Each week I’m going to share something that I find appealing from the Vast Wilds of the InterWebs. Then in comments, you get to do the same!

This week a trip down memory lane with A Little Bit of Fry and Laurie from BBC Worldwide on YouTube (a fraffly rich and creamy aid to procrastination):

I think Kevin Rudd’s success on Sunday came from being rooted in a culture in which, though politicians will always be wary of media and vice versa, he is still able to see an interview as a place to make a series of big strategic points, not as a dull contest in which to secure a no-score draw is viewed as something close to triumph by the politicians, failure by the broadcasters, and plain dull by the public.

Let’s come back to that one.

I think Campbell has put his finger on something here:

…the gentle but firm pushing back on Marr’s opening question, which allowed Rudd to take control of the interview pretty much from then on in; and the explanation that just because the London Summit would not achieve everything did not mean it should be dismissed for achieving nothing.

Part of Rudd’s success as a communicator does, I think, come from delivering a modest and realistic message which runs counter to the normal all or nothing media perspective.

But while I have a fair degree of respect for Campbell, after reading his Diaries, I’m not at all sure the broader assessment of a contrast between political and media styles between us and the UK is accurate. Campbell’s perspective may be coloured by his own distaste for the UK tabloids and his particular beef with the Beeb. But there is no doubt that Kevin Rudd is an excellent political communicator, and it would be worthwhile in my view if analysis of his skills in this arena went beyond the observation that he knows how to repeat a soundbite.

Maybe I’m easily amused but I really liked this one!

Rules:
* Take the closest book from you
* Open to the page number 56
* Look at the 5th sentence
* Write down this sentence as your status
* Comment on your status and copy these instruction in a comment
* Don’t look for the book you prefer or the coolest but the closest book

Mine is:

Marius’ imperious habit of awarding citizenship to whole cohorts of Italian allies as a reward for exceptional valour was gratefully remembered.

That’s from Tom Holland’s Rubicon: The Triumph and Tragedy of the Roman Republic. It’s a great book – I’ve been watching the second series of HBO/BBC’s Rome and thought it was an apt choice to start rereading last night, so it was right next to me on the couch.

I’ve seen this meme around a few blogs lately, and although I mostly refuse to do memes “properly” (i.e. I tend not to tag other people to post on the same meme) this one struck me as a good one.

My style of reading these days is to have about half a dozen books on the go, stashed in various areas of the house for when & where the yen strikes me to read a chapter or three. They are usually about half speculative fiction (science fiction and fantasy), one good mystery novel, one historical fact or fiction, and one popular science. At the moment, I confess, I’m not really stretching myself.

I’ve just finished re-reading a bunch of Terry Pratchett Discworld novels and Douglas Adam’s Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy. They were all still immensely enjoyable, full of delicious puns and cynical wit.

I’m in the middle of re-reading Asimov’s I, Robot collection. The older I get, the more pedantic I find his style of narrative exposition (oh, the dialogue, it goes on so long, and his protagonists are so obtuse), but he still has some of the greatest ideas, and his psychological insights into how humans might react to fully intelligent and self-aware robots in our society is, I suspect, spot-on.

I am, at the moment, lacking a good mystery author to keep up with. Patricia Cornwall jumped the shark long ago, I’ve read all the latest Rankins and McDiarmids, I’m a bit meh about most of the other staples of the mystery section: are there any new twisty plotters who do strong characters that I really should start reading? I rather enjoyed the Gil Mayo Mysteries on telly earlier this year, but the books by Marjorie Eccles are a little hard to get hold of here in Oz (Auntie’s marketing department has really fallen down on the job) – are they worth chasing?

My history at the moment is another reread: yet another biography of the Six Wives of Henry VIII, this time from Antonia Fraser. It’s still good – she includes a lot of the lesser-known details and weaves the narrative deftly. Recommended for anyone who wants to separate fact from fiction given the plethora of recent Tudor-period dramatisations which have taken a fair degree of license with the source material.

Lacking a mystery, I’ve got a second history on the go: Michael Wood’s In the Footsteps of Alexander the Great. It’s a tie-in to a BBC TV series, and thus a little heavy on the friendly text and coffee-table photographs while disappointingly light on the footnotes, but it’s a nicely produced overview nonetheless. The breadth of the landscapes that Alexander’s army trudged over on their way to yet another conquest is truly impressive. Of course, I only picked it up because I was looking for my copy of Tacitus, that my husband wants to borrow – have any of you seen my copy?

My science book at the moment is shamelessly chosen for its soporific qualities (I’m currently struggling with bouts of insomnia): another oldie but goodie, James Gleick’s Chaos, his 1987 introduction to and overview of chaos theory. One of the many snap! moments that led to Mr Tog and I pledging our troth lo these many years ago was that he had this on his bookshelf as well (yes, I know – I’m just a sentimental softy).

So, you lot: what are you currently reading? Is it good so far?