Reviews

A Year of Magical Thinking is a meditation on grief. Faced with the sudden loss of her husband and the uncertain health of her daughter, Joan Didion tries to hold the pieces of her world together. The book offers a voyeuristic glimpse into an upper-class introvert’s ideal life—Didion and her husband, also a well-known author, had built an insulated existence that, apropos of nothing, ended. Full of anecdotes and disarming vulnerability, the reader can’t help but participate in Didion’s loss.

Summary Mayer initially planned to go to Germany in 1935 to interview Hitler himself. He failed to secure an interview but discovered, to his horror, that the Nazi movement had more mass appeal than he had previously expected. He decided to switch tactics and focus on the experience of the man on the ground. How does a person, who in most other respects would be considered normal or even good, get swept up in a genocidal ideology? After the war he moved to a small town that had strong support for the NSDAP before, during, and after WW2. He made genuine relationships with 10 of the residents and engaged them in extended interviews. The first half of this book is essentially these interviews, organized into a clear timeline. The second half is Mayer attempting to psychoanalyze Germany as a whole based on what he had learned from these interviews. ...

Summary I have yet to see any problem, however complicated, which, when you looked at it in the right way, did not become still more complicated. -Poul Anderson Donella Meadows was an integral part of a group out of MIT who pioneered the art of “systems analysis”. How does one analyze a system? It starts by defining what the essence of a system is. According to Meadows a system is a group of things material or immaterial that interrelate to cause a behavior which persists through time. In plain English, behaviors are things we observe like floods or forest fires. Systems are the relevant variables that have an effect on the observed behavior, like rain or ground cover. In analysis, behavior is typically the easy thing to observe while defining the variables that constitute the system underneath can be quite a task and isn’t solved but often requires flexibility and good judgement. ...

Happiness or freedom, which would you choose? Summary Levin tells a story about a community known as “the family” which is comprised of a group of members who are sedated and regulated by a computer known as “uni”. Uni knows all, plans all, and grants from each according to his ability to each according to his need. One member starts having doubts about the entire enterprise. Thoughts It is hard to judge books like this one in the year of our lord 2023, as so much of what we now read and see draw their inspiration from seminal works such as this one. A side effect of this is that when read in the present the story feels redundant, is this Levin’s fault or a consequence of passing time? This book at a surface level has some obvious critiques against Communism and in our times against the encroachment of AI into public decision making. The message of the book did seem at times to be too transparent, too in the readers face, damaging the experience for me. On a deeper level this book asks us what it is we are striving for? This is actually a very interesting question especially in terms of equality. We strive to create a world where everyone is treated the same, but is that possible when people are so diverse? Will we need to sacrifice individuality for equality? To me this is still an open question, and thanks to my recent reading of Freud’s Civilization and its Discontents I find it hard not to see the hand of Eros in this movement towards oneness. Another takeaway from this book was that of further critiquing Utopia’s in general. The main character Chip agrees with Dostoyevsky’s underground man, Utopias are inhuman because they are not built for humans, but for machines. They are built for things that always act according to rules that are tabulated in cold sterile databanks. In order for humans to act in this way they must forfeit the thing that makes them human. ...

Summary America’s third president was a citizen of the world. An idealist in values, but ruthlessly pragmatic when in the seat of authority. Jefferson was in public service for about fifty years, with his influence lasting directly up to Jackson’s presidency, making him one of the most effective political operatives in American history. Meacham gives a full view of Jefferson’s life from early education to his end-of-life correspondence with Adams. Jefferson cuts one of the most romantic and contradictory figures in early America. To the rest of the world, he displayed a certain sophistication many thought impossible to emerge from the Americas, whereas to history his regressive stance on slavery taints his memory: he at once acknowledged its illegitimacy yet could not bring himself to reject the peculiar institution altogether. Jefferson was the most vocal of the founding fathers in his defense of the individual rights of man (though, of course, definitions of “men” varied), and this manifested in an expressed distrust of strong federal governments. The preference for small government formed the basis for his antagonism with America’s other premier intellect, Alexander Hamilton. This disagreement ended up forming the first political parties in the US, the Federalists (Hamilton’s party) and the Republicans (Jefferson’s party). The founding gets mythologized for obvious reasons, but it is truly remarkable that two such politically fertile minds as Jefferson and Hamilton would be selected to form this country’s first cabinet. It is also a testament to Washington’s leadership that such a cabinet could exist for as long as it did. Always sure that Washington was Hamilton’s puppet, Jefferson would eventually retire to Monticello in a semi-theatrical way. His avowed aim was to put the dirty work of politics behind him, but both Washington and Hamilton suspected that Jefferson was “protesting too much.” Their suspicions turned out to be correct, he would shortly be back in office, serving a single term under the acerbic John Adams as vice president. He would then deftly create the first single-term president in US history, ascending to the highest office in the land. Once in the driver’s seat, strong centralized authority seemed useful, and Jefferson did little to curtail the powers of the executive. In fact, when Napoleon offered Jefferson the Louisiana Purchase, he was worried that the purchase of lands was not within the scope of Federal authority and would require an amendment. He ended up deciding the amendment path would open the purchase up to an extended window of debate and deliberation when decisive and quick action was needed, and so he pushed the purchase straight to Congress. This is not to say that Jefferson’s values were inauthentically held; it was more a testament to his adaptability. After Jefferson served two terms, the presidential office went to his long-term friend and ideological ally Madison. He would keep in close contact with leaders of the Republican Party for the rest of his life. ...

My first foray into Nietzche I did not find this book to be super enjoyable. It is about Zarathustra who is a spokesman for Nietzche’s new vision. He declares that God is dead and presents the idea of the over-man (or superman) as what should replace him. This super man should be a warrior and have a personal sense of pride and above all should not be driven by pity. For as one of the most interesting quotes of the book says, “Thus spoke the devil to me, once on a time: “Even God has his hell: it is his love for man”. And lately did I hear him say these words: “God is dead: of his pity for man has God died”. So, Zarathustra comes down from a mountain and teaches some disciples about his ideas but then they try to couple his idea with some ideas of Christianity. This will not do because this is the thing that led to the death of God in the first place. So, after teaching these disciples Zarathustra starts to become overwhelmed with pity for man as well. So, he retreats back to his mountain and reconnects with nature to “find himself”. He thus returns to his enlightened state of supreme joy and happiness. After some time, some “higher men” of various types come to visit him. He thinks that they may be a sort of mantle carrier for him after he passes. But long story short, although better than most they are no superman. The story ends with him deciding to come down from the mountain again in an attempt to find some men that would live up to his standards. As far as writing goes it was pretty well written (obvious) I feel like as with most poetic type of literature it was hard to follow from time to time due to the over-floweryness of the language. Overall, I did not really like the tone very much because the “enlightened” character seemed to mirror Nietzsche’s own character too closely. It seemed a little like a long high five to himself for being so awesome and better than everyone else. ...

Deserves its place in classic American literature. It also deserves to be read in high school as it walks the balance of respecting norms and traditions while maintaining a personal responsibility to rise above them when they fall short of our ideals. Thus, the reader is left neither a dupe nor Anarchist, but responsible for their own sphere as well as their ‘place’ in society.

Summary A mother tells a boy that he will be able to go to a nearby lighthouse. The father says that it is unlikely the boy will be able to go to the lighthouse because of bad weather. Ten years pass, the father finally takes the boy to the lighthouse. Thoughts As you can guess from the summary this is going to be one of those ‘modern’ books where nothing seems to happen. For some this will be a turn off, but if you find the endless twisting and turning of your mind during one of the thousands of mundane conversations that make up a life, then this book is for you. Similarly to Mrs. Dalloway, time and experience take on new meanings as a single day, seemingly chosen at random, is played out in intricate detail. The level of emotional data that is packed into everyday exchanges will be surprisingly to all but the most mindful. Woolf’s diaries indicate that she would spend hours listening to herself think, and the emotions that would arise as responses to external stimuli. She was able to bring this clarity to each of the characters in this book. Some take up more space than others, but with each, the reader feels like they are getting the unfiltered experience that the character themselves are having. Since Woolf is a modern writer, it is not good enough to watch someone do something, we must watch someone watching something be down. Being removed twice from anything is the price we must pay for this authentic experience. Whether the game is worth the candle will be up to each reader to decide on their own. I think it was, providing a unique way to convey emotion and setting. There are moods in this book that are difficult to find anywhere else, consider the following scene when we are briefly left without any narrator so the abandoned house itself takes up the thread: ...

Someone let Freud loose in the field of Anthropology! Spurred on by works from his rival Jung, Freud investigates the connections of totems, exogamy, taboos, religious and neurotic thoughts. A collection of four essays Freud initially investigates (or attempts to) the origins of “Incest Dread”, that is to say why incest became a taboo to begin with. From there he considers the correlation between Taboo and emotional conflict. He demonstrates this with some fascinating deconstructions of certain ceremonies to honor a king which required severe austerities that (in the school of psychoanalysis) demonstrates the peoples wish to honor but also torture the king. To prevent harm from coming to the king, but also prevent the king from harming. The subtitle of the book is Some Points of Agreement between the Mental Lives of Savages and Neurotics. This is looked at in depth in the third essay investigating the similar power that animist and neurotics both attribute to thought. In many cases elaborate rituals are created to propitiate themselves of actions that were only committed in the psychic and perhaps subconscious realm. The fourth and final essays is a sort of climax where he attempts to tie everything together and put a Freudian bow on it. In this brilliant essay he argues that our entire society is built off of a real or imaginary event that has given us generational guilt (i.e., original sin). This guilt is the origin of all religion. Drawing from one of Darwin’s speculations about human society possibly being constructed similarly to gorilla’s social structure, that is one alpha male with a harem. The original act then was the brothers (whom the alpha male kicked out) united to murder their father. The father that they loved, feared, and respected. At the end of the day, you gotta go back to Oedipus. ...

This was a very enjoyable fast paced novel. Would definitely recommend, brilliant! The thing that I loved in this book the most was his attention to little details. These details really helped to complete the feel of the sci-fi world his characters inhabited. The story was great and loved the ending except for the very last chapter. This one felt too much like a concession to leave the door open for an “Ubik 2”. Other than that, a fantastic book. ...