You’ve got to take it with a grain of salt — a politician’s self-reporting of what books he is reading is more about image than a reflection of what they are actually reading — but it’s revealing what British members of parliament think will impress the citizenry:
In the annual survey of MPs’ holiday reading, released today by the bookshop chain Waterstone’s, first place was taken by William Hague’s biography of William Wilberforce, which was published to coincide with the bicentenary of the abolition of the slave trade. It came well ahead of books that received more hype at the time of publication, such as the latest Harry Potter fantasy, or the diaries of Alastair Campbell.
It is perhaps not surprising that Mr Hague should be the top seller among Conservative MPs, but what is less predictable is that the survey showed the same book to be the Liberal Democrat’s top summer read.
A new mood of religious scepticism seems to have taken hold of Labour MPs, who have made The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins, their main choice. This follows the loss of Tony Blair, who looked to God as the ultimate judge of whether it was right to invade Iraq.
I am reminded of Bush’s announcement that he was reading that godless Frenchman, Camus. Now there was a cryptic message to the electorate…I think he was relying on the likelihood that his base wouldn’t have any idea what the The Stranger was about, so he was actually just trying to convince them that he is too a smarty pants. The title The God Delusion doesn’t leave a lot of room for ambiguity, though, and is well-known enough that everyone knows what it’s about.
Maybe some reporter should ask W if he has read any Dawkins lately…
(By the way, the Wilberforce biography is also on my to-read list, although I don’t know that I’ll get to it before the new term slams into my face.)
Anyone have an ISBN for Hague’s book? I can’t seem to find it listed anywhere.
Given G.W.’s grades in college and the lack of politicians who actually read the Patriot Act, I’d say it’s quite possible all of them have sufficiently forgotten how to read.
I don’t think The Stranger was a political choice. If it was a ploy of some sort, I really don’t get it. Is he pandering to the existential philosopher demographic? Maybe he’s trying to deal with the tension between fear of death and apathy with an innately meaningless existence.
What? It could happen ya know… stranger things have.
Hmmm, maybe it was the Classics Illustrated version?
Can I credibly claim that I’m the biggest fan of said “godless Frenchman” around these parts?
I remember when Maureen Dowd wrote a Op-Ed in the NYT about W and his “readings.’ Classic. However, what I find most mind blowing is the fact that W said he read “50 some” books that year. I can’t imagine the time/stress/intelligence/dedication it must take to actually head the ship that is America…but I can’t entertain the idea that I would have time to complete 50 some books. I’m in Grad school and I only make it through 20 or so.
I really doubt Bush’s reading list extends much beyond “Little Golden Books”
http://www.randomhouse.com/golden/
Although, to be honest, Poky Little Puppy is a classic.
OEJ
He’s wishing he were in Crawford fishing tonight.
Actually, I think the Camus thing was done by either a particularly callous or particularly ironic speechwriter. After all, the main jist of the story is that a man kills an Arab, then coasts through the repercussions without any sign of care or remorse.
So, do you suppose Dubya was wandering ’round the ol’ White House singing The Cure’s relevant song?
Hard to imagine it with that simply awful Texan drawl of his. (N.b., it’s awful coming out of his mouth; it’s not awful by default.)
You know, I wasn’t paying any attention when they announced Bush’s little foray into existentialism.
And just as Moody seems to have realized.
The Stranger is about “Killing an Arab”, sort of.
What the hell?
phat
Craig,
ISBN-10: 0007228856
ISBN-13: 978-0007228850
The title of the book is William Wilberforce: The Life of the Great Anti-slave Trade Campaigner.
ciao, great blog! visit mine :)
rieux, La Peste is indeed one of my favorite books. I read it in translation before I learned French and then read it and Camus’ other books in VO.
As a poster said back at the time of the report, he doubted that Bush knew that Camus was French. I think that Bush probably thought it was a book about Shamus the whale. BTW, the bible doesn’t mention how fish and water mammals survived the flood. Fresh water ones would have been killed by the increasing salinity and sea water ones by the dilution of salinity by the mixing of all the waters.
Also, another blogger back at that time described Bush as a born-again literate”. Too bad that the reporter didn’t ask Bush what he thought the message of the book was.
Sure it is. You’re just trying to impress us, aren’t you?! I know your game.
Well, Clinton always had a reputation for being a voracious reader (among other things). I’ve seen many an article about him staying up all night to read something or other.
But I just can’t see W staying up past milk and cookie time to read something. I can, however, picture him wearing the PJ’s with the little butt-flap and praying on his knees at 8:00 pm.
Maybe Laura reads him a story? She was a librarian; I’m sure she’s got some great suggestions.
I’m embarrassed to admit that I was extremely impressed that he was reading Camus at all, although I think The Plague would have been a better choice. O well. I still hope he read it.
thanks
50 books in one year they claimed…I couldn’t help but wonder if those included all those “books in the Bible”. I make it through about 25 a year and I consider myself an above average reader, mainly because the median number of books read per year is around 5 (according to a gallup poll). Although I admit some of those I read are re-reads.
I can picture Bush deciding to read The Stranger — it’s thin. Toss in the bonus of appearing more intellectual than anyone believes aWol to be, and Camus looks even better. What I find unbelievable is the idea of the man ever reading for sheer intellectual pleasure. He’s too unimaginative and self-centered.
PZ, this is one of the situations where Britain is Bizarro USA. At least for Labour (and often Lib Dem) candidates, it’s usually considered as bad an idea to flaunt your religion, if you have one, as it would be in the States to flaunt your atheism. Tories can get away with it, because proclaiming their own moral superiority is their whole schtick.
Heather (#16):
Larry Summers said as much to me, the first and only time we met. One of my friends was entering Harvard, and I snuck into the barbecue they held for incoming freshmen (hey, free food). Clinton left quite an intellectual impression on Summers — for what that’s worth.
Why don’t you just do a word count of all the papers you read and homework you correct, and pretend every 200,000 words or so is another book?
As one who used to work for an MP, they will give said worthy books to their researchers who will then ghostwrite the reviews for their local papers.
On my iPod right now:
Singer and Mason: The Way We Eat.
Alan Weisman: The World Without Us.
George Orwell: 1984.
Samuel Beckett: The Unnamable.
Mark Twain: Huckleberry Finn.
Natalie Angier: The Canon.
Embracing my inner pessimist – with a manic dollop of science thrown on for variety.
I’d love to believe all these MPs just independently decided to read TGD but I suspect the following might have something to do with it…
http://richarddawkins.net/article,565,Send-The-God-Delusion-to-your-MP,J-Christie-PledgeBankcom
I don’t think The Stranger was a political choice. If it was a ploy of some sort, I really don’t get it. Is he pandering to the existential philosopher demographic? Maybe he’s trying to deal with the tension between fear of death and apathy with an innately meaningless existence.
Or maybe he just felt a certain sympathy with the story of a man who kills an Arab for no reason.
I’m a voracious reader — but only seem to get time to read from my *own* list on half of my flights (the only good thing about flying near every week). The rest of my time is spent reading reports (or worse – writing appraisals of, or position-papers based on, reports)
IF I read only books I wanted to – I’d get through three or more each week. Currently I’m lucky if I can read one every two weeks.
My brother in law is an MP in London – and his ‘required reading’ is even more onerous than mine. So I doubt very much if any MP has *any* significant time for any non-work reading – unless they replace other activities – like sleeping!
I’m not sure if llewelly’s suggestion to pretend every 200,000 words or so is another book would be any succor whatsoever!
Just remember that we have since at least Hogarth been allowed to take the piss out of our elected representatives (and the unelected ones too). We can even do it in public without anyone accusing us of being unpatriotic or partaking of un-british activities.
And ever since the ’60s we have discovered we can even be nasty about and rude to them in person, and on television too. So when instructed by the party whips to contribute to such things MPs will be told ‘no hostages to fortune’. They are much more frightened of being laughed at than they are thinking about who might vote for them because of it. Not that I noticed any reporting of this over on this side of the pond. If PZ had not pointed it out I never would have known.
BTW did you know there was a guy here who pledged that he would send his MP a copy of The God Delusion if other people would pledge to send a copy to their MPs. AFAIK all the MPs got a copy. So it was probably sitting on the desk of a lot of them when the questionaire came by…
Farbeit from me to rush to the defence of members of parliament, but I suspect the Wilberforce book really is on their reading list… It has received pretty good reviews, and Hague (ex Conservative leader, current member of parliament) is one of their number.
When he said he was reading Camus his lips were moving…so we all know what that means. What a pathetic human being.
If you like off-the-wall ravings–er, writing–try the latest from Camille Paglia.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2007/08/08/clarkson/index1.html
“As a professed atheist, I detest the current crop of snide manifestos against religion written by professional cynics, flâneurs and imaginatively crimped and culturally challenged scientists. The narrow mental world they project is very grim indeed — and fatal to future art.
My pagan brand of atheism is predicated on worship of both nature and art. I want the great world religions taught in every school. Secular humanism has reached a dead end — and any liberals who don’t recognize that are simply enabling the worldwide conservative reaction of fundamentalism in both Christianity and Islam. The human quest for meaning is innate and ineradicable. When the gods are toppled, new ones will soon be invented. (“Better Jehovah than Foucault,” I once warned. For more on this, see “Religion and the Arts in America,” a lecture I gave at Colorado College earlier this year that was broadcast on C-SPAN’s “American Perspectives” series and that has just been published in Arion.)”
Of course she doesn’t name names, but she sure doesn’t seem to have read Dawkins or listened to any of his many lectures.
30: True. Hague, whatever his faults, is a smart and articulate man, and I am ready to believe that his Wilberforce book is pretty good – both in terms of academic quality and readability. Plus there’s probably a sense that it’s written by One of Us…