katieproctorbooks's review against another edition
5.0
4.5–This was fascinating! So much history, mythology, and science about four plants- apples, tulips, marijuana, and potatoes.
macnchz's review against another edition
1.0
I can pinpoint exactly why I didn't like this book. It was overly pretentious for one, and it just wouldn't stop jamming its one point in your face. I had trouble finishing it.
zoe_'s review against another edition
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.0
Interesting, especially in some of the more speculative analysis/cultural musings (though these are also, notably, less factual or built on hard evidence). However, I do think that some of the central historical aspects remained quite unexplained (I wonder how well someone who has not learned about the tulipomania beforehand understands it after having read this book? How well do I understand the contended relationship between humans and marihuana?), in favor of a more free-flowing and almost stream-of-consciousness writing. Personally, I didn’t mind this that much but it does take away some of the educational value/potential of this book. At the same time, the flow of the narrative is quite elusive, which I think is favorable for some people (it sometimes almost reads like an ADHD person being distracted by interesting tangents).
I've been thinking about it since I read it and I believe that in retrospect the lack of educational value that is a result of many of these criticism makes me look back less favorably the more time goes on.
I've been thinking about it since I read it and I believe that in retrospect the lack of educational value that is a result of many of these criticism makes me look back less favorably the more time goes on.
eososray's review against another edition
2.0
This book was almost entirely boring, each of its sections on a different plant had different problems for me.
When discussing apples, the meandering story of Johnny Appleseed was uninteresting. Though this section did provide me with the most unknown information and curious history. That a single man could have predicted where the next wave of settlers was going to show up and create a very profitable business out of the American pioneers insatiable appetite for apple cider, and that this should turn out to create a massive variety of different types of one fruit is nothing short of amazing. That the story should have been so Americancentric when the history of apples is obviously much wider was disappointing.
Moving on to tulips provided me with very little new knowledge other than that the beautiful aberrations in tulips are caused by a virus.
The long and detailed talk about marijuana was perhaps not interesting for me based on where I live, who my friends are and how familiar I am with the industry, both in its legal and illegal facets. Living where I do has given me ample opportunity to know about the subject and to not really associate the drug with as much stigma as living in other areas might have done. Discussing cultivars and changes in the plant are old news, talking about hydroponics, smells and indoor cultivation is stuff I know and in much more detail than talked about here. When it's a big political topic about whether to legalize or not, almost everything gets discussed in the press, when it's so accepted in a social sense and your friends, neighbours and co-workers smoke it with impunity, it's hard to get excited. Are mind altering drugs good for us or not? I've heard his theories and many opposing ones, there was nothing new here.
And then for the lowly potato, my big issue here was not enough information, how do you judge with so little data? How do you know if it is good or bad? A few anecdotes and a couple conversations are pretty measly information to go on as far as I'm concerned. If you're worried about genetic changes in potatoes, there is a whole lot of other food you should be concerned about, possibly all of it. Maybe part of the discussion should be about the good in this as well as the bad. And isn't there other corporations that should be brought to the table here, not just Monsanto?
Over all I found the book slap dash and uninformative. Some of this could be that in the intervening years since it was first published, much of this information is common knowledge. Some of it could be my taste in a more factual, historic and scientific nonfiction rather than social commentary or personal opinion pieces. Whatever the reason, I don't think it was a very good book.
When discussing apples, the meandering story of Johnny Appleseed was uninteresting. Though this section did provide me with the most unknown information and curious history. That a single man could have predicted where the next wave of settlers was going to show up and create a very profitable business out of the American pioneers insatiable appetite for apple cider, and that this should turn out to create a massive variety of different types of one fruit is nothing short of amazing. That the story should have been so Americancentric when the history of apples is obviously much wider was disappointing.
Moving on to tulips provided me with very little new knowledge other than that the beautiful aberrations in tulips are caused by a virus.
The long and detailed talk about marijuana was perhaps not interesting for me based on where I live, who my friends are and how familiar I am with the industry, both in its legal and illegal facets. Living where I do has given me ample opportunity to know about the subject and to not really associate the drug with as much stigma as living in other areas might have done. Discussing cultivars and changes in the plant are old news, talking about hydroponics, smells and indoor cultivation is stuff I know and in much more detail than talked about here. When it's a big political topic about whether to legalize or not, almost everything gets discussed in the press, when it's so accepted in a social sense and your friends, neighbours and co-workers smoke it with impunity, it's hard to get excited. Are mind altering drugs good for us or not? I've heard his theories and many opposing ones, there was nothing new here.
And then for the lowly potato, my big issue here was not enough information, how do you judge with so little data? How do you know if it is good or bad? A few anecdotes and a couple conversations are pretty measly information to go on as far as I'm concerned. If you're worried about genetic changes in potatoes, there is a whole lot of other food you should be concerned about, possibly all of it. Maybe part of the discussion should be about the good in this as well as the bad. And isn't there other corporations that should be brought to the table here, not just Monsanto?
Over all I found the book slap dash and uninformative. Some of this could be that in the intervening years since it was first published, much of this information is common knowledge. Some of it could be my taste in a more factual, historic and scientific nonfiction rather than social commentary or personal opinion pieces. Whatever the reason, I don't think it was a very good book.
tealight's review against another edition
2.0
This book didn't find me at the right place and time. I know enough about the topics at hand and there wasn't much new knowledge to offer, nor was the analysis particularly insightful either. To be fair, this was published over twenty years ago and the ideas must have been much more novel then. The attitude it takes towards genetically modified foods is certainly of its time. It's worth reading as a primer, but doesn't give much to someone who's already familiar with botany and industrial agriculture.
changelingreader_adrian's review against another edition
funny
informative
lighthearted
reflective
relaxing
medium-paced
3.75