Truth is stranger than fiction. It is also unpredictable. While there have been many nuclear disasters, none have been like Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. It occurred at the peak of the cold war and could have destroyed a continent. The story of the disaster is essential to be told to the general public. What happened? How did it happen? How was it contained? And more importantly, what was the human cost? Both in terms of population effect and the people involved in the containment zone. There is no better way to tell the story than via cinema.

The 5-part TV series “Chernobyl” produced by HBO is a must watch masterpiece. It is bingeworthy. It is both suspenseful and factual. It covers the accident in detail, action taken by politicians (aka Soviet comrades) and role of scientists in determining the cause. The characters are real and the situation they face is unprecedented. Watching the series is like observing it in real time from a distant view. Whether it is the worry in the face of Mikhail Gorbachev, or the wife of a firefighter caring for her radiation infected husband, it is deeply personal. And deeply factual.

Killing of animals because they were contaminated is cruel and scientific at the same time. Ordered not by a politician but a scientist who cared for the future generation. The lives of people changed overnight, and they have to find a new home for the rest of their lives. An old woman who didn't leave her village since birth, despite living the fears of the two world wars, Nazi occupation and Soviet capture, had to succumb to the radiation to find a new home.

And finally, the culprit: Was it a human error or the faulty rods? While the TV series ends blaming the system and faulty rods, the answer is more profound. Shouldn't scientists consider human error when designing a reactor? Especially when the stake is high, like in the case of a nuclear power plant. These are the questions one is left wondering at the end of the series. And the thing that makes it so real and thought-provoking are the characters and the actors portraying them. I am glad that HBO made the TV series and I watched it.

While all economists are wrong, someare useful and entertaining. Such is the case with the book "Edible Economics". It gives a primer of various economic concepts and justifies them with selective facts. However, the justification is well-reasoned and respectable. Coming from a left leaning perspective, it favors government intervention, and at the current time of high inflation, the arguments does seem compelling.

More than the topics, it is theauthor Ha-Joon Chang and how he narrates each story is where the fascination of the book lies. Picking an edible vegetable, fruit or condiment, the author describes its history and its relation to a culture; sometimes its commercial value and trade association. One learns a lot about these edible items and subsequently an economic trait or policy that resembles a similar life.

Who thought that term "Banana Republic" is actually linked to banana trade in the Central and South America. Or strawberry is not a berry, but tomato is! Chicken is neither loved or hated, but still is omnipresent, revealing the sustainable power of remaining non-controversial. Or varieties of noodles and pastas that are unheard of; going viral doesn't seem to be their strong suit!

The stories are narrated in shortchapters, which makes the book easily readable and a definite page turner. One may not agree with each economic argument presented, but it definitely provides food for thought!

A person unfamiliar with basiceconomics will find it useful for gaining valuable insights with nice anecdotes. One may also surprise friends and family with newly gained knowledge, especially if one doesn't currently belong to the elite club of economic discourse at the family table.