Interstellar

I love Christopher Nolan films.  He generally produces a story that's engaging, intriguing, and thought-provoking.  Interstellar, his latest offering, is no different.  In this film, something has happened (we're never told exactly what) that is rendering Earth increasingly uninhabitable- crops are dying, weather patterns changing, and life is vastly different than we know today.  The only hope isn't to save the world- it's to leave it.  A wormhole has opened near Saturn, through which a dozen explorers left years ago to look for new worlds.  NASA sends a team to see if one of them really did find a new home.  With the team are thousands of fertilized eggs- a Plan B for humanity's survival, in case Plan A (relocating survivors still on Earth) becomes impossible.  Will they succeed?  And at what cost?

I was pleased with this movie, but not as pleased as I generally am with Nolan's films.  The plot was interesting, certainly, and mind-bending (as is the norm); the scenery was impressive and the acting good.  There were a few problems that made it fall short of stellar, though, for me:
- even though the film clocks in at almost 3 hours, certain plot points seemed rushed or underdeveloped
- a key realization reached by a main character seemed to come out of the blue, as thought it was just a lucky guess
- the overall message of the film was confusing.  It looked at survival, truth, deception, selfishness,  sacrifice, and every combination thereof.  This was very interesting, but I came away feeling there was not an overall (or clear) point.  Was the movie advocating one at the expense of all others?  It wasn't clear to me.

In the end, it's certainly worth viewing the film.  I'm still thinking about it- a sign of quality work- but rather thinking about the message, I'm more trying to figure out what the message was.

Rating: B+

Helmet for My Pillow (Robert Leckie)

Another book* on which the HBO miniseries The Pacific was based, Helmet for My Pillow is Robert Leckie's memoir of his time in the 1st Marine division during WWII.  Starting with his enlistment, we see him go through stateside training and on to a horrible conflict- Guadalcanal.  After that, it was months of recovery in Australia, followed by shorter (but no less horrifying) battles on Cape Gloucester and Peleliu.  Injured in the latter, his contribution to the war (and the book) ended there.

With the Old Breed still fresh in my memory, I found myself making the inevitable comparisons between it and Helmet for My Pillow.  Both are fantastic and well-written accounts, conveying the horror of battle and strength of combatant camaraderie.  The differences are as follows:
- Leckie, a journalist by trade and professional author who would go on to write almost 40 other books, has a beauty to his prose that was missing from Sledge's account.  At times, this almost felt like a poem.  Both are excellent; Leckie's is more 'polished' and includes cultural commentaries or observations lacking in Sledge's account.
- Sledge's book focuses on the fighting and often gives broader context to the conflicts- where other units were in relation to his and the enemy, when they attacked, what regions they held, etc.  Leckie's, on the other hand, was almost entirely focused on what happened to him and his immediate comrades.  There was little to no mention of overall troop movements or objectives, and a good deal of the work is away from the war entirely- on leave in Melbourne or at field hospitals, Leckie tells all, with no apparent preference (as weighted in length) given towards the more glorious aspects.
- Leckie's disposition is more contrarian and obstinate than Sledge's, and it shows in their respective accounts.  Leckie gets in trouble more than once, ends up in the brig (twice), and is frequently in conflict with superiors and others.  Sledge is more of a 'passive,' agreeable fellow.

In the end, Helmet for my Pillow is excellent, and an appropriate complement to With the Old Breed.  Read both if you can.  As I did with the latter, I'll conclude with a quote from the former:

"A woman . . . said to me: 'What did you get out of it?  What were you fighting for?' . . .  For myself, a memory and the strength of ordeal sustained; for my son, a priceless heritage; for my country, sacrifice.  The last is enough for all, for it is sacrifice- the suffering of those who lived, the immolation of those who died . . . it is to sacrifice that men go to war.  They do not go to kill, they go to be killed, to risk their flesh, to insert their precious persons in the path of destruction."

Rating: A

*the first, With the Old Breed, is reviewed here

Star Wars: Vector

When Dark Horse Comics owned the Star Wars license, they had four lines of Star Wars comics concurrently running:

1. Knights of the Old Republic 
Set thousands of years before Episode IV, KOTOR dealt with a Jedi padawan Zayne Carrick as he fled his Jedi masters, who were trying to prevent the return of the Sith and had foreseen (correctly?) that Zayne was involved.

2. Dark Times
Set just after Episode III, DT looked at fugitives (Jedi and non) in the aftermath of the Clone Wars.

3. Rebellion
Set just before/during/after Episode IV, Rebellion told stories during the height of the war to bring down the Empire.

4. Legacy
Set 120 years after Episode VI, Legacy was the tale of Cade Skywalker and the Imperial remnants, as they battled the Sith Reborn, as led by Darth Krayt.

The minds at Dark Horse thought a cross-over would be interesting, and so they developed the Vector storyline.  Vector is the story of Celeste Morne (an Old Republic Jedi) and the Muur Talisman- an ancient Sith artifact that grants tremendous power (and longevity) to the bearer.  Celeste encounters the artifact (and its Sith ghost inhabitant) accidentally while with Zayne in KOTOR. Against her will, it latches on to her and gives her command of others (and tempts her to use the power for evil).  To protect the galaxy, she puts herself in a stasis box with it, and is abandoned.  Four thousand years later, she gets awoken by Darth Vader in DT, who has plans to use it for his own.  She fends him off but is abandoned on a remote world.  Celeste comes back into contact with the Skywalkers during Rebellion, and is granted a ship in which to flee.  She does so, and 100+ years later comes into contact with Cade & company in Legacy.  They eventually work out a way to free her from the Talisman and rid the galaxy of the threat, though it may not end well for all involved.

The concept of this cross-over series was great, and it was fun to see characters across centuries and story arcs come to together in a cohesive tale.  The execution wasn't quite as good- the art wasn't great, you needed to be familiar with each story arc to get maximum enjoyment, and the story felt forced in places to incorporate all the characters.  A noble attempt, in the end, and worthwhile for Star Wars die-hards, but could have been better for the layman.

Rating (concept): A
Rating (execution): B-

The Practice of the Presence of God (Brother Lawrence)

Brother Lawrence was a 17th century member of a Parisian monastery.  This book, The Practice of the Presence of God, is a Christian classic.  In it, Lawrence states that "we should establish ourselves in a sense of God's Presence by continually speaking with Him . . . It was a delusion to think that the times of prayer ought to differ from other times. We are as required to adhere to God in action, as by prayer in its season."  Basically, he's saying that we should be in community with God at all times, and He should influence all our actions.  He can't be 'put in a box' and considered only during prayer or on Sundays- the Christian walk requires nothing less than a constant, consistent communion with the Lord.  Brother Lawrence lived this out:

As he proceeded in his work, he continued his conversation with his Maker, imploring His grace, and offering to Him all his actions. When he had finished, he examined how he had fulfilled his duty; if he found well, he returned thanks to God. If otherwise, he asked pardon, and without being discouraged, he set his mind right again, and continued his exercise of the presence of God, as if he had never deviated from it.

This book is very short (95 small pages) and convicting- I recommend it for all Christians.  In college, I practiced the presence of God pretty well.  I've tapered off as I've aged, as [I confess] I've allowed the cares and concerns of adulthood to occupy more of my thoughts than they warrant.  This is to my detriment- the peace, contentment, and joy of being with (and delighting in) the Lord is far better.  I'll end with a final round of strung-together quotes from this book- may I take this to heart:

Be satisfied with the condition in which God places you . . . He sometimes permits bodily diseases to cure the distempers of the soul . . . Continue then always with God. It is the only support and comfort for your affliction . . . If we only knew the need we have of the grace and help of God, we should never lose sight of Him, no, not for a moment.

Rating: A

With the Old Breed (E.B. Sledge)

Praised by many and used as source material for The Pacific (an HBO miniseries) , With the Old Breed is one Marine's tale of his time with the First Division, first in training, and then in action on the islands of Peleliu and Okinawa against the Japanese.  In addition to the combat itself, Sledge gives a stirring account of other aspects of warfare- being surrounded by decaying corpses, going without water and sleep, sitting for weeks in wet boots, and facing similar conditions that led thousands to lose their minds- if not their lives.

This book is deservedly well-regarded.  E.B. Sledge's account is captivating, informative, and well-written.  He doesn't hold back about anything- his own fear, the bravery (or brutality) of his comrades, the gruesome Japanese practices, and the horrifying conditions are all well and candidly described.  Noted historian John Keegan called this "one of the most arresting documents in war literature."  It's easy to see why.

I'll finish by quoting Sledge as he summarizes his experience:

War is brutish, inglorious, and a terrible waste.  Combat leaves an indelible mark on those who are forced to endure it.  The only redeeming factors were my comrades' incredible bravery and their devotion to each other.  Marine Corps training taught us to kill efficiently and to try to survive.  But it also taught us loyalty to each other- and love.  That esprit de corps sustained us. 

  Until the millenium arrives and countries cease trying to enslave others, it will be necessary to accept one's responsibilities and to be willing to make sacrifices for one's country- as my comrades did.  As the troops used to say, "If the country is good enough to live in, it's good enough to fight for."  With privilege goes responsibility.

Rating: A

Star Wars Armada

In Star Wars Armada, you send a fleet of capital ships and starfighter squadrons against an opponent's to vie for galactic domination.  As you'd suspect, each unit has strengths and weaknesses, so position your ships for maximum effectiveness.  You can also use upgrades (like enhanced weapons or famous admirals/pilots) to aid in the fight.  May the best commander win . . .

I've been waiting for this one for a long time.  The starships are my favorite part of the galaxy far, far away, and the only game to date focusing solely on them- 2006's Starship Battles- was a dismal failure.  Would Armada be up to snuff?  I've played only once, so I don't yet hold a completely informed opinion, but what follows are my initial impressions.

The good:
- most game components are of high quality.  The capital ship models are fantastic, and the myriad counters and cards are also good.  The ship stands are well-constructed.  The fighter squadrons are very small and unpainted, but it makes sense given the scale of the game (the focus is on the capital ships).
- the counters/stats are well-presented.  There's a lot of information for each unit (which is presented across cards and dials), but it's done in a smart way that helps everyone understand what's going on.
- the rules capture the expected nuances of Star Wars fleet operations.  Based on conflicts in the films, this game delivers what I expected.  Capital ships, due to their momentum and bulk, are forced to accelerate or decelerate slowly- they can't stop on a dime- and can move only in wide arcs, as restricted by a handy maneuver tool.  Fighters can buzz around and screen their larger allies from enemy fire.
- I can only hypothesize (since only the starter set has been released to date), but this game looks to have many customization options that promise good re-play value.  You add weapons and commander/pilot cards to your units to increase their potency- for a cost.  The recommended fleet size is 300 points, so whether that is comprised of many 'basic' units or fewer 'enhanced' units is entirely up to you.

The bad:
- this game is expensive.  The starter set retails for $100; the expansion packs range from $20-$50 . . . for as little as one ship.  You can generally get everything 30% cheaper online, but still . . .
- there's a moderate-large learning curve.  Lots of data, rules, and options.  I think a few games will clear most things up, but there is an initial 'whoa'.  That's fine by me . . . but it means I'll have a harder time finding friends willing to learn.  Every game is a balance between 'authenticity' and simplicity, and it looks like Armada mildly favors the former.
- the rulebook isn't overly intuitive.  The primary instruction method is through an example game, which can be very good, but it leaves a lot of questions unanswered.  The included glossary answers most of them, but I had a harder time with the format than expected.
- the board can get crowded.  It can be hard to rotate the dials on a ship's base when it's in the middle of a swarm of fighters . . . several times, we inadvertently moved other ships trying to access the relevant dial.  That could get problematic, as range matters for attacks and such, and even subtle movements could change things.

Overall:
I'm happy with the game and believe it to be a solid recreation of a Star Wars space battle.  I think regular play will turn it into a favorite of mine.  The key phrase here is "regular play;" if I can't find a gaming buddy for this, I won't play enough to get over the aforementioned learning curve.

Rating: A-

The Essential Drucker (Peter Drucker)

Peter Drucker is a legend in the management/corporate world.  He started writing about management in 1939, and continued producing books, articles and other media until 2004 (he died in 2005 at age 95).  He was tremendously influential in this sphere, and I believe many common management practices, beliefs and perspectives can be traced to him.  How do you take such a wealth of material and boil it down to its essence?  In The Essential Drucker, he (and presumably others) take snippets of his writings through the decades and paste them together into a book of highlights.

My kindle tells me I highlighted 289 passages in this 368-page book, so that alone tells you how I felt about it.  It was very good.  In fact, I'm still thinking about it, and will continue digesting Drucker's wisdom over the next few weeks.  There's a lot here, for sure.  I can't say I agreed with everything he said, but I still learned so much about communication, decisions, innovation, the changing landscape (the move to knowledge workers) and even the definition of leadership and how to define the value those in such positions can provide.  Since I'm new to leadership myself, this book really helped me start to think through some challenges I've been having from the start.  This is a real winner.

Rating: A

Below are just some of my favorite quotes from this book:

the fundamental task of management remains the same: to make people capable of joint performance through common goals, common values, the right structure, and the training and development they need to perform and to respond to change.

Management is about human beings. Its task is to make people capable of joint performance, to make their strengths effective and their weaknesses irrelevant.

Every enterprise is composed of people with different skills and knowledge doing many different kinds of work. It must be built on communication and on individual responsibility.

What the customer buys and considers value is never just a product. It is always a utility, that is, what a product or service does for him.

The most productive innovation is a different product or service creating a new potential of satisfaction, rather than an improvement.

If objectives are only good intentions, they are worthless. They must be transformed into work. And work is always specific, always has—or should have—clear, unambiguous, measurable results, a deadline and a specific assignment of accountability.

One does not “manage” people. The task is to lead people. And the goal is to make productive the specific strengths and knowledge of each individual.

it is the definition of a manager that in what he does he takes responsibility for the whole—that, in cutting stone, he “builds the cathedral.”

It is not intuitively obvious to most people that a new and different job requires new and different behavior.

Every knowledge worker in a modern organization is an “executive” if, by virtue of his position or knowledge, he or she is responsible for a contribution that materially affects the capacity of the organization to perform and to obtain results.

Knowledge workers are rarely in synch with each other, precisely because they are knowledge workers. Each has his or her own skill and concerns.

The great majority of people tend to focus downward. They are occupied with efforts rather than with results.

The next generation should take for granted what the hard work and dedication of this generation has accomplished. They should then, standing on the shoulders of their predecessors, establish a new “high” as the baseline for the generation after them.

The knowledge worker, moreover, is usually a specialist. In fact, he can, as a rule, be effective only if he has learned to do one thing very well, that is, if he has specialized. By itself, however, a specialty is a fragment and sterile. Its output has to be put together with the output of other specialists before it can produce results.

It is barbarian arrogance to assume that the layman can or should make the effort to understand the specialist, and that it is enough if the person of knowledge talks to a handful of fellow experts who are his peers. Even in the university or in the research laboratory, this attitude—alas, only too common today—condemns the expert to uselessness and converts his knowledge from learning into pedantry.

Meetings are by definition a concession to deficient organization. For one either meets or one works. One cannot do both at the same time. In an ideally designed structure (which in a changing world is of course only a dream), there would be no meetings. Everybody would know what he needs to know to do his job. Everyone would have the resources available to him to do his job. We meet because people holding different jobs have to cooperate to get a specific task done.

Most books on decision-making tell the reader: First find the facts. But executives who make effective decisions know that one does not start with facts. One starts with opinions.

People inevitably start out with an opinion; to ask them to search for the facts first is even undesirable. They will simply do what everyone is far too prone to do anyhow: look for the facts that fit the conclusion they have already reached.

effective decision-makers deliberately disregard the second major command of the textbooks on decision-making and create dissension and disagreement, rather than consensus.

communications has proven as elusive as the unicorn.

it is the recipient who communicates. The so-called communicator, the person who emits the communication, does not communicate. He utters. Unless there is someone who hears, there is no communication. There is only noise.

There is no possibility of communication, in other words, unless we first know what the recipient, the true communicator, can see and why.

The foundation of effective leadership is thinking through the organization’s mission, defining it, and establishing it, clearly and visibly. The leader sets the goals, sets the priorities, and sets and maintains the standards.