NOW READING: The Bible & More

From the start of Project Bookshelf, I intended to read the Bible toward the beginning of however long it may take to read every book in my house. In a silly bit of symbolism, I had hoped to read the Bible when I was 33 years old- a commonly-believed age for Jesus when he died. My slow progress with the dictionary derailed any hope of even starting the Bible when I was 33. But here I am, at long last, starting one of my big project reads.

It’s time to crank this project back up to Dork Factor 5. After reading one book at a time for the last several years, I’m plunging straight into the mayhem of reading multiple books at once. Fortunately, all of my next concurrent reads are all related. I will read the Bible alongside two Bible commentaries (one focusing on the Old Testament and the other on the New Testament), two other books providing contextual information (again, one for each testament), and a book focused solely on helping a reader better understand the Book of Revelation.

Based on introductions and prefaces, here is the order I will start these books in:
-The New Oxford Annotated Bible- NRSV with Apocrypha (3rd Edition)
-The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament
-Reading the Old Testament
-The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament
-Reading the New Testament
-Breaking the Code: Understanding the Book of Revelation

The Bible itself will span the full length of this reading project. During the Old Testament, I’ll be reading three books at once. During the Apocrypha, I will be reading only the Bible. For most of the New Testament, I’ll be tackling three books simultaneously. At the end of it all, the Book of Revelation will see me add a fourth book into the mix.

The challenge in all this is keeping each book separate in my mind. The commentaries shouldn’t be difficult to separate mentally, though there may be some overlap with the footnotes in my Bible. The Reading books will offer more general context to sections of the Bible rather than individual verses. My evaluation of the Bible will be geared towards its accessibility to the reader, the clarity with which it communicates its message, and the quality of its introductory sections, footnotes, and supplemental essays in helping a reader understand the Bible itself and its message on a deeper level.

I will not be evaluating the validity or merits of the Bible’s message. Any Bible is a translation prepared by many people with the express purpose of conveying a religious message. I will judge the conveyance of the message and the editor’s ability to clarify cultural and contextual differences rather than the message itself. To do otherwise seems improper to me.

While these six books provide the meat of my next reading adventure, I will supplement them with portions of two other books: The Atlas of World History and World History Volume I- Before 1600: The Development of Early Civilization. I won’t be reading these two books in full for a final rating at this time. Rather, I will use them to gain a broader understanding of the historical timeline of the ancient world taking place at the same time as events in the Bible. Israel, after all, was but a small kingdom wedged between giant empires. A lot more was going on that may have had a trickle-down effect into the lives of biblical events. My other books may provide some cultural context based on the writings and customs of other civilizations but I am a history nerd, so I want as broad and full a picture as possible.

These six books will more than double my current page count. This leaves me clueless as to how long it will take me to read through them all. There will be a start-and-stop element to this process, as I read a chapter from the Bible, look through footnotes, consult the appropriate commentary, and possibly read the chapter again. I’m hungry to work my way through this challenge, but I’ve bitten off more than I can chew before.

‘Mysterium Tremendum’ is Not a Harry Potter Spell: A Review of The Idea of the Holy

I thought that I might write an update post at the end of July. Then I thought I might post an early-August update when I finished the main body of the book. But here we are; the book is finished and I’ve spent two weeks thinking about what to write. Everything was going to be different about this reading experience, considering it was my first non-reference book. I didn’t expect the process of even approaching a review would be so different or so difficult.

Toolbox Level 1 (Structure): B+
It didn’t take long to come across a book that scored less than an A- is this category. Two main factors stand out to me as explanations. First, this book is translated from German, though I think that may affect the Toolbox Level 2 score more so than this one. Attempting to replicate the author’s original words as closely as possible may explain why the presence and absence of commas in certain places confounded me at times. Second, the original publication is over 100 years old. Language is always changing, so some of the guidelines for commas (and a few curious spellings) may have been different at the time. The answer is probably a combination of the two. It made the reading the slightest bit clunky but not a deal-breaker.

Toolbox Level 2 (Style): B
Rudolf Otto was a theologian, a philosopher, and a professor. In other words, he was a perpetual academic. In my short time on this earth, one of the few universal truths I have developed in my mind is that academics like to write far more than they need to. Whether it’s ego or overthinking ways in which they may be misunderstood, people like Otto get insufferably wordy at times. It is possible that such wordiness was acceptable or even the norm among German academics back in 1917, but yours truly is a big fan of conciseness.

The main problem with Otto’s writing for me is the amount of tangential and subordinate clauses that he pins to the main crux some of the time. One or two tangential or subordinate clauses per sentence is manageable. Otto, however, is fond of cramming multiple of each into the same sentence. The result forced me to re-read many comma-filled labyrinths to make sure I followed his point correctly. I prefer sentences to be 50 words long at the absolute most; Otto pushed many of his sentences past 70 words. A few even topped 90.


Fulfillment of Purpose: B+
Otto’s core thesis is compelling. While the evolutionary science of his day was chipping away at religion by suggesting that mankind created more complicated and sophisticated religious stories as our brains developed the capability to do so, Otto proposes the opposite. He argues that God and holy experiences have always been complicated and sophisticated, and mankind’s understanding of and articulation about God has improved thanks to our highly-evolved brains. Rather than understanding religious experiences as a construct of the human mind, Otto presupposes God in an eloquent way. God has been the same this whole time; mankind has only gotten better at expressing what it’s like to experience Him.

Many chapters are spent laying the foundation for his big idea. He gradually introduces terms like ‘numinous’ (something possessing strong spiritual or religious qualities) and ‘mysterium tremendum’ (an almost overwhelming feeling of awe and mystery when encountering the numinous), adding layers to their meaning in an attempt to describe more fully the sensory overload of a religious experience. Otto adeptly relates it to the chill-inducing qualities of music, art, and architecture that are hard to put into words that, even when adequately done, can’t quite capture the magic of the moment.

It’s all heady, dense stuff, but Otto pulls it off well through the first nine chapters. While the first third of the book introduces the concepts on a general basis, as something common across many religions, Otto shifts gears and spends three chapters talking about how the numinous and mysterium tremendum can be found in Judeo-Christian scripture and in the writings of Martin Luther. This reveals Otto’s bias for Christianity as the best embodiment of his theory of the numinous, and it awkwardly breaks the momentum of his work.

The author spends another six chapters writing about the development of man’s ability to experience and articulate the numinous. These chapters come from a general perspective again, but are then followed by three closing chapters that steer the reader once more toward the suggestion that Christianity is the current apex of numinous articulation, if not the embodiment of it. This highlights that Otto had two purposes for this book. First, he aimed to refute the evolutionary science of the day by establishing a comprehensive presupposition of God. Second, he aimed to sell the reader on Christianity being the best and most accurate realization of man’s evolving ability to comprehend the numinous experience.

This first goal is a home run for me. I recall embracing it when I read portions of this book for a college class, and I embrace it now. The second, more subtle goal sucks some of the air out of the room. I realize that Otto was a Christian theologian, so his bias is for Christianity. I just wish he didn’t wear that bias so nakedly. He takes a few potshots at other religions, Islam in particular, that betray his academic credentials. He studied and wrote on comparative religions, which helped him realize his concept of the numinous, but his focus on Christianity as the best example was disappointing in a way that I can’t articulate. I’m not looking for his theory to stay within the realm of pantheism, but I feel as though he should have kept building the general construct together and saved all the Christian-specific content for the end. It felt disjointed the way it is presented.

Reading Experience: B
Did I mention this book is heady, dense stuff? Between the deep theological substance, the slow ratcheting toward each point, and the wordiness on display in every chapter, I wouldn’t say I love this book. I’ll heap praise upon the main point of Otto’s work to anyone who will hear it, but this book is not for everyone. I don’t say that as a way to portray myself as intellectually superior for having gotten through it. This is a tough book to read. At times, it felt like a chore to me, but the payoff is mostly worth it.

I would shift some of the chapters around, or at least advise a different reading order. It might be easy to suggest that Otto is guilty of over-writing his magnum opus, but I think it is more of a case of the author over-explaining himself. As an academic, he sought understanding more so than we common folk do. Looking back on it, I get the sense that he approached his theory from multiple angles. This leads to repetition of thought via explaining his point two or three times in a row but in slightly different ways each time. I didn’t need that, but others might.

Overall Score: 3.17 out of 4 (solid B)

I told my wife that the world needs a CliffsNotes version of this book. Intellectually stimulating though it may be, it drags in too many places to earn a broad recommendation. The ideas presented are worthy of a small group study but it needs condensing to make it approachable. Perhaps I’ll revisit this book some day and try to turn my notes into an outline that does both the numinous and the mysterium tremendum justice.

This was a very fascinating book to select for my first non-reference read. At the start, I stated that I wanted to use The Idea of the Holy to cultivate a proper mindset for reading the Bible. I think that I was successful in using this book in that way. The Bible is a chronicling of human beings experiencing God in intimate ways. With Otto’s concepts of the numinous and mysterium tremendum, I can impart those concepts on and infer them from the pages of scripture. It will add depth to my next read.

Another outcome of this read was one of personal introspection. Otto talks about the Holy being a balance of the rational and the non-rational, the logical and the mystical. Too much emphasis on one side tips the scale and misses the true, full picture. I had myself pegged as being too far to one end of the scale for years but this book suggests to me that, while I am in many ways entrenched on one side of this spectrum, the core of my beliefs is actually anchored at the other end. It is a balance that baffles me but also gives me hope.

NOW READING: The Idea of the Holy (1958)

I’m choosing not to jump right into fiction for my first non-reference book. Believe it or not, reading any fiction will be prefaced by two books about writing fiction. I’ve had enough instructional material for now, so this is actually an exciting turn for me. If you’ve heard of this book, then my nerdiness is only being reinforced for you right now.

The Idea of the Holy was first published in 1917 in the author’s native German. A few years later an English translation came out. My copy is a revised English translation from 1958. It was required reading for an Introduction to Religion course that I took my sophomore year of college, and it was my first taste of serious theological study.

I remember being overwhelmed at times by this book and others from the same course. There I was, a know-it-all 19-year-old kid getting smacked in the face with a heaping dose of academic might that cut me down to size. And yet, I was fascinated by it. Much like the numinous that Otto writes of in this book, religion possesses a unique draw and power that can only be understood when you feel it for yourself.

My personal reason for reading this book now is to help put me in the right frame of mind to encounter that which is holy when I tackle my next book- the Bible. The author writes from a Christian perspective, but the subject matter is more theology than doctrine. Rather than tell me the right way to believe in God, I want to use this book to prepare me to think about God in a clearer way. I’ll let the Spirit move me as it will when reading the scripture.

If this book proves to be a dense, slow read, I may post a reading update partway through. If not, I will just post a review like my last book. Something tells me that this one will be a slower, more deliberate read though, and I welcome that.

If Prescriptivism Is Wrong, Then I Don’t Want to Be Right: A Review of The Elements of Style

I knew it wouldn’t take me long to finish this book. Coming in at a trim 128 pages, The Elements of Style lives up to every ounce of praise and hype that you may have heard about it. The only reason you may disagree with my assessment is if you despise prescriptivism and prefer that language devolve into a fluid and chaotic mess. If you fall into that camp, then read no further.

Toolbox Level 1: A
As was the case with The Bedford Handbook, The Elements of Style is flawless in this department. It was written by an English professor specifically for his students. How could it not fetch the highest of marks? This category is essential to a writer because you cannot hope to write an effective composition without these structural elements. Unless I come across a book that fails to excel in this department, I may merge it with Toolbox Level 2.

Toolbox Level 2: A-
It feels strange to give a book called The Elements of Style less than perfect marks in the style category. I only do so because there are a few points where either Strunk or White come across as too condescending. Whether they were trying to hammer home their point too much or simply lost themselves in a moment of ivory-tower glory, a few quips go a tad too far. These remarks only cross the line for me on style issues that have clearly evolved since Strunk first committed his commandments to print. White affords some leeway for the evolution of written communication, but even he slams the gavel down in a showy way once or twice.

Fulfillment of Purpose: A
Do you have to follow all of the rules laid out in this book? No. The authors each admit this. Strunk and White do suggest, however, that knowing the rules well allows writers to break those rules more effectively should they choose to. The Elements of Style is a firm foundation for writers to embrace and embrace it they should.

I walked away second-guessing my own tendencies: Am I making the most effective use of commas and semicolons? Am I guilty of overwriting, overstating, or overexplaining too often? These questions and more bounced around my head while I read this book. It is easy to grow overconfident in your writing skills, but it takes a stiff jolt to shake you off of that comfortable perch. This book will serve as a wake-up call to any writer open to introspection every time they open it. Strunk and White may plunge weaker writers into insecurity, but those who have the gift will use this book as a stone to sharpen their iron against.

Reading Experience: B+
This book is short and the writing is crisp. These two facts make it easy to read through The Elements of Style so quickly that you fail to absorb enough of its wisdom. I read most of this book twice to ensure I got the most out of it. As much as I enjoy the authors’ ways with words, I think that a cover-to-cover read is the wrong approach for this book. That keeps it in line with the other reference books I have read to date.

I set out to read the five main sections of this book in one sitting each, but in doing so I realized that, while wittier than The Bedford Handbook, this book should still be used for specific guidance rather than general reading. Some of the consecutive rules, principles, and suggestions build upon each other. Others reside as stand-alone nuggets of wisdom. Without constant layering, retention of this book’s wisdom is hard to achieve.

Overall Score: 3.75 out of 4 (solid A-)
From the start, I was interested in comparing the rules and recommendations in The Elements of Style to those found in The Bedford Handbook. Only the first section of Elements concerns the ingredients found in Toolbox Level 1. The Bedford Handbook drifted a little bit into Toolbox Level 2 but only as far as exact word choice, appropriate language, and some paragraph structure instruction. Elements only covers a few Toolbox Level 1 points and even then in just a general way; thus I find that both books are necessary for different reasons, neither one replacing the other.

The portions of the book written by Strunk possess a more colorful voice than White’s contribution, but they are not so unalike in tone and voice that it disrupts the coherence of the book. Both men offer valid, if not exactly timeless, advice. Time will continue to chip away some of the rules they affirm so rigidly, but much of this book’s guidance will continue to be essential to proper written discourse as long as the English language remains in use.

Some may be able to intelligently read this book in just a few sittings. I envy them. Perhaps my reading comprehension and retention skills are closer to average, but I see two ideal ways to read The Elements of Style: first as a true reference book, there for you when second-guess yourself or find yourself written into a pickle; second as a writing nerd’s bathroom reader, enabling the reader to refresh his or her memory of one or two sections per pit stop. Either way, you can’t go wrong turning to this book. The pages are few but the well is deep. Draw from it often.

NOW READING: The Elements of Style, Fourth Edition (2000)

This will be the last reference book covering words and writing skills I read for some time. My next few reads will still have a reference component to them but they will serve as a supplementary material. Stay tuned for that announcement; this current book is short.

I purchased The Elements of Style at the recommendation of Stephen King. It is listed chief among the horror master’s recommended materials for improving your wordsmithing. King’s On Writing is a terrific read in it own right and I look forward to getting to it before I tackle some fiction. I don’t remember when I got this book but I believe that I requested it either for Christmas or for my birthday one year and this reading journey was taking shape in my head.

This book’s goal is to clear up weaknesses that plague writers. Coming off the heels of The Bedford Handbook and its dose of Toolbox Level 1 content, I hope to use this book to strengthen my ability to assess Toolbox Level 2 content in future reads. In the end, I hope that enhancing my ability to recognize good style will lead to exhibiting good style in my own writing.

I don’t believe that I will post any reading updates for this book. It is a slim thing, not even 150 pages. If it is as enlightening and essential as Stephen King claims, I suspect that I will make short work of it.

Thank God I Don’t Have to Write Research Papers Anymore: A Review of The Bedford Handbook

It should come as no surprise to hear that this was the most useful book I have read so far along this journey. Words for the sake of words was an interesting way to start my reading quest but it wasn’t very useful. I will admit that the dictionary’s usage notes provided some worthwhile commentary and highlighted the importance of selecting the right word to convey what you wish to express. The thesaurus and my word roots dictionary contained few, if any, insights. Assessing The Bedford Handbook required the most thought to date, both while reading it and while sitting down to write this review.

Toolbox Level 1: A
Much of The Bedford Handbook’s focus is on honing and perfecting the structural elements of writing that fall under Toolbox Level 1. For that reason alone, it should come as no surprise that this book scores as high as possible. I didn’t note any spelling errors or any odd grammatical turns. This has me thinking that I may want to reevaluate how this category is weighted compared to the others. Perhaps not every book will score so high. If they do, however, then I may have to do a little fine-tuning.

Toolbox Level 2: B
I wasn’t able to dock my previous reads for their style and structural elements. Form and function are very basic for dictionaries and thesauri. While a B may not seem like taking a book to task, I feel it is a harsh but deserved score. The author’s style isn’t suspect but I feel that the organization of this book leaves something to be desired. It’s filled with great content but the chapters are not arranged in a manner that benefits the readers in the greatest need of assistance. Parts I and II are fine where they are but I am still baffled by the decision to stick the grammar section in Part XI. I think a more natural and logical progression was missed, resulting in far too much page turning.

Fulfillment of Purpose: B+
If I wanted to be nasty, I could punish this book for how dated some of its research guidelines now seem. I suspect that more research is done online now than in physical books. I could also rail against the fact that the website supplements this book points readers to no longer exist. In fact, Ms. Hacker’s website, the backbone of The Bedford Handbook’s online presence, is no longer in operation- not even by the publisher. This is almost to be expected, however, for a reference book that’s old enough to drive. For this section, I chose to focus on the strengths this book has to offer.

While the organization of the book could be better, the content is excellent. The MLA, APA, and Chicago reference and works cited sections will come up big for you if you are writing a research paper. The only way it could fail you is if MLA, APA, or Chicago style rules have changed, so it would be best to pick up something more current. It is 2019 after all.

The value of this book extends well beyond research papers. Even if you think you are a good writer, there at least two or three chapters in this book that will make you realize that you still struggle with something. I plan on coming back to this well of information as I start to write more. Heck, I’ve already used it to assess and correct some of my reading posts.

Reading Experience: B-
Given that I am neither writing research papers anymore nor struggling with ESL issues, this book was hit-or-miss as a cover-to-cover read. The chapters that I could relate to or gain help from kept my attention. Chapters focusing on areas I don’t think I struggle with were easy to read less intently. Those chapters that I had no interest or stake in were chores to read.

This is probably how most reference books covering a broad range of topics feel though. I’ve been sheltered by my first three books because they have very narrow foci. This is the first book I’ve read with more than just a few pages containing paragraphs, making it hard to compare to the dictionary, thesaurus, and word roots guide. It reads like a true book and yet it reads quite differently from non-reference material.

Overall Score: 3.25 out of 4 (solid B)
The Fulfillment of Purpose section is easily more important for a reference book than Reading Experience. The purpose of this book helped me get a better sense of the kinds of things I should look for when evaluating a book’s Toolbox Level 1 ingredients. This is precisely why I read this book when I did. It will help me evaluate both my own writing and the writing of others. It’s foundational stuff that may be easy to ignore as a reading-worthy subject, but it is also the kind of foundational stuff that separates the wheat from the chaff if we only choose to focus on it.

While I wouldn’t call this an enjoyable book, I have no regret calling it a worthwhile book. That may lose me points with the anti-prescriptivism crowd, but I believe that a fair amount of prescriptivism is necessary in written works. In face-to-face conversation, you can ask for clarification. Written communication is an all-or-nothing pursuit. You are either understood or you are not. If you follow the rules for grammar, usage, and mechanics laid out in this book, then you will have a better chance of having your written words understood. On some level, we all just want to be understood, don’t we?

READING UPDATE: The Bedford Handbook- Part XI – Index

Excited as I was to move past the MLA, APA, and Chicago drudgery, I made a point to slow down while reading the four grammar chapters. The Bedford Handbook loses points for relegating these chapters to the tail end of the book. Some of the terminology presented in these chapters is necessary to understand the guidance offered in earlier chapters. These four chapters aren’t even that dense, so I think it is more logical to put the grammar refresher chapters right before the chapters advising how to punctuate clauses and sentences described in the grammar refresher. Doing so would have spared me a lot of awkward back-and-forth page flipping.

Because I just can’t get away from dictionary-esque things it seems, this book also contains a glossary of usage. It was a nice way to wrap up the useful content of the book. After that was the answers section for all the mid- and end-chapter exercises that readers can partake in. Since I used the exercises to test myself while reading, I had already read over the answers section once, allowing me to skip it.

I admit that I skimmed over the index rather than read it in earnest. I kept an eye out for any terms or topics that I either didn’t remember or wanted to take a second peak at. They were few and far between.

It is a relief to be done with another book. I finished this one in 100 days. Blasting out a reference book in that short a span of time feels good but my page-per-day count is still on the low end. Perhaps my next book or two will lift that up some more. I’ll post a review in a few days.


Page Count: 928/928 (100.00%)
Countdown to my next update: 0 pages

READING UPDATE: The Bedford Handbook- Part IX – Part X

This latest section I finished off was the most useful to me as a college student. As an adult who no longer writes research papers with works cited pages, this section was about as riveting as watching paint dry. There was one snippet, however, that provided much needed advice for all communication, not just the written word:

“People believe that intelligence and decency support their side of an argument. To change sides, they must continue to feel intelligent and decent. Otherwise they will persist in their opposition.”

Aside from this gem of a quote, there wasn’t a lot to see. This portion of the book contains a few chapters about how to approach researching for a paper, avoiding plagiarism, and structuring an effective argument. The research chapters show their age, with broad warnings against using the internet pretty much at all. It also provides a small, clunky list of search engines trusted by the author. About half of those listed no longer exist.

One of the biggest affronts to all that is good and decent (at least in my silly mind) came in the form of a list of over 21 different reference and documentation styles that the book suggests are common. It seems as if every other academic or scientific discipline has come up with its own style guide for research documentation. It all just seemed a little too much. I’m not opposed to different disciplines being unique in certain ways, but this overabundance of style guides seems like it has to be intentional out of misplaced pride or arrogance- having your own system just to have your own system if you will. Perhaps some of the style guides listed have vanished over the last 17 years. I hope so, because it was hard enough in college to bounce back and forth between MLA and APA style depending on the professor.

The rest (and majority) of this section was split into three documentation guides for MLA, APA, and Chicago formats. This is where The Bedford Handbook was worth its weight in gold when I was in college. In the end, it probably only saved me a few percentage points per paper, but those extra points helped me graduate cum laude.

The final stretch of this book is upon us. After a few chapters on grammar, a usage glossary, and the index, I will be done and on to one last reference book. I admit that I got fidgety several times during this last section, so it seems my tolerance for reference material is waning fast. It’s a good thing my next book is a short one.

Page Count: 811/928 (87.39%)
Countdown to my next update: 117 pages

READING UPDATE: The Bedford Handbook #3- Part VI – Part VIII

I can’t lie- I lost some steam through this latest section. Maybe there was too many chapters about familiar topics, or maybe I’m just rowing tired of reading reference books. Whatever the cause(s), progress is slowing down and that doesn’t bode well for the next oversized chunk I get to read next.

Part VI of this book contained three chapters about things that trip up people who do not speak or write primarily in English. My wife is an elementary school teacher, so I have heard many stories about ESL students (and parents for that matter) and the difficulties they have in a school setting. Overall, this section was a nice reminder that we all need to keep a broad perspective when communicating with other people. Otherwise, there wasn’t much there that intrigued me.

Part VII focused on standard punctuation. I was pleased to learn that I already follow all the rules for when to use a comma. The chapter on when not to use a comma, however, showed me that I’ve still got some things to work on. The same goes for when to use question marks or italics for emphasis. Those, along with using dashes, parentheses, and/or commas to separate sidebar supplemental information, seem more flexible than the rules for commas. The chapter covering end punctuation cast shade on almost any use of exclamation points, yet it failed to even mention an amusing punctuation mark I discovered while reading the dictionary- the interrobang.

Part VIII covered mechanics- the first component of my rating system for books. The rules put forth regarding abbreviations, numbers, and spelling were all obvious to me already, as were most of the rules for capital letters. The guidelines on hyphens were a nice refresher and showed me a few things I either never learned or just forgot about. I will have to come back to the chapter on italics as I go forward on my reading journey. The rules may have changed since 2002, but I found a few things I wasn’t aware that should be italicized.

While it may be a little disheartening at times to find that my writing skills have a few rough edges, I’d rather be shown where to improve than let pride make me think I’m better than I am. This is the very reason I chose to read something like this so early on in Project Bookshelf. All these chapters that highlight trouble spots and areas of potential confusion for me will be worth revisiting as I write these entries, future book reviews, and other blog posts. Correcting those problems during these practice sessions will better prepare me for actually trying to write some of the stories that swarm around inside my brain.

The next section is a doozy, so you might not see another post for quite some time. One big reason I lost momentum, which I did not mention earlier, is that it’s Stanley Cup playoffs time. Unless hockey action gets boring, I’ll be less inclined to read as much until the Cup has been claimed.

Page Count: 522/928 (56.25%)
Countdown to my next update: 288 pages

READING UPDATE: The Bedford Handbook #2- Part III – Part V

For a while there I had a nice, one-chapter-a-night reading pace. As seems to be typical for me, such productive paces are short-lived. I finished the latest section of The Bedford Handbook over a week behind schedule but it proved to be a good read.

Part III is subtitled Clear Sentences, and contains eight chapters about non-grammatical pitfalls to avoid when writing sentences. Some chapters cover concepts and skills that I consider writing basics, such as avoiding passive voice, maintaining proper point of view, and utilizing a variety of sentence structures. I did appreciate getting a refresher on parallelism, mixed constructions, and misplaced/dangling modifiers. Those chapters may be worth returning to when I set out to write more than just these update posts.

Part IV’s topic is word choice. Nothing in these three chapters served as a wake-up call to me. I already try to avoid wordy sentences, and I understand the need to adjust tone and language depending on the intended audience of a piece of writing. I did appreciate Chapter 18’s emphasis on using a dictionary for finding exact words, and an admonition against misusing a thesaurus.

I found the most meat to chew on in Part V. In 10 chapters focusing on grammatical sentences, I recognized a few personal growth areas as a writer. I struggled to correct a few of the example and exercise sentences dealing with comma splices, coordinating conjunctions, pronoun case, and subjunctive mood’s impact on verb tenses. While other chapters in Part V were easier for me to work through, I think that all 10 are worth reading again.

My biggest takeaway from this portion of The Bedford Handbook is also a qualm against it. During Part V, I found myself lost at times in a sea of grammatical terminology. Some of those terms I hadn’t seen since high school, while others may never have been taught to me by name. Later in the book, there are four chapters covering grammar basics. The chapters in Part V refer to this future section quite a bit. Considering the extensiveness of these references, why not put grammar basics earlier in the book? Perhaps I’ll find justification for this when I reach Part XI.

Page Count: 390/928 (42.03%)
Countdown to my next update: 132 pages

READING UPDATE: The Bedford Handbook #1- Preface – Part II

What a difference full sentences and paragraphs make. I haven’t even been reading this book for a month yet and my page-per-day count has skyrocketed. In fact, I’ve read more pages in the last three weeks than there are in the last book I read, which took me almost two months to work through. I do sense a hunger inside me. Whether it’s a craving to tackle some meaty fiction in another few books or the long-repressed desire to write, I can’t say. What I can say is that this book hasn’t been too boring yet.

Rather than monthly reading updates like I planned, I sectioned this book off in my mind into groupings of its parts. In my mind, these clusters fit together well enough to break up my reading updates accordingly. This first update covers my thoughts on the introductory sections and the first two parts (seven chapters) of The Bedford Handbook.

Diana Hacker gets most of the credit but there are a lot of people involved in the writing, layout, and editing of this book. Boy, does she ever make sure they get thanked. The preface serves as a hybrid introduction to educators using the book for their students and thank you section. It comes in at a staggering 20 pages. This precedes a nine-page introduction for student users of the book. Then, at long last, comes the contents section. By the time you reach the first section of composition guideline content, 46 pages of roman-numeral fluff stands between you and the book’s cover. Perhaps long-winded introductory sections are standard in these kinds of academic texts but it seems like a bit much to me.

Part 1 contains four chapters covering the writing process. Perhaps it’s a sign that my middle and high school teachers did a good job, because much of these pages struck me as the kind of thing a college student should already know how to do. It’s been a long time since I thought about how to write an essay or a research paper, but the refresher didn’t reveal any secrets that I’ve been missing out on all these years. The author does make a unique distinction between revising (for effectiveness) and editing (for correctness). I don’t recall ever hearing a teacher or professor make that argument before. Then again, many of my final college papers were either really good first drafts or labors of love that I edited while writing.

Part 2 shifts gears and covers document design. Margins, headings, fonts, charts- all of these get some focus with the caveat to incorporate them based on the preferred format for the end reader (academic versus business). I snickered at the chapter covering the differences between paper and web résumé formats, a section that dates this book without question. There was also a chapter on writing website content that is of little use now. Most of Part 2, in fact, is outdated but a few nuggets of wisdom still hold true.

This has been an easy read so far. Some evenings I set out to only read a section or two but I blast through a whole chapter. I’m trying not to read too quickly though, because I want to give this book a chance to reeducate me on any good writing practices I may have forgotten after my work life shifted from word-focused to number-focused. One point in Hacker’s opening sections made me chuckle though. In her introduction for student users, she writes, “…it is unlikely that you will want to study all of the chapters in this book in detail.” She doesn’t know me very well, now does she?


Page Count: 180/928 (19.40%)
Countdown to my next update: 201 pages

NOW READING: The Bedford Handbook, Sixth Edition (2002)

After reading three reference books focused on individual words, it’s time for a change. My next book is a reference work that focuses on what to do with all those words. I think this fits my logical progression. The Bedford Handbook will serve as a refresher to a lot of writing basics, some of which I may take for granted and some of which I may have forgotten.

I picked this book up in 2002. It was a required purchase upon starting my freshman year at Lebanon Valley College. The current edition retails for around $96 but I can only imagine what the overpriced college bookstore charged for it back in the day. I recall largely ignoring this book except for the works cited guidelines.

When I went back for a second bachelor’s years later, I poked around a few of the other sections while working on papers. In some ways, I feel bad about ignoring a pricey buy. Then again, the first half of this book appears to cover a lot of writing basics that I already learned in high school. Perhaps that’s why I ignored so much of it at first. Now, I’m going to put my preconceived notions and hubris aside and actually read the whole thing.

Given the different structure of this book (sentences, paragraphs, and chapters!), I have no idea how long it will take me to read. I don’t want to read this book just to cross it off the list. I want to read it with an open mind and try to learn from it if has anything to teach me. It’s been years since I last studied grammar, so I’m sure I will get some refreshers. I just hope that I’m not breaking too many rigid rules (even though there are plenty of writing rules that can be broken).

Monthly update posts will still be the goal, but I suspect I will go a little deeper this time around. I know a few people who teach or have backgrounds in the English language arts. I may pose questions to them (and Facebook friends at large) at various times, whether it be at the end of each chapter or section of chapters. A dose of interaction may be the spice I’ve been missing all this time with Project Bookshelf.

Reading Harry Potter Will Never Be the Same Again: A Review of the Dictionary of Word Roots and Combining Forms

Completing this book brings me to the end of a cycle of reference books focused entirely on words alone. It’s not surprising to find that the shorter the book, the more I enjoyed reading it. While the dictionary and thesaurus managed the same score in different ways, the Dictionary of Root Words and Combining Forms was its own animal and it shows in the scores.

Rating criteria refresher.

Toolbox Level 1: A-
After that introductory paragraph, this probably looks like a regression. This is the same rating that the dictionary and the thesaurus each earned in this same category. It still feels like a cop-out to hand it out yet again, but it still fits, given the limitations of a book containing mostly fragments. I only counted three errors at the most- two for spelling and one for a word root being placed out of alphabetical order.

Toolbox Level 2: A-
This score is also identical to those of the preceding two books at this level. What I like in this book is that the content of the minority of pages that can be analyzed for style lives up to the purpose the author claims. Donald J. Borror wrote this book to help people. There’s not an ounce of holier-than-thouness in the introduction and no attempt to sell this book as the best of its kind. But there are only 12 pages in the whole book with fully formed sentences to analyze. That didn’t leave me enough room to justify an A here.

Fulfillment of Purpose: A
Unlike the dictionary and thesaurus, I gave this book the highest possible marks here. Where a physical dictionary may no longer be necessary thanks to online tools, I feel this book easily justifies its existence on the shelf of any science-minded individual. It’s compact and far from cumbersome to pick up and search through. Most science terms come out of Latin and Greek, so I can’t knock it for only featuring 141 root words coming from other languages.

My one quibble still arises over one of the closing sections. I think a case could be made for putting the three-page section on formulating words from these roots at the beginning of the book. I can see how that might tempt some eager beavers to try doing so right out of the gate, but that assumes there are enough weirdos like me out there who will read a book such as this from cover to cover. In case there are enough of us odd ducks out there, I can see how the placement of the word formulation guidelines might be warranted.

Reading Experience: B
I didn’t take the same detached approach to reading this book that I adopted with the thesaurus. Perhaps that stems from positive memories from the high school biology class that forced me to buy this book. This book is almost entirely word etymology, which was one of the components I enjoyed the most about the dictionary. Words alone get boring, but some new ones may stick enough to expand your vocabulary. The structure of words, however, is pure knowledge. I won’t retain much of what I read in this book but, over time, I will come back to it when I come across fancy or odd words. That opens the door to lifelong learning. The more I read, the more I’ll turn to this book, and the more parts of it will stick in my memory.

That’s not to say that I read this entire book with equal fervor. I didn’t. Some pages were plenty boring, and this book did very little to improve my lack of interest in words of Latin and Greek origin. They monopolize the market, and overexposure and over-saturation gets boring.

The last portion of the book was also a nice refresher. After nothing but alphabetical root words, the closing section groups common combining forms together in familiar categories like colors, shapes, numbers, and body parts. I very much enjoyed seeing these clusters because it gave the book a meaningful closing. I can’t explain it much more beyond that it just felt good to finish things out that way.

Overall Score: 3.5835 out of 4 (solid B+)
This is a terrific little book. I don’t recommend reading it cover to cover like I did, but it’s a great reference if you’re curious about how certain words are built and what their components mean. It can’t replace a full dictionary but this one ages better. I learned and retained more from this book than either the dictionary or the thesaurus. As the title of this review suggests, however, I plan on pulling this bad boy out when I get to my wife’s Harry Potter books. If nothing else, it will be fun to see if J.K. Rowling actually pieced together her curses and spells correctly or if she just made stuff up on the fly.

Project Bookshelf Rating Criteria

I use four categories to rate a book. These categories are Toolbox Level 1, Toolbox Level 2, Fulfillment of Purpose, and Reading Experience. My first two categories are nicknamed Toolbox Level 1 and Toolbox Level 2 in honor of one of my favorite authors- Stephen King. His book On Writing is excellent stuff and had an impact on my outlook on my own writing skills.

Level 1 contains structural essentials like vocabulary, spelling, grammar, and mechanics. More often than not, a published work should score high here because some editor has already made sure that words are spelled correctly and that the work doesn’t fall apart grammatically or mechanically speaking. You don’t get published (or shouldn’t get published) if you don’t have a firm grasp on these things. There is still room for nitpicking word choice and sentence structure though.

Level 2 is the broad category of style. How does the author compose paragraphs, develop characters, and describe the action? How does the dialogue sound? Does the author have a competent and independent voice, or does he or she sound phony, pretentious, or objectionable in some other way? If Level 1 is like engineering (it has to be there to function), then Level 2 is akin to architecture (the little design touches that set it apart, be they necessary or not).

The third category is Fulfillment of Purpose. Does this book accomplish what it set out to do? Here creeps in a little more subjectivity. I take into account the genre of the book with Level 2 to a degree, but it becomes more relevant here.

The fourth and final category is Reading Experience. This is as subjective as it gets. Did I enjoy this book and why or why not? Think of this as the recommendation factor. A book may be well-written and an adequate example of its genre, but if it’s not my cup of tea, I’ll let you know here. Feel free to debate me on any of my four assessment areas, but this is where most disagreement will originate.

All four assessment areas receive equal standing. I award letter grades to each category and use a GPA-style grading scale (A = 4.0, A- = 3.667, etc.) to create a final score.

READING UPDATE: Word Roots and Combining Forms- Part 2- Mad – Some Common Combining Forms

February started out as a very poor month for reading. So much seemed to be going on. When I did have free time, I found myself falling asleep on the couch in the evenings, worn out from whatever taxed me during the day. I started worrying at one point that my three-month goal for reading this book would fail.

Somewhere not long after Valentine’s Day, however, a switch flipped. I tore into this book, making huge dents on the weekend. At first I was just glad to catch up to January’s pace. Then I started wondering if I might actually finish the darn thing a month early. That is exactly what happened.

After finishing the dictionary component of this book, I hit a handy guide for creating words from these roots and the rules that scientists tend to follow. That was interesting to read through, and I thought it might have been better for that to come at the beginning of the book. I’m on the fence on that issue, because I can see it working both before and after the portion that fulfills its purpose.

Despite reading at a faster pace, I still came up with a number of intriguing finds:

Narc- We’ve all seen this root before but I never bothered to look up what narcotic meant. Narc means numbness or stupor and tic means relation or belonging to. Put them together and it makes sense.

Obnoxi- While the word that comes immediately to mind now means annoying, its root is far more serious. This Latin nugget means hazardous or liable. That makes sense, considering the root word is itself composed of two roots- ob, meaning reversed or against, and noxi, meaning harmful.

Presby / Presbyt- This root is known mostly for its association with a Protestant denomination. It means old or an old person. This Greek term follows a logical path to become the name of a body of believers. The Presbyterian church is led by elders. While an elder isn’t always an old person now, they probably were back in the day.

Pristin- When you see a pristine landscape or a pristine room, you probably don’t mean old-fashioned or primitive. But that’s what this Latin root means. The word pristine comes from a Latin word, pristinus, which draws on this root word but meant former. See how we got there? Old-fashioned, leads to describing something as if it existed in a former state, which leads to our current definition.

Sceptic / Skeptic- In today’s understanding, this word has a negative tone. But rather than doubtful, the original meaning of the root means reflective or observant. So if someone calls you a skeptic, you can thank them for the compliment and leave them puzzled.

Stimul- Latin words gave me fits while reading the dictionary. Should I be surprised that they gave me fits here as well? I often questioned how Merriam-Webster determined that seemingly unrelated Latin words somehow formed the basis of words that look nothing like it. Here, I’m left to wonder how this root, meaning to goad, shifted over the centuries to its current meaning. I can see how it made the journey. It’s not a big stretch, but the connotations are so different.

Thesaur- Having read the thesaurus, I got a good laugh out of its root word. Perhaps Roget thought a little too highly of his creation, because thesaurus means gift or treasure. The thesaurus was a more enjoyable read than the dictionary, but I wouldn’t call it a gift. Then again, gift means poison in German, so maybe it is appropriate?

Torrid- This root caught my eye because I’ve seen a store by the same name in the mall. The only reason I can come up with for why they named a plus-size women’s clothing company something meaning dried up or parched, is that Torrid is a sister company to Hot Topic. Otherwise, I’m not sure it was a wise choice.

Vaccin- A cool story goes along with this one. The Latin root means of a cow. How did something as common as a shot get named after cows? A physician and scientist named Edward Jenner noticed that milkmaids who contracted cowpox did not contract the smallpox virus. He correctly surmised that exposure to cowpox, a milder form of smallpox, made these dairy workers immune to the more aggressive human form of the virus. The scientific name of cowpox is Variolae vaccinae. Later scientists advocated for calling all inoculations be called vaccines in honor of Jenner’s work.

Non-Greek/Latin Word Roots So Far: 141

Page Count: 142/142 (100.00%)

READING UPDATE: Word Roots and Combining Forms- Part 1: Preface – Macula

January was a good reading month. My methodical approach to reading this book definitely slows down the momentum but it’s been a worthwhile exercise. I’m starting to get the itch to read books that don’t fall under the reference genre but not rushing things along is a welcome break from the pace of the rest of my life at the moment.

I decided to track the number of word roots coming from sources other than Greek and Latin. To be more specific, I’m lumping Low Latin, Middle Latin and New Latin together with Latin. New Latin may be the one source that you could argue against me ignoring for my tally but it’s all Latin to me and I grew bored with Latin while reading the dictionary. I’m also not counting anything that comes from Greek or Latin mythology or Greek and Latin formal names.

The number of non-Greek and non-Latin word roots surprised me a little but not very many of them stood out in ways beyond just being not Greek or Latin. I did come up with a few notable word roots to share with you, so let’s get to it.

Aedoe & Aidoi- Both of these roots come from Greek and both of them mean either to regard with reverence or the genitals. Either the Greeks were a bunch of perverts or they regarded their genitals with great reverence. I’d love to know how this split-meaning came to light.

Aig & Aix- Another split-meaning root. Once again, both come from Greek. They can mean either a goat or waterfowl. I’m not always the most observant person alive, but I’m pretty sure that I’ve never gotten goats and waterfowl mixed up in my head before. How on earth did the Greeks settle on leaving these two animals under the same word root? Maybe the Greeks were lazy perverts.

Alkali- This was the first non-G/L word that got my attention. As a lover of science, I’m familiar with the word root and some of the words that come from it. I did not know it was of Arabic origin. I checked back through my dictionary write-ups to see if it stood out to me all those years ago but it must not have registered then.

Arch- Depending on which vowel or consonant structure you follow this Greek root with, it could have four different meanings. Two meanings, ancient and first/beginning, go hand in hand and make sense. The other two? Not so much. Arch- can be the start of something that means chief/principal/superior/ruler or it can be the start of something that means the rectum or anus. A word root that puts rulers and rectums under the same umbrella? Perhaps the Greeks were lazy perverts with a sense of humor.

Candidat- My root words dictionary made this term and its meaning a little misleading. It’s Latin and means clothed in white. It’s easy to assume that this is some kind of reference to purity but you know what happens when you assume. Rather than suggesting that those running for office are pure in heart or conviction, this root word comes from the fact that candidates in ancient Rome wore white togas. This probably helped them stand out from the rest of the populace, inviting questions.

Corolla- Ever wonder what the Toyota model’s name means? It means a little crown or wreath. They’re not the biggest cars, so a diminutive crown be what they were going for. If they wanted to name a car after a wreath, then I’ve got nothing to say about that.

Echel- A French word root meaning ladder. That makes sense when you think of the term echelon.

Galax- This Greek word root means milky. It makes sense that the ancient Greeks, lacking anything close to the light pollution we have today, would think that the portion of our home here in the universe that’s visible in the night sky resembles milk. But does that mean that the phrase Milky Way Galaxy is redundant?

Galen- Yet another Greek root word. It should come as no surprise why I was drawn to this one. It means calm or restful. It can also mean lead ore, so consider this one another baffling split-meaning term. For the record, I consider myself more similar to calm and rest than lead ore.


Non-Greek/Latin Word Roots So Far: 67
Page Count: 61/142 (42.96%)

NOW READING: Dictionary of Word Roots and Combining Forms (1960)

It may come as a surprise that I chose another sort of dictionary for my third book but this is one I’ve been looking forward to. While the word dictionary is in the title, it’s a very lean book- just 142 pages. I’m taking a relaxed approach to getting through it though. This will be another very dry read, but one that I want to pay more attention to than the thesaurus.

I bashed plenty of words of Latin origin during my read of the dictionary, so karma has me swimming against a current of Latin and Greek prefixes and suffixes with this book. Donald J. Borror assembled this reference piece to provide students and members of the scientific community with a handy guide for discerning both the meaning and pronunciation of many of the naming roots in many areas of science, especially biology. It may be small but it is dense and broad in scope.

This is the first book in Project Bookshelf that has a story attached to it. I acquired my copy of this book when I took an advanced biology class during my senior year of high school. It was a hard but rewarding class. At times, I spent a couple of hours each night reading and working on homework, making it one of the five most study-intensive classes I think I ever took.

I don’t remember how much of my study time involved my nose being stuck in this book in particular, but the book itself was significant enough to leave a mark. Its cover is worn, folded, and cracked. The page corners are all curved out one direction or another, some even still bearing the scars of being folded over for quick reference. I come to it not as an adversary, but as an old friend.

I plan on highlighting the most interesting prefixes and suffixes that I come across. That aspect of my update posts will be completely subjective. I also plan on looking for the root words in this book that come from sources other than Greek and Latin. Perhaps I’ll even keep a tally. This all will slow me down a little but I’m confident that this book won’t even take me as long as the thesaurus.

What’s Another Word for Thesaurus? Finished!: My Roget’s II Thesaurus Review

All the way through reading the thesaurus, I was hard on it. I’m not some ivory-tower dwelling linguist, but I know enough words to not need to use the thesaurus the way the introduction section sells it. Using the thesaurus to add color and bigger words to your writing may feel satisfying but it can also make you look foolish. I do, however, have to concede a few points its way.

Toolbox Level 1: A-
Remember this category? It’s the engineering of writing (vocabulary, spelling, grammar, and mechanics). Much like the dictionary, the thesaurus is all about vocabulary. I only caught a handful of spelling errors, none of which were the main word entry. Rather, all spelling errors came in the short sentence or fragment examples of proper use of the word. This rating is a bit of a cop-out when you consider that most of this book was just single words in rapid succession. The dictionary was the same way.

Toolbox Level 2: A-
Just like the dictionary, the thesaurus, as a reference book, defies much of what anyone can throw at it from a stylistic analysis perspective. The only style here lies in the introduction section, which was pretty straight-laced. The rest is just words, fragments, and occasional sentences. This feels like a cop-out too but I am hopeful that I can rein in this category and Toolbox Level 1 more as I hit books with actual style to evaluate.

Fulfillment of Purpose: B-
The people at Roget’s want you to use this book to fluff your writing and possibly expand your everyday vocabulary. The former makes me gag and the latter seems like a lofty goal. Vocabulary is something you either have or you don’t. You can build it up but only if you expose yourself to it in use. I think you are more likely to remember words when you hear them coming from the mouths of others. I found a few new-to-me words while reading the dictionary, but I haven’t put many of them to use. The environments I find myself in certainly don’t use them and they may not even be appropriate for most of them anyway.

At the end of the day, I have to concede that most of the synonym suggestions my thesaurus lays out are in-bounds. I still hate the fact that there was only a halfhearted caution about context. If you want to use a word that you aren’t 100% comfortable with because it’s not already in your vocabulary, please look up the definition of the word in the dictionary and pay attention to all possible definitions and even the etymology.

Similar to the dictionary, I have to wonder about the future of print thesauri. Having one handy may be useful for a quick check in an office, dorm room, or the home, but most people are carrying around smartphones that double as powerful inquisitorial tools. Merriam-Webster keeps some information behind a pay wall with their definition contents but I don’t see how an online thesaurus could keep much hidden without being abandoned and becoming irrelevant.

Reading Experience: C-
The thesaurus rates higher than the dictionary in this category because it was so much easier and faster to read. After a bitter fight to the end with the dictionary, I kept myself detached while reading the thesaurus. There’s very little to latch onto here, so I made “it’s just a bunch of words” my mantra for the 175 days it took to read it.

Points of interest were few and far between. Maybe part of that is due to my cold approach to the book. I didn’t give it much of a fair shake but I still believe it didn’t warrant much of one to begin with. There were times when the act of reading became a bit of a chore but there weren’t spirit-crushing lengthy ruts to contend with. I read it to read it and get it out of the way. The thesaurus gave about as much pushback to that goal as I expected.

Overall Score: 2.917 out of 4 (high B-)
Of course the thesaurus would come away with the same score as the dictionary. Why not? Their journeys to a high B- had different paths but it’s a fitting score. One was informative but bothersome to work through. The other was easy to read but void of anything approaching engaging reading. The thesaurus is another book that’s just not meant to be read cover to cover like this but it can be done. To do so in such a short span of time after completing the dictionary gives me the feeling of momentum. I hope it’s not a false sense though.