Collected Miscellany

I enjoyed Shannon Olson’s first book so much that I decided to buy her latest novel myself rather than wait to read it on my next trip to Minnesota (the authors home state and setting of her stories) to visit my in-laws. It was worth it. It is a unique, funny, touching, and thought provoking book about being single and trying to find your place in the world.

It might come as a surprise that I was able to relate to the character in the book. After all, the lead character – a semi-fictionalized Shannon Olson – is a single woman trying to break free from the orbit of her mother while I am a happily married man who hasn’t been that close to his family since junior high (my parents are divorced and live far away). I do share a small connection with Olson in that my wife’s family are from Minnesota and share much of the state’s quirky nature. But while Olson is seeking companionship and meaning as a single person and through therapy, I have been married for almost ten years and think of psychology as just up from astrology. Olson is Catholic, I am firmly Protestant.

Clearly we are not exactly analogous.

Continue reading →

Ronald Reagan is a controversial figure. Like most recent Presidents he seems to be – to use that over-worked phrase – a divisive one. People either love him or they hate him; he either saved the world or darn near destroyed it. I am sure readers of this blog will have little difficulty figuring out which side of the debate I am on. When it comes down to it, count me on the side of Reagan.

So yes, count me as biased on Reagan. I think he was one of the good guys. But my appreciation of the man involves more than just gushing complements and empty nostalgia. I am fascinated by Reagan warts and all. Politicians are flawed human beings just like the rest of us. Reagan made mistakes, had faults, and was wrong about issues. What made Reagan important was his ability to rise above his faults and mistakes to achieve great things; to become a leader. Like all historical figures to some degree, Reagan has become a icon and a figurehead. He is a projection of what people want and need not a living breathing person. But Reagan the saint is less interesting than Reagan the person.

Not surprisingly what prompted these musings is a book: How Ronald Reagan Changed My Life by Peter Robinson. Robinson, a former Reagan speech-writer, has written an interesting and unique book about our 40th President. The book is part biography, part auto-biography, part self-help, and part leadership guide. With the title How Ronald Reagan Changed My Life you are probably thinking that it is simply a hagiography; a love letter written to Robinson’s former employer. And in some ways it is. But what makes it interesting is that Robinson relates how Reagan impacted his life personally and how the qualities that the young speech-writer admired played a crucial role in Reagan’s success.

Continue reading →

I often find it is interesting and instructive to study an issue by looking at the grey areas; the borderline between out right rejection and actual belief. I especially find this to be the case when discussing belief in God. Doubt is often the stimulus for faith. I enjoy reading books, fiction and non, that deal with faith, divinity, or the supernatural in interesting ways. So it was not unusual for me to stumble on to the web site Killing the Buddha, The site’s manifesto offers this explanation:

Killing the Buddha is a religion magazine for people made anxious by churches, people embarrassed to be caught in the “spirituality” section of a bookstore, people both hostile and drawn to talk of God. It is for people who somehow want to be religious, who want to know what it means to know the divine, but for good reasons are not and do not. If the religious have come to own religious discourse it is because they alone have had places where religious language could be spoken and understood. Now there is a forum for the supposedly non-religious to think and talk about what religion is, is not and might be. Killing the Buddha is it.

This struck me as a worthwhile, and potentially interesting, project and I have often clicked over to see what they were up to. More recently, I was reminded of the site and decided to pick up the book of the same name.

Continue reading →

I am feeling a bit uninspired of late but I wanted to put down a few words about the books I have been reading (it wouldn’t be much of a blog if I never post now would it?). Thanks to my recent bout with bronchitis I was able to finish the Emily Bronte classic Wuthering Heights. Below a few thoughts:

– I have to admit up front this is not really my type of work. I am general a tight plot or interesting perspective type reader. Long meandering family sagas are not my usual choice. To be fair, however, the book was a rather amazing work of imagination. To create the world of Wuthering Heights and to populate it with such large characters is no mean feat. I found it rather easy to read but it didn’t really capture my attention and pull me along.

– I also was put off by the constant cruelty and over-reaction. I kept thinking what is wrong with these people? Is there something in the water up on the moors? I am not sure why anyone would find Heathcliff attractive. Sure I can see why his undying love for Catherine might be romantic in some ways but after he goes off the deep end doesn’t his cruelty and malice negate his supposed love? Perhaps I lack the imagination to really see the characters for what they were.

– I did sympathise with Hareton some. The poor guy wasn’t really given a chance by anyone but forced to live a cold hard life full of fear and violence. I was happy that the younger Catherine was able to break through her selfish melancholy and reach out to him and that he could respond in kind. A little balanced love for a change!

– The narrator, Nelly Dean, was also a well written character. She seemed at times the only sane one in the story. Her voice as a narrator seemed real and also kept the tension (such that it was) going.

– I have no insightful literary comments I am afraid. It wasn’t the worst book I have read (heck I couldn’t even finish A House for Mr. Biswas!) and it wasn’t the greatest either. But hey, at least I know what it is about.

Sorry about the lack of posting but I have been down with a bug for the last week. I have been reading but just don’t have the energy to post reviews or read much online. I hope to be back soon.

Interesting book review in the most recent New Republic. Devils in America by Harvey Klehr reveals just how difficult it seems for historians to write balanced and informed books about one of America’s most controversial figures: Joseph McCarthy.

Klehr, a historian and co-author of In Denial: Historians, Communism, & Espionage, is reviewing Reds: McCarthyism in Twentieth-Century America by Ted Morgan. What Klehr finds is that Morgan does a credible job of balancing the real threat of communism and McCarthy’s bullying and lies but undermines his argument by over-doing the details and ending with an out of place rant.

Continue reading →