Israel 172, Hamas 0

In the latest round of fighting, Israel has scored 172 fatalities. Hamas has scored zip. It looks like Israel is winning. Hamas fires rockets. Israel shoots them down. Then they retaliate by bombing buildings.

Living space is at a premium in the Gaza Strip. The last thing the Palestinians need is fewer buildings. Yet Israel keeps knocking them down. Israel claims to defend itself in a humane manner. Hell, Israel even warns the Palestinians before they knock down their buildings.

But humane is not a word that fittingly describes life in the Gaza Strip. It's cramped, unemployment is high, travel is restricted, and goods are scarce. While the Palestinians are not blameless, neither are the Israelis. Knocking down buildings and killing innocent non-combatants is not helping things. Maybe it's time for Netanyahu to try something new—something constructive instead of destructive.

For whom the bell (ringtone) tolls

Political pollsters phoned me five times in the last two days. So far, I‘ve refused to answer their questions. But they‘re starting to wear me down. I hope I can hold out long enough to deliver a warning.

One must not answer questions asked by political pollsters. Should you do so, they will hunt you down, brainwash you, and force you to vote for idiots. They may even get you to contribute to the campaign coffers of those same idiots.

If you feel you must answer their questions, then by all means, lie. The nature of their questions provides hints regarding what they want you to believe. Tell them what they want to hear. If they think you’ll be voting for their idiots, they may leave you alone. If you receive follow-up calls asking for money, tell them that you’ve already contributed the maximum amount allowed by law. They may believe you. If they don’t, ask, “Are you calling me a liar?” That always makes them defensive. No one likes to be called a liar, least of all liars. If you follow this advice, you may survive the next election. Good luck.

Tastier than rhubarb pie

Legitimacy

M.H. Van Keuren

Fiction 650 pages

CreateSpace, 2013

At 650 pages, a story becomes too lengthy, unless it’s skillfully told. And this book is very skillfully told. The characters and the future setting are believable and the story is interesting.

Part of this novel is set in space, however no light sabers are drawn and no ray guns fired. Indeed, the only instances of violence occur not in space, but in a Bangkok boxing gym and over breakfast in a refugee camp. Large battles are planned and fought, but the action doesn’t occur on battlefields. And the enemies do not readily show themselves. They mostly lurk unseen in cyberspace.

In some ways, Teague Werres, with his robotic lemur, reminds me of an early William Gibson cyberpunk. However, Teague is very much his own man, not Gibson’s. Son of American missionaries and self-raised in Bangkok, Teague is street smart and ambitious. Presented with an opportunity to study far from Earth, Teague finds himself among the wealthy and influential. If he is clever and lucky, he’ll survive with his integrity intact and avoid becoming their pawn.

Compared to Teague, Rob is less complex. He is somewhat naive, under-ambitious, and loves liquor too much. Yet his heart is pure. Before the two are through with each other, Rob and Teague will interact in complex ways leading to unexpected conclusions for both. The book ends where it should, however there remains much to learn about the fate of the two men. I hope there’s a sequel, and soon, because I really want to know what happens next.

I liked Van Keuren’s first book, Rhubarb very well. However, I enjoyed Legitimacy even more. While Rhubarb is a satirical romp, Legitimacy is wholly serious. While Rhubarb describes a simple man’s desire for romance and escape from a dead-end job, Legitimacy is more fleshed out and philosophical. Both books involve conspiracies. The one in Rhubarb involves space aliens, while the conspiracy in Legitimacy involves humans. You can imagine which conspiracy is more frightening. That’s right, people can do really scary things. What’s worse is that they can be subtle in how they go about it. This was an intriguing book. Like rhubarb pie, Van Keuren is addicting.

Another hit for the Supremes

The Supreme Court ruled today, defending the constitutional right of donors to spend as much as they want when buying political influence. Although, donors remain limited in how much they can spend on buying individual politicians, there is no spending limit when purchasing variety packs.

Some people won’t like this decision. But, that’s too bad because the constitution says so. If you don’t like the constitution, you’ll just have to change it. If you do decide to change it, here are my suggestions:

1. Government has grown too big and wasteful. We should abolish Congress. Half our congressional representatives don’t do anything anyway except complain, obstruct, and obfuscate issues.
2. Convert the Senate into a senior recreation center. Those old farts need something to keep them busy and a recreation center would keep them safe and off the streets.
3. With both Congress and the Senate out of his way, the president will be able to do pretty much whatever he wants. That’s why he should be elected by large corporations. They already do a good job of ignoring laws, spouting falsehoods, and doing pretty much whatever they want.

There are additional advantages to corporations electing the president. Voters won’t have to miss work in order to vote. This decrease in absenteeism will benefit corporate profits. News channels will no longer have to pretend to deliver news. They will be able to concentrate on the more crucial tasks of entertaining viewers and persuading them to buy crap. Lastly, those who worry about having an informed electorate will be able to stop worrying. It won’t matter. And most people won’t even notice the change. 

So sweet, so cold, so fair

I first heard the song on Dr. John’s, N'Awlinz Dis Dat Or D'Udda. That CD, featuring, Mavis Staples, Eddie Bo, Cyril Neville, and a lot of other talent, is a strong contender for his best effort.

With its horn punctuation and the doctor’s keyboarding, this recording of St. James Infirmary is superb. I prefer it to the White Stripes more truncated version.

I wondered if a video of Dr. John performing St. James Infirmary, could be found on the internet. I found one of him performing it with Eric Clapton.

Who else has recorded St. James Infirmary? Many have. I particularly like Trombone Shorty’s spirited performance.

Louis Armstrong’s version is somewhat mournful, while Cab Calloway’s version is more upbeat.

Others who have covered the tune include, Cassandra Wilson, Arlo Guthrie, Joe Cocker and Eric Burdon—and that’s’ only a few. In fact, the song has its roots in the 18th century. In its original version, The Unfortunate Rake, the song describes a soldier who frequents prostitutes, then dies of venereal disease.

Talking Head

Andrew’s Brain
E. L Doctorow

Fiction 200 pages

New York. Random House. 2014

Who is Andrew? In the beginning, the narrator calls him “my friend Andrew, the cognitive scientist.” But it doesn’t take long before the reader realizes that Andrew himself is telling the story. Another man is asking him questions, apparently a psychiatrist. Andrew is baiting him, attempting to catch his attention by telling him he hears voices.

Andrew tells his psychiatrist a good deal more as well, occasionally reprimanding the doctor’s ignorance and naiveté. Apparently, Andrew is well educated, and perhaps a good bit older than the psychiatrist. Yet Andrew is flawed. As a child, he caused a fatal accident. As an adult, he fatally over-medicates his baby. Although his second wife’s death is not his fault, he seems to accept the blame for the event.

Like other books by E. L. Doctorow, “Andrew’s Brain” is a historical novel. Its history is contemporary, and its historical figures are implied rather than named. Andrew is a scientific man in a world governed by archaic ideas and values. When he delivers his message to authority, it is ill received.

His message is to stop pretending to be what we are not. We have minds, but not souls and we are less important than we think we are.

Andrew defends his pessimism through the cognitive science he teaches, “If consciousness exists without the world, it is nothing, and if it needs the world to exist, it is still nothing.” But when he falls in love, Andrew’s pessimism is replaced with joy. Andrew isn't merely a scientist who views brains as machines; he’s also a romantic idealist. Doctorow gives us a full picture of Andrew, complex and self-contradicting.

The book is witty, well-written, and delivers a few surprises. One of Doctorow’s best.