Virtute.org

In response to Laresa’s post.

Bold means I read it completely, italics mean I started it. Underline means it’s retarded and I refuse to be bothered with it. I won’t get into what this lacks, but I will list a few quick life-changing books:

• Suttree, Cormac McCarthy
• All the King’s Men, Robert Penn Warren
• East of Eden, John Steinbeck (better than the examples below)
• The Golden Age, John C. Wright
• Ivanhoe, Sir Walter Scott
• The Spy Who Came in from the Cold, John Le Carré
• Dandelion Wine, Ray Bradbury
• Perelandra, CS Lewis

Read more »

Another one of those books I stumbled on and bought, and I’m glad I did.  Even though the events occurred more than 40 years ago, it’s still the same fight being fought, with nearly all the same players (except the USSR, and perhaps Iraq, barring any foolishness after the election.  Russia still has a role to play in the Middle East, though; technology to Iran?).  It’s the same impotent UN, the same dead-end Arabs, and the same dithering from the US government. 

I think most of us are familiar with the strategic victory of the Israelis, with their lightning pre-emptive strike on Egypt’s air power.  What’s amazing are some of the diplomatic details.  When it became clear Israel was going to smash the united Arab nations, the Israeli goal was to seize as much territory as possible before the UN forced a cease-fire.  Early in the conflict, the US government presented a cease-fire plan to the UN security council, and the Israelis, for diplomatic reasons, pretended to be pleased with the plan (while hoping that they would have a few more days to consolidate their gains).  Nasser, on the other hand, in desperate need of a cease-fire, was forced (somewhat due to his own propaganda – "We’re in Tel Aviv!") to reject the cease-fire.  The result was more time to secure the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, the Old City of Jerusalem, and the Sinai peninsula. 

Anyway, I found the book very readable and actually very balanced.  Nasser and Amer are given equal time with Eshkol and Dayan.  I would recommend it to anyone interested in a better understanding of the situation in the Middle East.

Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East

Time for another book review.  I’m not sure how I stumbled on this particular book, but it’s a very interesting look at the film industry.  It’s a quick read, in an engaging style, and has some great thoughts about the nature of drama and what’s wrong with movies in America.  Mamet describes the process of storytelling succinctly: "Once upon a time, and then one day, and just when everything was going so well, when just at the last minute, and they all lived happily ever after.  Period." 

For a guy like me who isn’t necessarily into movies, it’s a look at the interactions between producers, writers, directors, actors, and the guys doing the grunt work on the sets. 

The book also helped me crystallize what makes a good film.  I’m notoriously picky about what I like, and wind up keeping my opinions to myself.  I’ve been told I don’t make much sense in the movies I don’t like (example: Forrest Gump) and the movies I do like (example: Starship Troopers).  Well, I know what I like, and now I know a little better why I like what I like. 

Anyway, great read.  Pick it up using the link below.

Bambi vs. Godzilla: On the Nature, Purpose, and Practice of the Movie Business (Vintage)

So I just finished a decent SciFi series by Dan Simmons.  This is the first I’ve read of his work, and I thought it was pretty decent as current SciFi stuff goes.  It’s a commentary on my reading style that I have to go through books a couple of times before I really know where I stand on them sometimes.  This is one of those; when I reached the end, I wasn’t really sure how to feel.  I will say the ending has been cycling in my head for a few days now.  It does carry some emotion.  He seems to have a knack for his characters most of the time; they’re unique, lifelike, interesting (mostly), and make sense in their context. 

Anyway, you can tell from the paragraph above that I’m a little scattered on this one.  The series consists of four books: Hyperion, The Fall of Hyperion, Endymion, and The Rise of Endymion.  It’s more like two pair than a real series; the events of the second two books are separated by nearly three hundred years from the first two, so you can take a breather in between and read something else.

I guess some of my problem with this is religious.  SciFi a lot of times tried to present answers to the flaws in our lives, and does a pretty miserable job at it.  The author’s characters have no belief in any life after death, and the way they deal with it seems empty.  I know some folks would call me deluded to think about life after death, but I get a very hollow feeling when I read some of these attempts to deal with grief and loss.  "They live on in their loved ones and memories."  Pretty weak.  There’s something so vital and vibrant in each person, that having it just quit at death doesn’t feel right to most people.  Dan Simmons makes a very vibrant and powerful personality in the second two books, and the belief that nothing but memories is left after death feels sad and wrong to me.  I guess that’s my main complaint against the books, and others may not have the same issues.

Hyperion