The Little Prince - Antonie de Saint-Exupery

I saw "The Little Prince" mentioned in the list of top books by a close friend in one of those facebook chain posts (it is interesting how some things never seem to die!). There were a quite a few in her list of ten that I had not read. Some did not interest me much, others did. This one lied in the latter. Co-incidentally she had borrowed the book from a colleague and I borrowed it from her before it was eventually returned.

I am not too sure whether this book is for children or adults. But then that is probably what distinguishes a great book from the lot. Every age that you read it, you have a different understanding of it. There are layers that you unravel with time and experience. "The Little Prince" is one of those books that I wish I had read as a kid. In the book, de Saint-Exupery shows the world through a child's eyes. The world of adults and what they (we) hold dear and how pointless and funny it seems to a child. He also talks about love, its pangs, and death which give an eeire dark side to the otherwise light story.

The narrator finds the little prince in the desert while fixing his crashed aircraft. The little prince asks a lot of questions but answers very few. The narrator manages to reconstruct the little prince's story from the bits and pieces he gathers during their conversations. The prince lives on a planet with two active volcanoes and a dead one, and a flower which is the most beautiful in the universe. He loves to see sunsets and keeps his planet free of baobabs. The flower's vanity and demanding nature make the prince leave his planet to explore the universe. He visits six other 'small planets', each inhabited by ridiculous 'adults' and finally ends up on Earth where he meets the fox which teaches him the meaning and importance of love, and the snake which promises him a passage back to his planet and his beloved flower.

This book can easily be finished in a single sitting, but 'we adults' are in such a haste to complete! I imagine it as a bedtime story that one could read to a child. Though I did not mind it much, the book seemed a little random in the way it is structured and I liked almost everything about this book, especially the paintings that accompanied the story. It was an extremely delectable read.

The Trouble With Physics - Lee Smolin

This one came up during a discussion with a colleague about random things during the night on the train to Goa. I think we were talking about thinking out of the box and perspectives. He had said that this one offered a fresh perspective on Physics. I have always been passively interested in Physics; it used to be my favourite subject of study in school. It is now, many years later, that I fully grasp why it was so. Anyway, I ordered the book upon return and took it up a few months later.

"The Trouble With Physics" is a brief recap of what has happened in Physics since Einstein. More specifically, it is an analysis of the biggest fad that Physics saw in this period, the 'string theory'. Smolin recaps how 'string theory' promised a revolution (or the end of it) in the 1980's and how a quarter of a century later, there was still no inkling of that revolution. The book is written in a language fit for an enthusiast. The language does get technical at times but mostly it is something that a layman can easily follow. There were two things that I specially liked about this book. One was that it introduced a lot of ideas that have been worked on or that came up and failed. Writings of this kind tend to trigger one's brain in directions that one does not think in usually. It makes the reading slow and interesting, propelling you in tangential directions. The second was the bit where Smolin explores what science is and how it should be done. Ensuing was a general discussion about what is wrong with the way power is distributed within the academia. This brought me back to my university applications a few years back and reminded me how the entire process had made very little sense to me. As another tangential offshoot, it resulted in this.

Smolin begins with Einstein and the 'revolution' that he had triggered with his relativity theories. The quantum theory was advancing in its own right but a unification was lacking. This unification was the primary target for this revolution to end. Enter 'string theory', a promising and enchanting young candidate. Smolin does a quick tour of the more important ideas that arose as a result of the academic world jumping into 'string theory'. He then tells us of the problems that have ensued, like poor distribution of resources, cult formation, etc. Towards the end, Smolin expresses what he feels to be wrong in the academic community; how and why such problems arise and how they can be averted or rectified. He says that there are more than one kind of scientists : the ones who bring a revolutionary idea and the ones who progress it. He talks about a few of such revolutionaries in the making and tells us that all is not lost.

The book was extremely well written for a book on Physics. Moreover, it presented an objective point of view on the subjects that the author touched. The author presented a few facts, his opinion on the matter and left it on the audience to decide what they would. There was no definitive judgement, which is what I like in books of science. By the end of the book I had a list of three topics that would interest me ("The Fabric of Reality", "The End of Time" and quantum computing). However, I don't think I would like to read this much of Physics at a go. I will leave those for sometime later.

Batman : The Dark Knight Returns - Frank Miller

I had been browsing online lists for graphic novels. I stumbled upon a list that dealt with Batman specifically. Of the top three on that list, I already had the number two (Killing Joke) and had zeroed in on the number three (Year One). So after much deliberation, I decided to order the top rated (The Dark Knight Returns) along with 'Year One'.

This one is Batman's omega. Miller has tried to look into the head of a retired vigilante. 'The Dark Knight Returns' plays around the psychologies of the main characters. There is a retiring Commissioner James Gordon handing over the baton to a lady officer half his age; Harvey Dent has been treated of his physical and mental ailments; Bruce Wayne is facing a middle age crisis and his alter ego has never truly subsided; The Joker is facing ennui at the lack of a worthy opponent; Clark Kent is trying to survive despite all his super powers. The city is still on its knees but not all hope is lost. The Dark Knight returns to save the day and to take an alternate mode of retirement.

'The Dark Knight Returns' shows a Gotham that is still over run with crime. Despite Batman having put all the major criminals behind bars before his retirement ten years ago, the city has not been able to overcome its disease. Bruce Wayne is having issues coping with his retired life. And he has still not been able to overcome the memory of the night his parents were killed on the streets of Gotham. Wayne decides to come out of his retirement and takes to his caped crusade again. The city is spurred into the never ending debate again : Batman - good or evil. Batman's old foes rejoice at his return. But Commissioner James Gordon does not find his views on Batman echoed in his successor, Ellen Yindel. So Batman must fight for his cause again. He must fight the crime in the city. He must also face Superman in a battle to death. And he has a thirteen year old girl for his aide in arms - Robin.

Miller's storytelling is very comprehensive. He creates exceptional plots and adds action to them. I will not compare him to Moore, both have their strengths in very different domains. But if I am to read more action comics, Miller is definitely a preferred name. The pages of this book were intricately designed and packed with action and words. It has been a pleasure reading and rereading the pages. The art work is not really exceptional though. Frank Miller is better at story telling. I think I will give Batman a rest for some time now. But then there is 'The Long Halloween'...

Batman : Year One - Frank Miller and David Mazzucchelli

Since I had read 'A Killing Joke' by Alan Moore, I had started looking at more from the Batman series. Recently I had read Mazzucchelli's 'Asterios Polyp' and, looking at his other works, I noticed a cross with my interest. 'Batman : Year One' with Frank Miller. It was hailed as one of the greatest Batman novels ever. The next time I felt like reading a graphic novel, the choice was obvious.

In 1986, Frank Miller had recently finished work on 'Batman : The Dark Knight Returns' when DC entrusted him with reworking Batman's original story. Batman was to stop being a comic character since. Miller turned Batman into the dark character that most of my generation associates it with. But this was before Nolan had come up with the Batman trilogy that would be etched into our brains. But the book stands out over the movies for one simple reason : James Gordon. Miller creates Gordon as a man while the movies treated him flippantly. Miller's storytelling needs to be appreciated here. Wayne's initial struggle as a vigilante and roots of his immense will power that keeps him from killing even the worst of Gotham's villains. How a Lieutenant made a name for himself despite all the disapproval from his colleagues and city's bureaucracy. Gordon's turbulent personal life. Batman bringing James Gordon around to accepting him and relying on him to do the dirty work.

'Year One' traces the lives of two individuals who come to a city run amok and a decaying society. Lieutenant James Gordon and the heir of Wayne Enterprises, Bruce Wayne. It traces the beginnings of Wayne's vigilante activities, how and why he finally picks up a cape and a mask. It traces Gordon's struggle within a corrupt police institution and his initial stance against Batman. It tells us the story of how two individuals with conflicting opinions join hands to fight a city full of criminals. 'Year One' also briefly talks about the origins of the Catwoman. But most of the story is about Wayne's transformation into the Batman and Gordon's acceptance of the crusader as a necessary force in the city.

Miller really outshone with his story telling. And Mazzucchelli's art work was aptly dark for the kind of character they were trying to bring to life. It was a well done book with some superb moments. Of course I will read more Miller. And Batman.

The Iliad - Homer / Robert Fagles

This book has had one of the longest shelf lives so far. I picked it up in the international book fair 6-7 years back. Since then it has sat on my shelves for more reasons than one. Ere I read the other Greek tragedies, my mind kept prodding me to pick 'The Iliad' up. But it somehow never happened till my last visit home. I finished Dr. Sacks' fascinating case stories and before I had a chance to pick anything new up, I was looking at the dust covered books in the shelves back home. 'The Iliad'! Finally!

I would like to think that I am no stranger to Greek tragedies. I have read Euripides and Sophocles, though I am yet to read Aeschylus. I had thoroughly enjoyed the plays and the 'deus ex machina's. I have even read Virgil. But never had I enjoyed anything as much as when I read Homer's 'The Odyssey'. The story was more complete than the shorter plays and much more gripping. So I expected the same from 'The Iliad'. And it exceeded all expectations. I finished the book faster than any other work of similar nature or length. The poetry was fabulous. And so was the story. Fagles had done an amazing job with the translation as well. At times I read it out loud to myself. Such was the joy of reading this one. My biggest regret is that I should have started my foray into the Greek works with this one. It is now that the characters of the other plays are falling into place. Most of the other works have been written around this epic. It is here that the primary characters make their mark. The great Agamemnon; pitiable Hecuba; Aeneas, beloved by Gods; god-like Diomedes; the cunning Odysseus. But this book is about swift Achilles. Him and his rage. Him and his inescapable hands.

The book begins in the ninth year of Troy's siege. The city has not yet been taken. In the opening scene Achilles and Agamemnon have a fall out when Agamemnon takes the beautiful Briseis from Achilles. Achilles swears to no longer fight for a king who does not respect his captains. So while Achilles holds off from the battle, the Trojan forces advance till the Achean ships. All this by the will of Zeus of course, for nothing happens without the will of the son of Cronus. Now as the Gods fight on either sides, man-eating Hector pushes forward and the Achean captains are injured and disabled from battle one by one. But Zeus would not relent. He wishes to give Achilles the glory for his mother, Thetis, had held his knee and asked him the favour. But Achilles rage would not be doused, not by gifts from Agamemnon. But he yearns for the glory that war brings. Despite knowing well that that glory would come at the cost of his life before the city is taken. So as the Trojans keep advancing, he sends Patroclus, his beloved aide in arms, to the war on his behalf instead. Patroclus shines in battle, but is taken down by Trojans and Hector claims the glory. Achilles sees blood. He forgets his rage at Agamemnon and instead rages at Hector now. He needs Hector's blood. His mother gets him armour made by Hephaestus and once Achilles dons the armour and picks up his legendary shield, he is an unstoppable force. He tears through the Trojan ranks. He pushes them back behind their walls and Hector, who dares to face him, is humiliated and killed and humiliated again. The book ends after funeral games for Patroclus and Priam's ransoming of Hector's body.

The above story is beautifully portrayed in twenty four parts. There are adjectives abundant and the introduction provided a good reason for them. It is one of those introductions that are as important (perhaps even more) than the book itself. To sum it all up, the book was a joy all through. Right from the original story by Homer to the beautiful translation and the introduction to top it all off. I have already read Odysseus's tale, so I guess there is nothing more that I can get from Homer. But I have a revived interest in the Greek tragedies again and I have Aeschylus' Oresteia lying in my shelves.

The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat - Oliver Sacks

Another of the belated birthday gift that I chose for it's name. Of the few choices given to me, this one had the most interesting title. So I read the description and decided that it was worth reading. The reviews were good and one can consider experimenting with gifts.

Dr. Sacks is a renowned neurologist who worked in America and Britain. His fascination with Luria and his work led him to adopt the romantic style of writing that Luria professed. The clinical tales are more than facts recorded as statistics. It is history and emotions which, as Dr. Sacks believes, forms an equally important part of the story, or case. Thus his stories have a rather personal touch to them. He empathises (rather too much I believe) with his patients and sees them not as dilapidated items in need of repair, but as individuals struggling to maintain their identity in the midst of a chaotic mental tempest. A fascinating TED talk by Dr. Sacks will give a picture of him and his way of connecting.

The book recounts twenty four tales of his erstwhile patients who suffered from some neurological problem. The cases are divided into four sections : Losses : dealing with the classical problem of loss of some brain function; Excesses : dealing with the excess of a brain function; Transports : dealing with visions and hallucinations; and the World of the Simple : dealing with autistic patients and their enhanced skills. The book presents a number of interesting brain irregularities like loss of the ability of identify people and things, phantom limbs, loss of control over one's own body, religious visions, enhanced smelling ability, identifying primes and mnemonic memory. Sacks raises existentialist and moralist questions on how the patients are and ought to be treated by the society as well as the doctors and nurses. The last section, dealing with the autistic and 'morons' was much more personal than the earlier ones, perhaps because of the elongated period of association with the patients, for unlike in the other cases, the patients suffering from autism did not "get better".

Dr. Sacks' vivid portraits of his patients was extremely fascinating. Leads one to question how and why the brain is treated as a model that has a "normalcy". At times though, Dr. Sacks' empathy and appreciation for the patients was a bit too redundant and drag. He has more interesting books but I will come back to him later.

myth=mithya - Dr. Devdutt Pattanaik

It was at Chennai Airport, while I was waiting for a flight back to Pune that I entered the airport bookstore. Weirdly, after all this time I am somehow naive enough (or stupid enough) to believe that I will just look around and not buy anything from a bookstore because of the big stack of pending books. Yes, I see you pointing a finger at me and laughing your head off, but that was my intention. For real! So as you must have already gathered, I bought this book and stowed it away for a not so distant future.

I had heard of this book earlier but never given it a serious thought. But a recent argument about the Hindu religious philosophy with a colleague and the pending Basham's "The Wonder that was India" drew me to the book. I flipped through randomly and saw a lot of small sections of stories, a page at most, and many crudely drawn sketches of the various Hindu deities. I was to find out later that the book was full of such drawings, tables and flowcharts. I found the pedantic efforts of Dr. Pattanaik extremely cute. The work did not seem half baked and incomplete. The research was well done. At no point of the book did it seem that the author was fleeting through the topics, despite the concise nature of the work. Also, the work is not theistic in nature like religious texts tend to get. Pattanaik does not impose his opinions anywhere. Rather he states in the preface that religion is a matter of faith and can be rationalised only till a point. He recommends seeing it as a way of understanding human life rather than an explanation for it.

The book revolves around the three primary Gods of the Hindu mythology (Bramha, Vishnu, Shiva) and their counterparts (Saraswati, Laxmi, Shakti). It seeks to explain the Hindu religious beliefs in the light of modern concerns. Dr. Pattanaik comes up with an extremely persuasive way to present what we currently know as Hinduism. Scattered throughout the books are the various small stories from the Puranas and Vedas describing the conflict between the devas and asuras. The author brings this strife to a new light by deeming every section of the mythological league as essential in the Hindu culture. The asuras are as important as the devas. He interprets the Hindu culture as non-judgmental, saying there is room for every type of culture, but each has its place and time.

The read was an interesting one, to say the least. There were aspects of the Hindu culture that I was unaware of (at least the aspects as Devdutt Pattanaik sees them). There were also many stories that I did not know of, and many lesser deities that I knew no more than the name of. I am very impressed by Dr. Pattanaik, though I doubt I would reach out for another such work of his any time soon.