New to me, anyway. I mentioned earlier that I've finally made the transition to books not on tape. That is, to digitized versions of books. I could have gone the CD route, but they cost the moon, I use my computer's DVD drive for more important things, and I don't own a CD player. So, at Charles' suggestion, I downloaded 2 books on tape for my iPod.
The first book was the third volume of Schama's History of Britain, a wonderful book I've listened to maybe 20 times. I am not a specialist in British history, so I don't worry about little things like "accuracy." I'm listening for the language, and especially for the careful use of colloquialism, contraction, and wry humor.
The second book was the one whose book jacket you see above. The image is a link to Amazon. It's new to me (though published in 2003, so not new by Schama's standards. He has a yet newer book on American history/culture which I might read soon), and so far very enjoyable. Like all his books, there are growling bits of gritty practicality, puns and references to older, other histories, and a wide-ranging mixture of ideas and actors.
Now here's the thing: real historians aren't supposed to like Simon Schama. His popular success, his inability or unwillingness to stick with one field, his crazy-complex sentences that sometimes seem to side with one historical interpretation but on a second reading take the opposite stand - it's not the stuff of which academic stars are made.
But I don't care. It makes me want to write.
6 comments:
He is writing a regular weekly column in the FT (Financial Times) that we really like. I think that "real" historians are just jealous that he has made it through to the other side: where he actually makes money writing books and not just teaching. I think he is great, but many of those same "real" historians don't consider me one either...
Do you get his TV documentaries in the States? He's a pretty good showman, really, which I imagine rubs a lot of academics the wrong way. I would think that anyone who has success inspiring the wider public to take an interest in history would be at least begrudgingly appreciated to some extent.
Dude, "what real historians are supposed to like." I have less patience for this with each passing moment of direct contact with academia.
You must, however, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyQe_jDq7oM
OMG-- that video is hilarious!!!
Yes, very funny. I particularly enjoyed "it's what we expected, but of course not what we anticipated." Schama pulls that crap all the time.
When I'm queen, I'll instruct his editors that the word "evidently" is no longer to appear in any of his books. Sometimes, it pops up 3 times in 2 sentences. Ack!
Post a Comment