There’s something ridiculous about these books reviews. They’re short, for one, and rarely contain any original insights. Indeed, for many of them (especially those dealing with classic works), they tell you next to nothing. My goals in writing them are, first, to force myself to articulate at least some thoughts about the books, even if those thoughts are not particularly original or insightful, and two, to perhaps give you a bit of flavor of what the book is about and whether you should spend your time reading it.

The reviews are all keyed with one of three ratings:

“Recommended” means that I think the book would be of interest to most readers – its something at least a little special.

“Recommended for the Enthusiast” means that if this is your jam (i.e. crime fiction, classical history) it will be of interest, but if this isn’t your section of the library, perhaps you should avoid it.

“Not Recommended”. means you shouldn’t waste your time.

Some caveats:

I have no taste. I read heaps of crime novels, spy novels, and science fiction novels. Some of which are real literature, some of which are page turning mind candy.

I also read widely in subjects in which I am not an expert. For example, I have lately been reading extensively in ancient history, but I have no academic background in classics.  Take everything here with the knowledge that I’m just a white dude from a small town in Connecticut who went to mediocre schools. There is nothing special or authoritative about my opinions.