Bibliography, February 2010

Books acquired (1)

The Bible (KJV)

Books read (14)

BOTM: R. Gildea, Children of the Revolution

L. Ayres, Nicaea and its legacy
Aurelius Victor, tr. H. W. Bird, De Caesaribus
A. Cobban, A History of Modern France, vol 1: 1715-1799
Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History
John Chrysostom, Selected Homilies
M. Edwards (tr. & comm.), Lives of Plotinus and Proclus
M. Gladwell, Outliers
N. Gordimer, Writing and being
Mgaloblishvili, Ancient Christianity in the Caucasus
Nimmo Smith, A Christian's guide to Greek culture
A.F. Norman, Antioch as a centre of Hellenic culture as observed by Libanius
C. Stewart, Cassian the Monk
D. Thomson, England in the Nineteenth century

Unread remainder - 150

Note the purging. I have a read decent number this month, but I've thrown as many. Actually, scrutinising the historical collection has been illuminating. I've accumulated a number of books in areas that I am not actually very interested in and imbalanced in others. Specifically

• I'm just not that interested in Nazis, yet I've a barrage of books on the Third Reich. They've gone, leaving Shirer's This is Berlin as the only one to read*


• England and its politics is just really boring. I'm fooling myself that I'm ever going to read biographies of Henry VII, Paddy Ashdown, Geoffrey Howe or Edward Heath. Gone. I've kept Macmillan and Thatcher but even that might be a push - and may not make the end of the year.


• I really don't have enough books on France

It appears I would have been better asking my eighteen year old self what to read than any later edition. However, that would have deprived me of a decent collection of C19 history, from whence this month's best book comes from. Had I done any modern continental history, Gildea would have taught me at Oxford, which from this book would have been great fun. Books where the politics is dispensed in the first third are usually of limited interest, but this was engrossing, partly one suspects because it's closer in time to the present, and the contours of society are nearer to the surface, but he also has a skillful eye of startling statistics and facts.

I'm conscious this echoes my praise for Robb's The discovery of France in 2008, but Gildea's is a more weighty tome and more analytical in its approach to key issues of religion, policy, and economics. Together they work well. Roll on December when I can add more to my French collection. I think I need a biography of Napoleon III, a few regional studies (perhaps about Brittany on account of the parental villa, but also something on the south), and something on royalism in the post 1815, and probably post 1848 world. Bring back the party of Order.

*I should stress this doesn't mean I'm not grateful for the books I have already read on the subject, of which Klemperer's diaries probably the best
**P.S. Actually, the best book I read this month isn't on this list at all. Following sanity checking, I don't include books I read in academic libraries in this list, which excludes most of my academic reading, but David Gwynne's The Eusebians, which I read on Thursday, was the best thing out there this time. It is, of course, entirely inaccessible to the general reader so probably best not to record it.

Technology fast

It's Ash Wednesday; I still haven't decided what to give up. Although a detailed perusal of my diary suggests that booze is out of the question. I think it's going to be about bible action on the positive - & I've lined up a load of books to read ont this. Interestingly, I've been reading the bible on the Morning and Evening prayer rotas this month and it's been great

However, I like very much the church's call for a technology fast. Actually they call for a reduction in carbon, but most of those are boring. However, I will do two, and more strictly than they call for.

Have a technology fast. Try a day with no TV, no iPod, no computer, and even no mobile. Five days in Lent (vs their one a month) is target. Dates TBC with Anna, but should default to all Sundays. And, for those thinking about it, I am aware of the irony given my job.

Be a part-time veggie. Aim to eat at least two vegetarian meals every week. This is hard. I gave up meat once (in 2006), but I forgot about halfway through. Here though I want two veg days a week, not just two meals. Will have to think about recipes (though without cheating and using the Internet)

I'll also give up crisps.

Bibliography, January 2010

Acquired (5)

V. Nabokov, Pale Fire
Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History (4 vols)



Read (13)

BOTM - E. Burke, Reflections on the revolution in France


D. Botting, The island of Dragon's Blood
M. Bradbury (ed.), Penguin book of short stories
V. Brittain, Testament of Youth
A. Christie, They do it with mirrors
A. Christie, Mrs McGinty's dead
H. James, The Aspern Papers
H. James, The Turn of the Screw
S. Little, Isms
S. Mitchell, Rocky Horror: from concept to cult
Themistus, Politics, Philosophy and Empire in the Fourth Century
(tr. P. Heather & D. Moncur)
G. Tyrell, Medievalism
K. Ward, Priests and People


Unread remainder - 181


To focus the mind, I'm now counting down. I had thought I'd got this below 100, but examination of the history shelves revealed a lot of books I'd claimed were 'academic collection' or 'Reference' but were clearly nothing of the sort. So, a purified list now reveals 181 books to get through by the end of the year, assuming I don't buy any more (unlikely). For the record that's about 10% of the eligible collection (c.11% are reference works). Anna's books are excluded from all considerations. Astute calculators will realise this implies a bit of throwing out if I'm to be done by December, but I think that's healthy.


Anyway. this month threw up some good stuff, but Burke was the best. I'm not entirely sure why I haven't read Burke before, given his place in Conservative thought. Part of me was expecting it to be a bit shit, but it was a wonderful, savage, attack on the ideals of the revolution and all they stood for. I loved it. I did carefully note the passages that I loved most, but my bookmarks have been dislodged in the journey back from France (I read it 'on location' as it were) so cannot reproduce them. However, a quick search online has located my favourite one:

Thanks to our sullen resistance to innovation, thanks to the cold sluggishness of our national character, we still bear the stamp of our forefathers. We have not (as I conceive) lost the generosity and dignity of thinking of the fourteenth century; nor as yet have we subtilized ourselves into savages. We are not the converts of Rousseau; we are not the disciples of Voltaire; Helvetius has made no progress amongst us. Atheists are not our preachers; madmen are not our lawgivers. We know that we have made no discoveries, and we think that no discoveries are to be made, in morality; nor many in the great principles of government, nor in the ideas of liberty, which were understood long before we were born, altogether as well as they will be after the grave has heaped its mould upon our presumption, and the silent tomb shall have imposed its law on our pert loquacity. In England we have not yet been completely embowelled of our natural entrails; we still feel within us, and we cherish and cultivate, those inbred sentiments which are the faithful guardians, the active monitors of our duty, the true supporters of all liberal and manly morals.

Ace.

Bring back Maggie

TUC on the radio this morning seem to be doing their best to remind everyone why we must never let the Unions near power again. Ever.

Here it is. In summary, a perfectly sensible woman from KCL has written a report on whether national pay bargaining is a good idea. I've no idea if it is or not; may be rubbish, but the whole thing was met by a ranting delusioinal ad hominem attack from the TUC's rep Sarah Veale, which was inappropriate, and in most cases, drivel. I can't be bothered to argue with all her points but here are a couple of the worst ones :

• Trade Unions create jobs; and keep wages high. I suggest they cannot do both, certainly not in a contracting public sector which needs to cut close to £200bn from the annual payroll. I think all you need to work that out is multiplication; maybe she can't do that.
• There's more, but I'm busy
• Most importantly, we already have this, through London weighting, Sarah Veale appears not to know about this, as she thinks nurses get paid the same in Newcastle and London (see 2.56. The scale for London weighting is here. As Ms Veale advises the TUC on employment, she probably ought to have read it)

Idiot woman. Anathema indeed

Also, there is an amusing slip of the tongue at the start when John Humphries tells us the South is cheaper than the North at the start