"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))

Monday, April 28, 2014

King Lear (William Shakespeare, between 1603 and 1606 (with later revisions))


My "Shakespeare project" continues.  (And I continue to think it's well worth the little time that it requires.)

King Lear = famous tragedy.  Universally admired.  But I had a problem:  the tragic side of this is just too tragic for my taste.

King Lear has three daughters - bequeaths his kingdom to the older two (Goneril and Regan), cutting out the much-beloved younger sister (Cordelia) because she wouldn't play along with whatever game he dreamt up at bequeathing-time.  (But the King of France marries her nonetheless.)

Goneril and Regan are the grasping type; they quickly tire of hosting the ex-king and his knights (which was part of the bequeathing-deal).  Loyal Duke of Kent and Duke of Gloucester (with his loyal son Edgar and disloyal bastard Edmund).  Invasion from France.  Edmund successfully flirtatious with both Goneril and Regan, which was a little weird.  Kent and Edgar are in disguise for big chunks of the play.

Cordelia loyal.  Lear descends into madness.  Quite a few folks die.

Thursday, April 24, 2014

Days of God - The Revolution in Iran and Its Consequences (James Buchan, 2012)

Gift from PJr and Nedda.

Author focuses on the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran.  With a great deal of very useful background about 20th century events in Iran that led up to 1979.

A good reminder of the special kind of power that religious leaders (whether sincere or using religion as an avenue to power) hold over the faithful (or gullible, or whatever descriptor you prefer).  In many ways the success of Khomeini et al reminded me of modern U.S. politics - where belief systems seem to trump quaint concepts like listening carefully to those with whom you disagree, exploring alternative viewpoints, etc.  (Or as commencement season warms up:  the now-quaint idea of permitting speakers at the graduation ceremony who may not have 100% litmus test scores on points of college orthodoxy.) (Sigh.)  Where traditional religion loses its hold, it seems that other religious-like belief systems quickly step in.  (Which in turn reminds me of the Bolsheviks as I just finished reading a biography focused on ex-seminarian Josef Stalin's early adventures.)

Be that as it may - the book itself was really quite good, I ended up constantly dog-earing pages.  Definitely would recommend it.

Some thoughts:

1.  For all Persia's historical glories, I hadn't realized how thoroughly backward the country had become as 19th century turns into 20th.

2.  Pahlavis did not have a long pedigree; oft-criticized; but it seems like they did accomplish quite a bit through several incredibly challenging decades in the 20th century.  Reza Pahlavi - Iranian Cossack background!

3.  Challenges with new-found oil reserves, initially cutting bad deals with the Brits.  Oil wealth thus was not a factor until much later than I had realized.

4.  No active modern tradition of a centralized state - the bazaars were incredibly important.  And funded the Iranian clergy, which in turn became even more powerful.

5.  Useful explanation of Khomeini's rise, and why he turned on the U.S. as Iran's worst enemy - when the U.S. had really been a bit player compared to esp. Britain.  (The author says that the excuse was what seemed like a fairly insignificant set of rules about diplomatic privileges and immunities for U.S. citizens in Iran.)

6.  Petrodollars started gushing due to better deals with Brits et al, higher worldwide petro use, then the 1973 embargo.  Incredible growth; incredible spending (much on military); but as always in these situations - sustainable economy cannot be bought.  Not likely the necessary institutions will take root now.

7.  Stories of the Shah's departure, Khomeini's installation, the hostage crisis, the war with Iraq.

What a mess . . .

Friday, April 18, 2014

The Moon is Down (John Steinbeck, 1942)

This was quite unusual, and I didn't even know anything like it existed.  Steinbeck, of all people, as government propagandist?  CPG (Steinbeck fan) recommended.  It's a short book, and the plot involves a takeover of a northern European country by an aggressive neighboring power.  Pretty clearly:  Norway and Germany.  The locals fight back, surprisingly effectively.

As I read it, I was pulled up regularly by the notion that it wasn't the great writing I normally associate with Steinbeck - somewhat cheapened by what seemed like obvious propaganda dimensions.  (Also:  we've since learned that a large percentage of the population in the occupied countries were all too happy to collaborate with the occupiers - even if they all claimed to be resistance or partisan heroes after the war.  So that makes it a little tougher to accept the images of heroic resistance that suffuse this book.  (And I say this without the slightest negative judgment on anyone in those circumstances, I'm mostly grateful I never had to face those choices.))

And who would ever have thought of Steinbeck as a propagandist in the first place?  Even further:  he had no special knowledge of Europe or the war or the conditions in the occupied countries.  Yet it is clear that somehow this book hit a responsive chord across Europe.  It was translated into many languages; outlawed by the Reich; smuggled regularly; etc.  I don't know if these things can be predicted or planned, but Steinbeck somehow "got it" in terms of communicating effectively with Europeans in occupied countries, in a way that the professionals at this sort of thing simply didn't.

So that's pretty cool, even if the book will be remembered as effective propaganda rather than a grand literary achievement.

Which means it met the author's goal.