December 26 might be my favorite holiday. Not because it’s Boxing Day. Not because it’s the second biggest shopping day of the year (for sure not that!). Not because it’s St. Stephen’s Day in the Catholic calendar. Not even because it’s the First Day of Christmas. (The 12 Days of Christmas were inspired by the Saturnalia – the Romans’ 12-day feast in honor of Saturn that featured gift-giving and decking the halls with lights.) For me, December 26 is Book Day.
The hectic round of visiting is done. The fridge is stuffed with left-overs. The presents are still scattered under the tree. And I have a pile of new books to read – and some quiet time to read them. Actually it’s a little daunting: 5 books, 2,122 pages! This year's books include:
The Ancestor’s Tale, an evolutionary time travelogue in search of our earliest ancestors down through the millions of years by Richard Dawkins.
Loving Frank, a novel of Frank Lloyd Wright and Mamah Cheney by Nancy Horan.
Tree of Smoke, a novel of Vietnam and more by Denis Johnson.
In a Far Country, a tale of adventure set in Alaska in 1897.
The Complete Tracker, a guide to the tracks, signs and habits of North American wildlife by Len McDougall.
But that’s enough writing. Time to get reading.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Dave's Faves
Sorry, couldn't resist that headline. Here are David's top five books for 2007:
Saturday, Ian McEwen
Atonement, Ian McEwen
The Worst Hard Times, Timothy Egan
Truman, David McCullogh
The River of Doubt, Candice Millard
McEwen and McCullough need no introductions, but I was not familiar with Candice Millard or this book. Just in case you were not either, here's the start of The Washington Post's review:
Just try to imagine it: George W. Bush loses re-election by a landslide and, undeterred by the humiliation of it all, sets off on a journey of unspeakable danger and hardship into the darkest depths of the Amazon jungle. There would be a media circus the likes of which the world has never seen. Picture the TV crews following in his wake, tripping over chemical toilets, generators and satellite phones. In these times of media gurus and spin-doctoring, we would write off the expedition as a stunt, a way of stealing the limelight from his rival's victory.
Rewind almost a century, to November 1912. Theodore Roosevelt, one of the most popular presidents in American history, is crushed at the polls by Woodrow Wilson after two terms in office (this was before the two-term rule). Roosevelt is 54 years of age, 5'5" tall, weighs more than 200 pounds and when speaking sounds "as if he had just taken a sip of helium." He's shunned by his high-society Republican friends for having run as a third-party candidate, and is generally lampooned by everyone else for losing by such a wide margin. What does he do? Sets off into the Brazilian jungle to venture up an uncharted tributary of the Amazon, known as "The River of Doubt," which has given Candice Millard the title of her fine account of the expedition.
Saturday, Ian McEwen
Atonement, Ian McEwen
The Worst Hard Times, Timothy Egan
Truman, David McCullogh
The River of Doubt, Candice Millard
McEwen and McCullough need no introductions, but I was not familiar with Candice Millard or this book. Just in case you were not either, here's the start of The Washington Post's review:
Just try to imagine it: George W. Bush loses re-election by a landslide and, undeterred by the humiliation of it all, sets off on a journey of unspeakable danger and hardship into the darkest depths of the Amazon jungle. There would be a media circus the likes of which the world has never seen. Picture the TV crews following in his wake, tripping over chemical toilets, generators and satellite phones. In these times of media gurus and spin-doctoring, we would write off the expedition as a stunt, a way of stealing the limelight from his rival's victory.
Rewind almost a century, to November 1912. Theodore Roosevelt, one of the most popular presidents in American history, is crushed at the polls by Woodrow Wilson after two terms in office (this was before the two-term rule). Roosevelt is 54 years of age, 5'5" tall, weighs more than 200 pounds and when speaking sounds "as if he had just taken a sip of helium." He's shunned by his high-society Republican friends for having run as a third-party candidate, and is generally lampooned by everyone else for losing by such a wide margin. What does he do? Sets off into the Brazilian jungle to venture up an uncharted tributary of the Amazon, known as "The River of Doubt," which has given Candice Millard the title of her fine account of the expedition.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Bruce on page one
If you subscribe to The Capital Times, you saw son-in-law Bruce on the front past last Friday. If not (you should), here is the top of the story:
Cooling Coal
Sierra Club Lawyer Here Successfully Fights Power Plant Pollution
Friday, December 14, 2007
By SAMARA KALK DERBY The Capital Times
In the last four years, local Sierra Club attorney Bruce Nilles has stopped 58 coal-fired plants from being built in the United States. As a result of his work, energy companies have abandoned their plans, fearing going through the permitting process of getting a new coal plant built.
Nilles, 39, is director of the organization's National Coal Campaign. He has stopped plants in Kansas, Illinois, Florida, Texas and Nevada. He also had a hand in last month's settlement in which the state of Wisconsin agreed not only to clean up UW-Madison's coal-fired Charter Street power plant but also to examine and possibly improve the operation of 13 other coal-burning plants it manages across the state.
He is in the process of fighting 54 more coal-burning plants in America. In the last two weeks alone, Nilles has beaten back four plants. "It's been a very good two weeks," he said, grinning.
Here is the link to the full story:http://www.madison.com/archives/
read.php?ref=/tct/2007/12/14/0712140281.php
Cooling Coal
Sierra Club Lawyer Here Successfully Fights Power Plant Pollution
Friday, December 14, 2007
By SAMARA KALK DERBY The Capital Times
In the last four years, local Sierra Club attorney Bruce Nilles has stopped 58 coal-fired plants from being built in the United States. As a result of his work, energy companies have abandoned their plans, fearing going through the permitting process of getting a new coal plant built.
Nilles, 39, is director of the organization's National Coal Campaign. He has stopped plants in Kansas, Illinois, Florida, Texas and Nevada. He also had a hand in last month's settlement in which the state of Wisconsin agreed not only to clean up UW-Madison's coal-fired Charter Street power plant but also to examine and possibly improve the operation of 13 other coal-burning plants it manages across the state.
He is in the process of fighting 54 more coal-burning plants in America. In the last two weeks alone, Nilles has beaten back four plants. "It's been a very good two weeks," he said, grinning.
Here is the link to the full story:http://www.madison.com/archives/
read.php?ref=/tct/2007/12/14/0712140281.php
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Harry's favorite books
Harry sent along his list of most liked/ most memorable books of the year, although he cautions that they may not all have fallen strictly into 2007 and therefor calls them "recent favorites." We accept the caveat and thank Harry for the contribution.
1. Team of Rivals, Doris Kearns Goodwin
2. Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan
3. Decade of the Wolf (reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone National Park)
4. Lincoln and Tanney, James Simon (Tanny was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and wrote the Dred Scott Decision)
5. Washington's Crossing, David Hackett Fisher
6. The Land Remembers, Ben Logan
1. Team of Rivals, Doris Kearns Goodwin
2. Omnivore's Dilemma, Michael Pollan
3. Decade of the Wolf (reintroduction of wolves in Yellowstone National Park)
4. Lincoln and Tanney, James Simon (Tanny was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and wrote the Dred Scott Decision)
5. Washington's Crossing, David Hackett Fisher
6. The Land Remembers, Ben Logan
Friday, December 14, 2007
Fear itself
“There go my people. I must hurry and catch up with them for I am their leader.” --Mohandas (Mahatma) Gandhi
We heard Jesse Jackson at The Capital Times 90th birthday party Wednesday and came away more convinced than ever that if anything is to change, the people must lead; the leaders won’t.
The Capital Times story said it this way:
Most campaigns are "more poll conscious than change conscious," Jackson said. If the people push leaders to address the subprime economic crisis and better public education, the leadership will emerge and claim they were campaigning for those things all along. If the demonstrations are big enough, the candidates will catch up with the people."
Many of the issues that Jackson has championed, including civil rights struggles, were initially below the radar, he said. "It might not be popular or politic, but if it is right it will win ultimately."
Jackson’s brand of politics wasn’t popular with the mainstream media (with the notable exception of The Capital Times) and practical politicians when he ran for president – despite winning 18 million votes. It is the politics of hope, the belief that if enough people work for positive change, it will happen. It’s not popular now either. The Democrats too often seem to be engaging in the politics of despair – how to not lose. And the Republicans of course, are all about the politics of fear – fear the terrorists, fear immigrants, fear environmental protection, fear change of any sort.
Fear is the most basic of human emotions and is therefore the winning position in times of crisis. When Roosevelt said the only thing we had to fear was we had “fear itself,” most people understood that we had nothing to fear, but in fact, the important part of the sentence was the last two words. We must fear fear. One of the most common lessons of history – if anyone reads history these days – is that fear always leads to bad decisions – choices we will regret later. I don’t imagine I have to innumerate those in this blog. There's a long way to go to correct the abuses of the last seven years, but step one is to cast our most narrow-eyed suspicion on any politician who tries to lead by fear. They are always the enemy inside the camp.
We heard Jesse Jackson at The Capital Times 90th birthday party Wednesday and came away more convinced than ever that if anything is to change, the people must lead; the leaders won’t.
The Capital Times story said it this way:
Most campaigns are "more poll conscious than change conscious," Jackson said. If the people push leaders to address the subprime economic crisis and better public education, the leadership will emerge and claim they were campaigning for those things all along. If the demonstrations are big enough, the candidates will catch up with the people."
Many of the issues that Jackson has championed, including civil rights struggles, were initially below the radar, he said. "It might not be popular or politic, but if it is right it will win ultimately."
Jackson’s brand of politics wasn’t popular with the mainstream media (with the notable exception of The Capital Times) and practical politicians when he ran for president – despite winning 18 million votes. It is the politics of hope, the belief that if enough people work for positive change, it will happen. It’s not popular now either. The Democrats too often seem to be engaging in the politics of despair – how to not lose. And the Republicans of course, are all about the politics of fear – fear the terrorists, fear immigrants, fear environmental protection, fear change of any sort.
Fear is the most basic of human emotions and is therefore the winning position in times of crisis. When Roosevelt said the only thing we had to fear was we had “fear itself,” most people understood that we had nothing to fear, but in fact, the important part of the sentence was the last two words. We must fear fear. One of the most common lessons of history – if anyone reads history these days – is that fear always leads to bad decisions – choices we will regret later. I don’t imagine I have to innumerate those in this blog. There's a long way to go to correct the abuses of the last seven years, but step one is to cast our most narrow-eyed suspicion on any politician who tries to lead by fear. They are always the enemy inside the camp.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Favorite books of 2007 Part III
My favorite books of 2007 don't form any clear pattern. They are here because I liked them, or found them influential, or because they made me think. Some are still making me think months after I read them. The top five are presented here in no particular order.
Why Kerouac Matters: the Lessons of On the Road (2007), by John Leland. I read On the Road 40 years ago; I can hardly remember the characters anymore and certainly not the events. But Leland reminded me why Kerouac mattered to me then. His critique is insightful, sympathetic and scholarly. His writing (better than Kerouac’s) is hip, sharp and surprising. But that’s not the only reason this book makes my list. Lots of people ask why bother with Kerouac at all. He was a lush and a misogynist and not a very good writer. It’s because he caught the ghost of an America we all feel, but can’t quite catch. He believed it was possible to work hard, hold a job, raise a family (though he was lousy at all of the above) but still have a be-bop soul that wasn’t constrained by traditional thought. In his words: “We were embarked on a tremendous journey though post-Whitman America to find that America and to find the inherent goodness in American man. It was really a story about two Catholic buddies roaming the country in search of God. And we found Him.”
The Worst Hard Time by Timothy Egan reminds us of how venal, selfish and pig-headed humans can be and at the same time how steadfast, honest and admirable in the face of inconceivable hardship. The stories are compelling and the writing is good, but the big, black cloud that looms over this book is the idea that we really haven’t learned a damn thing about messing with nature. The dust bowl was driven by economics and hubris and as soon as the price of wheat went up, people forgot the lessons of the dust and went back to making the same mistakes. We are making the same – or similar – mistakes still. And we are always surprised when nature bites us in the ass.
The Omnivore’s Dilemma (2006) by Michael Pollan, has changed my eating habits and that earns it a place on the list. Few books affect behavior. I hope this one affects the nation’s food policies, not just mine.
The History of Love (2005) by Nicole Kraus is a novel structured like the two halves of the yin-yang symbol. The stories come together at the end in a Dickensian way, but it seems not only natural but inevitable. The characters are true enough to break your heart and the writing does them justice. As you can see from my lists, I don’t read many novels. In fact, I quit reading two highly recommended novels in the middle this year because I got too bored with them. Nicole Kraus had an answer every time boredom knocked.
I am still reading Blessed Unrest (2007) by Paul Hawken, but I have a notion that it will become the next Omnivore’s Dilemma. Here’s how the publishers describe it: The dawn of the 21st Century has witnessed two remarkable developments in our history: the appearance of systemic problems that are genuinely global in scope, and the beginning of a worldwide movement that is determined to heal the earth with the force of passion, dedication and the force of collective intelligence and wisdom. Across the planet, groups ranging from ad-hoc neighborhood associations to well-funded international organizations are confronting issues like the destruction of the environment, the abuses of free-market fundamentalism, social justice, and the loss of indigenous cultures. While they are mostly unrecognized by politicians and the media, they are bringing about what may one day be judged the single most profound transformation of human society.
OK, I showed you mine, now show me yours. What were your best books of 07?
Why Kerouac Matters: the Lessons of On the Road (2007), by John Leland. I read On the Road 40 years ago; I can hardly remember the characters anymore and certainly not the events. But Leland reminded me why Kerouac mattered to me then. His critique is insightful, sympathetic and scholarly. His writing (better than Kerouac’s) is hip, sharp and surprising. But that’s not the only reason this book makes my list. Lots of people ask why bother with Kerouac at all. He was a lush and a misogynist and not a very good writer. It’s because he caught the ghost of an America we all feel, but can’t quite catch. He believed it was possible to work hard, hold a job, raise a family (though he was lousy at all of the above) but still have a be-bop soul that wasn’t constrained by traditional thought. In his words: “We were embarked on a tremendous journey though post-Whitman America to find that America and to find the inherent goodness in American man. It was really a story about two Catholic buddies roaming the country in search of God. And we found Him.”
The Worst Hard Time by Timothy Egan reminds us of how venal, selfish and pig-headed humans can be and at the same time how steadfast, honest and admirable in the face of inconceivable hardship. The stories are compelling and the writing is good, but the big, black cloud that looms over this book is the idea that we really haven’t learned a damn thing about messing with nature. The dust bowl was driven by economics and hubris and as soon as the price of wheat went up, people forgot the lessons of the dust and went back to making the same mistakes. We are making the same – or similar – mistakes still. And we are always surprised when nature bites us in the ass.
The Omnivore’s Dilemma (2006) by Michael Pollan, has changed my eating habits and that earns it a place on the list. Few books affect behavior. I hope this one affects the nation’s food policies, not just mine.
The History of Love (2005) by Nicole Kraus is a novel structured like the two halves of the yin-yang symbol. The stories come together at the end in a Dickensian way, but it seems not only natural but inevitable. The characters are true enough to break your heart and the writing does them justice. As you can see from my lists, I don’t read many novels. In fact, I quit reading two highly recommended novels in the middle this year because I got too bored with them. Nicole Kraus had an answer every time boredom knocked.
I am still reading Blessed Unrest (2007) by Paul Hawken, but I have a notion that it will become the next Omnivore’s Dilemma. Here’s how the publishers describe it: The dawn of the 21st Century has witnessed two remarkable developments in our history: the appearance of systemic problems that are genuinely global in scope, and the beginning of a worldwide movement that is determined to heal the earth with the force of passion, dedication and the force of collective intelligence and wisdom. Across the planet, groups ranging from ad-hoc neighborhood associations to well-funded international organizations are confronting issues like the destruction of the environment, the abuses of free-market fundamentalism, social justice, and the loss of indigenous cultures. While they are mostly unrecognized by politicians and the media, they are bringing about what may one day be judged the single most profound transformation of human society.
OK, I showed you mine, now show me yours. What were your best books of 07?
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Favorite books of 2007 Part II
This is the second of three posts with my list of favorite books for 2007. This post covers the five books that nearly made my top five list and they appear in no special order. This is not a countdown.
Tent Life in Siberia, was written as a journal by George Kennan, who was sent in 1864 to survey Eastern Siberia for a telegraph line and spent two years living with the natives in dark, cold yurts that smelled of smoke, sweat and blubber or camping out under the aurora borealis at 50 below. Like his contemporaries Mark Twain and John Muir, Kennan had prodigious powers of observation and wrote with a very sharp pen. For more, see my October 13 and 15 entries.
Speaking of Muir, he also makes my top-ten list for My First Summer in the Sierra, written shortly after the summer of 1869 from his journal notes. The heart of the book is not Yosemite or the unspoiled Sierras, but Muir’s own palpable love of the land and everything in it, his boundless exuberance and a Zen-like unity with grizzly bears and cumulus clouds.
Audubon, The Making of an American (2004), Pulitzer Prize-winner Richard Rhodes’ 20th book, is a good account of JJ’s painting and naturalizing, if you’re already an Audubon fan, but I found it fascinating for its portrait of America in the early 1800s – the forgotten years of American history. Everyone (it seems) had boomer fever and business consisted of get-rich schemes and an endless attempt to collect on debts at a time when just getting from point A to point B required incredible physical energy and courage. It’s also notable for the descriptions of the nearly untouched wilderness of the Ohio and Mississippi valleys and Audubon’s belated realization that it was all vanishing before his eyes.
The Making of the Fittest (2006), by Sean B. Carroll, is for fans of evolution. Yes, evolution has fans! Carroll takes evolution down to the genetic level to answer some of the puzzles of everyday life, including a fascinating chapter on color vision. There’s plenty of math and bio-chemistry in the book, but it’s still accessible for us dilatants.
After the Ice Age: The Return of Life to Glaciated North America (1992), by E. C. Pielou, has more statistics and graphs than a glacier has gravel, but like the glacier, the book inevitably gets to its point. Pielou is worth reading just for her nifty explanation of the Milankovich cycle -- the 105,000-year cycle in the shape of the earth's elliptical orbit, as mediated by the 41,000-year cycle in the tilt of earth's axis (known as the obliquity of the ecliptic) and both mediated by the 21,000-year precession of the equinoxes, the movement of the equinox forward through the months. And that's not even what causes the glacial pre-condition. (Hint) It’s continential drift and the relative position of the continents.
Coming soon: My top five.
Tent Life in Siberia, was written as a journal by George Kennan, who was sent in 1864 to survey Eastern Siberia for a telegraph line and spent two years living with the natives in dark, cold yurts that smelled of smoke, sweat and blubber or camping out under the aurora borealis at 50 below. Like his contemporaries Mark Twain and John Muir, Kennan had prodigious powers of observation and wrote with a very sharp pen. For more, see my October 13 and 15 entries.
Speaking of Muir, he also makes my top-ten list for My First Summer in the Sierra, written shortly after the summer of 1869 from his journal notes. The heart of the book is not Yosemite or the unspoiled Sierras, but Muir’s own palpable love of the land and everything in it, his boundless exuberance and a Zen-like unity with grizzly bears and cumulus clouds.
Audubon, The Making of an American (2004), Pulitzer Prize-winner Richard Rhodes’ 20th book, is a good account of JJ’s painting and naturalizing, if you’re already an Audubon fan, but I found it fascinating for its portrait of America in the early 1800s – the forgotten years of American history. Everyone (it seems) had boomer fever and business consisted of get-rich schemes and an endless attempt to collect on debts at a time when just getting from point A to point B required incredible physical energy and courage. It’s also notable for the descriptions of the nearly untouched wilderness of the Ohio and Mississippi valleys and Audubon’s belated realization that it was all vanishing before his eyes.
The Making of the Fittest (2006), by Sean B. Carroll, is for fans of evolution. Yes, evolution has fans! Carroll takes evolution down to the genetic level to answer some of the puzzles of everyday life, including a fascinating chapter on color vision. There’s plenty of math and bio-chemistry in the book, but it’s still accessible for us dilatants.
After the Ice Age: The Return of Life to Glaciated North America (1992), by E. C. Pielou, has more statistics and graphs than a glacier has gravel, but like the glacier, the book inevitably gets to its point. Pielou is worth reading just for her nifty explanation of the Milankovich cycle -- the 105,000-year cycle in the shape of the earth's elliptical orbit, as mediated by the 41,000-year cycle in the tilt of earth's axis (known as the obliquity of the ecliptic) and both mediated by the 21,000-year precession of the equinoxes, the movement of the equinox forward through the months. And that's not even what causes the glacial pre-condition. (Hint) It’s continential drift and the relative position of the continents.
Coming soon: My top five.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Favorite books of 2007 Part I
Saint Nicholas' Day is nearly upon us, so I guess that means it's time to erect the Christmas tree and think about the books that made an impression in 2007.
This is the first of three posts about the books that were my favorites or most influential or whatever for 2007. They are not necessarily new books; I just happened to read them this year. And they were not necessarily on the Drinking & Reading Society's list.
The first two are books about faith, and they could hardly be more different: What Paul Meant (2006), Garry Wills’ short, scholarly and generous reconstruction of the earliest writer about Christianity, and The End of Faith (2004), Sam Harris’s diatribe against the very idea of religion.
Wills draws upon dozens of scholars to present a strong argument that most of our current understanding of Paul is wrong – starting from the (fictitious?) tale of his conversion on the road to Damascus. Wills points out that Paul would have been angered and confused to hear his movement called Christianity. Unfortunately, I think Wills is better at telling us why what we know is wrong than he is at clearing saying what Paul actually did have to say to the 21st Century.
Harris’s argument starts from the premise that radical Islam is a threat to civilization as we know it, and, come to think of it, so are other radical religions, and come to think of it, all religions. So let’s just dispense with such irrational vestiges of our primitive past. Harris argues well and without quite the heavy dose of anger and vitriol that lace many similar books. But his task is Sisyphian. Religion seems to be as deeply embedded in our DNA as a taste for sugar or alcohol. By sticking to rational argument (although I suppose believers wouldn’t call it rational) he fails to address why religion appeals to us on an emotional level. For that I guess we have to read Franz deWaal and Jane Goodall.
The next two postings will be five books that almost made my list. Then I will get to the five books I would (and have) recommend to my best friends.
This is the first of three posts about the books that were my favorites or most influential or whatever for 2007. They are not necessarily new books; I just happened to read them this year. And they were not necessarily on the Drinking & Reading Society's list.
The first two are books about faith, and they could hardly be more different: What Paul Meant (2006), Garry Wills’ short, scholarly and generous reconstruction of the earliest writer about Christianity, and The End of Faith (2004), Sam Harris’s diatribe against the very idea of religion.
Wills draws upon dozens of scholars to present a strong argument that most of our current understanding of Paul is wrong – starting from the (fictitious?) tale of his conversion on the road to Damascus. Wills points out that Paul would have been angered and confused to hear his movement called Christianity. Unfortunately, I think Wills is better at telling us why what we know is wrong than he is at clearing saying what Paul actually did have to say to the 21st Century.
Harris’s argument starts from the premise that radical Islam is a threat to civilization as we know it, and, come to think of it, so are other radical religions, and come to think of it, all religions. So let’s just dispense with such irrational vestiges of our primitive past. Harris argues well and without quite the heavy dose of anger and vitriol that lace many similar books. But his task is Sisyphian. Religion seems to be as deeply embedded in our DNA as a taste for sugar or alcohol. By sticking to rational argument (although I suppose believers wouldn’t call it rational) he fails to address why religion appeals to us on an emotional level. For that I guess we have to read Franz deWaal and Jane Goodall.
The next two postings will be five books that almost made my list. Then I will get to the five books I would (and have) recommend to my best friends.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)