mars2k's Reviews (234)

You Are an Artist

4.5

adventurous informative inspiring lighthearted reflective relaxing fast-paced

Learning about artists’ processes has always been one of my favourite parts of being an art student. You Are An Artist reveals the inspirations and techniques of dozens of contemporary creatives – many of whom I hadn’t heard of before – in a series of fascinating behind-the-scenes glimpses.

The suggested tasks are accessible and can be achieved with everyday materials. There’s a lot of variety, and there’s an index of categories in case you fancy a certain kind of project (design, performance, activities suitable for kids, etc). I found some prompts more interesting than others, but that’s to be expected. Green’s encouraging and reassuring tone makes for a relaxed, low-pressure environment and an overall pleasant read.

One criticism I do have is that the formatting is a little odd. There is an excessive amount of blank white space, as though this was intended to be a smaller book but was reconfigured into a larger coffee table book at some point during production. I don’t know if that’s true, but once that idea entered my mind I couldn’t unsee it.

Still, You Are An Artist is a book I would gladly recommend to amateurs and professionals alike – anyone looking to experiment with creative processes and express themselves in some way. It’s a nice, easy read with plenty of inspiration. I’ll almost certainly revisit it myself at some point :)

Content Warnings

The Vampyre and Other Tales of the Macabre

John Polidori

3.5

adventurous dark emotional funny mysterious sad tense fast-paced

Plot or Character Driven: A mix

Strong character development: Complicated

Loveable characters: Complicated

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: Complicated

The Vampyre and Other Tales of the Macabre is a bit of a mixed bag, like any anthology, but I quite liked it overall.

My thoughts on each individual story (listed best to worst rather than in the order in which they appear):

Monos and Daimonos – 4.5☆

Honestly, I really liked this one. Beautifully written and even comedic at times, with a paradoxical main character who feels realistically complex despite being confined to an eight-and-a-half-page story

Passage in the Secret History of an Irish Countess – 4.5☆

A gut-wrenching tale of abuse and violence that really got under my skin

Life in Death – 4.0☆

Nice imagery and an interesting premise which deserves more than seven pages. Francis’s transition from a carefree young man to a ruthless manipulator ought to have been explored more thoroughly, I think

Confessions of a Reformed Ribbonman – 4.0☆

Evocative yet, at the same time, economical. Not sure how I feel about the author’s literal demonisation of Ribbonism, though

The Vampyre – 3.5☆

It’s a solid metaphor for sexual assault and generally predatory behaviour by men in positions of power, but it’s not particularly well written. It feels very rushed and there’s a lot the reader is told instead of shown

Post-Mortem Recollections of a Medical Lecturer – 3.5☆

This one was alright. It’s funny, in a grim way, that the story told from the perspective of a medical professional is based around the idea of recovery through willpower. Basically “well, have you tried not being dead?”

The Curse – 3.5☆

This story is more tragic than macabre. The opening paragraph is very strong but the tangential story-within-a-story really does mar the pacing. I did like the theme of change, though

Sir Guy Eveling’s Dream – 3.0☆

Literally just a guy trying to woo a ghost. It’s not especially scary or spooky, just kind of weird

The Bride of Lindorf – 3.0☆

This one is a mess. It begins with some beautiful prose but gradually falls apart – the last page in particular feels like some very lazy writing. As for the story itself, if incestuous relationships upset you, give this one a hard pass

The Victim – 3.0☆

No supernatural elements (metaphorical or otherwise), just a straightforward murder. Many stories from this time are quite misogynistic but this one felt especially dehumanising and objectifying, what with the corpse kissing and all

Some Terrible Letters from Scotland – 3.0☆

I don’t really know what to make of this one. It’s not bad but it’s not particularly memorable either

My Hobby,—Rather – 3.0☆

An intriguing start, with a narrator who is seemingly obsessed with observing and documenting macabre events. Disappointingly, the “monster” is just an ordinary cat (which is killed)

The Master of Logan – 2.5☆

A moral tale about resisting temptation and turning to God for protection against evil. I found it dull

The Red Man – 2.0☆

Another story I found dull and unmemorable. I struggled to keep track of what was happening because I just wasn’t invested, unfortunately. It doesn’t help that it’s one of the more sexist and racist tales in this collection

Content Warnings

The Dinosaur Encyclopedia: A Handbook for Dinosaur Enthusiasts of All Ages

Michael J. Benton

4.5

adventurous informative inspiring fast-paced

Despite – or perhaps because of – its many inaccuracies, this is a really charming book. It’s a perfect snapshot of 1980s palaeontology, with prehistoric animals being eagerly described as “intelligent and quick-moving” and potentially “warm-blooded just as we are.” Breakthrough discoveries are presented with gusto, but there’s plenty that wasn’t known or understood at the time. The entry on Deinocheirus sums up this wide-eyed attitude well: “It is a pair of arms and nothing else [...] we cannot even guess what the whole animal looked like”

The encyclopaedia is supplemented with extra information on dinosaur biology (such as locomotion and egg-laying), a list of record-breaking specimens, an overview of the origins of palaeontology, etc. I appreciate that kids are encouraged to visit museums and take up fossil hunting as a hobby.

The illustrations are nice but they’re not scientifically accurate. Most depict unnatural postures and are lanky or overly lizard-like (which is typical of 1980s palaeoart) though the oddest reconstruction has to be the Ankylosaurus, which resembles a gargoyle or a Chinese guardian lion. Syntarsus (now considered a synonym of Coelophysis) is shown with a speculative tuft of feathers on the back of its head, but all the other dinosaurs are restored with scales or elephantine skin.

Speaking of feathers, I was surprised by the exclusion of Archaeopteryx – not only did it not have its own entry in the encyclopaedia, it wasn’t mentioned once in the entire book. I did some digging and found a Nature article written by Benton in 1983 (a year before this book was released) titled “No consensus on Archaeopteryx” which shows that the animal’s classification as a dinosaur was a somewhat contentious issue at the time. The more you know!

The Dinosaur Encyclopedia taught me more about the history of palaeontology than about dinosaurs themselves, but that’s not a bad thing. This isn’t really a book I’d recommend to a kid looking for an introduction to prehistoric fauna but it’s definitely an interesting read for palaeo enthusiasts like myself, especially after having read Benton’s more recent book Dinosaurs Rediscovered which is dedicated to exploring the ways in which the field has evolved (no pun intended) from the 1980s to the present day.

Content Warnings

Bosch

Laurinda Dixon

3.5

informative slow-paced

Bosch is refreshingly easy to read; it’s accessible without insulting the reader’s intelligence. Though the content is probably nothing groundbreaking for art historians, I, as someone who picked this book up on a whim knowing very little about Hieronymus Bosch, enjoyed it well enough.

There were some points I was a little unsure about, however. Dixon talks about physiognomy and how that relates to depictions of Jesus, but utterly fails to comment on the racism (and antisemitism in particular) inherent in this. She also interprets the presence of a few black people in The Garden of Earthly Delights as “personifying the marriage of opposites,” analysing the figures the same way she’d analysed animals, mythical creatures, plants, and inanimate objects but, notably, not the white people, who were allowed to simply be people.

Another interpretation which I found odd – not problematic, just highlighting a difference between her perspective and mine – was an image Dixon saw as “a disturbing image of poverty overcoming prosperity” which to me seemed to represent the poor overcoming the rich. She also claimed that landlords and money-lenders “serve the community” and referred to the rich as “persons of means” like that one guy who insists “billionaire” is a slur, which I found funny.

Still, I did learn quite a bit from this book. Dixon really made a point of exploring both the Christian and alchemical interpretations of Bosch’s work and showing how the two are not contradictory but, rather, inextricably linked. There were also some interesting notes about the significance of the funnel hat and the symbolism of hay which I hadn’t considered before.

All in all, this book is a decent introduction and overview of Bosch’s life and works. Nothing more, nothing less.

Content Warnings

Why Marx Was Right

Terry Eagleton

3.0

challenging dark lighthearted medium-paced

Why Marx Was Right is exceptionally accessible – no background in philosophy or familiarity with leftist theory necessary. I feel as though a more appropriate title would have been “Why Marx Wasn’t Wrong,” however, since the book is dedicated to debunking common misconceptions about Marx and his philosophy. With a title like Why Marx Was Right, I’d expect the author to focus on what Marxism is, not what it isn’t.

There are quite a few points on which Eagleton and I disagree (he is pro-state, pro-military, pro-police, and seems to view capitalism as something of a necessary evil when it comes to technological advancement) but I won’t pick that apart here. I do appreciate him not making any excuses for atrocities committed in the name of communism, though – he disavows Maoism and Stalinism, referring to them as “botched, bloody experiments.”

Something I really didn’t enjoy was Eagleton’s habit of casually bringing up serious subjects for humour, hyperbole, or just plain shock value. This is grating at best, and potentially triggering at worst. The problem isn’t that these topics mustn’t ever be discussed, it’s that they’re being treated in a way which is recklessly insensitive. And it’s completely unnecessary too, which makes it all the more frustrating. Edginess for the sake of edginess is dull.

The book gradually mutates into an anti-SJW rant, complaining about political correctness and multiculturalism, and using the terms “postmodernist” and “liberal” to refer to any progressive the author deems too soft. There’s one part where he complains about liberals being opposed to hierarchy which... just isn’t true. I assume he must mean anarchists? But “liberal” and “anarchist” are not synonymous at all. Later, he responds to the argument that Marxism is Eurocentric by calling his imaginary opponents “simpleminded” and accusing them of reverse racism. The fact that all this is in a book about dismantling straw men is just *chef kiss*

Despite all this, I can’t really describe Why Marx Was Right as a bad book. There are some good points and some bad takes, which is why I’m giving it three stars.

Content Warnings

Capital: A new abridgement

David McLellan, Karl Marx

4.0

challenging informative slow-paced

It’s Capital, what can I say? It’s pretty dense – it’s hard to say sometimes whether the painstaking detail Marx goes into should be regarded as thoroughness or long-windedness. Economics and mathematics aren’t exactly my strong suits, so I’m sure there’s plenty that went over my head. That said, it was surprisingly sarcastic and more accessible than I thought it would be, and I appreciated the supernatural metaphors (as I always do)

I kept notes while I read, tweeting a thread of very short chapter summaries. It’s not particularly in-depth and I don’t really offer any insight or analysis, but it did help me keep track of what arguments were being made
https://twitter.com/bigfootsheelys/status/1332311389004832768

After reading this book, I now have a firmer understanding of what capitalism is and how it functions. I would give it four and a half stars but it was a tough read and there are some parts I’m still trying to make sense of, so I’ve settled on four. I definitely prefer it to The Communist Manifesto, which I felt was too cursory

Content Warnings

The Book of the Sword: With 293 Illustrations

Richard Francis Burton

3.0

informative slow-paced

Let’s not beat around the bush – this book is extraordinarily racist, even when its age is taken into consideration. Scientific racism, an obsession with the dichotomy of “civilisation” and “savagery,” casually referring to white people as “the worthier race” – barely a page goes by without incident.

An example: Burton really makes a point to remind the reader that Ancient Egypt was extremely advanced and served as a major influence on contemporaneous and subsequent cultures, but a hypocrisy emerges as he discusses its impact on European and African societies. Greece and Rome being inspired by Egypt is presented as an interesting tidbit. Meanwhile, when discussing “uncivilised African races” (he goes on to use some slurs I won’t repeat here) the author claims the only reason they have advanced metallurgy is because they “had the advantage of dwelling within importing and imitating distance of Egypt,” implying that North Africans aren’t intelligent or skilled in their own right, they just profit off other cultures’ achievements. This double standard demonstrates Burton’s unwavering conviction that Europeans are unquestionably superior – an attitude which permeates each and every chapter.

There are frequent tangents concerning metallurgy, mythology, and even animals – so many that I’d say, at a guess, maybe 15% of this book is actually about swords (and daggers, axes, polearms, etc). The fact that Chapter VII is called “The Sword: What is it?” goes to show how much preamble there is. Still, I did learn a considerable amount about the history and use of swords and other melee weapons when the author managed to stay on-topic.

This was supposed to be the first in a trilogy, serving as “an efficient introduction” before going on to explore the sword’s development and progression into its “Golden Age” (the sixteenth century) in Part II and its decline up until what was then the present day (late nineteenth century) in Part III. Honestly, Parts II and III, as outlined in this book’s introduction, sound far more interesting than this would-be Part I, but the rest of the trilogy wasn’t completed before Burton’s death in 1890. I couldn’t help but feel a pang of disappointment reading the closing phrase “Here begins the romance of the Sword.”

I was originally going to give The Book of the Sword two and a half stars, but Joseph Grego’s illustrations elevated it to three stars for me. To be honest, the cover art is what made my pick this book up in the first place.

There’s much more I could say but I think I’ll leave it here. This is a book let down by poor structuring and incessant bigotry, but I suppose it does have some historical value and could serve as a jumping off point for further research. It isn’t something I’d recommend, necessarily, but I don’t think reading it was a complete waste of time.

Content Warnings

Strange Harvests: The Hidden Histories of Seven Natural Objects

Edward Posnett

3.0

adventurous dark informative reflective slow-paced

Strange Harvests started strong. The evocative writing style of the introduction really drew me in, but that spark quickly faded and the book ended up being quite dull overall. The aimlessness only got worse chapter by chapter, with Posnett talking about topics which on the surface seemed interesting, but he wasn’t really saying anything – it’s unclear what his message was supposed to be. In the introduction he mentions “the possibility of a different relationship with the natural world, one predicated on cooperation rather than domination” as something he intends to explore, but the rest of text seems to contradict that by describing nothing but cruelty and exploitation (of animals and human workers alike).

I cannot understate the extent to which capitalist realism permeates this book. Posnett’s insistence on never questioning or criticising capitalism really is beyond parody at times. Trickle-down economics is presented as the solution to wage theft and extreme poverty, though enviro-capitalism (“protecting” nature by exploiting it for profit) is treated with some scepticism, at least. Communism is misrepresented as dismissed as being an “ideology,” but what’s even more concerning is the way fascism is praised for providing jobs and boosting the economy.

I just want to share this bone-chilling quote: “This is the market. There is nothing that can be done against the law of the market. The law of supply and demand is stronger than God.”

Though I can’t really call this book bad, I will say it was uncomfortable to read. It could have been much better considering the potentially fascinating subject matter.

Content Warnings

The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs: The Untold Story of a Lost World

Steve Brusatte

4.0

adventurous informative medium-paced

The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs is a flawed book, but I liked it overall and I did learn a few things. Everything was explained very clearly, though sometimes it came across as somewhat dumbed down rather than just being accessible.

Unlike Dinosaurs Rediscovered, this book focuses on scientists more than science. Each palaeontologist mentioned gets a full introduction, which is sweet but it does take time away from discussing dinosaurs. The novel-like storytelling laden with anecdotes sometimes makes the book meander a little too much for my liking but it does make it more engaging to read. I liked the chapter “The Tyrant Dinosaurs” – it was nice to see tyrannosauroids besides the famous T rex getting some attention.

My main objection is that at several points throughout the book, assumptions and assertions were made with very little evidence to back them up. For example, Brusatte insists that palaeontologists are certain Tyrannosaurus must have had feathers, but T rex integument has been a highly controversial topic for many years and there has never been a solid consensus, only conjecture. Further dubious claims about T rex (it used its arms to subdue prey, it was intelligent, it lived in packs) are based on circumstantial evidence at best. They’re not necessarily wrong, we just don’t know for sure that they’re right. There are also some points that are known to be untrue, such as Archaeopteryx being “the oldest bird in the fossil record” (it was an avialan but not a true bird).

Palaeontology books are bound to include a few errors – that’s to be expected. My issue is that Brusatte presents guesswork and inaccurate information with confidence, and this book is aimed at non-experts who don’t have enough knowledge on the subject of dinosaurs to recognise these mistakes for what they are.

Still, this isn’t a bad book. I imagine it would serve as a nice introduction to palaeontology for the layperson. I’d recommend it as to someone interested but not particularly well-versed in palaeontology, with a reminder not to take the author’s word as gospel and to instead use it as a jumping-off point for their own research.

Content Warnings

The Adventure Zone: Petals to the Metal

Griffin McElroy, Clint McElroy, Justin McElroy, Travis McElroy, Carey Pietsch

3.5

adventurous emotional hopeful fast-paced

Strong character development: Complicated

Loveable characters: Complicated

Diverse cast of characters: Yes

Flaws of characters a main focus: Complicated

So... I want to start off with a disclaimer that Petals to the Metal is probably my least favourite arc of the Balance campaign. It’s not bad, but it is flawed. The same is true of this graphic novel.

One of the main flaws Petals has (in the podcast and in the book) is the major tonal dissonance. On one hand, there are a lot of sexual jokes (even by TAZ standards), to the point where it starts to get pretty uncomfortable to read/listen to. On the other hand, this arc is also incredibly sincere, tender, and emotional. The lewd goofs and the genuine heart don’t complement each other at all – in fact, they undermine each other and it gives the whole arc this weird, uneasy quality that I can’t quite put into words. It does make sense that this would carry through from the podcast to the graphic novel adaptation, and I know it would be unreasonable to expect unfeasibly drastic changes that would alter the entire plot and structure of the story. It does feel kind of unfair to fault the book for being a faithful adaptation, but at the same time this tone issue is difficult to overlook.

Quite a few changes were made, however. Some were small while others were quite significant, and some were much-needed while others seemed counter-intuitive. I can’t discuss every alteration because that would involve diving into the deep end of spoiler territory (and making this review ridiculously long) so I’ll just talk about the masks as an example.

In the podcast the animal masks were worn for anonymity. I understand why Pietsch drew them barely covering the characters’ faces – so that their expressions are still visible – but it kind of defeated the purpose. I think masks with Spider-Man-like inexplicable expressiveness would have worked better. For some reason, Hurley picked out the boys’ masks in this version, but Taako was still asked about the significance of the mongoose. This no longer made sense because he wasn’t the one who chose it, making the whole scene pretty confusing.

While I’m talking about Hurley, I just want to say she’s so cute and I love her design. I like Sloane’s design too, and I think they look great together. It would have been nice to spend more time with Sloane, but I’ll take what I can get.

The artwork in general is nice, though in some ways I feel it’s not as good as in the previous instalment. Something I praised in Rockport was the characters’ spot-on expressions (specifically Taako’s), but here he and other characters keep doing this ugly, distracting, Ren and Stimpy-esque pout. I’m not sure why this decision was made, but I’m not a fan. Some pages have way too much text. Exposition dumps aren’t a problem in a podcast, but in a graphic novel it does get a little annoying. The second half of the book is basically one big action scene, which isn’t Pietsch’s strong suit unfortunately. I worry that someone who isn’t familiar with the podcast would have a hard time following this story. I did appreciate the splash pages and the full-body character introductions, though – something I felt the previous two graphic novels were lacking.

I didn’t enjoy this book nearly as much as I enjoyed Gerblins and Rockport. I guess that makes sense since I didn’t enjoy the Petals podcast arc so much, but some of the problems this graphic novel has aren’t present in the podcast, so I can’t really attribute my disappointment to it being an adaptation of something I’m not a huge fan of. There were some touching moments and some funny easter eggs (like “Robots harder to draw than cars?”) but overall I just wasn’t into it. I’m giving it three and a half stars, though it’s probably closer to a three than a four. Hopefully the series will only get better from here.

More...