MOST INTERESTING ESSAYS 12/4/25: THEORY & TRUTH, MEMORY & INTELLIGENCE, PSYCHIATRY, WRITING, EGYPT IN 2019, LIVE OR DIE, GARDEN OF EDEN, SOCIAL DYSFUNCTION, DEATH ROW, RIGHT & WRONG, FRANTZ FANON, TRUTHINESS, CONSPIRACY, LIBERALITY, LIFE IS LIQUID, BECOMING god-LIKE, TIPPING POINT, VANISHING WORLD
Niall Williams (Irish author and playwriter born in Dublin.)
There is poetry in Niall Williams’ story of a young boy’s life in Ireland in the 1950s. William’s hero is a young boy, nearing manhood, who grows close to a 60 something adult. At an earlier time of the 60-year-old’s life, he jilts a woman on their wedding day. The 60-year-old’ wishes for forgiveness from the jilted woman who marries a pharmacist who dies some years after their marriage.
Whether idyllic or real, “This is Happiness” reminds listeners of the difference between life as it is, life as remembered, and life as it ends.
The young hero thinks the older friend wants to rekindle the relationship but finds his older friend is principally looking for forgiveness. Compounding the hero’s confusion is the older woman’s reluctance to either acknowledge the event or countenance any forgiveness for her jilting fiancé.
The hero works on the electrification of Ireland. He works with the jilting groom to negotiate with Ireland’s landowners on the physical placement of electrical poles to be installed across the country. Ireland’s leadership negotiates with Finland to buy 1,000,000 trees.
The jilting groom is working for the company that is to install the poles, but his primary motive is to meet with the woman he left at the altar. They meet but no mention is made of their past acquaintance and his disreputable behavior. When the young boy hears the story from his older friend, he grows to believe he has some obligation to reconcile the two. His friend had married and divorced while the jilted bride marries a pharmacist whom she marries after her fiancé stands her up. The young boy believes neither his friend nor the jilted bride will be happy without forgiveness.
An accident occurs when a pole falls on the young boy and he is taken to a doctor who has three daughters near the young boy’s age.
As he comes to his senses in the medical treatment room, he sees one of the older daughters whom he thinks he loves. The boy’s infatuation grows with the first daughter he meets but later he is surprisingly asked by a younger sister to go to the movies. The younger sister introduces the hero to kissing at the local theater. He begins to think of this younger daughter as something more than a friend. A third daughter is introduced, and the boy concludes he is in love with all three of the doctor’s daughters.
A young boy’s confusion about life’s happiness is his first inkling of love for one and then all three of the physician’s young daughters. Obviously, this is not love but youthful infatuation.
Williams cleverly ties his story together with Ireland’s electrification and power line connections that have to be installed throughout the country. The story of electrification is complicated. There are religious differences, private property, and social concerns of its citizens.
The complication of tying the nation together with a power system is like the complications of building and maintaining human relationships.
The hero works on the electrification of Ireland, works through his dalliance with one of the doctor’s daughters, sadly loses his mother to illness, and chooses a life in the church. He cares for the woman left at the altar with respect for her failing life from old age and an undisclosed illness. The young man learns how one should care for one nearing death. One sees in the dying a sense of acceptance but a wish of the dying to control what remains in their power to control. The care giver needs to respect the dying’s limited power and help only where help is asked or needed.
At last, the jilted bride and errant groom begin to talk about what happened on the date of their unconsummated wedding.
The explanation by the groom may be a lie or an Irishman’s tale, but the jilted bride tells him there is no need for forgiveness. She implies there is nothing that can be done to change the past. In the end, she forgives the errant groom, enjoys his company and the stories he has to tell. She dies with knowledge of the love and care of the people she knows.
Niall William’s story is about growing to manhood, dying, and old age. In William’s mythical Irish town of Faha, everyone knows everyone.
The mythical town of Faha, Ireland is a community where knowing is accompanied by responsibility for care of the living, dying, and dead. There are no secrets. Happiness is within the person who chooses to be happy, regardless of life’ events and circumstances.
Conscious management of deleterious and harmful content by news media is the hope of humanity’s future. That is the message one may find in Lagorio-Chafkin’s history of Reddit.
Audio-book Review By Chet Yarbrough
Blog: awalkingdelight Website: chetyarbrough.blog
We Are the Nerds (The Birth and Tumultuous Life of Reddit, the Internet’s Culture Laboratory)
By:Christine Lagorio-Chafkin
Narrated by:Chloe Cannon
Christine Lagorio-Chafkin (Author, reporter, senior writer for “Inc” magazine.)
Christine Lagorio-Chafkin offers a detailed history of the internet forum known as Reddit. Founded by Steve Huffman and Alexis Ohanian, with coding help from Aaron Swartz in 2005, Reddit has grown from an idea to a user-based internet newspaper estimated at 57 million daily readers and users as of December 2022. Huffman and Ohanian were roommates and students at the University of Virginia. These two founders are helped by Aaron Swartz, a nerd coding extraordinaire, with coding expertise. These are early days of a yet to be named web site.
With the help of start-up idea’ consultant Paul Graham, these three young men parlayed their idea into an asset that is purchased in 2006 by Conde-Nast to make the founders millionaires in their early 20s.
In 2018, Advance Publications, the parent company of Conde-Nast, values Reddit at $6 billion. Advance raises $250 million in funding in 2021. From Conde-Nast’s original purchase price of $10 million, one gains some idea of Reddit’s value despite having not made a profit since its inception. Chafkin suggests they are almost there in her book.
Steve HuffmanAlexis OhanianAaron Schultz
Lagorio-Chafkin’ story of these three young men offers insight to a generation that is reminiscent but different from the movers and shakers of the industrial revolution. The industrial revolution might be broken into two periods. The first began in the 17th century when Samuel Slater introduces British industrialization into the textile industry of America. The second occurs after the American Civil War with machine inventions like Eli Whitney’s cotton gin, and du Pont’s improvements in chemistry and gunpowder needed for the War of 1812.
Just as the industrial revolution’s pioneers, the tech revolution pioneers are obsessed with their work.
Their motivations were similar, ranging from fascination with their work to interest in being financially successful. The difference is the work of the industrialist focuses on material productivity while the technologist focuses on idea productivity. Both benefit society but the industrialist looks at material results while the technologist focuses on ideas, and knowledge that can be put to productive use. Both benefit society but from different starting points. The industrial economy is weighted heavily toward material productivity while the tech economy is more heavily weighted toward social and service influence.
Reddit went through several generations of CEOs. Each made changes to the direction of the company. Yishan Wong, a former Facebook employee, began Reddit’s transition from scandal sheet to newsworthiness. His success is limited because of Reddit’s drive for profitability and his manufactured controversy over relocation of its headquarters. Since inception, Reddit has gone through 5 CEOs.
Steve Huffman (2005-2009, 2015-present) (born 1983) 1986 for Swartz and 1983 for Ohanian
Ellen Pao (2014-2015)
Yishan Wong (2012-2014)
Erik Martin (2010-2014)
Jay Adelson (2005-2009)
Ellen Pao’s tenure as CEO of Reddit is brief but consequential. Pao implemented several changes to the site’s policies, including banning revenge porn and unauthorized nude photos. Pao’s resignation came after a week of intense criticism and harassment from some members of the Reddit community.
Ellen Pao resigned from her position as CEO of Reddit in July 2015. Her leadership was met with controversy and criticism, and she faced backlash from some members of the Reddit community over her policies and decisions. Some users felt her changes were too restrictive and infringed on their freedom of speech. Yes, Ellen Pao filed a gender discrimination lawsuit against her former employer, Kleiner Perkins, in 2012. The case went to trial in 2015 and Pao lost the suit. After leaving Kleiner Perkins, Pao became the CEO of Reddit in 2014, but resigned her position in July 2015.
The principals of Reddit are Steve Huffman and Alexis Ohanian who begin as friends and become estranged as the company grows. In time, they reconcile with Huffman becoming CEO of the company.
Both contribute to the success of Reddit, but Huffman becomes the guiding light for its future as a publicly designed profit-making internet newspaper. Ohanian becomes particularly famous for the woman whom he marries.
Serena Williams and Alexis Ohanian marry in November 2017
The tragic story of Aaron Swartz’s important contribution in the early days of Reddit explains an underlying purpose of a public paper. Swartz is vilified by the American government for downloading private information to the public without corporate or government authorization.
Aaron Schwartz commits suicide. Chafkin notes Swartz’e father argues his son believed in a “right-of-the-public” to know everything there is to know about society. To Swartz’s father, Aaron did not commit suicide but was murdered by the American government as a result of its relentless prosecution.
Fundamentally, “We Are the Nerds” is about an internet generation concerned with greater social self-realization, if not comity. Reddit is a social news aggregation and rating website that offers a forum to the public that broadcasts user’ beliefs and understanding of the 21st century world. It is not about industrial productivity but about people’s social perceptions and beliefs ranging from facts to fiction about the material world.
The purpose of Reddit is not to produce “all the news that’s fit to print” but to reveal all the news that reflects the beliefs of a flawed society.
Reddit, while counseling moderation, allows extreme views of a diverse and self-interested user base. As a public forum, it interviewed the President of the United States (Barrack Obama). On the other hand, Reddit provided a forum for trolls like Michael Brutsch, who broadcasted images of scantily clad underage girls, porn, gore, misogyny, incest, and other societal images of human depravity. There is little social comity in that scenario, but it is a part of human society. Troll behavior is the bane of click-bate oriented internet platforms. Reddit, since the return of Huffman, focuses on eliminating hate-speech and dysfunctional societal contributors to its public forum. Chafkin notes Reddit’s exposure of Russian interference in the election of Donald Trump. It offers evidence of Reddit’s effort to clean-up misleading information and fake news that is the bread and butter of click-bate’ media sites.
To use the oft quoted Star War’s meme–Reddit is trying to follow a “this is the way” principle to give legitimacy to News’ purveyors of the future.
Reddit, like past and present newspaper and television stations are subject to their owner’s conservative, liberal, or independent biases. Owners of media sites like The New York Times, Fox News, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Facebook, Google search, Microsoft search, X, and Amazon have their biases. Conscious management of deleterious and harmful content by news media is the hope of humanity’s future. That is the message one may find in Lagorio-Chafkin’s history of Reddit.
One can choose the life of Buddha, Muhammed, Jesus Christ, Zoroaster, Rishabhanatha, Maimonides, Saint Francis of Assisi, Confucious or some other spiritual figure but it is one’s individual memories and our ability in “letting go” that will give one peace of mind and happiness in life.
Audio-book Review By Chet Yarbrough
Blog: awalkingdelight Website: chetyarbrough.blog
The Untethered Soul (The Journey Beyond Yourself)
By:Michael A. Singer
Narrated by:Peter Berkrot
Michael Alan Singer (American Author, journalist, motivational speaker, software developer.)
Michael Alan Singer’s audiobook is a reification of “Letting Go” written by David Hawkins. Hawkins, a medical practitioner, and Singer, a successful tech entrepreneur, come to similar conclusions about how to live life. Singer offers a more spiritual and ritualistic approach in working through remembered, and often suppressed, experiences of life by confronting them and letting them go.
Dr. David Hawkins posits the idea of a cosmic mind that can be tapped into by one’s thoughts to mitigate negative feelings. Singer’s approach is more direct and based on actual experience revealed by conscious thought and conscious rejection.
Singer believes every experience in one’s life is recorded by the mind, either correctly or falsely.
Singer suggests, through meditation, harmful or distorted memories can be revealed and discarded as inconsequential by the process of “letting go”. This is the same “letting go” referred to by Hawkins but located in a cosmic mind (the totality of human thought) rather than the individual mind argued by Singer.
Singer’s idea for treatment seems more therapeutically practical than Hawkins.
Both writers offer a solution to many human problems, but Singer suggests a therapeutic process exercisable by the individual, without the mysticism of a cosmic mind.
Singer introduces the idea that every experience in an individual’s life is consciously or subconsciously recorded in one’s mind.
Singer’s suggestion is that all negative feelings from life experience can be eradicated by letting them go. By “letting go” of accurate or inaccurate memory, Singer suggests one’s peace of mind, energy, and happiness improves.
One can choose the life of Buddha, Muhammed, Jesus Christ, Zoroaster, Rishabhanatha, Maimonides, Saint Francis of Assisi, Confucious or some other spiritual figure but it is one’s individual memories and our ability in “letting go” that will give one peace of mind and happiness in life.
Detroit manages to restructure their debt with the help of its citizens. Greece is caught in the grips of E.U.’ and IMF’ bureaucracy that only increases its debt.
Audio-book Review By Chet Yarbrough
Blog: awalkingdelight Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Adults in the Room (My Battle with the European and American Deep Establishment)
By:Yanis Varoufakis
Narrated by:Leighton Pugh
Yanis Varoufakis (Author, Greek economist and politician, Minister of Finance of Greece for 7 months in 2015, launched Diem25, the “Democracy in Europe Movement 2025” in February 2016.)
Yanis Varoufakis gives listeners a glimpse of decisions made when a national government is compelled to declare a national debt crisis. To fairly understand “Adults in the Room”, one will struggle with Varoufakis long story. His story is about restructuring rather than refinancing the debt owed the E.U. and IMF for a national debt crisis. Restructuring debt changes terms of repayment based on an original debt, while refinancing increases the debtor’s burden.
It is helpful to have listened to a book about Detroit’s bankruptcy. Detroit’s harrowing experience gives some idea of how difficult it is for a government entity to repay creditors for profligate government economic management. Detroit manages to restructure their debt with the help of its citizens. Greece is caught in the grips of E.U.’ and IMF’ bureaucracy that only increases its debt.
Varoufakis’ argument for understanding the plight of society’s poor is highly relevant in this era of democracies’ homelessness and economic inequality.
Varoufakis acknowledges socialist beliefs while inferring a negative opinion about capitalism. Varoufakis professes strong belief in democracy with a pronounced lean toward socialism, i.e., a belief similar to America’s Bernie Sanders who is mentioned in “Adults in the Room”.
Varoufakis notes that Greek, like American society, is unequal with rich and poor being disproportionately benefited by intended and unintended government and economic policy.
Greek government’s effort to compensate for inequality seems couched in an economic system meant to equalize citizen inequity with a pension system designed to compensate the poor for economic inequality. A poorly managed national economy and a weakly enforced tax collection system compounds Greek government failure to live within its means.
When Greece declares a sovereign debt crisis, the European Union and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) provide a credit lifeline of $9.5 billion to avoid a default on a previous bailout.
This so-called lifeline is contrary to what is requested by Varoufakis who becomes the Minister of Finance for Greece. The benefit of restructuring the debt provides liquidity to the Greek banking system without theoretically damaging credit worthiness of either the E.U. or IMF. On its face, it seems a win-win solution for Greece’s debtors and Greece’s citizens. However, the E.U. sees it as a dangerous alternative that fails to address the root causes of Greece’s profligate behavior. The E.U. demands control of all economic expenditures of the Greek government in return for a bail-out of past debt with a larger tranche of new debt. Financial control of Greece’s use of the new funds is to be exercised by a triumvirate representing the debt holders.
Varoufakis asks that Greece’s original bailout debt be restructured as a long-term bond with reduced payments over a long period of time, with payment size largely determined by Greece’s liquidity in a recovering economy.
In contrast, the demands of the E.U. and IMF are that salaries and pensions be cut, government employees’ pensions frozen, and retirement age raised. Those measures disproportionately hit the poor, destroy jobs, do nothing to improve tax receipts, and make it more difficult for Greece to pay its debt; not to mention the strict control of all expenditures by an external triumvirate of debt holders.
With these draconian rules, Varoufakis notes unemployment improves. However, the economy is estimated to be 25% smaller; not to mention the impact of the external triumvirates’ control reduces living standards, pensions, and salaries of the working poor.
The point of Varoufakis’ story is that the E.U. and I.M.F.’s mandated terms victimizes the most vulnerable Greek citizens trying to make a living.
Varoufakis resigns after 7 months in office after unsuccessfully fighting the onerous and inequitable demands of the E.U. and IMF. In some listener’s opinion, some may suggest Varoufakis abandons the poor, but his story suggests the decision of the controlling triumvirate of the E.U. and IMF rendered his continued role as Minister of Finance a virtual joke. Varoufakis is unable to change the E.U. and IMF board’s inflexible rules. Greece’s Minister of Finance cannot achieve a delay in their demand for restructuring the Greek’s debt to correct a poorly managed tax system and weak economy that victimizes the most vulnerable citizens of Greece.
For listeners of “Adults in the Room”, one wonders where wealthy Greek citizens were when Varoufakis tries to pull Greece out of its financial ditch.
Unlike the book about Detroit’s bankruptcy, there seems no appeal to rich citizens of Greece and a method for using Greece’s historical art and artifacts to collateralize a more equitable bail out for its people. Where were the Greeks who could afford to pay their taxes? Where were the art and antiquity foundations that could have aided in the negotiations with the E.U. and the I.M.F.? The historic art and monuments of Greece are an international treasure, particularly for western culture.
In retrospect, Varoufakis’s idea of restructuring the debt seems brilliant but there seems no time is allowed for Varoufakis to organize a response that could change the mindset of the members of the E.U. and IMF decision makers. As a “Monday morning quarterback”, Varoufakis’s idea would have carried more weight if he had gathered support from wealthy Greek merchants and art foundation entities that could have created a repayment sweetener to seal his loan restructuring idea. However, it appears there was not enough time for Varoufakis to gather enough support to make a case for debt restructuring. The triumvirate controlling the purse strings of the bailout would not wait.
Listeners owe a debt to writers like Varoufakis who are willing to tell their stories, whether right or wrong. In fairness to Varoufakis, it is easy to retrospectively review his actions to save the Greek economy.
At best, one concludes, restructuring Greece’s debt was a great idea that could have achieved a decent compromise for its lenders. On the other hand, one wonders what the leaders of Greece were doing when the repayment crises first began to show itself.
There were undoubtedly some powerful and rich Greek leaders who could have come to the aid of their country in this 21st century “time of need”. One is reminded of the heroic defense of Greek citizens in Crete when Nazis invaded their strategically located island. Where were the descendants of the many great Greek heroes of antiquity?
Francis Spufford (Author, received the 2017 Desmond Elliot Prize and Costa Book Award for “Golden Hill”, the author’s first novel.)
Francis Spufford captures a listener’s interest in “Golden Hill” with the idea of an Englishman sailing from London to New York City in 1746. New York City has a population of maybe 20,000, while London is a city of 630,000 to 740,000. What would a young Englishman with a 1,000-pound Bill-of-Exchange want in traveling from London to New York city? In today’s dollars 1,000 pounds would be over $127,000. The hero’s reason for leaving London for New York is not given until the end of Spufford’s story.
This is New York city in the 18th century. One could walk around the city in a day with its circumference less than a square mile.
This is a fascinating beginning to a story that gets bogged down by too many incidents that are mystifying until the last chapters of the book. The incidents are relevant to what it must have been like in 1746 but some listeners will become impatient for answers that could have been explained earlier.
New York City in 1746 is a mecca for protestants from many parts of the world. Spufford implies many New Yorkers are Dutch, a prominent ethnic group in wealthy New York.
Spufford’s hero is found to have a deep understanding of the theatre and its impact on an audience if an actor’s parts are well played. He attends a bad play that has an actress who, in spite of her poor lines, shows talent he recognizes. His appreciation of her acting leads to an unforeseen tragedy. This becomes a clue to the traveler’s perception of others and how unintended consequences impact one’s life. He seems to walk through life as though the City of New York is his stage. He plays his part, but his acting chops end with a mixed review.
Spufford’s hero appears to be accepted by the influential citizens of the city. At least, until it appears the Bill-of-Exhange is not going to be honored. The hero is thrown into debtors’ prison.
Debtors’ prison is an interesting place to write about. Spufford reflects on its barbarity in a confrontation with a fellow prisoner. The Bill of Exchange is eventually honored, and the hero is released. The next chapters address the repatriation of the hero to the Poo Bahs of the town and a woman of interest becomes more enamored with the traveler. The profile of the woman is somewhat unbelievable because of her implied business influence in a time when women have even less power than today.
The hero attends a party set up by leading members of the city that is, in part, to apologize for his mistreatment and to carry out whatever his mission is in the city. An interesting historical point of the apology is that America is primarily a barter system of exchange. Even though the traveler’s security is in English pound sterling, any negotiation for exchange is in goods, not cash. This is fine for the traveler’s purpose, but it reflects a point in American history that is often forgotten. There is no full faith and credit of a bank with gold or some other form of value to back-up American currency.
An interesting point Spufford reminds listeners of is the American’ anti-Catholic sentiment of the time.
One realizes how important Protestantism is in the foundation of America. The hero is almost killed by a mob that believes the traveler is a papist. Some historians have noted Protestantism is one of the deepest biases of early American citizens.
The reason for the hero’s appearance in New York is explained at last. To avoid discouragement of listeners, the purpose of the hero’s journey is not disclosed. “Golden Hill” is an interesting commentary on the tenor of an historic time, and it reveals some founding principles that trouble America to this day. The criticism of Spufford’s story is that it is too clever by half with a denouement too long in its revelation.
Gorbachev freed the Russian economy and Putin capitalized on that freedom. However, both reached beyond their grasp and damaged Russia’s standing in the world.
A History of Russia: From Peter the Great to Gorbachev
By: Mark Steinberg, The Great Courses
Narrated by:Mark Steinberg
Mark David Steinberg (History Professor at University of Illinois specializing in the cultural, intellectual, and social history of Russia.)
Professor Mark Steinberg’s history of Russia is an informative tour of Russian history that gives some context to the perplexing, contradictory, and murderous behavior of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Though Steinberg’s history focuses on Tsarist Russia, a little research reveals why Putin argues Ukraine is historically a part of Russia.
Russia is an ancient nation that reaches back to the year 862.
The northern and southern lands were combined in 882 by Prince Oleg of Novgorod upon the seizure of Kiev in what is today the capital of Ukraine. Kiev becomes the capital of the combined lands. Eastern Christian religion is adopted from the Byzantine Empire by Russia in 988. Upon the Mongol invasion in 1237-1240, Russia’s size diminishes, and Russia’s capital moves to Moscow.
The first leader to be titled Tsar of Russia is Ivan the Terrible in 1547.
Ivan IV (Called Ivan the Terrible’s visage is forensically reconstructed by Mikhail Gerasimov)
Ukraine emerges as a nation in the mid-18th century, but large portions of the country remain under the control of Russia.
It is not until 1991, that Ukraine’s independence is recognized by America, Poland, and Canada.
Steinberg’s history addresses the time of Peter the Great through Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev. What one hears from the lectures is the vacillation of Russian leadership from Europeanization to de-Europeanization. The primary interest of non-aristocratic Russians is in the political principle of socialism.
Autocracy is a common thread in Steinberg’s history of Russia. However, beginning with Peter the Great, that thread is frayed by changes that modernize Russian government management of its citizens. It remains autocratic but recognizes the country is behind Europe in its economic and cultural improvement.
Tsar Peter the Great (As Tsar from 1682 to 1721, Pyotr I Alekseyevich leads Russia as a harsh autocrat with the goal of defeating Ottoman and Swedish control of the Sea of Azov and the Baltic.
Steinberg explains Peter the Great’s objective is to create a new Russia by replacing its traditionalist and medieval social and political systems with enlightened public policies. He plans to modernize Russia by promoting education and industrialization. His objective is to emulate and compete with European modernization. The Russian Academy of Science and Saint Petersburg State University are founded in 1724. Peter the Great creates a governing Senate in 1711 and other institutions to improve the administration of the Russian autocracy.
Peter the Great dies unexpectedly and fails to designate an heir to the throne. Succession founders for several years with little progress toward modernization until Catherine II becomes Catherine the Great, empress of Russia from 1762 to 1796.
Catherine the Great II (Born 1729, dies in 1796 at age 67.)
Catherine the Great marries the grandson of Peter the Great who died months after becoming Emperor of Russia. Catherine the Great is of the same mind as Peter the Great in modernizing Russia. New Russian cities, universities, and theatres are created by Catherine the Great. With the help of fellow nobles, Grigory Orlov and Grigory Potemkin, and Russia’s generals of that time, Russia expands their territory and continues its Europeanization. Western philosophers like Voltaire become friends of Catherine the Great.
After Catherine the Great, her son Tsar Paul I takes control of the Russian government. Steinberg characterizes Paul I as a despotic ineffectual leader who projects an authoritarian and patriarchal image and reverses many of the liberal policies initiated by Catherine the Great. He is assassinated by the elite guards of the Russian military and his son, Alexander I, becomes Tsar.
With the rise of education, Steinberg explains the creation of what is called the “intelligensia”, a class of younger Russians interested in social change. Some were largely self-educated like Vissarion Belinsky, the son of a rural physician and Nikolai Gogol, born into the Ukranian family gentry (a class below aristocracy). Others were from the aristocratic class like Alekasndr Pushkin.
From left to right, Belinsky, Gogol, Pushkin–associated with the Russian Intelligesia in the early and mid-19th century.
Alexander I (reigned 1801-1825) is described by Steinberg as a leader of two minds that on the one hand reestablishes many of the reforms of his grandmother, Catherine the Great.
On the other hand, Steinberg suggests Alexander I resists revolutionary movements that were roiling Europe during his reign. Alexander, I joins Britain in 1805 to defeat Napoleon Bonapart. Alexander switches sides and forms an alliance with Napoleon in the Treaty of Tilsit in 1807. However, in 1810, Alexander abandons Napoleon over disagreement on Polish territory. Napoleon’s invasion of Russia in 1812 is a disaster for the French and Russia gains territory in Finland and Poland.
Nicholas I (Reign 1825-1855, Grandson of Catherine the Great.)
Serfdom is a troubling social problem in Russia that is acknowledged by Catherine the Great but not resolved until after an 1861 decree for abolition by Alexander II. Though Catherine and Allexander II are not related, it is Alexander II who initiates what Catherine the Great recognized as the iniquity of Russian inequality. Though it is many years before the reality of abolition of Serfdom is truly addressed, Alexander II is the first to begin its reversal. His predecessor, Nicholas I did nothing to eliminate serfdom and in fact tried to re-establish aristocratic privilege.
Mid-day meal for peasants in 1860s Russia
Inequality in Russia, just as is true in America, remains a work in progress. Steinberg offers more detail of Russia’s drive toward modernity, but the next great change is of course the revolution of 1917. Steinberg explains Russia’s growing interest in socialism and its conflict with patriarchal rule. He notes the two major factions that wished to change the course of Russian history. One is the Bolshevik movement. The other is the Menshevik movement. But, before we get to 1917, it seems the 1904-1905 Russo-Japanese war is important because of its relevance to Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine.
The last Tsar of Russia is Tsar Nicholas II. Nicholas II’s reign is from 1894 to 1917, after which his entire family is murdered by Bolshevik revolutionaries.
A precursor to the 1917 revolution is the 1905 uprising of Russian citizens who are unhappy with Tsar Nicholas II’s leadership. Growing inflation, poverty and hunger, a defeat in the Russo-Japanese War, and widespread discontent lead to a revolt. A workers demonstration leads to “Bloody Sunday”. An estimated 1,000 to 4,000 Russian citizens are murdered by Russian soldiers.
Of particular interest is the loss of the Russo-Japanese war. Both Russia and Japan want warm-water ports in the Pacific Ocean. A port that served that purpose is on the Korean peninsula, either off Manchuria or Korea. Tsar Nicholas’s inept management and the superior military actions of the Japanese defeat Russia.
The relevance of that defeat is the position Putin has put the Russian government in with the invasion of Ukraine. The question is whether Ukraine will be as successful as Japan in defeating Russia. The west must ask itself whether they have a dog in this fight or let Ukraine bear the brunt of an unjust war.
The exclusiveness of being a member of Lenin’s red party undoubtedly aided the ultimate success of the revolution because it required committed enforcers to rally the Russian people.
Steinberg explains Lenin clearly understood that authoritarian force would be required for communist’ socialism to succeed. The future of the revolution became dependent on a leader like Stalin who exemplified a party member that understood the importance of authoritarian command. The test of that truth comes in 1924 when Lenin dies from a brain hemorrhage.
Joseph Stalin (1878-1953, died at age 74, ruled Russia from 1929 to 1953.)
Authoritarian leadership, with its history of competent and incompetent Russian Tsars, is not new to the Russian people. With an improved education system in the 18th century, Steinberg explains even the intelligentsia accepted authoritarian rule. Adding to Russian’ acceptance of authoritarian rule is the belief that something had to change because life in Russia during Tsar Nicholas II’s rule is abysmal for the majority of Russian people.
Mikhail Gorbachev (1931-2022, died at age 91. Ruled the U.S.S.R. from 1985-1991 and served as President of Russia 1990-1991.)
Nearing the end of Steinberg’s lectures, the rise of glasnost with Mikhail Gorbachev is addressed. Between the death of Stalin and the rule of Gorbachev, 5 men ruled the U.S.S.R. Gorbachev wishes to keep the U.S.S.R. together but fails. His failure, in part, seems related to Steinberg’s history. Rather than glasnost, the U.S.S.R. seems to have needed a more authoritarian leader. Not in the sense of repression but in a demand to keep the U.S.S.R. together until the government’s effort at reform has time to be enacted. America had a civil war to prove it is one nation. That may have been a possibility with a more authoritarian Russian leader but that appears not to have been in the nature of Mikhail Gorbachev.
The U.S.S.R. dissolves in 1991. Since that dissolution, Russia has occupied some of the eastern territory of Ukraine and Crimea.
Though Steinberg does not fully address Vladimir Putin in his history of Russia, he sets the table for understanding why a reader/listener might think there is no way out for Vladimir Putin. The history Steinberg suggests Putin in one sense is the perfect transitional leader of the territorially reduced Russia. The firm hand of a secret police officer, with 16 years’ experience as a former KGB agent, and a position as Deputy Mayor of St. Petersburg’s seems an apt formula for success for a future President of Russia. Putin did well in his first years as President of Russia but seems to have made a career, if not life ending, error in his invasion of Ukraine.
Steinberg illustrates how Russia’s leaders range from enlightened to repressive managers of government. At different times in history, that management style served Russia’s economy and citizens, sometimes well and sometimes poorly. It is up to Russian citizens to decide which government actions and leaders best serves their needs.
From a western perspective, both Gorbachev and Putin served Russia well.
Anton Chekhov in 1989 (Author, 1860-1904, physician and philanthropist.)
Most societies in the 1800s have variations of the same story. However, one recognizes there are societal remainders that carry through to modern times. Anton Chekhov’s short stories tell much of what is evident in today’s Russia just as stories of the wild west is in today’s America. In both Russian and American history (as well as most of the world), women are considered the inferiors of men. Children were generally seen as a burden until they could take responsibility for work that had to be done. Rarely did women work outside the home except as servants to families with means to pay for their work. In the 1800s, both Russia and America had a gap between the rich and poor.
Chekov’s first story is of a young woman who is characterized as beautiful, vivacious, and promiscuous.
She chooses or is seduced by a man who is not her husband. She is caught in an embrace with this man by her husband who berates her for her flirtations. The cuckolding suiter offers 100,000 rubles to allow the husband’s wife to divorce him and leave her husband to marry the alleged seducer. The husband agrees but at a price of 150,000 rubles. This is an example of two transgressions. One, a human being treated as property and two, a woman having a right to choose how she wishes to live her life. Just as in most of the world today, this Russian story shows women being treated as unequal to men.
Uneducated Americans and Russians in the 1800s took advantage of the environments in which they lived. One of Chekov’s stories addresses a peasant who removes a nut from a railroad track because he needed a weight for his fishing line. He is taken to court for removing the nut because there were incidents of derailment from peasants who took several nuts from railroad track bolts for not only a single fishing line but for nets used for the same purpose. American killing of bison for sport is a similar ignorance that reduced a major resource for food and protective clothing of native Americans.
Serfdom in Russian history is long and sustained as a social and economic reality.
What Chekov’s short stories tell listeners is that though there are similarities, there are differences. Serfdom never takes hold in America, but its consequence extends into the mid 19th century despite Czar Alexander’s decree to eliminate it and Catherine the Great’s effort to end it. Even with the Alexander’s decree, serfdom remains a law until 1861 with its true abolition only begun during Catherine’s reign. Of course, America’s tragic faults are black slavery and Indian displacement with consequences that extend into today’s century.
Because serfdom did not take hold in America, the growth of capitalism created economic opportunities not available in mid-19th century Russia.
American capitalism is a two-edged sword that undermines the ideals of equality by denying equal opportunity for all. An underclass exists in both Russia and America, but Russia’s underclass suffers from slower economic growth as well as discrimination.
Though economic growth is turbocharged by capitalism it creates an underclass based on easily identifiable racial, ethnic, and sexual differences.
Social position in Russia came through military experience and promotion, or in association with unique opportunities offered to peasants by wealthy landowners. Capitalism had little place in Chekov’s mid-19th century history of Russia. What mattered to Russian citizens is social hierarchy. This seems evident even in today’s Russian kleptocracy.
In almost every Chekov story, heavy drinking is a common part of Russian men’s, if not women’s, lives.
Reasons for the Russian tradition of drinking may be related to the economic, or socio/political environment but its tradition is evident in today’s Russia. Not that alcoholism is not a problem in America, but in Russia alcohol seems an ever-present libation in all political and social recollections of modern events.
Wealth grows as a societal leveling influence in America while Chekov shows wealth only reinforces societal separation in Russia.
He tells a story of a woman actress that makes more money than her husband. The husband sees that reversal as a challenge to his ability rather than a benefit to his family. The husband acts like a petulant child when his wife is awakened late in the night by his drunken arrival in which he rants about money needed to start a business that has little prospect of success.
As with all short stories of an era, there is much to be learned about a nation’s cultural roots. Most of Chekov’s stories in this first folio are well written and informative. One will find them entertaining and interesting, maybe even enlightening.
Ha Jin is the pen name of Jin Xuefei (born in 1956, a Chinese-American poet and novelist. Graduated from Brandeis University with an MA and PhD.)
Ha Jin’s book, “Waiting”, reminds one of our misogynistic world.
“Waiting” may be a true story or a mix of truth and fiction. The last chapter infers it is a part of Ha Jin’s life during Mao’s reign in the late 1960s as leader of China.
Ha Jin is the pen name of Jin Xuefei, a Chinese American poet and novelist. Jin’s father was a military officer in China. At 13, Jin joined the “People’s Liberation Army” during the Cultural Revolution in China. He left the army at nineteen to earn a bachelor’s degree in English at Heilongjiang University and a master’s degree in Anglo-American literature at another Chinese university. He went on to Brandies University to extend his education.
As is noted in the last chapter of “Waiting”, Ha Jin receives a scholarship to Brandeis University which is interestingly the author’s destination in America. He chooses to emigrate after Tiananmen Square’s Massacre in 1989. Of course, this is long after Mao’s cultural revolution between 1966 and the early 70s, i.e., the time of Ha Jin’s story in “Waiting” and the time of the author’s experience in the “People’s Liberation Army”.
The “People’s Liberation Army” was created as a teaching body for Mao Zedong Thought.
“Waiting” is about a 23-year-old nurse in the Peoples Liberation Army that falls in love with a doctor named Ha Jin, who is already married with a daughter who lives with her mother. The mother and daughter live in a village away from Ha Jin while he serves in Mao’s Cultural Revolution. Ha Jin may be viewed by a reader/listener as either a strong moral character or a weak “go along to get along” Maoist survivor.
Ha Jin either chooses or is compelled by the influence of the 23-year-old nurse to seek a divorce from his wife. Ha Jin takes 20 years of numerous appeals (the “Wait”) for the Chinese judicial system to finally approve the divorce.
During those 20 years, he and the nurse have no sexual relationship. In that time, the nurse is raped by a soldier who had befriended Ha Jin. The rape is unreported for the same reason many rapes are not reported today. The nurse does not believe the authorities will believe her story. The nurse tells Ha Jin of the rape. Ha Jin tries to convince her to tell the authorities. She refuses and Ha Jin reconciles himself to an understanding of her position and blames himself for what happened. As has been reported by other women who have been raped, the nurse feels guilt for the rape even though she said no and fought the rapist.
Ha Jin continues to pursue a divorce from his wife. His wife, despite Ha Jin’s numerous appeals for divorce, stands by her husband and cares for their daughter throughout the 20 years of their pending divorce. She finally agrees and Ha Jin is free to marry the nurse.
Ha Jin agrees to pay his ex-wife a monthly fee as a part of his obligation to her for their years of marriage. Ha Jin grows to love his daughter and wishes to help her succeed in life.
The nurse, at the time of marriage, is now in her early forties. She becomes pregnant and twin boys are born. The delivery is premature, but the boys are born healthy. Their fate is undisclosed. The relationship between the father and the nurse deteriorates for reasons that seem related to the hardship of the birth and a growing animosity of the nurse toward her husband.
The nurse suggests Ha Jin visit his ex-wife and daughter to see how they are doing. Ha Jin visits appears to realize he has made many mistakes in his life, not the least of which is the pursuit of a divorce and his failing marriage to the nurse.
The story ends with Ha Jin leaving China and becoming a professor at Brandies University in the United States. The listener is left to ponder which of these personalities, the husband, or the nurse and ex-wife are the strongest mental and physical humans in this battle of the sexes. At the very least, what is clear in “Waiting” is that misogyny is a multicultural reality.
The demographics of life demand better care of the human population and the environment. Power, whether from individual wealth or ruling authority, needs to be refocused on service.
Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants
By: Robin Wall Kimmerer
Narrated by:Robin Wall Kimmerer
Robin Wall Kimmerer (Author, Professor of Environmental and Forest Biology, PhD from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.)
Robin Wall Kimmerer’s “Braiding Sweetgrass” channels a movement for economic change around the world. Capitalism and socialism are evolving in similar ways to respond to the world’s ecological crises. Neither economic system is capable of dealing with the crises because of the governing weaknesses of their evolution. Capitalism, like socialism, is driven by human nature’s self-interests. With capitalism, unbridled self-interest views individual wealth as a measure of success. Socialism views unbridled power as a measure of success. Neither freedom of capitalism nor the power exercised in socialism will stop earths’ despoliation.
Kimmerer tries to convince listeners to recognize their self-interest is in caring for the ecology of earth and its environmental and human diversity.
This is not a new argument. Sir David Attenborough, Jonnie Hughes, Joseph Marshall III, Charles Mann, Barry Lopez and others make similar arguments. Even though they may be right, human’ interest in balancing ecology and diversity will only happen with governance that is neither purely capitalist nor purely socialist.
At times, Kimmerer’s solutions are too mystical and spiritual. Some of her tales will dispirit listeners. On the other hand, some of the mythology she writes about is entertaining, if not actionable.
The character of “Windigo” is a representation of the weakness of capitalism and its extremity that entails the growth of greed. Her tales of the creation of humanity reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of human nature.
What Kimmerer offers listener’s is contemplation, if not realistic solutions for earth’s despoilation.
What is wrong with capitalism and/or socialism that can be corrected to stop earth’s deterioration? It is in a middle way where money and power are not ends in themselves but tools for improvement. Service to all species of life is an objective that can only be achieved with money and power. A cultural shift is required to understand what can be done. There needs to be a shift from manufacturing and industrial growth to a service-based economy. With the advent of technology, particularly A.I. that shift is happening.
INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION ON A BAD DAY IN BEJING,, CHINA
Homelessness, hunger, disease, natural disasters, pollution, mental dysfunction, failing public education, racial and religious discrimination are all solvable problems in the world. Money and power are the tools that can be used to solve those problems, but it requires the will of governments to manage those tools to focus on service to society, not manufacture of things that do not conserve the environment. This is evident in the too-long story written by Kimmerer. There is an element of irony in her book because that is what her Indian heritage practiced hundreds of years ago. Indian tribes had no need for money, but their Chiefs used their power to care for land and its diversity that served their people’s needs.
Money has become synonymous with power in both capitalist and socialist economies.
Even Indian societies in America have adopted that reality with the building of Casinos. What is missing is how that power is being used. Kimmerer explains power should be used to serve the earth’s rebirth and the needs of all life. The obvious point is that without earth’s rebirth, human society ends. The future of the world is dependent on service, not manufacturing. The demographics of life demand better care of the human population and the environment. That job can be fulfilled with a reorientation of the world’s economic rewards and punishments. Power, whether from individual wealth or ruling authority, needs to be refocused on service.
Sandeep Jauhar (Author, Cardiovascular Physician, opinion writer for The New York Times.)
“Heart” is a history of cardiovascular medicine, personalized by Sandeep Jauhar, a cardiovascular physician. Jauhar’s history of cardiovascular medicine is not for squeamish listeners. It is a personalized account of advances in cardiovascular medicine by a physician whose personal life is interwoven with the ravishes of heart disease. Jauhar addresses the history of heart ailments, his family, his patients, and physician/inventors who advanced the treatment of heart disease.
Heart disease remains the top medical cause of death according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other statistical agencies.
Jauhar notes the heart is a critical organ of the human body, but its essential function is as a pump for blood. It is a muscle. With its contraction, blood carries the nutrients and oxygen of life to organs of the body. When that pump malfunctions or stops, life is in jeopardy. Jauhar’s history of the “Heart” recounts advances in medical treatment for the heart’s repair and maintenance.
There are several reasons why Jauhar’s history is difficult for listeners to hear.
Many of the most important advances in cardiology are dependent on animal experimentation before human application. To animal lovers, the thought that animals, whether they have awareness or not, are used to test pacemakers, heart transplants, and human drug treatments for heart ailment. Their earts are stopped and restarted. Animals die from tests being run by doctors and clinicians searching for answers and treatments for heart disease and other medical maladies. The human reason for this method of research poses the question–who would want sons, daughters, or parents treated without tests for the unknown consequences of experimental drug treatments and physical interventions?
Descriptions of pain and anxiety of heart disease symptoms are explained with details that may scare listeners who have been diagnosed with heart disease.
The balance between living and dying, pain and nothingness, is a constant presence in conversations between physician and patient. Stories of individual patient and mass casualty events are a part of Jauhar’s history of “Heart” disease and treatment.
Jauhar views major advances for heart disease treatment are near their end in the 21st century.
Jauhar offers many stories showing how research and great inventions have mitigated the consequences of heart disease. The key to that observation is that inventions and interventions mitigate but do not cure the disease.
Jauhar explains an abnormal heartbeat called an arrhythmia led to the invention of an implanted mechanical electrical conduction system to automatically shock the heart when an arrhythmia occurs in a patient. The shock can be painful. However, without that shock, an arrhythmia stops the flow of blood to vital organs which may lead to death or disability. The idea of the shock creates anxiety in some patients that can induce further arrhythmia which repeats the shock. Jauhar reports one patient asks to have the implant removed because of its repeating shocks. Jauhar notes the patient dies soon after the removal of the implant.
Three-dimensional echocardiography has significantly improved diagnosis of cholesterol build-up in blood vessels that can be mitigated with drugs. Statins have been shown to reduce high cholesterol. As with any drug therapy, there are unintended consequences when something new is introduced to one’s blood stream. Muscle pain, digestive problems, and mental fuzziness can be side effects from statin treatment. As one grows older, the first two may be manageable but with age who wants to be fuzzy headed. Clarity of thought seems more and more a sadly missed luxury as we age.
Jauhar notes better diet and exercise, and no smoking are important benefits to those who have hereditary heart disease. Jauhar suggests anger management and quieting one’s thoughts through meditation offers benefits to those who suffer from heart disease. Don’t get mad and don’t try to get even because both aggravate the heart muscle.
Jauhar explains a number of inventions have led to short- and long-term treatments for cardiovascular diseases. From the example of stab wounds to congenital heart malfunction, the medical profession has invented machines that can take over the hearts’ function during surgery. More time for operation on the heart is provided to the surgeon with the use of the artificial heart pumping machines.
Christian Barnard (Resident surgeon at Grotte Schuur Hospital in Cape Town, S. Africa, Born 1922. Died 2001.)
Heart transplantation’s history is reviewed by Jauhar. The first heart transplantation was by Christiaan Barnard in 1967. The patient lived for 18 days after the surgery. The average life span for a heart transplant has risen to 10 years but the supply of healthy human hearts limits its potential. Jauhar notes the Jarvik-7, named after its inventor, is the first mechanical heart pump but its refinement has failed to repeat the success of human heart transplants. Its practical use has been limited to short term use for time to find donated hearts and extend patients’ lives during surgery.
Jauhar tells of his experience in New York on 9/11. It is a horrific story told by many writers but not with any more stomach-turning clarity than that which a participating doctor imparts.
Jauhar ends his book with the loss of his mother who may have died from a heart attack. He suggests there are other conditions that may have led to her death, but his point seems to be–live as healthy a life as you can because death is a part of every life, and fulfillment is in one’s health.
REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE 