Killing Pablo (Mark Bowden, 2001)

This book was a birthday gift from KHG. It focuses on a 16-month effort to capture (though the goal turned simply to killing, once they figured out imprisonment was hopeless) drug kingpin Pablo Escobar; the effort succeeded in December 1993. The book also gave lots of background information about Escobar's rise to power in Colombia.

The story simply feels unbelievable - but apparently it all happened.

It seems impossible that one criminal (admittedly with a well-paid, loyal organization) could exert such control over an entire country. Seems he had a pretty simple system in dealing with people - (a) they could do what he wanted and be paid handsomely, or (b) they would be killed. Also seems he left no doubt that he would enforce the system - stunning numbers of murders of judges, police, anybody in the way. Accordingly, huge numbers of folks selected (a). The organizational reach was unbelievable - politicians, judges, police. He had intelligence about almost everything that was going on.

Particularly telling was his negotiated "surrender" leading to "imprisonment" in a luxe facility he built for himself (before eventually escaping by slipping through a cordon of hundreds of soldiers who somehow "didn't see" him). What a deal.

There was a Harrison Ford movie some years ago based on some popular novel where the story line was built around an Escobar figure. I thought it was pretty hyped up. I was wrong, the real-life guy had far more money and influence.

All this is a bit unsettling thinking of the drug violence in Mexico and elsewhere; also the incredible challenge of running honest politics in countries with this kind of heritage. (But that might get me started on U.S. politics.)

But you know what? There is some room for optimism. There were some honest folks that took PE down, and I'm guessing that took courage in quantities most of us couldn't even imagine, and very few are ever called on to show.

Good book.

From Here to Eternity (James Jones, 1951)

Another book that I never would have planned to read. But actually was looking forward to it after The Thin Red Line.

I also wouldn't have thought of the author (James Jones) - as anything special. But the book is just excellent. Not much at all about WWII - instead, Jones writes about the army in Hawaii in the last years building up to 1941.

I have zero direct experience with the Army, especially as it existed in the 1940s. But I'm convinced Jones had a gift for supplying the reader with snippets of understanding how some of this must have felt.

This is why I read.

For example, he writes poignantly about the loneliness and rootlessness of so many soldiers; this perhaps was even stronger in the years following the Depression. Strong scenes of a man (Pruitt) carrying his few things in a couple bags, moving into the bunk area, set up a couple things on the locker - and you've completely moved with all your stuff. And lonely among a room full of soldiers.

I think he also "gets it" in the way he writes about the unique camaraderie that develops in spite of (or probably because of) the shared Army experiences, miserable though so many may be. I liked the part where the soldiers fell into a shared work routine when "digging in" in one of the more serious field exercises as WWII neared. I think Jones liked big chunks of Army life.

He also "gets it" when it comes to writing about music. Pruitt - who is just a great character - is a talented bugler. Something that would seem mundane to me, but Jones insists that those who listen to the buglers multiple times a day can tell the difference. Pruitt leaves the bugle corps for Pruitt-ish reasons, but gets the chance to play Taps one night at the base. What a great scene, as Jones describes what's running through Pruitt and his listeners almost note by note. I really liked where Jones had a soldier step out of a bar during the middle of the song and say to a friend - as if winning a bet - that he knew it was Pruitt. It somewhat reminded me of Proust's efforts to describe music in words - the writers know it's ultimately impossible but make a great run at it.

Pruitt was a strong character; he realized he loved the army despite everything, and recognized he was destined to be a 30-year man. He was a good athlete (boxer); sharpshooter; musical (trumpet); tough, smart, uneducated. But he had developed a code of behavior from growing up in poverty in Kentucky coal mines and years on the lam in the Depression. His code was at cross-purposes with a long Army career. The second major character was Warden, and much of the story revolves around their interconnected story lines.

In fact there were lots of well-developed characters (which is a benefit of a really long book). You can look back at the list of folks - the Malloy, Karen Holmes, Maggio, Andy, Stark, Warden, Bloom, Galovitch, Holmes, Alma, Pete Karalson, and on and on - you felt that you knew them all. There were many scenes where they are talking through their thought processes, very interesting. Also many scenes where they focus on Army diversions such as wine & women.

A terribly sad scene was finding the Re-enlistment Blues on the seat of the car; coupled with Warden checking out Pruitt's belongings and just sitting there for an hour. In fact, the book consistently leaves me feeling something like wistful, though I don't exactly know why.

I've never seen the movie and there's no way it could cover this territory. It's well-reviewed, and hopefully it's good on its own terms.

I also had no idea this book was on The Modern Library's list of top 100 20th century novels (#62).

Paris: The Secret History (Andrew Hussey, 2006)

This book had been well-reviewed, but I was a bit leery because of the title (if a book is being marketed on the basis of "secret," it's probably not very serious). And I would say the book isn't great, but it certainly is extremely helpful in lining up all the things going on in Paris since Roman times. Much worth the time to read it.

This is particularly useful in sorting out all the changes from the Revolution through WW II.

Not to mention terms like the "left bank" - didn't realize older maps often had west to the top. The university history was stronger than I knew.

There was some discussion of Knights Templar, consistent with the discussion in this book.

First cafes (coffee rather than ale or wine) supposedly in the 1660s. Fancy restaurants appearing in late 18th century (including chefs of aristocracy looking for work after the Revolution.) Haute couture as wealthy mimic ex-royalty. Haussmann changing the look of the city; open boulevards, wrought iron railings. All sorts of leading ideas, regular turmoil, etc.

(Skipping some): Revolution, Directory, Bonaparte, Restoration, 1830 (Louis Phillipe - bourgeois king), 1848 (Napoleon III), 1870, Communards, etc. It's odd to think how much happened in such a short space of time; most folks would have lived through multiple stages.