Mid-length Non-fiction Book Reviews: Volume 2
AI skepticism—road-trips through rural China—the philosophy of grand strategy and leisure—Libertarianism—another mediocre business book—another amazing survival story—and the Battle of Gettysburg!
Country Driving: A Journey Through China from Farm to Factory by: Peter Hessler
The ONE Thing: The Surprisingly Simple Truth Behind Extraordinary Results
Alone on the Ice: The Greatest Survival Story in the History of Exploration by: David Roberts
The Killer Angels: The Classic Novel of the Civil War by: Michael Shaara
The aftermath of the election continues to reverberate. I think this selection of book reviews is almost entirely culture war free, so perhaps it will act as a palate cleanser. I guess there is one book advocating for libertarianism, and I suppose if people still imagined that might one day happen, that book might count, but these days libertarianism seems to be an artifact of a simpler time.
For something that’s more indicative of the current moment, you may be interested in a bet I made recently. Without getting too deep into the details, one of my acquaintances offered to bet me $5000 that “Trump replaced Biden with an actor and that this will be widely agreed to by the mainstream media”. I took that bet, though my conscience (atrophied as it is) would not allow me to take it at even odds (which is how it was originally offered). Instead I insisted that it be at 5-1 odds. So if this new version of the “Great Replacement” is not revealed by January 20th, I will get $1000. But if Trump did!?! Well, then I’m out $5000 and everyone else is in for the craziest January in recorded history.
AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can’t, and How to Tell the Difference
By: Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor
Published: 2024
360 Pages
Briefly, what is this book about?
The ways in which AI is overhyped, particularly in the realms of prediction, content moderation, and AI risk.
What are the authors’ angles?
They’re two Princeton professors who seem to be trying to make a name for themselves as AI-realists. This book is part of a larger push which includes a newsletter. Though all of this is more a point about their incentives than their veracity.
Who should read this book?
If you’re skeptical about headlines announcing that the latest AI model (say ChatGPT-o1) is blowing away this test or that benchmark, you’ll appreciate this book. It also has some good stuff on the difficulties of using AI to tame the internet cesspool (content moderation). On the other hand, it’s pretty bad at discussing AI risk.
Specific thoughts: Some great bits, some good bits, some laughable bits, but overall kind of dull
This book works well as an argument against lower-stakes AI doomerism like job automation and horrible, AI-driven privacy invasions. It also does well at expanding the “replication crisis” into the domain of AI, pointing out how most of the really impressive claims about AI are distorted in ways large and small.(In particular it’s hard to ensure, because of the enormous amounts of data the AI has ingested, that it hasn’t already “seen” the answers.) Furthermore it points out how these claims drive AI hype, which leads to AI being used to do things it’s not very good at, which leads to most of the AI harms.
On the other hand, its discussion of high-stakes AI doomerism was laughably weak. Narayanan and Kapoor misunderstood the point of the paperclip maximizer thought experiment and claimed the only reason we fear AI is because:
…we’ve been endlessly conditioned by sci-fi to do so: the Terminator, Skynet, and other examples of rogue AI readily come to mind.
So the only reason we’re afraid of AI is that we’re surrounded by fictional examples of rogue AI, and even though these portrayals are ubiquitous, they can only come up with two illustrations before hand waving “other” examples. “You know all those others.” Oh, and also? The two actual examples, Terminator and Skynet, are the same thing!
You can disagree with Yudkowsky and others who are panicking about AI Risk, but to declare that the only reason they’re worried is they’ve consumed too much science fiction goes beyond strawmanning into pure laziness.
Country Driving: A Journey Through China from Farm to Factory
By: Peter Hessler
Published: 2010
448 Pages
Briefly, what is this book about?
Hessler’s experiences in China during the years 2001-2007. This was a time of rapid growth and widespread change in the country, which Hessler documents from the perspective of the rural citizens.
What's the author's angle?
Hessler wrote this while serving as the China correspondent for the New Yorker.
Who should read this book?
If you’re interested in a different angle on China—one that’s less about China as a faceless competitor and more about China as a nation of individuals—then you’ll like this book. It’s more or less a collection of interesting anecdotes which unobtrusively join together into a fascinating portrait of a very different world.
Specific thoughts: Read it for the humor not the geopolitics
I understand that most people are interested in China because of its place in the world, the threat it poses to the US lead world order, and the possibility that—when it inevitably invades Taiwan—it will start World War III. The book completely ignores those issues, which may disappoint some, but this lack of geopolitical focus is part of its charm.
So, if the book won’t help you better navigate the realities of Great Power competition over the next decade, what will it do for you? For one, it will help you develop affection for the average Chinese citizen, which is always a good thing. It turns out these citizens can’t even name the leader of China, let alone offer any insights into how that leader might behave as he channels the will of China (or far more likely his own ambition). But we have enough of that already.
Also, the book concerns the period 2001-2007 and, while that doesn’t seem that long ago, the amount of change undergone in China since then has been enormous. That can be helpful to remember when you’re trying to get a sense of things. It makes the book seem hopelessly out of date, but if you don’t understand these changes, both in scope and in impact, you’re not going understand the Chinese people.
As I have said, this understanding isn’t going to do you much good, because the people of China aren’t making the important calls. But at least you can be sad as you think about the rural Chinese citizen, making the transition to working in a rapidly-industrializing city, and how he’s caught up in the same implacable march of history with everyone else; a march that is hopefully not pushing us towards a fiery, nuclear end, but very well might be.
On Grand Strategy
Published: 2018
384 Pages
Briefly, what is this book about?
A discussion of strategy which proceeds mostly chronologically, starting with the invasion of Greece by Persia in 480 BC and continuing through a discussion of America’s Grand Strategy.
What's the author's angle?
Gaddis is a professor of history, and one gets the sense that the book is adapted from his lectures. I’m not sure that adaptation works. (Though it did win a Pulitzer, so what do I know?)
Who should read this book?
If you are, or want to be a fan of Isaiah Berlin (Gaddis refers to him constantly) then this might be the book for you. Otherwise I think Robert Greene’s the 33 Strategies of War does the same thing Gaddis is attempting here, only much better.
Specific thoughts: Moderately good stories, poorly organized
There are two ways of approaching a subject like this. Either you can build your foundation on stories, with lessons and morals being derived thereafter. Or you can build your foundation on principles and then offer stories by way of illustration. Gaddis seems to be trying to do both at the same time and he ends up half-assing the stories and garbling the principles.
Of the two, he probably pulls off the story portion better. (In particular I thought he did a great job summarizing the life of Augustus.) Of course, stories have a natural order one can draw on: “this happened, then this happened, then that happened”. Gaddis used this to decent effect; Greeks to Romans to Augustus to Napoleon, etc. (I’m skipping some names…)
Principles do not have the same natural, embedded order. As people frequently remark: principles are timeless. If Gaddis had an underlying system for presenting them, I missed it. Certainly they were somewhat tied to the history he was relating, but there seemed to be very little which tied them to each other.
My best guess is that his thesis was that Grand Strategy requires nuance and balance, that what works in one situation won’t work in another. And indeed this is very much true, but it wasn’t until the end of Chapter Seven (more than 2/3rds of the way through the book) that this potential thesis was clearly articulated.
As a devotee of Isaiah Berlin he has to mention his famous observation:
A fox knows many things, but a hedgehog knows one big thing.
Which actually came from the Ancient Greek poet Archilochus, but Berlin wrote a very popular essay on the topic. Alongside that, Gaddis has to mention Philip Tetlock’s conclusions about how these two modes relate to forecasting. As will become more and more apparent over the coming weeks anyone mentioning Tetlock as a core piece of their understanding of the world is automatically going to have several points deducted from their score. At least Gaddis has the good sense to admit that both forms of thinking are necessary for good strategy.
I was surprised when I found out that Berlin didn’t think much of his famous essay. And given all the times I’ve encountered this classification I was even more surprised that I hadn’t uncovered this fact earlier. Certainly one would think that as much time as Gaddis spends talking about Berlin that he would have mentioned it. In any case, concerning the essay, Berlin said, “I meant it as a kind of enjoyable intellectual game, but it was taken seriously.”
Yes, very seriously, some might even say too seriously.
Leisure: The Basis of Culture
By: Josef Pieper
Published: 1948
145 Pages
Briefly, what is this book about?
That the basis of our existence is a search for divine wonder and leisure, properly understood, is creating the circumstances necessary for this search.
What's the author's angle?
Pieper was a Catholic philosopher, so while the book is probably best categorized as philosophy, there is also a heavy theological undertone as well.
Who should read this book?
If you’re one of those people (like me) who can never relax, this book takes a very interesting approach to the question of leisure and relaxation. I wouldn’t recommend it if you’re looking for quick fixes, but if you’re interested in a deeper philosophy of leisure, this book is well worth your time.
Specific thoughts: I took a lot of notes
This is something of a cop out, but I took a lot of notes, and rather than attempt to imperfectly summarize Pieper’s points, I thought it might be best to let him speak for himself. Here are four of my favorite selections:
Leisure is a form of silence, of that silence which is the prerequisite of the apprehension of reality: only the silent hear and those who do not remain silent do not hear. Silence, as it is used in this context, does not mean “dumbness” or “noiselessness”; it means more nearly that the soul’s power to “answer” to the reality of the world is left undisturbed. For leisure is a receptive attitude of mind, a contemplative attitude, and it is not only the occasion but also the capacity for steeping oneself in the whole of creation.
The soul of leisure, it can be said, lies in “celebration”. Celebration is the point at which the three elements of leisure come to a focus: relaxation, effortlessness, and superiority of “active leisure” to all functions. But if celebration is the core of leisure, then leisure can only be made possible and justifiable on the same basis as the celebration of a festival. That basis is divine worship.
The ultimate perfection attainable to us, in the minds of the philosophers of Greece, was this: that the order of the whole of existing things should be inscribed in our souls. And this conception was afterward absorbed into the Christian tradition in the conception of the beatific vision: “What do they not see, who see him who sees all things?”
“We are not”, says Pascal, “we hope to be”. And it is because the structure of wonder is that of hope that it is so essentially human and so essential to a human existence.
Anatomy of the State
By: Murray Rothbard
Published: 1974
62 Pages
Briefly, what is this book about?
A classic libertarian text on the coercive and corrosive power of the state.
What's the author's angle?
Rothbard was a well-known libertarian and a huge advocate for an anarcho-capitalist conception of government.
Who should read this book?
As you can see, it’s super short: 57 minutes as an audiobook (and you can get it for $2.74 as of this writing). Even if you hate libertarians, you should read this so as to better define the source of your hatred. Plus if you're someone like me who has certain goals for how many books they want to read in a given period this is an easy one to check off.
Specific thoughts: An interesting vision which over time has been shown to be unfortunately naive
Like many people, I had my libertarian phase, and at the time it all seemed so clear. This book definitely reminded me of that. It was like visiting myself in my 20s. Back then, I naively believed (as many did) that drug legalization would be far better than the ridiculous “War on Drugs”. I still have my problems with the latter, but the former, even in its mildest form, turned out to be quite the disaster as well. As it turns out such problems are enormously complex, and full of dozens of difficult trade-offs. Libertarianism asks, “but what if it were easy?” That is a useful question to ask when confronting hard problems. Also, it’s enormously attractive. Unfortunately the answer to that question turned out to be: “It’s not easy! And stop distracting me with your super sexy libertarian ideas!”
The ONE Thing: The Surprisingly Simple Truth Behind Extraordinary Results
By: Gary Keller and Jay Papasan
Published: 2013
240 Pages
Briefly, what is this book about?
The importance of focusing only on what’s most important and eliminating from your life anything that isn’t your highest priority.
What's the author's angle?
Keller is apparently a huge deal in the real estate industry. He’s the founder of Keller Williams, which is impressive. He didn’t mention real estate in the book, but now that I know that it helps to explain the book’s vibe.
Who should read this book?
I think this book was recommended to me at a networking event or something along those lines. I can see why they did it, but I won’t be making a similar recommendation to anyone. As business books go it’s pretty mid (as the kids say). As something very much in the same vein I would recommend Greg McKeown’s Essentialism as opposed to this book.
Specific thoughts: A collection of cliches.
It’s clear that part of my reaction to this book is based on the fact that I have heard all of this advice before, so there’s some chance that it will land differently with you. But that assumes that you haven’t read a lot of self-help/productivity books, and, inexplicably, you choose this to be one of the first ones you read. Don’t do that. Perhaps I need to put together a list of great self-help books and the order in which you should read them, but for now just don’t start with this book.
The other thing that bugs me about this book is that, while focus is very important, it’s also a luxury for most people. Now to be fair Keller puts in some stuff about making time for your family, but you get the feeling it was done grudgingly. Even with that, there are a lot of people who cannot just focus on ONE thing, no matter how forcefully ONE is capitalized.
Furthermore, even if someone is in a position to focus on one thing, it still might not be a good idea. I think the world is suffering from a shortage of polymaths, and jacks of all trades, and further moving away from that isn’t going to help. To take a more concrete example, according to The Economist “Fully 57% of Gen Zs in America would like to be a social-media influencer”. For these people the ONE thing is obvious, but also disastrous. I have long thought that “Follow your passions!!” is horrible advice, and there is nothing to distinguish Keller’s advice to pursue ONE thing, from the advice to give up everything in pursuit of your passions.
Alone on the Ice: The Greatest Survival Story in the History of Exploration
By: David Roberts
Published: 2013
352 Pages
Briefly, what is this book about?
The tale of a largely forgotten Antarctic expedition mounted by the Australians. In particular one Australian (who ends up being the focus of the book) Douglas Mawson.
Who should read this book?
If you like survival stories, this one is an absolute banger.
Specific thoughts: He did what?
There are a lot of amazing stories in this book. And a lot of terrifying ones as well. The story of what Mawson went through is particularly amazing, and If you don’t want to be spoiled you should skip ahead to the next review.
The whole expedition was incredibly ambitious, but as the leader Mawson, and two others, Xavier Mertz and Belgrave Ninnis, took the hardest bit. They also ended up suffering the greatest calamity. The troubles started when Ninnis disappeared into a crevasse taking nearly all of the party's supplies with him. Mertz then went on to die from what people think was vitamin A poisoning from the husky livers they were forced to consume in order to survive. As a result Mawson ended up nearly starving and making the trip entirely on his own.
It was in this condition when he himself fell into a crevasse. Fortunately his sled ended up anchoring in some snow at the edge, but that still left Mawson dangling 14 feet down connected only by a couple of ropes. In a bit of prescience Mawson had tied some knots into the rope, which made them slightly easier to climb, but if you’ve ever tried free climbing a rope, even with knots it’s pretty tough, and that’s if you haven’t been starving yourself. Nevertheless Mawson had no other choice. In his weakened state the climb was insanely difficult, but he made it to the top. Tragically, as he reached the top and tried to climb out the lip of the crevasse broke loose and he fell back the full 14 feet.
It now seemed that he was clearly destined to die. He just did not have the strength to try again. But after hanging there for a bit, and getting some strength back, he resolved to try again. This time when he got to the edge he pushed his feet over first and managed to crawl out to safety. The effort was so extreme that the minute he was safe he completely passed out for a full hour, maybe two. As incredible as this is, I had to leave out many of the interesting bits, and this one incident only touches on the barest fraction of the challenges Mawson faced.
What makes this all more impressive is that in 2007 Tim Jarvis tried to replicate Mawson’s journey back from where he lost Ninnis. Jarvis was an amazing athlete, at one point holding the record for fastest unsupported ski journey to the South Pole, and yet not only was he slower covering the distance Mawson covered across a landscape that was notably free from crevasses (unlike Mawson), when the time came to recreate Mawson’s escape from the crevasse he made it out on the first attempt, but when they lowered him back in for a second try, he only made it halfway before giving up.
I’m not positive that this is, as the subtitle claims, “the greatest survival story in the history of exploration” but if it’s not, it’s dang close.
The Killer Angels: The Classic Novel of the Civil War
By: Michael Shaara
Published: 1974
368 Pages
Briefly, what is this book about?
A semi-fictionalized account of the Battle of Gettysburg. (Included here because I don’t otherwise it would be years before I had enough semi-fictional works to make up an entire post.)
Who should read this book?
My knowledge of the Civil War is less than it should be. This is maybe only the fourth or fifth book I’ve read on the subject, and it’s been awhile since I’ve read anything. I say this so you can discount my recommendation as you see fit. But I really enjoyed this book, and would recommend it to anyone interested in the Civil War, and also hazard a guess that it makes a good place to start.
Specific thoughts: A pioneer in POV writing?
Interestingly, this book reminded me of Game of Thrones, and I had cause to wonder if this book served as any kind of inspiration for George R. R. Martin. In both books each chapter has a different point of view character (POV). Of course having different POV characters goes back, arguably, to Canterbury Tales and Chaucer, but I think Martin and Shaara handle them very similarly. Both are sympathetic to all of their POV characters. There’s a great deal of inner life revealed in both books, and the subject matter of war and strategy is also very similar.
ChatGPT says that there is no evidence that Martin cited Killer Angels as an inspiration, so that does put a damper on my theory, but I strongly suspect that was because if he had said it, the parallels would be so close that Martin is afraid it would diminish his own achievement. Of course these days I assume Martin’s biggest fear is for his life, given the enormous delay of Winds of Winter.
Anyway back to Killer Angels. Shaara does a fantastic job with the descriptions and the various characters. So much so that I was disappointed that the Confederates lost. Which I understand is not a good thing, but such was the power of the book.
I guess showing forth any sympathy for the Confederacy might put this post in the middle of the culture wars despite my earlier disclaimers. But if you think that’s bad, join me in a few weeks for the next volume of Mid-length Non-fiction Book Reviews. There’s a book I’m in the middle of about people like Rosa Parks that I already hate.
If you want to make sure not to miss that, be sure to subscribe!