Saturday, July 30, 2022

The Flag, the Cross, and the Station Wagon (Bill McKibben)

In this book, activist Bill McKibben (he wrote the first popular account on global warming) reflects on his formative years in Lexington, Massachussetts, and uses that as a lens to describe what he believes is wrong with the world (racism, wealth inequality, climate change, hyper-individualism, etc.), along with a few thoughts on what to do about it.

This one disappointed me. I hadn't heard of McKibben, but apparently he's a well-known and staunch progressive. While there are some good points sprinkled throughout the book, they're overpowered by unfair characterizations of the opposition, dubious arguments (often overly-simplistic), and some suspect logic. He basically re-hashes the typical progressive positions on hot-button topics while adding nothing new and unfairly representing the opposition. (Though he does also criticize some in his own party, to include some Democratic presidents and his own liberal town of Lexington, the vast majority is pointed one direction.) There are some strengths, don't get me wrong- but I had a hard time overlooking the weaknesses.

One good point he makes concerns the distortion of history by ignoring facts inconvenient to the narrative. That's fair- the problem is that he proceeds to do the exact same thing, just in the opposite direction. I would argue that is the problem with most American history presentations . . . they tend to be simplistic and agenda-driven. We use an incomplete set of data and statistics to present a distorted story, which invariably leads to incorrect interpretations and (then) ill-formed political stances. (This happens on both sides of the aisle. That doesn't make it okay.)

I'm trying to figure out the audience of this book. It strikes me as an 'echo chamber' work, written to people who would agree with him. It's certainly not to persuade conservatives- to engage your opponent, one basic rule is fairly present their side of the story- so I guess it is to persuade centrists and mild progressives that they should be going farther to the left? It's unclear to me. Regardless, I had hoped for more.

Rating: C-

Friday, July 29, 2022

The Party Line

man reflecting (image from here)
"They are traitors to the party." I saw this comment on Facebook recently, from a friend referring to two prominent Republicans who have spoken out against Trump's conduct in several areas. His comment (combined with others he has made over the years) unsettled me- it is clear he puts party first, above all else. Above truth, justice, all of it. Right and wrong in a given situation don't matter- defend the party at all costs. It is something I would expect in Soviet Russia (or modern Russia), China, and other such regimes . . . not here. Yet he's not alone- I see it increasingly in America; this concept of 'party above all.' Both major parties will defend their own- even when the conduct is clearly wrong and indefensible. How terrifying.

What we put first shows what we value. Generally, we will defend our top priority to the death. Protect it all costs. Effectively, it is our god. Which is probably why the very first commandment of the famous ten in the Bible is "you shall have no other gods before me." Here the Lord is making it clear: He should be our number one. Everything- and everyone- else comes after Him. No exceptions. And we know that He is perfect love, truth, justice, and many other things- He is a safe foundation and the only standard by and through which we judge all things. 

If God is first, that means everything other than God is open to evaluation, criticism, and correction. Me. You. The Church. The State. God commands us to be holy. When something or someone is found to be outside of the bounds of God's standard, regardless of their party or any other defining characteristic (age, relationship, gender, race, religion, company, occupation, and so on), love dictates that we correct them. God corrects those He loves. We should, too.

In this vein, I've been drawn recently to two media personalities in particular, and they couldn't be more different: Bill Maher and David Press. 

Bill Maher is a liberal (or are we saying 'progressive' now?) media personality/commentator. He and I would disagree over many things- for example, I am diametrically opposed to his stance on religion. Yet, I've come to admire him in recent months for one reason: he does not hesitate to speak out against his party. You can see his videos on YouTube- either segments of his show "Real Time" (here's one playlist, and one video that particularly amused me) or other recordings.

David French is a Christian conservative (he left the Republican party in 2018 but his views remain) lawyer, veteran, and journalist. He and I would agree on many things (though perhaps not all). I've come to admire him for the same reason: he criticizes his own first and foremost. You can read his posts over at The Dispatch.

In both cases, I may not agree with everything they say- in fact, I'm sure I do not- but I do agree with, and admire, their willingness to correct their own. And of course, let's not forget Jesus, who criticized those in religious circles far more than those outside. And why? I assure you, it wasn't because He hated them. It was because He loved them.

May we always have our priorities in order, and be open to receiving (and giving) criticism based on what matters most. It's not about being on the winning side, in life or politics. It's about being faithful and holy. 
He has told you, O man, what is good;
    and what does the Lord require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
    and to walk humbly with your God? - Micah 6:8

Tuesday, July 26, 2022

The Fall of Gondolin (JRR Tolkien)


Tuor, cousin of Túrin, is given a task by Ulmo, Lord of Waters, in the Elder Days. With a faithful companion, Voronwë, to show the way, Tuor must journey to the hidden Elvish city of Gondolin, and counsel its ruler, Turgon, in how to defeat the evil Morgoth. Turgon spurns Tuor's advice, and Tuor settles down to a life of ease in the beautiful stronghold. Years later, treachery from within exposes the secrets of the city, and Morgoth's army (full of Balrogs, dragons, and Orcs) is soon on the move to destroy this last bastion of hope. Gondolin will fall, but hope will survive, as Tuor's son is one of the few escapees- a young boy named Eärendil.

Outside of The Silmarillion, this is one of three tales of the Elder Days (the other two being Beren and Luthien and The Children of Húrin). In The Fall of Gondolin, Christopher Tolkien presents four primary versions of the abandoned tale, plus some related material, as found among his father's many writings. The four main versions:
- The Original Tale (1916; 75 pages)
- The story told in the Sketch of the Mythology (1926; 8 pages)
- The story told in the Quenta Noldorinwa (1930; 17 pages)
- The Last Version (1951; 58 pages)
He concludes by discussing the evolution of the tale, compares/contrasts the versions, and adds background on likely reasons why the tale was abandoned.

Breaking down the tale into its main components (1. origin of Tuor, 2. his journey to Gondolin, 3. his abiding in the same, 4. the battle and fall of city, 5. the subsequent escape of a remnant, and 6. what happens next), only the last version covers 1 and 2 in any depth; the original tale covers 3-5 in the most detail, and the two condensed versions say more about 6 than any other. 

Of them all, the last version appears to have been started as the definitive version, but breaks off right as Tuor arrives in Gondolin. Per Christopher: "My father did indeed abandon this essential . . . form and treatment of the legend . . . for me it is perhaps the most grievous of his many abandonments." Why did the elder Tolkien do so? It appears, based on provided letters, that he was exhausted and disheartened. Remember the year was 1950. It was post-war, and Britain was still recovering from the ravages and rationing of World War II. It was costly to get anything printed, and the publisher felt The Lord of the Rings would be the most accessible/publishable of Tolkien's works. (That would be released in 1954.) But Tolkien's heart felt that The Silmarillion was an inescapable part of the entire tome, and was depressed by the reluctance to accept the 'high style' of that (and his other) writings. (The Silmarillion would eventually be published in 1977.)

Overall, I liked the story. My only wish was that Tolkien had been able to produce the one definitive version in his lifetime. Each version (and the related writings) conatins some interesting details or plot points that were condensed, changed, or omitted in the others; taken together, it would have been excellent. As it stands, the reader is left to piece together, with Christopher's research and insights, what might have been. 

Rating: A-

Wednesday, July 20, 2022

The Encyclopedia of the Dead (Danilo Kiš)

The Encyclopedia of the Dead is a collection of nine short stories by acclaimed Yugoslavian author Danilo Kiš. I got through six before I gave up.

I don't deny that Kiš is a talented author, and the titular tale has some value (in appreciating the common life), but I otherwise disliked both his messages (where I could understand them) and delivery. His is a "show, don't state" style, which is admirable and requires considerable talent- but most tales left me completely lost as to the overall point. He can run on in stream-of-consciousness, which has never grabbed me. Commentaries gave me some insight (and a small degree of appreciation) to some tales, but even with outside elucidation, I wasn't overly impressed- and some appeared to require knowledge of other literary works long out of popular view. Growing up in the shadow of WWII (he's half-Jewish and lost his father to the Nazis) and then under communism, I can perhaps understand how he developed a cynical view toward religion and life- but it is heartbreaking. Maybe there is amazing content here that is just too far above me . . . or maybe he was as lost as he appears.

Rating: C-

Sunday, July 17, 2022

How to Read a Book (Adler & Van Doren)


How to Read a Book is a guide about exactly that- "how to make books teach us well." First written in 1940 and updated in 1972, it argues that though nearly everyone can read, few can read well- meaning actively, with comprehension, interaction, retention, and application appropriate to the subject matter. Yet reading well is tremendously important, as it "serves to keep our minds alive and growing," and "a good book can teach you about the world and about yourself . . . You become wiser. Not just more knowledgeable . . . but wiser, in the sense that you are more deeply aware of the great and enduring truths of human life." The book proceeds to explain the levels of reading and provides rules, principles, and suggestions for each. It concludes with appendices providing reading lists and tests.

Summary
We read for entertainment, information, and understanding. The book focuses on reading for understanding ('expository' reading), as doing so will take care of the other categories. 

There are four levels of reading: elementary, inspectional, analytical, and syntopical. Elementary reading is learning and refining basic readiness, word mastery, vocabulary growth and utilizing context. This level is typically attained by the end of eighth to tenth grade, and is where most readers stop. At this point, one can read, but one cannot necessarily read well. Inspectional reading emphasizes time- understanding the gist of a work without diving in wholeheartedly. It includes skimming systematically (looking through the table of contents, paging through the book for major themes, etc.) and superficial reading. Analytical reading is thorough/complete reading; it is "preeminently for the sake of understanding." Finally, syntopical reading is thoroughly analyzing a given subject through the inspectional and/or analytical reading of many related books. It is comparative reading.

The essence of active reading is asking four questions:
1. What is the book about as a whole?
2. What is being said in detail, and how?
3. Is the book true, in whole or part?
4. What of it?
Getting at these questions is the point of the third level of reading (the analytical). The book presents  15 rules for analytical reading, broken into stages:
Stage 1 of analytical reading, speaking to question one above:
1. Classify the book according to kind and subject matter.
2. State what the whole book is about with the utmost brevity.
3. Enumerate its major parts in their order and relation, and outline these parts as you have outlined the whole. 
4. Define the problem or problems the author has tried to solve.
Stage 2 of analytical reading, speaking to question two above:
5. Come to terms with the author by interpreting his key words.
6. Grasp the author's leading propositions by dealing with his most important sentences.
7. Know the author's argument, by finding them in, or constructing them out of, sequences of sentences.
8. Determine which of his problems the author has solved, and which he has not; and of the latter, decide which the author knew he failed to solve.
Stage 3A and 3B of analytical reading, speaking to questions three and four above:
9. Do not begin criticism until you have completed your outline and your interpretation of the book. [Make sure you understand before you say I (dis)agree.]
10. Do not disagree disputatiously or contentiously.
11. Demonstrate that you recognize the difference between knowledge and mere personal opinion by presenting good reasons for any critical judgment you make.
12. Show wherein the author is uninformed.
13. Show wherein the author is misinformed.
14. Show wherein the author is illogical.
15. Show wherein the author's analysis or account is incomplete.
The next section of the book covers how to read different kinds of books- in other words, how the above rules apply (or are emphasized) depending on the nature of the work. The authors look at how to read practical books, imaginative literature, stories, plays, and poems, history, science, mathematics, philosophy, and social science.

The final section of the book discusses syntopical reading ("how to read two or more books on the same subject")- its value, its challenge/paradox*, the role of inspectional reading as a major tool in it, and how it involves (and yet differs from) analytical reading (example: "in synoptical reading, it is you and your concerns that are primarily to be served, not the books that you read"). He concludes with seven steps (across two stages) that have to do with creating the list of books, inspecting them for relevance, 'translating' them as needed to compare them appropriately, defining the issues, and analyzing the overall discussion.

Ultimately, "you will not improve as a reader if all you read are books that are well within your capactiy. You must tackle books that are beyond you, or, as we have said, books that are over your head. Only books of that sort will make you stretch your mind. And unless you stretch, you will not learn."

Review
This is a foundational work, full of profound insight and valuable tips to improve your reading ability. Though I think myself accomplished in this area, I came away with either 1) new insights and things I should be doing, or 2) ways to articulate things I've known and done for years but haven't been able to adequately explain. Some personal takeaways:
- The importance of reading different books (or different parts within the same book) differently, at varying speeds. It's okay- and necessary- to speed up or slow down as required by the text you're tackling.
- You do not understand what you cannot explain concisely.
- The importance of inspectional reading- reviewing a book's table of contents (for example) and paging through it to get the gist before you dive in. I almost never do this.
- The need to write in books (which I do) and 'spar' with the author to show both comprehension and active engagement. Reading is not a passive affair.
- I appreciated their discussion on the importance of 'coming to terms' with an author- we need interpretation because language is an opaque medium.

I wonder how the authors would have handled the Internet age. The last portion, on syntopical reading, was especially 'archaic' in that it discusses how to find reading matter on a subject in an age before computer-aided searches of globally-accessible resources. But even that was highly valuable, and the rest of the book remains extremely relevant today. 

Ultimately, this book confirmed why I blog. I need to do this sort of thing to comprehend and retain- to process a work and ultimately grow. 

Rating: A

*That you first choose a subject and develop a list of books, but then must inspectionally read said books to see whether a given "book says something important about [the] subject or not."

Friday, July 15, 2022

1917


It is April 6, 1917, in northern France, on the Western Front at the height of World War I. The Germans have pulled back; the British want to take advantage. Units are deploying forward, planning to press the advantage- but command realizes it is a trap. They dispatch two messengers to cross enemy lines and notify the commanding officer of the forward units before it is too late. One of those messengers has a brother in the forward unit, giving extra incentive to success. Can they make it before it's too late?

This is certainly a different approach to a war movie. Appearing to be shot in one take (it was actually 34, I'm told, but stitched together in a way that made it look like a continuous shot), the focus is on the messengers and the challenges/trials they face as they attempt to complete the mission. The cinematography is breathtaking and made me wonder how they possibly built those sets. I thought I might be bothered by the lack of different camera angles- and indeed, it took me a few minutes to adjust to the style- but it was done very well. 

This is a film to be experienced- there isn't a lot of dialogue to process. Instead, you almost feel in the main characters' shoes as they undertake their quest. It is suspenseful and highlights the horrors and hardships a common soldier experienced during 'simple' duties like serving as a messenger. 

My main dig against it were a few elements that seemed incredibly unlikely ("how did that/they end up on a battlefield?"-type moments). And this is not a true story (nor based on one), so that diminished it a bit. But overall, it was worth at least one viewing.

Rating: B

Monday, July 11, 2022

Thor: Love and Thunder

Deprived of his daughter and spurned by his deity, Gorr is on a mission to slay all the gods across the universe with the powerful necrosword. Elsewhere, Thor wrestles with inner peace and Jane Foster, his ex, fights advanced cancer. But soon Gorr will find that Thor is back . . . and this time, he has a mighty friend.

This movie is a mixed bag. It's fun. It's zany. It's rock'n'roll. And there are hilarious goats (this may be the funniest MCU film yet). But it's also serious, tragic, and scary in places. The messages are largely poor and somewhat inconsistent*, and elements are a bit rushed (the film was short but the assembly cut was 4 hours, apparently). Overall, I enjoyed this, but in a 'turn brain off and enjoy the zaniness' kind of way. Looking back on Thor: Ragnarok, this film featured some of the same pros and cons, but Ragnarok was better.

Final thought: MCU feels directionless post-Endgame (as mentioned in this spoiler-infused article). That contributes to the disappointment.

Rating: B

*Namely, 1) the deities don't care about you, 2) there is no eternal rest, but also 3) life is about sacrificial love and 4) if you die a warrior's death you will be worthy and go to Valhalla . . . which sounds a lot like eternal rest. 

Sunday, July 10, 2022

The Collected Novellas of Stefan Zweig (Stefan Zweig)

As the title states, this work collects five novellas from famous Austrian author Stefan Zweig. They are:
- Burning Secret: A boy teeters between childhood and maturity as he wrestles with the secrets of life.
- A Chess Story: Idiosyncratic chess players square off in a tale of obsession.
- Fear: A psychological thriller about a woman wrestling with how to handle her infidelity.
- Confusion: A university student wrestles with the bizarre behavior of a beloved professor.
- Journey into the Past: A man and woman struggle with their life and longing from a decade past.

Zweig's stories are full of torment and anguish, with his characters in a permanent state of longing and obsession. They often come from means, but desire something other. His focus on psychoanalysis and fondness for Freud is evident: in four of the stories, there are strong sexual undertones. He writes well, and his stories are compelling, but his humanist focus removes most sense of right or wrong- it's about feeling and longing for him, with no thought to a moral law that should guide human conduct. His tales wrestle with what true life means- what really matters, what it means to be mature, but the focus is on desire vs. responsibility. And, appropriately, his characters almost never find true contentment- a correct conclusion to those who "spend labor on that which does not satisfy" (Isaiah 55:2). So there is value here in the probing- but you won't find answers. Some quotes I enjoyed:
"for the first time he thought he had understood the nature of human beings- they needed each other even when they appeared hostile, and it was very sweet to be loved by them."

Fear is the one tale where the protagonist seems to realize that contentment can be found in the life granted to her: 

"everything seemed worthless when you knew you couldn't take it with you." 
"She lay with her eyes closed to relish, at a deeper level, her real life or what it was, and it was now her happiness too. Something still hurt her, deep inside, but it was a promising pain, burning but mild, just as wounds burn when scar tissue is about to close over them for ever."
Rating: B+

Tuesday, July 5, 2022

America: A Narrative History, Vol. 1 (Shi & Tindall)

America: A Narrative History, Volume 1, is a survey of United States history from pre-Colonial times to the end of Reconstruction (1877). I read the "brief tenth edition," which is 20% shorter than the regular tenth edition.

I wanted a refresher in American history. Years ago, I searched for a 'fair' survey text, as American history presentations can be wrought with agendas from the political Left or Right. I was seeking a middle ground- one that presented the events clearly (and gave sufficient/inclusive coverage to noteworthy events and personalities) but also interpreted the significance and motive of controversial episodes in a way that was fair to both sides. This text was recommended, and I think it succeeds. This is largely a political history, but covers some social aspects. The few events with which I was previously familiar were decently (though not perfectly) presented. And I especially appreciated their coverage of the "War of the Union" (what most call the Civil War). Of course it is a whirlwind, covering centuries in just 600 pages. But overall, I think the authors did a good job with this textbook. It was clear, informative, and fair. Recommended.

Rating: A-

Friday, July 1, 2022

Minor League Caps

I've blogged a few times this year about baseball- a consequence of being back in the USA. Today's focus is on the minor leagues and other non-affiliated baseball leagues.

For the unfamiliar, each Major League Baseball (MLB) team has a 'farm system'- affiliated teams at lower-level leagues for player development (and rehabilitation- injured MLB players often play a few games in the minors as they're working their way back). There are four leagues- Single-A, High-A, Double-A, and Triple-A. These are collectively called the Minor Leagues- each MLB team has an affiliate in each league. (See here for a list for all 120 teams.) There are also are MLB 'partner leagues' (independent but associated, like the Pioneer League), as well as Collegiate Leagues (unaffiliated with universities). Regardless of league, they often have wonderful hats and team names.

These non-MLB teams are consistently fun and whimsical. I love it. We often take ourselves too seriously, but we can be absurd in so many ways . . . and these lower-league teams get that. So today I celebrate the amusing, looking at fun hats and team names (earlier this year, I looked at two here). 

The following ten hats, from left to right and top to bottom, are for the:
Akron RubberDucks (their alternate hat; intuitively featuring a hot dog(?))
- Charlotte Knights (who became the "Charlotte Traffic Cones" for a game, hence the hat)
- Hartford Yard Goats
- Jamestown Jammers (a former minor league team; the current team in Jamestown is called the Tarp Skunks, in a Collegiate League . . .)
- Missoula Paddleheads (moose!)
- Modesto Nuts
Montgomery Biscuits
- Norfolk Tides (not that whimsical, but they're the Orioles' AAA team, so they get a slot)
- Rocket City Trash Pandas




Some other fun team names:
- Kannapolis Cannon Ballers
- Sugar Land Space Cowboys
- Inland Empire 66ers
- Fort Myers Mighty Mussels
- Amarillo Sod Poodles
- Albuquerque Isotopes
- Binghamton Rumble Ponies
- Biloxi Shuckers
- Lehigh Valley IronPigs
- Richmond Flying Squirrels

In the NFL, we recently saw the Washington Redskins become "Football Team" before settling on "Commanders" as their new nickname. How boring. They could learn a thing or two from these baseball leagues.