The Bookshelf

Where we’ll talk about books…obviously.

The Hobbit

Posted by sammano on 04/26/2012
Posted in: The Bookshelf. Tagged: , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment

I really love a good biography. And I am fond of history in its various forms. In the more than half dozen book cases at The Bachelor Palace you’ll find tomes on a variety of subjects, from statesmen like Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, LBJ, and both Presidents Roosevelt, to entertainers like Frank Sinatra, Charles Schultz, and Evel Knievel, to explorations of things like The Civil War, Titanic, olive oil, and philosophy. Then of course there is my love of sports, which explains the shelf entirely dedicated to Roberto Clemente, Jerry West, all things Pittsburgh Steelers, and a strange fascination with golf…among other things. But sometimes one just needs to escape into a whole other world, to ride the wave of a writer’s imagination and bask in the glow of the land of make believe. No one helps a reader do that quite like John Ronald Reuel Tolkien.

It’s probably safe to say that Tolkien is most beloved for his epic Lord of the Rings trilogy, not only because it is a fantastic story but also because it received a huge revival about a decade ago in the form of a well done, hugely popular, critically acclaimed film series. However, I’m a big believer that occasionally less is more and brevity is the soul of wit. Lord of the Rings is, if I’m being quite honest, a bit of a slog. It’s kind of like a fat guy running a 10K. He may make it to the finish line, but he’ll be exhausted, hungry, hallucinatory, begging for water, and quite possibly crawling & in need of medical attention. Conversely, The Hobbit is like a lazy summer weekend spent on the front porch sipping iced tea and enjoying the gentle breeze. I’m not completely against drama & action, I just prefer it in small doses. The Hobbit has plenty of excitement, but it has it in a perfect quantity and in an easily digestible, eminently readable package.

Tolkien was certainly not the first author to write about things like epic quests, hidden treasure, dragons, wizards, elves, dwarves, goblins, and trolls. However, I do believe that his works are among the best of the fantasy genre. His success has inspired generations of new writers, all of whom do their best to borrow from their guru while mixing in original elements, but it is a lofty standard very few can ever get close to reaching.

The Hobbit introduces us to Bilbo Baggins and his home village in Middle-Earth called The Shire. Hobbits are described as a diminutive race of beings that are related to Men, but are different. They are between two and four feet tall with hair covered feet, live on average 100-130 years, and prefer a conservative, leisurely, simple life of farming, eating, smoking, singing, and socializing. They reside in hobbit-holes, which are underground homes with round windows & doors found in hillsides and banks. The Shire is an idyllic, pastoral, fertile land whose inhabitants keep to themselves and don’t really worry about what goes on in the outside world. I think I would get along really well with hobbits, and I could definitely dig living in an awesome place like The Shire.

Bilbo seems to feel the same way as me, and is outwardly quite content with his uneventful little life. However, his wizard friend Gandalf the Grey apparently knows more about the adventurous spirit and valiant wisdom that lies deep within Bilbo than even Bilbo himself. Gandalf introduces Bilbo to Thoren Oakenshield & his party of dwarves who are on a quest to The Lonely Mountain to retrieve the vast treasure that was stolen from them when the evil dragon Smaug destroyed their kingdom. Somehow Bilbo gets persuaded to join this excursion. Adventure ensues. Along the way the group encounters goblins, trolls, wolves, and giant spiders. And Bilbo stumbles upon a certain magic ring that we’ll learn much more about later.

Tolkien not only manages to create fascinating characters, but he places them in a world that is just familiar enough to be comfortable yet imaginatively dissimilar enough to produce the escapism readers seek. His writing is unpretentious to the point that youngsters can enjoy the stories, but charmingly lyrical enough to be appreciated by adults. It is not easy to pull off the task of writing a story that appeals to readers of all ages, but somehow Tolkien does it with aplomb. One can read The Hobbit as a pre-teen then read it again three decades later in middle age, and both experiences will be enormously gratifying.

Related articles

Stephen King’s 11/22/63

Posted by sammano on 04/14/2012
Posted in: The Bookshelf. Tagged: , , , , , , , . 2 comments

I’m not really a Stephen King kind of guy. I have nothing against one of the 20th century’s foremost authors, and greatly respect the fact that he has sold more than 300 million books & had his work adapted into more than three dozen feature films, numerous TV movies, and even plays & comic books. It’s just that I’m not a big fan of the horror/suspense genre. Until now the only King book I’d ever read was Christine (about a possessed 1958 Plymouth Fury) when I was probably 13 or 14 years old. I’ve seen bits & pieces of movies like Stand By Me, Misery, Carrie, & The Shining, and found the 1996 adaptation of Thinner creepy in a good way. I had absolutely no clue that The Shawshank Redemption (a splendid film) was based on a King novella until years after I’d first seen it.

This lack of any meaningful history or connection with Stephen King’s work was why I found it odd when I decided not all that long ago to place his latest novel, 11/22/63, in my Amazon shopping cart.

I knew from the outset that 11/22/63 had three things going for it. First, it is not a traditional horror story of the ilk that made Stephen King a household name. It’s more of a fantasy with a little bit of history thrown into the mix. Second, the assassination of JFK serves as a major plot point. I was not yet born when Camelot was beguiling the nation and Kennedy’s death rocked it to its core, but it is just one of those stories, like the Titanic or The Civil War, which continues to fascinate generations of people centuries after the event itself. And finally, a key element of 11/22/63 is time travel, and time travel is almost always a very cool literary device. Those three things convinced me to give the book a whirl, and after reading it I am very seriously considering going back in time myself and giving the rest of King’s novels a looksee.

One of the most beloved time travel adventures…from my generation anyway…is the 1980’s Back to the Future film trilogy. But the adventures of Marty McFly & Doc Brown were child’s play compared to the intricacies of this story. King takes the concept a step further by giving us rules. First of all, the main character, a 30-something Maine high school English teacher named Jake, can only go back to a particular point…specifically September 9, 1958. Secondly, whatever Jake changes when he goes back in time will be reset to its original outcome if he comes back to present day and then goes back thru the “rabbit hole” into the past again. These rules are very important to  keep in mind.

Jake is introduced to this time portal by Al, the elderly owner of a local diner. Al discovered this path to the past several years ago in the back of his eatery’s pantry, and has made several trips to what Jake eventually comes to refer to as the Land of Ago. No one in modern day Maine knows this because every time the traveler comes back only 2 minutes have passed in the present. At some point Al became obsessed with the idea of stopping the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, but has concluded that he will not be able to complete the mission because he is quickly dying from lung cancer. So he wants Jake to do it. Al believes that if JFK had lived and Lyndon Johnson not become President other significant events might not have occurred. The Vietnam War…and the deaths of millions of American soldiers…would not have happened. Martin Luther King Jr. would have lived. Bobby Kennedy would have lived. Basically the whole path to hell that the United States seemed to take in the 60’s would have been prevented.

Surprisingly Jake agrees to do this crazy thing, but he wants to kick the tires a bit first. Going back to 1958 Jake becomes George and just has to hang out for a few weeks…long enough to prevent the mass murder of almost an entire family by their drunken husband/father on Halloween night. Jake/George knows about the situation because the only survivor of the massacre is the high school janitor who wrote an essay about it in a GED class Jake teaches. This subplot takes up about the first quarter of the book and might actually be the stronger portion. At any rate, Jake/George quickly learns firsthand something that Al taught him, something that becomes an ongoing theme…the past is obdurate and does not want to be changed. He runs into roadblocks that Marty McFly could never have even dreamed of. I will not reveal the outcome of the mission, but suffice to say that, despite the past actively fighting against change, Jake/George becomes comfortable enough with the whole idea that once he comes back to modern day he does not hesitate to again go back in time to pursue Lee Harvey Oswald.

And that is the meat of the plot. Once Jake/George is back in the Land of Ago for the second time he must hang out for 5 years until the events of that fall of 1963 begin to unfold. This is not really a hardship, as he begins to enjoy a time when the root beer tasted better, the cars were far cooler, and life was quieter & lived at a slower pace. He moves to a small burb outside of Dallas. He makes friends. He gets a job at the local high school. He stalks Oswald’s every move to make sure that he really did act alone and that none of the plethora of conspiracy theories are true. He makes a boatload of cash by betting on sports events of which he already knows the outcome. And he falls in love with the young & beautiful Sadie, the school’s librarian.

It is these last two things that gets Jake/George into trouble, complicates his life, and compromises the outcome of his mission. The past is indeed obdurate and does not want to be changed.

Does Jake/George prevent Oswald from blowing Kennedy’s brains out?? Does this make 21st century America a better place?? Does Jake/George come back to modern day Maine and resume his life, or does he decide to stay in the Land of Ago with the love of his life?? These are questions I will not answer. You’ll have to read the book.

At over 800 pages I must admit that King probably could have tightened things up a bit and trimmed atleast a hundred pages or so, but it’s a small nit to pick. 11/22/63 is an engrossing read. It is thought provoking, well written, and quite possibly one of the finest time travel yarns ever told. I read somewhere that a movie has already been given the greenlight under the capable direction of Jonathan Demme (The Silence of the Lambs, Philadelphia). But unfortunately I know how these things go. With such a big novel they’ll end up eliminating whole characters & subplots, robbing the story of its rich nuance and depth. Ah well…that’s Hollywood. At any rate, no matter how much the Left Coasters end up butchering the story on the big screen, we’ll still have the book. And that’s not a bad deal.

Related articles

The Hunger Games Trilogy

Posted by sammano on 02/24/2012
Posted in: The Bookshelf. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , . 2 comments

The Olympics. Reality television shows like Survivor, The Bachelorette, American Idol, & The Amazing Race. Orwell’s 1984. Huxley’s Brave New World. Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. Greek & Roman Mythology. 24 Hour news channels who don’t even try to hide their political ideology. American Gladiators. Movies such as Star Wars, The Truman Show, Blade Runner, and The Running Man. All of these would seem to contribute bits & pieces of inspiration to The Hunger Games Trilogy.

I was a bit hesitant to give The Hunger Games a whirl. It is officially classified as “young adult fiction”, and given the fact that I am an educated 30-something with refined taste & somewhat high standards rather than a pre-pubescent teenager easily taken in by hunky heartthrobs, werewolves & vampires, and angsty love triangles I was understandably trepidatious. However, the premise won me over and I am glad it did.

The trilogy consists of three solidly lengthy but not drawn out novels…The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, and Mockingjay…written by Suzanne Collins, a middle-aged woman from Connecticut who, much like Harry Potter creator JK Rowling, had achieved nothing notable in her literary career before penning what has become a sensationally popular phenomenon.

The Hunger Games is set in Panem, a dystopian version of North America in which the nations we know & love have been destroyed, although exactly how that occurred is never really explored (I smell a “prequel”). At any rate, Panem…atleast most of it…isn’t a futuristic society of technological wonder. No, it is more primitive, more…colonial. The nation is divided into 12 districts all controlled by the dictatorial folks in The Capitol and lead by malevolent President Coriolanus Snow, whose creepiness factor makes our modern day politicians look like a collection of fine citizens from Mayberry. We are told that a quarter century before there was an uprising among the districts against The Capitol that was squashed like a bug, and that as punishment for that unsuccessful mutiny The Hunger Games was created. The games are an annual televised event in which two teenagers, one male and one female, from each district are chosen at random as “tributes”. These 24 tributes are dropped into The Arena, where they are expected to fight to the death until only one is left standing as The Victor. And this is considered big time entertainment in Panem.

The poorest of the districts is 12, a coal mining region reminiscent of what we know as Appalachia. That is where we meet our young heroine Katniss Everdeen, a 16 year old girl who spends her time hunting illegally to support her fragile mother and younger sister after her father was killed in a mining accident. Her best friend & hunting buddy is Gale Hawthorne, who also lost his father in the same tragedy and takes care of his mother & younger siblings. Then there is Peeta Mellark, the local baker’s son who comes from what passes for an upper middle class background in District 12. These three form the requisite triumvirate, although to be honest the romance aspect of the story isn’t nearly as distracting as I originally feared it might be.

The Hunger Games has Katniss & Peeta being chosen as tributes and fighting in the 74th games. Catching Fire finds Panem on the cusp of another revolution, thanks to a perceived act of defiance by our two protagonists at the end of the first book. That insolence lands them back in The Arena fighting an all-star group of past victors. Mockingjay shows The Districts in full scale war against The Capitol, with Katniss as the reluctant figurehead of the rebellion.

Though the two stories bear little more that superficial resemblance to one another I cannot help but draw comparisons between this trilogy and the wildly popular Harry Potter series. Both are supposedly aimed at the younger demographic, yet neither hesitates to take the reader down a dark & violent path. Stylistically, Rowling writes on a much deeper level. Potter may be “young adult” fiction, but the multi-layered storytelling is on par with some of our most beloved classic literature. Conversely, The Hunger Games books, all written in the first person through the eyes of Katniss, never quite reaches the profound gravitas that transcends greatness and segues into sublime singularity. Whereas one gets the feeling that Rowling’s aim was to write some really good books and that the ensuing pop culture obsession that was thrust upon her was a pleasant byproduct, The Hunger Games feels like Collins had a movie deal on her mind from the very beginning and purposely hoped to manufacture a sensation to match the likes of Potter, Twilight, and The Lord of the Rings trilogy. That’s not meant to be as much of a criticism as it is an astute observation.

All three books are intensely absorbing, real page turners that are hard to put down. Their shortcomings are likely directly related to the target audience. There are several spots where I felt like plot points weren’t fully explored, where important happenings were glossed over to appease the short attention spans of young readers. At times the author seems to be on the threshold of making some keen observations about society, politics, and war, but stops short and pulls back so as not to bog the action down with philosophical insight. Each book could have easily been another hundred pages and more thoroughly covered key elements of the story without becoming tedious. However, these flaws are the minor irritations of a nerdy bookworm who has no qualms about tackling an 800 page novel if the story is good enough. In all likelihood these books as they are were a smart choice by the author. At the end of the day we have a gripping premise, interesting characters, and a story that keeps the reader on the edge of our seat and wanting to see what happens next. That’s a pretty good recipe for some great books in my humble opinion.

I must admit that the only reason I even heard of the books is because the first movie is coming out soon. At first I was dismissive due to the inevitable association with Twilight…books that I’ve never read & movies that I’ve not seen and likely never will. Like I said, the whole vampire/werewolf thing just doesn’t frost my cupcake. But the political overtones and the somewhat realistic vibe…the idea that this really could happen to our world…was enough for me to take a flyer. I am looking forward to the movies because as mentioned I believe they were the intended end game all along. Whereas the Potter movies are good but cannot hold a candle to the books, I have a feeling that the Hunger Games movies will surpass the books’ achievements. The violence, action, and high body count are tailor made for the entertainment appetite of 21st Century America.

Related articles

The Harry Potter Series

Posted by sammano on 12/07/2011
Posted in: The Bookshelf. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , . 5 comments

I envy author JK Rowling. She has stated more than once that the idea for Harry Potter just came to her as she was riding a train back in 1990. Five years later she was a clinically depressed single mother living on welfare when the first book was published. Less than a decade after that she was a billionaire. If that isn’t a rags to riches story I don’t know what is. Someone somewhere once said something to the effect that “everyone has a book inside of them”, and I have long believed that to be true for myself. I’ve always felt like there was a great idea right on the cusp of forming in my brain but it never quite has. I so want to someday have that Rowling moment, to just be driving along in my truck or traipsing through WalMart and have that awesome character or story come busting through into my consciousness. I am not even concerned with becoming wealthy or famous…I just think it would be very cool to create something that scores of people enjoy and that would last beyond my lifetime.

That definition of success certainly fits the accomplishment of Rowling and her boy wizard. The Potter series encompasses 7 novels which have been made into 8 films, with both the books & movies setting multiple records within their respective industries and making billions of dollars. My focus here is obviously the books, and I don’t think I’d be stepping out on too much of a limb to assume that children and adults will still be reading and be thoroughly enthralled by them a century from now, just as modern readers still enjoy the works of authors like Dickens, Twain, Tolkien, Bradbury and many others whose greatest achievements came long long ago. I wouldn’t go so far as to classify Potter as classic literature, but it probably comes as close as anything that has been published in the last few decades.

For the benefit of those unfamiliar and as a refresher for those whose mind may be more feeble than they care to admit, Harry Potter is, at the outset, an 11 year old boy living with his abusive aunt & uncle because his parents died when he was a baby. We find out that Harry isn’t your normal, average, run-of-the-mill pre-teen…he is a wizard. And he isn’t even your normal, average, run-of-the-mill wizard…he is The Boy Who Lived. Harry’s parents didn’t just die, they were murdered by Lord Voldemort, the most evil wizard in all of wizardry, sort of a cross between Darth Vader, Adolph Hitler, and Biff Tannen from Back to the Future. Harry is whisked away to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft & Wizardry, where he spends the next seven years coming of age, having various adventures, and battling Voldemort, who eventually resurfaces after lying dormant for about a dozen years.

In the course of 7 books we meet a whole host of interesting characters from Rowling’s fertile imagination, but only a few are what can be called featured players. Of course there is Harry, who evolves from a sheepish young boy into a courageous, valiant hero & leader. Then there are his two best pals, Hermione Granger and Ron Weasley. Hermione is an intelligent, precocious, ultra driven, somewhat annoying muggle child, meaning neither of her parents are wizards. Ron is the classic sidekick…loyal & brave, yet somewhat clumsy & unaccomplished…the very essence of mediocrity. This triumvirate forms the centerpiece of the action for all of the books. Their mentor is Hogwarts’ headmaster, Professor Albus Dumbledore, a wise & gentle soul akin to Star Wars’ Yoda or Gandalf in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. There is also Rubeus Hagrid, a half giant that serves as the groundskeeper for Hogwarts (a little like Schneider from One Day at a Time) and becomes a trusted confidante to our young heroes-in-training, and Professor Severus Snape, the triumvirate’s nemesis reminiscent of teacher Dick Vernon in The Breakfast Club or Dean of Students Mr. Rooney in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, only a lot more bitter and pissed off for reasons we learn about in the last few volumes.

Rowling, much like her fantasy predecessors JRR Tolkien & CS Lewis (Chronicles of Narnia), masterfully creates a whole other world filled with unique characters and memorable images, but she doesn’t stop there. Harry Potter isn’t all style and no substance. Just like the famed works of Tolkien & Lewis, there is a lot of meat on the bones here, much much more than just fancy window dressing. Sure Harry Potter might be cloaked in a world of magic, potions, and spells that makes it palatable to adolescents, but underneath it all is an epic plot and a level of quality writing that easily surpasses most of what is considered modern “popular fiction”. Don’t be fooled…these books may be marketed as children’s literature, but once one gets past the first two books the tone becomes progressively darker and more mature.

I did not begin reading Harry Potter until I believe after the fourth book was published. First of all I thought it was for kids and that as a nearly 30 year old man I wouldn’t be the slightest bit interested. Secondly, I had some serious concerns relating to God & faith vs. the occult.

Let’s face it, the literary device that is the whole framework for the series is sorcery and other pagan imagery, which The Bible is very clear in warning against. Deuteronomy 18:10-12 says “there shall not be found among you anyone…who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead, for all who do these things are an abomination to the Lord.” Sorcery is one of the works of the flesh that we are warned against in the 5th chapter of Galatians. Lots of space in the Scriptures is dedicated to differentiating between darkness & light and telling us that we are to be the light in the world. 1 Thessalonians 5:5 says “You are all sons of light and sons of the day. We are not of the night nor of darkness.” 1 John 1:5 tells us that “God is light and in Him is no darkness at all.” Romans 13:12 advises to “cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armor of light.” The Gospel of John says in the 3rd chapter that “Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”

I understand that there are many Christians who choose to stay away from or even actively campaign against things like Halloween, Harry Potter, Santa Claus, and a host of other pop culture & entertainment influences, and I appreciate their viewpoint. Some feel that such things, while harmless on the surface, serve as a sort of gateway into dabbling in much more serious & sinister activities that pull people away from God and into the abyss of darkness & sin. I am sure that isn’t an unheard of circumstance. However, as usual, I tend to look at things a bit differently. It has always been my opinion that if something as simple as a movie or rock n’ roll music or buying the occasional lottery ticket can so easily sway a person and drag them into a life of debauchery then maybe their faith wasn’t very strong to begin with. Discernment grows as one’s relationship with Christ deepens, and personally I don’t see these books as a threat. I may be wrong, I may be right, or I may be crazy.

Actually I see a lot of Christian undertones in Harry Potter. I see themes like good vs. evil, sacrifice, friendship, love, life & death, and standing up to fight for what is right. To the extent that the books deal with darkness & light, darkness is ultimately defeated. Good triumphs over evil. I still struggle with the debate, just as most Christians battle a variety of issues. It’s just that in the grand scheme of life I think there are bigger nits to pick and at the end of the day I don’t feel that my enjoyment of an extremely well written series of books threatens my faith. Your mileage may vary, and that’s okay.

I would be remiss if I didn’t atleast mention the films that have been made based on the books. Honestly I think I have only seen half of them. As is usually the case, the books are far superior to the movies. Most of the books are 500-900 pages long, so when the movies were made lots of things got left out. There are entire characters & subplots that are interesting parts of the books but never appear in the movies. That doesn’t mean they are bad movies, it just means that one shouldn’t skip the immensely pleasurable experience of reading the books.

Most Harry Potter fans would probably agree that these stories will be enjoyed for many generations to come. I suppose at some point that would qualify it as classic literature. But for now let us avoid labels and just enjoy a fun reading experience.

Related articles

The Great Gatsby

Posted by sammano on 11/17/2011
Posted in: The Bookshelf. Tagged: , , , , , , , . 1 comment

Here’s the cool thing about F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby: published in 1925, it so accurately reflects modern America that it could have been written in the 1980’s or after the turn of the 21st Century and, with the exception of a distinct lack of foul language and overt sexuality, no one would know the difference.

 

At its heart Gatsby is a love rhombus entailing multiple affairs amongst people that, to be honest, aren’t very likeable.

 

The titular character is a mysterious noveau riche New York businessman who throws great summer parties at his mansion in the pretentious suburbs, which is about the most anyone seems to know about him. We learn a little bit more as things proceed, but his vague ties to organized crime and how that may have played a part in his amassed wealth aren’t really explored all that deeply. It says a lot about the shallowness of Jazz Age “society” types that legions of people keep showing up to Gatsby’s house every weekend for his soirees even though they don’t know a damn thing about their host. These are folks who just want to see and be seen. Kind of like your typical Hollywood stars of today.

 

Gatsby has an agenda that we don’t find out about until midway thru the story, and things pick up speed from there and become vaguely reminiscent of a dime story crime novel mixed with morally ambiguous modern romance sans the blatant eroticism. We learn that Gatsby used to be in love with Daisy back in Chicago. Not coincidentally Daisy is now living just on the other side of the lake from Gatsby, who is apparently a stalker. Unfortunately Daisy is married to Tom. However, Tom is already in the midst of an affair himself with Myrtle, the wife of George, a local auto mechanic. I guess even in the 1920’s marriage vows meant nothing. Eventually Gatsby makes his presence known to Daisy and she falls for him…again…instantly.

 

The entire tale is told thru the eyes of Nick Carraway, who is Daisy’s cousin and befriends Gatsby. Nick is really the only character with any redeeming qualities, the one I’d be least likely to want to slap upside the head. He seems to get Gatsby and genuinely like the man, whatever his shortcomings may be. Nick is apparently dating Daisy’s tennis pro pal Jordan Baker, but their relationship is barely touched upon.

 

Once all the cards are out on the table things get bloody. Daisy accidentally runs over & kills Myrtle while driving Gatsby’s little yellow sports car. Since little yellow sports cars aren’t that difficult to track down a distraught George comes to Gatsby’s house and shoots him dead in his swimming pool before turning the gun on himself. All the sudden we have an episode of Law & Order or CSI. Daisy & Tom seemingly escape any consequences, and Nick is left to plan a funeral for Gatsby that hardly anyone shows up for.

 

And that’s pretty much it. I am not sure The Great Gatsby deserves to be thought of as one of the two or three best American novels of all time. However, it is an interesting commentary on the attitudes and lifestyles of the superficial, soulless, and egotistical affluent class and how, at the end of the day, their money, power, and fame cannot buy them the love & affection we all truly seek. F. Scott Fitzgerald is a talented wordsmith who writes a novel that is a fairly easy and entertaining read, and I am sure that in 1925 his story was edgy & groundbreaking. Unfortunately in 21st century America its characters are far too reminiscent of the types of empty-headed, out-of-touch, famous-for-no-reason people we see nearly every day on “reality” television and in the pages of rags like The National Enquirer or People, which would seem to reinforce the old maxim “the more things change the more they stay the same”.

 

Related articles

The Sherlock Holmes Canon

Posted by sammano on 03/03/2010
Posted in: The Bookshelf. Tagged: , , , , , , , . 3 comments

I promised that The Bookshelf was going to get some attention, and there’s probably no better place to start than with my favorite book series of all time, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes canon. I first became enamored with Sherlock Holmes back in junior high school when, for some reason, our English textbook contained the story The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle. I instantly fell in love with the cleverness of both the writing and the character. Not too long afterward I picked up a two volume paperback edition of the complete works and spent the next few weeks devouring each and every story.


Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote 56 short stories and 4 novels featuring the world’s most renowned amateur detective and his trusty sidekick Dr. Watson from 1887-1927. Nearly all the stories were first published in England’s The Strand magazine, the 19th century equivalent of The New Yorker or Reader’s Digest. Doyle himself was a less-than-successful Scottish doctor who turned to writing to pay the bills. I assume Dr. John Watson was loosely based on Doyle himself. The main man though…Sherlock Holmes…was inspired by a professor of Doyle’s at the University of Edinburgh, Joseph Bell. Bell’s methods of deductive reasoning left a deep enough impression on Doyle that when he began writing stories Sherlock Holmes was created. Readers of The Strand fell in love with Sherlock Holmes immediately. In fact, the folks in merry old England had such an abiding affection for Holmes that when Doyle (who apparently didn’t love the character as much as his readers) tried to kill him off after just 2 novels and 24 short stories there was much consternation…so much that Doyle felt compelled to bring Holmes back to life, which would spur 2 more novels and 32 additional stories. Doyle seemed to have that yearning that so many artists – writers, actors, singers – have…to be taken seriously. Hopefully before his death in 1930 he came to realize that no other writings by him could have possibly come close to being the gift to the world that Sherlock Holmes was and continues to be a century later.


I will make the assumption that almost everyone from the youngest child to the greyest seasoned citizen has atleast heard of Sherlock Holmes and probably thinks they have a vague idea of what he’s all about…the deerstalker hat, the cape, the pipe, the phrase “Elementary my dear Watson!!”, the home address of 221B Baker Street. Holmes consistently appears in the top 5 of any lists dealing with beloved fictional characters, and at one time (I do not know if it is still the case) he held the Guinness world record for the most portrayed character in film. The character has been used in countless movies, plays and pastiches (in other words, imitations by other authors) that portray Holmes in a wide variety of ages and put him in all manner of fascinating situations…trying to track down real life serial killer Jack the Ripper, fighting Nazis in World War II, going up against Dracula. I don’t necessarily dismiss all non-canonical varieties of Holmes, but I do tend to tread lightly. Part of the magic of Holmes is the setting…foggy, gaslit, Victorian England. When one takes the character out of that setting it can either be an interesting fish-out-of-water scenario or a complete disaster. I am a traditionalist, so I like my fictional characters to stay in the era and locale of their origin, and I tend to prefer any new reincarnations be based on or atleast show respect to the author’s intent.  Putting a centuries old character in a modern day situation with guns blazing, car chases, and meaningless explosions does not impress me at all. For example, I sincerely believe that the powers-that-be responsible for the atrocity that was 1996’s Romeo & Juliet starring Leo DiCaprio and Claire Danes should never be allowed to work in Hollywood again. At any rate, I recommend reading Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Holmes canon first (obviously), and then being very selective in what other Holmes incarnations one digests. There was a PBS series in the 1980’s and early 90’s that was very good and pretty faithful to the canon. 41 of the 60 Holmes stories were produced, and the remaining 19 probably would have been done if not for the untimely death of its star Jeremy Brett (certainly among the best portrayers of Sherlock Holmes). I’ve always heard mixed reviews leaning toward positive about the 1940’s films starring Basil Rathbone, but to be honest my intent to see them has never come to fruition. The fact that only 1 of the 14 films, The Hound of the Baskervilles, is canonical is a concern, and it is well known that they portray Watson as a bumbling stooge which was not how Doyle wrote the character. I suppose one day I will cave and will attempt to be open minded, but I have a strong inclination that I’m not really missing anything.


The influence of Sherlock Holmes over the past 100+ years is truly amazing. Most mystery and detective type stories owe much to Holmes, and shows like CSI wouldn’t exist without him. Sherlock Holmes was forensics before forensics was cool. Hundreds of societies (all based on the original Baker Street Irregulars, founded in 1934) regularly gather to discuss and celebrate Holmes. I cannot think of any literary figure with that kind of influence and following…not even Shakespeare. The stories themselves are interesting enough to keep the attention of adults, but uncomplicated enough that teenagers and maybe even overachieving and precocious pre-teens can read them. They are eminently readable, and one can go back to them over and over and they never seem to get old.  As a matter of fact, picking up a book of Sherlock Holmes stories is like reuniting with an old friend. I would strongly encourage anyone who has never read them to give them a whirl. You are unlikely to regret your choice.

Related Articles

Angels & Demons and The DaVinci Code

Posted by sammano on 08/05/2009
Posted in: The Bookshelf. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment

The Bookshelf is a much too lightly used feature here at The Manofesto, and that’s my fault. I could blame my job, blame my puppy, blame being involved with church, blame television, etc. But the truth is it is 100% purely me being lazy. That needs to change.

Books are an integral part of my life. I love to read. Reading opens up whole new worlds to a person, taking them on a ride as far as the imagination can travel. Books also educate and inform. I am involved with a ProLiteracy organization mostly because I feel compassion toward those who cannot read, who don’t have the privilege of experiencing the pleasure of losing themselves in a good book. Illiteracy is a damning indictment of both our educational system and the shortcomings of parents, but that’s a whole other can of worms to be opened some other time. My purpose du jour is to review two books that I just recently finished reading, Dan Brown’s Angels & Demons and The DaVinci Code.

It took me a long time to finally read these books. I am a Christian, and knowing the basic gist of The DaVinci Code (the second book but the one that caught fire first and became a national topic of debate) and how many fellow Christians felt about its contents I was hesitant to read it. Three things changed my thought process. First, a hardcover copy of DaVinci was available at a ProLiteracy book sale I was working…..for $1, a deal I couldn’t pass up. Secondly, an acquaintance who happens to be a fine, God-fearing, Christian woman mentioned in conversation (a conversation about books…a rare treat but one I always enjoy) that a pastor had told her that Christians should not avoid the book at all and actually needed to read it. Right about that time the Angels & Demons movie was coming out and I became aware of what that book (the first book but the second movie…oh that wacky Opie Cunningham)  was about, The Illuminati…..a subject that had always interested me to a degree. The movies were the clinching factor I will admit. I’m a Tom Hanks fan and knew I’d eventually catch the movies on HBO or rent them. So…I picked up a paperback copy of Angels & Demons and decided to read the books in their proper order before that occurred. After reading the books I did see The DaVinci Code on HBO and it was okay.

Any examination of these two books needs to be done from two perspectives…..the literary view and the religious view. An analysis of the book for what it is…a book, a work of fiction…seems the easier of the two tasks, so I shall climb that mountain first.

Warning…..spoilers lay ahead for anyone who hasn’t read these two books or seen the movies. Don’t say I didn’t give you fair notice.

As far as modern popular fiction goes, I’ll give Dan Brown his due. These stories are well written, move at a brisk and exciting pace and tell an absorbing story. I enjoyed Angels & Demons far more than I did The DaVinci Code, and I think there are two reasons for that. First of all, DaVinci had become extremely popular and raised such a ruckus amongst church folks that it was impossible to be as consumed by the story as I likely would have been had I not known the “shocking twist”. I already knew the big reveal was that The Holy Grail isn’t a cup as commonly believed, but a human being, the heroine of the story that turns out to be the only living descendant of Jesus Christ, who according to the storyline married Mary Magdalene and fathered a daughter. With the ultimate ending ruined I was simply left with enjoying the path traveled to arrive at that destination, a trip that was certainly not unexciting. However, that brings me to my second issue…..I had already read Angels & Demons. That story involved The Illuminati threatening to blow up The Vatican during a Papal Enclave, and was fresh, unpredictable, and a great read…a real page turner. The problem is that Brown takes the same basic template used for Angels & Demons and uses it for The DaVinci Code…..comparable characters, similar time frame, very familiar general outline of events. So even if I’d not heard about The DaVinci Code ad nauseum for months before I’d read it I would have probably figured it all out anyway. Many authors have created a memorable main character (as Brown has here with Professor Robert Langdon) and written multi-volume series starring that character. That isn’t a problem at all if done right. But the fact is that DaVinci is just a repetitive sequel to the much superior Angels & Demons. It’s like watching Vegas Vacation or The Godfather III…..it’s not terrible in and of itself, but it’s been done before and been done better. I read somewhere that Brown has about a dozen more Robert Langdon novels planned. If that is true he’s going to have to find fresh territory for his guy to trapse through, otherwise we’re going to tire of him very quickly and move on to something original.

Now for the deeper and more disturbing scrutiny, that of looking at these novels through the prism of God.

I’m a Christian, but I’m far from a prude. I’m not easily offended but I do have my beliefs and convictions. This has a tendency to put me in the crosshairs of both fellow Christians, who I am sure think I’m not quite hardcore enough, and the non-believer/atheist/agnostic types who I am sure subconsciously brand me a Bible Thumper or a Jesus Freak. I’ve reached a point in my life where I realize I cannot please everyone and have pretty much stopped trying. That being said, I do try to please God and live every day more Christ-like than the day before, so as I grow older and stronger in my faith I am assuming I will tick off fellow Christians less and annoy the heathens more.

The author, Dan Brown, claims to be a Christian. That would probably be mildly surprising news to anyone who has read these novels. The books both show a disdain for the church (specifically The Catholic Church) and paint religion as the bad guy. In Angels & Demons the underlying story is the battle between science and religion, with religion being painted as the bad guy desperate to hold onto its power. A pope, dead as the story begins, is revealed to have fathered a child. That child, who grew up to hold a very important position within The Vatican, is revealed to be a crazed murderer. The scientists are the good guys. In The DaVinci Code the church is written as the mastermind of the most massive cover-up in history. In this universe Mary Magdalene was not a prostitute…..that is a lie fabricated to downplay her importance. Instead, Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus but the church covered that up and put a little creative spin on the life of Jesus Christ, fabricating his divinity for the sake of power.

Dan Brown’s beef could very well be with The Catholic Church explicitly. If so that wouldn’t be a huge mountain to overcome. I know a lot of believers who have issues with the church…..church politics, church hypocrisy, church legalism. I myself differentiate between faith and religion. My difficulty is that Brown takes whatever issues he may have a bit too far, especially in DaVinci. In recent times we’ve seen a lot of clergy fall from grace…..TV evangelists who cheat on their wives, priests being accused of sexual misconduct, ministers being exposed as money grubbing charlatans. That’s why I don’t have a huge problem with Angels & Demons…..it simply presents a priest as being something other than what he is believed to be, something we’ve seen occur in real life far too many times. However, in DaVinci the very foundation of the entire faith is called into question. One guy isn’t discovered to be a bad seed…..the whole enchilada is made out to be one giant lie. That’s quite problematic. I am a person who believes The Bible to be the foolproof Word of God. Something as significant as Jesus being married likely would have been mentioned. I’ve read arguments that say that if Jesus was married that would do nothing to take away his divinity. I’ll admit that’s a fascinating hypothesis, but one that doesn’t hold water when it’s pondered thoughtfully. If He was married then why isn’t it in The Bible? And if it was in The Bible but men who craved power took it out, why would they do that if the marriage itself wouldn’t discount the divinity of Christ? It’s a circular argument that makes no sense either way. The only thing that makes sense is what we’ve always known and believed. It makes sense otherwise we wouldn’t believe it. Granted, faith is the assurance of things hoped for and the conviction of things not seen…..but that doesn’t mean we’re all a bunch of dopes who’ll believe anything. There’s a reason we believe in God, believe in salvation through the blood of Jesus Christ…..but don’t believe (after a certain age) in Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy, and The Easter Bunny.

I suppose if I was put on the spot I would highly recommend Angels & Demons, but would be far more hesitant to give an enthusiastic thumbs up to The DaVinci Code. The first is an engrossing read that doesn’t necessarily rank up there with actual literature (think Shakespeare, Mark Twain, Ernest Hemingway, Charles Dickens, etc.) but is a lot better than the cookie cutter romances and action-adventure rubbish you see in the paperback section at WalMart. The latter is not only a stylistic rehash, but also really rocks the boat on the faith front. If you have a strong foundation and aren’t easily swayed then I’d say tread cautiously. If you are a young Christian still trying to find that firm footing and really understand what you believe then I would say run in the other direction. It’s akin to watching professional wrestling…..it may not be high quality entertainment for anyone, but atleast a reasonably intelligent adult can enjoy it as the fictional soap opera that it is while it may become too real to a child or a less-than-bright grown-up. Ultimately it’s a personal decision. I don’t regret my time spent reading Angels & Demons at all, while I’m glad I only paid a buck for The DaVinci Code and don’t put it on any kind of pedestal as either a great work of literature or some sort of Satanic tool of evil.

Related Articles

The Catcher in the Rye

Posted by sammano on 05/06/2009
Posted in: The Bookshelf. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . 1 comment
Обкладинка книги

Image via Wikipedia

“Must we go on with this inane conversation?” someone inquires of Holden Caulfield at one point in The Catcher in the Rye. It’s a question I recall asking myself a few times back when I read the book.

I suppose maybe I read the book too late to really “get it”, too late in my life and too late in the history of our nation and world. For some reason I didn’t read it until I was an adult. I went to high school in the 1980’s, and even though political correctness was in its embryonic stage Catcher had already been deemed too scandalous for young ears.

That “scandal” is, in my opinion, what has really vaulted Catcher to its abstract significance. It has given the book an undeserved level of prestige. We tend to embrace the forbidden, to be drawn to the esoteric. Telling teenagers that a book has been banned gives that book a one way ticket to Coolsville and makes the youngsters want to read it that much more. Unfortunately in this case the controversy is much ado about nothing. From my viewpoint it seems like a bunch of uptight wet blankets got themselves in an uproar about some “damns” and “hells” and various instances of taking The Lord’s name in vain. I’m not saying these are good things by any means, but I am suggesting perspective. Banning The Catcher in the Rye from…well, anywhere…..while simultaneously turning a blind eye to the garbage that has been appearing on our televisions and movie screens with increasing quantity and intensity over the past couple of decades seems somewhat misguided.

The book itself is an easy read…..too easy as a matter of fact. The first time I read it I kept waiting for the symbolism, foreshadowing, and other hallmarks of great literature. I pegged Holden Caulfield as a Shakespearean tragic hero with a fatal flaw in the mold of Macbeth or King Lear. I assumed there had to be some reason why many thought of this as such a great novel. All I got for my intellectual effort was a reminder of what happens when one assumes.

The “hero” Caulfield is just an irksome and petulant bundle of neuroses. I suspect that if I’d done my academic duty when I was supposed to, at around age 14 or 15, I might have more closely identified with the whole angst vibe, the sense of being perpetually unimpressed and underwhelmed by everything and everyone. But it’s amazing what a difference a decade or so can make. Two decades really changes the game. As cynical as I can be, as adept as I am at openly mocking the absurdity in our world, even I find Holden Caulfield to be a bit much. He’s the kind of galling personality that in “real life” would have people just waiting with fervent anticipation for him to fall on his face. It’s difficult to like Holden or feel any semblance of compassion for his plight. He does have a tendency to accurately see through the speciousness of others, one of his few redeeming qualities.

I don’t dislike The Catcher in the Rye. It’s a decent, well written story. I don’t feel like the time I spent reading it (and re-reading it years later) was necessarily wasted. I’m just of the opinion that those who deem it as one of the best books ever written are giving gravitas to something unworthy of their passion.

Blue Like Jazz

Posted by sammano on 04/15/2009
Posted in: The Bookshelf. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , . 2 comments
Cover of

Blue Like Jazz

There are church goers, there are people who are “spiritual”, there are Christians and Jews and Muslims, there are those who claim to be “religious” but won’t go into specifics…..many many shades of grey. But the truth is you can’t always have your cake and eat it too. Sometimes one must actually make a choice and stand behind it, through the sunshine and the storm.

I first ran across Blue Like Jazz while looking for books about jazz and blues music. Realizing that it had nothing to do with music I moved on. Then a friend with whom I have a lot of conversations about God, the Bible, church, Jesus Christ, etc. mentioned it and I said “oh yeah…I remember seeing that”. He recommended I read it, and I obliged.

At first I was blown away. The writer uses a straightforward humorous tone that’s a little unorthodox but eminently readable. The book is a breezy read, and that’s cool. He has a unique perspective that occasionally made me go “Wow, I hadn’t thought of that. He’s right”. But as I kept getting further into it I was reminded of the movie Planes, Trains, and Automobiles. In one scene Steve Martin’s character is ranting against John Candy’s character and says “And by the way, you know, when you’re telling these little stories? Here’s a good idea – have a point!! It makes it SO much more interesting”. Blue Like Jazz is kind of like that…..I still don’t know what the point is exactly.

I realize what direction the writer was attempting to go. Church these days can be very legalistic, ritualized, and ultimately meaningless. Almost every congregation has its fair share of heathens and what my minister refers to as 7th Day Christians, meaning they’re “Christian” for a couple of hours on Sunday but then do whatever feels good the other six days (I have been that person in the past and am doing my best to improve). As a matter of fact Easter Sunday was just a few days ago and I spotted several Christers myself, meaning people who only go to church on Christmas and Easter. I understand suspicion and trepidation when it comes to the church. But that doesn’t mean one can just ignore everything about Christianity that’s uncomfortable and inconvenient. The church and its people may be broken, but the faith itself is most certainly not.

I kept waiting for some big resolution or lucid path to somewhere conclusive…..but it never happened. Ultimately Blue Like Jazz comes across as one man’s free association about spirituality, with subtle hints at a political agenda. The premise had potential, but the finished work feels more like a first draft that has never crossed the desk of an editor or any kind of authority who may have given the directive for..…well…..direction. It’s not the worst book I’ve ever read at all, but I was expecting better.