"To compensate a little for the treachery and weakness of my memory, so extreme that it has happened to me more than once to pick up again, as recent and unknown to me, books which I had read carefully a few years before . . . I have adopted the habit for some time now of adding at the end of each book . . . the time I finished reading it and the judgment I have derived of it as a whole, so that this may represent to me at least the sense and general idea I had conceived of the author in reading it." (Montaigne, Book II, Essay 10 (publ. 1580))

Thursday, August 30, 2012

The Art of the Sale - Learning from the Masters About the Business of Life (Philip Delves Broughton, 2012)

I have a pretty firm rule against reading business books.  I broke it for this book.  The rule is reinstated.

I don't know exactly why business books are so useless; I do think this author had some useful insights about  it.

I was willing to give this one a chance because it's about sales - crucial to everyone in business, not to mention life-in-general.  But the author just went around interviewing a variety of superstar salespersons.  That's not helpful.

There were some funny passages about Apple's approach - how they deliberately set out to make customers into evangelists.  And clearly they have figured out how to do this - lots of unpaid Apple promoters out there.  "Once part of Apple's tribe, devotees tend to exhibit the zeal of converts, displaying a sense of superiority and a willingness to sing Apple's praises to the heathen.  The tribe aren't just using a different smartphone or tablet, they are living a better life."  "Its selling methods successfully erode its customers' will to do the very thing that as a company it claims to do best:  think different."

Not recommended.

Thursday, August 23, 2012

God and Gold - Britain, America, and the Making of the Modern World (Walter Russell Mead, 2007)


The title of the book seems to be a curious choice - wouldn't the first four nouns (God, Gold, Britain, America) be considered four of the most un-cool words in a modernist vocabulary?  Doesn't the title suggest the book will be just another triumphalist exercise by some out-of-fashion West-centric writer?

I was willing to give it a try because I'm familiar with the author via his blog - something I've added to my daily reading list (a list that I try to guard jealously) as of a couple months ago.  I don't know exactly where the author fits on the ideological spectrum, which I take to be a good sign.

In any event:  this book was full of good ideas - very much worthwhile - provides a valuable historical framework for thinking about the modern world.  To be sure, he describes the ascendancy of what he calls the maritime states, but (at least to this citizen of the current leading maritime state) it's done in the manner of reporting historical trends with eyes wide open to the shortcomings as well as achievements.

The most interesting idea (to me at least - see the list below, there are plenty of others) was the notion that societies tend to have three primary drivers, and that successful societies (exhibit A being Britain) find a way to balance them.  The three drivers are Reason, Revelation and Tradition.  I think this is important and useful.  The triad appears in various societies in different ways.  Tradition - countries like Spain and France went on for many centuries with state-institutional Church dominating life.  Proponents are religious, but power players.  Also includes populist nationalism.  Revelation - religious folks who want to get back to the religion's true roots - opposing the traditional power structure - Lutherans, Puritans, evangelical Christians, Pentecostals, Wahhabi in Saudi Arabia, Al-Quaeda, etc.  We can see what happens in states where those folks get too much power.  Reason - central planners; folks who reject religion and believe society can function by experts; "Great Society" where all goes well via government fiat - this, too, has been proven inadequate.  England - during the years it was the predominant maritime state - found a way to balance these three elements.  Kept a monarchy in place but took away its power.  Church of England - practical, didn't claim a monopoly on religious truth.  Etc.

Other ideas:

1.  Religion has mattered a great deal to peoples all over the world for millenia.  To minimze or ignore this in interpreting history or looking to the future is a mistake - something we fall into because so many folks in the West, especially in the punditocracy, are (or profess to be) beyond it in the 21st century.  Even non-religious folks often think in religious terms, if unwittingly.

2.  The Dutch, English and Americans, in that order, have been the leading players he in what he calls the "maritime system".  That it wasn't set in stone that this progression would occur, esp in the early going for Dutch and English.  (In fact, the era of Dutch predominance was pretty short.)

3.  Land-based empires are forced to deal with quarrelsome neighbors, get caught up in frightful fights over terrain not crucial to the big picture.  This hurt the Netherlands (based in mainland Europe).  Obvious examples would include Russia and Germany wrecking each other over Poland, Ukraine, etc.; France and Germany wrecking each other over Alsace, Lorraine, etc.  England and in turn the US able to play the global whole - far more effective.

4.  Looks to the Glorious Revolution (1688) as the key event for England.  William of Orange arrives from Netherlands.  Protestants hold sway thereafter notwithstanding continuing struggles to restore Stuarts or whoever (often financed from abroad in an effort to destabilize England).

5.  Interesting discussion about national debt - how England reached its heights while constantly incurring debt beyond what was dreamed to be sustainable.

6.  One of the fundamental sources of conflict:  capitalism isn't for everybody (certainly not at first blush); yet nations are inevitably left behind if they don't play the game.  Forced into something they may not want, resentful of those on top of the system that does the forcing.

7.  Wars of religion - primarily a phenomenon among the three Abrahamic religions (Jews, Muslims, Christians).  Not surprisingly, conflict results when you claim that only your religion is based on revealed truth - doesn't leave much room for compromise!

8.  Secular modernism as a fourth major religion.  Yes, it does function as such.

9.  I've always felt that Adam Smith was right because the concept of "original sin" is right (however one wishes to phrase it).  Individuals are flawed, if for no other reason than we cannot possibly avoid over-emphasizing our own importance.  And we act accordingly.

10.  Therefore Plato's "benevolent dictator" cannot exist - in any form.  We are better off with decentralized power and decision-making - the "invisible hand" may not be infallible but the idea is far more than a pretty phrase.  And it certainly operates far better than central planning, as has been demonstrated over and over.

11.  "The greatest wealth of countries like the United States and Great Britain is not their mineral deposits or their agricultural land.  It is not the money that they have in the bank.  It is the mentality and habits of the nation at large.  These are peoples accustomed to governing themselves, accustomed to promoting enterprise, ready to join in spontaneous and private activities of all kinds - but also accustomed to an ordered liberty whose roots now are many centuries old.  This human and social capital is by far the most valuable to have - and by far the hardest to get."

12.  #11 is critically important.  Compare how most other countries function.  Yet it is not an eternal, immutable situation.  The modern welfare state - yes, including Obama - destroys this ethos - a straightforward example of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.


Sunday, August 19, 2012

The Master and Margarita (Mikhail Bulgakov, written in 1930s, published 1966-67)

Similar to this novel in two ways:  translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky; gift from PJr and Nedda (this was for Father's Day).

The devil and his devilishly delightful retinue visit Moscow in Stalin-era 1930s.  The novel incorporates two intertwined stories (i) the devil's doings in Moscow; and (ii) a version of the Pontius Pilate story that is readily recognizable, but different from the version in the gospels.

The book was way too hot to be printed in the author's lifetime - he died in 1940, his wife (Margarita supposedly based on her) held together the manuscript and had it printed in the west in the 1960s.  After samizdat versions had circulated (reminded me of descriptions of circulated literature in this book).  So it had a publishing history not unlike works such as this one and or this one; just remarkable to think what life was like for these writers in Soviet-era Russia.  Esp. in 1930s.  Too hot to be printed because of the spot-on descriptions of issues under the Soviet system

Just delightful, though I now need to learn more about what Bulgakov was doing - pretty sure I missed lots of what was going on.  His use of language, literary allusions, writing style - all great (at least insofar as we can tell through lens of translation).  Much enjoyed reading the entire book.  Unexpectedly found the Pilate portions every bit as compelling, if not moreso, than the main tale.

"The Master" was writing a Pilate novel as part of the main plot - his work is rejected by the literary bureaucrats.  Faithful Margarita - willing to go a long way to support the Master.  Various officials at The Variety - bad consequences from the black magic seance.  Foreign currency; foreign currency store (foreigners only!).  The cat (Behemoth) - always entertaining, loves the primus stove (a cooking device mentioned often in this book).  Koroviev; Azazello.  It all started with Ivan and Berlioz showing off their atheist bonafides to Woland - and Berlioz being unceremoniously beheaded shortly thereafter in an unrelated, I think, incident.

Pilate and his secret police force; his subtle way of approaching the Judas Iscariot issue; KGB (or its predecessor) would have been proud.

Numerous echos of this book, naturally enough - very helpful to have read it.  (At the gym, I'm currently in the middle of Thomas Mann's Dr. Faustus, which will fit in quite nicely with all this.)

Sunday, August 12, 2012

LACMA (August 5, 2012)

As mentioned in this post, EPG took us to LA County Museum of Art on Sunday, August 5.

After the visit, we were discussing LACMA in comparison to the Getty (where EPG took us last year).  Both are wonderful places, to be sure.  The Getty grounds are more impressive, for whatever that's worth.  We probably prefer Getty, would gladly revisit both.

I thought the German expressionism - if that's the right term, I don't really know - was the most interesting exhibit of our 8/5/12 visit.  Really ties into WWI and inter-war stuff I've been reading.  How a wrecked country looked for some answers, or something - they faced a level of change that is unimaginable.

Click any image to enlarge all.  (And how about this look at LACMA?)

First item - caption immediately beneath it - self-explanatory.  Done by some poor guy that lived through the eastern front.



Second item - communist party - a serious contender for influence in Germany during these days (and elsewhere in the world, including the US).  Rosa Luxemburg.  Description beneath is useful.




Third item - the "Orator" - 1920 - eerie precursor to Hitler, one might say in hindsight - desperate people prone to falling for someone who appears to lead them out of the abyss.




Fourth item - just read the below description - this is detail from a large work - since it's from the French Revolution, it was interesting to me.



Item 5 - this looked great in the gallery, especially the sand.



Item 6 - they had some pop/folk contemporary work from Iran.  We were leaving so I didn't get a chance to figure out what this is supposed to be


And then there's the previously posted "Madonna with Child, Times Two".  Best in show.


Thursday, August 09, 2012

The Lady in Gold - The Extraordinary Tale of Gustav Klimt's Masterpiece (Anne-Marie O'Connor, 2012)

Far more interesting than anticipated.  I'm sure it helped that I've recently read quite a bit more about Austria and this historical period (most recently here and here).  This had strands of Austria in twilight of Habsburg empire, incorporation of Jews into the empire, all of the famous musicians, scientists, thinkers in Vienna c. 1900, Nazi looting of war art, concentration camps, Anschluss, etc.  Not to mention the main story lines about Klimt's art and the postwar efforts to reunite lost art works with owners or heirs.

The far-more-famous portrait (version 1)
Klimt apparently quite the personality - not of noble birth, but an obvious artistic talent that received major commissions.  He and others decided they needed to be "free" of the usual bourgeois restraints - no doubt some artistic considerations here, but some of this is just uninteresting pushing of boundaries for its own sake.    Klimt got into doing nudes; quite a bit apparently pornographic more than anything else; loved having relationships with his female models (reportedly had 14 children by them).

But Klimt was an undeniable talent.  Jews - generally accepted and successful in Viennese society notwithstanding some strong anti-Semitic strains - were more willing to sponsor non-mainstream artists like Klimt.  He did a pricey portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer.  Then a second portrait years later - more realistic, far less attractive.  The author was more than willing to endlessly speculate whether Klimt had an affair with Bloch-Bauer - whatever, no one knows, who cares.  That got tiresome.

The circles these folks ran in - Gustav and Alma Mahler.  Sigmund Freud.  Arnold Schoenberg.

Hitler as making a serious attempt at becoming an artist in Vienna.  Walking the streets there at the same time as all these other folks!  Perhaps contributing to his view of the relationships of Jews and "degenerate" artists.  (Not surprisingly, the Nazis did not care for most of Klimt's work - though they did recognize the significance of Adele's portrait #1.  Couldn't display it as originally titled - a Jewess! - so just gave it a neutral name (The Lady in Gold, if I recall correctly).

#2 - more realistic.
I hadn't realized that the Ringstrasse was made possible by tearing down the old city walls (useful in repelling Turks all the way up to 1683).

The stories about Nazi looting and other depredations were effective in this book - partly because the characters and families had been introduced.  Interesting escape stories; generally bad outcomes for Jews who waited too long.  The same effect held with the moral ambiguities facing Austrians in the face of a Nazi tide - how does one react?  Wow.

As discussed in Tony Judt's work - how Austria, perhaps more than anywhere else, tried to position itself after the war as Hitler's "first victim" - deliberate amnesia.  That seems pretty understandable, also - ugh - but somehow life needed to go on.  Later generations were more willing to look into the unpleasant facts.  Kurt Waldheim, for example.

And real ambiguity about how to handle stolen artworks - should they remain on exhibition in Austria?  Or returned to heirs, somewhat distant, for resale into the private market where they end up who knows where?

Remodeling the Belvedere (built for Eugene of Savoy!) as a back-up bunker for Hitler.  Stolen artworks hidden there.

Los Angeles expats - Bertolt Brecht, Thomas Mann, Alma Mahler, Schoenberg, Billy Wilder.

Adele's portrait #1 as the center of the controversy - partly because an aging heir (sympathetic figure) residing in LA found a lawyer who pushed the case.  And to what a result!  Not resolved until around 2006.  An Estee Lauder heir as buyer.  Interesting story (with picture of the primary plaintiff (Maria)) about the purchase is here.

Wednesday, August 01, 2012

Light in August (William Faulkner, 1932)

I have avoided Faulkner, but this book makes me reconsider.

What do blacks think of works like this?  A period piece (from 1932)?  Joe Christmas's alleged Negro blood is not presented very favorably (or am I projecting that somehow).  The description of the "negro" part of town.  Etc.

Also seems like there are lots of characters who were "Christian" in pretty psycho sort of way.

Maybe all this was a staple of the South in this era?  In one way the story/setting reminded me of this book:  a world really far away, I couldn't even imagine what that was like.

Main story lines are interconnected:

Lena Grove is pregnant and looking for the father - Lucas Burch (who is on the run under the name Joe Brown).  Lena gets to the right town and runs into Byron Bunch, who helps her get settled and get in touch with Burch/Brown (while falling in love with her himself).  (I know there are lots of Christianity allusions in this book though typically I miss stuff like that; but even I could pick up Lena evoking the unwed Mary with child, Bunch evoking the Joseph figure here.)

The town's ex-preacher is Gail Hightower - his grandfather was killed in the Civil War (though not gloriously).  Hightower keeps having visions of Civil War cavalry charges; this obsession (and a let's say unsatisfactory relationship with his wife) is why he is "ex" preacher.  Bunch consults with him, etc.

Joe Christmas is an orphan adopted by conservative parents - doesn't conform with the father's wishes, has uniformly negative relationships with women, starts selling alcohol illegally and uses Burch/Brown as a go-fer in the business.  Stays in an old negro cabin on a property owned by a wealthy northern woman who was ostracized by the town because she supported progress for blacks.  They have a relationship.  The woman gets murdered - not clear which of two suspects did it, however.

Burch/Brown's claim that Christmas had negro blood served him in good stead.  The sheriff captures Christmas eventually and he is visited by his grandparents (who he's never seen).

Not sure what to make of this, but I liked it.