The Emperor of Lies (Steve Sem-Sandberg, 2011)

This book is very unusual, and (I think) very valuable.  Over the course of 600+ pages, it made me really uncomfortable quite regularly.  Presumably that was one of the author's goals.

As to Holocaust literature - I'm slowly getting a little more perspective on this.  Reading this book helped me understand that for many years following WWII, the focus was kept only on the nations (as a whole) that were victimized by the Nazis - very little attention was allowed to the idea that the Jews were a special target - instead, they were lumped in with the rest of the population.  This changed in the 1960s - one catalyst was the 1962 Eichmann trial - one of the first times the special (mis)treatment of Jews was highlighted.  Over time following this, things changed.  The camps became memorials, the politicians starting apologizing, movies were made, books were written, museums pop up all over the world.  One profane comic in 2012 is saying, among other things, that "the Holocaust of course must not be forgotten, but that doesn't mean we are required to talk about it 24/7."

So is there too much attention, and am I personally reading too much about this?  Who knows - the circumstances are way beyond compelling.  That makes for great story lines, but also makes them perhaps less applicable to the more normal circumstances we customarily face.

This book is a novel, but based on an unusual place - the Polish city of Lodz (just a bit southwest of Warsaw) - with what became the second-largest ghetto.  Something unusual is that the Jewish administration maintained The Ghetto Chronicle - and may other written records survived.  So the novelist can piece together a story of life in Lodz during the many years (February 1940 through the end of 1944) under Nazi domination.  And include characters as to whom there was a wealth of information.

View Larger Map
And it's thoroughly, thoroughly depressing.  The "Emperor" is a Jewish businessman who became an authoritarian figure over the ghetto (though always under the thumb of the local Nazi administration).  The "Emperor" believed that cooperating with the Nazis was the key to survival - primarily through everyone working hard at factories.  He talked like a politician.   Collaboration.  Jewish-operated factories making parts for the Luftwaffe, uniforms for the Wehrmacht.  How strange it must have been!  But survival comes first.

Power corrupted even in this odd little world - the Emperor could indulge his unsavory habits and patronize his family, friends and favorites; payola and bribes for many in power while incredible tales of heroism by others.  The litany of awful decisions in ghetto circumstances - how much food, who gets deported, what to do with those that can't work.  Struggling to keep jobs and avoid getting transported, while always cold and hungry.  Clandestine radios.  Terrible scenes where families are split up.  Awful results for those transported out of the ghetto (which even the ghetto dwellers couldn't deny after awhile.)

The cover photo is great - the Nazis commissioned some photographer to take photos in the Lodz ghetto, equipped him with color film.  I need to track down more of the photos, I'm hoping they're sitting online somewhere.

Not an easy read.  Just amazing.

The Leopard (Giuseppe di Lampedusa, 1958 (posthumous))

I much liked this, though I'm still considering why it worked so well.  It's very unusual.

For one thing, the author is remarkably economical with words; the book is relatively short; at one level the author can't create the kind of connection with the characters that a Tolstoy can accomplish over many more pages; yet he pulls it off, and the book really works.  The author truly is quite marvelous using words, it is a delight to read the book just on that level.

Perhaps my sense of connection to this work is related to the way the story line fits with other things I've been reading (though I have no doubt the story line also would stand perfectly well on its own).  The story primarily is set in 1860s Sicily - a noble family experiences changes wrought by the Risorgimento (crystallizing around Garibaldi's arrival in Sicily).  The Prince (Fabrizio) of the House of Salina (symbol = the leopard) - approaching 50 years in age when we meet him - is the central character.  His nephew (Tancredi) appears to be nearing marriage with his daughter (Concetta) (which I guess was ok at the time), then meets the uncommonly beautiful commoner, Angelica (daughter of the nouveau riche Mayor).  Father Pirrone - confessor to the Salinas - makes a trip back to his home village and experiences a marriage setup similar to that affecting the house of Salina.  Interesting speeches by the Prince about the character of the Sicilians.  Death of the Prince - and the passing of an era in many senses.  Concetta and her sisters with the relics.  Sicily itself - the importance of geography in shaping the people.

Perhaps above all - a really effective way of communicating the oft-neglected but fundamental idea:  the transience of so many things on which we burn so much energy.

I'm constantly struck with how reading is self-reinforcing - each book makes other books far more interesting.  For example: This book was helpful in understanding The Leopard - good discussions of the gulf that still exists between northern and southern Italy (certainly including Sicily).  This book was helpful regarding the Risorgimento and the various revolutionary movements following the French Revolution (including 1848 events); with this book, it communicated the importance and incredible popularity of Garibaldi (if he was politically marginalized).  This book was interesting in terms of 19th century Italian politics - how the French and Austrians intrigued in the country (and not just in the north).  This and this drive home the Prince's comments about the history of Sicilian invaders, going back to classical times.

Well-known quote:  "If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change." (spoken by Tancredi).

Reading Chekhov: A Critical Journey (Janet Malcolm, 2001)

I had seen a couple favorable reviews on this book, plus I much enjoyed this compilation of Chekhov short stories (though the book actually included actually fairly long stories by what I now understand to be his standard).

I found this interesting, but not terribly so.  Probably because I haven't read enough Chekhov.  Part of it was the style - the author was traveling around Russia looking at Chekhov sites, and linking occurrences to stories or themes in Chekhov stories - some of this seemed strained.

Of interest to me:

1.  Chekhov really had Tolstoy - older, more established, and so definite about so many things (if unreasonably so) - up on a pedestal.

2.  Chekhov as a master of distilling the story to the bare minimum.  Quite modern - didn't like neat resolutions.

3.  Chekhov as closely tied to his family; very loyal; grew up very quickly and pretty much led the family - the father was a religious fanatic of some sort.  Chekhov became a doctor but didn't practice a lot; did some work with indigent.

4.  The famous trip to Sakhalin - penal colony - and a report on the conditions there.  I hadn't realized he traveled cross-country (assumed it was via boat both directions, not just on the return) - and this was before the Trans-Siberian Railroad existed - wow.

5.  I liked the discussion of "The Steppe" - which was my favorite among the stories in the compilation I read.

6.  Chekhov not a fan of Dostoevsky - didn't like the "psychological" stuff.  But similar to Harold Bloom, this author traces Dostoevsky influences in Chekhov stories.

I definitely will read more of Chekhov's stories.

Reappraisals - Reflections on the Forgotten Twentieth Century (Tony Judt, 2008)

I signed out this book solely because I thought Judt did such a fantastic job with Postwar, summarized here.  This isn't a book per se, it's a compilation of various articles that he published in various periodicals between 1996 and 2004.  Like Postwar, this is full of interesting ideas - and focused on recent history, an area I have read so little about (unfortunately).

Highly recommended. 

(It would be interesting to see what Judt has to say in 2012 as the European welfare state breaks down - at the time these pieces were written, he was pretty adamant about the success of the European project, how it is a superior model to the U.S., etc.)

Things I noted:

1.  He thinks America is the only advanced country that glorifies the military; notes how we tend to put down the Euros for their de-emphasis on military.  Points out that the contrasting attitudes probably are based mostly on recent histories - Europe constantly devastated, America triumphant and un-invaded.

2.  Why Marxism was attractive to so many, and why it wasn't irrational for so many to find it attractive.  But he makes no apologies for those who hung on after its shortcomings were obvious (Sartre, for example).   How intellectuals tried to prop up Marx by going to his early writings - Louis Althusser - who wrote a book I had in a 1970s "Marxism" class about young Lenin - Judt explains why this was pretty ridiculous.

3.  Why it is a mistake to view "terrorism" as a post-Cold War phenomenon; the huge policy error of converting this to a state of world-wide war with radical Islam.

4.  He profiles various writers/intellectuals of the 20th century - most of who were just names to me until going through these articles.  (OK, they're not much more than just names at this point to me anyway.)  Hannah Arendt.  Albert Camus.

5.  As in Postwar, he goes through analyses of various countries.  France - preserving its history.  Romania - Bucharest closer to Istanbul than any central European capital. 

6. Interesting discussion of how the six-day war (1967) backfired on Israel in so many ways.  A small underdog with European Jews and a European mindset (kibbutzim); now a military power with a whole new set of issues.

7.  Interesting commentary on Nixon and Kissinger - how the two of them went off on their own, excluded State, etc.   

The Brothers Karamazov (Fyodor Dostoyevsky, 1880)

Another deservedly famous Dostoyevsky novel.  (Though I think I liked both Crime and Punishment and The Idiot even better.)  I had read this about 15 years ago but wanted to come back to it after having had the opportunity to do more reading in the meantime.  Didn't remember much except the initial scene when papa Karamazov buffoons it up at the monastery visiting the elder (Zosima).

So many strong characters:

- Fyodor - lecherous father
- Alyosha - the hero - younger brother - reminds me of the Idiot (Myshkin) in some ways.
- Dmitri - older brother - passionate; generous (always with money received from others)
- Ivan - middle brother - intellectual (rationalist, nihilist); anxious to rise above Christian, run-of-the-mill values
- Smerdyakov - Fyodor's illegitimate son (it is rumored); thinks he has a special relationship with Ivan; too clever by half
- Katya - bowed down to Dmitri
- Grushenka - Dmitri (and Fyodor) fall for her "curves", Dmitri ending up very much in love
- Madame Kohvalov (talky) and daughter (Lise - nice scene professing her soon-to-be-withdrawn betothal with Alyosha)
- Ilusha and his father (wisp of tow); Krossotkin
- Father Zosima

The "Grand Inquisitor" - Ivan's poem about Jesus returning to earth and being imprisoned by a Spanish Jesuit - this is often presented as a separate work. 

Toward the end of the novel, there is a lengthy portrayal of Dmitri's trial.  I didn't think it added much to the story.