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
“Old School Indian” is returned without being completed. It would have been interesting to know more about what it is like to be raised in America as a descendant of a Mohawk Indian Tribe but experimenting with gender identity are steps too far for this reader/listener.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Old School Indian (Novel)
Author: Aaron John Curtis
Narrated By: Jason Grasi
Aaron John Curtis (Author, essayist, member of the Akwesasne Kanienkehaka, a Mohawk tribe.)
Curtis begins a rye, mordant, and witty novel that gives one an idea of how an Indian descendant might view themselves as a part of American society. Curtis’s main character is Abe Jacobs; raised in an Indian family deeply rooted in their Mohawk culture. He grows to attend college at Syracuse University in New York with an ambition to become a writer. He becomes concerned about skin sores that develop on his skin that itch, suppurate, appear, and disappear.
Abe is a handsome young man in Curtis’s story. He is troubled by skin sores and anxious to find out what causes them and how they can be treated and cured. He meets his future wife while going to college. She is a free spirited, attractive woman who is drawn to Abe because of his good looks which become more attractive when she finds he is a descendant of a Mohawk tribe. They become lovers on the day they meet. As their relationship grows, life goes on. They have times when they are apart, living life on their own terms but staying in touch by phone and recurrent rendezvouses.
The seriousness of Abe’s disease is finally diagnosed. The symptoms can cause artery inflammation leading to organ failure and dementia at an early age. This fictional disease (though there is a true similar disease) prepares readers for a story about what it is like to be in the prime of one’s life to face a disease that can disfigure your appearance and shorten your life. Aside from the point of having a potentially deadly disease, a listener/reader wonders what it is like to be a descendent of an Indian tribe in America.
As the book progresses, the story of Abe and his girlfriend are shown to have been raised in families struggling with poverty. Abe and his soon to be wife begin revealing the hardship of their lives. Poverty diminishes life in so many ways that the author’s clever beginning is not enough for this critic to complete his story. His hero tries to commit suicide at 12 years of age. Abe’s poverty is something many generations have experienced but being drawn to suicide and willingness to experiment with gender identity are steps too far for this critic.
“Old School Indian” is returned without being completed. It would have been interesting to know more about what it is like to be raised in America as a descendant of a Mohawk Indian Tribe but experimenting with gender identity are steps too far for this reader/listener.
The inference of “Plato and the Tyrant” is that all forms of government are like the parable of the cave in “The Republic”, i.e., people only see shadows of life’s truth.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Plato and the Tyrant (The Fall of Greece’s Dynasty and the Making of a Philosophic Masterpiece)
Author: James Romm
Narrated By: Paul Woodson
James Romm (Author, Professor of Classics at Bard College, specializes in ancient Greek and Roman culture and civilization.)
James Romm reviews Plato’s personal correspondence that offers an interesting perspective on “The Republic” as a critique of Dionysius the Elder’s tyrannic rule of the island nation of Syracuse, Sicily, and southern Italy. (Syracuse is a Mediterranean island 620 miles off the coast of Greece.) Some believe there are 13 private letters written by Plato with the most famous and debated letter being number 7. Romm’s book is about these private letters and what they reveal about Plato’s character.
Excerpt of the 7th letter to Dionisius the Elder:
Holding these right views, Dion persuaded Dionysius to summon me; and he himself also sent a request that I should by all means come with all speed, before that [327e] any others13 should encounter Dionysius and turn him aside to some way of life other than the best. And these were the terms—long though they are to repeat—in which his request was couched: ” What opportunities (he asked) are we to wait for that could be better than those that have now been presented by a stroke of divine good fortune?” And he dwelt in detail on the extent of the empire [328a] in Italy and Sicily and his own power therein, and the youth of Dionysius, mentioning also how great a desire he had for philosophy and education, and he spoke of his own nephews14 and connections, and how they would be not only easily converted themselves to the doctrines and the life I always taught, but also most useful in helping to influence Dionysius; so that now, if ever (he concluded), all our hopes will be fulfilled of seeing the same persons at once philosophers and rulers of mighty States. [328b]
By these and a vast number of other like arguments Dion kept exhorting me; but as regards my own opinion, I was afraid how matters would turn out so far as the young people were concerned—for the desires of such as they change quickly, and frequently in a contrary direction; although, as regards Dion’s own character, I knew that it was stable by nature and already sufficiently mature. Wherefore as I pondered the matter and was in doubt whether I should make the journey and take his advice, or what, I ultimately inclined to the view that if we were ever to attempt to realize our theories [328c] concerning laws and government, now was the time to undertake it; for should I succeed in convincing one single person sufficiently I should have brought to pass all manner of good. Holding this view and in this spirit of adventure it was that I set out from home,—not in the spirit which some have supposed, but dreading self-reproach most of all, lest haply I should seem to myself to be utterly and absolutely nothing more than a mere voice and never to undertake willingly any action, and now to be in danger of proving false, in the first15 instance, to my friendship [328d] and association with Dion, when he is actually involved in no little danger. Suppose, then, that some evil fate should befall him, or that he should be banished by Dionysius and his other foes and then come to us as an exile and question us in these words—“O Plato, I come to you as an exile not to beg for foot-soldiers, nor because I lack horse-soldiers to ward off mine enemies, but to beg for arguments and persuasion, whereby you above all, as I know, are able to convert young men to what is good and just and thereby to bring them always into a state of mutual friendliness [328e] and comradeship. And it is because you have left me destitute of these that I have now quitted Syracuse and come hither. My condition, however, casts a lesser reproach on you; but as for Philosophy, which you are always belauding, and saying that she is treated with ignominy by the rest of mankind, surely, so far as it depends on you, she too is now betrayed [329a] as well as I. Now if we had happened to be living at Megara,16 you would no doubt have come to assist me in the cause for which I summoned you, on pain of deeming yourself of all men the most base; and now, forsooth, do you imagine that when you plead in excuse the length of the journey and the great strain of the voyage and of the labor involved you can possibly be acquitted of the charge of cowardice? Far from it, indeed.”
Dionysius the Elder ruled for 35 years and is succeeded by his son, Dionysius the Younger. Dionysius is characterized as a combative, brutal, and authoritarian leader. Plato visited Syracuse many times with the desire to ameliorate the Elder’s style of leadership. Plato’s effort results in the Elder’s selling him into slavery, presumably because of political differences and the Elder’s tyrannical power.
Plato (428/423 BC to 348/347 BC, died near 80 years of age.)
Soon after being sold into slavery by Dionysius the Elder, Plato is rescued by Anniceris who bought Plato out of slavery. Anniceris (aka Annikeris), a wealthy Greek philosopher, apparently recognized Plato’s brilliance. Plato goes on to create his famous academy in Athens. Though the Elder successfully controlled Syracuse and much of Italy during his tyrannic rule, his son, Dionysius II, used similar but less effective tyrannical rule and was eventually defeated. Plato tried to convince Dionysius II of his errors in leadership but fails and is compelled to flee house arrest to return to Athens. (Romm suggests Plato loved Dionysius II in more than a platonic way but was unable to change his tyrannical rule.)
Plato’s ideal republic envisioned a just society led by philosopher-kings. These rulers would rule based on collective good rather than personal gain.
This ideal republic would be built on wisdom, justice, and a strict class structure where there would be rulers, soldiers, and workers. Of course, the weakness in this ideal is human nature. Whether ancient or modern culture, as Lord Acton notes in 1887–power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. People do not naturally fall into specific classes. Human beings are individually and differently self-interested which ensures conflict. That is why both communism, capitalism, and its socialist leanings work inefficiently in ways that unjustly create haves and have-nots.
At the heart of all known forms of government is power.
There are good and bad leaders in history. The good are those who shaped nations, inspired movements, and changed the course of civilization for the better. The bad are the tyrants, the incompetents, and the cruel. Both the good and bad can be found in the histories of every form of government rule. One can argue Alexander the Great, Napoleon Bonaparte, Abraham Lincoln, and Queen Elizabeth I led forms of government that changed the course of civilization for the better. By the same token, one can argue Dionysius the Elder and Hitler changed the course of civilization in the opposite direction. The common denominator for constructive and destructive leadership is power. The type of government makes little difference. Every form of government has human leaders which may lead in ways contrary to the best interest of those they rule.
Plato’s Republic, Adam Smith’s “…Wealth of Nations”, and Adolph Hitlers’ “Mein Kamph” are ideas directed toward the exercise of power.
“Plato and the Tyrant” offers a perspective that makes one think about the history of Plato and government but does not offer anything new.
Romm’s evaluation of Plato’s “Republic” is a retelling of an ideal form of government that cannot exist because of the nature of human beings and the caves in which we live.
The private letters of Plato reveal little new about the consequences of rule by democracies, monarchies, oligarchies, dictatorships, theocracies, or anarchies. The inference of “Plato and the Tyrant” is that all forms of government are like the parable of the cave in “The Republic”, i.e., people only see shadows of life’s truth. Governance will only improve when people crawl out of the cave to see the truth of life.
Being bad is a human characteristic, i.e., the desire for money, power, prestige, and sex are elemental parts of the human condition. They are the “Snares” of human life.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
The Snares (A Novel)
By: Rav Grewal-Kök
Narrated By: Neil Shah
Rav Grewal-Kök (Author, “The Snares” is his first novel. Rav Grewal-Kök has written for The Atlantic, New England Review and won a National Endowment for the Arts fellowship.)
“The Snares” is about a well-educated lawyer who feels like an American outsider struggling to become a success. His mother and father are Punjabi. He seems burdened by being a person of a different race and ethnicity in white America. That feeling is reinforced by the circumstances of his life. He is married to a woman who comes from a wealthy white American family. He is a lawyer at forty years of age that is offered a job by the CIA. His hope is that working for the CIA will be a career making move that will make him a success in his own eyes and in the opinion of his in-laws. The irony of Grewal-Kök’s story is that the CIA is not an avenue for success but a road to perdition. The author paints a picture of the CIA and FBI that makes a mockery of American ideals.
What Grewal-Kök shows is that American government employees are just like the general population.
All the prejudices and dishonesty of America (or any country) are as present in governments as in any organization of human beings. The difference is that government has wider societal influence than a singular business, or eleemosynary organization. Government is filled with all the social goodness and prejudice of the society in which it is designed to serve.
“The Snares” the author is writing about are the best and worst of what the American CIA represent. The author’s main character, Neel Chima, is interviewed for a job with the CIA. Chima is hired by the CIA during the George W. Bush administration. George W., considered a Republican conservative, is the first President to authorize drone strikes for targeted killing. President Bush approved the killing of 6 Yemeni’ men in Yemen for their attack on the USS Cole. What is often forgotten is that Barack Obama, a Democratic liberal, authorized between 400 and 600 drone strikes that killed an estimated 3,797 people, of which 300 to 400 were civilians.
Obama’s drone strikes were in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia.
One takes for granted that every drone strike is based on a careful examination of the human targets that are chosen. What Grewal-Kök implies is the CIA is something more than an intelligence service charged with collecting, analyzing and acting on foreign threats to America. As CIA operatives, these very human and well-educated government employees are pursuing a good life by stopping considered threats to America. Neel Chima is hired because the CIA officer in charge believes he can be an asset in the pursuit of foreign intelligence because of his ambition and life as a Punjabi American. However, Chima’s career ends in a state of turmoil, in part because of his own human vices but largely because of inept management by unscrupulous supervisors.
The snares that Grewal-Kök is referring to are “bad people” who are in powerful government positions. These bad government actors use their position to subvert newbies to their organization for actions that are contrary to ideals of the government agency for which they work. This is particularly dangerous in organizations like the CIA and FBI that are designed to interpret behaviors of potential criminals, i.e. not criminals in the act of crime but those who may or may not commit a crime.
J. Edgar Hoover led the FBI from 1924 to 1972.
The FBI arrested Americans suspected of being radicals during the Red Scare without due process. President Trump is doing the same thing with the arbitrary exportation of immigrants today. The FBI targeted Martin Luther King Jr. and tried to discredit him by closely surveilling, recording, and interpreting his activity. Hoover arguably collected secret files on politicians and famous Americans to aid his power and influence in government more than to reduce public corruption. The author infers the same is true in the CIA.
Grewal-Kök’s primary focus is on the CIA but the “Snares” of which he writes are the same that troubled the FBI. The CIA is creating files on other countries’ citizens with recommendations on actions to kill real and perceived enemies of America. Both conservative and liberal Presidents of the United States have used the CIA to kill foreign nationals. In 2o05 Abu Hamza Rabia was killed by a drone strike under George W. Bush’s administration. In 2006, the assassination of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was done in an airstrike under Bush. In 2011, Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. born cleric and Al-Qaeda figure was killed in Yemen by a drone strike under Obama’s administration. In the same year, Osama bin Laden is assassinated in a U.S. Navy Seal’ raid ordered by Obama. In 2020, Qasem Soleimani, a major general in Iran’s Islamic Guard was killed in a drone strike at the orders of the Trump administration. In 2022, a CIA drone strike in Kabul, Afghanistan killed Ayman al-Zawahiri under President Biden.
WHAT IS THE TRUTH?
Even if all of these sanctioned murders by American Presidents have been justified, the story of “Snares” makes real–the potential for a bad or ambitious CIA agent to lie or inadvertently misconstrue the truth. Grewal-Kök explains how all human beings are subject to the “Snares” of life.
The character of Neel Chima is an everyman in America. His fall from grace is partly self-inflicted but accelerated by bad actors in the CIA. Being bad is a human characteristic, i.e., the desire for money, power, prestige, and sex are elemental parts of the human condition. They are the “Snares” of human life.
A President who only sees government as a cost and the wealthy as the nation’s only benefactors, compounds America’s inability to solve the problems of poverty with eviction being a preeminent symptom.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Evicted (Poverty and Profit in the American City)
By: Matthew Desmond
Narrated By: Dion Graham
Matthew Desmond (Author, sociologist and a Pulitzer Prize winner, Professor of Sociology at Princeton.)
Matthew Desmond has written about American poverty in “Evicted”. There are two types of poverty. One is a worker who is not making enough money to be anything more than poor. The second kind of poor is grinding poverty where one must choose between having food to eat or a roof over one’s head. One who is poor can live in America, may get an education, find a job, and get along in life. However, those with too little money to eat and have shelter–live lives of desperation. Desmond’s book is about the latter to show how American society is failing desperate citizens. Desmond interviews several poor Americans that offer a clear understanding of the difference between being poor in America and being desperately poor in America.
“Land of opportunity” believers argue there are jobs in America and those who choose to beg for food rather than work deserve their fate. The truth is that many jobs in America do not pay enough for those who have jobs to pay rent and feed their families. Housing is expensive and affordable housing is not being produced in large enough quantities to reduce the costs of housing. Affordable housing is hard to build because many homeowners resist having it built in their neighborhoods. When land is found, it is often too expensive for the builder to make a profit with low rents. The cost of construction is often higher than it needs to be because of high land prices, building code requirements, or rezoning needed to allow multifamily housing.
Education in America is not meeting the needs of its citizens.
School availability is not well enough managed to ensure education for all who live in America. Sex education and contraception are being discouraged in school, which is a foolish, self-destructive societal mistake. Healthcare is too expensive for many Americans with low incomes which compounds the health problems of the poor who cannot afford either medical service or treatment. Grinding poverty causes some to seek relief through drugs which increases medical problems and further aggravates inequality being fed by an illicit industry that is growing in America. Drug abuse kills Americans in many ways; not the least of which is addiction and poverty.
The history of American income inequality is burdened by forms of racism and sexual discrimination that do not treat people equally.
Jobs are changing with automation and outsourcing of goods produced by an international economy. American government has failed to create policies that help those who need more help. As one of the wealthiest nations in the world, America has been incapable of solving the spread of poverty among its citizens.
In reading/listening to Desmond’s research, it seems like there is an American conspiracy making one of the wealthiest countries in the world incapable of solving the housing, education, and employment problems of its citizens.
A President who only sees government as a cost and the wealthy as the nation’s only benefactors, compounds America’s inability to solve the problems of poverty with eviction being a preeminent symptom.
History of the world has shown all forms of government are “equal opportunity” inhibitors, if not destroyers.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Secondhand Time (The Last of the Soviets)
By: Svetlana Alexievich
Narrated By: Amanda Carlin, Mark Bramhall, Cassandra Campbell & 8 more.
Svetlana Alexievich (Author, Belarusian investigative journalist, winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature in 2015.)
Svetlana Alexievich’s “Secondhand Time” is a remarkable and informative explanation of why Putin believes he is right and why many citizens of Russia seem to continue in their support of his administration.
Map of the former U.S.S.R.
Alexievich conducts a series of interviews with Russian citizens of different generations about the U.S.S.R. and its return to the world stage as a Russian nation. The narrators of her book recite those interviews to give listener/readers a complex and enlightening picture of Russian culture. The clash of communist and capitalist ideals is at the foundation of the interviews and the narrators dramatically told stories.
The Russian Soviet Army is the first to arrive in the Battle of Berlin on April 16, 1945. Their flag was hoisted on May 1, 1945.
The citizens of Russia are justifiably proud of their role in WWII that turned the tide of Germany’s war of aggression. (Of course, that is putting aside Stalin’s Machiavellian decision to join Hitler at the beginning of the war.) Some Russian soldiers who fought in that war were disgusted with what they feel was a betrayal by Mikhail Gorbachev of communist ideals for which they lived and died for in the 20th century.
The rejection of communist ideals for capitalism is viewed by some Russians as a tyranny of greed that lays waste to the poor and creates a class of haves and have-nots.
Some Russian veterans of WWII see the seduction of capitalism destroying the ideal of a classless society. Some citizens see the ideal of a government is to demand the wealth of life be spread equally according to individual need. To these believers, enforcement of communist ideals would eliminate private property and greed that would create a classless society. Some believed Stalin exemplified leadership that would achieve that ideal. The hardship of life during Stalin’s rule is considered by some as justified means for the achievement of the Marxist ideal of communism.
Statue of the “Circle of Life” in Norway.
Cultures may be different, but all human life is the same.
The underlying point of these interviews is to show Russian culture is not monolithic, just as culture is not in any nation. All cultures are filled with diversity. There is no singular cultural mind but a range of interests among many factions that establish a nation’s culture. The evidence of that is the contrast of Gorbachev and Putin in Russia and FDR and Trump in America. All four leaders led their countries but represent completely different cultural beliefs.
Conservatives, New York Governor Al Smith, Southern Democrats, and isolationists like Charles Beard opposed FDR in America. Putin and Trump have their cultural supporters in today’s national governments, but they also have their critics. The difference is that in Putin’s world, being killed or put in prison for opposition is culturally acceptable. In America, one is reminded of Trump’s deportation and imprisonment of migrants without due process.
The author’s interviews are not suggesting that either Russia or the West have good or bad governments but that every culture tests their leaders.
Many Russians, undoubtedly blame American Democracy for the dismantling of the U.S.S.R. Alexievich interviews Russians who believe the hardship that countries within the U.S.S.R. experienced were not the fault of Stalinist policies but the failure of citizens to live up to the ideals of communism. To anyone who has traveled to the Baltics, that opinion is founded on ignorance of the hostility expressed by citizens of the Baltics who were starved, displaced, jailed, and murdered during their occupation by Russia.
The other part of the story is the rise of the oligarchs in Russia as a result of the greed associated with capitalism.
The gap between rich and poor is accelerated in Russia just as it has been in America. Democracy does not have clean hands when it comes to equality of opportunity. Like the Jewish pogroms in Russia, America’s enslavement, murder, and discrimination of Blacks is proven history.
Siberian Exile during Stalin’s reign in Russia.
Alexievich draws from all sides of Russian beliefs. Those interviewed note the terrible conditions of those exiled to Siberia. Many Russians became disillusioned by the redistribution of wealth and privilege after Gorbachev and Yeltsin showed themselves to not be up to the task of leadership change. In fairness, one wonders who could have been up to the task when Russia had a long history of monarchal and tyrannical leadership?
A few Russians became immensely wealthy while the majority were somewhat better off but some struggled with the loss of State benefits and fewer jobs. The rising gap between rich and poor soured communist idealists. Even those who had been sent to Siberia by Stalin who toiled and suffered the experience of isolation, slave labor, and frigid weather felt they were no better off because of the loss of a socialist future.
Migration is the movement of people to new areas of the world for work, better living conditions, and safety. In that process the world economy is strengthened. .
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
The Shortest History of Migration
By: Ian Goldin
Narrated By: Julian Elfer
Ian Andrew Goldin (South African born professor at the University of Oxford, specializes in globalization and development.)
Professor Goldin has written a history of migration that reminds one of the well-known phrases attributed to Socrates: “I know that I know nothing”. Goldin is born in South Africa to a Lithuanian father who fled his home country to escape political and social upheaval in Europe during the early 20th century. In retrospect, that migration saved the future of the Goldin’s from Stalinist suppression after WWII. It is ironic that Ian Goldin is raised in South Africa where white suppression of native South Africans was common. “The Shortest History of Migration” is no apologia, but it is a forthright history of the ubiquity of world migration.
Migration is an essential characteristic of civilization believed to have begun in Africa.
The obvious irony of human origin is the darker skin tone of our first ancestors who had higher levels of skin melanin to protect them from the harsh effects of the sun. Humanity began as a species of a black ancestor, an estimated 6 to 7 million years ago.
Neanderthal precursor of human beings.
Goldin implies humans moved from Africa to explore the world. They may have left to escape the harshness of their existence or because of the nature of species’ curiosity. Their change in environment led to changes in their physiognomy (facial features and expressions) caused by the evolutionary nature of life and the exigencies of environment. The point is that migration has been a part of history since the beginning of life on earth.
What may be forgotten by some is that migration was largely unregulated until WWI according to Goldin.
That seems largely true except the United States passed the Naturalization Act of 1790 that established rules for citizenship and an Immigration Act of 1891 that created the U.S. Bureau of Immigration; both of which implied regulation. Nevertheless, the fundamental point is that migration has been a part of society from the beginning of human life.
WWI generated many new laws and policies about migration.
Wartime measures required passports and border crossing cards to manage migration. National security increased scrutiny of immigrants. Broader societal and political concerns about migration spread across the world. Migration became more complicated.
Goldin argues the benefit of migration is misunderstood and misrepresented by leaders like Donald Trump.
Goldin suggests the economic impact of Trump’s anti-migrant beliefs and policies will undermine both the world and American economies. In 2023, an estimated 18% of the economic output of the American economy came from migration. The two industries most impacted are agriculture and construction but many immigrants work in caregiving and medical professions, all of which will be impacted by labor shortages. Goldin notes that migrants working in other countries send money back to their home countries that amount to more revenue than is provided by tourism and foreign aid. Many, if not most, economists would argue migration is a cornerstone of economic growth and stability. Trump’s false statements about migrant criminality are overblown and unsupported by economic statistics that show migrants contributed an estimated $25.7 billion in 2022 to the Social Security system in taxes that benefit aged American citizens (like myself).
Trump policies will not return American to the manufacturing prosperity of the twentieth century but to a possible depression like that of the 1930s or, at the very least, a recession like that of 2007-2009.
Migration is the movement of people to new areas of the world for work, better living conditions, and safety. In that process the world economy is strengthened.
There is enough abundance in the world to create opportunity for all, but Ernaux’s history implies people must change their ways.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
The Years
By: Annie Ernaux
Narrated by: Anna Bentinck
Annie Ernaux (Author, French writer, 2022 Nobel Prize winner, born in 1940.)
Annie Ernaux offers a perspective on history from the experience of her life as a French woman in the mid 20th to 21st century. Though born before the beginning of World War II, Ernaux matures as a young woman in the 1950s. A striking difference between the history of this time is the difference between Algeria’s drive for independence and American’s mistakes in Vietnam. French Algeria is less understood in American memories than its troubled history in Vietnam. Aside from misunderstanding France’s Algerian experience, the social changes Ernaux’s notes are similar to many Americans’ experiences in Vietnam.
Eisenhower’s, Kennedy’s, and Johnson’s leadership in the Vietnam war seem, in some respects, similar to Ernaux’s memory of Charles de Gaulle’s leadership in Algeria.
Eisenhower and Kennedy were veterans of war who became leaders of their countries. Though Eisenhower and Kennedy believed Vietnam was a threat as a communist Domino, de Gaulle believed Algeria was a threat to France’s right to colonize. These famous nationalist leaders were wrong. Southeast Asian countries had a right to choose their own form of government, and Algeria had a right to choose self-government.
Though Annie Ernaux was born just before 1946, she matured during great changes in the world.
Her experience of post-war reconstruction, the rise of consumerism, women’s rights, sexual liberation, social class differentiation, and societal norms changed in America, France, and most nations of the world.
George Marshall was Secretary of State from 1947 to 49 and headed the Marshall Plan to reconstruct Europe after the war.
America played a great part in the financial reconstruction of Europe, Japan, and Germany after the end of WWII. America’s goal was to prevent future conflicts, promote economic recovery, and counter the influence of communism, but in that process, America influenced social norms throughout the world. Some of the influences created clear lines of opposition between communism, socialism, and capitalism. However, all economic systems influenced societal change. Whether communist, socialist, or capitalist there were changes in normative social values. Societies increased consumerism, instituted policies for equal rights to some degree, and made class distinctions based on money, or its equivalent, i.e., power. In capitalist and socialist societies, social position became more about money and the power of its influence. In communist societies, it was more about power and the influence of money. Political differences remained sharply divided in ways that influenced social norms, but the general direction was similar. Communism, socialism, capitalism, and all its derivations focused on consumerism, women’s rights, and class differences that changed the world during Annie Ernaux’s “…Years” of life.
American President Harry Truman led the U.S. from 1945 to 1953.Emperor Hirohito next to MacArthur was emperor of Japan from 1926-1989. Mao was China’s leader from 1924 to 1953. Stalin led Russia from 1943 to 1976.Charles de Gaulle effectively led France from 1944 to 1959 with the last ten years as France’s President.
Feckless leaders, deluded authoritarians, and a few truly service-oriented leaders rose in every system of government, including American, English, Japanese, Chinese, French, Russian, and other nations. The main differences lay in leader’s longevity, and their economic policies. Leaders of China and Russia having fewer leadership changes between 1946 and 2006 than most nations were largely authoritarian. There were 6 leadership changes in China and 9 in the Soviet Union. Only 1 of 6 in China and only 1 of 9 in the Soviet Union leaned toward capitalism.
From 1946 to 2006, there were 11 presidents in America, 13 prime ministers in England, 32 prime ministers in Japan, and 6 presidents in France. All of these democratic nations exclusively leaned toward capitalism.
However, Ernaux’s history infers every nation shows social norms changing in similar ways. Even China and Russia show changes in consumerism, women’s rights, sexual liberation, and class differentiation. Unquestionably, the societal changes did not change to the same degree, but they were similar. Maladies of society are common in all forms of government, only the degree of change in societal norms is different. All nations have more or less consumer opportunities, more or less human equality, all have class distinctions, but normative change is a work in progress, not an end but a beginning process.
Annie Ernaux in earlier years of her life.
Ernaux’s trip down memory lane is interesting but not particularly revelatory. Her remembrance of the past is helpful because she shows how social change evolved in both good and bad ways in her own life. Consumerism seems on the edge of being out of control with money and wealth being the “sine qua non” of the good life. Without money, life seemed not worth living to some. Ernaux suggests America has become an arrogant example of wealth and privilege that diminishes civility. Ernaux is not suggesting she is above the fray of wealth as privilege and reveals her own character flaws by noting affairs with younger men in what seems a wasted attempt to reclaim youth. She implies a prejudice against Arabs and Africans who she believes wrongly consider themselves as French. She infers they are not French because they are not white Christians, even if they are born in France.
One comes away from “The Years” with a feeling that societies of the world are at a crossroad.
Wealth should not be the measure of one’s social value and privilege. Inequality is a sin against humanity. Prejudice is the cause of much of the world’s conflict. Immigration is a misunderstood value of societal comity. Tolerance of all religious beliefs has been an unresolvable puzzle but a desirable societal goal. There is enough abundance in the world to create opportunity for all, but Ernaux’s history implies people must change their ways.
Only with education and understanding of the past can society or the individual change their future.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Cowboy Apocalypse (Religion and the Myth of the Vigilante Messiah)
By: Rachel Wagner
Narrated by: Dina Pearlman
Rachel Wagner (Author, professor of religion and philosophy at Ithaca College in Ithaca New York.)
Rachel Wagner has written a highly personal book about American gun culture that will resonate with some and appall others. As an academic philosopher and professor of religion, Wagner analyzes gun violence and sexism and how belief in “might makes right” is deeply ingrained in American character.
There are so many stories of death and injury from gun violence in America that one becomes numbed by Wagner’s apocalyptic story.
We were living in Las Vegas when 59 people were killed, and 527 were injured by one gunman in a hotel room less than 3 miles from our home. When one looks at statistics of children murdered in school rooms since 2010, a solution for gun violence should be urgent, but it appears not.
Rise in school shootings between 2010 and 2o19.
Wagner argues gun violence in the U.S. is viewed by much of the public as a belief in the myth of the “good guy with a gun” that is embedded in the history of America and reinforced by fictional stories, books, television, and the movies. She argues detective fiction like “The Big Sleep”, TV series like “Have Gun Will Travel”, and movies like “Die Hard” have lone heroes who defeat dastardly villains.
Think Alan Ladd in “Shane” or John Wayne in any of his westerns, and one believes gun-toting man-gods keep the world safe.
Wagner shows how malleable society is and why the gun lobby is rewarded and sustained by the myth of the “good guy with a gun”. Wagner argues gun-toting Americans have become gods in their own mind. What they really are is examples to potential killers of school children and unsuspecting tourists.
HAVE GUN WILL TRAVELDIE HARD
Wagner believes American gun obsession has wheedled its way into a religious narrative based on Christian apocalypticism and romanticization of American history. She notes the myths of armed vigilantes who are seen as saviors who can reset society when it goes astray. This myth seeps into American cultural shibboleths of white supremacy and patriarchal dominance that pervade video games, movies, and novels.
Wagner argues sexual and racial inequality are exacerbated by America’s gun culture. Wagner notes an experience in her personal life and her education in religion show how “might makes right” has been, and still is, a danger to society.
Wagner argues America needs to look in the mirror and quit glorifying firearms and vigilante justice. She suggests the January 6th attack on the capitol shows how widespread belief in vigilante justice is in America.
January 6, 2021, insurrection when a mob of supporters of then-President Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol.
The philosophical and religious beliefs of the author are made clear in her final chapters. Only with education and understanding of the past can society or the individual change their future.
This review does not do justice to Swafford’s excellent history of Mozart. One of the most revelatory and entertaining parts of Swafford’s history is the bawdy, funny, and clever poetry that Wolfgang’s letters reveal about his personality. Genius takes many forms.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Mozart (The Reign of Love)
By: Jan Swafford
Edited By: Tim Cambell
Jan Swafford (Author, American composer, lecturer and writer.)
Jan Swafford has written a magnificent biography that diminishes and reinforces the comedic/tragic/brilliant characterization of Mozart in the film Amadeus. By any measure, Mozart is shown by Swafford to be a funny and brilliant musician while widely considered by musicologists as one of the greatest composers of all time.
Tom Hulse as Mozart in the movie “Amadeus”.
Vaguely remembering the film, the comedy enacted by Tom Hulce was hilarious, but Swafford shows how truly remarkable Mozart was as a violin and piano musician who began at the age of seven to tour Europe with his eleven-year-old sister, and their father, in 1762. The film is entertaining but misses the immense talent of this family’ trio in his book “Mozart”.
Maria Anna Mozart (1751-1829) Sister of Wolfgang Mozart was a highly talented musician who played piano and toured with Wolfgang when he was 7 and she was 11.
Though Maria Anna Mozart may not have been a genius like her brother, Swafford explains she was a piano prodigy as a result of her father’s guidance as a music teacher. Leopold Mozart may have been a helicopter father who dominated his children’s lives but his contribution to their success is made clear by Swafford.
Leopold Mozart (1719-1787, father of Wolfgang and Maria Anna Mozart.)
Though Leopold Mozart is criticized by some as an over controller of his son’s life, it seems unlikely that Wolfgang Mozart would have become such a great musician and composer without his father. Wolfgang came to revile his father’s control of the family’s income that is largely a result of his daughter’s and son’s talents. Swafford shows how instrumental Leopold was in creating Mozart’s legendary abilities. Leopold was a great teacher who adjusted his teaching methods to the innate interests of his son and daughter. His daughter’s precocity did not reach the level of her brother’s success, but one wonders how much of her fame and ability is related to societal misogyny?
Leonardo da VinciSIR ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727)ALBERT EINSTEIN (1879-1955)Emily Dickenson
This remarkable history of the Mozart family makes one wonder what makes the difference between geniuses like da Vinci, Newton, Einstein, Dickinson and others and those of us who are ordinary. One presumes it is a combination of genetic disposition, education, and luck. All of these circumstances are presumed and revealed by Swafford in Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s life.
Swafford notes two women in Wolfgang’s life that were important. They were sisters. In 1777, Wolfgang sent a letter to his father about Aloysia Weber (on the left) and the possibility of her traveling with him to Paris. Aloysia is alleged to have rejected his advances, but Wolfgang’s father wrote a letter that vociferously objected to his son’s dalliance with the Weber’ daughters. Leopold implies Aloysia was a gold-digger and would ruin Wolfgang’s career. One may interpret the letter as more of a concern with Leopold’s son’s ability to raise money for the family, i.e. not the scandal of her travelling with Wolfgang. In any case, Wolfgang marries Constanze Weber (on the right), the younger sister, in 1782. It has been characterized as a marriage filled with love and mutual support.
Swafford explains why Wolfgang leaves Salzburg for Vienna, Austria in 1781.
Mozart felt his music was undervalued and constrained by the archbishop he worked for in Salzburg. To the disappointment of his father, Wolfgang moves to Vienna to pursue his career. His father’s disappointment was both financial and social. Because Leopold had been a guiding force in Wolfang’s life and career, not to mention the wealth he brought the Mozart family, his move to Vienna became a break from his father’s influence. They continued to correspond, but the familial and financial bond were broken with growing hostility felt by Leopold toward his son.
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756-1791 died at the age of 35.)
Wolfgang lives until 1791. His exact cause of death is unknown, but he had endured many illnesses in his 35 years of life. There is speculation that it was a recurrence of rheumatic fever or complications of strep throat. Some suggest it may even have been poisoning. The reality of that time is that the average life expectancy in the 18th century was 25 to 40 years of age. Some certainly lived to 50 or 60 but they lived most of their lives within a wealthy or privileged group. Wolfgang had some wealth in his last years of life, but not without a great deal of hard work as a master musician, composer and son of a near-do-well father.
One of the most revelatory and entertaining parts of Swafford’s history is the bawdy, funny, and clever rhymes that Wolfgang’s letters reveal about his personality. Two examples: “Oh my dear little cousin, I send you a thousand kisses, And if you don’t like them, Send them back with your wishes.” or “To every good friend I send my greet feet; addio nitwit. Love true true true until the grave, if I live that long and do behave.”
As noted in an earlier audio book review of Professor Robert Greenberg’s lectures on classical music the innovations of great composers were greatly enhanced by audio supplements.
This review does not do justice to Swafford’s excellent history of Mozart. Swafford’s audio book would be hugely improved for lay listeners with audio examples of Mozart’s noted contributions to classical music.
George Faludy suggests the most popular books written by Erasmus were “The Praise of Folly” and “Colloquies” which are similar in that they offer humorous and insightful stories of the human condition. One leaves Faludy’s biography of “Erasmus” with the thought that these two should be read, particularly because of the time in which we live today.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
ERASMUS
By: George Faludy
György Bernát József Leimdörfer aka George Faludy (1910-2006) Author, Hungarian poet and translator.
George Faludy’s biography of Erasmus was published in 1970. A few years ago, I purchased a paperback edition of Faludy’s book because of an interest in a 16th century “man of the cloth” (an ordained Catholic priest) who became a devotee of Francesco Petraca (better known as Petrarch who is considered the father of humanism). Erasmus was born in 1466 and died in 1536. He believed in the value, dignity, and potential of human beings. Petrarch had been dead for a hundred years when Erasmus became a proponent of humanism at a time when Catholic’ Indulgences were challenged by Martin Luther. Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses led to a schism in the church leading to the establishment of Protestantism.
Martin Luther (1483-1546)
Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses led to a schism in the church leading to the establishment of Protestantism.
It is hard to imagine how Erasmus managed to become a leader in reforming the Catholic Church with his humanist beliefs. Erasmus walks a fine line between the schism fomented by Martin Luther and his belief in reform. Erasmus wrote the famous work “The Praise of Folly” that was a satirical critique of societal and ecclesiastical practices of the Catholic church without joining the movement started by Luther. On the one hand, Erasmus agreed with Luther on the importance of faith and the perfidy of “indulgences” sold by the Church. Indulgences were to raise money with alleged religious guaranties for a Catholic’s admittance to heaven. On the other, Erasmus insisted on faith in God and reform, not abandonment of the Catholic church. Erasmus’s academic and scholarly review and interpretation of religious texts convinced him that the Church only needed reform, not schism.
Faludy carefully explains the tumultuous relationship between Erasmus and Luther that at times seemed to break but survived their fundamental disagreement on reform versus schism.
Erasmus acknowledged many misrepresentations of religious text with an unwavering belief in the divinity of their origin. As one who is skeptical about the divinity of religious texts, it is encouraging to read of this highly respected scholar’s belief in their truth. Faludy’s biography of Erasmus may not change an agnostic’s mind about God, but it will give one pause because of Erasmus’s reported research of original religious works in Greek, Latin, and other languages, i.e., a skill beyond most peoples’ capabilities.
Faludy does not write of Erasmus as a saintly person but as a well-educated and diligent scholar.
A surprising note by Faludy is that Erasmus suffered from syphilis which suggests something less than perfection in Erasmus’s character. However, Faludy’s note is not corroborated by any other information known to this reviewer.
Faludy suggested the most popular books written by Erasmus were “The Praise of Folly” and “Colloquies” which are similar in that they offer humorous and insightful stories of the human condition. One leaves Faludy’s biography of “Erasmus” with the thought that these two should be read, particularly because of the time in which we live today.
REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE 