"The Shortest Distance Between Two Women" by Kris Radish

Published by Random House.

"I say just get over it. It's life, Emma, for God's sake. Suck it up." So says Susie Dell on page 119 of the novel, but Emma refuses to suck it up for at least a hundred more pages.

Emma Gilford is a boring woman who seems to have done absolutely nothing with her life or had any meaningful contact with anyone for at least twenty years, and one phone call from an old boyfriend is enough to throw her over the edge. She starts to question her boring existence, her wussy attitude, and, well, not much else because she's been under a rock for so long. She refuses to do anything interesting for the entirety of the novel, unless you're into complaining and blaming everyone else for one's own problems. The novel picks up near the end, when the action focuses on the more interesting characters; but told through the dishwater voice of Emma Gilford, it's not enough to make this worth reading.

Throughout the novel Emma whines about how her sisters mistreated her as a child, and I think to myself, "You're in your forties. Get over it already. Grow a bloody spine." She makes a big deal out of tiny tasks she's expected to do for a big family reunion, like make a reservation at a park and pick up plates at the store, and I say, "Really? Just fucking do it." I wonder how Emma Gilford could waste so much of her time not doing what she's supposed to do to plan this party, then complaining about it, then complaining about the fact that she's expected to do it. And I wonder why I'm wasting my time reading about it. (But at least I did manage to get around to it.)

Throughout the novel is the question of whether Emma will ever get together with Samuel, her once-boyfriend who ran off to Nicaragua to do some botany. He calls and calls but never makes an appearance. He just provides more fodder for Emma to engage in reminiscent self-reflection that leads to more self-pity and whining. I was hoping that by the end of the novel, something actually interesting would happen, but no. The moment we are intended to take as the turning point between old boring Emma and new, less sedentary Emma (though probably still boring) is at the very end where she is about to call him. Which means, of course, that the reader is never provided access to anything but boring, whiny, adolescent Emma who, were I ever to meet her, would certainly be on my "Do Not Invite" list for parties.

"Pride and Prejudice and Zombies" by Jane Austen and Seth Grahame-Smith

Published by Raincoast Books.

This is the classic novel by Jane Austen (which I'd never had the urge to read), now with zombies. The story revolves around the Bennetts, specifically Elizabeth Bennett and her four sisters, all zombie fighting machines of the highest class, trained by Master Liu at a Shaolin Temple in China. We follow Elizabeth, whose prejudice against Mr. Darcy compels her to at first reject his advances; Mr. Darcy learns a thing or two about having too much pride, and redeems himself.

Longbourn and the surrounding area (I'm not sure how far this extends) has been infested with zombies (referred to as "unmentionables"). Where any traveling takes place in the novel, we can be assured there will be a zombie fight scene. The zombies, while adding action and excitement, don't seem to play too much of a role in altering the general progression of the book. At most times, the zombie addition fits in well with the novel. The only point where zombie-ism was infused to greater effect was with regard to the plight of poor Charlotte, Elizabeth's best friend, who became infected and strove to marry quickly so as to spend her last months in relative comfort. Many references to "the bride's condition" would lead me to assume that in the original work, she was pregnant rather than a zombie. In this version, however, other characters (besides Charlotte, whose training allows her to recognize the signs quite early on) barely notice that by the time Elizabeth goes to visit her in her new home, Charlotte is at least three quarters dead and conducts herself in an odd, zombie-ish manner. This by no means detracts from the story; rather, it's a very funny situation indeed.

My only complaint towards this version is that Grahame-Smith's commitment toward the zombie plot seems to wane toward the end. The last hundred pages contain very few zombies. Since the zombies are the point of buying this version, I'd have to say this is a problem that should have been addressed. Nevertheless, the previous zombie plot provides the necessary backing for a final battle between Elizabeth and Darcy's aunt. I would have enjoyed more explicit alterations directly related to zombies, comparable to earlier scenes, such as when a ball the sisters are attending is overrun with unmentionables, or the scene describing the demise of Bingley's kitchen staff.

Still, if you've never read "Pride and Prejudice", this book will provide you with what seem to be the most important elements of the original (the plight of a bunch of sisters who just want to get married to any male who makes an appearance), along with some zombies. Both authors' contributions are entertaining, if not (for reasons cited earlier) completely balanced.

"The World Bank: A Critical Primer" by Eric Toussaint

Published by Between The Lines.

"The World Bank: A Critical Primer" is critical, yes, primer, maybe. The book reports atrocities the bank has committed since its founding and attempts to prove through these that the bank itself has a policy of committing atrocities and therefore must be abolished. If we ignore the the fact that generalizing from specific examples is a no-no, it's pretty convincing. Toussaint reports instance after instance of how the World Bank has, under the guise of being an institution dedicated to helping underdeveloped countries, used its influence (i.e., its money) to instate policies in countries to make them suitable environments in which U.S. corporations can turn large profits, to the detriment of the countries' citizens. Toussaint includes statistics showing the hefty profits of the bank, while the countries to which it lends struggle to pay back ever-increasing loans, the majority of which seem to end up in the pockets of politicians. The book seems to divided somewhat chronologically, with chapters on specific examples of bad banking, specific presidents and economists at the bank, some generalizing argumentative chapters, and some tracking the bank's activities over large spans of time (oh yes, there are graphs).

The book is well-researched and well-referenced and, while critical throughout, does not generally extend its criticism beyond the scope of what's been shown to be true through example. For instance, if reporting an instance where the bank has granted a loan on the condition that essential services are privatized (causing costs to citizens to skyrocket), Toussaint may criticize the bank for prioritizing the benefits of corporations over citizens. In the chapter on the bank's treatment of human rights, for example, Toussaint argues that the bank tends toward the policy of upholding negative rights only (though I don't think he uses that term), meaning that the rights of the citizens are such that the only responsibility of others to uphold those rights is not to interfere with their property (i.e., the kind of rights advantageous to corporations), while the bank has no regard for a positive right, which would include the rights to water, food, shelter, etc. (i.e., the kind of rights that allow for happy, alive citizens).

It seemed a little odd to attribute human characteristics to the bank itself, e.g., the bank acts in this way, the bank shows this preference, the bank likes to eat kittens, etc., and my initial tendency would be to find that individual who was responsible. But it seems the individuals responsible are anyone with any policy-making power at the bank, and it's much easier to simply refer to "The Bank" rather than "that bunch of jerks".

While the point of the book is clear throughout (kill the bank), the text is difficult to read in parts if the reader, like myself, has no prior knowledge of economic terms (besides the very common ones) and if, like myself, cannot immediately commit to memory the meanings of the scores of acronyms strewn throughout the book.

This book, while not perfect, has made a valiant attempt to back up its criticisms with thorough research, and has, in my opinion, succeeded in proving that there is something wrong with the system.