Read another Fred Vargas novel, Sans feu ni lieu (The Accordionist), a 1997 detective story that is recycling the characters of Debout les morts! (The Three Evangelists). It took me a while to engage with the story since the dialogues are terribly artificial and dated. The resolution of the crime series is also terrible, with an absurd link to a poem by Gérard de Nerval posted in the Paris métro… Also read Orogénèse, a novel written by Dominique Picard—a French statistician at Paris Diderot, who worked on differential geometry and wavelets, and was an ICMS speaker in 2006—, about a reluctant (male) lawyer taking the case of a murderess who does not want to be defended. This book is inspired by the true story of Fabienne Kabou, who drowned her 15 month daughter on a North Sea beach in 2013. And presumably by the book written by her (female) lawyer. Immensely troubling story that is reflected by the style of the novel and the half-truths in the lawyer monologue, Orogénèse stays away from judging or explaining, by slowly exploring the surrounding of the infanticide. Impressive (in many senses).
Made an attempt at a “no-bun burger” using panned Portobello mushrooms—making a very rare appearance on my market stalls—that did not prove very practical as they could not hold much of the onion, avocado and salad contents. But tastier than the (button) Paris mushroom type. We also had an unusual series of take-outs from the local Thaï restaurant, out of solidarity with the long-time owners as their place was about to close and be demolished by the owner. Also made rhubarb compote with the last stems of the year, along with the very few apples that grew in our garden this year.
Watched part of the Korean drama A girl who sees smells (냄새를 보는 소녀). Which is unsurprisingly as terrible as the title suggests. Also watched House of Dynamite after listening to Kathryn Bigelow on the French National Public Radio (France Inter). While the message against [unstable and irreversible] nuclear terror “balance” and for immediate disarmament is necessary, esp. in the current atmosphere of unilateral military actions and of unhinged Supreme Leaders!, the film is terrible and unrealistic, even though The Guardian disagrees. Maybe because the decision chain appears to be less (rather than more) than the sum of the individual decisions. Maybe because of the accumulation of irrelevant actions in the face of the incoming missile. The (US) Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation (CACNP) has provided a detailed analysis of the right and wrong of the scenario, the most obvious for me being the need to hit back at a potential originator (of the nuclear missile) before the missile strikes. (The US’s Missile Defense Agency (MDA) also criticised the failed interception of the attacking missile as unrealistic but CACNP states that the probability of a hit is around 50% , at a cost of $53 billion for 44 interceptors!) That they fail to explicitly name this originator (as North Korea) may be due to fears of cyber attacks as in the earlier instance of The Interview. (The New York Time also enjoys the pace and tension of the movie, while providing a recollection of the best earlier movies acting on the same cliffhanger.)
Read both the first (1605) and the second (1615) books of 
