tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-44392691964769935022024-02-08T12:21:41.463-08:00Non-Fiction Books. Reviews and Commentaries.These book reviews contain commentary beyond the simple reportage of conventional formats. For readers seeking reviews with more curbed opinion, this reviewer suggests the synoptic, excellent work of "Library Journal" and "Choice Magazine."Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.comBlogger143125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-68489661406361265702019-07-21T12:29:00.001-07:002019-07-21T12:29:54.897-07:00I have moved, and begun a new effort to transform our Plutocracy into a Democracy.<h3 class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 22px; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0.75em 0px 0px; position: relative;">
<span style="font-size: 13.2px;">I have moved my activities to </span><a href="http://democracy4citizens.com/" style="color: #888888; font-size: 13.2px; text-decoration-line: none;">http://democracy4citizens.com/</a></h3>
<div class="post-body entry-content" id="post-body-4473285886711906294" itemprop="description articleBody" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; line-height: 1.4; position: relative; width: 570px;">
<br />The focus of this site is a book that I have been working on whose working title is:<br /><br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; line-height: 15.18px;">1) From Plutocracy to Democracy. </span></div>
<br /><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; line-height: 15.18px;">How the United States is Run by a Wealthy Elite and What We Can Do to Advance Democracy.<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<br /><br /><br />The premise is this:<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; line-height: 15.18px;">The wealthy 1 percent, and the wealthier 0.1 percent of our country, pay for the campaigns of almost all our nation’s candidates in Senate, House and Presidential races. As a result, these candidates, once elected, serve that elite group. Our representatives are best defined as political servants of this class. Private campaign finance is only one method of legalized bribery where the elite funnels money to politicians.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; line-height: 15.18px;">A democracy is a system of government by the eligible members of a nation, typically through elected representatives. If these elected officials of the US citizenry no longer represent those citizens; if instead they chiefly represent the interests of this owning class; the United States is not a democracy.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; line-height: 15.18px;">If the rich control the decisions of our government, they are our rulers; not co-equal citizens. The definition of a political system controlled by a wealthy elite is a plutocracy.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; line-height: 15.18px;">The United States is not a democracy; it is a plutocracy.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; line-height: 15.18px;">The purpose of this book is to transform the US plutocracy into a democracy.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br /><br />I hope that those still using this forum will visit me at my new location and add their hopes and ideas.<br /><br />Perry<br /><br />#democracy #plutocracy #liberal #progressive #book #activism</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-83378443882892637612018-08-12T10:09:00.001-07:002018-08-12T10:09:26.503-07:00The Boxers, China and the World. Editors: Robert Bickers & R.G. Tiedmann.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>The Boxers, China and the World</u> is composed of papers
that were “prepared for a conference” of the same name “at the School of
Oriental and African Studies, London University, on 22-24 June 2001” (Bickers
& Tiedemann [eds.], p. ix). The goals are immediately set-out in the
Introduction: “This book explores the causes of the Boxer Uprising…its
particular…cruelties, and analyzes its impact on China, foreign imperialism in
China, and on the foreign imagination.” It also “explores the impact of the
events of 1900 on Chinese rural communities and on foreign empire building”
(Bickers & Tiedemann [eds.], p. xi).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Among its goals relating to issues external to China, (i.e. the
war’s effects on foreign imperialism, the foreign imagination and foreign
empire building), the book covers these issues extensively and well. But there
are difficulties in the book when it comes to examining the aforementioned
goals that are internal to China, (namely the causes of the uprising, its
cruelties and the impact of events on Chinese rural communities). That is
because successful coverage of these aspects depends upon Chinese views of
events, from past and present, which are conspicuously absent until the final
chapter.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is understandable that fact-based researchers would have
an aversion to the propagandistic, state-approved views of the People’s
Republic of China; especially given that scholarship which contrasts with
official versions is censored there. In 2006, Zongshan University professor
Yuan Weishi published an article in Bingdian (Freezing Point), arguing for “a
rational understanding of the past” and claiming that “textbooks were stuck in
the past. Hailing the Boxers as patriotic heroes, glossing over their violence
and evading problems raised by their beliefs.” Freezing Point was “closed down
for a period of ‘reorganization’” (Bickers & Tiedemann [eds.], p. xxiii). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While the absence of views from within contemporary China is
explicable, the dearth views from Chinese historians living outside of China is
perplexing. Of the ten papers in the book, only one is from a professor of
Chinese descent. Even more perplexing is the fact that most of the primary
sources for the first nine papers are foreigners’ experiences of the Boxer War.
A couple of the presenters attempt to address the preponderance of foreign
views. Robert Bickers writes that the Boxers “had little by way of opportunity
to speak for themselves before their destruction” (Bickers & Tiedemann
[eds.], p. xi). Lewis Bernstein, writing about the foreign occupation
government in Tianjin, simply says “I have not yet discovered any Chinese
account of its operations” (Bickers & Tiedemann [eds.], p. 141). But Paul
A. Cohen, in the last chapter entitled “Humanizing the Boxers” contradicts the
excuses of other historians. He explains “my efforts…draw heavily on…published
notices by the Boxers themselves, the diaries and eyewitness chronicles…letters
and journals of foreign participants and observers. I also make extensive use
of Boxer oral history transcripts” (Bickers & Tiedemann [eds.], p. 182).
Apparently, there are ways to obtain information on how Chinese people and
Boxers viewed events in 1900. It requires extensive digging, but it is
available.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Most of the conference’s articles attempt to re-view and
redress omissions or inaccuracies in the historical record that originated in
Europe’s colonial past. Brutality and looting by European and Japanese forces
is examined. Resentment of Christian missionary activity is presented as a
cause of the War. Sympathetic connections are made between Indian and Chinese
anti-imperialists. There is a good deal in the book that is instructive.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The last paper the reader sees is Professor Cohen’s
monograph “Humanizing the Boxers.” It is, quite literally, the only study that
attempts to see events from the Boxers’ point-of-view. Using materials from Chinese
observers, Boxers and compassionate foreigners, this author approaches
universal human issues like anxiety around death. He takes issue with portrayals
where death “stands as a metaphor for the cruelty of the Boxers or the
brutality of the foreign relief forces…But its meaning as an expression of
individual experience is largely lost” (Bickers & Tiedemann [eds.], p.
183). Cohen presents personal accounts like that of Liu Xizi, which describes
young Boxers after a battle as “children in their early teens lying by the
roadside, with wounds to their arms and legs, crying out for their fathers and
mothers” (Bickers & Tiedemann [eds.], p. 193). This inquiry is also the
only one that portrays the Red Lanterns; the female allies of the Boxers.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>The Boxers, China and the World</u> is valuable as a
study and critique of how imperialist powers of the period viewed the Boxers
and events in China. A re-examination by historians from former imperial powers
is useful as a means of confronting racism or injustice within their own
nationalist traditions, both then and now. That said, a more well-rounded view
would have been obtained if additional researchers had attempted to understand
how Chinese citizens of that period viewed the Boxer War and foreign activities.
The study of history is, at least in part, an avenue to explore experiences,
perspectives and ethics, of people who lived in the past.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Exploring the ancestors of a foreign, much
maligned populace, could have allowed readers an opportunity to broaden
personal outlook by seeing the world through another’s eyes.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bickers, Robert & Tiedemann, R.G. (editors). <u>The
Boxers, China and the World</u>. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers,
Inc., 2007.</div>
<br />Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-56877322605274224502018-07-21T14:47:00.001-07:002018-07-21T14:47:29.882-07:00The Right Side of History. 100 Years of LGBTQI Activism. Author: Adrian Brooks.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
This book is a collection of historical writings about the
LGBTQIA Movement. What is unique about it is that all of the writers are
activists who have worked within that movement. No academic historians participated.
This approach contains strengths and weaknesses. Its most favorable strength is
that activists know strategies for creating and organizing movements which
uninvolved historians generally do not. A historian who has not worked for
social change, will usually focus upon a nation’s political office holders;
examining their legislation and speeches. While that element is part of
history, it is merely the end product and most visible mark of progress, thence
the easiest road to travel in writing a history. Unfortunately, it creates the
false impression that an altruistic notion just popped into the head of a
self-interested politician; whose only real job, even in the best of
democracies, is to get herself re-elected and do the bidding of those who paid
for that re-election. Activists, on the other hand, know what goes into
creating change. As a result, the activities of grassroots activism and
behind-the-scenes organizing are ferreted-out by these writers. Published in
2015, four months before lesbians and gay men won marriage equality, <u>The
Right Side of History</u> reveals how the movement evolved from the late-1800s
to the present. The views of the activists who wrote chapters make it both a
history and a primer on how to advance political rights.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Adrian Brooks, who edited this project, arranged the 31
contributions chronologically. The first 12 examine activist endeavors prior to
the Stonewall Rebellion. Here the reader will begin to see some of the
drawbacks of having histories written by activists unfamiliar with the process
of primary evidence-gathering. Telling the whole truth is sometimes not as
important as promoting the movement. Among the several chapters discussing
Stonewall, none mention that the Stonewall Inn was owned by the New York Mafia.
Though there are two flattering portraits of Bayard Rustin, neither mentions
his later, neoconservative activism (see <a href="https://portside.org/2016-03-17/rebel-who-came-cold-tainted-career-bayard-rustin">https://portside.org/2016-03-17/rebel-who-came-cold-tainted-career-bayard-rustin</a>
). Such omissions, calculated to make the movement appear uncontaminated, do
not advance the goal of preserving historical knowledge.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What is omitted is important. But so is what is included.
There are rare histories of forgotten activists and early organizations, which
the reading public would never know about without this volume. In addition, the
contributors excel with later chapters involving political action in which they
personally participated. Here, important events are preserved in oral histories
that would otherwise have disappeared from the record. The full story of a
social movement cannot be contained within one document. This iconoclastic book
is an important contribution to the history of LGBTQIA success in attaining
civil rights.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Brooks, Adrian. <u>The Right Side of History. 100 Years of
LGBTQI Activism</u>. New York: Cleis Press, 2015.</div>
<br />Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-42561151205999871302018-07-15T07:05:00.002-07:002018-07-15T07:05:09.404-07:00West Side Story as Cinema. Author: Ernesto R. Acevedo-Munoz.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
A note for those who have not seen the movie “West Side
Story:” The book being reviewed was written for an audience who had already
seen the 1961 film. There will be spoilers by both the reviewer and the author;
as well as confusion for the reader regarding plot, characters and elements
discussed. If one has not seen this version, one should consider stopping here
and watching it first. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“West Side Story” (WSS) was an important musical for a
number of artistic and political reasons. Artistically, it was the first US
musical to defy the convention that problems or tensions in the story are
resolvable through song-and-dance. Here musical numbers, when not romantic, are
used to illuminate conflicts or make matters worse. Importantly, musical
numbers from the second half of the play which were lighter or comic, were
shifted to the first half of the movie. In this way, WSS becomes a show whose lightness,
humor and humanity drop away, until despair is all that is left.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ernesto R. Acevedo-Munoz is an associate professor and Director
of Film Studies at the University of Colorado. So his book is largely a film
study course enclosed by covers. His chapters are an introduction to special
effects, film staging, selection of actors, transitions, and other decisions
made by producers and directors. He takes the reader inside the creation of
this movie. Directors Robert Wise and Jerome Robbins, Composer Leonard
Bernstein, as well as producers Harold and Marvin Mirisch, are examined. One is
taken behind the scenes to see the conflicts and choices they faced with each
other and the material.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Politically, WSS was the first musical to feature Puerto
Rican characters as protagonists. Since it was written in the 1950s there is
the inherent racism of its period. Puerto Rican commentators have been divided
on their view of this seminal portrayal of their people in a successful
musical. The vast majority of Puerto Rican characters, including the lead male
and female roles, were acted by white people in brown-face make-up. Even Rita
Moreno, the only Puerto Rican in the play, was darkened with cosmetics. This is
too similar to minstrel shows, exclusionary of Puerto Rican actors, and
stereotyped. We only see Puerto Rican persona who are gang members or “gang
girls.” Latin American viewers, who see the show as positive, point-out that
the Sharks are all people with families and jobs. Both film and stage have
Puerto Rican cultural elements which are presented positively. This community
only establishes a gang in defense against racist violence. Bernardo and the
Jets confirm twice in the film that he was “jumped” on his first day in the US.
In contrast, the Jets are unemployed juvenile delinquents, whose families are
broken and whose racism is blatant. The author argues that, between the two
gangs, the Sharks are both more sympathetic and more culturally represented, as
well as being articulate about oppression. There is a lot more written on
racism that cannot be covered here. However, if one is seeking an author who
can successfully moderate the two sides of the Puerto Rican conflict over WSS,
one must look elsewhere. In his introduction, Acevedo-Munoz says, as a child in
Puerto Rico, he “was overwhelmed and giddily proud to see ‘Puerto Ricans’
represented onscreen, however inaccurate or stylized the portrayal…West Side
Story is the reason why I study films” (Acevedo-Munoz, pp. 5-6). As a result,
the chapter specifically devoted to racism is weighted in favor of WSS.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But racism is not the only area where the author discusses
politics and culture. Borrowing from Rick Altman and Matthew Tinkcom,
Acevedo-Munoz discusses gay male expression in WSS. Altman is quoted as saying
that musicals are “associated with camp, gay, utopian, ‘drag,’ and marginal
sensibilities…created by gay talent because it offers a ‘place’ where sexual
repression (especially in classical Hollywood) can be channeled…redress[ing]
heterosexuality itself as a camp fantasy.” Tinkcom adds that “‘camp excess,
masquerade and performance’ hide a gay sensibility that ultimately serves to
self-consciously mock the realism of heterosexual coupling narratives”
(Acevedo-Munoz, p. 154). This observation may be entirely apt since all four contributors
to the creation of WSS were gay men (Jerome Robbins, Leonard Bernstein, Stephen
Sondheim and Arthur Laurents). Professor Acevedo-Munoz also mentions that all
four were Jewish, but does not explore how a Jewish sensibility might have
influenced the show (Acevedo-Munoz, p. 154). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>West Side Story as Cinema</u> is a delightful and
instructive book. Acevedo-Munoz is an enthusiastic Film Studies teacher. It is
enlightening to have the perspective of a politically aware professor, who has
much to say regarding content related to his people. If one has enjoyed the
movie, this book will reveal features not previously evident, and make one want
to see it again with new perspective.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Acevedo-Munoz, Ernesto R. <u>West Side Story as Cinema</u>.
Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 2013.</div>
<br />Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-70837046939390889052018-06-09T05:27:00.002-07:002018-06-09T05:27:09.128-07:00The End of White Christian America. Author: Robert P. Jones.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>The End of White Christian America</u> was released in
July of 2016. It acknowledged the now well-cited US Census Bureau statistic
that, by 2042 the United States would no longer be a majority white nation. It
followed-up with statistics from the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI),
stating that the numbers of US citizens who were both white and Christian (by
which they mean all Catholics and Protestants) had already “slipped below a
majority” to 47% of the population as of 2014 (Jones, p. 47). The author
reinforced PRRI’s findings with a 2013 Republican National Committee task force’s
conclusions. It recommended Republican leaders begin “rebranding their
conservatism to appeal to women, ethnic minorities, and young people, who saw
the party as narrow-minded and out-of-touch” (Jones, p. 102).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, what followed were a series of ill-advised
premonitions. Chief among those was the claim that “appeals to white
Christians…will likely set the GOP back when it turns to the task of reclaiming
the White House in 2016” (Jones, p. 107). Four months later Donald Trump won
the presidency in large part by feeding on division; using racist, sexist,
anti-Islamic, anti-immigrant and Christian bigotry. This event did not help the
author’s book sales. Non-fiction readers quietly re-shelved their copies of <u>The
End of White Christian America</u>, and went out to find new books explaining
why God-fearing hillbillies in the middle of the country were fooled into
believing that a New York billionaire would hand them jobs and money.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Despite its failed forecast of political events, the book’s
sources of information appear unbiased. PRRI is a Christian organization. The
author is its CEO and a religious Christian. Even though Jones is a liberal
Christian, neither he nor PRRI gained anything by admitting that Christian
influence or population is diminishing. Even fundamentalist Christians worry
about the decline in church attendance, so the concern crosses the political
spectrum. Similarly, the Republican National Committee task force had no stake
in admitting that its views are out-of-touch with America. And finally, the US
Census Bureau has, in the past, shown a bias against minorities. It has been
repeatedly criticized for under-reporting the country’s non-white population. We
know that they are not prejudiced in favor of minorities when they announce the
demise of white majority status.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So where did Jones go wrong? He failed where most
statisticians fail: He was overly focused on the numbers and did not take into
account human reaction or emotion. Statistics about a population’s rise or
decline in percentage reveal nothing about their enthusiasm, their fears, their
anger or their irrational prejudices; the kinds of things that drive people to
the voting booths. A demographic that makes-up 47% of the country is still a
significant number and can change an election. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But this may not be the only blind spot in the book.
Although Jones’s statistics, if accurate, point to a continual decline in white
Christian percentage, they fail to take historical events into account. The
United States has experienced periods of religious revivalism in the form of
two “Great Awakenings” (circa 1730 and 1790), and several smaller but
significant bumps in church attendance (most recently circa 1980). Again, too
many statistics; not enough meditation on human nature. These kinds of revivals
have the potential to push our non-fictionally illiterate,
scientifically-impaired fellow citizens, back into the open arms of the
superstitious congregation.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It’s easy to kick a book when it’s down. So let’s focus for
a moment on what is positive about Jones’s study. <u>The End of White Christian
America</u> is an optimistic and useful book for atheists, minorities and progressives.
Feminist activists seeking federal funding for battered women’s shelters
learned that, when they did their own research on the numbers domestic violence
survivors, they were accused of inflating the data. So they began using crime
stats provided by the FBI; an undeniably male-dominated, politically
conservative organization that could not be accused of promoting a feminist
agenda. Similarly, atheists, minorities and progressives, can turn to Jones’s
Christian, Republican and US Census Bureau conclusions, in order to both
bolster their arguments and provide them with a sense of optimism for the
future. After all, barring a “Third Great Awakening,” not much stands in the
way of the further decline of white or Christian domination.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Jones, Robert P. <u>The End of White Christian America</u>.
New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc., 2016.</div>
<br />Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-45890952714913227242018-05-20T14:24:00.001-07:002018-05-20T14:24:47.223-07:00 House of Wits. An Intimate Portrait of the James Family. Author: Paul Fisher.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is unusual for any nuclear family to produce one talented
child who influences their culture. Henry James Sr. and Mary James produced
three: William James is often called the Father of American Psychology and was
the creator of the Pragmatic school of philosophy. Henry James Jr. was a
successful novelist whose works were bestsellers in the 1800s and are classics
today. Alice James was an acerbic diarist, whose repressed life and insightful
writing have influenced 21<sup>st</sup> Century feminism regarding its view of
middle class women’s lives in 19<sup>th</sup> Century America. Many individual
biographies have been written about these three siblings. But Paul Fisher does
something that has never been done before; he writes a biography of the entire
family. This permits a reader to see the environmental influences on these
three and examine what elements came together to precipitate such intellectual
talent.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At the very beginning of the book, Paul Fisher makes an
important blunder that throws a damp washcloth on a reader’s enthusiasm for his
project: he spends more than 100 pages on Henry James Sr., the father of this
clan. Henry Sr. was a follower of Emanuel Swedenborg. He was a theologian, a
lecturer and a writer, who was neither successful in his lifetime, nor
influential after it ended. He wrote a dozen volumes of arcane religious
philosophy that were little noticed when published and are of little importance
today. If it were not for his three famous offspring, it is safe to say that
Henry Sr. would not be remembered at all. That a figure of such modest
consequence should consume so much of a book which includes his three more
influential children, is a waste of time. Surely, his importance lies in his
impact on these children. A more useful beginning would have involved an
abbreviated chapter on Henry Sr. and Mary that discussed their individual lives
and how they came together. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Fisher writes with an ease and informality which allows his
book to flow. He can be amusingly sarcastic with his subjects’ flaws. When
Henry Jr. squanders family money in European spas, rationalizing that he must
“get thoroughly well” so he can work, Fisher writes “Harry bled with
self-sacrifice” (Fisher, p. 259). When William’s insecurity causes him to
continually fail with women, Fisher comments that his “would-be liaisons struck
one wet match after another” (Fisher, p. 304). It is this informality and
refusal to hold his subjects as sacred, which permit him to delve into their
lives in a way that holds nothing sacred.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author exposes the worst about the Jameses, holding-up
each nasty secret like an exterminator bringing a homeowner every poisoned rat:
William is “living with depression” (277), has “quirky, skittish methods of
human interaction” (442), and was “cut off from reacting, empathizing, and
relating to others’ emotions” (Fisher, p. 439). Henry Jr. is a vain,
self-involved social climber, “tipping his hat like a marionette” in high
London society (Fisher, p. 432). Alice is a neurasthenic shut-in, whose fits of
“hysteria” are part of a “long career as an invalid” that brings her “much
attention and solicitude” (Fisher, p. 461). With such debilitating
psychological problems, one wonders how they accomplished anything.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
None of these revelations are new. Biographers have been
analyzing this family for over 100 years and, given William James’s vocation, a
number of those have been psychologists. So throughout the book Fisher is
reaching for new insights that, due to the competence of his competition and
the obsessive letter-burning practices of the Jameses, may simply not be
available.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But because this author is examining the family as a whole,
he has the benefit of everyone else’s biographies and his own research. He does
spend time on the two ignored James sons Wilkie and Bob, which adds an
interesting dimension to the family dynamic. Early in their lives, Henry Sr.
and Mary determined that those two had little intellectual promise and were
cut-out for the world of commerce. So they did not receive the privileged
educations of William and Henry Jr. In addition, the two less promising Jameses
both serve for the Union in the Civil War, whereas Henry Jr. and William dodge
service with ailments. The war service and unhappy journeyman lives of the two
unsuccessful Jameses leave the privileged sons with lifelong guilt.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Fisher does have an evolved social conscience through which
he views the Jameses and their period. He spends a good deal of time on Henry
Jr’s alienation due to his being a closeted gay male. Henry’s fears of
discovery affect his responses to his sister’s “Boston Marriage” with Katharine
Loring. A special focus on the status of women is unavoidable given Alice’s
penetrating diary. But even with avoidable issues, like anti-semitism and the
condition of the poor, the author makes sure to expose the era’s injustices.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Occasionally, Fisher can be a bit melodramatic in pursuit of
deeper Jamesian problems. He uses the word “incest” or “incestuous” so often
that one is certain he’d love to discover some. In one silly passage, the
author describes seven-year-old Alice selecting colors for a new hat with a
London milliner. He characterizes the resulting color clash as causing
“distress and confusion” (Fisher, p. 132). The shopping trials of an over-privileged
child seem hardly worth mentioning in a city where her fellow seven-year-olds
were working in factories and wearing rags. Fisher also uses literary devices
to create dramatic tension. Sections often end with premonitions of doom as
entrees into the next section: “Quincy Street harbored a grim secret” (232),
“The winds were already gathering” (422), “a more immediate drama was
unfolding” (510). Such breathless, gothic style can become tiresome.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But, for all of his melodrama and faux suspense, Fisher
strives with some success to pierce through the Jamesian wall of stolid
Puritan/Victorian repression and self-regard. One feels a sadness pervading the
book as the Jameses struggle against their common, depressive, inner darkness.
Because they are not portrayed as the paragons of their earliest biographies,
one sees them as human and roots for them to succeed in love and work. The
author’s unique approach, to the household as a whole, reveals how the
environment produced three individuals who were highly intellectual, driven and
emotionally problematic. His angle has produced a compelling read.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Fisher, Paul. <u>House of Wits. An Intimate Portrait of the
James Family</u>. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2008.</div>
<br />Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-29843326998461598032018-05-12T05:57:00.000-07:002018-05-12T05:57:10.983-07:00Until the Rulers Obey: Voices from Latin American Social Movements. Editors: Clifton Ross & Marcy Rein.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Until the Rulers Obey</u> is a selection of interviews
with South American social activists from organizations that are not affiliated
with any government or party. Occasionally, their concerns and resulting
popularity have resulted in their becoming an opposition party, but that is a
rare occurrence. This is an extensive project involving 400 pages of interviews
with individuals and groups of courageous activists. Their differing issues
cover a broad range which includes indigenous rights, women’s rights,
environmentalism, LGBTQIA rights, and poor people’s movements. Almost all of
the interviewees have faced violence from governments, paramilitaries, or thugs
hired by multinational corporations. Without these interviews, their concerns,
persistence and contribution would have remained unknown outside of their own
nations. Some remain anonymous so that their activities cannot be tracked by
the state. The interviewers themselves faced significant danger in their efforts
to gather some of these stories.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Each chapter represents a different South American country.
After a brief overview of the social issues facing the populace of that nation,
a series of interviews with activists working on those issues follows. Their
approaches are creative, and as wide ranging as their topics: opposition
newspapers, underground abortion services, protest, sabotage of mining
equipment, occupations of land, public anti-homophobia education, creation of
worker cooperatives; these are just a few of their differing responses to
oppression. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Though their issues and approaches differ, there are some
commonalities among them. Aside from the aforementioned autonomy from
government, these groups are, almost uniformly, opposed to multinational
corporate interference in their national economies. This opposition was
expressed by interviewees whose issues were not necessarily economic. LGBTQIA
and feminist organizers also expressed that international capitalism was
harming their nation. The authors employ the term “neoliberalism,” a
re-emergence of 19<sup>th</sup> century classical liberalism which embraced
free market capitalism and, in its South American iteration, included a
component of colonialism. It is understandable that activists with compassion
for the local people would oppose multinationals regardless of their area of
work, given the pervasive damage caused by these companies. These giants, with
the assistance of local oligarchs, have displaced indigenous populations from
their homes, extracted minerals or agribusiness products and polluted the
environment. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But be aware that the selection of anti-corporate interview
subjects was a conscious choice on the part of the editors. They avoided
interviewing organizations and individuals who lacked such a critique, and even
subtlely derided activists who did not include anti-multinational ideas in
their program. For example, Adrienne Pine, who wrote and performed most of the
interviews for the Honduras chapter, stated “groups dealing with gender and
sexuality issues organized primarily around a nonprofit model in the 2000s, and
often found themselves limited by the priorities of their funders. Much
feminist work focused on documentation of and service to women victims of
domestic violence, ‘empowerment,’ sexuality trainings, and other narrowly
defined women’s issues: LGBTQ organizations found themselves working
primarily<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>on antihomophobia and HIV/AIDS
prevention educational outreach work. (Ross & Rein, pp. 62-3). Pine’s
statement is condescending towards South American activists, indicating that
these people were not sincerely interested in correcting social problems like
domestic violence and homophobia; but were “limited by the priorities of their
funders.” One is lead to presume that, if not for their funders, these individuals
would have been working on economic, anti-capitalist issues. The author gives
no credit to the organizers themselves for having independent wills and perhaps
choosing to fight domestic violence or homophobia because they or their
populations were harmed by these problems. Pine’s statement also demeans the
importance of LGBTQIA and women’s issues. Though the author may think of these
concerns as “narrow,” or imported from above by white western funders, many
women and LGBTQIA people feel that their rights and survival depend on solving
these problems.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is nothing wrong with having a book that primarily
examines economic issues and takes a stand against the damage done by
multinationals. In addition, the editors are to be complimented on their
open-minded inclusion of women’s and LGBTQIA concerns. However, intersecting
with other movements requires respect for, and sensitivity towards, their
issues. At times, it appears as if some human rights concerns are drawn into
the narrative as a way to entice readers for whom those issues are a priority.
In another situation, editor Clifton Ross interviews Paraguayan feminist Liz
Becker. Becker opens with a two page criticism of government and neoliberalism
before even beginning to discuss women’s rights. She then gives women’s issues
slightly less than a page of analysis (Ross & Rein, pp. 351-4). Again, this
is a book intended to combat international capitalist abuses. But there is a
strong flavor to this discussion reminiscent of a doctrinaire 1970s Russian
Communist Party technique: they would send-out female comrades to women’s
organizations, allegedly to discuss feminism, but with talking points about how
capitalism enslaves women, whereas the Party’s program would make women free.
It is propagandistic, co-optive and disrespectful.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The pictures of these mostly tiny, non-violent, autonomous
organizations, (struggling against worldwide capitalist money, wealthy
oligarchs, colluding governments; who employ violent paramilitaries and armies),
is compelling. Occasionally, we see victories: The retaking of land by
indigenous communities, the defeat of a mining or hydroelectric project, an
autonomous movement fielding an independent parliamentary candidate who wins.
But, if there is an eventual victory against this array of powers, it’s a long
way off and a long shot. This overview of South American anti-multinational
struggles is a window on a set of movements rarely seen outside of their
localities. It broadens our world, opens our eyes, and provides perspectives
from individuals working in small, sometimes anonymous ways, to carve-out a
little justice.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ross, Clifton & Rein, Marcy (eds.). <u>Until the Rulers
Obey: Voices from Latin American Social Movements</u>. Oakland: PM Press, 2014.</div>
<br />Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-90878107165750870972018-04-22T05:10:00.002-07:002018-04-26T14:33:24.649-07:00Haiti. The Aftershocks of History. Author: Laurent Dubois.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
An educated reader, seeking to expand their understanding of
Haitian history, will likely not be expecting a light romp through the
centuries. The first half of this book covers from Haiti’s war of independence
in 1804, up until its occupation by US forces in 1914. This was a nation born
out of the world’s first successful slave revolution. It was surrounded by
powerful slave-owning nations who took turns invading with the intention of
reintroducing slavery. Those efforts were repelled with great loss of life on
all sides.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In addition to external enemies, the majority of the
population was oppressed internally by successive military dictatorships. These
regimes functioned from the very inception of an independent Haiti until the US
invasion. The original leaders of the revolution, Toussaint Louverture and
Jean-Jacques Dessalines, became despotic. They created a tiny, wealthy elite of
Haitians, by holding agricultural workers in a state of semi-slavery and
forcing them to remain on plantations. Anyone attempting to escape was punished
severely. Rebellions were crushed mercilessly.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Laurent Dubois manages the difficult assignment of
presenting multiple points of view that currently exist within Haiti regarding
that nation’s early history. The author presents equally the thoughts of patriotic
apologists who felt that money from plantations was necessary for defense
against invasion; and the depictions of suffering under this semi-slave
condition. Of course, all ideas are not equal. Louverture and Dessalines
committed a grave injustice when they forced people, who fought and sacrificed
for freedom, to work the plantations. An obvious solution would have been to
offer the euphemistically-named “cultivators” more money to remain on the land;
but this solution would not suit the greed of the dictators or the elite.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The second half of the book examines the early 20<sup>th</sup>
Century up until 2012. It begins with the US invasion of Haiti in 1914, which
initiated a 20-year occupation. This period was marked by violent suppression
of Haitian revolts for freedom, individual acts of brutality against black
citizens by racist white soldiers, and the policies of forced labor. A moment
of hope occurs in the narrative when Haitian resistance finally breaks the
grasp of US domination, and Haiti is regained by the Haitians. But euphoria
quickly reverts to terror, with the re-emerging pattern of dictatorships. These
bring with them modern, Orwellian trappings: control through propaganda, secret
police, torture of opposition and murder for the slightest (even unintended)
provocation. The Duvalier dictatorships represent the last of this harrowing
period, ending in the 1980s. They are followed by Aristide’s election, and a
depiction of Haiti’s condition into the 21<sup>st</sup> Century. That condition
is not a happy one, even without the presence of frightening despots. The
country remains in poverty with all of the associated problems of health,
housing, nutrition and education. The environment is unforgiving, with natural
disasters and depleted soil, creating an unfriendly situation for human
habitation. “State institutions are weak and largely unresponsive. And the
population has no control at all over foreign governments and organizations,
which in many ways call the shots in contemporary Haiti” (Dubois, p. 365).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Throughout the book, Dubois maintains a stubborn optimism.
He invokes the persistence of the Haitian citizenry: “Generation after
generation, they have demonstrated their ability to resist, escape, and at
times transform the oppressive regimes they have faced” (Dubois, p. 369). Hearkening
back to the nation’s birth, he states “out of a situation that seemed utterly hopeless,
they created a new and better world for themselves…if it happened once, perhaps
it can happen again” (Dubois, p. 370). What else can he do? As an author who
has invested both years and emotion in a project, delving deeply into a
devastating history of slavery, dictatorship and poverty, he has two choices:
He can intone a splendidly jejune “tomorrow is another day,” or find a high
ledge for an air dance. One can empathize with the choice he has made. However,
a reader, whose investment is considerably different, may experience a more
reserved enthusiasm based on her perusal.<br />
<br />
While the circumstances and history of Haiti may cause one to question Dubois' optimism, it also gives us reason to admire the people of Haiti. They have struggled against powerful forces, within and without, that have attempted to control their lives, their nation's resources and their political freedoms. This book shows that they have consistently fought those forces through rebellion and resistance; from their nation's founding to its present. Their history is a lesson in fortitude.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="tab-stops: right 6.5in;">
Dubois, Laurent. <u>Haiti. The
Aftershocks of History</u>. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC. 2012.</div>
<br />Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-79890203231210694952018-04-07T13:06:00.002-07:002018-04-07T13:06:13.691-07:00The Unquiet Grave. The FBI and the Struggle for the Soul of Indian Country. Author: Steve Hendricks.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>The Unquiet Grave</u> begins with the 1976 discovery of a
body in the South Dakota Badlands. She was Anna Mae Aquash, an American Indian
Movement (AIM) activist. She was executed by fellow AIM activists, allegedly on
orders from the organization’s leadership, because she was falsely believed to
be an informer for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The rest of the
book describes how AIM, an ardent Civil Rights entity, arrived at a place where
it could order and carry-out this murder and several other acts of violence.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The author, freelance investigative journalist Steve
Hendricks, is well-versed in the historical and current injustices against
Native Americans. Throughout his narrative, readers see ample illustration of betrayal
and genocide directed against the original population of North America, along
with the poverty of modern reservation life. Hendricks makes no secret of his
sympathy for the Civil Rights goals of AIM. But he follows the evidence where
it leads. Though Hendricks does not absolve AIM of violent, criminal behavior,
he presents the FBI as an intentional contributor to AIM’s descent.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
During the 1970s, the goal of the FBI regarding political
movements was to quell what they saw as insurrection. In doing so, they
frequently violated the constitutional rights of citizens seeking social
justice. Most of the book’s activity occurs in the vicinity of the Pine Ridge
Reservation. There, Hendricks offers a portrait where repressive forces are
aligned against AIM: Tribal President, Dick Wilson, is a corrupt leader who
creates a “goon squad” that terrorizes residents. He sees AIM as competition
for leadership on the Reservation, which results in violence between supporters
of Wilson and supporters of AIM. The Bureau of Indian Affairs Police, charged
with maintaining order, viewed AIM as a disruptive influence. The FBI used both
Wilson’s gang and the local police to dismantle AIM. They colluded with Wilson
by refusing to prosecute his employees when they injured or murdered AIM
supporters, but arrested AIM activists who retaliated. Several instances of FBI
agents directly threatening the lives of Native American rights activists are
recounted. In addition, the FBI planted agents provocateurs within the Native Rights
organization. These individuals disrupted AIM by agitating for greater
violence, accusing innocent people of being FBI snitches, and performing
actions that would cause residents and Wilson gang members to despise AIM.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The environment was clearly one of suffocating repression,
paranoia and violence. Still, AIM could have made different choices. When AIM
activists (Leonard Peltier, Dino Butler and Bob Robideau) had a shoot-out with
FBI agents, they did not have to walk several hundred feet down a hill to
execute the two wounded agents who were begging for their lives. When AIM
thought that Aquash was an informer, they did not have to murder her. In fact,
AIM did not have to be at Pine Ridge Reservation at all. They were, and still
are, a national organization. There were numerous reservations throughout the
country, without oppositional goon squads; reservations where the vast majority
of residents and leaders were in alignment with AIM’s program. The FBI would
have had fewer allies among the populace. Activists could have remained focused
more upon their pursuit of justice, rather than defending themselves against
violence. In effect, AIM members sat in one end of a canoe, rowing in one
direction, while Dick Wilson and his gang sat in the other end rowing in the
opposite direction.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some apologists for AIM have said that “the stratum of
Indian Country from which AIM sprang was too angry, too ‘ghetto,’ in the words
that AIMers often used, to answer the provocations of the FBI by turning the
other cheek” (Hendricks, p. 360). But that is a racist argument: it requires a
belief that the cultures of “Indian Country” are inferior, in both morals and
intellect, to other cultures who also faced oppression and whose movements for
justice did not become paramilitary. While one cannot always control one’s circumstances,
one can control how one responds to them.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hendricks’ conclusion is a balanced assessment of
accountability. He begins by writing “Aquash was murdered because the
government of the United States waged an officially sanctioned, covert war on
the country’s foremost movement for Indian rights” (Hendricks, p. 360). He
finishes that paragraph by writing “AIM leaders” were “criminal not merely in
the legal sense but in their betrayal of the thousands of their race who had
entrusted their hopes to AIM. When AIM’s leaders killed Aquash, they killed
their own movement as surely as the FBI did” (Hendricks, p. 361).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>The Unquiet Grave</u> is a warning to Civil Rights
organizations to remain steadfast about their goals while facing both covert
and overt opposition. It is also another reminder to the citizens of the United
States that they cannot uncritically trust the FBI; and to citizens of all nations
that they cannot uncritically trust their governments. Hendricks’ thorough, carefully
researched inquiry, is an engrossing read with much to say about politics and
abdicating responsibility.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hendricks, Steve. <u>The Unquiet Grave. The FBI and the
Struggle for the Soul of Indian Country</u>. New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press,
2006.</div>
<br />Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-7734331064713733882018-03-19T05:17:00.002-07:002018-03-19T05:17:32.100-07:00The Wars of Watergate. Author: Stanley I. Kutler.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>The Wars of Watergate</u> is an examination of a
president and an event that profoundly, lastingly eroded public trust in both
the Executive branch specifically and the US Government in general. It was the
culmination of a decade of challenge to traditional authorities, as well as the
undeniable proof that suspicion of those authorities was warranted. While
Watergate stands alone as a worthy subject of study, a most readers during the
Trump presidential era who choose to learn about this period are doing so with
attention to their own era. Watergate provides comparative background
information on the process of investigating or dissolving a purportedly corrupt
presidency.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Stanley Kutler organized his book as a historically
evidential, rather than a politically partisan, assessment of an affair. He
begins with the formative information of Nixon’s life and career from his
childhood, to his first years in the Senate, through his bids for the
presidency and his first term. Only then does he recount the crisis itself. The
historical continuity does not end there; this writer provides extensive
post-Watergate analysis of its impact up to the end of the 20<sup>th</sup> Century.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is a meticulousness to this study which readers will
find alternately gratifying and frustrating. Frustrating, for example, is Kutler’s
depiction of the House Judiciary Committee. He evaluates not only each of the
congressional members (which is useful), but even some of Majority Special
Counsel John Doar’s staff, who are nothing more than office functionaries.
While trudging through such compulsive sections, one should keep in mind that a
historian must consider more than simply informing their audience. More
important, especially for one writing about fairly recent event, is to create as
complete a historical record as possible. Who knows what bits of information
will aid future historians in their research? However, Kutler’s thoroughness
pays-off for a reader when he presents White House interactions among Nixon and
his staff. He has carefully perused the White House Transcripts, offering
extensive excerpts. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Here, the inner
workings of an administration steeped in constitutional violations and cover-up
is a fascinating glimpse into a once hidden history.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is little chance that non-fiction bibliophiles,
reading <u>The Wars of Watergate</u> while living through the crises of Trump’s
administration, could ignore the important similarities between Trump and
Nixon. Both lied with frequency and ease. Both attacked the news media for
exposing their indiscretions. But more significantly, both failed The Two Part
History Test: To paraphrase Mark Shields, Lesson One of Washington scandals is
that the cover-up, not the initial crime, causes presidents the most legal
trouble. Lesson Two is that they always forget Lesson One. For Nixon, the
break-ins at DNC headquarters and Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office were crimes;
but neither was as great a violation of the Constitution as the Obstruction of
Justice charge with which he was eventually hounded out of office. For Trump,
the picture may be slightly different. If it is true that he personally
colluded with an enemy foreign power attempting to undermine our democratic
elective process, that’s more serious than a simple break-in. However, it is
unlikely that US citizens will ever have the truth there. What we do have is a
bold, repeated, unapologetic admission that the President fired an FBI Director
who would not stop an investigation against him. In an interview with Lester
Holt, Trump claimed that “<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Segoe Print";">he
had been planning to fire Comey even before he received Deputy Attorney General
Rod Rosenstein's recommendation to do so.”^^ In a May 2017 meeting with Russian
officials, Trump stated "I just fired the head of the FBI...I faced great
pressure because of Russia. That's taken off."^^^ Both Trump’s and Nixon’s
inability to absorb Lessons One and Two caused them to commit Obstruction of
Justice. Our best hope, for maintaining the integrity of our Constitution, is
that Trump’s presidency follows the same course as Nixon’s. But that is far
from certain. During our troubled period, Kutler’s careful examination can be a
useful, calm source of information regarding the anatomy of administrations
that break the law and how justice is subsequently pursued.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Segoe Print";">Kutler,
Stanley I. <u>The Wars of Watergate</u>. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1990.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
^^<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-reveals-he-asked-comey-whether-he-was-under-investigation-n757821"><span style="color: blue; mso-bidi-font-family: "Segoe Print";">http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-reveals-he-asked-comey-whether-he-was-under-investigation-n757821</span></a><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Segoe Print";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Segoe Print";">^^^<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html"><span style="color: blue; mso-bidi-font-family: "Segoe Print";">https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html</span></a></div>
<br />Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-38775307640736786202018-03-03T12:50:00.002-08:002018-03-03T12:50:28.568-08:00Strapless. John Singer Sargent and the Fall of Madame X. Author: Deborah Davis.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Strapless</u> is a story about John Singer Sargent’s famous
portrait of socialite, Amelie Gautreau. While it provides biographical
background on these two figures, its main focus is on the years these two US
expatriates lived in Paris and collaborated on a work intended to increase the
cachet of both individuals. The “Madame X” portrait, which currently hangs in
New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art, became the subject of scandal when
exhibited at the 1884 Paris Salon. While there was wide criticism of the
sitter’s position, her gown and Sargent’s technique, the foremost complaint
revolved around the sexual suggestiveness of the model’s fallen right shoulder
strap.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Davis begins with Gautreau’s family (the Avegnos) in the New
Orleans area. Like most slave-owners of the time, they had an estate in the city
and a plantation on the Louisiana agricultural lands. While the family owned
over 100 slaves, there is only one reference to them: “tending to the animals
and the crops were 147 slaves, watched by an overseer” (Davis, p.13). It is
shocking that a book published in 2004, (one that details shopping in Paris
over four pages), dedicates only one sentence the lives of those who were owned
and mistreated by the Avegnos. Information about these particular slaves would
not have been difficult to exhume from the historic record. Family
correspondence, records of punishments or escapes, oral history of former
slaves, archaeological excavations of slave quarters on family property,
artifacts (like whips, torture devices, manacles), all of these methods were
available to the historian. But Davis, in a pattern typical throughout the
book, avoids topics of human rights, politics or suffering. The majority of the
book concerns Belle Epoch Paris between 1870 and 1900. Remaining consistent
with her evasion of the slavery issue, this author is able to talk about
Parisian history without mentioning the primary culture clash between
traditionalist nationalists and cosmopolitan modernists; an issue that divided
French society among all classes, including that of her subjects. She mentions
Alfred Dreyfus as a patient of the doctor who introduced Sargent and Gautreau,
but ignores the Dreyfus Affair that was so central to that culture clash. She
spends three pages on the presence and musical significance of Richard Wagner
in society, without any reference to his influential anti-semitism. To indicate
that Ms. Davis is not very political is like saying ISIS is a tad impertinent.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of course, this is a story about Parisian High Society’s
horror regarding a painting transgression of proper mores. While the author may
exhibit deficits of conscience, anyone picking-up this book and expecting to
read riveting social commentary is not paying attention. It is a book one reads
as a break from worldly concerns; much like the reasons why someone would take
time-out in an art museum to admire Sargent portraits in the first place. This
does not excuse lapses in historical content or social conscience, but it does
explain it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While Davis exhibits little political awareness, she does
show a touching affection for Sargent and Gautreau, as well as a concern for
the trajectory of their lives before and after the scandal of 1884. She tells a
good story. One empathizes with the rise of these two outsiders and their
dramatic fall; then watches them intrepidly dust themselves off and struggle to
revive their reputations. It’s a real life personal drama with all the
importance of a fallen strap.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Davis, Deborah. <u>Strapless. John Singer Sargent and the
Fall of Madame X</u>. New York: Penguin Group (USA) Inc., 2004.</div>
<br />Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-13074827699098590392018-02-11T13:20:00.001-08:002018-02-11T13:20:11.576-08:00For the Soul of France. Culture Wars in the Age of Dreyfus. Author: Frederick Brown.<div class="MsoNormal">
There is value in learning about the past for its own sake. But
when a situation in history corresponds to one in the reader’s current society,
it can inform in additional ways. Such a narrative has the ability to show us
error in our own society, paths to take and paths to avoid. Observing a similar
event of the past, in which we are not swept-up, can allow insight through
emotional distance. This is the case
with Frederick Brown’s <u>For the Soul of France</u>. With its focus upon the
culture war between liberal cosmopolitans and conservative nationalists, it in
some ways mirrors the United States of today.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These two nations are not exact mirrors of each other. But instructive
similarities are present: 1) The unreconciled tribes of liberal cosmopolitanism
and conservative nationalism in both cases. 2) The damage of conservative
religion interfering in the public sphere (Conservative Catholics in France. Conservative Catholics and Protestants in the
US.). 3) A convenient, immigrant enemy perceived as foreign even when they are
citizens (Jews in France. Islamics and Latin Americans in the US). 4) Attempts
to replace scientific method with belief-driven propaganda (French parties
favoring Catholic Monarchy which they believed would confer divine intervention
and raise-up France after the catastrophic Franco-Prussian War. Groups in the
US that deny global warming and evolution). 5) Competing media (in each nation
a mainstream media seeking evidence to draw conclusions and a right-wing media
attempting to fabricate alternative facts by simply pronouncing what they wish
were true). 6) Rising hate groups committing acts of violence (In France,
organizations who proudly labeled themselves “anti-semitic.” In the US,
white-supremacists, modern-day Confederates, anti-semites and violent
anti-immigrant assemblages). 7) The denigration of intelligence (In France,
“Rationalism and individualism were seen as the baggage of an alien culture to
which the bourgeois…held France hostage. Intelligence undermined an organic
historical community” [Brown, p. 122]. In the US, the supporters of Trump,
whose mindless enthusiasm for their leader permits them to ignore evidence of
his harm). There are more, but the space of this review does not permit full
elucidation.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Frederick Brown is an enjoyably lucid writer. With such
complex conflict, it is of immeasurable value to have a historian who can
present facts in an organized manner and narrate with color. His ability to
detail the competing cultures, so that one understands their ideologies and
acquires a sense of their separate social compositions, is useful to the
reader. Brown organizes his book in a series of chapters, each of which
describes a particular event and the responses of the two socio-political
sides. The building of Sacre-Coeur Cathedral, the rise of the secular republic,
the crash of the Union Generale, the rise and fall of General Boulanger, the
building of the Eiffel Tower, the Panama Scandal, the Dreyfus Affair and the
burning of a charity bazaar, all of these chronologically presented events
produce reactions on both sides of the divide. Because Brown takes-on these
events within individual chapters, one is able to concentrate on the event, its
significance to each side, and which side advances its cause.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A history that reveals similarities to our own time can also
instruct us by how it is different from our own. France’s racists and
conservative nationalists experienced a day of reckoning with the Dreyfus
Affair. Their prejudices and wishful thinking met reality in a way that caused
their national decline. Comparable forces of prejudice and regression in the US
have not experienced, and may not experience, a decline.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The standing of our nations is also quite different. In
France, during the late 1800s, its cultural and political prominence on the
European continent had already been usurped by Germany. But for the United
States, (who is watching China in its rearview mirror, gaining on us
economically like a monster in a horror flick), it is not necessary to
surrender our position in the world. Though there are deep divisions within our
nation, we have the capability to work together where we must. I can think that
my neighbor is a superstitious fool for believing in an invisible superman in
the sky, who instructs him to interfere in the private lives of LGBTQ people or
women seeking abortions. But I can still understand that, when it comes to
economics, we need to put down our clubs and work together. My neighbor can
believe that I’m going to hell and take pleasure in picturing me there. But she
can still work with me while we reside in this more temperate clime. We can
have our differences, can but agree that a Communist dictatorship that uses
slave labor might not make an acceptable world leader. Likewise, Congress can
cooperate, culture war or not, to compromise on domestic and foreign policy
issues that would promote US interests. The fall of every empire is inevitable,
but that does not mean that our fall has to happen now. The cultures battling
in <u>For the Soul of France</u> call to mind a Zen parable where two tigers
are fighting, go over a cliff, and continue to claw each other to death on the
way down. The harm in France was that each side saw the other as un-French.
Nationalists thought the cosmopolitans were selling-out their nation to the
Jews. Cosmopolitans thought the nationalists were incapable of change or
reason, therefore out-of-step with a continuing progress that began with the
French Enlightenment. Each saw the other as an enemy who was harming the nation,
so could not imagine partnering with them to preserve it. As a result, even
though the cosmopolitans won the internal war, France never again regained its
prominence. The United States can read Brown’s book as a warning and a choice.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Brown, Frederick. <u>For the Soul of France. Culture Wars in
the Age of Dreyfus</u>. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2010.</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-45810792420697415342018-01-12T12:13:00.002-08:002018-01-12T12:13:47.710-08:00A Nation Rising. Untold Tales of Flawed Founders, Fallen Heroes, and Forgotten Fighters from America’s Hidden History. Author: Kenneth C. Davis.<div class="MsoNormal">
Kenneth Davis continues an enterprise begun in his
bestselling <u>America’s Hidden History</u>: dispelling historical myths. He
does so in a simple, direct way by unearthing factual events concerning white
male figures from history, then narrating a version of those events. The
stories he tells are engagingly colorful. There is little analysis; but there
doesn’t need to be an in-depth thesis to accomplish his task. One reads a “this
is what happened” approach to history; the superficialities of an affair told
with excitement. His main theme is that the people whom we are supposed to
idolize as heroic founders or leaders are flawed human beings, and sometimes
actually pernicious human beings. It may not be sophisticated, but it is
supported by the evidence he presents and can be an eye-opening experience if
one has been taught to revere and mythologize our ancestors.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This particular project examines figures who lived between
the Revolutionary and Civil Wars. Davis’s method is to open a chapter with a stirring
incident; then connect that incident to a larger issue. He begins with the
arrest of Aaron Burr, then explores the patriot’s checkered career culminating,
with his alleged plans to raise a private army, invade Spanish territories, and
set himself up as Governor or President. The historian moves on to “Weatherford’s
War,” where the Massacre at Fort Mims launches a theme that becomes central to
the book: the treatment of Native Americans and African Americans by white
settlers and leaders. Davis does not idealize the Native Americans either. The
author describes native massacres of whites with the same truthfulness that applies
to white massacres of natives. In this section he also exposes the racist,
bloody character of President Andrew Jackson in his dealings with slaves and
Native Americans. The next chapter, “Madison’s Mutiny,” begins with a
successful slave revolt led by Madison Washington on a slave ship that ended in
freedom on the Bahamas. It provides a jumping-off point to illustrate slave
ship mutinies and plantation revolts prior to the Civil War, in addition to
presenting the revolution in Haiti. “Dade’s Promise,” the following chapter,
describes the ambush of Major Francis Dade’s infantry in Florida. The event is
then used as a way in to a discussion of The Second Seminole war, more on the
culpability of US presidents (Jackson, Van Buren and war “hero” Zachary
Taylor), and an interesting introduction of the sub-culture of “maroons”
(escaped slaves who created hidden communities in Florida that cooperated with
Native tribes). “Morse’s Code” focuses upon the anti-Catholic riots in
Philadelphia and the associated screeds of inventor, Samuel Morse. It
follows-up with the development of the nativist parties and organizations,
connecting their anti-Catholic prejudices to those faced by John F. Kennedy
when he ran for the presidency. After all of the blood and tears, Davis ends in
nightly news fashion, with a human interest story. In “Jesse’s Journey” he
portrays the difficulties overcome by Jesse Fremont as she travels from New
York to San Francisco, to meet-up with her husband, the explorer John C.
Fremont. Jesse later became famous in her own right as a writer. But the story
is inserted largely because women have been ignored throughout the volume
during its presentation of flawed white men.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Non-fiction readers will find in Davis something unusual: a
light read that is also informative. There are no challenging theories; only
myth-challenging narratives. Books like this are an antidote to the
indoctrination one experiences in public school history classes. The goal of
those institutions is to tell acceptable stories that produce patriotic
citizens; not questioning minds. By revisiting US history (or any history) with
a more skeptical eye, we are able to correct misperceptions of our past that
occurred on the way to adulthood. Some critics feel that this form of education
weakens the United States by cracking the perceived foundations of our country.
On the contrary. Informed, intelligent citizens have a greater possibility of
making unique, thoughtful contributions to our nation than do indoctrinated drones.
It is more important to inspire a future of invention and possibility than to
preserve a past of fable.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Davis, Kenneth C. <u>A Nation Rising.</u> <u>Untold Tales of
Flawed Founders, Fallen Heroes, and Forgotten Fighters from America’s Hidden
History</u>. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 2010.</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-269681198694161762017-12-31T13:41:00.002-08:002018-01-01T04:43:05.432-08:00Art and Politics in the Weimar Period. Author: John Willett<div class="MsoNormal">
John Willett begins his <u>Art and Politics in the Weimar
Period</u>, with an inscription in a book that haunts him. It reads “Memento of
an afternoon spent in Stuttgart in Mart Stam’s house, to music by Kurt Weill.
13 Aug. 1938” (Willet, p. 8). He then asks “What was so apposite…about playing
Kurt Weill records in a [house built by] Mart Stam?...What again might link a
Dutch Communist architect to a Left Socialist Berlin Jewish composer whom he
apparently never met?” (Willet, p. 10). Clearly, both were a part of a leftist
subculture seeking unconventional, innovative answers to political problems and
unconventional, innovative ways to express themselves. But Willet is not as
concerned with this group’s cultural history as he is with its artistic concepts
and techniques. He focuses upon its expression of “a particular constructive
vision…a new realism that sought methods of dealing both with real subjects and
with real human needs, a sharply critical view of existing society and
individuals and a determination to master new media and discover new collective
approaches to the communication of artistic concepts” (Willet, p. 11). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The book is set-up chronologically. It begins with the First
World War and the changing political order between 1914-20. Here, Willet examines
how war’s devastation, the transformation from imperial to Socialist
government, Germany’s failed communist uprising, and artistic developments in
neighboring countries, affected the artists of Germany. The war, the leftward
politics and changing technologies, give rise to a number of innovative
approaches in the arts: Dada performance art, Constructivist & Bauhaus
architecture, mechanized music and anti-war Expressionism to name a few. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The next section explores Weimar’s somewhat economically stabilized
years of 1924-8. It introduces the Neue Sachlichkeit (loosely translatable as
New Objectivity) art movement, which was “a neutral, sober, matter-of-fact
approach, thus coming to embrace functionalism, utility, absence of decorative
frills” (Willet, p. 112). The author illustrates other currents of this time:
Impersonal painting, interior design, the rising importance of photography,
developments in theater and new musical composers with more machine sounds. It
is a bright period of innovation, with less cultural conservatism, between the
fall of the Kaiser and the rise of Hitler.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The book then records German cultural descent, beginning
with economic collapse in 1929-30, followed by the “triumph of the Nazis and
total suppression of the modern movement” (Willet, p. 213). In the end, we
return to that tender, lost starting point: “Mart Stam’s houses and Kurt
Weill’s music did indeed hang together, and this was ultimately because they
reflected the same assumptions: an openness to new technologies and media, an
economy of resources, a sense that art should have a function, and a reluctance
to work only for a social-cultural elite” (Willet, p.124). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But while the author has reached this conclusion, he has not
brought his audience along with him. This is largely because the artists are taken out of the context of their subculture. He presents the artists; he describes the movements; he talks about the politics; but he has not shown the development of a
living milieu composed of people who held leftist views and appreciated
avant-garde art. One discerns fragments of this culture: Bauhaus artists
working together in Dessau, Berlin Constructivists visiting Moscow to meet
their counterparts, Kurt Weill collaborating with Bertolt Brecht, but these are
disconnected scenes. The book needed a full portrait revealing the
interconnections and functioning of this community. To contrast, John
Strausbaugh’s history of Greenwich Village reveals the complexity of a
thriving community. He shows artists and fellow travelers drinking together,
arguing together, sleeping together and protesting together. They gather in the
same bars, bookstores, cafes and living rooms. Strausbaugh discusses the many
relationships and conversations that resulted in political and artistic
collaboration. He describes organizations and salons which helped mold this
community. He clarifies what draws them together. Even if two artists in
Greenwich Village never met, they would have been influenced by the same
social, artistic and political factors. By the end, if Strausbaugh had depicted
someone listening to a Bob Dylan album, under a Jackson Pollack painting, while
making a poster for a women’s rights rally, the reader would have understood
the connections. Without a similar portrait of the Weimar subculture which
valued both Stam and Weill, Willett has left out evidence that would have revealed
why Stam and Weill were in the same environment.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Art and Politics in the Weimar Period</u> is successful
in its portrayal of the era’s art. Additionally, it shows how the changing
political landscape first inspired, then silenced the creativity of German
artists. It is an important example of how liberal, democratic, political
structures nurture individual creativity; and how conservative, autocratic
political structures control art. Willett ends with a warning that applies to
any age: “If there is a lesson for our own time, it is not just that art can
benefit from a greater integration with hopeful socio-political causes. Above
all it is that those causes had better not be lost” (Willet, p. 229). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Willett, John. <u>Art and Politics in the Weimar Period</u>.
New York: Da Capo Press, 1996.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Strausbaugh, John. <u>The Village. 400 Years of Beats and
Bohemians, Radicals and Rogues</u>. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2013.</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
For a Review of <u>The Village</u>, please go to <br />
http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-village-400-years-of-beats.html<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-9480131548391725152017-12-17T08:49:00.002-08:002017-12-17T08:49:24.629-08:00A Cross of Thorns. The Enslavement of California’s Indians by the Spanish Missions. Author: Elias Castillo.<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0d0d0d; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 242;">On September 25, 1988, Pope John Paul II beatified Father Junipero Serra,
the founder and first administrator of California’s mission system in 1769.
Beatification is a major step towards declaring someone a saint. Immediately
there was an outcry of protest, writing and testimony, by many Native Americans
and civil rights activists who recognized that Serra had enslaved, tortured and
killed, thousands of coastal natives, “facilitating the destruction of their
culture” (Castillo, p.201). Elias Castillo was one of the critics who
maintained pressure on the Vatican by presenting a record of Serra’s
inhumanity. <u>A Cross of Thorns</u>, Castillo’s indictment of Serra, was
published in February of 2015. In September of that year Pope Francis (often
hailed as the most socially progressive Pope regarding human rights) canonized
Serra.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0d0d0d; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 242;">Castillo’s book is a straightforward chronology of Serra’s role, along
with that of the Spanish missions, in the conquest, persecution and destruction
of native cultures. Castillo takes a bit too long getting to the incarceration
and forced labor of Native Americans within the missions. He spends fully a
quarter of the book chronicling Spain’s actions towards native people from 1492
to 1769; moves on to describe the history of missionary activity from 1492 to
1769; then provides a history of Native Americans from their migration across
the Bering Straits 14,000 years ago until their contact with the Spanish. This
is much like someone who is protesting against the Keystone Pipeline explaining
first how fossil fuels evolved. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0d0d0d; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 242;">When he does finally arrive in 1769, Castillo provides an immense quantity
of archeological and documentary evidence to describe Serra’s internment
facilities. Incarceration was achieved through a mixture of military force,
false promises of material gain or food, and offers of baptism without
explaining that those who submitted became wards of the Catholic Church.
Children were especially vulnerable. Once parents were baptized, the entire
family was moved into a labor enclave. When children reached the age of ten,
they were separated from their nuclear family, moved into a sex-segregated
dormitory and considered laborers (Castillo, pp. 118-119). Castillo provides
testimony from visitors who describe “how similar the missions were to slave
plantations…everything…brought to our recollection a plantation at Santo
Domingo…the resemblance is so perfect that we have seen both men and women in
irons, and others in stocks. Lastly, the noise of the whip” (Castillo, p. 109).
<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0d0d0d; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 242;">Beatings were a routine part of life. This punishment was instituted by
“Padre Junipero Serra…who advocated that only by using ‘blows’ and holding them
captives in those compounds could the Indians in the missions be civilized”
(Castillo, Preface page 1). “In his letters, Serra described the Indians’ gods
as ‘demonic’…he wrote that only Catholicism could save the Indians from evil,
believing that punishment was important to rid the demons from their souls. For
this reason, natives were lashed regularly, sometimes so severely that death
followed” (Castillo, p. x). <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0d0d0d; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 242;">Severe beatings were not the only reason for native deaths. Castillo
employs the medical research of Randall Milliken and Shelburne Cook, whose
separate studies on health conditions explain high mortality rates. Milliken’s
research showed that “native people were being introduced to diseases that came
from everywhere in the world” due to mission trading with many European nations
and “through the medium of the yearly visits of supply ships from Mexico. These
new diseases thrived not only because the population was immunologically
unprotected, but also because of the crowding and squalor that existed in
mission communities” (Castillo, p. 139). Diet also had an impact on mortality.
A study comparing skeletal remains between mission and pre-Hispanic coastal
natives reveals that “the diet forced on the mission Indians by the friars was
inferior nutritionally when compared to the diet enjoyed by Indians prior to
the establishment of the missions” (Castillo, p. 154). This combination of
factors resulted in the unusual circumstance where “more Indians died than were
born annually” (Castillo, p. 2). According to Cook, “from 1779 to 1833, the
year the missions were effectively dissolved, there were 29,100 births and a
staggering 62,600 deaths…40,000 could be considered natural mortality, leaving
22,600 to be accounted for as due to the negative effect of mission life”
(Castillo, pp. 139-140). <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0d0d0d; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 242;">So how did Saint Serra respond to the mounting death toll? “Rather than
express grief over the deaths, Serra rejoiced. And, according to his biographer
and close friend, Friar Francisco Palou, Serra frequently proclaimed ‘Thanks be
to God that by now there is not a mission that does not have sons in
heaven’…even the many deaths of Indian children did not faze Serra’s dark joy.
In a report dated July 24, 1775, to Friar Francisco Pangua, his Franciscan
superior…Serra wrote…‘the spiritual side of the missions is developing
happily…there are simultaneously two harvests, at one time, one for wheat, and
of a plague among the children, who are dying” (Castillo, p. 82).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0d0d0d; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 242;">When looking back at the cruelty of an individual in the past, one is
always in danger of judging them according to modern standards. Were Serra’s
actions considered cruel for his time? Castillo, who is aware of this question,
uses the testimony of over 100 of Serra’s contemporaries who were horrified at
the treatment of Native Americans. Significantly, the author employs the
observations of Serra’s fellow Spanish clergy and government officials who
concur that the system was inhumane, even for its time. But even if those of
Serra’s century had fully accepted the enslavement and violence of his forced
labor facilities, should it be acceptable to us? The Turkish government in 1915
looked upon the Armenian population in their country as fit only for
annihilation. Does that make the genocide of 1.5 million Armenians acceptable? <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0d0d0d; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 242;">Regardless of the judgment of history or the present, the Catholic Church
should have its own standards. With the canonization of Serra, it is their
hypocrisy that is truly in question. They allegedly base their decisions and
actions on Canon Law and the biblical myths of a non-violent savior who lived
in poverty and sacrificed his life out of compassion for humanity. There are
individuals, like Serra, whose devotion to the institution caused them to act
in violent, inhumane ways, but are ignored rather than honored. No pope has
seen fit to canonize Tomas de Torquemada, Spain’s first Grand Inquisitor, a
famous administrator of torture and death by burning. But a friar who enslaved
as many Native Americans as he could, causing the deaths of thousands and abetting
the annihilation of surrounding tribes, is accorded sainthood. Why? Because the
Catholic Church exists, as a profitable institution, to expand its wealth and
influence. Canonizing Serra is a way to claim California as an area where they
have power. Sainthood gives the faithful an idol around whom to gather and
pray. Canonization is highly political and propagandistic in its enactment. In
the most craven, calculating manner, the Church weighed the value of increased
power/influence, against the lives of the thousands of Native Americans Serra
killed. They decided that the institution would benefit more from having Serra
as a saint. The outcry for justice from Native Americans, the inhumanity of
Serra, even the Church’s allegedly vaunted morality; none of these were factors
in their decision. The Vatican may wish to ignore the acts of Junipero Serra.
But Castillo will not. After all of his work, he deserves the last word:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0d0d0d; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 242;">“Serra and his Franciscans established, in the Century of Light, a
movement that had a goal of crushing the civilization of California’s coastal
Indians. Imprisoned within the missions, where they died by the tens of
thousands, the Indians saw their lands lost and their culture all but
extinguished” (Castillo, p. 202).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #0d0d0d; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 242;">Castillo, Elias. <u>A Cross of Thorns. The Enslavement of California’s
Indians by the Spanish Missions</u>. Fresno: Craven Street Books, 2015.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-40551376714787801342017-11-20T12:53:00.002-08:002017-11-20T12:53:34.860-08:00Transgender History. The Roots of Today’s Revolution. Author: Susan Stryker.<div class="MsoNormal">
Professor Susan Stryker has written a heavily revised
version of her <u>Transgender History</u>. It is practically a new book. Just
released in November 2017, this volume is an up-to-date examination of
transgender/genderqueer history from its beginnings through the Trump election
and the “explicitly transgender inclusive and affirming” Women’s Marches that
occurred throughout the US on January 21, 2017 (Stryker, p. 235).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But this updated book is not just a history. It is also an
exploration of gender-nonconforming community and an invitation to those (who
are interested or isolated) to join. History is used as a way to both inform
about the past and inform about the culture. A group’s history is part of its
culture and this one has struggled against a great deal of prejudice. As a
result, Stryker presents, through successes and setbacks, a people, a heritage
and a set of individual activists, of whom a community member can be proud.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For all that is positive about this book, it does not begin
well. After a stirring introduction, the first chapter is designed to dampen
enthusiasm. It is entitled “Contexts, Concepts, and Terms,” and is a confusing
bombardment of definitions. Considering that her community has not yet settled
upon a definitive term of self-definition, this leaves the reader tangled in a
morass of words. Further confounding the issue is Stryker’s continuing use of
“Transgender” as an all-encompassing word. Stryker admits that, “in recent
years, some people have begun to use the term <i>transgender</i> to refer only to those who identify with a binary
gender other than the one they were assigned at birth” and that transgender is
a 1990s term “similar to what <i>genderqueer</i>,
<i>gender-nonconforming</i> and <i>nonbinary</i> mean now” (Stryker, p. 37). This
chapter functions as a wet washcloth on the first embers of anticipation. It
would have been better if the author had included some limited terminology in
her introduction; and reworked this chapter as a glossary appended to the end.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The book truly begins in Chapter Two: “A Hundred Plus Years
of Transgender History.” It portrays genderqueer history in the United States
from the 1800s to the 1960s. Chapter Three, on “Trans Liberation,” overlaps
slightly with the previous chapter, illustrating the rise of a human rights
ethos within the community and activism from the 1950s through the 1970s. The
last three chapters cover more contemporary developments in nonbinary history
and community from the 1970s through today.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Professor Stryker is not afraid of confrontation. She is
resolutely critical of prejudice from both the right and the left. While she
defines herself as “transfeminist,” Stryker is critical of feminists who
exclude transgender women from events that are for “women-born-women” only. She
also takes aim at lesbian and gay organizations that were late in their support
of gender-nonconforming people. But, as one might imagine, she is most expository
regarding oppression directed at her community from the larger society, a topic
faced throughout the narrative.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The last section in the book is particularly current. It is
called “Backlash, Survival, and Resistance.” Stryker begins this section by
reasoning that “it would be remarkable if all the historic changes in how
society understands and accepts trans and gender-nonconforming people failed to
produce a backlash among people hostile to changes” (Stryker, p. 226). She depicts
the trajectory of reaction against the Obama years and progressive political
gains for nonbinary and other minorities, which culminated in the Trump
presidency. But her analysis is hopeful. After describing the Women’s March and
the “trans inclusive” mass human rights work that produced it, she ends her
narrative by citing Martin Luther King’s revision of a Theodore Parker quote: “The
arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice.” As an activist,
Stryker is not one to depend on historical determinism to secure that justice.
She adds “we can do more than cross our fingers and hope for the best if we
ourselves work together to bend our little corner of the universe in that
direction” (Stryker, p. 236).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Stryker, Susan. <u>Transgender History. The Roots of Today’s
Revolution</u>. New York: Seal Press, 2017.</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-48014297828438849632017-11-11T05:40:00.002-08:002017-11-11T05:40:45.109-08:00Feminine and Opposition Journalism in Old Regime France. Le Journal des Dames. Author: Nina Rattner Gelbart.<div class="MsoNormal">
In France, before the revolution of 1789, there existed
three classifications of periodical publications: There were the official
publications, which were licensed by the Royal Court, staffed by aristocratic
royalists, and propounded sentiments acceptable to the monarchy. There were the
underground publications which were illegal and included writings that ranged
from pornography to political dissent. The third kind of publications were
tolerated publications. These were periodicals with alternative or marginal
views, attempting to convince the public to accept new propositions, who wished
to reach a wider audience than the underground press.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>Le Journal des Dames</i>
(1759 – 1778) falls into the tolerated category. Its 19-year history reflects
the fluctuations in French politics during the Ancien Regime. In the author’s
words, “these papers kept alive a dissenting journalistic spirit and fought to
achieve the maximum press freedom possible under a system of censorship…Periods
of leniency, such as the mid-1760s under [book trade minister] Choiseul and the
mid-1770s under [ministers] Malsherbes and Turgot, encouraged the <i>frondeur</i> [opposition] journalists to
believe that the reform and redefinition of social values would be possible within
the established order, but such periods
of repression as Maupeou’s ministry and Le Camus de Neville’s directorship of
the booktrade forced the <i>frondeurs</i>
into more subversive modes of discourse”
(Gelbart, p. 291). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Though <i>Le Journal des
Dames</i> would become a feminist publication, that was not its original
purpose. The two first male owners and editors presented it as a confection to
amuse bored aristocratic and middle class women by printing their writings. It
failed miserably. But three successive female editors gave the paper its more
serious purpose of encouraging women’s creativity and independence. The final
set of editors were men who, although they valued women’s independence, were
more interested in using <i>Le Journal</i>
as a mouthpiece for anti-autocratic ideas, resulting in the paper’s final
suppression.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Gelbart is a diligent academic historian. Unearthing the
record of this forgotten periodical involved deep submersion in the stacks of
eleven different French archives. The author’s dedication to historical accuracy
is reflected in her narrative: Though she expresses a great deal of enthusiasm
for the three female editors, when one of them writes that <i>Le Journal</i> was distributed by 81 booksellers throughout Europe,
Gelbart is quick to point out that this claim was “a sham, a publicity stunt”
(Gelbart, p. 112). Professor Gelbart would not sully years of intense research
by allowing inaccurate statements to stand.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Throughout her work, this historian builds a case that “the <i>Journal des Dames</i> was the first French
paper to encourage women to think, take a stance, and speak up…it worked with
many opposition papers transmitting explosive combinations of subversive
principles and values that would later find their fullest expression in
Revolutionary discourse” (Gelbart, pp. 302-3). In presenting this view, Gelbart
is patient, thorough and effective.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Gelbart, Nina Rattner. <u>Feminine and Opposition Journalism
in Old Regime France. Le Journal des Dames</u>. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987.</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-39332692834736972782017-10-28T10:47:00.002-07:002017-10-28T10:47:18.381-07:00American Visions. The Epic History of Art in America. Author: Robert Hughes.<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>American Visions</u> is as much art criticism as it is
Art History. But what penetrating, colorful art criticism! There are few recent
critics whose power, daring and insight, match that of Robert Hughes. There are
few writers whose careers are so eclectic that they include general history,
art criticism and travel. Many art critics remain within a narrow cultural
environment and a self-created cocoon of opinion, devoid of external influences.
But Hughes’ broad self-education and world travel have provided a balance of
experience that permits wider influence upon his perspective.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This offering covers painting, sculpture and architecture,
in the United States from untrained Colonial painters through 1990s
photographers. The author examines socio-political influences as well, showing
how colonial artists faced a Puritan ethic that considered images blasphemous,
and extending into the 1990s when conservatives forced censorship of art whose
content they disapproved. This wide-ranging examination is supported by a
format where large color photos depict the individual works and movements
discussed. Unfortunately, there are no footnotes or bibliography; an artifact
of devising a project that is less formally a history. If a writer is going to
present controversial views or even just educate, she should support her
assertions with documentation.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At the outset, Hughes is faced with a dilemma: The chief
American painters were just not very good. Both Copley and Peale, the most
well-known of the new republic’s painters, created some of the most appallingly
stiff, expressionless and anatomically misshapen portraits of the 1700s. Both
artists were admirably honest and humble about their skills. Copley avoided traveling
to London, where he was encouraged to train, because he would have been “a
sprat in an ocean of talent” (Hughes, p. 83). Peale candidly wrote to a friend
“how far short I am…of the excellence of some painters, infinitely below that
perfection…I have not the execution, have not the ability” (Hughes, p. 95). But
Hughes is a polite Australian guest in the US, writing for an American
audience. He rationalizes that the comically outsized head in Copley’s portrait
of Paul Revere by writing “the assonance between its big smooth mass and that
of the teapot…is surely meant to remind us of the identity between the
craftsman and his work” (Hughes, p. 86). Surely not. Copley simply had no sense
of proportion. It would have been more instructive about the development of
skill in US artists if Hughes had been as blunt as Copley and Peale about their
lack of talent. It isn’t until the career of Gilbert Stuart that we begin to
see some semblance of proportion and expression among the portraitists who
remained in the US.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another problem comes much later in the book with the
migration of Abstract Art across the Atlantic. It resulted in Abstract
Expressionism; the first original art movement on US soil. The difficulties
involved with a trend, where communication with an audience is not the goal of
the artists, is treated in another article at this link <a href="http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2017/09/the-problem-of-abstract-expressionism.html">http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2017/09/the-problem-of-abstract-expressionism.html</a> It is
too extensive a conversation to be done justice here.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are times when the colorful, enthusiastic writing of
Robert Hughes, carries him away: “In the 1950s and 1960s Americans came to
believe in the supremacy of their art” (Hughes, p. 465). The author may love aesthetic
works that much, but the majority of US citizens ascribe little importance to
art. For the most part however, Hughes has an excellent sense of history and
artistic mood. His ability to pair an unrelated poem with a sculpture, or his
interpretations of a work, are preternaturally spot-on. He can write movingly
as he does of the Vietnam War Memorial: “the names of the dead on the black
walls, in whose polished surfaces the living see themselves visually united
with the dead. They take rubbings; they leave flowers; they kiss the names of
those they have lost” (Hughes, p. 570). He can write bitingly: “Mabel Dodge
Luhan was a mystagogue, an egoist, a sexual imperialist and much of the time an
intolerable bitch” (Hughes, p. 389). His brashness, emblematic of his style,
will force a reader to react emotionally, to take sides, to think. His
colorful, opinionated demeanor, highly articulate and broad, drives the
narrative and engages his audience. One will not be sleepwalking through this
book.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hughes, Robert. <u>American Visions. The Epic History of Art
in America</u>. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997.</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-76790245099092076772017-10-23T13:36:00.002-07:002017-10-23T13:36:35.679-07:00Antifa. The Anti-Fascist Handbook. Author: Mark Bray.<div class="MsoNormal">
Since the ascent of Trump to the White House, more attention
has been paid to the hateful rhetoric and terrifying violent attacks of the
alt-right, white supremacists and fascists, against minorities. More attention
has also been paid to Antifa, a loose confederation of groups that organize
against those forces. Though the acts and photos of Antifa members have been
ubiquitous in the media, who they are and what they stand for is not generally
understood. <u>Antifa. The Anti-Fascist Handbook</u> will supply a reader with
an insider’s perspective on their history, their members’ differing views and
their activities. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Mark Bray, an Antifa activist, begins his elucidation by
saying “I wish there were no need for this book. But someone burned down the
Victoria Islamic Center in Victoria, Texas, hours after the announcement of
the Trump administration’s Muslim ban”
(Bray, p. xi). He continues with a now familiar, record of the hundreds of
attacks against minorities that have occurred since the inauguration of Trump. This
is followed by a fascinating, and rarely taught, series of three chapters on
the history of anti-fascist organizing. After a chapter summarizing historical
lessons about the rise of fascism in different nations, the author spends the
rest of his book on strategy and tactics for anti-fascist activists.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Before discussing the more controversial aspects of Antifa
activism, namely their opposition to freedom of speech for fascists and their
violent tactics of preventing speaking engagements and rallies from occurring,
it is important to briefly examine their non-violent methods that are more in
alignment with constitutional republican values. Antifa expends a great deal of
effort on doxxing (photographing and otherwise identifying fascists at rallies
and meetings, then presenting their activities to their employers, parents and
communities, which results in pressure, and firings, for their fascist
activities). They also teach self-defense, form neighborhood committees to
protect targeted populations, create propaganda, recruit people to outnumber
fascists at events, research far-right organizations, infiltrate fascist groups
with spies, and carry-out creative non-violent actions like singing outside
right-wing offices (Bray, pp. 168 & 188). The handbook can be a useful tool
for groups who wish to organize against fascism, but are opposed to violent
tactics and censorship. Since these are the majority of anti-fascists, Bray
provides a useful service.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, one cannot ignore the violent acts that Bray proudly
depicts. In addition to organized campus actions that prevented right wing
speakers (Bray, p. 176), he portrays individual acts of violence “in the
Atlanta punk scene…someone walk[ed] into a show wearing a No Remorse [fascist
music group] shirt…a black skinhead punched him four times, knocked him out,
and dragged him outside by his feet completely unconscious…we completely made
it so that these people are not accepted” (Bray, p. 70). He even presents
overseas anti-fascist riots proudly, which occurred on a scale the US has not
seen. In Greece, 2008, the police murdered an anarchist, triggering “a month of
unparalleled insurrection…when the smoke cleared, approximately 200 million
euros of property destruction had been committed” (Bray, p. 100). These are presented
as anti-fascist successes; so presumably, we will see similar occurrences in
the US if Antifa is successful here.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now, on to Bray’s ideological support for violently
suppressing freedom of speech. This is the section in which most people,
regardless of political affiliation, are interested. This is where the line
exists between Antifa and everyone who thinks that the Bill of Rights is a good
idea. For Bray to get readers past reservations about violent censorship and
recruit more activists, it was the place where he really needed to shine; to
make his most cogent, thoughtful arguments. His explanation amounts to a
disappointing failure of rationalizations for depriving those with whom one
disagrees of their constitutional rights. Bray begins reasonably enough,
arguing that “the American government already seriously limits what can be
expressed…It restricts false advertisement, libel and television commercials
for tobacco.” So there is a false assumption that “anti-fascism is the only
threat to an otherwise pristine state of free speech” (Bray, p. 144). He warms
to his discussion, following the history of censorship from our two Red Scares,
through the brutal suppression of Occupy and Black Lives Matter protesters
today (Bray, p. 145). The bedrock of his argument is that freedom of speech is
imperfectly applied in the US. Incarcerated prisoners do not have the same
level of freedom of speech as the rest of us. Corporations are considered by
the Supreme Court to be people and have more than the rest of us. It is a poor
argument for violent vigilante censorship. Most readers who are not driven by
their fear of fascism, or caught-up in the crass emotionalism that replaces
rational thought in such times, will conclude that permitting increased freedom
of speech to those who need it, and curtailing corporate domination, are more
reasoned courses of action. Freedom of Speech is an ideal, therefore imperfect
by definition. The Constitution will always require deliberation and the US
will always require vigilance around the protection of rights. There are more
convolutions and rationalizations in the author’s argument, but a
point-by-point refutation is beyond the scope of this review. Readers will
undoubtedly make-up their own minds. Unlike Antifa’s goal, the purpose of this
review is to inspire thought & discussion, not shut them down.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The next chapter is a continuing explication of tactics,
both violent and non-violent. Where the previous chapter addressed freedom of
speech, this one is designed for those who have misgivings about violence.
“There are three main arguments that anti-fascists use to justify their occasional
use of violence…First…‘rational debate’ and the institutions of government have
failed to consistently halt the rise of fascism…Second, they point to the many
successful examples of [using violence in]…shutting down…far-right
organizing…Third, fascist violence often necessitates self-defense” (Bray, p.
169). Aside from self-defense, the other two arguments undermine our
Constitution. They also undermine the anti-fascist movement. Though most
anti-fascist activists are non-violent, everyone gets tarred with the Antifa
brush. Since the media focuses upon the most violent scenes, even peaceful
protesters who have shown-up to outnumber the fascists are thought to be
violent and/or anti-Freedom of Speech. Antifa thereby provides a service for
the fascists, who can deflect from their own brutality by arguing that they’re
just good Americans defending themselves and their rights. US citizens watching
the news will conclude that Antifa are also fascists because, they use the
tactics traditionally associated with fascism. Fascism is actually a form of
state rule by an elite group. That elite has a specific ethnic identity which,
they assume, makes them superior to other ethnic groups. So Antifa is not
literally fascist. But if they act like fascists, pedantic subtleties of
definition will be lost on the average citizen watching TV or reading news
accounts.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bray does effectively counter that public sympathy is not
the measure of a movement’s success and that “shifting spectrum of sympathy
must be weighed against specific movement goals” (Bray, p. 185). It is
important for the public, individuals working alongside Antifa and those
considering joining Antifa, to know that their goal is not simply turning-back
racism in a democracy. Their goal is a successful revolution to create a
post-capitalist society. This is not a hidden agenda. Bray clearly states that
“most American Antifa have been anarchists or antiauthoritarian communists”
(Bray, p. 148), and that “anti-fascism is but one facet of a larger
revolutionary project” (Bray, p. 159). He sees anti-fascism as “a stepping
stone toward promoting revolutionary socialist consciousness more broadly”
(Bray, p. 162). Liberal anti-fascists must recognize that the reason that our Constitution,
methods and values, are not important to Antifa is because they are not
dedicated to liberal democratic principles. When they employ violent and
censorious behavior, they are not sacrificing something they value. Those of us
who are not revolutionary communists, anarchists and socialists, will need to
be judicious about where we work with them and what our vision is without them.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bray presents “the liberal formula for opposing
fascism…reasoned debate…police to counteract fascist violence…parliamentary
government to counteract fascist attempts to seize power.” He honestly admits “there
is no doubt that sometimes this formula has worked” (Bray, pp. 129-130). There
is also no doubt that violent opposition, as in the case of Germany, Italy and
Spain, has sometimes <i>not</i> worked. These
facts are important to those of us who value democratic process and critical
thought over violent solutions. If one thinks that the Constitution, equitable
precepts and rational thought, are important to preserve, one employs
constitutional methods against fascism to the very end. If the fascists do win,
and the Constitution is then invalidated by authoritarian leaders and their
mobs, then it’s time to physically defend one’s self against their excesses.
But we should give our values every chance of success before tossing them aside
and reaching for the nail-studded baseball bat.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bray would no doubt argue that, by the time the fascists
gain power, it will be too late to defend one’s self; and he may be right. As
one whose Eastern European Jewish relatives, on both sides of my family, died
in gas chambers, and one who is likely to be among the first dumped into a
concentration camp, I am willing to risk a late violent response. I would only
pick-up a gun when all hope of the Constitution working is lost. Our Constitution,
and its freedom of speech, is that important to civilization. Everyone else can
read and decide for themselves where they will draw their line. Readers still
have the freedom to use their own minds; that is one of the best things about
our Constitution.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bray, Mark. <u>Antifa. The Anti-Fascist Handbook</u>.
Brooklyn: Melville House Publishing, 2017.</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-16349929048295649832017-10-08T08:10:00.002-07:002017-10-20T14:30:01.115-07:00Orders to Kill. The Putin Regime and Political Murder. Author: Amy Knight.<div class="MsoNormal">
Amy Knight’s expose book on the Putin Regime begins with an
eye-opening depiction of how the current political system evolved and how it
works. After the fall of the Soviet Union, President Boris Yeltsin disbanded
the KGB spy service. This released a flood of spies who used their connections
and skills to obtain positions in various areas of government and economy. Some
began using their covert skills in support of the rising rich, some switched to
other government branches, some became employees of the growing organized crime
organizations. Relationships between former KGB agents knit these three groups
together in a form of mutual support. There would always be competition between
various factions and individuals, even killings, but they understood that
maintaining their position depended on each other.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Then “Yeltsin, an impulsive, erratic leader, whose
commitment to democracy was half-hearted, faced popular opposition and thus
needed the police and security organs to keep him in power. So he
systematically rebuilt these agencies…By the time Vladimir Putin became Russian
president in 2000, the security services had become every bit as powerful as
the former KGB” (Knight, p. 32). With Putin, a former KGB administrator, the
cooperation between new security agencies, organized crime, new wealthy
oligarchs and government became even more cohesive. The new president appointed
many former KGB colleagues to the highest posts in government, called “power
ministries.” These individuals are called “Siloviki.” They are “former members
of the Communist Party. But they believe in economic nationalism, a
centralized, authoritarian government, and the restoration of the supposed
greatness of the Soviet Union” (Knight, p. 33). They also believe in amassing
personal wealth and are willing to use corrupt practices to do so. With such
cohesive power, economic ambition and their web of connections, they tolerate
no internal dissent, political opposition or media scrutiny of their dealings.
Hundreds of reporters and opposition politicians have been assassinated.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Because police and security agencies are part of the system
that orders assassinations, subsequent trials convict trigger men, but not the
functionaries ordering these murders. Even if a persistent, unconnected
investigator or attorney were able to make a case, “telephone justice”
determines the outcome: “a call from someone higher in rank than the judge or
prosecutor giving instructions as to how the case should be resolved…telephone
justice, accompanied often by monetary bribes, and even threats of violence,
prevails…because Russia has no tradition of a democratic legal process”
(Knight, p. 58).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
After this depiction, Knight focuses specifically on the
most high profile murders of pro-democracy politicians and journalists. This is
where the author’s narrative moves from solid historical evidence to facts
mixed with fuzzy speculation. Her examples exhibit a spectrum of reliability.
On one end of this spectrum are murders that were likely carried-out by Putin’s
government, such as the 2006 poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in London.
There, the “British High Court in January 2016” concluded “that Litvinenko was
killed most probably on Kremlin orders” (Knight, p. 8). On the other end of the
spectrum are doubtful claims and a few frankly crack-pot theories, like the
assertion that the Boston Marathon bombers of November 2011 were “pawns in the
hands of Russian security services” (Knight, p. 254). In between these extremes
are a multitude of cases tried in Russia where culpability cannot be properly
ascertained due to government interference and absence of evidence. This is
hardly a ringing endorsement of the author’s investigative prowess or the
strength of her cases. But even if one assassination of a pro-democracy victim
were carried out by the Putin regime, it is an indictment of that regime’s
integrity. Would the citizens of any legitimate democracy tolerate a murder
committed by their president?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The question that should concern most US citizens, given
Russia’s combined government-espionage-crime-business system, is: What kind of
business relationship does Donald Trump have with Russia? The CIA, FBI and NSA, agree that Russian espionage efforts attempted to disrupt
US elections to favor Trump. Business relations do exist between Trump and this
nefarious Russian system. Donald Trump, for his part, has expressed a
perplexing, admiration for Putin that has persisted in spite of hacking and
international aggression by Russia. Trump has even gone so far as to defend the
murders discussed in Knight’s book. When Fox News Host, Bill O’Reilly, reminded
Trump that “Putin was a killer,” Trump responded “We’ve got a lot of killers.
What, you think our country’s so innocent?” (Knight, p. 280). The current
President of the United States even fired the FBI director investigating
Russian election interference, and bragged to Russian diplomats that he did it to
ease pressure from the investigation.**
The connection between Trump’s businesses and Putin’s criminal system
should be fully disclosed.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Amy Knight writes with aplomb that Putin is directly
responsible for the ever growing piles of journalist and opposition politician
corpses in Russia. She catalogs the evidence and conclusions of others with the
dedicated hand of a court stenographer. But, for all of her confidence, she is
not a convincing prosecutor. She lacks both the necessary evidence and the
sleuthing ability to place a smoking gun in the hands of a Putin functionary.
The most she can do, from the safety of North America, is to introduce the
statistical likelihood that, out of the crushing hundreds of assassinations,
Putin is responsible for at least a few. The victims deserve a more probing
book. Unfortunately, most of those who attempted first-hand investigation have
already been killed. So perhaps being an ally to opposition journalists and
compiling the cases is all we can ask a writer to risk.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, this does not detract from what the book provides
for US and international audiences. First, it creates a clear picture of the collaborators
with, and agencies of, Putin’s regime. Second, it presents a record of
assassinations, revealing a consistent pattern of violence against regime
critics. Though a reader will not observe a direct connection between Putin and
any individual crime, she will find her view of Russian politics expanded.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Knight, Amy. <u>Orders to Kill. The Putin Regime and Political
Murder</u>. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2017.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: rgb(241, 244, 245);">**https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html.
“Trump Told Russians That Firing ‘Nut Job’ Comey Eased Pressure From
Investigation.” <i>The New York Times</i>, The New York Times, 19 May
2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html.</span></div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-55847571631477019662017-09-16T12:42:00.000-07:002017-09-16T12:42:36.891-07:00The Culture of Power and the Power of Culture. By TCW Blanning.<div class="MsoNormal">
As the author concisely states: “This book is a comparative
study of the development of political culture in Europe from the late
seventeenth to the late eighteenth century…the focus is chiefly on Great
Britain, France and the Holy Roman Empire. Its central thesis is that during
this period a new cultural space developed, which posed new challenges to
regimes and their ruling orders. Alongside the old culture, centered on the
courts and the representation of monarchical authority, there emerged a ‘public
sphere’, in which private individuals come together to form a whole greater
than the sum of the parts … ‘public opinion’ came to be recognized as the
ultimate arbiter in matters of taste and politics. These changes presented
regimes with both a challenge and an opportunity” (p. 2).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tim Blanning’s introductory framework is a restatement of
Jurgen Habermas’s ideas, from <u>The Structural Transformation of the Public
Sphere</u>. But, there are important disagreements between the two. Blanning attempts
to depart from Habermas by “clear[ing] away” his predecessor’s “insistence on
the ‘bourgeois’ nature of the public sphere” and “its allegedly oppositional
orientation” to 18<sup>th</sup> Century regimes (Blanning, p. 14). That he
fails to clear away either will be explained in the course of this review. But
he does provide a significant history. His examination is richly informative
and applies public sphere theory to an expanded range of political
environments. Habermas focused his initial examination on France. Blanning surveys
France, Britain and the Holy Roman Empire. By doing so, he is able to exhibit
how other early modern authorities dealt differently with this newly formed cultural
space.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
An important revelation is that the challenge of the public
sphere did not have to result in violent revolution, as it did in France. Great
Britain was able to adapt to public opinion. It had a monarch who projected a
moral character admired by middle and working class subjects, and a Parliament that
prided itself on liberty to an extent not mirrored in France. There were
factors ignored by Blanning: Part of the island’s advantage over 18<sup>th</sup>
Century France was in having an economy where, thanks to imperialism and
industrialism, fewer commoners went hungry. While these conditions were immediately
harmful to subjects, slaves and colonies, they gave the government time to acclimatize
to democracy.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Holy Roman Empire is a more problematic example. Blanning’s
focal point is Frederick II’s Prussia. This historian sees Frederick as
Frederick saw himself: as an enlightened despot. Certainly, Frederick II deserves
credit for fostering the arts, censoring publications less than France did, surrounding
himself with Philosophes and talking a good game. But he didn’t “create” the
Prussian public sphere as Blanning claims (Blanning, p. 227). Neither did he
make “contributions to the formation of a public sphere” (Blanning, p. 223). This
arena was evolving in his nation in spite of monarchy; not because of it. One
should be more judicious in evaluating this king: Frederick allowed “some
freedoms of the press” (Blanning, p. 224). He joined the liberalizing
Freemasons (Blanning, p. 226). He wrote articles that were widely read. Some
credit is due. It may even be true, as the historian claims, that Frederick II
“was a genius…as a political theorist, historian, poet, dramatist, composer and
flautist, he would deserve his niche in any cultural history” (Blanning, p.
227). But a careful reader needs to look past Blanning’s colossal man crush to
examine the workings of power. A monarch has privileges of action and
expression that others do not. The public sphere is an arena of thought
experiments and debate. But the only times that the author quotes someone criticizing
Frederick’s ideas is when that person is outside of Prussia. Moser disagrees
with the king over Shakespeare from the safety of Osnabruck (Blanning, p. 251).
Writers for the <i>Hamburgische Neue Zeitung
</i>dispute Frederick’s evaluation of German literature from their free city
(Blanning, p. 262). No evidence is shown of <u>Prussians</u> debating their
king over literature. Also, what is not publicly spoken is as important as what
is spoken. Literary criticism is one thing, but the menace of authority would
not permit one to excoriate governmental shortcomings in Prussia. Frederick did
not contribute to the growing public sphere; he controlled it in some areas and
usurped unrivaled privileges of expression in others.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Part of the author’s misperception of monarchical government
lies in a basic misunderstanding of power. Blanning’s Introduction states “in
1679, Louis XIV obliged Frederick William…to return to Sweden all the territory
conquered…not by force of arms…but by his aura of authority” (Blanning, p. 5).
Earlier, he says it was “the success of the British and Prussian states in
adapting their political cultures which enabled them to achieve success in war”
(Blanning, p. 3). While factors like an aura of authority or a modern political
culture may contribute to success, the ability to do violence and visceral fear
are far more persuasive motivators. Frederick William knew that France had the
largest modern army in Europe and immense wealth to support a protracted war.
Power is not as intellectual a force as Blanning presents. So he depicts
Frederick as an enlightened participant in the public sphere without seeing how
his threat gave him control. He shows British government reasonably bending to
public opinion, without understanding that behind this civility loomed their
memory of Civil War, and numerous bloody revolts, which produced a taste for
compromise and stability.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
When examining history, one must look forward as well as
backward from an event to understand it in context. The history of the public
sphere is one of a public applying pressure to authoritarian governments to
produce changes. The scope of Blanning’s book only shows the period of 1660 -
1789. So he neither sees back to the series of the aforementioned armed
conflicts in England, nor ahead to the results of public sphere pressure. The
history of British monarchical & aristocratic government is one of bending
so far that it was eventually bent-over. The UK gradually achieved full
suffrage, between petitions and revolts, because government eventually
accommodated over three centuries of pressure. In the German principalities
consistent pressure, memories of the French Revolution and occurrences like the
Revolution of 1848, eventually led to government concessions. Public opinion
favoring democracy, educated over years of legal and censored writing, along
with the Kaiser’s loss in World War I, produced Germany’s first republic. In
the long view, a persistent, inextinguishable public voice desiring equal
participation (along with the threat or actuality of violence), won in Europe.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Blanning’s failure to see the dominance of the bourgeoisie
in the public sphere is puzzling. Monarchs and aristocrats did write, and
create institutions, outside of the court. But the institutions they produced
were fairly exclusive. The author’s own statistics regarding European musical
events, show that middle class individuals attended middle class venues and
aristocrats attended aristocratic venues. When liberal aristocrats opened their
events to the populace, few subjects could afford tickets (Blanning, pp.
172-3). If institutions are not available to the public, they cannot impact the
public sphere. Concerning publicity and writing, aristocrats were a small
minority of the participants. Many of them supported ideas that would improve
conditions for the middle class. In general, public sphere publicity benefitted
the middle class and diminished aristocratic power. Saying that the public
sphere was not bourgeois is like saying that Black Lives Matter is not an
African American cause, because a minority of white people are involved.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Though Blanning fails to disprove Habermas with his notions,
that the public sphere was neither bourgeois nor antagonistic to the
traditional power structure, his study has a great deal of merit. His central thesis, quoted at the outset, remains intact. This
study is broader, though not deeper, than Habermas. He examines more nations,
showing how they avoided revolution through accommodation and usurpation of
public sphere vehicles. It is unfortunate that a writer, with “power” in his
title, does not understand how power over people is different from power with
people. But the author’s survey is thoughtful and coherent. He remains on-point
throughout a lengthy project. More importantly, one can understand him. As
Blanning observes, “even native German speakers have difficulty deciphering
[Habermas’s] tortuous prose” (Blanning, p. 6). Readers of English who have
found translations of Habermas to be a scrum of concepts, should pick-up <u>The
Culture of Power</u>. Habermas may have had an original and brilliant theory,
but Blanning explains and exemplifies it with superior clarity. Able writing,
coupled with broader application, make this work a valuable contribution to
history and public sphere theory.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Blanning, TCW. <u>The Culture of Power and the Power of
Culture</u>. Old Regime Europe 1660-1789</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-15083789414476900542017-09-11T14:46:00.001-07:002017-09-11T14:46:27.696-07:00The Cambridge Illustrated History of China. By Patricia Buckley Ebrey.<div class="MsoNormal">
For a historian writing a book that covers a great swath of
time or region, there are pitfalls which are difficult to avoid. The mass of
information can overwhelm an author to such a degree that marshalling facts
like significant dates, names of rulers and wars, result in a text composed of
desolate rote data. But that data is
important evidence which cannot be disregarded.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Patricia Buckley Ebrey has performed a masterful job of
solving this problem. Her subject, China, is lengthy in history, wide in
regional influence, vast in geographical proportions, incomparable in
population and important in modern geopolitical power. Fortunately, she has
structured her narrative with such balance that it breathes with humanity. All
the necessary mechanical facts are present, interwoven with a plethora of information
on culture, individuals and experiences of the Chinese people. Ebrey gives
special attention to artistic and intellectual developments. She highlights
movements and personages responsible for social, political and cultural change.
She provides snapshots of daily peasant life and emphasizes conditions for
women during each age; in a society with a notable history of suppressing both
of these groups. Ebrey emphasizes that China is a collection of many conquered
and amalgamated ethnic groups with distinctive attributes. Her presentation of
softer realities (culture, humanity and transformation), within a framework of
hard chronological facts, is a balancing act that will provide readers with a
holistic picture of China’s history.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ebray does fall down near the end of her study. The last two
chapters, from China’s revolution to the present, compress too many
sociopolitical changes and events into 66 pages. The author is unable to
present a form or conclusion during this bombardment of information. The reader
is presented with chronology, but superficial analysis. In this circumstance,
the reader is as flattened as the author under the weight of an unmanageable
rush of developments. Clearly, the author’s forte is the presentation of
history. Her ability to present current events, or the connection between
current events and history, is in question.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But the structural breakdown that befell the last two chapters
does not detract from Ebrey’s stellar accomplishment. She has presented the
history of an immense topic in an effective manner. For a non-fiction reader to
benefit from an extensive text, there must be something human on which to
adhere. When a historian presents humanizing information within a chronological
framework, it gives the audience an experience of empathy with the topic. This
empathy enhances one’s ability to remember facts. If one feels empathy towards
women subjected to foot-binding, one is more likely to remember the time period
in which it occurred or the class of Chinese who practiced it. If one develops
an appreciation of Chinese painting, one is more likely to remember what was
happening in the environment in which it was produced. These humane keys are
scattered throughout Ebrey’s narrative, giving the reader a means to manage the
volume of information and connect to China’s past. This technique also
encourages lifelong learners to pursue further improvement and education by
looking for materials that address subjects they found interesting in the text.
In general, readers will retain substantial information and develop greater
interest in China because of Ebrey’s technique. More historians should examine
what she has done if they wish to inspire interest in their topic.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ebrey, Patricia Buckley. <u>The Cambridge Illustrated
History of China</u>. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-50190813737893822632017-09-11T14:32:00.000-07:002017-09-11T14:32:14.935-07:00Savage Beauty. The Life of Edna St Vincent Millay. By Nancy Milford.<div class="MsoNormal">
Most poets do not make a living from their writing. This was
especially so for female poets in the 1920s. Undoubtedly, the road was even
harder for one from an impoverished family in Maine. But Edna St Vincent Millay
was recognized by the literary world for a salient talent by the time she was
nineteen. She entered a national contest for poets and, although she did not
win, she caught the attention of a New York socialite named Caroline Dow. A
Vassar College alum, Dow convinced her alma mater to accept this gifted young
woman and prodded her New York alumnae circle to pay the tuition.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Millay’s poetry is not flowery or sentimental. It more reflects
the cynicism in her life regarding relationships: </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 10.0pt;">I shall forget you presently, my dear,<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 10.0pt;">So make the most of this, your little day,<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 10.0pt;">Your little month, your little half a year,<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 10.0pt;">Ere I forget, or die, or move away,<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 10.0pt;">And we are done forever; by and by<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 10.0pt;">I shall forget you, as I said, but now,<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 10.0pt;">If you entreat me with your loveliest lie<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 10.0pt;">I will protest you with my favorite vow.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">(Milford, p. 175)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Millay knew whereof she spoke. She had so many simultaneous
lovers, both men and women, that it is surprising she was able to keep her
personal life from the public spotlight. But even when her poetry alluded to
what would have been scandalous indiscretions for that era, her fans seem far
more interested in her ability, her presence and the passion with which she
writes.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As with any personality, one must contend with some
unlikeable traits. Millay is vain, self-absorbed and emotionally impervious to
the harm that her recklessness causes others. This is particularly so late in
life before she learns to control her addiction to opiates and alcohol. But
even in college, her letters home are crassly insensitive: She lists all the
clothes that Ms Dow is buying for her just when her impoverished mother and
sisters are being evicted from their rental property (Milford, p. 120). Also,
the narrative records complaints of friends and acquaintances used by Millay
for personal or professional gain, then ignored after they have outlived their
usefulness. But there are appealing qualities to balance these negative traits.
Millay had a sparkle that made people want to know her whether she was at
Vassar, in Greenwich Village bohemia, or in the Midwest on reading tours. One
roots for her to succeed and lift her family out of poverty. Her verse, honest,
self-revealing, well-written, allows a reader access to appreciate her. This
biography presents so much of her poetry chronologically, in context with
events of her life, that it exposes her struggles, her triumphs and her
development as a poet.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nancy Milford’s book is an absorbing, pleasurable meditation
on personality and inner life by an author who has researched her subject in a
deep, personal way. It was helpful that she had unique access to Edna’s private
papers and letters which had been jealously guarded by Millay’s sister, Norma.
This younger sibling had hoped to write her own biography of Edna, but never
got around to it. Milford formed a friendship with Norma and cajoled both the
papers and much intimate family information out of her. Because of its
sensitivity, its revelation of the internal and its many intersecting
personalities, <u>Savage Beauty</u> reads like a Jane Austen novel come to
life. Milford’s offering is a master writing course for biographers. This is
how it is done.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Milford, Nancy. <u>Savage Beauty. The Life of Edna St
Vincent Millay</u>. New York: Random House, Inc., 2002.</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-29176120333825303372017-09-02T15:35:00.003-07:002017-09-03T14:50:07.331-07:00The Problem of Abstract Expressionism. Inspired by reading Robert Hughes.<div class="MsoNormal">
In Europe of the early 1900s, abstraction of a visual image
permitted painters to express additional emotion or features that a simple
representative painting might not. It was part of the constant experiment of
thesis-antithesis that permits artists to innovate, rejecting what came before
and creating something new. Witness how German Expressionism in the hands of
Oskar Kokoschka produces a scrumble of paint in the flesh of his figures to
show conflicting emotion. Some movements, like Cubism, were an attempt to come
to terms with a fast paced society where, in a newly invented car, for example,
a rider will see the front, right and back, of a walking pedestrian, all in the
matter of two seconds. Cubism was an experiment to communicate this experience
visually on a two-dimensional surface in a fixed time. But in the hands of US
artists in the 1940s and 50s, these attempts at new means of communication and
expression to an audience evolved to exclude the audience. The first original
art movement created on US soil, Abstract Expressionism, eliminates any image onto
which a viewer could latch. It encompassed a collection of motives, some useful
for the development of painting. Pollack’s drip paintings are a freeform play
with technique that liberates the painter from the fist and brush. It results
in often aesthetically pleasing patterns, but for a viewer who has not read
that Pollack is only playing with technique and not attempting to communicate,
it can be confusing. Robert Motherwell produced conceptual works. He wrote
volumes on his ugly shapes of black washes on white canvas that look as if they
could have been applied with a dish sponge. There is not one person who could
look at his famous “Elegy to the Spanish Republic” and see anything that
vaguely resembles its title. But his concepts have inspired generations of
artists, even representational artists, to create and invent. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It would be authoritarian, and potentially censorious, to
say that these works are not art. Such pronouncements are too often used to
squelch creativity that is either not understood or not approved by an
establishment. If we wish artistic expression to remain an unrestricted process,
an open-ended definition such as “Art is an expression using a medium” is
required. It prevents art Nazis from defining and controlling what is, or is
not, art.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, there is nothing wrong with saying that a kind of
art has difficulty communicating with a viewer, especially when it is not the
intention of that work to communicate. Let’s take, for a moment, the
black-and-white lines applied to paper by Franz Kline. Some conceptualize his
works as “A Unique Existential Act.” Others claim that his inspiration came
from Zen Calligraphy. And still others state categorically that his “work had
nothing to do with … Zen Calligraphy” (Hughes, p. 481). It is possible that,
given the many contradicting opinions on Kline’s work, that no one can grasp
what he is doing. Maybe he is describing the taste of cauliflower. He doesn’t
say. It is an internal monologue not meant to communicate. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Then, of course, there are those artists who are simply
attempting to deceive the viewer. About his abstract “zip” paintings (visually,
a canvas painted all one color with one contrasting color stripe down the
middle), Barnett Newman once said that a friend “challenged me to explain what
one of my paintings could possibly mean to the world. My answer was that if he
and others could read it properly it would mean the end of all state capitalism
and totalitarianism.” The critic Robert Hughes responded “Such utterances are
the very definition of bullshit: empty depth” (Hughes, p. 494). But these
utterances are so common that they have become a written prelude to most art
shows. The art world is now open to a greater number of posers and con men
than ever before.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So how does an art lover approach work that is entirely
abstract? Should we follow the advice of knowledgeable, well-read critics and
art historians? The same generation of critics who could not agree on the line
paintings of Franz Kline also panned the drip paintings of Jackson Pollack in
1948; then in 1949, when Clement Greenberg wrote that Pollack was a genius,
they all started to praise the artist. The critics don’t know any more than the
casual observer. The only solutions appear to be either 1) to keep one’s self
up to date by reading the volumes of sincere and insincere writings that
artists and critics have produced on individual painters, democratically making
one’s own judgments, 2) Look at the specific works in galleries and museums
with an emotional/gut approach concerning how you feel about the work, or 3)
Forget about abstract art and look at representational forms. This is art; not survival. How
you approach the topic is entirely up to you.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Hughes, Robert. <u>American Visions. The Epic History of Art
in America</u>. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997.</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4439269196476993502.post-39206377802339032922017-07-16T14:07:00.000-07:002017-07-16T14:07:24.523-07:00A Brief History of the Vikings. By Jonathan Clements<div class="MsoNormal">
Jonathan Clements’ <u>A Brief History of the Vikings</u>
chronicles the rise and fall of this seafaring culture. He begins in the 5<sup>th</sup>
Century as the Romans are abandoning Brittania and Gaul. At that time, many
Northern European tribes, including the forebears of the Vikings, were
asserting themselves by raiding the edges of the beset Empire. He ends with the
Viking defeat by Godwinson at Stamford Bridge in Northumbria, in 1066; followed
three weeks later by Godwinson’s loss to the Norman descendents of Vikings at
Hastings.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is understandable that the author should begin and end
his Viking narrative with their maritime roving and predation; particularly
beginning and ending in Britain: Clements was born in the United Kingdom. Despite
family genealogy connecting him with Scandinavia, he has views of one raised
outside of that region. The traits that he and non-Scandinavian Europe
associate with the Vikings involve pillage of their territories. But what of
the culture itself? What of the unique internal qualities and creativity that
distinguish a culture? Clements does describe their ship-building and their
sagas. He does credit their navigation and exploration; their establishment of far-flung
trading posts and colonies from the rivers of Russia to the shores of North
America. However, most of the book is a chronology of pillage, wars and
conquest.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Like most civilized scholars, Clements struggles with his
perspective on Viking violence. He resists the efforts of “Latter-day
apologists” and “some museum curators” to “soften the image” (Clements p. 11).
But then, one is left only with the violence and a lot of explaining. Why does
a set of tribes from one area become the pillagers of Europe? Clements’ explanation,
that those who sailed from their homes “were the rejects of Scandinavian
society—forced to travel further afield to make their fortune” is not entirely
satisfying (Clements p. 12). The label “rejects” and the description of them
separating from the rest of society, makes a pretense that the pillagers were different
from the decent folk of Scandinavian settlements. However, the fact that slaves
and goods, captured in Ireland and Brittania, were traded through Scandinavia,
down Russian rivers, to the Muslims, indicates that the pillagers were part of
the Scandinavian economy. Also, many of the marauders had families at home whom
they were supporting. Finally, many voyagers returned to their homelands to
settle, and some even became rulers. Clearly, these plunderers had little or no
stigma attached to their actions which might prevent them from leaving,
communicating or re-settling. It was a job, and one that profited their people.
They were integral to their societies. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Perhaps one would not take such a dangerous job under circumstances
where one was prosperous in situ. Clements points to population growth as a
pressure that made jobs, land and inheritance scarce. The author’s later
comment, is uncomfortable to accept but closer to a reasonable conclusion: “Almost
everyone was atrocious back then…The Angles, Saxons, Irish and Scots were just
as bloodthirsty with each other, and with their Scandinavian foes” (Clements p.
12). The only differences between the Vikings and these other tribes were that
ability, geography and technology, offered them better opportunities to exploit
their enemies. Scandinavians had better ships and navigation skills with which
to invade distant lands. Angles and Saxons lived next to each other and raided
mutually. If population pressures had forced the Angles to develop long
distance navigation skills and raiding ships, perhaps they would have taken the
risks associated with marauding far from home.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Clements deserves credit not only for facing the brutality of
early medieval life, but also for his straight-forward approach to the
historical record. He cuts through the hyperbole of the sagas where a lesser
historian would simply quote from them for narrative color and leave their
claims untouched. So when the saga of Floki Vilgerdason states that he cast
ravens from his ship and observed their flight to find land, Clements
points-out the suspicious similarity to the biblical Noah myth (Clements p.
140). The author also employs modern science to de-bunk claims. For example, he
exposes the legend that skin from murdered Danes covered the doors of
Westminster Abbey, citing that modern forensic evaluation of the “Daneskin”
found it to be “perfectly normal leather” (Clements p. 167). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Clements’ book provides some important perspective on the
Vikings. His anglocentric approach does go too far in portraying the Vikings as
invaders and outcasts among their own people. This prevents him from seeing
their contribution to their society and prevents him from examining the culture
of their settlements. His information on Viking art, innovation or other
contributions is limited. But there are no romantic elegies to a vanished
fraternity of seafaring adventurers singing heroic sagas. His skepticism, and
his unvarnished approach to the darker elements of human nature, are useful
traits in this context.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Clements, Jonathan. <u>A Brief History of the Vikings</u>. London:
Constable & Robinson Ltd., 2005.</div>
Perry Krasowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10155561064283087547noreply@blogger.com0