Too often I read a book, and then quickly forget most of it (or all of it, for less memorable works). I'm hoping this site helps me remember at least something of what I read. (Blog commenced July 2006. Earlier posts are taken from book notes.) (Very occasional notes about movies or concerts may also appear here from time to time.)
"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))
I've seen numerous positive references to this book. Including comparisons to "All Quiet on the Western Front" (discussed here), but set in WWII.
I didn't find it all that compelling. One indicator: I don't like to write notes in books; instead, I dog-ear pages with passages I find interesting. I didn't dog-ear any pages in this book.
Murphy did have an unbelievable career in the army, and worked his way through Italy, France and Germany. And the stories are very interesting (especially as I have quite a bit of interest in the Italian campaign due to interest in Cassino, etc.) But too much space was devoted to wise-cracking repartee between folks in his unit.
Also interesting that he started out in extreme poverty - share-cropping background - and was able to thrive in the army and in Hollywood.
This was quite different from Our Man in Havana and The Quiet American. Set mostly in WWII London; protagonist has an affair with wife of an acquaintance; various characters deal with the question of belief in God in a Catholic sort of way; this takes an unexpected turn in the latter part of the book. The private detective's son recovers; the rationalist's facial markings disappear.
I liked. Perhaps should try the movie version(s) (1955, 1999).
I liked this. Entertaining, informative, and a good fit with other things I've been reading recently about this period. The book primarily revolved around several discrete biographies - but the subjects overlapped, and were linked, somewhat, by association with Joseph Banks (in his role as President of the Royal Society - an organization promoting science in Britain).
The bios:
1. Joseph Banks - very interesting story of his travels around the world; especially in the South Pacific; specifically to Tahiti (first arriving there in 1769). JB was great at collecting data, sketches, etc. But his notebooks etc. about native life in Tahiti created quite the stir in England. JB was open-minded about the lifestyle there. And he was spending time before booze, Christianity and venereal disease permanently changed the Tahitian atmosphere. Sufficiently well-thought of to be elected as President of the Royal Society - a position he held for decades.
Contributed to development of viewpoints on man in "state of nature."
2. William Hershel - came over from Hanover due to hard times there; eventually brought over his smallpox-scarred sister (Caroline), who wanted to be a singer. Hershel was an excellent musician and had meaningful gigs in England. Avocation was astronomy - something like John Harrison, he somehow taught himself the techniques for grinding lenses for marvelous telescopes. Unlike Harrison, he was generally supported by the Astronomer Royal (Nevil Maskelyn). (Harrison situation discussed here.) Made his reputation by discovering Uranus - the first "new" planet since ancient times.
Caroline's story was most interesting - she did progress to where she was starting to have performance opportunities as a singer, but she ended up working hand in hand with William on astronomy matters. Eventually gained her own recognition.
All sorts of famous folks visited - Hayden supposedly was inspired in writing the "Creation."
Led to discussions about the infinite number of stars, the likelihood of life on other planets given the huge number, whether Christ could have redeemed all these worlds, etc. A discussion continuing to this day.
3. There was a mostly uninteresting chapter about balloonists.
4. Mungo Park - Scottish - toured Africa. I do love the stories of 19th century explorers there.
5. Humphrey Davy - sold the scientific community (and the public) on the importance of chemistry. Experimented with various gases and how they might be used - if he had stuck with this, might well have pioneered anesthesia - did test, on himself, all sorts of dangerous mixtures and amounts. Hung closely with various poets (Coleridge), especially after a society marriage. Invented the Davy Lamp (trying to make coal mining safer).
6. There were shorter passages on other scientists, including Hershel's son.
Quick and easy read. I didn't realize that determining longitude for sailors was so difficult, nor the attendant dangers. Basically, folks far out at sea were able to find latitude - but were guessing at longitude. Especially on a longer voyage, this could be deadly.
Apparently there were numerous attempts over the years, but no good solution. Reliance on tactics like "dead reckoning" was dicey.
A British ship returning from battle ran aground with great loss of life; with other disasters, the government was prompted to throw some serious money (>$4.5 million in today's dollars) behind finding a solution.
There were two main approaches thought most likely to succeed: a highly accurate clock (permitting the navigator to know the difference in time from London); or extensive star charts.
This book focuses on John Harrison, who worked on a clock. I didn't realize how inaccurate clocks were up to this point (Harrison was working on this in the mid-18th century). He had to figure out a way to keep the clock precise on a pitching ship that faced extremes of temperature and humidity. He seemed to have absolutely no background for the task, but somehow figured it out. The powers-that-be that ran the prize commission favored the star-chart approach, and placed all sorts of roadblocks in Harrison's way. But he succeeded.
I had no idea "Longitude" would overlap with concepts in this book by Umberto Eco - including the race for a solution, the idea of using a wounded dog on ship to bark in sympathy with a dog on land (hopefully not a serious idea), the clocks, etc.
I don't quite know what to make of this book. Reviews were highly favorable; it seemed like a topic I'd enjoy a lot. Probably I'm missing something. I do believe one of the problems is that some of Hadrian's musings sounded like Montaigne essays, only not as compelling.
But still.
The story is quite interesting; the comments from the author about her experiences and goals with this work are fascinating. She was struck by a quote from Gustave Flaubert: "Just when the gods had ceased to be, and the Christ had not yet come, there was a unique moment in history, between Cicero and Marcus Aurelius, when man stood alone."
This led her to a multi-decade effort to write memoirs from Hadrian's perspective.
I don't know much about the various emperors, but Hadrian apparently was one of the greats. He did far more than construct a big wall in Britain. The book goes through his ascent to power, military career, loving Antinuous (in an Achilles-Patroclus sort of way) (with the Antinuous thing resulting in significant follow-through, as described here), dealing with issues in Germany, Egypt, Roman politics, etc. Ruminations on impending death; this was written as a guide of some kind to Marcus Aurelius at the time Hadrian's health was failing.
A minor note: he recognized that stretching Roman interests all the way up into the Afghanistan area would be a mistake . . .
It seems that a movie version is in the works, scheduled for release in Italy this year (2010).
I would highly recommend this book - it was unexpectedly personal, interesting, even moving. Also unexpectedly helpful for me in piecing together some threads of German history.
Stern lived through "five Germanys": a few years as a youth in Weimar Republic; Third Reich; postwar West and East Germany; unified Germany after the Berlin wall came down.
But he also wrote interestingly about pre-World War I Germany. About how political immaturity of the area compared to at least some other nations - Germany didn't come together until 1870 - persisted into 20th century. Germany energy went into Bildung (self-formation and education) (Bildungsroman stories popular to this day) and Wissenschaft (science); if at risk of Bildungsphilister (cultured philistine); at any event, not much opportunity to put energy into politics. ( This resonated with themes in the Goethe and the Holy Madness book, among others.)
Stern's family included a line of eminent physicians. Had converted away from Judaism a couple generations back. Plenty of interesting family connections, including Einstein. The religious conversion, such as it was, didn't help in the Third Reich. The family emigrated to NYC just in time; Stern ended up as a student and long-time professor at Columbia (along with many other roles). Some items:
2. Had a good way of writing about how Jews and liberals were scapegoated for the WWI defeat.
3. Interesting to think about how Jews converted to Christianity in Germany and elsewhere . . . we had touched on this when performing "Elijah" by Felix Mendelssohn. Pressures everywhere . ..
4. His retelling made the Nazi dangers seem more personal - folks losing positions in universities, etc. Hiding books in home library. Watching conversations. Even in the early days before Nazi power had been consolidated.
5. What an interesting, difficult idea - shifting borders - Stern's family was in Breslau -which ended up in Poland (as "Wroclaw") after the war - some pretty hard feelings about this which took awhile to resolve.
6. A big focus was the lingering question about why the Germans stood by in the face of Nazi behavior; Stern referred to National Socialism as a "temptation" - it's hard to imagine the depth of Nazi participation (whether as enthusiasts, "mere collaborators", or whatever) that ran through Germany in the 1930s and 1940s; how possibly to address this in the postwar era? Fritz Stern - an American - as an unlikely but effective voice in framing the issue.
Interesting. But all in all, one of the less interesting books I've read lately. Mostly because I didn't feel like it added much new to similar items previously read. The author is a "senior editor" at Newsweek (International), which I didn't take to be a great sign.
Anyway, it made for a quick read at the gym.
He recounts the stories of Stalin ignoring Hitler's fairly obvious preparations for repudiating the shaky treaty between Germany and Russia; then panicking as the German army rolls through Russia; then Hitler compounding his belated start by hesitating and dividing his troops, rather than smashing straight through to Moscow. Also the stories of Hitler not sending winter clothes for his troops (limited rail capacity was prioritized in favor of ammunition and food stocks). Stalin did stick around in Moscow rather than evacuating, which no doubt helped save the day.
Also interesting to hear again the stories of the Soviet "blocking" units, and the harsh treatment for any Russian soldier that was captured. Wow.
One new concept for me: I hadn't thought about how it came about that Polish soldiers fought at Monte Cassino - what with Poland having disappeared from the map following the deal between Russia and Germany in 1939. Turns out that Stalin gave permission for Poles to join the fighting in the west by escaping through eastern Europe. Stalin didn't want these folks anywhere near the Eastern front (of course).
I liked The Red and the Black so was looking forward to this one. Also because I had for the first time (and quite recently) paid some attention to Napoleon's early military success in Italy in this book - so the setting seemed quite familiar territory. And Zamoya talked about Stendahl and his participation in the retreat from Moscow in this book.
I read that Stendahl is categorized by some as an early "realist". OK.
Numerous strong characters; perhaps the lead is Fabrizio de Dongo - his father is collaborating with the Austrians, but Fabrizio runs off and appears, if ineffectively, at Waterloo. His aunt (Duchessa Sanseverina) is a great character, as is Count Mosca - who works for a despotic prince. Clelia Conti, daughter of the warden at the infamous Farnese Tower, falls for Fabrizio.
Fabrizio - despite lacking any apparent inclination for the job - becomes a leading cleric in Parma. Intrigues with court factions. Etc.
Jacque Barzun had raved about Montaigne; I liked Barzun's work a lot, and decided to take a tour through the essays. 800+ pages, written in late 16th century, looked like something I might scan through at best.
But about 50 pages in, I decided I needed to own this book. So went out and found a lightly-used hardcover version. Worked through Book I (of III, to use Super Bowl numbering) and about half of Book II before pausing. Not that I wasn't interested in going on - there just is too much to absorb.
Not sure how to describe this. Apparently the book was a staple for centuries, sat on bookshelves of most anyone with much education. How neat that folks like Pascal (to pick one from a very, very long list) worked through this, commented on it, praised it? Montaigne covers everyday and not-so-everyday topics in depth, or briefly. His style is conversational; loaded with quotes from classical sources; thoughtful; candid; seems like just the kind of person I would love to sit and talk with. When I went back and read the "introduction" section, it seems that my reaction is not unique (a better description would be "it's commonplace") - readers tend to see themselves in Montaigne's musings, even if different readers bring very different things to the book.
He was writing at a time when religious wars were quite violent in France.
I note a few sections here, but this book just needs to be read.
Of pedantry - includes a good discussion of the age-old distinction between book-learning and wisdom - this discussion never goes away.
I liked his discussion of the value of creating a written record, or diary; and his discussion of keeping written summaries of books he read so that he wouldn't entirely forget them. I'm going to use some of those quotes as a sort of frontispiece on two of my websites.
Much liked his discussion about being a father. Much liked his passages about worrying for the future, finances, etc.
Incredibly modern, incredibly pertinent. One of the few off-key notes is general dismissiveness toward the capabilities of women.
I generally don't write notes in books; I dog-ear pages that I find interesting. Which has led to ridiculous dog-earedness in the case of this volume.
My brother Charlie sent this one along, it was published by St. Martin's Press (where Kate worked).
The subject matter and era are hard to beat for someone like me - I have more coherent memories of 1970s baseball than any other decade (including the current one). Plus we were collecting baseball cards in those days at a pretty fast clip, at least at the beginning of the decade. So this was highly enjoyed.
The author has a chapter for each year in the decade during which he summarizes the divisional races, playoff and World Series outcomes, major events during the year.
The far more interesting part of the book - though unfortunately just four of the chapters - is where he takes off on various themes: those round multi-purpose stadiums; AstroTurf; colorful uniforms; haircuts; stadium promotions (featuring, of course, dime beer night at Cleveland Muni and disco demolition at Comiskey Park).
A couple items of note:
I read that the wire "baskets" on the Wrigley Field fences were installed in 1970 following a bunch of drunk and/or stoned folks storming the field following an April game (supposedly a bunch of antiwar protesters in town). Also a discussion of how seedy the Wrigley area was in those days, much changed now.
Folks were distraught that Dave Kingman struck out 140 times in 1972 (he hit higher totals later in his career). You can tell baseball has changed, our own Diamondbacks feature a third baseman who has the three highest single-season strikeout totals of all time (topping out at 223). And they just gave him a contract extension last off-season.
Crazy times. It's difficult to imagine any current player involved in a wife-swap, pitching a game while on LSD, etc.
As noted here, I found the whole discussion of the British WWI memorial services to be quite compelling. I won't recount the earlier discussion except to note that it is difficult to try to imagine a more solemn, emotional setting than those raw years right after the war.
I ran across a Chicago Symphony version of Elgar's "Nimrod" Enigma (Adagio, Variation #9). (There is a whole story about how these came to be created, discussed here.) I have heard this work in various contexts and always thought it quite wonderful. Now I learn it is played every year at the Cenotaph (the one in London) on Remembrance Sunday - and I'll bet it has gained power over the decades.
Elgar was quite famous, late 19th century and early 20th century, also did "Pomp and Circumstance."
I like this version of Enigma #9 a great deal, perhaps because it is a touch slower than others I've heard. I try to imagine how this felt 90 years ago at the first memorial services at the Cenotaph.
(The entire piece is quite excellent, but I note the buildup with the double bass section that you can feel (and see!) starting at 2:28; then I like how the camera "moves back" at the climactic passages, around 3:30.)
[Re-read for book club per my own selection, 2015. Below is from original read in 2010.]
Another WWI book; these are increasingly compelling as I get a bit more familiar with the subject matter.
I found this particular book particularly powerful, particularly poignant. There's something about the (British) author's style. Systematic; detailed; matter-of-fact; he totally "gets it" that the subject matter is so intrinsically powerful that no hyperbole is required.
In many ways he is taking Remarque's approach in "All Quiet on the Western Front", but with a different story angle. With the same underlying, unspoken message that beyond all the rationalizations and pious memorials - and who can blame anyone for trying to make sense of this in the immediate aftermath - so much of this slaughter was nonsense.
He starts with the stories of three characters. Paul Hub's story is the most interesting - this poor German enlisted in the first days of the war; refused to marry his fiancee because he didn't want to leave a war widow behind; survived all the major hell-holes - amazing in itself (Verdun, the Somme, Ypres, Passchendaele); lost his only two brothers in combat in the first months of the war; relented after four years and was married while on a short leave; was killed when the Allies counterattacked against Germany's "Operation Michael" in spring/summer 1918; and all the while sent a steady stream of loving, personal, informative letters to his parents and fiance. His body was never found. She never remarried.
Second character was Alec Reader - British. Third was an American aviator - but he didn't have any letters to quote and was in the war only a few months, I think he was included here because his mother was involved in the founding of the Gold Star Mothers.
The author quotes extensively from Hub's letters in particular; also Reader's letters; works these into factual descriptions and excerpts from other letter-writers in a manner that really works.
Lots of matter-of-fact descriptions of trench life, shells.
The volume of shelling was just unbelievable. Supposedly 14 million shells at Verdun alone
Difficulties on the German home front - the British blockade made life extremely difficult. This is illuminated in the letters Hub received from home hoping he could track down basics like shoes, string, etc.
While the German army itself was weak with low supplies. When they swept over Allied trenches in Operation Michael - the good news was that they finally had chocolate, food, tobacco; the bad news was they realized their leaders had been constantly lying to them about how the Allies were starving (when the opposite was true). Germans were quickly pushed back.
The author then turned to the idea of remembering the war dead and covered this in detail - remembrances previously had not been done except for senior officer types. There was definitely a political calculus involved. No British bodies had been brought home - too dangerous to morale for stacks of coffins to show up. Literally millions of bodies unidentifiable.
The stories of the remembrances were far more compelling than expected - the Cenotaph in London; the tomb for the unknown warrior in Westminster. The planning - special seating for mothers who lost husband and all sons; mothers who lost all sons; and down the line. The unexpected outpouring of emotion; endless piles of wreaths (dwarfing the piles for the people's princess, it seems)
Hard to imagine the effect on those left behind in the countries with the biggest losses. America was at a definite distance.
And just look at the guys in the bottom photo . . .
I was quite taken with Voltaire's Candide, especially the closing line about "we must cultivate our garden." Maybe it was a good idea to wait until age 54 to read it; that approach looks better and better over time.
In any event, I was vaguely aware that a musical of some kind had been written based on Candide. Today I was listening to a CD (or MP3 collection) from the San Francisco Symphony Choir and heard a song I've heard many times (particularly liking Dawn Upshaw's version) . . . finally made the connection . . . it' s "Make Our Garden Grow".
Leonard Bernstein wrote this. It's beautiful. Sounds like the operetta was a failure at the outset, but was revised and has gained a great deal of popularity.
Lyrics below, along with video version of the last performance Bernstein conducted (London symphony orchestra). I'm convinced Voltaire wouldn't have approved this song (except perhaps for the cow dying (per lyrics below, but not part of this musical presentation - instead we have Pangloss at the end)). But I like it.
CANDIDE You've been a fool And so have I, But come and be my wife. And let us try, Before we die, To make some sense of life. We're neither pure, nor wise, nor good We'll do the best we know. We'll build our house and chop our wood And make our garden grow... And make our garden grow.
CUNEGONDE I thought the world Was sugar cake For so our master said. But, now I'll teach My hands to bake Our loaf of daily bread.
CANDIDE AND CUNEGONDE We're neither pure, nor wise, nor good We'll do the best we know. We'll build our house and chop our wood And make our garden grow... And make our garden grow.
(ensemble enters in gardening gear and a cow walks on)
CANDIDE, CUNEGONDE, MAXIMILLIAN, PAQUETTE, OLD LADY, DR. PANGLOSS Let dreamers dream What worlds they please Those Edens can't be found. The sweetest flowers, The fairest trees Are grown in solid ground.
ENSEMBLE (a cappella) We're neither pure, nor wise, nor good We'll do the best we know. We'll build our house and chop our wood And make our garden grow. And make our garden grow!
I've never known much about Napoleon's early years - was vaguely aware that he wasn't French per se; knew of the expedition to Egypt etc. But mostly had just read that he showed up in Paris as an artillery expert and helped put down some sort of insurrection in the years following the start of the revolution, after which his career took off.
So this book was very interesting - looked in-depth at Napoleon right up to the time of the 1799 coup. Starting with his days in Corsica - he was very focused on events there and learned a ton about politics. (Corsica was being passed between Genoa and France, and considering (or pipe-dreaming about) independence.) Idolized "Paoli," the local leader.
Earlier, he had been lined up for schooling in France thanks to his father's intervention. So he had something of a dual background - initially strongly Corsican, but with enough French background to handle the transition.
The French Revolution, and Napoleon himself, were responsible for so many modern innovations (many quite terrible). First mass conscription. Adroit manipulation of newspapers to sell false imagery. Pillaging of art works from Italy in a manner that would have impressed the Nazis. Creation of puppet states to serve as allies or buffers, or both.
Napoleon definitely had something remarkable in his military leadership - after gaining popularity and credibility with the politicians, he had great success in charge of the Army of Italy.
Infatuated with Josephine (who apparently had plenty of charms that outweighed her bad teeth). Pulled a David and Bethsheba scene when taking up with a soldier's wife in Egypt - sent the poor fellow on a mission where he was almost certain to be captured. British spies knew what was up so, to the surprise and consternation of all the principals, they released him back to Egypt.
Awful scenes in Egypt as Napoleon demonstrated an insensitivity to loss of human life that would be repeated. It was a bad campaign, but skillful propaganda left him pretty much untouched if not aggrandized - notwithstanding his abandoning his army there.
This should be good background reading for The Charterhouse of Parma. A good follow-on to this book.
We had heard lots of good things about the movie "Inception" from various sources, so Patricia and I went to see it this afternoon (with Paul Jr. and Pat Herrera). Leonardo DiCaprio is the lead - he is expert at utilizing technology to invade dreams - seems the technology is used regularly as a corporate espionage tool. But now he is hired by a corporation to implant an idea in the mind of the principal of a competing firm, which we're told is much more difficult to accomplish.
Longish but engaging; I was a little concerned during the first hour but ended up liking the movie. Definitely in the summer blockbuster field with lots of action, chases, shooting, etc. But much more thoughtful. Four layers of dreams are depicted simultaneously toward the climax. I still can't figure out a number of things, especially the way the opening scenes fit with the rest of the movie.
He had a complicated relationship, let's say, with his dead wife. (I read that there is Edith Piaf music on the soundtrack.)
The special effects were really well done, especially the scenes where they were floating in the hallway (a couple dream layers down). And this is the kind of movie - depicting dream worlds - where the effects actually add something to the storyline.
I've seen numerous positive references to this book. Including comparisons to "All Quiet on the Western Front" (discussed here), but set in WWII.
