Scan barcode
traitorjoes's review
3.0
I’ve been eager to read this book sometime, and so I was incredibly disappointed when I finally got my hands on it. I’ve been learning Chinese for around eight years, and switched from simplified to traditional when I moved to Taiwan. I was so fascinated to learn about the history and process of simplification. I was excited the author was Taiwanese, and admittedly my own fault, hoped the book would offer insight of how China simplifying aided (or hurt depending on opinions) the country vs sticking with traditional in Taiwan.
I’d say around 1/2 of this book offers little on its main subject - while the digressions themselves are interesting topics, it takes over a hundred pages to get to the book’s core topic. There is so much excess and needless detail, particularly a desire to paint vivid descriptions of scenery or looks, that are wholly unneeded. I agree that history books can often be generally inaccessible, but the trend of long flowery scenic writing needs to only been applied when it is actually aiding the greater point.
For me, the book either needed to be far shorter or entirely focused on the direct topic of simplifying the Chinese language. A history of characters, from oracle bones to radicals etc, would have been better fodder than other chapters. I think the process of creating typewriters and computers could be a book itself. The author has done a remarkable amount of research and I enjoyed her work overall, but ultimately the book was a let down.
I’d say around 1/2 of this book offers little on its main subject - while the digressions themselves are interesting topics, it takes over a hundred pages to get to the book’s core topic. There is so much excess and needless detail, particularly a desire to paint vivid descriptions of scenery or looks, that are wholly unneeded. I agree that history books can often be generally inaccessible, but the trend of long flowery scenic writing needs to only been applied when it is actually aiding the greater point.
For me, the book either needed to be far shorter or entirely focused on the direct topic of simplifying the Chinese language. A history of characters, from oracle bones to radicals etc, would have been better fodder than other chapters. I think the process of creating typewriters and computers could be a book itself. The author has done a remarkable amount of research and I enjoyed her work overall, but ultimately the book was a let down.
rbruehlman's review
3.0
I WANTED to like this book. I’d had my eye on it since last spring. I love linguistics and etymology, and I love learning about other cultures. Chinese characters in particular are a topic I don’t know much about, but what I do know has me fascinated.
But I just could not get into this book. It’s not badly written. I just couldn’t get into it. I can’t put my finger on why. I guess maybe it was because it was primarily a history book, rather than a book about language? It’s a very exhaustive book that explores each dead end, regardless of whether a given dead end inspired whatever did take off. I got bored, I guess.
I wish the book had included more illustrations, diagrams, and visual examples. It was really hard for me to picture some of the things the book discussed, especially since I don’t know Chinese. The mechanical stuff like typewriters, I honestly just really struggled to visualize.
I think the biggest problem, ultimately, was that I don’t know a lot about Chinese history. While the book mentions important events and movements, it doesn’t go into detail. So I didn’t really have anything to put these literary ideas, beliefs, and people into context. History without context is just facts. I don’t think it’s the book’s responsibility to educate me about Chinese history more generally, but I do think I would have enjoyed it more if I knew more.
Not a bad book, feel bad giving it 3 stars, but I was anxiously awaiting its end.
But I just could not get into this book. It’s not badly written. I just couldn’t get into it. I can’t put my finger on why. I guess maybe it was because it was primarily a history book, rather than a book about language? It’s a very exhaustive book that explores each dead end, regardless of whether a given dead end inspired whatever did take off. I got bored, I guess.
I wish the book had included more illustrations, diagrams, and visual examples. It was really hard for me to picture some of the things the book discussed, especially since I don’t know Chinese. The mechanical stuff like typewriters, I honestly just really struggled to visualize.
I think the biggest problem, ultimately, was that I don’t know a lot about Chinese history. While the book mentions important events and movements, it doesn’t go into detail. So I didn’t really have anything to put these literary ideas, beliefs, and people into context. History without context is just facts. I don’t think it’s the book’s responsibility to educate me about Chinese history more generally, but I do think I would have enjoyed it more if I knew more.
Not a bad book, feel bad giving it 3 stars, but I was anxiously awaiting its end.
linguaphile11's review
3.0
The timeline of the Chinese script evolution makes for a fascinating read if you are interested in China, Chinese, or language in general. The author builds a strong narrative that although it wasn’t easy, the language revolutions that occurred have been necessary for the Chinese language. As someone who is actively learning Mandarin Chinese, this book was very enjoyable.
Critical point against the book is although I enjoyed the content and storytelling at points, this book felt a bit wordy in certain spots. It’s a minor gripe against a book I did enjoy, but I’m mentioning it for objectivity’s sake.
Critical point against the book is although I enjoyed the content and storytelling at points, this book felt a bit wordy in certain spots. It’s a minor gripe against a book I did enjoy, but I’m mentioning it for objectivity’s sake.
conquixote's review
3.0
3.5. I found this incredibly interesting, especially the start, and it really made me want to learn some Mandarin. I did think it could have been more succinct, though