Book Review: The Secret Perfume of Birds

Image: The cover of the book is a powder blue background with two hoopoes- birds with long curved bills, rufous bodies, and black and white wings and crests- in the upper left and lower right. In the center in large black print is "the secret perfume of birds." Below that in smaller print is "uncovering the science of avian scent" and below that "danielle whittaker."

I was excited when I first discovered Danielle Whittakers book on avian scent-  The Secret Perfume of Birds - in part because I was struck by how little I knew about the subject. There are many myths, old and new, surrounding birds ability, or inability, to smell. This book not only taught me a lot about this subject, but also helped me understand some things about myself and other humans. This book is well written, albeit in conflicting styles at times. It also functions in part as a memoir of an unintentional scientist. Whitaker had an unusual path to becoming a researcher, which adds an interesting element of storytelling. It also shows how people with diverse educational backgrounds often find important ways to collaborate with researchers from other fields. At times I felt like the switch between memoir and harder science made the book geared towards conflicting audiences. Sometimes this served the text, but others it did not.

One of the things that struck me early on about this book, that made me quite excited, was the author's discussion of social issues and how they pertain to sciences and the history of research on birds. In many texts, we learn information about great ornithologist of the past such as John James Audubon. Times have been changing, and some Audubon Societies have voted to shift their names to something other than a man who enslaved people and shot birds that are portrayed in his famous artwork in order to pose the dead bodies. It was interesting to see a text not only mentioned Audubon's history, but also call attention to one of the times that he really messed up in both his research methods and his conclusions. Due to his extremely faulty studies of turkey vultures (and through ineptitude mislabeled black vultures,) a myth was spread that birds do not have a keen sense of smell in his publication of his results. We now know the turkey vultures can smell carrion from miles away- they are one of the few species of birds whose evidence for keen sense of smell is widely accepted. Other ornithologists called him out on this. The issues remained. 

When discussing the exclusion and oppression of women in sciences, the author draws the conclusion that the reason that smell was not given as much attention in ornithology and other research is that women like her were the ones studying it. I think this is a bit more complicated as she discusses men rebutting claims that birds could not smell early on. She bases much of this on personal (accurate, believable) experiences being shut down by men regarding her hypotheses and findings. It is also worth noting that the biggest beneficiaries of things like affirmative action are white women, but race is not discussed much until the end. She also discusses the myth that birds cannot smell you (being the reason that returning nestlings is ok.) While well intentioned, it is not true, and luckily many warnings have been updated to say returning baby birds to the nest even if they do smell like you isn't a problem. In my experience, most people working in in bird and other animal rescue are women. So it seems the proliferation of the myths came for many sources. None of this is to say that we should not be aware of these biases as it is well known that women are over represented in many fields that involve the care of and understanding of other animals

Another reason why the myth of birds having an inability to smell proliferated was due to incorrect hypotheses about brain size.  You may have heard the phrase bird brain used to describe someone negatively. The reality is that while birds have smaller brains, the neurons within are much more densely packed. This is why we find out through research, and to be quite honest through observation of anyone with an open mind, that birds are able to think, feel, have culture, individual differences, and so on. We also learned through research like that of the authors that birds have keen senses of smell that are important in many aspects of their lives. Through her own and others research, the author has found evidence that smell influences birds' social lives, mate choices, health and well-being, traits of offspring, and even the proliferation of a healthy microbiome. I will not go into too much detail of these because I want to focus a little bit more on how science was written about in this book.

I did not have the same reaction that some other readers had to the science reporting in this book. There is more nuance to it for me. I believe that the biggest error is that this book seems to be written for the layman at times and at others is geared toward people with science and statistical backgrounds. As a result, when the author reports an observation and then refers to that observation as not being "statistically significant," folks with a science/statistics background know that this means that that result could be caused by chance (or human error/bias.) We know that this is something that needs to be studied further or something that may not exist at all as a result. People without any science or statistics background may read these passages and take away from them that the result was proof of a behavior. Whittaker choosing to mix many of her statistically significant results with other observations that may be caused by pure chance or coincidence can be seen as irresponsible with a mixed audience.

On the other hand, there is a large issue in science publication wherein only certain results that support certain hypotheses end up being published. However, it is very important for us to also publish when studies do not support the hypothesis, but these papers aren't as sexy and as a result, are not found in journals nearly as much. With this reality in mind, I found the author's humility regarding what she found in many of her studies to be refreshing. She discusses the results in a rather young field and admits when her team made mistakes, didn't find what they were looking for, or where the methodology even if it does provide a cause and effect result, may not tell the whole picture. The last point is extremely important and something that I find highly frustrating in a lot of science reporting on other animals. I thought the author did a good job of this provided that the reader understands what some of the terminology is ahead of time.

The ethics reporting in this book started off strong but ended up mixed or disappointing at times. While she did highlight some of the problems with researchers like Audubon and mentioned that some studies with birds are cruel, she goes on to discuss many of these things later to support her points. She does so not only without criticism, but with faulty euphemisms to turn off the reader's (and I assume her own) empathy and cognitive dissonance. I would honestly rather someone report on horrific abuse of animals in sciences without comment, than to do so in a way that falsely placates the warranted worries of the reader. I also found some of her descriptions of her own actions with birds to go against her assertion that research causes stress that must be accounted for and reduced as much as possible. None of this is unusual for science writing, but I expected better from an author claiming to go against the grain in terms of oppression in science. We need to accept that the idea of "no difference that humans chose to see" does not mean suffering did not occur. I believe anyone who's had brain surgery or injury can explain pretty definitively that is it is not like getting a paper cut yet it is always treated that way and text like these, and those are people who can actually grasp what has happened and why.

I believe her reporting regarding evolutionary advantages to certain aspects of avian scent to be frustrating at times. This is another thing that is very common in science texts and I don't really understand why. Perhaps it is the need to be able to streamline things into a simple conclusion, or just seeing what we want to see. We know from the entire study of evolution that traits existing currently in any living creature are not all entirely advantageous. We know the evolution is something that takes place over an extremely long amount of time with traits appearing randomly and some proliferating through selective breeding. However, since you cannot isolate or remove one aspect of anyone, other traits will proliferate with those some of them being advantageous in others being not at all- sickle cell anemia being protective of malaria infection for instance. There are also tons of individual differences especially psychologically. Whitaker goes out of her way a lot to talk about why every single thing birds do is due to evolutionary breeding advantages. Maybe birds sometimes just like having sex. Maybe some birds that are paired for the season, or especially for life, don't mind raising the young that is genetically sired by another bird because they like their partner. Or maybe they're just used to that partner and the comfort of staying there outweighs the need to genetically pass on information. Think about how many things humans do that are not evolutionarily advantageous. Other animals like humans are messy in this arena. I don't think we really need it as much time spent on evolutionary reasoning for results as they are interesting enough on their own.

The large section at the end of the book on microbiomes is where I learned the most. There was so much interesting information in there that I'd never heard before and the sections which included human information ended up making things more personal. I have hyperosmia. My sense of smell being so strong and my reactions to scents both ruin my life at times. Post-covid-19-lockdown era (covid is not over,) we know that many human beings have also experienced changes in both the scents they emit and what they can/not smell. I never realized how much physical distancing would have to do with that though until reading this book. Discussions on the combination of microbiomes through affection and socialization being important was extremely interesting. To folks wno commonly DNF books, even if you're familiar with things in the first chunks of the book I really recommend reading through the last part.

I realize that my review appears highly critical, but this is not because I did not enjoy nor get a lot out of this book. On the contrary, I learned a great number of things and this vastly expanded my understanding of birds. I now find myself thinking about avian scent research when I'm out birding, adding an entirely new aspect to the way I understand these birds' interactions and lives in general. I chose to focus critically on the writing based in part on how other reviewers discussed this book. All of this is to say that I recommend reading this book even with these criticisms in mind. Going into it already knowing to look out for some of these things enriched my experience and allowed me to focus on the things that I really wanted to learn. I would definitely read more by this author and I look forward to hearing about new advances in research on avian olfaction. 

This was also posted to my storygraph and goodreads.

Book Review: Red Flag Warning

Image: the cover of the book is an overexposed low contrast image of flames in colors of white and red. Across the top and black is Red Flag Warning. Below that in white is mutual aid and survival in California's fire country. Below that in Black smaller letters is edited by Dani Burlison and Margaret Elysia, introduction by Manjula Martin.

Red Flag Warning, edited by Dani Burlison and Margaret Elysia, is necessary reading in current times. This collection of essays covers a lot of ground for such a small amount of pages. I found all of the entries to be very well written and edited. The use of space in this book is quite efficient and appreciated. 

Equal parts affecting and pragmatic, RFW manages to capture the horrors and desperation of wildfire while also understanding it as an inevitable and sometimes useful part of the landscape. I am in my 40s now and grew up in SoCal until I was about 9 years old. I remember back then the droughts, fires, and heat waves. Over these few decades since, it is frankly terrifying to see how much ecological disaster and collapse has accelerated. Now I watch the destruction from afar, gaining glimpses but no longer experiencing it the same way. The entries in this book bring the issue more front and center and grounded me more in the dire situations now plaguing fire prone areas. 

The way some of the authors capture the experience of terror and loss has left me thinking about them for days. The book can be difficult at times for this reason, but not without purpose. We also learn the many ways that communities came together to solve problems that the state would not solve. We learn about love, resilience, and cooperation even when that alone at times is not enough to save us.

There are multiple entries discussing indigenous knowledge about controlled burning and other methods of living alongside fire. I liked that it did mention that all humans cause disruptions of the ecosystem, which burning can be part of in a negative way. The reason this stood out to me was that some writing about (and even by) indigenous people can be tokenizing- treating all indigenous folks as a single homogenous tribe of mythical entities living in pristine wilderness. We can acknowledge that humans have had diverse and disruptive effects on other species and environments in every location that we have traveled to. We can acknowledge that colonialism exponentially exacerbated these effects. We can note what we have learned over time and we can also take wisdom from the past. There were effective methods of preventing fire via controlled burning and combining that with the new limitations caused by the population levels and ecological collapse of today provides accessible solutions. Indigenous people have been instrumental in finding ways to preserve their own land and communities - both environmentally and culturally. They have also taught other people throughout the area how to preserve the wisdom of the past and apply it to the future. They do so with generosity and solidarity, despite so many being descendents of colonizers who led us to the catastrophic present in fire country.

The book also focuses on the myriad of people often left out of discussions around wildfire. Many of the stories we see on the news are about wealthy celebrities who have lost their third home in some affluent area of California. Many of the people most affected by wildfire are those of smaller rural low-income communities, indigenous people living on reservations, immigrants-especially undocumented folks, and people of other marginalized communities. There is also an entry on the fire fighters who are also prisoners, putting their lives on the line to protect these communities, only to find themselves unable to find employment when they are out due to unjust restrictions. 

I like that they included an essay on the financial effects of fire. I didn't realize until I was reading it that we often don't have this sort of economic viewpoint in many leftist or mutual aid based texts because we understandably don't want to center capitalism. It was enlightening seeing someone sort out some of the statistics to create a wider view of the effects of disaster. For instance, I had never realized that state of emergency designations are often based on economic loss and other numbers, not relative to population. This means that smaller communities, even if the fires are far more dangerous and devastating in that location, will often not be labeled as in a state of emergency because there are not enough people there to meet some sort of criteria. This happens on top of the other oppressions facing these communities.

The only criticism I really have about this text is how discussions of other animals were treated. Some of the most horrific stories I've heard about these fires are of farmed animals who were left trapped, unable to escape, as the flames engulfed them alive or of already threatened wild animals being surrounded. The only real reference is to domesticated animals are as "livestock" and there are few things more capitalist than designating others as property. Other animals are unable to offer their stories and this book so they rely on us to have to tell them for them. Near the end there is mention of one community who offers a place for some people to take their animals. However the rescue networks for animals, both domesticated and through wildlife rehabilitation, are really important parts of this puzzle that I would have liked to be better represented and discussed. Mentioning animals as an afterthought without truly immersing them and discussion shows a lack of scope in terms of understanding some of the greatest contributors to climate change and those who are most affected by it outside of humans. 

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph. 

Book Review: The Starving Saints

Image: the cover is a black background rimmed in gold with a painting of a religious saint in the center, a gold sun behind her head, draped in cloth from head to toe, with orange hands holding up a square partition from a beehive. Inside the face of the saint are painted three small faces in shades of pink and red with their mouths open. Across the top in pink Old English style lettering is the title of the book. At the bottom in white letters is Caitlin Starling - author of the death of Jane Lawrence.

I almost passed on Caitlin Starling's The Starving Saints. Medieval stories usually aren't my jam. I have enjoyed Starling's other work and this one seemed surreal and insane enough to give it a shot. The cover is also fantastic. I am very glad I picked this one up. 

So many reviewers referred to this book as a fever dream and they were not kidding. The world building in this book is excellent and the build up to the more fantastical of the horror aspects is complete with real life horrors of the time. I could imagine myself there, with the smells, sights, growling insides, and uncertainty. The desperation of starvation and war is clear while also transporting the reader into a time in history that none of us have ever touched. 

Starling manages to navigate historical fiction and fantasy in a way that feels very real. I not only pictured the characters in this story, but also people throughout these histories who committed their own myths and explanations for events around them to writing. Without the sort of scientific knowledge that we have these days, people came up with descriptions for things that made sense given the knowledge or belief systems of the time. I imagined what these people must have felt and thought while trying to understand the world around them. I imagined the sense of betrayal the religious must have felt when atrocities abounded regardless of how hard they prayed. This book does very well to capture all of that. It is a story of how those assumptions can be turned against people. 

I'm being as deliberately vague as possible as so much happens in this story that is best for the reader to experience without having read about it beforehand. One note I want to make is that the queer aspects of this story were quite enmeshed and believable. There are often criticisms from people, even in the realms of fantasy where you have flying lizards, that certain stories remain unbelievable when characters of certain demographics are included. I really liked the way Starling included a variety of strong, queer, and flawed women. Much like her other book that I read, The Luminous Dead, the theme of conflict and betrayal between women is there. There is darkness, light, and everything in between all the way to the end. 

This was also posted to my goodreads and Storygraph.

Book Review: The Power of Adrienne Rich

Image: The cover of the book is a white background with "the power of Adrienne Rich" ,in large black letters across the top. Below that in red is "a biography" and I'm black "Hilary Holaday."Below that is a black and white photo of Rich, wearing a black long sleeve shirt, a short haircut, and holding her hand to her chin held in a light fist while looking directly into the camera.      

I initially sought out Hilary Holladay's The Power of Adrienne Rich due to my knowledge of her as a feminist during and after the second wave movements. I had been exposed to her quotes and writings sparsely throughout my life, but having been born in the early '80s, many of these things came to my awareness long after they had occurred. The retelling of history tends to change it over time. I've written before about how mischaracterizations of certain radical feminists caused me to have a prejudiced idea of who they were and miss out on their wisdom (or just the complexity of their flaws.) I had not heard too many messy things about Adrienne Rich, but she still got the same mischaracterization of many lesbian feminists of the time- of being a man hating, sex hating, creature of some sort. I find myself more and more wanting to read about things through the lens of the time period where they took place. Now that I've read this book, I've come to see Adrienne Rich as another historical feminist that was open to expanding her viewpoint outside of the limits of a specific wave. Though I still feel that important pieces are missing.

I find it difficult to review biography and memoir as it feels like reviewing someone's actual life. I will do my best here to review the book itself. I have never been much of a poetry person, so I knew this was a slightly odd choice for me as a biography about a poet is obviously going to include a lot about poetry. In terms of personal taste, I do admit that I felt bored at times reading parts of the book that focuses on her upbringing and early life as a well respected poet. It took about 12 chapters before I reached anything about her feminism and it wasn't until the last couple of chapters of the book that we got down to her activism, belief systems, and so on in the sort of detailed way that I was hoping for. I don't think that my personal taste should reflect on the book or biographer's skill in that regard. 

You can tell that this book was a labor of love for the author who is a biographer and poetry scholar. She clearly did an immense amount of research on every aspect of Rich's life that she could get her hands on. I think that this often worked in the book's favor, but also could hurt it at times. I know that, when speaking about someone's life, relationships are going to be a huge part of that. I also know that in poetry and any sort of writing, review processes and public criticism can be issues. (I say, uncomfortably, as I write my own review.) However, I felt disappointed at times that this book focused so much on relationships to the point that the smallest disagreements or shifts were given more space that I'd have rather seen dedicated to other topics. The extensive detail of every review and reaction to them also seemed to be a bit much. 

If relationships and wider criticism were to encompass more, I think a better picture of Rich and those around her could have been achieved. For instance, there are multiple mentions of Rich being friends with and a supporter of Janice Raymond, one of the most virulently anti-trans second wave feminists. Raymond claims to have been counseled by Rich while writing her paranoid rantings about the dangers of trans women. I would have liked if we learned about Raymond's flaws in terms of ideology and how Rich's own beliefs fit into that, rather than about petty disagreements or falling outs that are inevitable in anyone's life. We learn about Audre Lorde's many unreciprocated sexual advances that could have been better spent on a larger examination of Lorde and Rich's growth as feminists. This was covered somewhat, but was so interesting that I wanted more.

Rich grew up in a privileged household with a patriarchal, overbearing father who's internalized anti-semitism affected her greatly. Her mother had bipolar disorder and struggles with stability. The combination of these two things led to Rich being psychologically and emotionally neglected even with a financially privileged upbringing. She was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis in her early 20s as well which added great challenges throughout her entire life. Very young, she noticed that among the poetry she had access to, only male poets were writing about women and Rich wanted to correct that. It would be a long time before Rich found her way to feminism, but the foundation was there from a very young age. She likely had access to educational opportunities and, even in a very male-dominated world, her poetry was appreciated early on garnering her awards and positions rarely achieved by women. Rich later came to see worry that some of this was tokenism, but she was still legitimately appreciated by many people and institutions.

Holladay describes riches evolution aptly when she says that, "creating versions of herself that she could love and respect would be one of the great errands of (Rich's) lifetime."

Like many women of the time, lesbianism wasn't even on Rich's radar as a possibility. She had multiple relationships with men, some better than others, and one ending in massive tragedy that affected her for the rest of her life. Her relationship to motherhood was also complicated, falling into the role due to societal expectations and finding herself going against those expectations later in life. I felt like information was missing here and I didn't quite understand how her split from her husband and children at the time worked. But she remained close with her children.

Rich's Jewish heritage is also something that she would not claim until later in life, and large part due to her father's internalized anti-semitism, which became glaring when Rich chose to marry Alfred Conrad who was a practicing Jew as well as a civil rights activist. Coming into the identities of jewish, lesbian, and feminist, took place over years and involved a lot of changes in Rich that I found quite admirable.

 I often tend to judge myself for not having perfect views or for many mistakes throughout my life, finding myself comparing my own life to others and coming up short. I always find it interesting that pretty much everybody comes up short against inhuman portrayals of heroes, kill yr idols and all that. Rich also had her own myriad of flaws, such as issues with drinking, that placed her in the category of human being instead of distant historical figure. It was interesting to read how she made her way through so many journeys and hardships. It is no easy task to be passionately dedicated to causes and beliefs, while also being open to listening and to change. 

Rich went on to be connected to and involved with many well-known feminist poets such as Audre Lorde after becoming radicalized by the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. Holladay states that rich admired Martin Luther King Jr and Frederick Douglass for their ability to use words to convey important messages and fight for change. However, I did not like the way Holladay repeatedly name dropped these two as a comparison for where Rich found herself in her career and/or activism. I found it odd that a book about a lesbian feminist poet wouldn't be using women more as goals and comparative figures. It felt a little bit like name dropping two of the bigger names in abolition and civil rights movements while ignoring the great many Black women who were involved or comparing apples to oranges, even if both are very sweet. Rich had her own evolution regarding the topics of race both through friendships and her longest lesbian relationship which was interracial. Over time she came to learn how whiteness and white supremacy were involved and her feminism and strove to combat that, albeit imperfectly.

The parts I was most interested in regarding Rich's activism and feminism were the best parts of the book in my opinion. Until the last few chapters, activism and feminism would get sentences here and there or others and Rich's life- such as Conrad- would have profiles of their activism described in detail. At the end, we get more into the nitty gritty of the many actions Rich took to support anti-war, civil rights, gay liberation, feminist, and other causes. 

I was regularly impressed at how Rich was able to go against the crowd to make statements that were more in line with what she thought was right. When she moved to a neighborhood and community that was supposed to be more of a lesbian utopia, she felt that people were ignoring the greater issues going on around them to focus on infighting instead. This is a common problem with any insular group and one that she sought to resist. 

She was also caught up and debates about sex and sexuality that were common among feminists of the time. She criticized things like BDSM, pornography, other sex work, and so on. Interestingly though, she decided to break with the actions of Andrea Dworkin and Catherine and MacKinnon when she signed a letter against their movement to create laws to combat pornography. This history is very complicated, and often misrepresented, and I do not feel that I have enough space in this review to totally explain it. Dworkin and MacKinnon are often characterized as creating a right-wing anti-sex work bill, but it was more complex- a bill that would make it possible to include pornography and sexual harassment laws and open a door for women to be able to take legal action against pornographers due to harm caused against them. Whether or not one agrees with this, it makes a lot more sense through the lens of often misrepresented history in which second wave feminists were trying to combat misogyny and what they saw as (and what sometimes/often was) abuse of women. Adrienne Rich essentially took the more anti-authoritarian response, even if it didn't seem in line with her own beliefs about pornography. It was Joan Nestle who was able to sway Rich to the other side, noting that any law that was created to punish sex work would undoubtedly be used against not only women in these industries, but women who had sexual lives that were in any way outside the norm.

TPoAR includes hundreds of pages full of info about a long life well lived. I chose to place focus on my review on the things that I sought out the book for. There is so much more there, even if I have crystals about how the information was conveyed and organized. Overall this book is an important piece of scholarship on someone who lived in many worlds and touched so many hearts and minds along the way. 

This was also posted to my goodreads and Storygraph.

Book Review: Two Cheers for Anarchism

 

Image: the cover of the book is a cream background with red on the right side. In black stenciled letters is two cheers for and James c Scott with anarchism in red letters in between the two. The A is written in a punk style graffiti circle.

Many years ago, I was intending to attend a organizing community member's free class on anarchism. James C Scott's Seeing like a State was one of the first reading assignments. Unfortunately, as was the case of many commitments back when I balanced a life with too many responsibilities, I missed the class and the book remained on my to-read list. When I encountered James C Scott's, Two Cheers for Anarchism, it seemed like a good time to remedy the fact that I'd never read any of his work. I cannot comment on whether or not this book is a repetition of his previous works, as another reviewer mentioned. What I am able to say is that this brief volume has a decent group of ideas that can help introduce the reader to anarchist thought in a simple enough way that it can accommodate a larger audience.

This book does have an academic bent to it, but is not excessively jargony. I wouldn't necessarily call these six pieces "easy" depending on one's reference point, but they are readable. I like how Scott used analogies and creative explanations to make his points. There are some historical references that I got a little overwhelmed by at times essentially because I have a terrible memory and I was rusty on some of the details. Someone who is completely unfamiliar with some of the histories discussed in this book might need to look something up on occasion. But overall I think the average reader would be able to parse the point of these discussions with or without perfect historical knowledge. 

Scott offers a frame of reference that shows how anarchist ideas and practices have existed in many places and populations before and after the coining of the term. The central practices and belief systems of anarchism can be found anywhere collective liberation and mutual aid are taking place. Collective action was/is often unintended and selfish- meaning it is not always designed from the start as a wider liberatory framework, but people working together end up creating that in the process.

One element of the text is the idea of seeing things through anarchist glasses. Scott discusses that doing so still results in a wide variation of assessments. However, he is not claiming that anarchist glasses are rose colored. There is complexity to resistance that adds many wild cards to the possible outcomes. There is a discussion about how to use the state in an emancipatory role even while being anti-state. I would see this more as an accident or exception to the rule, such as his example of officers protecting Black schoolchildren during the dismantling of segregation. Yet, I get the point. This leads to a discussion in the other direction. Scott discusses the reality that disruption of the state and authoritarianism is necessary, though it can sometimes result in an authoritarian response. The latter does not take away the importance and inevitability of the former as a step toward liberation. 

I really liked Scott's idea of "anarchist calisthenics," which is a fun term for basically the practice of consistently questioning authority and rule breaking- especially rules that do harm or that are simply stupid. It takes practice to go against the normative human tendency towards conformity or fear of punishment to realize how easy and effective going against the grain can often be. True order in the anarchist sense relies on breaking rules and collectively organizing for effectiveness. He uses the example of speed limits (which due to widespread disobedience have changed in strictness over time) and factory workers resisting en masse (leading to better conditions being the only possible outcome if the factory were to continue.) 

Scott also discussed how (authoritarian) democracies are sometimes created with the intention to institutionalize resistance, but instead are parasitic, using the desire for liberation against the people. He makes an ecosystem analogy wherein a forest is disturbed to focus on propagating a single tree species to increase timber productivity. It works at first, but under the surface, the ecosystem is collapsing. Water and usable soil are running out, biodiversity is disintegrating, and once it becomes clear to everyone, if it does at all, the damage has been done. The imbalance is systemic. 

These are all things I was generally aware of, but I liked some of the framings that conveyed messages in ways I think can reach larger audiences. One newish thing to me from this book was not a new idea in general in anarchism. Yet, it was new in it's framing for me. Scott discusses how important participation in collective democracy is a crucial learning process for all community members. In state based ideology, we're supposed to lift up the most experienced/qualified to make various decisions. (I must mention though that this is often untrue in practice and is exceptionally laughable currently to anyone paying attention to USA politics, but I digress.) However, designing things hierarchically like this robs the public of collective growth that comes from making decisions together and teaching each other in the process. It creates a dynamic where people, especially those with no experience, see only one route forward- one in which they have no power or responsibility.

It all reminds me of a discussion with someone years ago where we were lamenting the length of a particular organizing meeting. She said, "Anarchy is beautiful. Anarchy takes forever." I do think that this book needed a little bit more about what more intentional anarchism is as far as next steps go after you examine the sort of accidental bits of anarchism discussed throughout this text. However, I think this book offers something to both those new to ideas of anarchism and to more seasoned readers (even if we would have liked a neater iteration of the circle A.)

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph.

Book Review: The Voices of Nature

image: the cover of the book is a cream background with illustrations if a blue elephant seal, yellow bird, green crocodile, and rust hyena in the 4 corners. Across the top on black is "Nicolas Mathevon with a foreward by Bernie Kraus." Below that I'm large letters is the title and below that "how and why animals communicate."

The Voices of Nature would probably have have been dubbed "how and why animals use sound" rather than "how and why animals communicate." Written by bioacoustics researcher Nicolas Mathevon, the book isn't focused on the rest of animal communication. Much like humans, sound is only a small part of how other animals communicate. Title aside, I did learn a lot from this book even if I did find myself a bit frustrated at times. I'm a birder and loved how much more I learned about birdsong and vocalization than I've read in other books. The sketchbook style illustrations are also a nice addition.

Mathevon mentioned being a former school teacher and it shows in his writing. The style is one of someone very excited to tell his audience all about the topics he researches, complete with copious amounts of exclamation points. He says that the book is written for a large audience but also for fellow scientists. The cutesy way he approaches writing wasn't really for me, but I am also one to enjoy books other people claim are "dry." I like the idea of making this book as accessible as possible and the style likely helps with that. I do think this book needed better editing in this arena though. I would have liked longer sections on topics that I discuss further down  with fewer words about him and his colleagues, or unrelated research of his. I like that he used accessible language, explained acoustics in ways one can understand, and regularly reminds the reader of info when referencing previous chapters. When discussing field locations, the world building is great and I feel like I'm there. 

Where I struggled most with this book was the constant contradictions the author seems unaware of. This book is a bit tough to discuss because it's far behind in terms of animal liberation or rights, but is still a bit ahead of the average anthropocentric animal researcher. Many of Mathevon's ethical standards were above average for those who conduct research on other animals. He does call out the cruelty of researchers who taped penguins' mouths shut or who deafened birds in labs. He discussed a ton of cool field and computer model research. Albeit I do think he should have discussed the disruption playback causes a bit more. 

He contradicts his own ethics a bit, unfortunately. He makes a comment, "we are sometimes cruel, but rarely." Researchers harming animals is not rare at all which he shows further on. While I very much appreciate him breaking with the tradition of many science writers refusing to make any statement about ethics, the throwaway comments coupled with his own deliberate participation is problematic. For instance, he explains how amazing zebra finches are and how they form massive social groups in semi-desert Australia. So, he decided to buy some at a pet store and breed them in cages, keeping some completely alone, to discover that birdsong is different when they have social interaction. Of course it is? What made this even more frustrating is that he then discussed studies showing the same thing in wild birds meaning his caged captive colony never needed to exist to gain this information. He also gushes about the (ab)use of rodents in labs and shows another example of how cold focus on manipulation and results causes one to objectify the subjects. (Don't even get me started on his mention of "autistic" and "schizophrenic" rodents, this is long enough.) We never learn what happens to his and others' lab animals, but I've read enough research to hazard a guess. It almost seems like he has an ethics switch he just flips off if he gets excited about learning something.

I enjoyed that he often mentioned that what humans can grasp is only a small subset of other animals' experiences. He shows a fascination with other animals' lives, giving them credit for having rich and complex worlds. He'd also make sweeping generalizations such as shoe horning animals' behavior into pure dominance hierarchy or claiming female birds sexual selection involves absolutely no thought or consideration, but purely evolutionary imperative. Then he'd hop back again to an understanding that birds likely have personal preferences and that many species have rich social lives. Contradictions like these and others made the book feel like he wrote parts at different times in his life.

Some of my favorite parts of the book were topics I wish he'd written far more about. I love that he includes a discussion of animal emotions and communication. I'd push it a bit further, and as mentioned, he also contradicts himself a bit, but it's still nice to see in a text like this. The idea of cross species emotional contagion was not something I'd read studies about before. Discussion of research blunders and the prevalence of female birdsong was important and enlightening. The discussions of ecoacoustics, noise pollution, and the effects of human sound on other animals and vice versa was very interesting. When each of these sections ended, I was craving more and wish he'd have replaced some of the human stories with more on these topics.

I was further surprised that after all of the extra wordiness, he wrote no conclusion to the book. This would have been a great opportunity to wrap things up for audiences who just took in a ton of info. But, the book just ends. 

Overall, I liked and learned a lot from this book. Even though I have many criticisms, it enriched my life and taught me many new things. It's worth picking up even if you only choose to skip around as his writing style allows for repetition. I hope in the future he can get a better hold on some of his assessments and beliefs so that things are less contradictory at times. 

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph.

Book Review: Sex is a Spectrum

 

Image: the cover of the book is a black background with large words- sex is a spectrum- colored in rainbow gradient positioned on their side (extending vertically rather than horizontally.) in small white letters between the words is "the biological limits of the biggest" and "agustín fuentes"

I come from a generation wherein discussions of gender often highlighted the importance of differentiating gender from sex. In these conversations we would often discuss diversity within gender, while also at least partially conceding that sex was binary, with the exception of an often ill described or tokenizing inclusion of intersex individuals. Many of us knew things were more complicated, but we needed a simplistic argument in order to fight for our rights, be they feminist, lgbq, trans rights, etc. More recent understandings of biology have shown that sex is a lot more variable than once assumed. This made sense to me, but I often didn't have the education or ability to confidently argue things one way or the other. This has become especially difficult with how algorithms have become so horrifically bad at nudging folks towards accurate information, making one's attempt at research through a highly monetized search engine often futile. Furthermore, much of the discussion around sex is dominated by archaic patriarchal structures within sciences or by bad faith actors with no scientific credentials who defend dated and debunked ideas about sex and gender. I went into Agustín Fuentes' book Sex is a Spectrum with high hopes but realistic expectations. This book surpassed both of them.

Fuentes is a biological anthropologist and primatologist who writes in extremely enlightening ways on these topics. I enjoy thinking and learning about evolution, including how it affects the human species psychologically and anthropologically. Unfortunately, I often go into readings with gritted teeth, wondering if I'm going to encounter something useful or something ridiculous. Some ideas of what constitutes evolutionary adaptation/advantage are dominated by people with highly archaic, patriarchal, racist, and other oppressive ways of thinking. Examples include men who argue that rape is an biological imperative of men, men who argue that the reason violent and abusive men exist is because women choose them for procreation, and a wide gamut of racist and xenophobic beliefs about evolutionary contributions of various peoples. Fuentes not only broke from these sorts of traditions, but brought many new ways of thinking about humans into my worldview. It was very refreshing to see someone make statements in the realms of evolutionary anthropology and psychology that both criticize more oppressive mainstream misconceptions while also bringing newer information (at least to me and mainstream thinking) to the table.

Some might expect this book, despite it's clear focus on biology, to lean on of gender/queer theory a lot, but there is very little of it therein. It is a matter of fact book about what biology, anthropology, primatology, and cultural histories tell us about sex in human beings. It is refreshingly grounded in hard science while also being accurate and honest in terms of what statements can be made with higher levels of certainly. Furthermore, Fuentes writes in a style that can actually be read by a wide audience. He also has condensed a massive amount of argument and information into a rather short book. Basically, this book is accessible and readable which feels more critical than ever given how this topic is treated in the world these days. 

Fuentes hits all of the topics that I've run into or questioned myself regarding the biology and (false) binaries of sex. These include everything from primate evolution, chromosomal variation, gender expression, sex assignment at birth, secondary sex characteristics, hormonal variation, environmental and cultural influence and interaction with biology (and vice versa,) behavioral differences between sexes and genders, diversity within sexes and genders in a variety of categories, and so on. 

Within these topics, Fuentes' makes many well supported arguments. There are multiple ways that sex binaries are defined, ranging from chromosomal variation (which most of us never know we have,) physical growth and development, behavior and psychology, expression (or not) of bodily functions, and so on that very rarely fit into two distinct categories. Intersex individuals are not aberrations or afterthoughts, but normal parts of human sex variation and have a wide variety of traits and expressions. Dividing humans into two binary sex categories results in reductive, inaccurate, and all around bad science and medicine due to the massive variability and overlap of attributes tied to sex. Sex and gender are biocultural (meaning culture and environment interact with and influence biology and vice versa) which causes variability across the globe. There is much variability across sex in all primate species and humans are no exception. The helplessness of human infants resulted in evolution of cooperative, (bio and non) family structure that is not in line with archaic ideas many have about gender and family. There are no "male brains" and "female brains" (an argument I have unfortunately seen some trans folks latch onto) and the variability, diversity, and overlap in brain function cannot be applied to one sex or another. There are other well argued points, but you get the picture. 

It is important to state that Fuentes is not at all making the argument that there are no differences between humans of various genders and sex assignments. I found the discussion of things like aggression and violence to be particularly interesting. He does not argue that everyone is the same and that patriarchal imbalance with abuse and violence does not exist. Rather he argues that claiming that this is a purely biological trait that men are predisposed to have is dangerous and inaccurate. Cultural influence combined with a variety of factors play into this far more than human sex biology alone does.

In the last section of the book, he speaks specifically about some of the topics where folks attend to onto binary thinking the most: Sexuality, family composition, medical research and practice, cardiac disease, organ transplants, pregnancy and birth, sports (wide ranging in and of themselves,) restroom assignment, and so on. He very clearly discusses where studies have shown differences and how well we are able to say where those differences come from. You may have already heard that it's not nature versus nurture, but how these two things interact. His discussions on the biocultural nature of sex took this idea to a new level for me as his emphasis on both biological and anthropological research really shows how damaging these binary categories are in many situations. 

Things in life are generally far more complex than we like to admit and sex is no exception. There are much better ways to categorize people than along and inaccurate binary. For instance, all humans have testosterone in different amount and it can be more appropriate to categorize people based on testosterone levels than on sex.

I could continue blathering on, but I will stop here because I want everyone to go read this book. An optimistic take would be that people from a variety of belief systems, if willing to open their mind just a little bit, would be able to take in this book and be changed by it. I've been changed by it. 

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph. 

Book Review: The Great Betrayal

Image: the cover of the book is a light cream background that fades into an image on the lower third of the cover. The image shows a large crowd of people, some holding up large blue or cream tarps or signs (I cannot tell as they are small) facing down two large camel colored tanks. Across the top in black is "the great betrayal," below that in red is "the struggle for freedom and democracy in the middle east." Below that in black is the author's name: Fawaz A. Gerges.

Due to being a basic white USAmerican, my education regarding the wide variety of countries and occurrences throughout the Middle East is meager at best. Despite deliberately seeking out information about the struggles I did know about, I often felt as if I couldn't trust what I was reading in the media and didn't know where to start outside of it. As a result, I cannot claim to be an authority or middle east scholar that can judge if this text is a perfect historical argument and narrative. However, I can speak as someone who has lacked a foundation on these issues, and sought out a book that could meet me where I am. Fawaz Gerges' The Great Betrayal: The Struggle for Freedom and Democracy in the Middle East very much does that. 

Gerges mentions in the introduction that he wrote this book to offer an explanation to his students and others who wonder why there is so much struggle and instability across the middle east. Fitting with this goal, the text is accessibly written and does not contain excessive academic jargon just for the sake of it. This book also has enough repetition from chapter to chapter that it could be assigned in classes as a whole or in parts. The organization also helps with the flow of the book in general as it covers a massive amount of history and information in a few hundred pages.

A goal stated by Gerges was that he wanted to break from the paradigm of focusing on middle eastern struggles by looking solely at leaders of various states. This is one of the things that appealed to me most. While Gerges does speak in detail about various leaders and other authoritarian organizing, he also spends about half the book discussing grassroots and other movements of the people of these countries. If you've ever spoken to leftists, you will often find frustration in being lumped in with the wrong group. Anarchists do not appreciate being lumped in with liberals or authoritarian left movements, all of which are highly variable within themselves. Western media makes the same mistake with "the middle east," often lumping entire countries together. If we do get more focus on a single country, the movements inside are often not covered except for the most violent such as ISIS, leading to highly prejudiced assumptions about the rest of the public.

Gerges also stated a desire to break from the other end of the spectrum- the paradigm of blaming colonialism or western intervention for all unrest throughout middle eastern countries. It is undoubtedly something that has played a massive role over time, but one still ends up erasing individual differences and the diversity of movements throughout these areas by solely looking at the west.

Egyptian history dominates a decent amount of this book. We learn a lot about the history of leaders there, the Arab Spring uprisings, and so on. This decision seems to be in part because this history offers a decent window into how colonialism, authoritarianism, popular movements, and so on interact, which does require a lot of specialized info to fully understand. I'm not sure if it is also because Gerges' knowledge may be more specialized in regards to Egypt than other middle east countries. We also learn how central western support of Israel and the resulting Palestinian genocide are to struggles throughout the rest of the middle east. The mistrust of the USA and other western powers who aid in the destruction of Palestine also leaves the door open for other nations like China to become involved as alternatives. The reach of the book spreads out much more as the it progresses and we learn about governments and popular movements throughout Iran, Iraq, Palestine, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and others.

A prominent and well supported argument throughout this text is that Western colonialists and local state leaders and actors seeking authority and control (rather than a functioning system that served its people) created breeding grounds for extreme Islamist movements to take hold. Even when more leftish leaning rulers- who created things like social programs to support the public- were in office, the corruption and authoritarianism that they implemented ended up souring the public view of these regimes and associating their politics with oppression. European colonialism, western invasions and wars, neoliberalism, and capitalism led the public to see "democracy" or western "aid" as mere smokescreens for exploitation. The problem being that, most of the time, the "democracy" offered by these powers wasn't democratic at all.

Consistently crumbling governments that did not serve the people made diverse Islamist movements more attractive. Some of these movements implemented social support and cooperative structures, showing the ability to do so without the corrupt state. At the same time, as some more oppressive fundamentalist movements became empowered, they often became more violent and extreme. It was wild for instance to read about how even Osama bin Laden eventually found ISIS to have moved in too extreme a direction for his tastes. Many extremist groups would start either in or adjacent to the government and then split off when the impossible task of altering authoritarian structures became clear. These struggles kept systems fragile and constantly crumbling. The religious elements throughout these histories exist in both dynamics of the oppressed and the oppressor in complicated ways.

When relating many of these issues specifically to the USA, Gerges does well showing how the "democracy" the USA claims to promote is a lie. Both Republican and Democrat leaders have behaved similarly in their violent and oppressive relationships with middle eastern countries. This is what makes many democrat/liberal reactions to Trump very frustrating to me at times. While Trump and the rest of his fascist regime are undoubtedly the worst, the utter silence from many liberals as soon as they get their candidate in office is abhorrent. The deportations and wars continue while they claim that their vote saved the day and everything is fine now and that just voting blue again will take us back to an imaginary land where immigrants are safe and muslims are beloved. At least when Republicans are in office, some of these people are willing to fight.

The remainder of the book is predominantly about the people's movements for liberation, where they have succeeded, and where and why they often fail. The structures people are up against outside of their countries, within their governments, and surrounding extremist movements are extremely difficult to resist. However, that has not stopped people from fighting. Gerges covers a lot of ground showing that there have been advancements even when faced with such adversity. He captures the resilience and passion of people often erased in these histories. This feels more important than ever regarding the new level of genocide being faced by Palestinians for instance. Gerges wraps up the text with ideas about ways forward which center the populace rather than authoritarian rulers or authoritarian Islamist groups.

Things I would have appreciated that this book lacked would have been some sort of graphic giving a timeline of events. Because Gerges skips back and forth in time a bit, I would find myself going back and rereading parts to remember what we'd covered. Now, it is worth noting that my somewhat impaired memory is below average, but I think having a reference graphic to quickly flip to could really boost the book's utility.

I also disliked his occasional characterization of movements in a violent/peaceful dichotomy. For instance, he describes the Arab Spring as a peaceful movement of people in the streets. In comparison to a revolutionary war with guns and bombs, he'd be correct. But, to portray them as if they were using a single tactic like marches and not a wider variety which included property destruction and so on is misleading. Like any successful movement, there were a wide variety of tactics involved that cannot be put into a binary box. There is no one right way to protest.

Overall this book gave me a good overview of many occurrences throughout the Middle East that I've craved to understand better. I have flags on almost every page to return to as a reference. I appreciate what Gerges has done here in making information about such struggles accessible.

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph.

Book Review: Multispecies Assemblies

image: the cover of the book has cream and teal stripes going across the top and bottom. On top in black is the title and on the bottom is eva Meijer's name. In the center is an illustration of a tropical scene with palm trees and a mountain in the distance. I'm the center an elephant drinks from a pond wherein fish swim. There are many rabbits lounging around or hanging out across the ground in the rest of the image.

I've long been a big fan of Eva Meijer's work. Her books about animal language and communication are some of my favorite in terms of scholarship regarding the lives of other animals. As a result, I was excited to see this book coming out, especially from the independent press of VINE sanctuary. 

Multispecies Assemblies is an act of both practicality and imagination. It involves thinking far outside of the box about how we can have participatory relationships with the rest of the natural world. Well this book went a little too far outside certain boxes for me at times, I still found the exercise itself to be brilliant. One of my biggest issues with animal liberation action and philosophy is that humans are often making decisions without truly thinking about what other animals want and experience. We tend to make decisions on how we feel about what we know. Even in many animal advocacy scenarios, there is a power dynamic that attracts people that do more harm than good at times. This is of course not unique to animal advocacy. Any sort of anti-authoritarian structure can attract those willing to exploit it. In the case of other than human animals, many on both sides of the divide will take advantage of the fact that the animals are not able to have a seat at the table.

In this book, Meijer asks us to imagine what it would be like if other beings did have a seat at the table. She offers strategies and many examples of what that may look like. The book is grounded enough that it is clear she is not saying we should have a round table discussion with fishes and trees anytime a decision needs to be made, as if that were possible. Rather, she takes steps to find ways to include others so that they cannot be forgotten in the conversation. 

There are many examples where the author discusses how to make sure everything from a river to a bird can be included as much as possible in the decision making about their lives. She discusses how human representation will of course be necessary in these conversations. Yet, she also make sure to offer ways that we can best step aside and decenter ourselves.

One thing she mentions having learned from VINE Sanctuary is that humans making decisions should be in proximity to those who they are making decisions for. For instance, if decisions need to be made about what will happen to a wetland area, the discussion should be had while that area is in view. Decisions about an animals life should involve proximity to that animal. As long as oppression is out of sight it is much easier to excuse it. People forced to stand in a slaughterhouse would have a much harder time defending what is going on there, then if they were simply in an aisle at the grocery store. It is easier to defend our fast fashion purchases at a discount rack than it would be while standing in the middle of a sweatshop. 

Where this book didn't fully work for me is how the author at times seemed to streamline the abilities and experience other species a bit too much. She seems to discuss plants and other parts of nature as having "cognition" and communication similar to animals. This is something that I found a bit frustrating. Meijer quotes from Braiding Sweetgrass (wherein the author asks trees for permission to kill them, but didn't mention this with animals, I assume because most animals tend to give a pretty emphatic and undeniable "no.") Plants also propagate from being killed and eaten among other things which would make suffering and pain completely incompatible evolutionary flaws common across far too many species for it to be a leftover maladaptive mutation. Plants are not communicating and having experiences of suffering like we animals do. We can discuss the importance of the natural world without needing to make them like us. Furthermore, this goes against the book's thesis as this is an anthropocentric action. 

The elevation of plants and other natural structures to a false similarity with ourselves can also backfire. It can cause people open to the idea of considering other animals languages and experiences to distrust the author due to incorrect information and misuse of terms like cognition regarding plants. It can also give ammunition to the dishonest strawmanning that anti-animal sentiment brings up where people claim that plants have feelings and thus farming/exploiting animals is the same. Aside from the fact that it takes exponentially more plants in order to farm animals, nobody truly believes that stepping on grass is the same as kicking a puppy. 

The other thing I found missing at times from this, which may be due to the limitations of the length of the essay, is the reality that these assemblies there will undoubtedly result in disagreements rooted in the way the natural world is as a whole. A balanced ecosystem has a wide range of creatures including animals that prey upon other animals. I am sure that a hawk has a different view than the vole on how things should go. Think of the debate around feral cats and the ecosystem imbalance that occurs as a result of humans introducing them.

I think that Meijer's scholarship regarding animal languages would have made this an extremely interesting direction to go in. I would like to hear an expansion of how to resolve conflicts about wounds that occur throughout nature that involve suffering but are simultaneously necessary/unavoidable. Without addressing this, the book can come off as a little naive, which has not been my experience with Meijer's other work.

I have said before that I often have the biggest, most detailed criticisms of authors that I like the most. I suppose I'm holding Meijer to a higher standard here than I would another precisely because I admire her work so much. The existence of this book in and of itself is quite a feat. Even trying to tackle the idea of having a cooperative interaction that goes beyond multiple species is the kind of progressive thinking I think we need in this world. These are the kind of discussions we need to be having. So, my criticisms are attempts to join the conversation, not silence it. I recommend this book wholeheartedly and I hope it starts a great many conversations and how we can resolve conflicts. Decentering the human is more important than ever in a dying world. 

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph.  

Book Review: A Continuous Struggle

Image: The cover of the book is a cream background with a photo of Martin Sostre broken up into several squares divided by thin lines. Sostre is bald, with medium brown skin and a very short beard. Across the top in black is "a continuous struggle," below that in red is "the revolutionary life of Martni Sostre." Across the bottom is the author's name Garret Felber and "Foreword by Robin D.G. Kelley."

In modern day USA, those unfamiliar with anarchism may only have government smear campaigns and mainstream media depictions to draw from. These usually portray anarchists as small groups of young privileged white people breaking windows for no reason or the anarchy=chaos colloquial use of the term. One of the biggest challenges in terms of growing anarchist community is connecting with people and showing them that anarchism is about dismantling and resisting hierarchies, building mutual aid/community based structures, and growing/practicing liberatory frameworks (and while we're at it, that those windows were broken for a reason.) Part of the optics problem also lies at the feet of our own communities. Anarchists who are often centered are white and as a result, a greater effort is needed needed to combat white supremacy within movements. While there are histories of anarchist movements from a variety of countries with mostly white demographics, some better or less problematic than others, the tent of anarchism is much larger and unfortunately often ignored or simply not known. As a result, people often miss out on the rich history and present of Black anarchism. One of the most passionate and often unknown anarchist organizers is Martin Sostre. It is very tough to find anything comprehensive out there about him for a variety of reasons I will detail later. When I saw that a biography about Sostre was being released, I was excited to learn more about him and his life. 

A Continuous Struggle: The Revolutionary Life of Martin Sostre is a labor of love by Garrett Felber. He begins the book humbly, expressing his concern that he may not be able to do this story justice, but being willing to try his best anyway. He also mentions that there were mixed feelings about whether or not Sostre would have wanted a biography as even his death was kept private when he passed. I think that Felber executed this biography well. There is an extensive and impressive level of research into history and materials that are not easily accessible. Much of Sostre's writing was in the form of letters or small pamphlets rather than books and better archived things of the past. I also think that Felber did well to center the revolutionary aspect of Sostre's existence, as Felber and Sostre's family guessed he would have preferred. Felber did this without sacrificing honesty, though, and did well to tell the story of Sostre as a human being rather than a flawless leader.

The life and history of Martin Sostre is essentially also a history of USAmerican prison industrial complex and civil rights movements for both Black and Puerto Rican communities at large. One cannot understand Sostre without also understanding these histories. I believe that Felber did well to set the stage for things that were going on at the time, including giving mini bios of the various organizers that worked with Sostre. Sostre spent so much of his time incarcerated, that much of his organizing took place behind bars. It was frankly quite intense reading about what he went through. In early life, he was incarcerated for drug offenses that he did admit to. However, moving on, changing, and creating community and liberatory structures landed him in the sights of the state, who then framed him (now documented and admitted to by the officers involved) in order to put him back in prison. He endured torture regularly, but remained so defiant throughout it all. I honestly don't understand how someone could have kept going, even with the supports he had and how incredibly strong his beliefs in the struggle were.

Sostre truly exemplified the "propaganda of the deed" style of organizing. While he did write and make speeches, which are unfortunately often lost to time, his real focus was in taking action and building community. Outside prison (or in part from within via help from his support system,) Sostre created revolutionary spaces that worked as book stores, libraries, community gathering areas, and so on. Dealing with everything from closures and fire bombs from the state, he kept going through it all. He also was involved in organizing for prisoners, despite the absolute brick walls built up around him. In prison, he resisted oppression every chance he got, even from solitary confinement, including the fighting the regular sexual assault of invasive bodily searches and the beatings that ensued. There was a lot of interesting history in this book about Muslim organizing in prison which led to many religious freedoms we see as more common today, however flawed. Sostre had an amazing support system outside composed of stellar and unrelenting organizers. However, even they could only do so much in the face of state repression. I found myself regularly thinking about what it was like for prisoners- political and non- who didn't have any support. Once he was finally out of prison for good later in life, Sostre continued the practice of radical bookstore/infoshop creation and also took up organizing around housing and education in his communities. Essentially, Sostre was known far more for what he did than what he said.

Sostre's journey towards identifying as anarchist was also interesting to read about. Like many, he initially saw anarchism as a white thing, but later realized it as a larger struggle. He discovered time and again that authoritarianism from state structures to the Nation of Islam were flawed at the center. To read about someone going from a corrupt military cop in his late teens (a story too long for a review) to black nationalist-adjacent/Muslim marxist-leninist to a prolific anarchist organizer added a level of hope to my worldview (and also forgiveness of my younger imperfect self.) Sostre went on to influence other Black anarchists such as Lorenzo Kom'boa Ervin who met Sostre in prison and was inspired by his guidance. The story is far more complex and interesting than I have detailed in this paragraph, so I highly recommend the book before seeing this as the whole picture.

In the end, I do think Felber was successful in this monumental task of telling the complex story of someone's life taking place in a complex time and in complex institutions. I like to hope that if Sostre were alive today, he would appreciate the way his story was told. This book is a necessary addition to the bookshelves of anyone interested in history as well as any anarchist or leftist thinkers. It expands upon not only general assumptions about what anarchism is but also about the various belief systems and activities taking place during the civil rights movements at the time all well telling the story of Martin Sostre, who kept fighting until the very end.

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph.

Book Review: The Birding Dictionary

Image: the cover of the book is yellow with blue binding and black writing. There is a red bird with brown wings sitting on a pair of binoculars in the lower right corner. Across the top is a quote from Ed Yong which reads "a laugh out loud funny guide to the ludicrously amazing and amazingly ludicrous world of birds and birders." Below that is the title The Birding dictionary. Below that is a pseudo definition reading "1. (Noun) a tongue-in-cheek guide for people who find themselves obsessed, against all logic and reason, with birds." In the bottom left corner it says written and illustrated by Rosemary Mosco.

I have been a long time fan of Rosemary Mosco. Her comic Bird and Moon brings joy and levity to life in general, but also to the birding world specifically. It's strange to say this, because I initially got into birding as something that relaxes me: Birding can be kind of intense sometimes. There is a seriousness to it, especially if you are contributing to citizen science projects. This can sometimes lead to forgetting just how much we are in it for the birds and our love of them. Being a lister and doing remote bird surveys can sometimes end up frustrating and I become desperate for something to kick me back into the space where it all started. The Birding Dictionary brings that whimsical humor that comes with any niche community willing to poke fun at itself. 

The author had me from the very start with an introduction page penned as a fantastical but realistic overly serious birder. I laughed out loud immediately. Every page that followed brought lightness to my days in these extra dark times we're living in. The dictionary aspect is an intentional design, but this is a brief cover to cover read full of jokes, fun facts, illustrations, and actual definitions- some of which were for terms I had not heard of before. Essentially, laugh AND learn.

This book would be great for any birder. I could see someone just starting out enjoying it as well as an expert with decades of experience under their belt. Hell, there's even a quote on the back from Sibley praising the book. You don't get a more famous niche recommendation than that and the birding world. I honestly wish I had more birders as closer friends, because I want to gift everyone a copy.

This book was truly an antidote for me. In both personal life and in relation to the larger world, things are pretty depressing. Even engaging in birding has been tough as a result. Looking forward to picking this book up each time and knowing I would smile was a simple pleasure I didn't realize I needed. This whimsical little book ended up being far more important to me than I realized it would be. 

So, if you are into birds or honestly anything adjacent to birding like the larger natural sciences, this book is for you. I really enjoyed it and will likely come back to it regularly just to get a little taste of the happiness it brought me.

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph.

Book Review: Transmentation Transience

image: the cover of the book is a swirling rendition of different landscapes spiraling towards the center. One includes a city skyline, another a desert, another an ocean, whales swim in the upper right corner. Across the center in large white letters is "Transmentation Transience" and across the bottom in amber is Darkly Lem. 

 Transmentation Transience is a creative project composed by a group of authors writing together under the name Darkly Lem. They describe themselves as "five authors in an impeccably-tailored trenchcoat, namely Josh Eure, Craig Lincoln, Ben Murphy, Cadwell Turnbull, and M. Darusha Wehm." I came into contact with this book due to being a fan of Turnbull, so it was interesting to see what a collaborative piece would turn out to be. I honestly didn't know what to expect. I have read books where two authors are writing under one name, but cannot recall reading a book where 5 authors were. Somehow, in ways I don't fully understand, they made it work. 

TT is a book about many worlds. Central to the stories are people who hop from one universe to another, finding themselves in a new body, retaining their own mind and personality, but still being changed by who they end up inhabiting. It is not fully clear how this works or what exactly it entails. This is probably a show don't tell choice, but I hope more explanation comes in future books. There are various groups existing in various universes, many of which have conflicts with one another. Thankfully, the authors give us a character list in the very beginning telling us which locality various characters are located in. As someone with a horrendous memory, I often have to take notes when reading books with tons of characters, especially when those characters are sometimes turning into other characters in another universes. I was very grateful to see this list when I opened the book. 

The writing in TT is cohesive. I am not sure if each author wrote a different section containing each story about characters existing in each locality. There are definite distinctions between each section that would benefit from such an approach. But, stylistically it still fits together for the most part. I would say the last quarter of the book feels a bit disjointed. That is also because there are a couple twists that occur that are not well explained. 

I'm being deliberately vague to avoid spoilers. Overall, despite all of these different universes, characters, and names, I found the book fairly easy to follow. There are some things that are just personal taste that weren't my favorite. I would say this book is what some call science fantasy more than science fiction. The way some of the worlds and the characters and beings within them are designed doesn't feel quite right to me. There are also a couple of events that occur in the last quarter that we're not introduced as fluidly as they could be. I ended up going back and rereading certain sections thinking I missed something. I had not. The characters themselves though all felt quite real to me. I especially enjoyed sections with long conversations. It's interesting that a story with so much extravagant inter-universal travel and wild action scenes enthralled me most when it was just two people discussing their experiences. 

The book is definitely designed to be part of a larger series- listed as the first book in "The Formation Saga." At over 400 pages, (in my ARC at least,) the conclusion leaves you with prompts for the story to continue, rather than a bunch of concrete resolutions. This was such an interesting approach to writing that I hope the series is given the green light to continue by the publisher and not abandoned like some of these projects are. I enjoyed a glimpse into these universes and was left curious about what comes next for these characters. I do hope that when a new book is written, they will offer a decent recap of things that happened in this one for other memory-deficient people like myself. 

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph. 

Book Review: Birds at Rest

Image: the cover of the book is a scene of three flamingoes resting on water. Each light pink bird is standing on one long leg and resting their long neck and head inside their wing. Across the center in white is "birds at rest." Before that in pink is "the behavior and ecology of avian sleep." In the bottom right corner is the author name Roger F. Pasquier.

Roger F. Pasquier's Birds at Rest: The Behavior and Ecology of Avian Sleep is a necessary addition to more common types of references and guides regarding birds and their behavior. Despite having shelves full of them and reading up on various things about bird behavior, there is very little out there like this book that details such a massive part of their lives- resting, roosting, sleeping, and all of the related behaviors that come with that.

The information in this book is exhaustive in a good way. While there was more captive animal research than I prefer to read about, that was to be expected going into this book and is not a mark against it. The author is not in charge of the ethics of those research studies. There is a ton of informative and more ethical field research, much of which I had never encountered anything close to before. I learned a lot of different things about species that I tend to focus my interest on, as well as many things about species I've never even heard of. I also learned about field research methods that were quite interesting. I had no idea there were mobile EEG methods where one could study the sleep of chimney swifts in flight for instance. I found a lot of this extremely fascinating. 

The book also covers what human intervention into the environment has done to the abilities referred to roost safely, communicate and breed effectively, and generally exist in the world. This was unsurprisingly the saddest part of the book. For instance I knew that our light pollution had affected migration and bird behavior for some time. I didn't realize, even though perhaps I should have, that it also damages their ability to breed successfully. A critical factor for consideration regarding the decline in bird populations is simply artificial light. Our introduction of non-native species has caused extinction and decline in large numbers. Our destruction of habitat causes birds to compete more than they would normally, resulting in further aggression and conflict. This was another thing that is unsurprising, but written in a way that I had not quite thought about it before. Humans tend to write about birds as fighting over territory and competing through various means as if it is a given. But we don't tend to write enough about how the sheer amount of competition is so directly affected by our destruction of their habitats for any number of reasons. I wonder how different aggression levels were before we decimated most of the planet.

 I will admit that I did find this book a bit dry at times. It very much reads cover to cover like a reference guide without photography. There are illustrations that I found quite charming and whimsical. There's almost a children's book quality to some of them which did break things up a bit. But, there weren't enough of them for my tastes when it comes to reading a book straight through like this. At the same time, it is very well organized such that one could treat it exactly like a guide. Each chapter is well labeled and constructed and contains a detailed summary at the end. So, if you find yourself overwhelmed by reading the catalogue of facts about each and every bird species, you could successfully read the summary of each chapter and then go through to seek out the more specific information that you need. Strangely though, there was no summary at the end of the book. It just ended abruptly after that last section on human influence. So, perhaps I went into this book expecting something different, but it is likely best to treat it as a reference guide. 

One may retain more information by hopping around the book rather than reading it cover to cover. Nonetheless it's full of page flags and I'll definitely be coming back to it time and again. I'm grateful to have a volume on my shelf containing such important information that is often so lacking and scholarship about the avian world.

This was also posted to my goodreads and storygraph.