Scan barcode
emniy's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
3.5
kikiandarrowsfishshelf's review against another edition
3.0
July 2017 My Book Box Non-fiction selection
I am at once very conflicted and very disappointed in this book. It is not a bad book. In fact, Lymbery's view on farming are ones that I agree with and of those farms I try to support. In fact, I stopped buy Purdue chicken several years ago after watching a Fronline program about chicken farms and pollution.
So I agree with his thesis.
At times, I found this book interesting. The chapters on palm oil and corn in particular stood out. It's just that sometimes Lymbery goes way off topic. For instance, he desribes the aviary that his mother and he use to keep while making sure the reader is aware that Lymbery no longer is comfortable with birds in cage. This story is interesting, and I wouldn't mind reading about it a different type of book. But why is it in this one? Seriously.
Additionally, when a reader does want more information about something, and that might be consdiered slightly off topic, Lymbery does not provide it. For instance, when he is dealing with elephants enroaching on villages. He mentions that elephant training (breaking) is horribly and wonders if the park rangers do this on the elephants they use. He never finds out, and considering the use of elephants in this case to allow humans and animals to co-exist, shouldn't he have asked? Also when talking about fishing, shouldn't you, well, talk to fishermen as well as scientists? There is a selection about bison, and he provides two quotes - a quote from each side of a debate. But each quote is only one sentence. If he had gotten rid of some the digressions, he could have added more in that section.
To be fair, there was one part of this book that really cheesed me off and undoubtedly strongly effects how I feel about this book. In part it is my American bias pride or what have you. Here it is. On a trip to Nebraska, Lymbery stops at a gas station to get water and an ice lolly (his words, btw). He wants to make sure he has picked up plain water - not sparkling or cabornated. He, being British, asks the owner if the water has gas in it. The owner is very confused. Now, I know that water with gas means carbonated water. But that is NOT how we refer to it in the US. And quite frankly, not many people in the US would known what that means. You have a greater chance of meeting someone who doesn't know that. It's a regional language thing. But the why Lymbery describes it comes across as "this stupid American hick". And you know what, no. That is not the case.
Still, parts of the book were interesting.
I am at once very conflicted and very disappointed in this book. It is not a bad book. In fact, Lymbery's view on farming are ones that I agree with and of those farms I try to support. In fact, I stopped buy Purdue chicken several years ago after watching a Fronline program about chicken farms and pollution.
So I agree with his thesis.
At times, I found this book interesting. The chapters on palm oil and corn in particular stood out. It's just that sometimes Lymbery goes way off topic. For instance, he desribes the aviary that his mother and he use to keep while making sure the reader is aware that Lymbery no longer is comfortable with birds in cage. This story is interesting, and I wouldn't mind reading about it a different type of book. But why is it in this one? Seriously.
Additionally, when a reader does want more information about something, and that might be consdiered slightly off topic, Lymbery does not provide it. For instance, when he is dealing with elephants enroaching on villages. He mentions that elephant training (breaking) is horribly and wonders if the park rangers do this on the elephants they use. He never finds out, and considering the use of elephants in this case to allow humans and animals to co-exist, shouldn't he have asked? Also when talking about fishing, shouldn't you, well, talk to fishermen as well as scientists? There is a selection about bison, and he provides two quotes - a quote from each side of a debate. But each quote is only one sentence. If he had gotten rid of some the digressions, he could have added more in that section.
To be fair, there was one part of this book that really cheesed me off and undoubtedly strongly effects how I feel about this book. In part it is my American bias pride or what have you. Here it is. On a trip to Nebraska, Lymbery stops at a gas station to get water and an ice lolly (his words, btw). He wants to make sure he has picked up plain water - not sparkling or cabornated. He, being British, asks the owner if the water has gas in it. The owner is very confused. Now, I know that water with gas means carbonated water. But that is NOT how we refer to it in the US. And quite frankly, not many people in the US would known what that means. You have a greater chance of meeting someone who doesn't know that. It's a regional language thing. But the why Lymbery describes it comes across as "this stupid American hick". And you know what, no. That is not the case.
Still, parts of the book were interesting.
patihato's review against another edition
1.0
Pozycja poniżej krytyki. Autor opisuje wpływ rolnictwa na dzikie zwierzęta, jednak jest to bardzo jednostronne. Bierze pod uwagę tylko swoje obserwacje. Nie ma prawie żadnych odniesień do badań, a użyte przypisy są z jednostronnych źródeł popierająych jego zdanie. Autor przeprowadza wywiady tylko z osobami, które podzielają jego opinie.
Polecam przeczytanie rozdziału o bocianach. Prawie cały nawiązuję do sytuacji Polski sprzed i po wejściu do Unii Europejskiej. Znając polskie realia w tym rozdziale można się najbardziej przekonać jak autor zakłamuje rzeczywistość.
Polecam przeczytanie rozdziału o bocianach. Prawie cały nawiązuję do sytuacji Polski sprzed i po wejściu do Unii Europejskiej. Znając polskie realia w tym rozdziale można się najbardziej przekonać jak autor zakłamuje rzeczywistość.
bookwoods's review
3.0
This book has one excellent aspect and two quite annoying things. Let’s start with the positive. Dead Zone gave me heaps of information about the problems related to agriculture – new views to issues I was already familiar with and introductions to ones I hadn’t even heard of before. But I wish the book was more concise and focused on those brilliant facts. Instead, there’s a lot of personal stories and I wasn’t interested in reading about things like how Philip Lymbery and her wife celebrated their anniversary, or how Philip encountered his first Barn Owl. I feel like these parts took away some of the credibility of the actual information. The other complaint I have relates to the way Lymbery states multiple times that even though animal agriculture is causing unfathomable suffering and severe environmental problems, you still shouldn’t stop eating meat. As a vegan activist, this didn’t resonate with me. At all.
More...