**WARNING**: There might be allusions to the story below. Don’t read any further if that bothers you.

Someone (who, incidentally, had //not// read the book) described the book to me as “a cross between //Catcher in the rye// and //Terry Pratchett//”. The reading guide at the back of the book itself says the book may seem like a cross between //Catcher in the rye// and //Adventures of Huckleberry Finn//. As you can see, the common theme here is [[wp>The_Catcher_in_the_Rye|the catcher in the rye]], so you can imagine that this is sort of a coming of age book, and sort of a depressing book (depending on the type of person you are).

Its a Booker winner, so much has already been written about Vernon God Little. Its a sharp, witty satire on teenage, violence, American media and sexuality. The book is a narrative in first person (just like Salinger’s book) and the protagonist has a distinctive way of talking (again, just like in CITR). This is a story about a 15 year old boy — Vernon Gregory Little — who is a witness to a high school murder incident and how he gets entangled in the chaos that ensues afterwards. As events unfold, he flees to Mexico (and herein lies the semblance to Huckleberry Finn’s adventure). Its a book about his journey as he tries to figure out his fate.

Though I took a really long time to read it, its a short book. I found the book depressing in parts, but its usually pretty funny and sarcastic. I //was// a little disappointed by the ending though, which is surprising, because its actually a happy ending. But its a refreshing book, and definitely worth a read!

Freakonomics is a good book, but I think its hyped way too much. Its a book about how economics can be used to shed light on common, day to day issues and curiosities. The authors do a really good job of bringing the usually boring and mundane world of academic economics out to the public and help them relate to it.

For instance, the book talks about how the reduced crime rate in the US in the late 90s was probably not a result of better law enforcement, but a consequence of legalized abortion. The important thing to realize, of course, is that all these studies and results rely critically on comprehensive data collection and accurate data analysis. Along the way, the book also brings out some common ways of mis-interpreting statistics.

Personally, I picked up the book simply because it had been on the best seller list for too long and I was just curious to know what it was about. Its a short book, easy read, perfect for a flight.

This is one of those historical books that everyone keeps talking about (right there with Fountainhead, for instance). Unfortunately, I hadn’t realized this when I read the book. It was only after I finished reading it did I truly grasp the history and the context behind the book.

Anyways, my first impression of the book wasn’t all that good. I think the book is very open to interpretation, and depending on what kind of outlook you have towards life, you may find the book a little or a lot depressing. So far I’ve yet to find someone who found the book not depressing at all. But then it was meant to be that way, so its not really a point against the book.

The book doesn’t make a lot of sense in the first reading. I think I’ll have to go back and re-read parts of it. I don’t/can’t relate much to the protagonist, Holden Caulfield. I was never that insecure during my teenage. Life was simple in those days, I was content and busy with the things happening in my immediate vicinity. I was far from bothered about the world at large, let alone feel discontentment at human behavior.

Wikipedia has lots and lots of interesting information on [[wp>Catcher_in_the_rye|the book]], so I’ll defer you to it if you’re looking for more facts and/or interpretations and spoilers. I just want to say a couple of things about the book: it was written //more than 50 years ago//, and it is still one of the most argued and challenged books; you would probably find it depressing to read, but you’ll come out more appreciative of the things you are grateful for in your life; you might shrug the book off, but it will come back to haunt you later.

I think it deserves a read.

After reading [[http://floatingsun.net/blog/2006/04/05/628/|Interpreter of Maladies]], I picked up a copy of Ms. Lahiri’s other book, “The Namesake”. The writing style is immediately familiar — fluent prose that makes you immediately comfortable. The story feels very realistic, sometimes not like fiction at all. Sometimes too real. As with IoM, the book doesn’t leave behind a sharp impression. It just hangs there, waiting for you to make up your mind.

The book tells us the story of Gogol Ganguli, a second generation desi born and brought up in the US. He reminds us of the stereotypical [[wp>American_Born_Confused_Desi|ABCD]]. The book is also about the lives of Indians in the US, and in particular, the Bengalis. Its an interesting portrayal and my Bengali friends can better judge its authenticity.

Much as I enjoyed reading the book, I didn’t quite relate to Gogol. I’m not talking about the ABCD aspect of his life — since I haven’t been born and brought up here, this is hardly surprising. I’m talking about his more general attitude towards life and his family (parents, in particular).

I was going to write a whole bunch of other stuff, but then I realized none of it is actually relevant to the book and then I kind of lost that thread of thought, so I guess I’ll just stop. The book is not earth shatterning or life changing, but reading you fills you with warmth and sadness and hope and despair. It reminds me of how //human// we all are, how in this complex web of life people come and go through over lives, and how, in the end, so little of anything matters…

The bad thing about reading a Pulitzer winner is that you already build up some expectation about a book. And more often than not, even if the book is good, it falls short and you wonder to yourself, exactly why did it win the Pulitzer again?

Interpreter of Maladies (IoM henceforth) was Ms. Lahiri’s debut book I believe, and the first from her that I’ve read. Its a good book, no doubt, but IMHO its not a //great// book. As subjective as opinions tend to be, you should take mine with a grain of salt, or even better, form your own.

The stories in IoM are not sharp. By that, I don’t mean they’re not witty or anything. I mean they’re not sharp like a knife edge — none of the stories sink into you with a clear, razor sharp image. Not story is going to lead you to a crystallized, focused ending. There will be no message to drive home.

And that, I think, is what makes these stories special. They are like those forgotten stains that appear mysteriously the next place, in the least spot you’d expected. The stories keep coming back to you, nibbling at the back of your head. They take you places, talk to you, leave you wondering, letting you fill in the gaps as you want to see them filled.

However, not all stories are that good. To her credit, I think Ms. Lahiri has a very good line up at the beginning. My favorite would probably be //A Temporary Matter//, while my least favorite would definitely be //The Blessed House//.

Next I’m going to start reading “The Namesake”, on the recommendation of a very dear friend.