The Time Machine

The Time Machine is H.G. Wells's first novel, and as he himself pointed out in a preface, it is apparent. That is not to say that it is a bad story by any means - a man inventing a time machine and travelling to the future to discover that mankind has split into two distinct races which are pretty much cattle and hunters - but I would not go so far as to label it a must-read by any means. In all honesty, I was more intrigued by the future world the Time Traveller journeys to after he visits the fate of mankind; the grotesque environment full of vile giant crabs.

As an aside, I find it astounding that Penguin can see fit to charge $9 or £8 for a 90-odd page book. For a book of this length, I think $5 would be fairer.

A History Of The English-Speaking Peoples: The New World

The second part of Churchill's history of England, and I am full of praise once more. I found this edition to be very easy to read, which surprised me after I read my thoughts on the first part. Perhaps it is due to the fact that this edition has a much smaller time-frame to focus upon and so Churchill can dwell upon matters in more depth. I especially wish that I had this book when I was taking A-Level History back in England, as the discussions on the cause and effects of the English Civil War were my favourite parts of the book. I found this to be a surprise, as prior to reading I was dreading this section due to having any interest in this topic slowly drained away over two years with a dull and lifeless teacher. But as usual, the writing form of Churchill made this a joy to read, and reignited my interest in this area. Thanks Winston!

My only minor complaint about this book is that sometimes Churchill throws out names without explaining who they are or why they are being mentioned. There was one part where he suddenly mentions Rupert as being a naval commander in the 1660s. Now, due to my earlier reading of this book, I had looked up Prince Rupert on Wikipedia (and discovered that in the civil war he had a white dog that the Roundheads feared as a witch's familiar) and so I knew that he was an admiral at some point following the Restoration. Otherwise, I would not have known that this was the same Rupert. But this is only a minor complaint.

And of course, it wouldn't be a Churchill book without some anecdotes. They mainly stemmed from the Henry's VII & VIII, but here are my favourites:

• The charges against the Great Earl were serious enough apart from his suspect favour to Perkin Warbeck. Had he not burned down the cathedral of Cashel? The Earl admitted it, but excused himself in a fashion that appealed to the King. "I did it, but I thought that the Archbishop was inside."
• Pope Julius II, who had been besieged by a French force in Rome, had excommunicated the entire French army, and now grew a beard, an adornment then out of fashion, and swore he would not shave until he was revenged upon the King of France.
• At the Field of the Cloth of Gold, five years before, King Francis [of France] had mocked at her [Queen Catherine, Henry VIII's first wife] behind the scenes with his courtiers, saying she was "old and deformed". A typical Spanish princess, she had matured and aged rapidly.
• A magnificent and valuable bed, which had lain in the Treasury since it had formed part of a French nobleman's ransom...
• A dead dog was flung through the window of the Queen's [Mary I] chamber, a halter around its neck, its ears cropped, and bearing a label saying that all the priests in England should be hanged.
• We must not be led by Victorian writers into regarding this triumph of the Ironsides and of Cromwell as a kind of victory for democracy and the Parliamentary system over Divine Right and Old World dreams. It was the triumph of some twenty thousand resolute, ruthless, disciplined military fanatics over all that England has ever willed or ever wished.
• The English Puritans, like their brethren in Massachussetts, concerned themselves with the repression of vice. Swearing was an offence... one man was fined for saying "God is my witness," and another for saying "Upon my life." Soldiers were sent round London on Christmas Day before dinner-time to enter private houses without warrants and seize meat cooking in all kitchens and ovens. Walking abroad on the Sabbath, except to go to church, was punished, and a man was fined for going to a neighbouring parish to hear a sermon.
• In these days, when the Catholic Church raises her immemorial authority against the secular tyranny, it is hard to realise how different was the aspect which she wore to the England of 1679, with the recollection of the fires of Smithfield, the Massacre of St Bartholomew, the Spanish Armada, and the Gunpowder Plot.

One other thing of note from this volume is the story of the Founding Fathers from the Mayflower. We all know that they left the shores of England supposedly in the search for religious freedom due to there not being toleration toward Puritans (who given their zeal and literal interpretation of the Bible, are effectively the 17th Century equivalents of the Taliban) to practice their extremism in Britain. What generally is not told is that once they had settled and established a colony, they were intent upon denying the right of toleration that they themselves sought upon others of non-Puritanical belief. So effectively a major holiday in the United States celebrates a bunch of bigots. That's not meant to be an anti-American statement, but rather something that I was struck by as the common story retold is that they sought tolerance and freedom, but not that they were a collection of bigoted extremists.

Crimes of New York

This book wasn't exactly what I was expecting (the challenges of buying a book almost at random from Amazon). But! The excerpts from various writers of New York crime was a really good concept. There was only one that bored me somewhat (The Rogues Gallery). For the most part, this book was a collection of an interesting ride around various tales of New York. And, let's be honest, crime is not often dull. This book has inspired me for when I eventually take my guided walk test, featured lots of interesting trivia, and even introduced me to PG Wodehouse, for which I am pleased. I even found out that surprise, surprise, the screenplay for the Gangs of New York isn't quite historically accurate, which might explain why apart from Daniel Day Lewis that film bored the shit out of me. I would recommend this if you like to read about crime, or if you are going to visit New York (or live there) and want some additional flavour to the area. My personal favourite story - the one at the end about the teenage schoolgirls getting ripped off. Not really, that one was a bit random. I think my favourite was the tale of Dr Dix and Gentleman Joe.

There were a couple of things that struck me as notable pieces of trivia, which are as follows:

• There were two sets of police at one time in Manhattan, the Mayor's corrupt force and a new set to replace them, who battled each other quite a bit until a Supreme Court ruling. The best bit of the battles? "Whenever a cop of one force made an arrest, a cop of the other would set the culprit free, and the competing forces routinely raided each other's station houses and freed en masse the prisoners in each other's jails."
• They used to hang people at 2nd Avenue and 13th Street.
• A description of Long Island as by PG Wodehouse's Bertie Wooster: "The days down on Long Island have forty-eight hours in them; you can't get to sleep at night because of the bellowing of the crickets; and you have to walk two miles for a drink and six for an evening paper."

Three Musketeers

Three Musketeers is an interesting novel, coming to us from Argentina (although obviously translated into English). It is a thriller hybrid, with sections quite obviously in the thriller vein - who is following the lead characters, what is the mystery of the past - and part life - why did the main character ruin his relationship, will he get back together with his love? I found it to be very well written and extremely well-written, indeed, I tore through it in a day. It is just a good story. I wouldn't go so far as to proclaim it one of the literary greats, but it sits there as a book that if you read it, you won't feel like you have wasted your time. It's not by the numbers, in other words. I enjoyed it!

The Scientists

Make no mistake. The Scientists, A History Of Science Told Through The Lives Of Its Greatest Inventors is an absolute beast of a book. It would be even more of a beast if the subtitle was kept up throughout the book, but once we reach the end of the 19th Century, there are far too many scientists, says the author, and so we do not go into as much detail. Plus by then people were more boring anyway - the best parts of the book for me was reading about some of the more 'interesting' characters from the 16th-18th Centuries.

That's not to say that this is a boring book. It won't be too everyone's tastes - I personally struggled through a lot of the physics, chemistry and modern day astronomy sections as being far too dry for me personally and eventually started skipping sections as I wasn't really reading it anyway. It's obvious that the author took a lot of time and care in putting this book together, and really, no-one without an interest in the subject is going to pick up this book (unless they were given it as a random Christmas present like me). I really did enjoy the sections on classical science - astronomy, geology and biology are the ones that stand out. I find it hard to believe that things like Ice Ages were only agreed upon 40 years ago! What also struck me was how often two or more scientists have independently been working upon the same theory, with the same conclusions, only for one to strike first and publish, thus seizing the glory.

Overall, this is an interesting read, but I don't feel guilty for eventually giving in and glossing over some of the sections that didn't interest me. Reading should be fun, after all!