Jason at Negro, Please! is engaged in a yearlong meme in which he will read the equivalent of (at least) one book a week and provide thoughts on it. Given that I feel as though I haven’t been reading enough print media recently, I feel this would be an excellent plan for me, as well. Naturally, I have some catching up to do, but I think I can handle it.

Cornel West • Democracy Matters Democracy Matters by Cornel West
Publisher: Penguin
Year: 2005
Pages: 240
Joshua Braff • The Unthinkable Thoughts of Jacob Green The Unthinkable Thoughts of Jacob Green by Joshua Braff
Publisher: Algonquin
Year: 2004
Pages: 272
Jon Stewart et al. • America the Book America the Book by Jon Stewart et al.
Publisher: Grand Central Publishing
Year: 2005
Pages: 240
Maria Tatar • The Annotated Brothers Grimm The Annotated Brothers Grimm ed. Maria Tatar
Publisher: W. W. Norton
Year: 2004
Pages: 416
Chuck Palahniuk • Fight Club Fight Club by Chuck Palahniuk
Publisher: Holt
Year: 2004
Pages: 224
Susannah Clarke • Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell by Susannah Clarke
Publisher: Bloomsbury USA
Year: 2004
Pages: 800
George Carlin • When Will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops? When Will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops? by George Carlin
Publisher: Hyperion
Year: 2004
Pages: 320
Dave Eggers • A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius by Dave Eggers
Publisher: Vintage
Year: 2001
Pages: 496
Hunter S. Thompson • Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas by Hunter S. Thompson
Publisher: Vintage
Year: 1998
Pages: 224
Bertrand Russell • Why I Am Not a Christian Why I Am Not a Christian by Bertrand Russell
Publisher: Touchstone
Year: 1967
Pages: 266

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

§549 · April 1, 2005 · Tags: , , , ·

9 Comments to “52 Books in 52 Weeks, 2005”

  1. Brady says:

    Did you raid my bookshelf? Because if you haven’t yet, I’ve got the Russel book and Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

  2. Ben says:

    Yeah, that’s where I got them from. I’ll also probably read the philosophy of the Matrix book.

  3. sasha says:

    hi, found this site searching something on google, but aynways, ive read a book on the philosophy of the matrix, and if youre talking about the same one, it wasn’t very good. Some good points in teh beginning, but the rest of the book is really repetitive.
    anyways, cool site

  4. […] Following the lead of Heliologue, who is himself following Jason at Negro, Please, I will also make a move to read 52 books in 52 weeks and review them. It will be monstrous but I admit that I will enjoy it. Plus, it will – or at least should – motivate me to keep the site updated frequently with my musings. […]

  5. no need to study the philosophy of the Matrix, it can all be summed up in one concise story:

    Plato’s Parable of the Cave (Also known as the Allegory of the Cave)

    That’s it and that’s all. Though, that paved the way for many future philosophic/psychoanalytic theories—Like Althusser’s Ideolgical States and Ideological State Apparatusses, or Lacan’s “Mirror Stage as a Formative Function of the I”

  6. Ben says:

    If that were true, the series wouldn’t have been as bad as it was. The problem was, they started with Plato’s cave allegory, but then threw in an omnium gatherum of other, unrelated philosophies.

  7. grindbastard says:

    The problem with the philosophy of the Matrix is that not everyone is a raging pothead and therefore won’t find it so mind blowing.

  8. Ben says:

    “Like, what if the world we think we see… [dramatic pause] isn’t there?”

    “Dude, that’s deep.”

  9. david says:

    i always thought the “deeper” philosophy of the matrix were the moral implications of artificial intelligence.

    if you create self-aware, free-will beings such as the computer programs, beings that can see the wrongness/rightness of their actions (think the program at the train station who makes sacrifices for his daughter-program in order to give her a better “life”/existence), then this “artificial” intelligence would have the same moral value as a human being. that’s why the movies had to end with the “copout” resolution of peace. for either side, humans or machines,to wipe out the other would be to commit genocide in a sense. to create artificial intelligence—truly self-aware artificial intelligence—would be to create something on an equal metaphysical plane of existence with ourselves.

    would we be gods? perhaps.

    and if that’s true, kind of gives you a whole new perspective on what happens after death. pull the plug on a “computer program,” and we all know it ceases to be. pull the plug on a human? philosophers and theologians have been guessing at that for… well, forever.

Leave a Reply