"Angels and Demons" by Dan Brown

Was this book written by a different author than The Da Vinci Code? It sure seems like it. I previously read The Da Vinci Code. I enjoyed the story, but I thought that Dan Brown was a very poor author. Angels and Demons on the other-hand, is a very good book. You get the same element of half-fact, half-fiction that adds a lot of depth to the book. I found myself reading the book with my laptop on hand so I could check what elements of the story were in fact true. It was a great read.

"The Equation that Couldn't be Solved" by Mario Livio

"Hiding in the Mirror: The Mysterious Allure of Extra Dimensions, from Plato to String Theory and Beyond" by Lawrence M. Krauss

Occasionally I get to thinking that I'm a pretty smart guy. Heck, I have a degree in Mathematics. I work as a software engineer doing research for a successful public company. There's an reason solution to this sort of prideful thinking. All I need to do is read a book about theoretical physics. A few minutes of reading this book was all I needed to remind myself that compared to many of the minds on the planet, I am Forrest Gump. It's a bit demoralizing to read a book and only understand one out of every four pages. What I understood was quite good though.

"The Spine of the World" by R.A. Salvatore

I don't know if I am becoming desensitized to R.A. Salvatore or if this is actually an alright book. As I say every time I finish one of his books, I think Salvatore is a very poor author. His books focus way too much on fighting (explaining every sword swing in excessive detail) and generally contain very one-dimensional characters.

There was something different in this book though. I think it is because he focuses more on character development and exploration than he has in his recent works. I was first drawn to Salvatore by his Dark Elf Trilogy. It was a very introspective trilogy about the conflict between one's principles and the acceptable practices of an amoral society. After that series, it seems that he decided to become simply popcorn. Spine of the World seems to be a return to his earlier style.

Another device that he uses well, that I generally really enjoy when used properly, is the device of telling two stories in tandem that do not actually join until very close to the end. He uses it well, resulting in an unexpected but significant connection between the two plots.

"Beyond the Moons" by David Cook

Ah, the joy of fantasy drivel literature. I must say that it is nice to occasionally read a book that offers no enlightenment whatsoever. This was just such a book. I must say that I was somewhat surprised though in how well it was written. That is not to say that there was anything to necessarily laud in the writing, but for what it was, it was written quite well and contained a story which at least held my interest.

"The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown

I have always planned on reading this book; I just never got around to doing it. I watched the movie the other day--which I enjoyed--and resolved to go home and read the book. I was immediately put off by Dan Brown's very poor writing. There is something very juvenile about his writing which was hard to overlook. He left so many cliff-hangers that the ended up losing their literary significance. Having seen the movie already, they didn't bother me nearly as much as they would have had I not known already how everything would turn out. That said, I think his story was very interesting. Apart from some logical jumps, I found the underlying premise very interesting and compeling. It's my belief that Dan Brown should find himself a writing partner. There are a number of writing pairs where one person creates the story and characters and so on, while the other person actually writes the story. If he were to do this, then maybe the writing quality would be as high as the quality of the story.

"Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Puncuation" by Lynn Truss

Everybody has the right to be irrationally fanatical about one or two things. Lynn Truss has abused that privilege. Her fanaticism concerning proper punctuation is excessive. At least, that's how the beginning of the book feels. Had the book not been recommended to me by a friend, I no doubt would have stopped reading after the first chapter, wherein she voices her indignation over the deplorable state of world punctuation. As the book proceeded, I began to wonder if her feelings weren't sensationalized to grab readers, for she becomes much more reasonable. Once reasonibility sets in, the book offers a lot of good insights into the use of punctuation. We could all stand to use punctuation a little more, especially those marks other than the comma and period.

One interesting side note is that I found a few punctuation marks in her book, marks in direct contradiction of her stated rules. Now, that's to be expected in any book and would be excusable if it were not for her outspokenness on the subject. So, I checked the internet and found a long list of punctuation errors posted by some critics. I found it amusing.