Register

Author Topic: Books  (Read 159114 times)

metroid composite

  • m_ACac
  • Administrator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4373
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #525 on: March 04, 2010, 01:17:00 AM »
The Uncommon Reader -- Fun 100 page book that starts out very simple, and takes some serious twists.

The Greatest Show on Earth -- A non-fiction book by Richard Dawkins about the evidence for evolution.  Some of it is stuff that's been brought up before in internet debates, but some of it was new stuff to me.  Stuff like some of the ways evolution could be disproven, and hasn't (like a rabbit in the precambrian layer, flowers that predict certain insects must exist to pollinate them).  Some interesting studies on bacteria that have been going on since the 80s, and thus have something on the order of 45,000 generations, including a mutation where the first part of the mutation had no particular benefit (only showed up in one of the 12 strains).  Something that I probably already knew if I thought about it enough is that we have enough evidence for evolution even if we had never found a single fossil; fossil evidence, while substantial, is still nowhere near as massive as evidence from currently living creatures.
Another one that's new to me was his presenting a great deal of evidence against Intelligent Design--like nerves that go toward the thyroid, one of which goes directly, and one of which goes all the way down the neck, loops around a blood vessel, and comes back up the neck.  Incredibly stupid as a design, but if you look at the equivalent nerves and organs in, say, a Shark, they're all very direct, they just cross over, which means when the organs in land animals moved to make a neck, one nerve was still crossed around a heart valve.  And on the extreme end of the spectrum, in the Gyraffe, the same nerve passes within centimeters of its target, but instead takes a 15 foot detour into the abdomen.  Or another fun one is why do Dolphins not have gills--like all mammal embryos they grow gills briefly in early development; wouldn't an intelligent creator think "hey, these are sea creatures, maybe they can use these gills" instead of nixing the gills, growing lungs, growing two nostrils and merging them into one, moving it on top of the head, and adding a blowhole cover skin flap.
Of course, philosophically-speaking you can't rule out "God is trying to fool us."  In fact, philosophically speaking, God could have made the world 5 minutes ago with holes in our socks and hair that needs cutting deliberately to fool us into thinking the world has existed for much longer.  The author argues that in order for evolution not to be true, we would need this level of intentional divine trickery.

Twilight: There's some vomit-inducing soft-porn in the middle, and some facepalm moments of stupidity from main characters, but in general this is a very fun book.  The climax is pretty good.  Also, I really want Bella to shack up with Alice.  Besides the obvious "as long as it's not Edward" and "eww, heterosexual soft porn", Alice is just awesome, and already unusually intimate with Bella (definitely seems like she sees Bella naked before any of the other potential suiters).

Twilight 2 (New Moon): So...it's repeatedly beat into you "this book is riffing off of Romeo and Juliet."  Pre-trans Jacob is a lot of fun.  Hearing voices Bella is...an improvement on the old character, for all that she's probably more stupid.  Post-trans Jacob is kinda lame, for all that there's flickers of the non-lame character.  Bella and Edward pull a Romeo and Juliet, except tragically neither of them die :(.  Alice is awesome; she also still needs to shack up with Bella.  The Volturi have style.

Twilight 3 (Eclipse): Answers an important question.  Namely "so uhh...if the second largest vampire coven in the world has 6 members, aren't there some pretty easy ways around that if you want to crush them?"  Some fun development of side characters like Rosalie and Jasper (who were previously not well-explained).  Other than that, just closes the obvious plot threads, like "where's Victoria?" and "We're neighbours and want the same thing, but can't work together because we are MORTAL ENEMIES."



I'll have to borrow Twilight 4 from someone sometime.  These are entertaining enough that I'd like to continue, but at the same time I don't have enough respect for the works to give the author more money, and can't imagine I'm going to reread these books.

Anthony Edward Stark

  • Is that... Alcohol?
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4347
    • View Profile
    • Modern Drunkard Magazine
Re: Books
« Reply #526 on: March 04, 2010, 02:31:59 AM »
Dawkins was on Fox News, of all places, talking about evolution. Crafty move on Fox's part, since Dawkins is so incredibly condescending that using him to represent everyone on one side of a debate makes people extremely unsympathetic.

Jo'ou Ranbu

  • Social Justice Steampunk Literature Character
  • New Age Retro Fucking Hipster
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 12981
  • Ah'm tuff fer mah size!
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #527 on: March 04, 2010, 02:45:11 AM »
Twilight: There's some vomit-inducing soft-porn in the middle, and some facepalm moments of stupidity from main characters, but in general this is a very fun book.  The climax is pretty good.  Also, I really want Bella to shack up with Alice.  Besides the obvious "as long as it's not Edward" and "eww, heterosexual soft porn", Alice is just awesome, and already unusually intimate with Bella (definitely seems like she sees Bella naked before any of the other potential suiters).

I think there are many pages in TV Tropes dedicated to Bella/Alice, one of them conspicuously being "Relationship Writing Fumble".
[01:08] <Soppy-ReturningToInaba> HEY
[01:08] <Soppy-ReturningToInaba> LAGGY
[01:08] <Soppy-ReturningToInaba> UVIET?!??!?!
[01:08] <Laggy> YA!!!!!!!!!1111111111
[01:08] <Soppy-ReturningToInaba> OMG!!!!
[01:08] <Chulianne> No wonder you're small.
[01:08] <TranceHime> cocks
[01:08] <Laggy> .....

NotMiki

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4476
  • Social Justice McNinja
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #528 on: March 04, 2010, 02:58:04 AM »
Crafty move on Fox's part, since Dawkins is so incredibly condescending that using him to represent everyone on one side of a debate makes people extremely unsympathetic.

I wouldn't read that much into it, unless you think they give Ann Coulter airtime because they hate conservatism.  TV likes sensationalism, and he's sensational (in the bad way). 
Rocky: you do know what an A-bomb is, right?
Bullwinkle: A-bomb is what some people call our show!
Rocky: I don't think that's very funny...
Bullwinkle: Neither do they, apparently!

metroid composite

  • m_ACac
  • Administrator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4373
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #529 on: March 04, 2010, 03:14:44 AM »
Crafty move on Fox's part, since Dawkins is so incredibly condescending that using him to represent everyone on one side of a debate makes people extremely unsympathetic.

I wouldn't read that much into it, unless you think they give Ann Coulter airtime because they hate conservatism.  TV likes sensationalism, and he's sensational (in the bad way). 

In fairness to him, he kinda tells it like it is.  Yeah, you could be less confrontational if you said "well, there are valid arguments for your viewpoint."  But the problem is that there aren't, and he really can't concede that point since if Intelligent Design was a valid scientific viewpoint, then he wouldn't have an argument for why it isn't being taught in schools.  Someone who declares "your viewpoint is invalid" is going to come across as condescending.

Now, granted, they probably could pick an ambassador that wouldn't rub people the wrong way (say, someone who believes in god unlike Dawkins; the Pope has accepted evolutionary theory, it shouldn't be that hard).

NotMiki

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4476
  • Social Justice McNinja
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #530 on: March 04, 2010, 03:28:56 AM »
Dawkins' problem isn't that he sounds condescending, it's that he IS condescending, and more to the point he relies on faulty logic.

His argument for the nonexistence of God: "Our brains trick us into thinking there is a God, therefore there isn't one."

If all he's saying about intelligent design is "your viewpoint is invalid and it shouldn't be taught in schools," it's an empty conclusion.  He's worthless, even if he's right.
Rocky: you do know what an A-bomb is, right?
Bullwinkle: A-bomb is what some people call our show!
Rocky: I don't think that's very funny...
Bullwinkle: Neither do they, apparently!

Anthony Edward Stark

  • Is that... Alcohol?
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4347
    • View Profile
    • Modern Drunkard Magazine
Re: Books
« Reply #531 on: March 04, 2010, 03:57:43 AM »
Crafty move on Fox's part, since Dawkins is so incredibly condescending that using him to represent everyone on one side of a debate makes people extremely unsympathetic.

I wouldn't read that much into it, unless you think they give Ann Coulter airtime because they hate conservatism.  TV likes sensationalism, and he's sensational (in the bad way).  

In fairness to him, he kinda tells it like it is.  Yeah, you could be less confrontational if you said "well, there are valid arguments for your viewpoint."  But the problem is that there aren't, and he really can't concede that point since if Intelligent Design was a valid scientific viewpoint, then he wouldn't have an argument for why it isn't being taught in schools.  Someone who declares "your viewpoint is invalid" is going to come across as condescending.

Now, granted, they probably could pick an ambassador that wouldn't rub people the wrong way (say, someone who believes in god unlike Dawkins; the Pope has accepted evolutionary theory, it shouldn't be that hard).

It's not so much that he says there aren't valid SCIENTIFIC arguments for it as much as he says "there is no valid reason to believe this." That's where you start getting inflammatory, because hey, whatever thing people are using to sooth their fear of death is being called out and they get angry.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2010, 07:29:39 AM by Rob the Stampede »

Cotigo

  • Jerkface
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4176
  • Yoo-hoo, Mr. Tentacle Guy...
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #532 on: March 04, 2010, 04:42:06 PM »
Eh, as a former Dawkins fanboy, the logic goes like this:  There's no RATIONAL reason to believe in the divine, ergo there is no valid reason to believe in the divine, ergo there's no reason to respect that belief.  At some level I still agree wholeheartedly with this, but this point of view falls into the same trap everything in game theory does:  It really only clicks when human are 100% rational.  That just isn't ever so, and so while his little anti-religion crusade is a breath of fresh air (particularly in this country where religious groups have more sway with the government than in, say, England), it's ultimately doomed to failure.

NotMiki

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4476
  • Social Justice McNinja
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #533 on: March 05, 2010, 01:29:11 AM »
There's no RATIONAL reason to believe in the divine, ergo there is no valid reason to believe in the divine, ergo there's no reason to respect that belief.

No matter how much you dress it up, the foundation of this argument is the fallacy that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.  At the end of the day, Dawkins substitutes volume for content, and that puts him in the same place as the people he scorns.
Rocky: you do know what an A-bomb is, right?
Bullwinkle: A-bomb is what some people call our show!
Rocky: I don't think that's very funny...
Bullwinkle: Neither do they, apparently!

Cotigo

  • Jerkface
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4176
  • Yoo-hoo, Mr. Tentacle Guy...
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #534 on: March 05, 2010, 02:06:43 AM »
Eh, he's too sure of his position by far, but shit, dude, are you really saying that it's not the more likely scenario in the face of the evidence we do have?  The argument from ignorance fallacy gets abused way more when trying to argue for the existence of god than against. 

His prosthelytizing is extremely obnoxious, sure, but only because people should be allowed to believe whatever stupid shit they believe and then leave each other alone.  It makes him little better than missionaries or preachers who use their religion as a political tool to force everyone to agree with them.  But if you're saying the position of atheism (or, more properly, agnosticism with a bias toward atheism) is based on faulty logic to the same degree that any religious viewpoint is... some pretty damn tortured logic in itself.

I... had a few more paragraphs, but I'm not sure if I'd be needlessly ranting or not.  We'll see.

EDIT:  tl;dr version of what I had ranted about:  You don't NEED evidence of absence because absence is the logical default conclusion in the absence of evidence.  Burden of proof is on the people making positive assertions in an argument.  Pink elephants in the room etc.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2010, 02:16:47 AM by Makkotah »

NotMiki

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4476
  • Social Justice McNinja
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #535 on: March 05, 2010, 02:18:55 AM »
But if you're saying the position of atheism (or, more properly, agnosticism with a bias toward atheism) is based on faulty logic just to the same degree any religious viewpoint   is some pretty damn tortured logic in itself.

I'm not saying that.  I agree that probability is on the side of atheism, but in order for someone to be as big a dick as Dawkins is and be ok in my book, probably right doesn't cut it.
Rocky: you do know what an A-bomb is, right?
Bullwinkle: A-bomb is what some people call our show!
Rocky: I don't think that's very funny...
Bullwinkle: Neither do they, apparently!

Cotigo

  • Jerkface
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4176
  • Yoo-hoo, Mr. Tentacle Guy...
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #536 on: March 05, 2010, 03:44:43 AM »
See, I knew I didn't need to rant as much as I had.

Shale

  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 5800
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #537 on: March 05, 2010, 04:52:14 PM »
My problem with Dawkins is that he's on the side of SCIENCE! and then acts like he can prove a negative.
"Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology."
-Ponder Stibbons

[23:02] <Veryslightlymad> CK dreams about me starring in porno?
[23:02] <CmdrKing> Pretty sure.

Strago

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 839
  • Scarfregist
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #538 on: March 11, 2010, 12:55:35 AM »
Just finished the first Mistborn. Good book. Looking forward to the next two, which I picked up earlier this evening.

metroid composite

  • m_ACac
  • Administrator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4373
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #539 on: March 11, 2010, 03:42:31 AM »
Just finished the first three books in the X-Wing Star Wars series.  Enjoyable, but really, really fluff.  Not a whole lot to say about them, except pertaining their twists.

SPOILERS I guess

Personally I felt they waited entirely too long to reveal the hidden agent in the squadron.  It was obvious to me...somewhere around the end of the first book to the middle of the second.  In the second they planted all sorts of false trails to another suspect...and also had the real traitor make just enough seemingly innocent but oddly suspicious moves.  It made sense to reveal things at the end of that book.  But no, they reveal things at the end of the third book, during which the traitor gets very little screentime.  It just...feels oddly delayed, like the author wants to mess with readerly instinct by making the readers think they were wrong for an extra book.

The location of Isard's prison...well I figured it out a couple chapters before it was revealed, but they were obviously dropping hints by now; good twist.  And...not surprised about the "OMG you're a Jedi" twist from the character who kept having ridiculous insights.

SPOILERS above

Hunter Sopko

  • Heavily in Debt
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4556
  • Hai, Kazuma-desu
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #540 on: March 11, 2010, 05:09:00 AM »
It's something Stackpole does very well. Enjoyable fluff. Case in point: his Battletech novels.

Anthony Edward Stark

  • Is that... Alcohol?
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4347
    • View Profile
    • Modern Drunkard Magazine
Re: Books
« Reply #541 on: March 11, 2010, 06:41:34 AM »
I happen to prefer Allston's X-Wing novels. But I also consider the first three X-Wing novels to be kind of the low point of X-Wing related stuff. Not as good as the comic, not as good as the fourth book, and no way in hell are they as good as the Allston books.

If you can get past how Stackpole writes dialogue, though, they're not bad. But the comics are still his better work because of two reasons: less dialogue and the Wedge Antilles-Soontir Fel teamup. "CAUSE WE'RE BROTHERS!!!!"

Veryslightlymad

  • CONCEPTUALIZATION [Challenging: Success]
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1141
  • Shitposts are a type of art for webforums
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #542 on: March 17, 2010, 11:02:36 AM »
Soon I Will Be Invincible by Austin Grossman.

Excellent read. Only book quite like it I have ever read. I'm shocked at how much I identify with one of the two main characters (the super villain).

Hunter Sopko

  • Heavily in Debt
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4556
  • Hai, Kazuma-desu
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #543 on: March 17, 2010, 02:16:31 PM »
If you can get past how Stackpole writes dialogue, though, they're not bad. But the comics are still his better work because of two reasons: less dialogue and the Wedge Antilles-Soontir Fel teamup. "CAUSE WE'RE BROTHERS!!!!"

Agreed, the exchanges can be good though. He's good at structuring conversations, but the dialogue itself is usually kinda of stiff and wooden.

Grefter

  • Villain.
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 10386
  • True and Honest. Smarter. More aggressive.
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #544 on: April 12, 2010, 04:23:01 AM »
Phonogram: The Singles - This is a comic book about pop art and it is fucking awesome and win.  Snow, you have to get this one.  Issue 4 is grandiose and fantastic, but I am thinking of taking an image from chapter 6 where a guy sets his manifesto on fire with the power of music.  This is rad.  Music is Magic.
NO MORE POKEMON - Meeplelard.
The king perfect of the DL is and always will be Excal. - Superaielman
Don't worry, just jam it in anyway. - SirAlex
Gravellers are like, G-Unit - Trancey.

Lady Door

  • Coming up with words is, like...
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1998
  • ... really hard.
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #545 on: May 09, 2010, 06:25:56 AM »
Dresden Files.

Let's see, over the past... two weeks? -- maybe a little less than that -- I read the Dresden Files from book 4, on.

The first few there (4, 5, and 6) had me wincing and wondering if this was going to have to be one of those series I abandoned part of the way through. I kept going, though, only partially because I simply needed a book to read, and I'm kind of glad I did.

They are pretty empty books, overall, written by a man who very clearly chose to write because he felt driven to be a writer, not because he was divinely inspired to express his art through the written word. They are fine, and get the job done -- they tell a story -- but the thing that makes them interesting is the characters, and by deity I will always come back to a book with characters I enjoy reading about. I will concede that even the characters have their moments, but nevertheless: enjoyable ride.

But goddamnit all if it doesn't succumb to the most ridiculously obvious post-marking I've ever seen. I can expect to see these things in every book, and if I don't, I know they'll be there later. The pub, his "Neanderthalish" protective instinct over women, the shield charm, the soul gaze, his orphan heritage, "Murphy is good people" ... it really wears down on a reader!

But, whatever. Enjoyable. Thankfully(?) it has been noted that Mr. Butcher plans to have at least 20 novels in this series. This one I just finished, the one released just last month, is #12. Whoopee for another decade of reading! Assuming he doesn't pull a Robert Jordan, anyway. I shudder to think of what would happen if his closest match -- Laurell K. Harding -- took up the mantle. Already had a few brushes with supernatural romance in those early books.

... yeah, that was a bit rambly, wasn't it? Spent the past, oh, 10 or so hours reading.
<Demedais> Humans look like cars to me.
<AndrewRogue> That must be confusing in parking lots

metroid composite

  • m_ACac
  • Administrator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4373
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #546 on: May 11, 2010, 02:32:10 AM »
So...went to the book store and bought six vampire-related books; the first four books in the Vampire Chronicles (only just starting with those) a book of mixed vampire short stories and, the first of the list I've finished...

Breaking Dawn

(A.k.a.: the fourth Twilight book...which doesn't have twilight in the title for whatever reason).

(SPOILER-FREE -- there are no spoilers in this review)

I went into this partially spoiled by the internet--I'd read the first few books, and thus wouldn't completely ignore internet discussions on the series; and...the average GameFAQs user seems to derive their knowledge of twilight either from hearing other people say "OMG THEY SPARKLE LAME"...or from that comic that summarizes the fourth book's whacky plot...so I was partially spoiled by people's offhand comments about the comic.  So anyway, I read it and...

Oh...

Oh my god...

That...

That was...

Fantastic.

I haven't laughed that hard in a long time.



With an introduction like that, I'm sure some of you are jumping to the conclusion that I was laughing at how stupid the plot was.  Actually no, for the most part I was laughing at the clever one-liners.  Hell, there's a significant section of the book where several characters band together for the shared goal of telling dumb blonde jokes.

If anything, it's made me re-evaluate the whole series in a more positive light.  The series has always had some pretty-good one-liners scattered throughout, but I had always chalked that up to characterization--I mean, it's supposed to be a romance novel, right?  And a sense of humor is attractive and thus serves the romance novel goal; therefore clearly we shouldn't be praising this too much because of the inglorious purpose of the humor.  Looking back, I see that I had it wrong--the Twilight books were meant to be funny, probably moreso than they were meant to be romantic.  To call Twilight a serious romance novel would be like calling Harry Potter a serious Wicca novel.

And in that light, I'm really finding my respect for Twilight criticism dwindling.  Responding to Twilight with "VAMPIRES DON'T SPARKLE.  THEY HAVE FANGS.  AND COFFINS." is like responding to Harry Potter with "WITCHES DON'T HAVE CHOCOLATE FROG CARDS.  THEY HAVE BLOOD RITUALS.  AND WARTS."  Not that there aren't legitimate complaints about Twilight, don't get me wrong, but being sacrilegious towards the mythology seems like a comical complaint the more I think about it.  Very few vampire myths are externally consistent (how many really match Brahm Stoker's Dracula?  Where Dracula can go out in the sun with no apparent consequences?  I can't think of any).  The goal, then, should be internal consistency.

Which brings us back to the review of Breaking Dawn: I was surprised by how internally consistent it was.  I mean, a lot of series have a moment where an intelligent reader will think "man, if that's how this universe works, why don't they just go back in time and kill the Evil Lord before he takes over?  Geez."  I don't recall a single moment like that in Breaking Dawn, but I do recall several moments where I thought "Oh, wow, that was really smart, and a rather clever use of what we already know."  I mean, I guess you could argue that it wasn't realistic in that there was too much cleverness.  But...frankly, I'm not worried about Twilight characters lacking flaws on the whole--it would be hard to read the whole series and not facepalm a few times.

Speaking of, I was surprised how basically every obnoxious character that had me thinking "why does this character exist?" actually ended up being an important piece of the final puzzle.  (Well...okay, not counting a few normal humans, but that's the life being left behind).  I'm further surprised at how essentially every loose end gets picked up (if not necessarily completed entirely) without any real Deus-Ex Machina.  (There's one new mechanic, but it's actually more of a biological corollary to older mechanics).  Surprised because once again I made assumptions based on the internet--you see, the internet talks about how horrible she is at writing, so I had just assumed that the series wouldn't be at all planned out (the way, say, Star Wars or Harry Potter have obvious little planning holes).  However, I really can't see how Breaking Dawn would be possible if Twilight were not planned.  (Not that novel planning is the be-all-end-all of writing; the Harry Potter series is still in competition for best series I've read.  Just...not what I'd expected from the supposed "bad writer").

All in all, Breaking Dawn really brings the series together for me.  I'm not sure yet if I consider it the best book in the series (I might, but now that my perspective's changed on the series...maybe the earlier books have gotten better).  But either way, I'm definitely glad I read it.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2010, 02:34:04 AM by metroid composite »

Cotigo

  • Jerkface
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4176
  • Yoo-hoo, Mr. Tentacle Guy...
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #547 on: May 11, 2010, 09:31:21 AM »
Being planned != Good writing.  The latter implies the former, but the former doesn't indicate the latter to any real degree.

Grefter

  • Villain.
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 10386
  • True and Honest. Smarter. More aggressive.
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #548 on: May 11, 2010, 10:22:22 AM »
Errr did the book help the parts from previous novels where Bella was apparently an insufferable bitch?  Cause that would be amazing.
NO MORE POKEMON - Meeplelard.
The king perfect of the DL is and always will be Excal. - Superaielman
Don't worry, just jam it in anyway. - SirAlex
Gravellers are like, G-Unit - Trancey.

metroid composite

  • m_ACac
  • Administrator
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4373
    • View Profile
Re: Books
« Reply #549 on: May 11, 2010, 05:04:22 PM »
Being planned != Good writing.

Yeah that's...pretty much what I said. >_>

Errr did the book help the parts from previous novels where Bella was apparently an insufferable bitch?  Cause that would be amazing.

No, I don't think there's any redeeming Book 2 Bella.  (Or Bella's more minor facepalm moments either).  Nor do I expect any redeeming of Edward--if anything my opinion on him may have lowered a little.

Spoilers, though not too major: Bella actually becomes a vampire (thank God, I was seriously starting to worry this wasn't going to happen) which...changes a lot of dynamics including the fact that her human memories fade.  It's hard to consider this a redemption of the character when it's supernatural intervention into personality.  And the part of the book where she's human she's...consistent with earlier books...just not actually a perspective character during the eyeroll moments.  So...yeah, I don't see it making her look any better.  Edward, on the other hand, continues his "I'm terrified of hurting you" even when she's a more powerful vampire than he is, and she's the one who needs to be careful about ripping his head off.  The power dynamic reversal is actually pretty cool, Edward's continued chivalry is just facepalmworthy.