Thursday, March 23, 2017

My Old Man and The Sea by David Hays & Daniel Hays

DAY 82:   0300.    I check the horizon and am impressed with how clear it is.

0430.  Our motion changes - I'm halfway on deck before I've even opened my eyes, and when I stagger through the hatch I wish they were still closed.  My eyes, not the hatch.

I realize suddenly that we are but one week out of bringing our small craft into dock at Caribou Bay.  We are expected at 1900 hours, and by that time we need to have everything stowed below decks, all manuals read and digested, and get Tiger into a small set of white works for the ceremonial piping aboard of Adm Woods.  

I have used the sextant three times in the last hour, and still find that my GP appears to be somewhere in NE Albuquerque, which I have always thought of as land-locked.  But we have 7 days to straighten this out.  Unfortunately, we're undermanned.  Lt. Ferrell jumped ship somewhere near Baja on the Mexican coast, Boatswain's mate Genoni is still hanging from the highest yardarm, and Seaman 3/c Gillen is pulling ARPA duty on the Manzano Mesa.  The rest of us need to take a deck bath or two, and turn to.  30 March 2017 sounded so far away when we started this voyage, but it is upon us and I feel woefully unprepared.  All I can do is scramble and claw through the chaos.  

We will be running the dingy out of Four Hills Bay, pushing off at 1830 hours.  

Carry on.   Sparrow is landing.  Last Thursday expects every man to do his duty.

Charlie P:  B+   This was a travelogue-plus; not a great book but very entertaining.  B+
Keith:  I thought it was a singularly unique dual biography of Father and Son.  I would like to see the story with two siblings; with a husband and wife; with a husband and mistress.  No message here - they loved each other and got along great.  B+
Dick Arms:  I enjoyed it, a good read.  Somehow it was disappointing, as nothing exciting happened.  I expected some Epiphany.  It would have been better if they were on the outs, then bonded during the Cape passage.  The writing was OK,  not great:  B
Mike:  I liked the honesty and the private personal stories of father and son.  Having the story told by two narrators, one with the day-by-day journal, and the father more reflective, was special.  I was moved to tears when Tiger was lost overboard; and as the book moved on, I was moved by the special relationship between father and son.  A-
Rob:  I missed the boat, to coin a phrase.  Two weeks ago, I realized I needed to get the book, but from the web site, I ended up with The Shape of Water.  To try to catch up, last night I watched the movie, The Old Man and The Sea, which was excellent.   No score.
Dick J:  I kinda enjoyed it but there were real gaps.  Such as at the end of the book, when he was returning and all the press was waiting for him.  It bothered me that the Cape passage seemed anti-climatic.  "There's the Cape - now go get a prostitute."  The father and son relationship was imporant to me, as I wanted that in my life.  Not great book, but OK, B.
Tom G:  I was very impressed.  I liked it, a page turner - I wanted to know what happens.  Both of the authors were excellent writers.  You expect that from the Harvard educated father, but Dan was only partly educated.  He was too much of a loose cannon to want in your Life, but very impressive with what he accomplished.  Mike was right:  A-
Kenny G:  I had mixed emotions - to begin with there were too many naval terms to learn.  It was better as it went on.  I found the humor to be fantastic.  I expected something big to happen in the Cape.  B+
Bob W:  I enjoyed it very much.  It became obvious to me that I was involved in the story when the cat disappeared and I was almost in tears.  I give it an A.  I first read it several years ago.  Both father and son had an excellent control of the English language.

... and from way North of the Cape:

Sorry I won't be able to attend the LTBC meeting at your house next week.  We're enjoying the jacarandas, bouganvillas, and beautiful weather (and two-dollar beer) in the highlands of Mexico.

I enjoyed My Old Man and the Sea.  Perhaps most interesting to me was the two very different perspectives of the events and the two different outlooks on the adventure as a whole.  I certainly appreciated the diagrams in the appendix.  They gave me a more complete picture of how the boat was rigged, outfitted, and organized.  A 317-day journey covering 17,000 miles in a 25-foot boat through some of the most dangerous water in the world boggles my mind.  (I am challenged whenever I take my 25-foot motorhome on a 60-day journey on North American highways.)  By the way, my basic high-school geometry did not help me understand David's explanation of celestial navigation.  Nonetheless, overall I thought it was a fun read and I would give it an A-.

Warm regards,


Thursday, February 23, 2017

The Sympathizer by Viet Thanh Nguyen

Gió thường xuyên đến hôm thứ Năm tại 14:00

"The American enterprise in Indochina was, I think, foredoomed by one thing, namely its direct inheritance from French colonialism in that region. The French empire should never have been restored after 1945. I think if President Roosevelt had not died, it wouldn’t have been. The United States should not have tried to come to its rescue, and shouldn’t have tried to succeed it. It’s not America’s role to succeed Western colonialism. It’s its role to help those colonies to become emancipated. And we missed that chance, and having missed it, engaged in a war where terrifying and illegal methods of warfare, like carpet bombing, the use of chemical defoliant, like Agent Orange, and other terrible war crimes were committed. And part of the reason why Cambodia went to year zero was that it had been half bombed back into the Stone Age already. And I’m sorry that should be on the conscience of anyone who supported the war, which I did not. But though I don’t try and evade the responsibility for what the other side eventually did, not just in Cambodia, but also in Vietnam, there was never any chance of keeping Vietnam partitioned, and it shouldn’t have been tried. Now furthermore, no American interest was really involved there. We were told we were fighting against the Chinese takeover, whereas the best insurance against Maoism in Indochina is always Vietnam. That’s been proved many times since then. So none of this applies in the case of Iraq, where we went to overthrow a hideous dictatorship that was a local aggressor, a sponsor of international terrorism, had used weapons of mass destruction inside and outside its own borders, was hated by its people, and was in thoroughgoing breach of all important United Nations resolutions. None of this, by the way, was the case with the government of Vietnam."  -  C. Hitchens

The crapulent majors of the Duc City met to interrogate one another re the acrid Apocalypse, Hitchen's Monday-morning summary, Nguyen's timeless prose, and Ferrell's forgotten involvement. They began by rattling their rice bowls at high noon at the Range Cafe in Bernalillo.  They found that Maj Jensen had been deployed to the Orient, i.e., Maui, and Maj. Gillen was to proceed by occidental directly from Manzano Mesa Tax Preparation Center. For the rest of us, the baht buses will form up for the crowded carpool convoy in the parking lot of the Range Cafe following lunch, at 1:45 pm on Thursday for the short but meaningful transformation to Sunset Blvd. All former communists were welcome.  Liquor to be provided by The General.

Meanwhile, we sent Violet over to proofread Jack's confession for Le Commandant.
"có thể gió thường xuyên vuốt ve trán nhăn của bạn, " she said.  And observed:­

Kenny G:  I think the author really knows how to write - eloquent writing, at times too eloquent for me.  Example in Chapter 22, with his "mattress' experience:  "experience yolk shimmering in ..." - a little two much at times.  The writing was very tedious at the end; and at times, confusing.  A-/B+

Ron B:  I read the first half of the book.  I liked the writing style - excellent!  I won't say I'm in love with it; and now I know I will not finish the (ending) 60 pages of torture.  He could have left out the squid episode.  I give it an A for the writing.  Throughout the book, I felt strung along with the commandant.  This is the last war story I want to read.

Dick A:  I think this guy has tremendous talent for writing.  He developed an excellent point of view throughout, then in Chapter 21 he uses the third person, as he was viewing himself.  I was bothered that he was a spy, yet everything he did played his part as a mole.  From a writing standpoint, how few have "names" - just the Madame, the General, the Captain (narrator).  Solid A.

Rob E:   This was a very impressive book with creative, imaginative writing. On the down side, I thought the movie part was overdone. I liked the author's phrases like the "kudzu of strip malls" and "pneumatic Miss June." Then, there were the "cross-­eyed catfish" that inhabited a fish pond situated under an outhouse (the fish watched the overhead butts, waiting to be served). However, he went too far for me as a Hank Williams fan, when he chose Hank's music as a way to torture prisoners. (He should have played "Your Cheatin' Heart, rather than"Hey, Good Lookin' " ­ Hank didn't use g's ­ as a way to work on a prisoner's conscience). Then, he went on to characterize country music as music to lynch by. That's unfair.

The Mao-­like "re-­education" that Uncle Ho imposed on what was South Vietnam was really grim. However, the author's essay on cleavage was quite entertaining. This was cast as a spy novel; the Russian spy novels by John Le Carre have grown more introspective over the years and I thought Nguyen fell into that format: ­­ too much introspection and navel­-gazing, at the expense of action and intrigue. Bottom line: this was very impressive as a first novel ­ I give it an A for creativity, imagination, telling his country's story in a compelling, way.

With respect to your comments on editors, I've been wanting to tell this story. Back in the 80s I was Editor of a technical (statistical) journal. I reviewed a submittal by a fairly well­ known statistician and found it not suitable for publication in my esteemed journal. I conveyed that message as diplomatically as I could. It happened that this author also edited a journal ­ sort of a vanity press for statisticians, one with low standards. This is where authors sent their papers if they got rejected by other journals.
He wrote me (approximately): I know what it's like to be an editor; perhaps you accidentally sent me the wrong form letter. I wrote back: Perhaps you accidentally sent your paper to the wrong journal!. After that, I always tried to stay out of his line of vision at conferences we both attended.

Tom G:  I agree about Hank Williams - that is part of our culture and tells me the author is not yet fully assimilated.  The book was often a little overdone.  The ending left me cold.   Could this be my lack of Zen?  was it really 'nothing' he did for the communist agent?  But as for the two sentences of nothing, I saw 'nothing' to distinguish them.  Then there was where he had the narrator "crack open a carton of cigarettes and offered her a cigarette" - makes no sense.  A-

Charlie:  Not much to add.  A-   Incredibly well written.  Extraordinary good writer.  As fiction, it made me look back on my life - brought back to me many thoughts.  Also, he explained for me the difference between refugee vs immigrant.  Give it an A as excellent fiction, and a comment of the current environment re refugees.

Keith:  The author:  1/2 French, 1/2 Vietnamese, 100% American.  Not a false narrator but not believable.  My second point:  the novel had a great start to it, but I felt the viscosity grow as I read on, finding myself in a jar of Vaseline.  I thought the middle bogged down.  This was an epiphany in eternal nothingness - as he said, a revolutionary in search of a revolution.  The will to live is the great truth.  I give it a B as I found it overwrought.

Bob S:  I think I have many of the thoughts that Keith did. I give it an A because he has captured the basic workings of human nature in a very literate manner. This was one of four takeaways. The other three included the loss of cultural identity, the loss of any commitment to a cause he could believe in that led to a spiritual awakening and finally the revulsion he felt from the horrors of war including his complicity in killing innocents. It bothered me when (in the middle?) that there was so much money, blood, sweat, tears spent to create a blood bath of killing. I got incensed. Also, the narrator was living with the ghosts of those he had killed. The third theme/plot was most interesting: that so many refugees ended up with no connection to any culture. The Captain like many of his fellow refugees was disconnected from the Vietnamese culture and thrust into the American culture, perhaps creating his bifurcated mind.
Finally, I loved the Zen ending: in his isolation of captivity he gained objectivity as he gained distance to view his existence, looking from far away (in the third person). As an objectivized observer, the Captain experienced an awakening, or nirvana. At the end, he gained a Zen like enlightenment that accepts all the craziness of his existence - and then he says, "Well, just live!" [see the essay at the end of the book about the birth of his son, the process of Life going on: "We will live!"] I thought the insights were great, and the unfortunate aspect of war was insightful. The self-awareness was all good

Mike B:  As I read the first 50 pages, I thought, "Wow!  This is the best thing I've read in twelve years!"  Then the next 50 pages dropped down, and only revived as the General's spirits revived, as he ordered the death of the crapulent major.  Relentlessly creative!  At times wore me down, but mostly I was impressed with the creativeness, such as saying the commandant laid page 307 down on top of 306 to complete the confession.  Solid A

Jack:  I found the novel fascinating - the first book I've read that tells the story from the Vietnamese point of view.  I found his use of irony very powerful in underscoring the absurdity of the war and its consequences. It was not an easy read and in places very uncomfortable, but it was important to get the Vietnamese perspective of a time and place I had thought I would just as soon forget.  I would recommend this book highly:  A

... and from well outside the Mekong Delta:

I'm in Maui so I will not attend the book club on Thursday. I read The Sympathizer and loved it. It's a powerful story that is extremely well written. It's a tough book to read but I learned a great deal about the war in Vietnam and the lives of Vietnamese immigrants to the United States. I hope the author writes a sequel. He apparently has recently published a book of short stories that focuses on ghosts. Sorry I will miss the discussion. Grade: A. The book deserved to win the Pulitzer Prize.
   -  Dick Jensen.

Monday, January 30, 2017

Go Set A Watchman by Harper Lee

Um, um, um!  Lawsy, lawsy, miz Scout, but weren't that meetin' somethin'? Shore, we'se learned that Methodists is Baptists what reads, but we'se learned much more than that.   We'uns learned that somethin is rotten in Monroeville and them lawyers waz behind it!  Why, that youngun Emmett Till done got hisself lynched in August of 1955!  And he was but borned in 19 and 41!  And Miz Scout, you done published in 1957, did you not?  Now, then, Uncle Jack hisself done invited all the Citizens Council to Maycomb County NE and they'se not kept themselves quiet, much.  Here's what I heard 'em asayin':

Thursday, December 22, 2016

God Bless You, Mr Rosewater by Kurt Vonnegut

The following constitutes the minutes of the annual meeting of the Rosewater Foundation held Thursday 15 December 2016 on the estate of Eliot Rosewater, Rosewater, IN. Those present were requested to discuss the concept of pearls before swine, with relevance to the following points:
  • When did you first read a Kurt Vonnegut novel?
  • What worked in this 1965 story that would not work today? 
  • Why is it that every year some rich young man comes in to our Law Firm and wants to give all his money away? "Your travels are over, Space Wanderer!" ­ 
  • The works of Kilgore Trout.  
  • Re Norman Mushari of Cornell Law School: how does one certify that his tremendous ass was indeed luminous when bare? 
  • Poo-­tee-weet? 
  • How does God Bless You, Mr Rosewater lead into Slaughterhouse Five? 
An accurate transcription of the investors' comments follows.
       Respectively submitted,
                             The Law Firm of McAllister, Robjent, Reed, and McGee

Jack Farrell:  I had read Slaughterhouse Five previously.  Like SHF, this book was thought- provoking, involving issues associated with distribution of wealth;  The Father-Senator figure is an image since Roman times. It was tragic that the rewards for compassion and sharing was life in an insane asylum.  I highly recommend it:  A

Charlie:  these were cartoonish characters, in a satiric and dark view of all things, not a compassionate view.  B+

Bob Woods:  I was 14 when I first read Vonnegut.  I read lots of them and considered it almost science fiction, not a lot from the story.  This did not meet my expectations for a Vonnegut story.  I missed the point until the last chapter.  Not impressed.  B+

Kenny G:  This was my first Vonnegut book.  Since I thought the meeting was not until next week, I blasted through, Genoni-style.  I found it repetitious, I expected more humor.  I did not find it to be very humorous.  "... luminous ass" and the "banana thrust through a pineapple ring"  B+

Bob Simon:  I found it a fast read, I loved the dialogue.  Good at, raised some interesting points such as how rich people make a life for themselves when endowed with great riches.  I found the ending very unsatisfying and similar to Farewell to Arms by Hemingway.  B

Dick Jensen:  I have been reading Kristin Lavsransdatter, a Norwegian historical trilogy.  I read this Vonnegut after one-third of Kristin, and enjoyed it because everyone was crazy, and very tongue-in-cheek.  Giving to 53 kids, we create a multitude of lawsuits, Fred probably did not get anything.  A-

Keith:  Kurt Vonnegut would reply to our criticism by saying:  "I have long felt that any reviewer who expresses rage and loathing for a novel is preposterous.  He or she is like a person who has put on full body armor and attacked a hot fudge sundae or a banana split."  He loathed science, and his brother was a scientist.  The writing was rambling with islands of wisdom.  Does not know what he does not know.  B-

Dick Arms:  I had no problem with his character development, he had great characters.  Fred was a great character.  The high school girl selling porn.  But what is he trying to tell me?  I never resolved why did he write the book?  The ending was an enging that kept the money from going to Rhode Island part of the family.  A-

Tom Genoni:  It was a disappointing ending.  Preachy stuff - adolescent. Vonnegut:  "I still believe that peace and plenty and happiness can be worked out - I am a fool."  There is a surreal fel throughout the book.  Would not recommend it.  B

Mike B:  This is the first time I have read this book since 1965.  I read a lot of sci-fi then; now, as a more discerning reader, I find that I enjoyed this more than Slaughterhouse Five, except for the catch phrase, "So it goes."  SH5 was an anti-war book written at the height of the Vietnam War.  I really liked the Fred character, trying to sell life insurance.  There was a great deal more plots and things going on, and it was fun and cartoonish.  I would recommend it.  B+

no comments submitted from outside of Rosewater, IN.

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

Kit Carson's Autobiography

   Once again we were on the trail.  We had remained in our camp on Powder Creek till the first of April, 1837.  It was time to head to Park Avenue in the great Southwest and attend the seasonal rendezvous.  This has been one of the coldest winters I have ever experienced, but Capt Simon assured us of warm victuals and vino to assuage our needs.
  This year's rendezvous commenced on the 17th of November 1837 with six wagons arriving after sundown, once the Blackfeet permitted passage.  With the mules we proceeded south, looking for any extranieous mountain men. Capt Jensen and Private Blackledge did not make this trip.  In periods of delirium they perceive they are somehow related to the Blackfeet and seek a replacement scalp.
    Rendezvous attendees are often encouraged to send dispatches of their understanding of the manuscript and this gathering will be no different.  The remainder of the crew will be served well if they can but remember to guard the horses, keep the buffalo from our camp by building large fires in the bottoms, and cover their shorts.

 The following I hereby transfer to Capt. Robert O. Simon to be used as he may deem proper for our joint benefit.
              -  C. Carson

Tom G – Unique; nothing like it. An interesting read after I stopped reading the footnotes. I got a real feel for his life and history of the time and places. It seemed to be an introduction to lots of other history. Grade - B

Ron B. – I found Carson’s Autobiography interesting because it dealt with so much familiar territory, especially Taos. I am thinking of reading other accounts of this history. One of the things I found interesting is how old historical accounts such as this book express a different point of view of their world than a contemporarily written history describing that same time and events. This Autobiography provided insight into the minds of the people who populated that time, an especially interesting period of American history.
  He lived in almost constant danger among Indians. What an amazing series of adventures! I was impressed by the several trips he made as courier of dispatches several times from California to Washington, D.C. and back in the late 1840’s because that was the fastest form of communication. There is no way to judge the writing. Fascinated by the events in the book and its good information about our area. Grade – B

Charles P. – An Important historical account and document. I am amazed how Carson could sustain such a life of action as a hero for 40 years. His actions exceed by far the lives of most persons. As a book it was nothing, simply a repetition of events without any real insight into him or the events of his life. I experienced no enjoyment in reading it. It is not a literary work and I would not recommend it, except to someone interested in the history of the period. Grade – C

Keith G. – For me the Autobiography paints a picture of an American: small in stature, big in ego, following orders, a womanizer, with a Napoleonic complex. An enormous Ego.

Carson is a unique character in American history. Bigger in life than in death. “Uniliberatable?” (Possibly, “an illiterate”). Each person must judge Carson by their own standard. Grade – a good B

Dick A. – had difficulty getting the book on Kindle, so ordered by post. Then got it on Kindle. So I read both the Kindle and the hard copy. Since the Kindle aggregates all the footnotes at the end of the text, I found reading the hard copy with the accompanying footnotes gave a much better flavor to the whole thing but made it a more dry read. Interesting history and geography, but I would not recommend it to someone unless they love history. I am glad I read it. I learned a lot. The book was written and Carson lived in a period before attitudes toward Indians changed to our current politically correct views. I give it a B, especially interesting for exposing that historical period’s attitudes toward Indians, Mexicans, and Washington.

Bob W. – I read it on Kindle, so did not read the footnotes. I found it an interesting account of what it was really like being there. Now we think of Indians differently; then it was war over horses. I also found it an interesting juxtaposition to the Zorro stories about life in California at the same time from the Mexican perspective. It is not a work of literature, but I learned a lot about history. Carson’s Autobiography brought the history of the Southwest to life. Grade - B

Ken G. – I tend to agree with Charlie. A little about history that was shocking. I found the book to be repetitious, boring, and did not cover all of Carson’s life. My research into Carson’s life on Wikipedia provided more complete information on his life. I noticed that there were many conflicts with Indians, but not all Indians were the same. Some were peaceful. I was shocked that the Americans massacred the Klamath Indians for no reason. The slaughter that occurred in much of the book seemed like Isis, murder without rhyme or reason. I learned a lot but the book was not well written. Grade – C

Bob S. – my opinion of the book as literature is the same. It is not a literary work, perhaps because it was a recitation by an illiterate. But I chose the book because it is an amazing 1st person account of an important era of American and Southwestern history. I became interested in primary source material when I took William H. Goetzmann’s American Studies course at UT in 1966. Charlie and I attended UT in Austin at the same time and were both exposed to some of America’s great academics because of our special curriculum. Goetzmann’s idea was that a better understanding of history can be gained from the study of primary sources. He created the discipline he called American Studies from this concept, first at Yale and then at UT. There are several themes I am exploring in this choice. One is whether there is a continuum of literature that has on one end the Great Books, as Mike noted and on the other end simple historical narratives like the Autobiography that merit reading only because they are of historic importance. This book is clearly the latter. I put down Blood and Thunder several times but could not put down the Autobiography. Grade – B

Scrivener’s Footnote – I am amazed that so many comments appeared to validate Goetzmann’s unique American Studies approach to American history. I think Goetzmann would have been pleased by comments, such as, “Whites and Indians were at war over horses.” “There were lots of conflicts but some Indians were peaceful.” “The book gave an insight into how attitudes towards Indians have changed in America from Kit Carson’s time to our time.” And finally, the thought expressed by several that the book exposes a very different perspective about the historic times than we can get from a historian writing about the same events from a contemporary point of view.

Your thoughts seem to validate Goetzmann’s idea that studying history from the perspective of 1st person accounts and historic literature written in the era being studied gives a different understanding of those historical events than reading a historian’s account of the same events written in our era. I am happy I chose both Kit Carson’s 1st person narrative and Hampton Sides’ contemporary Blood and Thunder, because comparing the two provided a great opportunity to examine Goetzmann’s theory. For me, Carson’s original 1st person narrative of his life, even filtered through the mind of a scrivener, engages me in Carson’s life and time more than a contemporary work written by even such a skilled writer/historian as Hampton Sides. It is a shame that we do not have a better account in Carson’s own words. As Dick J. commented; “He (Sides) also makes the point that Carson was good at telling stories in gatherings at peoples’ homes—why did he not tell stories when he was writing an autobiography?” I am reminded of a couple of Hatchet Jack’s comments to Jeramiah Johnson in the movie by that name, which seems to loosely follow the life of Carson: “Watch your topknot” and the great one that applies to each of you who participated in this intro to American Studies, “You’ve come far, pilgrim.”

and from well outside the Sangre de Cristos:

Hi, Bob - I wish I could be at the meeting.  I have read both books on Kit Carson and below are my comments on both.
   -  Dick J.
             Kit Carson's Autobiography edited with an Introduction by Milo Milton Quaife

   The brief autobiography of Kit Carson was an interesting read but it provided little information about Carson as a person.  I did learn that he traveled a lot, killed a lot of Indians, and that he really did not respect the courage of Mexicans.  He did seem modest in spite of his many accomplishments.  I wish the unkonwn author would have kept some of Carson's language - I think that may have made the book fore interesting.   I would have liked to learn more about him  maybe I will learn more when I read the etyra credit book by Hampton Sides.  Sides has a perfect description of Carson's autobiography (p. 10).  He said it was "a bone-dry recitation of his life and leaves us few clues.  It was said that Carson told a pretty good story around the campfire, but his book carefully eschews anything approaching an insight."   He also makes the point that Carson was good at telling stories in gatherings at peoples' homes - why did he not tell stories when he was writing an autobiography?"  Maybe it was because he did not like his fame nor was he willing to promote himself.

   The footnotes that Quaife put in the text added a great deal of information and made the events in the book clearer.

  The introduction by Quaife was quite pompous (as we professors tend to be) and in the end did not prove to be useful. He set out to explain how the manucript was produced and who the real author was (apparently someone listened to Carson and wrote down the stories).  In the end, Quaife concluded that he really did not know who produced the manuscript - though he does take a feeble guess.

    Grade:  C+

                                          Hampton Sides, Blood and Thunder

  Blood and Thunder is a very thoroughly researched and quite well written book.  The title is taken from a series of twenty-five cent novels of the "blood and thunder" genre.  Many of these books told stories about Kit Carson that never happened.  The books made Carson into a national celebrity and hero.

  Sides attempts to outline the events in the American West from the 1820s into the 1860s.  The book focuses on Kit Carson's role and actions over that period.  The author also discusses the role of a Navajo leader and leaders of the U.S. Army.  I think the book suffers because the author attempts to tell too many stories.  He jumps from period to period and from person to person, often interrupting the flow of the story.  I found these interruptions unnecesary and frustrating.  I also wonder why he left out significant periods of Carson's life such as the years he spent as an Indian agent.

  I learned a great deal about Carson.  This book is 500+ pages long.  At times I had to force myself to keep reading.  I'm glad I finished the book but I was tempted to quit on several occasions.

  Grade:  B+

Dear Bob, I'm holed up near Bloody Marsh on St. Simons Island without shoes and doubt I'll be able to complete the Long Walk before the rendezvous near the Rio Grande on the third Thursday, so I hereby transfer the following to you to use as you may deem proper:

 Driven by curiosity and by what I thought was a need to know, I plowed through Kit Caron's Autobiography, including the "Historical Introduction" and the 131 footnotes. I was curious to see how an illiterate mountain man would write his biography and I thought I should learn more about what makes an American "hero" tick. Not sure my curiosity or my thirst to learn was satisfied.

Although not as graphic, I could not help thinking about Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian, where scalp count/body count was the measure of success and fortune. If Kit Carson wasn't anything else, he was a killer. I am glad I read Hampton Side's Blood and Thunder, because it gave a more complete and perhaps a more sympathetic picture of this man of contradictions.

Not sure I would recommend the Autobiography. C

Regards, Jack

Kit Carson’s Autobiography: Mule Meat Matters
                             Review comments by M.A. Blackledge

We attacked them, and although I do not know how many were killed, it was a perfect butchery. 

Last night I went to a Women’s Basketball Game at The Pit. The National Anthem was sung by a Navajo woman, in the Navajo language. It was a strangely moving experience, hearing that most familiar of American anthems with words that I could not comprehend. It made me think of Kit Carson, who I too quickly label as illiterate, with his great linguistic skills, his ability to communicate with essentially any tribe or group in the American West in the 1840s.

Prof. Simon has informed us that his professor at UT encouraged his students to read original source material. This is not an uncommon methodology for a college education – I suggest our members skim the Wikipedia article on Great Books. Most of us have heard of The Harvard Classics (now in the public domain), and the program of St. John’s College (with two campuses – Annapolis and Santa Fe) is famous for this approach, having its students read the original texts and then enter into discussions with their mentor rather than the more traditional classroom approach. I am embarrassed to confess that I have experienced so few of those Great Books – probably about 3% of those listed in the Wiki article. But as Prof. Gilbert will tell you, I am a graduate of the US Naval Academy and thus never had a college education. And since my reading discipline is perhaps about 3% of Prof. Jensen’s, it is unlikely that I will cover many more of them during my remaining reading regimen. Recall Stephen Ambrose thought that all of us should read the diaries of Lewis and Clark. I haven’t done that either.

However, in the realm of history, we are fortunate to have historians who read those original sources for us, and produce great distillations such as Band of Brothers, Alexander Hamilton, and Blood and Thunder. These are obviously not primary sources, but for me, for many reasons, these are better. They provide the alternate views and the context of the times. Now consider Kit Carson’s Autobiography. We accept that Carson did not write these words. What did Carson actually say to Turley, and how did the ghost writing project proceed? What was left out, what was smoothed over, what was punched up? I am hoping that the Book Club discussion included the concept of patois – that it is fairly accepted that #TheRealKitCarson spoke in a backwoods patois, the dialect of the mountain man. We have snippets of his actual quotes in life which reinforce this. This is not the language of Turley’s transcription. Thus is not Carson’s ‘Autobiography’ by definition several degrees of separation from the true story of Kit Carson? If not what he actually lived, certainly not what he actually said.

Regardless: I found portions of the Autobiography to be moving and informative for my concept of Carson. One of the best examples of this is the unfortunate story of Mrs. White, whose rescue was imminent, and one of the few places where the usually terse Carson repeats himself due to his conscience, with his second guessing that an immediate attack on her Indian captors, which he espoused, would almost certainly have saved her life. And one of the most endearing stories for me occurred soon after, when at the end of an Indian and Californian fight, Carson came across one of the many books already written that publicized and exaggerated his life – how surreal an experience.

But I love Hampton Sides characterization of Carson: “He was also a natural born killer.” I was privileged to experience the anguish of Prof. Simon as he struggled with the choice: should I have the Club read Hampton Side’s Blood and Thunder, with the Autobiography as extra credit? Or the other way round? I am glad I read both. An example context that Sides provides and Carson could not: The happenstance of the mountain man riding 26 days across the desert and into Socorro at the very moment that Gen Kearney had also arrived south from Santa Fe changed both of their fates and gives credence to the vicissitudes of fortune for all of us. Kit Carson’s Autobiography is not one of the Great Books. I honor Prof. Simon’s courage and vision in the trail he chose for us semi-literates traversing the desert of pulp non-fiction, the trail less traveled. He gave up a sure “A” selection to have us encounter this “C“ exploit.

The past is a source of knowledge, and the future is a source of hope. Love of the past implies faith in the future. - Stephen Ambrose

Sunday, October 23, 2016

Reminiscences of a Stock Operator by Edwin Lefevre

Nine unwitting investors gathered at the Four Hills home of the original stock operator, Prof. Dick Arms, on the last Thursday evening of the month.  They understood the evening to be BYOB (Bring Your Own Bucket).

Prof. Arms explained in detail how the concepts developed by Livermore relate to the Arms Index (on volume).  For the rest of us, there is also a Wiki article.  Further, we enjoyed the Wiki article on the real Jesse Livermore.  And finally, for you non-capitalist puppets of Putin, here is a one-sentence description:
an unauthorized office operated by bad hombres for speculating in stocks or currency using the funds of unwitting investors.

Bob Simon:  I enjoyed this book - I found it very interesting.  I was a Finance major and I found it fascinating.  Livermore gained an awareness of how to manipulate the market.  It was historically interesting - and it couldn't happen today.  The self-analytic components that he developed on the facts gave rise to the personal question:  can you hold on to your methodology and act on it faithfully?  A-

Rob E:  I must claim an Incomplete - I read some 25% to 30%.  The story was Buy - Sell, Buy - Sell, and I got tired of it.  The Wisdom he dispenses:  Know when to buy, when to sell.  You can't buy unless someone wants to sell.  My grade:  Inc

Bob Woods:  I give it a B-  As literature, it is a total disaster.  An 8th Grade student could have written this.  Historically it was of some interest.  What put me off:  Livermore achieves brilliant success based on his intuition - but gives no indication of how that intuition works.  The book does give some inclination of what the guys in the corner offices do.

Dick J:  I enjoyed reading it.  I was intrigued by that display of intuition.  Myself, I rely on brokers.  The book was not well written, but I enjoyed the old-style language.  B

Keith:  As a top level summary:  the market is driven by fear and greed, with insider trading rampant, and the government does nothing to control or regulate.  Big money talks (e.g., Warren Buffett).  Tape watchers have all this data, yet they had less available to them in the largest brokerage house in 1906 than I have on my iPhone today.  Stock mutual funds average 10%, better than what the brokers could do for you.  Bernie Madoff, hundreds of other such examples - greed drives it all.  The Book:  I felt like I jumped into a huge ocean of decimal points, and I was searching for integers.  C

Kenny G:  The book describes the Wild West days of the market, when there were little or no regulations.  I found that history very interesting.  These issues still exist.  The writing was tedious and repetitious.  B-

Dick Arms:  The market is a delicate balance between fear and greed today, just as it was in the early 1900s.  I thought the most interesting portion of Livermore's life occurred after 1923, after this book ended, and I didn't hear anything about his Life.  I agree with what Jack said.  Good writing, but needs more personal details.  I recommended the book but I give it only a B.

Charlie:  It was a difficult book to start with - highly technical subject, tought to make people like me interested in the subject.  Way too much on trading, I wanted more on how the rest of his Life went.  The book has big limitations - way too long.  Grade:  B- due to these defects.

Ron Bousek:  Too long, but a one-track objective:  tell us all of his trades.  I listed his sayings:  "Follow the path of least resistance."   What does that mean?  "Can't beat the market."  Interesting insight on how the market worked when you could watch shares being traded in real time.  Then there were spots/locations in the city where the traders could gather around to obtain money offered by the customers at high interest rates.  This was very simple writing style that provided a snapshot in time.  B

Mike B:  I have the enviable position of batting clean-up, so I can respond to some of the earlier comments.  I would tell Rob that he does not need to claim incomplete - if he read 20% to 25%, he read it all - the rest of the book repeats the first 1/4, just with different stocks and different prices.  It was highly repetitious, and I would never recommend this book to anyone.  Dick Arms mentions that this is required reading for new brokers - I submit that there are books today that give a much, much better overview of the market processes - and something called investing.  This was not about investing, but gambling, pure and simple.  To say you have intuition, that you knew to short the Western railroads, and then two days later the San Francisco earthquake strikes - that is blind luck.  (But as Ron B. notes, he did follow up after the earthquake when others were slow to respond.)  C

... and from well outside the New York Stock Exchange:

Dear Dick,

I am sorry I won't be able to make it to the LTBC meeting at your house on Thursday.  I am sure I would have gained a better understanding and appreciation of  your selection after hearing the discussion.

I cannot say reading Edwin Lefevre's novel was fun for me.  I found the first part of the book interesting, but then it became too repetitive.  My eyes tend to gloss over anyway whenever economists and financial operatives discuss the market, so an account of Livermore's personal life would have offered more drama (Ran away at age 14; married three times in the course of 33 years (once to an 18-year old Ziegfield Follies showgirl); lost his fortune; fatally shot himself at age 63.) and hence would have been more enjoyable for me.  C

-  Jack

PS  One thing I failed to mention in my comments was the fact that the story did reinforce a point I thought I had learned many years ago from my mother and that was the need to always cover your shorts. 

Friday, September 30, 2016

Breakfast at Tiffany's by Truman Capote

Eleven well-to-do-yet-highly-mature men-about-town came in out of the rain at the Parkland brownstone apartment of Prof. K.I. Gilbert, and were delighted and mesmerized with the apparition-like appearance of a real-life Holly Golightly, complete with up-swept blonde hair, cigarette holder and glass of wine, a real pearl choker almost from Tiffany's, and, of course, the iconic little black dress.  Wow!  Were we dreaming, or what?  We all wanted to give her $50 for the powder room, but Bob W. thought she was selling drugs, and Tom G. didn't have anything on him less than $100.  What a character!  110 pages, and we discussed her up one side and down the other for two hours:

Dick J:  I really wanted to hate this book.   Truman Capote was an obnoxious curmudgeon, and I can't stand Audrey Hepburn as an actress.  But I really liked it!  I especially like the way he left the ending, making it not a love story.  A-

Jack F:  I thought it was a great story, he's a great writer.  I can't recall from my 13 years with this group of talking for two hours about one character who is covered in 85 pages.  I want to read more by Capote. A great evening and a spellbinding discussion.  A

Bob S:  I liked it, it reminds me of my mother's life.  The book was infinitely better than the movie.  The book captured a cultural aspect of America lucidly.  A

Ron B:  Good, short, not hard to follow, not verbose, I enjoyed it, and I enjoyed In Cold Blood.  This was the story of a young girl escaping from her past.  Good writing.  A

Dick A:  Really was 105 pages vice 85, as a study of one character, Holly.  She was very unconventional character, and he made her believable.  I call it a tragedy because she disappears at the end, a downer that she heads down to South America.  The ending was much better than the movie.  The writing was excellent.  I give it an A.

Kenny G:  Capote really knows how to write.  It could have been a comedy, it could have been a tragedy, it could have been simply a character study - you didn't know how it would turn out.  I give the book an A and the movie a B-

Rob E:  I liked the book.  The only thing that didn't ring true to me was Tulip, Texas.  This is so often the NYC literati view of anything west of the Hudson River as Rubesville.  I didn't mind that Blake Edwards made Hollywood-style changes to the book.  I liked the movie and its feel-good ending.  I had never seen Audrey Hepburn in this movie before a couple of days ago.  She was Holly:  flighty, strange, coping.  Even stealing the masks was fun.  I enjoyed both the movie and the book.  A-  (would have been an A book without the Tulip, Texas stereotype.  Note:  Tulia, Texas is the Panhandle hometown of Bob Wills. You can see one of his touring buses there and get a good chicken fried steak.  Saw no 14-yr old brides there, however one of the waitresses ...)

Bob W:  I thought it was an exercise in excellent writing.  You begin not liking Holly.  I didn't think there were people like Holly, but Bob S. says yes.  You end up liking her.  I thought the movie was piss poor.  The book:  A

Tom G:  1. re the movie:  Hollywood can make any movie they want, but it is dishonest to use the name of a well-known book and then make a movie that is not true to that book.  2.  This book reminded me of Shane - a story told by a narrator years later, about an iconic character that comes into his life (Shane, Holly), makes a huge impact, and then disappears.  3.  The word that describes all these stories is melancholy.  A

Mike B:  Truman Capote wrote a wistful, melancholy, heart-tugging American tragedy with uplifting and downing (mean reds) life cycles.  Blake Edwards made a romantic comedy with slapstick overtones - but was fortunate to have Audrey Hepburn create on screen the quintessential Holly Golightly.  Capote packed so much into his 110 pages, much the way that Holly packed so much into her dialog, into her Life - run, run, run; go, go, go.  I loved so many little feelings that Capote captured, right from page 1 when he talked of the good feeling of having that key in your pocket that meant this dreary apartment was really yours, with your things and your Life.  Beautifully done, all the way through.  A

Keith G:  You all covered it very well.  One character developed in 100 pages and you never understand her.  A

25 Things you may not know about Breakfast at Tiffany's (55th anniversary is 5 Oct 2016)

And from well outside downtown Manhattan:
I will be unable to attend the meeting tonight.  I have been entertaining my sister for three days and I am exhausted.  
I read the book and I found it very disconnected and rambling. I have always disliked Truman Capote ever since I saw him interviewed on TV.  He came off as a whiny little self-absorbed curmudgeon.  The movie was much more entertaining but the only part that was correctly cast was the Cat.  George Peppard as the author/narrator was miscasting. 
    -  Tom Eaton