Travelling with Gershom

I just finished two excellent books, which, when I started out, didn't seem related at all. The first, Michael Pollan's  In Defense of Food , is an entertaining and fascinating look at the impact of science, business, and journalism on what we eat. The second is Born to Run , by Christopher McDougall, an examination of the nature of humanity wrapped in an adventure story. Both Pollan and McDougall are fine writers, able and engaging storytellers dealing with a complex central argument in a compelling way. Pollan tackles food science and the food industry, McDougall sports medicine and sports footwear.  In its opening section, In Defense of Food traces the rise of nutritionism, evaluating food in terms of its component micro-parts - vitamins, nutrients, antioxidants, and the like - the reductionist view of what we eat. Next, Pollan considers what we eat and why we eat it, cataloguing the Western diet and gradual industrialization of food. Finally, he offers what he calls "p

Reason #1: Better Source Material Dan Brown is not a good writer. He is a very good storyteller, especially when all the action takes place in one day. Angels & Demons is a much better story and is better told than The Da Vinci Code. Reason #2: A Stronger Supporting Cast In The Da Vinci Code, Paul Bettany steals the movie as the murderous monk Silas, even though the cast features Ian McKellen, Jean Reno, Jurgen Prochnow, and Alfred Molina. The supporting players in Angels & Demons all put in very good performances, and manage to heighten intrique and interest in a film that badly needs it due to the sleepwalking Tom Hanks. The police officers played by Pierfrancesco Favino, Thure Lindhart, and David Pasquesi are excellent, as are the always reliable Stellan Skarsgard as the head of the Swiss Guard and Armin Mueller-Stahl as Cardinal Strauss. And Ewan McGregor puts in a solid performance in the critical role of the Camerlengo. Reason #3: Less Controversy, More S