I wanted to make a post specifically talking about all the books I've read since January, so, here it is. It will be long, and will be separated into sections for each books
The Vampire Lestat
I started this book in the last few months of 2024, and I finished it in February of this year. It was a much better, more well written book than Interview, book Lestat makes for a better character than the book version of Louis. I did enjoy this book, getting Lestat's backstory and all, it was interesting enough, it gives me a better idea of who the character is, but there wasn't much in the book that stood out to me much. Sure there was Gabrielle and Marius and those who must be kept, but we don't learn much about the latter two till the next book, and what we do learn of Gabrielle is minimal. (though I do headcannon her as a t-masc)
How to Keep House While Drowning
I've read this book once before, and I intend to read it at the start of each year for the rest of my life. I listened to the audiobook version with my partner this time. He disliked the language, but found the concepts useful. He thinks he has already internalized the core messages of the book, but he is so internally resistant to them. Reading it together helped us to have meaningful conversations about how we split housework, and what our expectations of each other are about housework. While he insists he got little out of it, I think just the conversations we had because of the book made it worth it, and I still did get a lot out of it the second time round.
K.C.'s gentle reminders to care for yourself first, to make the space serve your needs, not to serve your space are something I need reminders of regularly. Because of how I was raised, the fear and shame of having a messy home is something that I've been battling with since moving out. I started by just completely not giving a shit how my place looked, only doing chores when I needed things done, not keeping up with things. But by doing this my space was not serving me, it was always messy, and unsafe, I never had clean dishes, and it all contributed to my depression. It took me several years to find a system where I could keep things organized well enough, and keep up with chores well enough that my space was actually serving me, and I have found that I am almost incapable of being entirely self sustaining in this practice, I require help from others to keep my space clean.
Learning my limitations and when and in what area I need help has helped me to grow as a person, to be able to ask for help, to lose the shame associated with needing help and with not having a spotless apartment.
Consent of the Networked
So, I wanted to have this book in front of me when writing this section, so I could reference my notes, so this section is being written a week after the rest of this was written.
To say I had issues with this book would be an understatement. For one, its out of date, it was probably out of date by the time it was published, as any book discussing current events and the internet would be expected to be. It was published in 2012. But my main issue with it would probably be the mentality behind the whole thing. The Writer, Rebecca MacKinnon, is/was a CNN reporter, and when you read this book, you can clearly see how her life experience coloured her outlook and perspective. Her emphasis on "democracy" seems to come from a place of mistrust of governing bodies, the idea that those in power will do whatever is necessary to keep that power, even at the detriment of those they are supposed to protect and serve, She seems to hold certain corporations (who have, since publication of this book, changed their policies completely) in high regard, Google is one she seems to favor, due to their privacy policies (again, that they have since overturned) and policies concerning the use of their programs, information, and resources.
There are some good points made in the book, mostly about open source programs, and personal security. She makes swiping comments about Chinese internet policies, yet seems oblivious (although it may simply have either not been implemented, or was not widely known) to USAmerican companies doing the same things (although she does acknowledge the infringements on USAmerican rights in a very s,mall section, more as an aside than anything.) She is thoroughly uncreative when it comes to offering solutions to the problems she points out. While acknowledging the problems of governing bodies not concerning themselves with the well being of their constituents, and concerning themselves more with their financiers concerns, the only viable solution she offers is creating a political entity to lobby for netizens, which is a very US Liberal way of thinking, you must play within the system's rules to take down the system type thinking. She also conveniently downplays the US's role in world internet control, while making an example of Chinese internet policies, and fearmongering about them (this is what will happen to us if we don't do something), and to a degree, she was right, we have had sever losses in persona freedoms, rights, and protections online.
One thing she talks about is how companies are held accountable by their users, that violations of privacy are punished by loss of user traffic, but int he past several year corporations have learned that they can just get away with it, so they do, there is no holding them accountable now.
Her discussion of how China has effectively blocked itself off from the rest of the world, at least internet wise, does bring up some interesting points, such as Google being a tool to further implement US hegemony (corporate colonization), as well as how easy it can be to manipulate date and censorship to mould citizens perspectives and beliefs.
Honestly, I wouldn't say this book is without merit, there are some good points, some good information, and some good insights, I just think her conclusions are naive and very pro-capitalist, also her emphasis on democracy is very....colonial. Overall it was an interesting read, even if I completely disagree with her conclusions.
A History of Russia: From Peter the Great to Gorbachev
This technically isn't a book, but actually a series of lectures from a college professor on the history of Russia. I found it fascinating.
Growing up being homeschooled, my education is a bit spotty. Like most American schoolchildren, I learned history from a white, colonial perspective. I also dropped out of highschool, and I never learned anything about history past the american revolution, and even that I learned little about before dropping out, and I certainly did not learn about anything else going on in the world at that time.
My mother, my teacher, encouraged me to explore my interests, to do my own research. She would regularly let me loose in the library to consume as much information as I could, about whatever subjects interested me. Yet my world view was still so narrow and small. It wasn't until I left home, and even a few years after that that I actually started to learn the things my education had lacked. In the past couple years I have been putting in a concerted effort to educate myself about the history of the world from a non-colonial perspective, to listen to people who were not white about their lives, their experiences, and their history.
What I have noticed is that there is, what I can only call, an intentional lack of native voices speaking about their own history. And by 'Native' I don't just mean native american, but all peoples of their native lands around the world. Almost every book on the history of Africa that I've found has been written by a white guy. I do have on my reading list a book by a palestinian on the Israel-Palestine war, The Hundred Years War on Palestine by Rashid Khalidi, which I am very much looking forward to reading, as I am woefully underinformed about the Israel-Palestine war, as well as most of the history of the so-called "Middle East," especially since the time of British colonialism. But I'm getting off topic.
This series of lectures was a great beginning resource for learning the history of Russia. There is much that he skips over, or deems unimportant to the story he is telling, that I would still like to learn about. There are things he is very vague about, as well as things he draws emphasis to that I think would only be important to white cis men, such as himself, and the men whom he is speaking about.
I could not help but get the impression from a lot of descriptions of various czars that a few of them were autistic. I, myself, have complicated thoughts and feelings about armchair dignosies, especially of historical/dead people. I think it is reasonable to have personal theories, to identify with notable behaviour, to recognize symptoms, but because we cannot have a conversation with this person to get their own perspectives on their mind and their supposed symptoms, we can never have a firm diagnosis.
He focuses on the czars and their important political allies and opponents, there is little said about the lives of the people, other than vague general descriptions of their environments and how those change through the years. In fact he seems almost impatient when he has to talk about the peasants who made up the mass of the communist revolution. He also tries to give the impression he is presenting an unbiased, factual account of events, and while he may have his facts straight, he is far from unbiased. But, again, it was a good starting place, and I hope to continue to piece together a more complete understanding of the history of Russia, and its place in world history.
The Queen of the Damned
This has been, by far, my favourite Vampire Chronicles book. The history, the lore, the pieces coming together, it was great. I have not been a fan of how the books after it seem to have gone more into dealing with Rice's personal struggles with religion. Either way, I don't have much to say about the book, it was a great, fun read, it's one of the few I might read again, just for the enjoyment of it.
The Autobiography of Malcolm X
This book was useful for me, in that it gives an inside perspective to black manhood, and the expectations put upon black men, and how and why they think and behave in the ways they do. Obviously it is not indicative of all black men, I guess moreso poor american black men. Regardless, it has some good insights into that world, it made me face things that I would otherwise never have considered to be a part of the dominant culture that harms black men in the ways that it does. Towards the end of the book Malcolm says:
I think that an objective reader may see how in the society to which I was exposed as a black youth here in America, for me to wind up in a prison was really just about inevitable. It happens to so many thousands of black youth.
I think that an objective reader may see how when I heard “The white man is the devil,” when I played back what had been my own experiences, it was inevitable that I would respond positively; then the next twelve years of my life were devoted and dedicated to propagating that phrase among the black people.
I think, I hope, that the objective reader, in following my life — the life of only one ghetto-created Negro — may gain a better picture and understanding than he has previously had of the black ghettoes which are shaping the lives and the thinking of almost all of the 22 million Negroes who live in America.
To me and for me, this book had its intended effects. If oyu have not read this book yet, and you have a desire to better understand and learn form the lives and stories of black people, I recommend reading this book. Just, beware, as I said in the April Update, it is a very sexist book.
The Tale of the Body Thief
I don't have much to say about this book. It was a disappointing follow up to Queen of the Damned, although it does continue to expand on the world and the mechanisms that govern the world of Anne Rice's books. The story itself is interesting enough I guess, and it does the job of introducing new mechanics into the world. There is a rape scene in this book, though it is much more intense than the rape scene in Queen of the Damned, at least for me. The scene in Queen was not very descriptive, it wasn't gratuitous. The scene in this book, however, was very descriptive, and we read a description of the girl fighting back, her terror, her anger, her fear. It honestly made me a little sick, and it felt like it had very little impact on the character or the story, other than giving something to compare other sexual experiences against. I assumed that a female writer would have more compassion for rape victims. All in all, I would almost say you could skip this book, except there is one important plotline for you to know if you are going to skip to the next book, and that is the story of David Talbot, but you can look up a summary of that and skip the book, at least in my opinion.
The Will to Change
This is another book I wanted to have physically in front of me when writing its summary, so this is also being written a week later than the rest of these summaries.
A few months ago I was in search of anti-patriarchal forms of masculinity, and I was having a great deal of difficulty finding examples of that. I resolved to just go with my gut, to take a personal stand against a patriarchal mindset, to embody a form of masculinity that is not based on subjecting and objectifying others. This book has been exactly what I was looking for. Hooks' analysis of patriarchy and the way it harms both men and women, how it distorts relationships, how it perpetuates subjugation and fear, how it holds power over others as a requirement for masculinity, is just fantastic. I have never seen someone put such complex ideas so simply and beautifully. Her analysis of the patriarchal father really hit home for me, personally. This book also caused me to reevaluate my perceptions of myself and my masculinity, and also the lessons I was taught about patriarchy growing up, and how that affected my thinking and behaviour as a child and adolescent, how I did my best impression of a patriarchal male so as to be let into the world of men that I was consistently denied access to, not understanding that I would never be allowed in, no matter what I did. Like when I read Ain't I a Woman this book changed the core of my thinking, it changed how I see the world around me, and I can only be grateful for that. I cannot recommend this book enough
Ain't I a Woman
Some of you may be confused to see this book here. Didn't I just read that last year? Yes, I did, and I read it again this past week. After reading The Will to Change I felt a desire to go back to the work that first had that level of impact on me, to remind myself of the foundations upon which my concepts and beliefs about feminism are built. I don't have much to add to my analysis this time.
I will say, this book is a really good, foundational work, explaining the ways that racism and sexism intertwine, and the impact this has on, especially, black women. Making great emphasis on the ways in which every tier of the race/sex hierarchy that dominates USAmerican culture oppresses black women, and black men, and how black women have been thrown under the bus again and again in favor of other classes getting their rights. In essence, explaining how black women have been the stepping stool everyone uses to get to their "rightful place in society." She discusses the ways that it is all too common to say 'women' when one really means 'white women' and to say 'blacks' when one really means 'black men.' Time and time again she shows us how language shapes our world, our perspectives, and so refusing to create and use inclusive language pigeon holes us into a system of abusive cycles, cycle we can't break if we can't name them. (She also directly calls out Malcolm X's autobiography for its rampant sexism)
Memnoch the Devil
This book was, for one, incredibly short, especially compared to the previous books. I finished this book the same day as I am writing this post. Like the last book in this series, I have similar complaints, and the complaints I had about the religiosity in the previous book, of which there was only a little, is only increased with this book. The concept of God and the Devil and how that works within this world, how those mechanics work within this world, and the conclusion, were disappointing. With all that Rice has put into this world, for her to minimize it and its effects by adding a God and a Devil seems to undermine the foundations of this world. I understand that these writings of hers are a way of understanding herself, of contemplating and dealing with her feelings and thoughts on religion, and other topics, through this character of Lestat, and for that purpose, I'm sure they did help her to come to a better understanding of herself and her beliefs. It just seems like its such a sharp turn away from the path she already set with the first few books. The conclusion of this book, as I said, was disappointing. Lestat has this whole internal conflict, this war, this process, and in the end he just gets tricked? It just fell flat for me. But then again, I have never been religious, despite growing up ina religious household.