cupiscent's review against another edition
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
This was a really interesting read, almost more for the exploration of how we investigate, relate to and think about cities and the past than for the exploration of the history itself. I enjoyed Newitz's writing style (especially one memorable sentence that included both "sinecure" and "goofing off", which is entirely my jam in juxtaposition) and while it was sometimes overly involved with the specifics of Newitz's personal exploration, that did layer in nicely with gritty archeology, written history and more meta ideas.
kitwhelan's review against another edition
4.0
Fascinating and I learned a lot!
I almost wish the epilogue, where the author extrapolates about the future of cities based on the lessons of these four “lost” cities, was a bigger part of the book.
But as it is this is a very well-researched exploration of what brings humans together to make cities and what causes them to fade.
I almost wish the epilogue, where the author extrapolates about the future of cities based on the lessons of these four “lost” cities, was a bigger part of the book.
But as it is this is a very well-researched exploration of what brings humans together to make cities and what causes them to fade.
sophia608's review against another edition
2.0
If someone were interested in ancient cities from a progressive point of view, and isn’t too concerned with reading evidence, this was a decent read. The writing was fine, learning about the ancient cities interesting, a fairly easy read.
My biggest gripe: there was zero demarcation of which claims were backed up with anthropological evidence and which were pure authorial speculation. Occasionally they throw in a “possibly” or, on the other hand, a “based on archaeological dating,” but in general it’s difficult to parse which of the stories in this book are true. Part of this is expected: the stories and histories of people from millennia ago are at times speculative and imprecise, but some things we do know. I’d have liked to see more explanation of the evidence (where we have it) and more explicit comments about guesswork and other potential interpretations of the data.
On a literary front, the writing is just okay. I have NEVER read any author who uses the word “mused” so frequently — anytime they are talking with an archaeologist, the archaeologist is “musing” over something or other. The interspersed of personal narrative with the story was clunky (why did it start with them mourning their estranged dad’s death?!) and frankly I could have done with fewer quotes from “Jane Doe, a Scientist at University College” — the attempt to include tiny pieces of their visiting the archaeology sites detracted from the histories.
Not sure I fully agree with the thesis (I think a city abandonment is fair to label a collapse, despite the connotations); it definitely gave a anti-white, anti-colonial, anti-hierarchy, very liberal interpretation of ancient societies. It could’ve been more nuanced and I wasn’t fully convinced by some of their claims, but the effort to provide an alternate vantage is appreciated.
My biggest gripe: there was zero demarcation of which claims were backed up with anthropological evidence and which were pure authorial speculation. Occasionally they throw in a “possibly” or, on the other hand, a “based on archaeological dating,” but in general it’s difficult to parse which of the stories in this book are true. Part of this is expected: the stories and histories of people from millennia ago are at times speculative and imprecise, but some things we do know. I’d have liked to see more explanation of the evidence (where we have it) and more explicit comments about guesswork and other potential interpretations of the data.
On a literary front, the writing is just okay. I have NEVER read any author who uses the word “mused” so frequently — anytime they are talking with an archaeologist, the archaeologist is “musing” over something or other. The interspersed of personal narrative with the story was clunky (why did it start with them mourning their estranged dad’s death?!) and frankly I could have done with fewer quotes from “Jane Doe, a Scientist at University College” — the attempt to include tiny pieces of their visiting the archaeology sites detracted from the histories.
Not sure I fully agree with the thesis (I think a city abandonment is fair to label a collapse, despite the connotations); it definitely gave a anti-white, anti-colonial, anti-hierarchy, very liberal interpretation of ancient societies. It could’ve been more nuanced and I wasn’t fully convinced by some of their claims, but the effort to provide an alternate vantage is appreciated.
myworldtoread's review against another edition
informative
slow-paced
2.5
I felt like there were times the author was rambling, or didn't always make a connection to what was being discussed. It was interesting to learn about the way of life in these cities and what archeologists have been able to learn in their studies of the respective cities.
taffy_sea's review against another edition
3.0
3.5-4 stars— It’s deeply interesting to think about what different cities looked like and how people experienced life in them, across the globe and throughout time. My imagination caught, again and again, at the alien and yet recognizable scenes of urban life depicted in Lost Cities.
Well researched and delivered in a friendly, easy-to digest manner, Lost Cities pushes back on common assumptions and colonialist myths of past civilizations.
Speculation is both a strength and a weakness of this book, as Annalee Newitz’s imagination invites the reader in to see and feel ordinary life in cities long since dissolved, while also making frequent leaps into the “whys” of urban construction and decline that would probably prompt academic pearl-clutching. I’m pleased to have read this; I learned quite a bit and am walking away from the book with tons of answer-less questions.
Well researched and delivered in a friendly, easy-to digest manner, Lost Cities pushes back on common assumptions and colonialist myths of past civilizations.
Speculation is both a strength and a weakness of this book, as Annalee Newitz’s imagination invites the reader in to see and feel ordinary life in cities long since dissolved, while also making frequent leaps into the “whys” of urban construction and decline that would probably prompt academic pearl-clutching. I’m pleased to have read this; I learned quite a bit and am walking away from the book with tons of answer-less questions.
cuddlewithbooks's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
3.5
The subject matter intrigued me greatly but it was not as profound as I would've liked. It felt misleading that these cities were lost - they were certainly abandoned or destroyed but I did not feel like the way they were framed served the author's thesis statement. I wish each city had more introduction to it and that I wasn't fully floundering to place where it was and when it existed in context of the rest of the world. Overall through it was interesting and held my attention.
blairlovesbooks's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.75
Each section got progressively better as it went, but the section on Çatalhöyük felt like it was written before Newitz had fully codefied her central thesis and she never looked back. The epilogue was pretty grim - instead of tying together threads from each chapter she kinda just went “welp, society is doomed I guess.” It was also clear that Newitz is a journalist, not a historian, as her citations could charitably be called inconsistent. The portions on Cahokia and Angkor were fascinating, however; and the information in general was interesting.