I am roughly three quarters of the way through Dark Tide. I really like the way that he has set up the book, it reminds me of another book that I read from the perspective of ten cowboys telling the tale of a murder (obviously not the murder and cowboy part just the multiple points of view). This is also like the popular movie Vantage Point. I like the way he writes the story because it isn't complex, it's easy to understand, and the story flows nicely from one view to another. Structurally I like how the book is set up because dates are included in the chapters along with significant things that can be connected to from the time period.
My question about Freakonomics is along the same line as Leighann's. Other than the obvious reason of comparing things that aren't commonly compared, why choose these things. My theory is that after the studies are done they simply found the answers and then relayed them to us with interesting facts about how such things are connected and how and why they work. If anyone has a better theory I'd be glad to know about it.
I agree with your opinion about the connections made in Freakonomics. Some of them do feel like they're simply statistics being made interesting, like with schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers because I didn't see a very strong connection there.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point about Dark Tide, I also mentioned in my post about how you're able to see from many vantage points and one is able to get a full view of the story. I like your idea about Freakonomics,maybe they were just doing a variety of experiments and connected them, good observation!
ReplyDeleteI'm a large fan of the Vantage Point comment. Also, I agree with the rest of the post, about how he writes and the structure of the book in general. He writes simply, and its easy to follow. The dates help a lot too, for the purpose of connecting to other events of the time period.
ReplyDelete