Mark's Book Blog: Superfreakonimics

Sunday, November 8, 2009

Superfreakonimics - C-

Sorry that this post is a couple of days late. While I finished Superfreakonomics on Friday, I was in Ann Arbor, Michigan with my No. 1 (and only) son for the weekend. The game was no good, but I'll digress with a few non-book blog tidbits from the weekend.

1. I was heartened that Max got to see the average UM fan who is far more intense than I am. Sherri had led him to believe that I was abnormal (about this in particular).

2. College kids don't really change--just their toys do. Lots of cellphones. Lots of sex and drinking talk in line at Blimpy Burgers from the four kids in front of us. Fortunately, it went over Max's head.

3. Along the lines of No. 2, weird sights from the weekend include a nose ring--ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE NOSE HORIZONTALLY--and (it must have been a pledge) a kid in a teletubby costume carrying another kid on his back with the rider slapping the teletubby guy like a horse.

On to Superfreakonomics. I was disappointed. It was more of the same from Freakonomics with subjects that just weren't as compelling--though this might be because it was more of the same.

I was turned off early in the book. In the introduction, the authors discussed drunk driving. There were stats about the total number of miles driven annually in the US and the percentage of miles driven drunk.
Then, the authors presented the number of miles walked each year and ASSUMED that the percentage of drunk miles walked to total miles walked was identical to drunk miles driven to total miles driven. Based on this, the authors made a conclusion about the relative safety of walking. vs. driving drunk.

On the one hand, let's not take this too seriously. The whole point of the Freakonomics books is to confirm conventional wisdom or turn conventional wisdom on its head. To make you think. On the other hand, this type of "analysis" is not exactly compelling.

In this entry, Levitt and Dubner take on global warming, prostitution, the effect of tv on crime and other topics.

The book is a very quick read--only about 220 pages from start to endnotes. If you loved Freakonomics, you will enjoy Superfreakonomics. Just make sure you read the original first.

I'm taking a very short break. My copy of Under the Dome arrives later this week. I am not going to pick up a book in the interim, and this will be the first time in almost two years that I will be between books for more than a day.

RIF

No comments:

Post a Comment

Mark's Book Blog

Welcome to Mark's Book Blog!

Why did I set this up? Several reasons.

1. I'm constantly asked for book recommendations. I often cannot remember what I've read recently and, consequently, struggle for a recommendation. This will keep me up to date.

2. We're all busy. Sometimes I forget what I liked and what I didn't like about a book I read a month or two ago. As a result, this blog commits me to memorialize a book shortly after reading the book.

3. I, too, want book recommendations from those I trust (so I may or may not read your recommendation). From this blog, you can see what I've liked--you may not like my taste, may never come back to the blog--that's ok. If, though, you like some or all of what I like, tell me. And, more importantly, tell me what else I'd like!

Here's my recommendation scale--I will rate all books I read (subject to my ability to rate a book that I stop reading for good reason). The recommendation scale has gone through many iterations since inception of the blog and is effective for all books recommended on or after December 29, 2009. For the recommendation scale applicable to books recommended prior to that time, go here.

This blog uses a "grading" system. In order to accomplish the blog's goal of "recommending" books, the grading scale works out like this:

A - Highly recommended

B - Recommended

C - OK, you might like it

D - A waste of time

F - A HUGE waste of time

If a book, let's say it's a sports-themed, non-fiction book, earns a recommendation in the "A" range, the blog post will note that the book is "Highly recommended for fans of [we'll just insert the sport of tonsil hockey here as a placeholder]." In other words, even an "A" recommendation may not be a book that I suggest you read. It depends on your tastes. Certainly some books in the "A" range will be recommended to all.

One other note. I am generally a stickler for grammar and punctuation (for using made-up words like "stickler," not so much). As I've stated in various posts, I am well aware that this blog does not utilize the well-established "underline book titles" convention. There are some places where book titles are in quotes. There are other places where book titles are merely capitalized. While I apologize in advance for being such a heathen as to ignore this convention, it bothers me. It really does. This is the kind of stuff that keeps me up nights. Seriously. I decided, however, about 50 posts in that I would make the lack of consistency in the identification of book titles the consistency for the site. Therefore and henceforth, I will utilize whatever convention I want in any willy nilly fashion I see fit.

Mark

Mark's Book Blog

Sunday, November 8, 2009

Superfreakonimics - C-

No comments:

Post a Comment

Mark's Book Blog

Blog Archive