Book Reviews
Yesterday I finished two long books, both wonderful.
1. George Marsden's Jonathan Edwards. I read it to understand the social/cultural/historical/political setting more than to read about Edwards, whom I thought I knew something about. It turns out I knew much less than I thought. A 500-page biography by Yale University Press will have been carefully researched and vetted, so I can't comment on anything there--the depth of detail is mind-boggling. My attention flagged at points, but that is not a fault of his writing, only an indication of where my interests lay. Marsden is clear that he writes as an evangelical and is interested in Edwards' effect on later evangelical theology and practice, and in Edwards as an intellectual leader of the 18th century. If someone wants to read a well researched biography that is sympathetic to Edwards' world view, this is the one to read, despite its length (some parts can be skipped, although I wouldn't recommend it). We get a very detailed account of the Great Awakening in Northampton, the reasons why he was "let go" from that church, his work with the Indians (that might be something that could be skipped, because despite his good intentions it all rather came to nought). The last chapter, with its account of the deaths of four of the family, will make a reader cry.
I am not sure I believe as fully as Marsden that Edwards was a vitally important intellectual figure of the 18th century, but he makes his case. It seems that he oversaw the death of Puritanism in light of the Revolution, fighting for Puritanism's life all the way. But surely I have more reading to do about the relationship of the Puritans to later political and religious history.
I often felt that if I had ever been someone in a past life (pagan, absurd, I'm being silly here), however, it would have been Jonathan Edwards. As I was telling my husband and son, I just don't think I experience the universe like anyone else.
2. On the other hand, I do experience P.D. James like her other fans. I love it. I don't know if The Private Patient is my favorite, but it's close. (I still like Children of Men the most, but it's not a mystery). It follows some of her formula, but it ends happily, with joy, and so much of her books are joyless since they are unflinchingly about death. She has a razor sharp style that doesn't overdo visual detail; her characters can be unrelentingly cynical though. Maybe cynical is not word--perhaps detached and impersonal, not prone to pleasantries of human interaction, uncooperative, but then again, they have Dalgliesh to be wary of. In some respects, they seem wounded. That being said, I recommend the book, but not if you haven't read any of the other Dalgliesh's, since this may be the last (the lady is 89 years old, after all).
3. Not feeling myself yesterday, I watched Spencer Tracy's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. WAAAAAAY too Freudian for me. And what was with the 23rd Psalm at the end? Freud and David in the same movie. Too incoherent.
1. George Marsden's Jonathan Edwards. I read it to understand the social/cultural/historical/political setting more than to read about Edwards, whom I thought I knew something about. It turns out I knew much less than I thought. A 500-page biography by Yale University Press will have been carefully researched and vetted, so I can't comment on anything there--the depth of detail is mind-boggling. My attention flagged at points, but that is not a fault of his writing, only an indication of where my interests lay. Marsden is clear that he writes as an evangelical and is interested in Edwards' effect on later evangelical theology and practice, and in Edwards as an intellectual leader of the 18th century. If someone wants to read a well researched biography that is sympathetic to Edwards' world view, this is the one to read, despite its length (some parts can be skipped, although I wouldn't recommend it). We get a very detailed account of the Great Awakening in Northampton, the reasons why he was "let go" from that church, his work with the Indians (that might be something that could be skipped, because despite his good intentions it all rather came to nought). The last chapter, with its account of the deaths of four of the family, will make a reader cry.
I am not sure I believe as fully as Marsden that Edwards was a vitally important intellectual figure of the 18th century, but he makes his case. It seems that he oversaw the death of Puritanism in light of the Revolution, fighting for Puritanism's life all the way. But surely I have more reading to do about the relationship of the Puritans to later political and religious history.
I often felt that if I had ever been someone in a past life (pagan, absurd, I'm being silly here), however, it would have been Jonathan Edwards. As I was telling my husband and son, I just don't think I experience the universe like anyone else.
2. On the other hand, I do experience P.D. James like her other fans. I love it. I don't know if The Private Patient is my favorite, but it's close. (I still like Children of Men the most, but it's not a mystery). It follows some of her formula, but it ends happily, with joy, and so much of her books are joyless since they are unflinchingly about death. She has a razor sharp style that doesn't overdo visual detail; her characters can be unrelentingly cynical though. Maybe cynical is not word--perhaps detached and impersonal, not prone to pleasantries of human interaction, uncooperative, but then again, they have Dalgliesh to be wary of. In some respects, they seem wounded. That being said, I recommend the book, but not if you haven't read any of the other Dalgliesh's, since this may be the last (the lady is 89 years old, after all).
3. Not feeling myself yesterday, I watched Spencer Tracy's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. WAAAAAAY too Freudian for me. And what was with the 23rd Psalm at the end? Freud and David in the same movie. Too incoherent.
Comments