Saturday, November 24, 2018

This is Katherine so don't be confused.  Now and then I hijack Jim's place here and write something.  This is one of those days.

I've polished off another bunch of books and thought I'd do some quick reviews while I can still remember the books.  Nothing inspirational today.

1.  Thinking Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, Non-fiction. The first half of the book covers the psychology of System 1 (intuitive and speedy) and System 2 (analytical and lazy). The last part of the book connects to economics.  People prefer to avoid losses more than they seek gains.  Kahneman's work suggests people are reasonable, but not rational because their thinking lacks consistency (go figure). Libertarians vote based on the idea that we all will behave reasonably and that economic "nudges" in policy will drive rational thought. The book uses things like seat belt laws and social security as examples of policy increasing rational thought.  I learned some things, but the second half about economics was tedious for me. There's a lot of conservative rationalization in how the author argues for policy to limit safety nets for struggling folks. The writer is a prize-winning economist so I'm thinking if conservative economics are your thing, go for it.  It's several years old so I bet you can find it on sale. One more note, this book is in stark contrast to the psychology book I'm reading now (Why Buddhism is True) which says people are driven by evolutionary needs and we prefer pleasure because it is so fleeting.  Two Stars.

2.  The Monk of Mokah, Dave Eggers, Non-fiction.  Jim read this one after I did, but got a review up first.  His is more thorough.  I loved this book about an American son of Yemeni immigrants who returns to his country to try and create a great coffee from his homeland. He wants to restore Yemeni coffee to its glory days. Moktar (our hero) goes from being a San Francisco doorman to a successful brewer of specialty coffee. I learned about Yemen (war torn, but lovely in the mountains), coffee (how to grow and sort and roast and taste it), and the determination of this child of immigrants. Loved the book.  Four Stars.

3.  The Possessed, Elif Shafik, Non-fiction (I think). This seems to be a non-fiction book about a graduate student studying Russian Literature. She explores the lives and books of the Russian greats while mastering the language. Like me, she believes in the power of literature to heal and to pull you into so much more than a story.  Her life moves between books, boyfriends, campuses, and Russian landscapes. Her insights into Russian Lit are intriguing and make the tragic nature of it all more real and understandable.  I learned stuff and she writes good sentences. Not sure this is for everyone and I only picked it up because I read Anna Karenina not too long ago. I was sad this book never really discussed Tolstoy. Three Stars.

4. Birding Without Borders, Noah Strycker, Non-Fiction. I bought this book more to review the geography of the world rather than to learn about birds.  I learned so much about both, but the true lessons were about how wonderful people are all over the world and how much they will try to help you.  It made me feel sad about all the travel fears our country promotes and our fears of being any place without the comforts of home.  Sträcker moves through the world at a breathtaking pace notching off bird sightings (always confirmed by another viewer for verification's sake).  In each flight from one dinky spot to the next, local guides showed up when and where Strycker needed them and created miniature friendships. The geography and birds were both wondrous and Strycker limits what he shares perfectly. I really liked this book.  Four Stars.

5.  Many Lives, Many Masters, Brian Weiss, Non-fiction. Another psychology book. Our lives have messages and we just might not really know or understand what those messages are.  Weiss, a psychiatrist, leads a troubled patient, Catherine, through about 12 of her 86 previous lives.  He learns our lives have lessons and debts and we return to other lives for learning and repaying debts. Paying a debt can take many forms--living the type of life you imposed on another, dying the way you killed someone, or helping to guide another through a life from a different dimension as some sort of guardian angel. Most lessons are about overcoming greed, lust, and violence and evolving to unselfishness, love, charity and hope.  There is nothing religious in the book, but it feels very Buddhist to me. I read it on the advice of Terry Connell, a friend and acupuncturist,  I'd felt a real presence in the room when he treated me once and he told me about the book.  There is more about that, but not now:)  Four Stars.

6. The Fortunate Ones, Ellen Unmansky. Fiction.  This one reminded me a bit of The Goldfinch because it explores the power of art and how owning a great piece of art can change you. In fact the book talks about how art and history (both personal and of the world) change you.  The story covers how two women of two different generations each owned a famous painting (a fictional painting credited to Chaim Soutine). Rose's mother owned and loved the painting and it was lost to the Nazi's along with most of her family in Vienna. Lizzie, a hip California lawyer, threw a teenage party in the 60's the night the same painting was stolen from her father's house. When the two women meet and discover their connection, a lovely friendship blooms.  A good book.  Three Stars.

7. Bring the War Home, Kathleen Belew, Non-Fiction.   This is a powerful account of the growth of the while supremacy movement from the Viet Nam War until the Oklahoma City Bombing by Timothy McVeigh. The data is overwhelming.  The book documents the outrage of some Viet Nam vets and the growth of single-cell organization that made all the violence seem to be lone wolf behavior. Anti-abortion is the preservation of the white race and many defense positions were based on "protecting white women" who were complicit in the violence.  The theft from military bases (weapons), the use of the internet, the ability to recruit evangelicals and skinheads, and the fury over Ruby Ridge and Waco drive the movement.  Now we have Donald Trump.  A powerful and important book.  Not happy. Also Kathleen was a former student. We both are so incredibly proud. Four Stars.

8.  The Disappeared. C. J. Box. Fiction.  Joe Pickett books (he's a Wyoming game ranger) are my guilty pleasures. There's one a year. They aren't great, but he's covered all of Wyoming and I love learning the nooks and crannies of that state.  This one sends Joe to Saratoga to look for a missing British lady who vanished after a stay at a guest ranch.  Nate Romanowski and his falcons come into play in the story and I always enjoy that. He' a vicious good guy:) I like this one until the end.  There was no end. Now I wait until May for the next book.  C. J. Box just lost a star for that.  Two Stars.

9.  Less, Andrew Sean Greer, Fiction. Cindy Fite recommended this one.  I liked it.  The book follows Arthur Less around the world as he nears his 50th birthday.  Less is feeling low and lost.  He lover (Freddy and the ultimate narrator) has left him and Less is traveling the world to heal his wounds. Less thinks about loss, writing, grief, love, and age. He learns everybody does really like him.  It's a nice book.  Three Stars.

10.  An Odyssey, Daniel Mendelsohn, Non-Fiction.  A classics professor invites his father to audit his seminar reading The Odyssey. The book combines thoughtful literary criticism of Homer's work.  I thought about the meaning of words, the nature of heroes, the importance of recognition, and marriage. There were lots of times the book made me think about Jim and I as we age. The later part of the book, Mendelsohn takes his father on a cruise that supposedly retraces the Odyssey and ends all too naturally with the father's death.  I loved this book.  I even briefly thought about re-reading the Odyssey.  Four Stars.

11.  The Escape Artist, Brad Meltzer, Fiction.  I don't know why I bought the book.  Then I read the whole book.  I know I read a review that indicated it was about the history of the artists who work for the army and draw battle scenes and that intrigued me.  A character does that, but this is a pulp fiction, government conspiracy, silly short chapter book that I'm ashamed I read even though it was a big best seller.  Sometimes I wish I knew how to just quit reading a book.  I just can't do it though.  One Star.

That's it.  I managed 21 books last year.  I count:)





Sunday, November 18, 2018

Aesthetic Distance


This country has a problem with maintaining aesthetic distance.  Let me explain.  I'm a literaturist.  That is another way of saying I am a retired English teacher.  As an English teacher, I tried to teach my students that in order to evaluate and write about literature (Art) they must first manage to distance themselves from the work.  They must allow themselves to be arrested by the work.  That's what Beauty does; that's what Truth does.  They make the viewers of Art step back and look at the work as it is frozen in time and space.

One must shed all preconceptions, all history, all expectations in order to fully appreciate the work in question.  Without the aesthetic distance, the meaning of the work is informed by the viewer instead of the work itself.  You see examples of this all the time.  There was a woman at Jenny Lake once who was appalled to find me reading Cormac McCarthy's THE CROSSING because it was cruel to wolves and she happened to love wolves.  I've had a few female students and female friends who could not deal with CATCH-22 because Yossarian treated women like objects.  Some folks complain about HUCK FINN because it peppers its pages with the N word.

I can't abide the reader who has to stop half way through a book because it makes him uncomfortable.  You know, the attitude that says "I can't read OLD YELLER because I once had a dog who died."  "I can't watch SCHINDLER'S LIST because I lost my grandmother in The Holocaust."  "I can't watch MY COUSIN VINNIE because my cousin used to drive a Cadillac just like that before he got hit by a train."  "I can't watch SISTER ACT because the nuns at my  Catholic school were mean to me."

Sometimes we should look at moments of Beauty, Truth, and Clarity as exactly what they are: isolated moments that make us sit up and take notice, that make us say "Wow!  I wish I had created that."

Look at MADAME BOVARY for example.  There is that horrible scene where Emma's bumbling husband Charles is talked into making Homais' club foot all better.  The snapping of Homais' Achilles  Tendon is one of the most powerful scenes I've ever read.  I cringe.  I get angry.  I feel sorry for Homais.  I feel sorry for Charles.  I know this is not going to end well.  I feel all those things because that is exactly what Flaubert wants me to feel.  But mostly I feel elation.  Elation that a member of my species could create something that moving.  That is what I mean by aesthetic distance.  It was the way I felt when I saw my first opera (MIDSUMMER NIGHT DREAM - Benjamin Britton).  I didn't get offended because I used to dream about strange stuff.  I just got transfixed, arrested.

Maintaining aesthetic distance is also important in negotiating daily life, especially given the tribalism that characterizes so much of what we do lately.  For instance, we all learned the other day that Trump didn't go to Arlington on Memorial Day.  The reactions on social media and main stream media were immediate and completely informed by partisan rancor, revenge, vindication, and the entire history of presidential behavior.  "Obama went every year!"  "So what if it was raining, here is a picture of Kennedy standing in the rain."  "Our soldiers don't get to stay home if it is raining."  "Just another example of Trump thinking only of himself."  Etc.

Wouldn't it be better if we just treated that action, or inaction, like what it was, an isolated moment that really doesn't mean much?  Maybe he had a good reason.  Why should we care?

And the real problem with this dearth of aesthetic distancing is that humor depends on it.  If I watch a Three Stooges movie and end up worrying through the whole thing that Moe is being unfair to Curly, that Curly must really feel pain when Moe keeps slapping him, that one of them could get seriously hurt and put an eye out, I'm probably going to miss the humor of the whole thing.  It follows that if I look at the world through the filter of my causes, my certainties, my outrages, my VICTIMHOOD, I'm going to miss a nuance or two.

Remember the NEW YORKER cover when Obama first won the presidency?  Barack and Michelle, dressed in Muslim garb, are laughing and fist bumping each other.  I was up at Jenny when the magazine first came out and Michael, the assistant manager, came breathlessly up to me to show me the outrageous image.  My daughter, Obama's trip director, was similarly outraged.  But that's because they were not able to maintain an aesthetic distance from the issue.  I had not made the same investment into Obama that my daughter had and I was able to see it for the rather brilliant piece of satire it was.

I'm afraid that seeing things for the brilliant satire they present is no longer a wise move in today's America.  As a recipient of White Male Privilege, my opinions about a wealth of things no longer matter.  I can weigh in on #MeToo only at great risk.  Since I am not a woman, since I haven't been systematically put down and made to feel inferior, I have no right to an opinion.  It is just like the white artist who created a powerful image of Emmit Till until the museum was forced to take it down.  White artists have no right to comment on the travails of black people.

I truly believe it is possible to "walk a mile in another person's moccasins" through the pages of a book, through a lifetime of learning to be empathetic.  I almost think it is more possible.  Sometimes baggage just gets in the way.

Wednesday, November 7, 2018

Hey, Why The Long Face


I got into one of those dumb Facebook wars yesterday.  Katherine keeps telling me not to engage, but I am just too immature to resist.  The situation in a nutshell:  Katie Hoffman, one of my all time favorite people, posted that some strange man had told her to smile and it pissed her off.  I understand her reaction completely.  I hate to smile, always have.  I'm 70 years old and the years of smoking, drinking coffee and red wine, plus deteriorating 70 year old enamel, have made me ashamed of my smile.  Don't worry.  I'll cope.  Anyway, the strange man was being rather presumptuous to tell some stranger to smile.  Katie should have told  him to fuck off and gone about her business.

Katie's post gave me no problems, but the stream of reactions struck me as being all out of proportion to the actual event Katie described.  It was typical of a culture that systematically hurts women, a bunch of folks said.  It was just another indication that women have to make themselves look pretty for men.  It was a sexual assault.  The anger, outrage, and fury were evident throughout and I thought it was a little silly, so I made a typical, for me, smart ass comment.  I mentioned that strange women and men have asked me to smile from time to time during my seventy years and I never felt condescension; I just assumed they were coming on to me.  I also suggested that a possible solution to the problem would be to look happy while walking down the street.  Finally, I mentioned that Katherine and I used to give bonus F's to kids who didn't smile and look happy in class.

I was mostly trying to reduce the arguments on the stream to the absurdities they were, but all hell broke loose.  A few of the ladies on the stream were more than a little outraged that I gave F's to kids who didn't smile.  Let me explain.  Sophomore Language Arts offered speech and drama credit, so a big part of our curriculum was designed to meet speech objectives set by the county and the state.  It became a discussion class with an equal stress on  participation and active listening.  We would have one forced contribution discussion a week and the kids were given grades both as a group and as individuals.  If everyone in the group participated, added comments, encouraged others, and basically acted like adults having a discussion, everyone in the group got an A.  If even one person did not participate, did not encourage others, did not listen and have the kind of body language that proclaimed his/her eager cooperation, everyone in the group got an F.  We were labeled communists, terrorists, etc., but by the end of the first quarter a visitor could walk into any of our classrooms and see 25 kids sitting in a circle, maintaining eye contact, nodding, smiling, doing all those kinds of things.  Mostly, you could see 25 kids engaged and having fun.  Katherine and I were pragmatic teachers and we did whatever it took.  So sue me.

Of course, most of the outrage was directed at the fact that I was making fun of women for freaking out when someone asked them to smile.  I guess as a man, I'm not entitled to participate in a discussion centering on sexual predation.  I even had the temerity to suggest that some of the participants in the stream did not have a sense of humor.  I learned immediately that telling a woman she doesn't have a sense of  humor is the biggest sexual assault trope of all.

And then it was suggested that I did not have a sense of humor.  No sense of humor?  Moi?  Please!  So I ended my participation in the stream by offering my favorite joke as proof of my highly developed sense of humor.  You  will find it quite germane to the whole discussion:  A horse walks into a bar and the bartender says, "Hey, why the long face?"  You can easily see why my classroom was such a hotbed of jocularity.

My final reaction to all this is a question and I really wish someone would answer it without resorting to calling me names or telling me how disappointed they are in me.  One person on the stream, a former student, even said she was sad to see how sexist I had become.  Don't be sad, Bucko.  The Dems took the House.

My question:  If a man asking a woman he doesn't know to smile is sexual assault, what isn't?  In Willa's first year of preschool, I went to her school to watch her participate in a fun run.  I was standing by the course with my daughter Franny and another mother of one of Willa's classmates.  The mother was furious because on the playground the previous day some of the boys were trying to put rocks in the girls' mouths.  I suppose they were trying to get them to eat dirt.  The mother was planning to complain to the principal that Ms. Barb did not properly discipline the boys.  "It's just another example of rape culture at work," said the mother.  I'm sorry, but I think that reaction is absurd.

Okay, putting rocks in four year old mouths is tantamount to rape.  What else?  I am actually quite polite and always hold the door open for people of both genders.  When I hold the door open for a woman, is that just a way to show male condescension?  If I tell some lady, even some lady I have never seen before, that I love her hair, am I traumatizing her.  People of both genders tell Kathie they love her hair all the time.  Should she be offended by that?  Kathie was having a hard time putting our Kitchen Aid mixer together two days ago and I stepped in and did it for her without even asking.  Is that a particularly egregious example of Mansplaining?  I went with C. Fite to see Kathleen Belew's book talk at the Tattered Cover.  We had drinks and snacks in the little bar next door and I think I might have picked up the tab.  Isn't that the height of male dominance on display?

I suppose there are right ways to tell some stranger to smile.

"It's a beautiful day out there isn't it?  Doesn't it make you want to smile?"

"Smile!  It's another glorious day in Colorado!"

"Hi there.  It's a great day to be alive isn't it?  You just can't keep from smiling."

And there are wrong ways.

"Smile, goddammit.  You're depressing the hell out of everyone on the street."

"Stop being such a grouch and smile why don't you?"

"Hello!  Do you think you could smile a little instead of being such a sourpuss?"

And there are appropriate ways to respond.

"Why it is a beautiful day isn't it?"

"Thank you and let a smile be your umbrella."  (gag)

"Hey, let me show you where you can put your smile."

"Fuck you, asshole."

I'm truly sorry if I offended or disappointed anyone in that Facebook stream yesterday, but I just don't see how it is possible to conflate asking someone to smile with sexual assault.  Maybe the strange man who pissed Katie off was feeling like Dick Van Dyke and was encouraging everyone he met to "Put On A Happy Face."