is the second installment of the And I Darken saga which is due to be released in June 2017 which I will be reading as I am interested in what is going to happen next with Lada.
Overall I rated this 3.5 out of 5 stars
Cody Cook (8 KP) rated A Black Theology of Liberation in Books
Jun 29, 2018
James Cone is considered to be the founder of Black Liberation Theology, a variant of the Liberation Theology movement most widely connected with South American theologian Gustavo Gutierrez. Liberation Theology emphasizes those biblical concerns that white European flavored Christianity has often looked over– concerns like justice and liberation for the oppressed and downtrodden (Luke 4:16-21, Matthew 25:31-45, etc.). Though these emphases are quite important, in Liberation movements, they can often drown out other, extremely vital, elements of the Christian faith, as they clearly do in Cone’s Black Liberation Theology.
One major issue for Cone is one of authority. The experience of one group of people (the oppressed) becomes equivalent with universal truth, and not simply an important concern in Christian theology. In other words, Cone makes his own experience the judge of who God is and what God is for. While “white” (a term used by Cone not so much to reflect skin color but an oppressor mentality) Christianity commits this grave error without realizing it, Cone does so with full knowledge. So, for instance, while a conservative “white” theologian would say that his own views and actions *should* be directed by the scripture (whether or not he does in fact direct them by this standard), Cone makes the judgement of the oppressed black community the ultimate truth for them– and if mass violence against whites is decided by the group as the best means to effect their liberation, so be it. Cone explicitly distances himself from the approach of King, identifying more with the violence-prone philosophy of the Nation of Islam as propounded by Malcolm X. If someone criticizes his approach, he seems to assume that they’re doing so as a “white” oppressor and should be ignored– an oppressor has no moral right to question the rightness or wrongness of the actions of the people he is oppressing. This of course ignores the criticisms of violence, even from the oppressed, of black Christians like Martin Luther King Jr., Desmond Tutu, etc. Cone is also unfortunately either unfamiliar with or unconvinced by pacifist Christian claims to be committed to peaceful action, since he equates non-violence with inaction and acquiescence. While he is absolutely correct in seeing liberation as an important theme in the Christian faith, he, like “white” religionists, allows his own experience and emotions to determine what is right and wrong to the point of supporting evil in the interest of what he feels is best for his community. However, what can’t be said of Cone’s position on violence is that it is radical, because it is emphatically not. The political heroes of most white Americans are men who used violence to gain political autonomy. Thus, it is not radical for black men and women to look up to figures like Malcolm X and James Cone who advocate doing the same thing if it seems necessary for freedom and self-determination; it is merely status quo. The problem is that Jesus calls all men and women, regardless of color, to rise above the status quo and the myth of redemptive violence.
Seizing on that point, one major problem with Cone’s view of violent revolution is that when oppressed people rise up through violence, they become the oppressor– co-opting the tools of oppression and dehumanization. “Blacks” become “white” through the use of violence. Cone seems unaware of (doubtful) or unaffected by the history of the Bolshevik, Cuban, or French revolutions, wherein the oppressed quickly became the oppressors and became twofold more a child of hell than their oppressors. His view also reshapes Nat Turner, the slave who claimed to have been directed by God to murder white women and children, into an unqualified hero. Cone’s system re-establishes and re-affirms oppression– it does not end it.
For Cone, God is black and the devil is white, because God supports the oppressed and the devil supports the oppressor. But in so closely identifying God with blackness, the actions of those in the black community are now above being questioned, just like the actions of white enslavers were, according to them, above being questioned because they aligned themselves with God and those whom they oppressed with the devil.
What Cone is really trying to get at is that since Jesus supports the cause of the oppressed, the oppressor must so distance himself from his oppressor identity that he becomes indistinguishable from the oppressed– willing to suffer along with them– if he is to be Christ-like. In other words, the “white” must become “black.” Cone says that God can’t be colorless where people suffer for their color. So, where blacks suffer God is black. Taking this logic, which is indeed rooted in Scripture, where the poor suffer, God is poor. Where babies are killed in the womb, God is an aborted baby. Where gay people are bullied, God is gay. It is our obligation to identify with the downtrodden, because that’s what Jesus did. Paul, quoting a hymn of the church about Jesus, puts it this way:
“In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
‘Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!'”
–Philippians 2:5-8
Jesus not only gives up his power to express love to the powerless by identifying with them, He also takes on their sin and suffers with and for them. This is the essence of the gospel, and it often gets lost when we translate it into our daily lives. For Cone, this important truth gets lost in the banner of black militantism and the cycle of violence. For so many American Christians, it gets lost when they reduce the political nature of Christianity to scolding those whose private expression of morality doesn’t line up with theirs. We refuse to identify with sinners (which is a category we all fit into) in love.
One major issue for Cone is one of authority. The experience of one group of people (the oppressed) becomes equivalent with universal truth, and not simply an important concern in Christian theology. In other words, Cone makes his own experience the judge of who God is and what God is for. While “white” (a term used by Cone not so much to reflect skin color but an oppressor mentality) Christianity commits this grave error without realizing it, Cone does so with full knowledge. So, for instance, while a conservative “white” theologian would say that his own views and actions *should* be directed by the scripture (whether or not he does in fact direct them by this standard), Cone makes the judgement of the oppressed black community the ultimate truth for them– and if mass violence against whites is decided by the group as the best means to effect their liberation, so be it. Cone explicitly distances himself from the approach of King, identifying more with the violence-prone philosophy of the Nation of Islam as propounded by Malcolm X. If someone criticizes his approach, he seems to assume that they’re doing so as a “white” oppressor and should be ignored– an oppressor has no moral right to question the rightness or wrongness of the actions of the people he is oppressing. This of course ignores the criticisms of violence, even from the oppressed, of black Christians like Martin Luther King Jr., Desmond Tutu, etc. Cone is also unfortunately either unfamiliar with or unconvinced by pacifist Christian claims to be committed to peaceful action, since he equates non-violence with inaction and acquiescence. While he is absolutely correct in seeing liberation as an important theme in the Christian faith, he, like “white” religionists, allows his own experience and emotions to determine what is right and wrong to the point of supporting evil in the interest of what he feels is best for his community. However, what can’t be said of Cone’s position on violence is that it is radical, because it is emphatically not. The political heroes of most white Americans are men who used violence to gain political autonomy. Thus, it is not radical for black men and women to look up to figures like Malcolm X and James Cone who advocate doing the same thing if it seems necessary for freedom and self-determination; it is merely status quo. The problem is that Jesus calls all men and women, regardless of color, to rise above the status quo and the myth of redemptive violence.
Seizing on that point, one major problem with Cone’s view of violent revolution is that when oppressed people rise up through violence, they become the oppressor– co-opting the tools of oppression and dehumanization. “Blacks” become “white” through the use of violence. Cone seems unaware of (doubtful) or unaffected by the history of the Bolshevik, Cuban, or French revolutions, wherein the oppressed quickly became the oppressors and became twofold more a child of hell than their oppressors. His view also reshapes Nat Turner, the slave who claimed to have been directed by God to murder white women and children, into an unqualified hero. Cone’s system re-establishes and re-affirms oppression– it does not end it.
For Cone, God is black and the devil is white, because God supports the oppressed and the devil supports the oppressor. But in so closely identifying God with blackness, the actions of those in the black community are now above being questioned, just like the actions of white enslavers were, according to them, above being questioned because they aligned themselves with God and those whom they oppressed with the devil.
What Cone is really trying to get at is that since Jesus supports the cause of the oppressed, the oppressor must so distance himself from his oppressor identity that he becomes indistinguishable from the oppressed– willing to suffer along with them– if he is to be Christ-like. In other words, the “white” must become “black.” Cone says that God can’t be colorless where people suffer for their color. So, where blacks suffer God is black. Taking this logic, which is indeed rooted in Scripture, where the poor suffer, God is poor. Where babies are killed in the womb, God is an aborted baby. Where gay people are bullied, God is gay. It is our obligation to identify with the downtrodden, because that’s what Jesus did. Paul, quoting a hymn of the church about Jesus, puts it this way:
“In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
‘Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!'”
–Philippians 2:5-8
Jesus not only gives up his power to express love to the powerless by identifying with them, He also takes on their sin and suffers with and for them. This is the essence of the gospel, and it often gets lost when we translate it into our daily lives. For Cone, this important truth gets lost in the banner of black militantism and the cycle of violence. For so many American Christians, it gets lost when they reduce the political nature of Christianity to scolding those whose private expression of morality doesn’t line up with theirs. We refuse to identify with sinners (which is a category we all fit into) in love.