Book Reviews: Gates of Fire, Darkfall

Gates of Fire
by Steven Pressfield

Gates of Fire is the literary equivalent of the films Saving Private Ryan or Glory in that from the outside looking in it seems to capture not only the horror but also the courage and randomness of combat. Although the style of warfare depicted in Gates of Fire is extinct, war and death remain the same across time and place. I wonder if combat veterans think this book accurately illustrates the experience. The author is a Marine veteran. The book is on the reading list at West Point. Gates of Fire details the Battle of Thermopylae in which 300 Spartans allied with roughly 3-5000 Greeks from other city-states held off a Persian invasion force of at least twenty times their number for seven days before being betrayed, surrounded and annihilated in a last stand that has resonated throughout history as a definitive example of stubbornness, determination and total bada$$ery. To the very last, the Greeks disdained surrender, fighting with broken spear shafts, dented shields, blunted swords and finally their bare fists, feet and teeth. Sparta was not only famous for its military prowess but also for its wit, from which we have derived the word "laconic". This battle, or the legends that grew up around it, provided some famous quotations illuminating the particular and peculiar Spartan warrior ethos, which was considered extreme even by the standards of the time. Some of these include:

• Come and get them! (King Leonidas' retort to a Persian envoy's demand that the Greeks lay down their weapons)
• Good. Then we'll have our battle in the shade. (General Dienekes' response to a Greek refugee's claim that the Persian arrows would blot out the sun)
• Eat hearty men for tonight we dine in hell with ghosts! (King Leonidas' exhortation to his soldiers upon news that they had been surrounded)

After King Leonidas was killed, his body became a rallying point for the remaining Greeks. In these last frantic minutes two brothers of the Persian Emperor Xerxes were killed. Enraged, Emperor Xerxes ordered King Leonidas' body to be decapitated and crucified, something considered sacrilegious by everyone. As the Persians are burying their dead and tending to their wounded they discover that one Spartan warrior is still alive, though slowly dying. Instead of having him killed Emperor Xerxes orders his own doctors to treat the man's wounds. Emperor Xerxes regrets the mutilation of King Leonidas' body. He wants to know more about the Greek, specifically the Spartan, way of life and of war.

This dying Greek soldier is Xeones. He is not a Spartan by birth but that rarest of things, a Spartan by acculturation. In childhood, Xeones' home city was sacked by rival Greeks. His parents were murdered. His cousin and likely betrothed Diomache was raped. Believing that Sparta could have stopped such injustice Xeones eventually migrated to Sparta, where he grew into manhood. He became something more than a helot and something less than a citizen. To make Xerxes understand why in defiance of common sense, the Spartans flatly refused to submit, Xeones tells his life story.

This story of course ends in The Battle of Thermopylae. There are a lot of old tropes here that are easily recognized but can still be enjoyed by the reader. Polynikes is a vain aggressive drill sergeant and war hero, who upon discovering that a raw recruit (whom he dislikes anyway) has made a mistake, proceeds to humiliate and brutalize that recruit and his entire platoon until they get it right. Obviously this recruit, thought soft and effeminate, eventually proves his mettle under unthinkably harsh conditions while Polynikes shows that he will sacrifice everything for his city and his brothers in arms. This is as much a philosophical and ethical meditation as it is a battle story. Gates of Fire asks what exactly makes a man willing to suffer great wounds, kill and die, when every instinct tells him to flee. The answer would seem to be both fear and love. The Spartan training replaced the fear of death with the fear of letting your unit down and substituted the love of life's comforts with the love of your fellow soldiers. I don't mean that last necessarily in any sort of erotic sense. Aristotle for example, thought that homosexuality was rare among Spartans precisely because their women had too much independence, were too attractive (Helen of Troy was a Spartan) and were too healthy. He considered this a bad thing. Go figure.

Spartan military prowess came at a cost, for its men and women. As King Leonidas haltingly and gently explains to a Spartan woman who angrily rebukes him for taking her husband on what is sure to be a suicidal mission, he chose his 300 not for their strength or battle prowess but for the emotional and mental strength of their wives and mothers. The Spartan system could never have survived without women's support. For example, two Spartan warriors, having become virtually blinded in battle, were sent home by King Leonidas. One refused to leave and fought and died with the rest of his troop. The second returned to Sparta. There the women (including his own relatives!) led the citizens in scorning him. He was called "The Trembler" and shunned by all. Desperate to restore his name he later threw himself into suicidal charges in the Battle of Plataea. In Gates of Fire, even though Dienekes has massive respect from his Peers, he himself often defers to his wife Arete. As Arete points out the men are said to rule Sparta but women rule men. Arete will take steps that simultaneously increase her husband's fame, save the life of her unacknowledged nephew Rooster, and make her chances of becoming a widow virtually certain.

Gates of Fire examines the ugliness that supported the Spartan life style. Sparta's standing army required total mobilization of Spartan men and constant training. Accordingly, many of the other masculine jobs in society were handled by servants or more precisely helots (slaves). In Gates of Fire one of the helot leaders is Rooster, the illegitimate son of a deceased Spartan hero. Rooster is Dienekes' nephew by marriage. But Rooster despises Sparta and despite Xeones' urgings regularly refuses opportunities to be legitimized and become Spartan. This could cost Rooster his life as the Spartan secret organization known as the Krypteia routinely kills helots who are thought seditious. Although Xeones has put down roots, gotten married and had children his mind still turns to his cousin, Diomache, for whom he has never stopped searching. And the Lady Arete might be able to help Xeones find her. To sum up this is really good well researched historical fiction. It's not just about a battle. Although we know how the story ended in broad terms, it is fascinating to look beneath the big picture to see how these ancients fought, lived, loved and died. We're not so different.





Darkfall
by Dean Koontz

This is one of Koontz's older books. I recently reread it. I think it's better than some of the stuff he does currently though it's not necessarily his best. It is very creepy though. I'm surprised it hasn't been made into a movie or at least a mini-film.It's about 400 pages but it was very quick reading. I think it's a good introduction to Koontz's style if you're not familiar with him. This is a perfect book to read if you have to travel or wait for someone in a hospital lobby or something similar.
It takes place in New York City. Jack Dawson is a recently widowed NYC homicide detective with two small children. He's not a self-righteous sort but he is fundamentally a good man who tries to see the best in people. He's also starting to have feelings for his new partner, Rebecca Chandler, a beautiful but cold woman whom everyone assumes is either a harsh feminist, a lesbian or both. He's not sure if Rebecca feels the same way. She's very tightly wound.

But while Jack is wondering what to do about this (and taking good natured and not so good natured joking from fellow officers) an evident gang war breaks out in NYC. Several members of the Carramazza Crime Family are found dead in very suspicious circumstances. Some of them have been killed in locked rooms. Many of the dead men emptied guns without apparently hitting anything. The coronor and medical examiners don't know what to make of the bodies since the bodies all appear to be chewed or stabbed to death. But they can't figure out what the weapon or animal being used would be. And some of these men were heard screaming and begging for mercy. These men were all hardened thugs and killers. 

Both from word on the street and an unpleasant meeting with the head of the Carramazza Crime Family himself, Jack and Rebecca learn that it's not a mob war. It's a blood feud. Someone has some very personal reasons to eliminate not only the Carramazza Crime Family but the entire Carramazza bloodline. And this person is just as evil as the Carramazza Boss, only far more powerful. Jack has already done some private investigating on his own and come up with a few ideas that Rebecca doesn't like and can't even bring herself to examine. Jack is openminded when it comes to the supernatural while Rebecca only believes what she sees. But when Jack's own family is threatened both Jack and especially Rebecca have to put aside their skepticism and deal with the fact that magic and hell are real. As mentioned this was a fast read. Apparently Koontz did some research on Vodou. The villain is not completely cartoonish but from other reading I've done I'm not sure that the Western Christian concepts of good and evil or heaven and hell necessarily translate all that well to other civilizations. So I think Koontz was making a lot of things up. Even so this book might have you wondering what was that sound on the stairs late at night.

Who Runs Kansas Schools: The Courts or The Legislature

Kansas is a centrally located state that has often been ground zero for a number of social changes, some good and some bad. John Brown made his bones in Kansas. It was after all Kansas that rang the death knell for enforced legalized school and other forms of racial segregation in the Supreme Court case Brown vs. Board of Education. The author Thomas Frank chronicled the slow rise of conservative and occasionally racist populism in his noted book "What's the Matter with Kansas". Part of Frank's thesis posits that fiscal conservatives use hot button cultural issues to whip up resentment among the socially conservative base in order to get said base to support policies and ideologies which are bad for them economically. To add insult to injury it was rare that conservative politicians even delivered on promises to the socially conservative segment of their base, instead preferring to promote fiscal conservatism. This theory was really popular among some progressives as it tended to confirm some of their deepest beliefs about conservatives. Frank's thesis is a little out of date since the national energy on one of the hotter social issues of the day, gay marriage, seems to be almost entirely with the liberal pro-gay marriage supporters. 

However another key tenet among the conservative base is the importance of having the people, and not the judges, decide what is correct among competing political ideas. "Activist judges" remains a powerful epithet for many on the right. Some fervently hold to the idea that a great deal of mischief is caused by know it all, elitist, out of touch, Ivy League, smug judges who arrogantly substitute their own preferences for plainly written law or long agreed upon custom.

Or to put it another way some conservatives just throw a fit and start hurling insults when their favored position loses in court. People on the other side are hardly immune to this of course. Check out the liberal reactions to the Supreme Court's Heller decision. Temper tantrums seem to have become more common for everyone. Still, this conservative sensitivity and hostility to the very existence of judicial review was touched recently in Kansas. Like many states Kansas is seeing new battles over education and social spending. Conservatives and liberals almost by definition usually have quite different political preferences for the spending levels in those categories. These battles have not only been touched off by tax cuts or other reductions in spending but by the recession driven crash in property values in many localities. So even if some states wanted to keep the same level of school funding, it was sometimes very difficult to do so. States can't print their own money. States, unlike the Federal government, are generally constitutionally forbidden to run deficits. Still in Kansas, it appears that politics, not necessity is the primary driver of the latest contretemps. It's not necessarily that Kansas politicians can't spend the money. It's that they don't want to do so.

Kansas’ current constitutional crisis has its genesis in a series of cuts to school funding that began in 2009. The cuts were accelerated by a $1.1 billion tax break, which benefited mostly upper-income Kansans, proposed by Governor Brownback and enacted in 2012.

Overall, the Legislature slashed public education funding to 16.5 percent below the 2008 level, triggering significant program reductions in schools across the state. Class sizes have increased, teachers and staff members have been laid off, and essential services for at-risk students were eliminated, even as the state implemented higher academic standards for college and career readiness.

Parents filed a lawsuit in the Kansas courts to challenge the cuts. In Gannon v. State of Kansas, a three-judge trial court ruled in January 2013 for the parents, finding that the cuts reduced per-pupil expenditures far below a level “suitable” to educate all children under Kansas’ standards. To remedy the funding shortfall, the judges ordered that per-pupil expenditures be increased to $4,492 from $3,838, the level previously established as suitable.

Rather than comply, Governor Brownback appealed to the Kansas Supreme Court. A decision is expected this month. A victory for the parents would be heartening, but if it comes, would Governor Brownback and legislative leaders uphold the right to education guaranteed to Kansas school children? The signals thus far are not promising. If the Kansas Supreme Court orders restoration of the funding, legislators are threatening to amend the state’s Constitution by removing the requirement for “suitable” school funding and to strip Kansas courts of jurisdiction to hear school finance cases altogether. And if the amendment fails, they have vowed to defy any court order for increased funding or, at the very least, take the money from higher education.

LINK

So what's your opinion. Most state constitutions make it clear that the state has the responsibility to provide for public education for all. As in most things though the devil is in the details. On the one hand the state can't dodge that responsibility. On the other hand, times are tough all over. If the elected politicians of Kansas decide that their state is best served by a 16.5% funding cut to education, isn't that their business? Or is it ultimately the Court's job to determine what the mix of expenditures should be? Public school outcomes are never just about money in the system but on the other hand are there public schools that have provided better results with much less money? I can't think of too many where I grew up.  You can't cut a school system off at the knees and demand higher performance can you? Or can you? Who should prevail in this battle?

What's your call?

Are legislators and/or executives ever justified in threatening to ignore court rulings they dislike?

HBO Game of Thrones Season 4 Trailer

In case you missed it HBO released its first (I am sure there will be many more) trailer for Season 4 of its hit series "Game of Thrones". The show starts again on Sunday April 6. Enjoy the trailer below the jump if you are into that sort of thing. And as always if you happen to have read all of the books or be one of those know it all people who just looked up the published books' endings, kindly do not ruin it for everyone else, who may wish to watch the series in unspoiled anticipation. The Red Wedding may have been the series' biggest shock (to me at least) but there are several more surprises, twists and turns that may be coming along. My understanding is that the new season will cover at least the second half of book three, A Storm of Swords, which for my money is the most powerful and most disturbing book in GRRM's series. But who knows what the show's writers, producers and directors will choose to include or leave out from that book, how many new storylines they will create from their own imaginations, or how much material they will pull ahead from books four and five. We'll just have to wait and see.

Season 4 Trailer

December Jobs Report and Unemployment

In December the U.S unemployment rate fell to 6.7%. This should have been good news. Being below 7% should be a good thing. It should have been something that was seized on by economists as a sign that the US economy was continuing to recover and move out of the doldrums. We should have seen Democratic partisans run to the nearest microphone to take credit for Presidential economic policies that have led us to this point. (BTW the ability of ANY President-- Republican or Democrat-- to take credit or blame for a single data point in the massive system that is the US economy is far overstated but that never stops supporters or detractors from trying to give him credit or blame in good times or bad).

But this time there was no Vice-President Biden braying and bragging about a "recovery summer" on the way. That's because the greatest nation on the earth, a place that put a man on the moon and defeated Hitler and Tojo in just four years, was only able to create a net 74,000 jobs. Even by the standards of the so-called recovery we've been having this was a horrible number. The average net increase for 2012 and 2013 was a net 182,000 jobs. Even those numbers were just barely short of what was needed to keep up with population growth. The unemployment rate is only below 7% because more people gave up and moved out of the workplace. It's not because companies are on hiring sprees. They're not. At least they're not hiring in the United States.


So this number is hopefully something of a statistical fluke. Maybe there was something that was going on in December that won't be repeated again. Maybe this was the initial impact of ObamaCare. The health care sector lost 6000 jobs. Maybe this had something to do with colder weather. Maybe someone didn't get a clean compile on a program and so the number will be adjusted upwards in the coming months. We shall see. For now all we have is this data. What's more troubling than the unemployment rate is the reason why it's fallen. The overall labor participation rate is hovering at 62.8 percent, which is the lowest level in some 35 years. This is weird. I've always wondered about this because for me, there's no choice but to either be working or looking for work. I'm not yet rich enough to retire. There's no one who would be willing to work in order that I could pursue a life of leisure. So if I lost my job I'd have to keep looking for another one and/or create my own business. And I don't think I'm alone. So what are these discouraged workers doing? That's a mystery. Clearly some of them are working off the books, going back to school, relying on family and friends for food, shelter and income, going on disability or retiring. 

If the low labor participation rate was being primarily driven by retirements, that is by an increasingly older population, well then it would be nothing to worry about. The problem is though is that it's not being driven by retirements. The labor participation rate for workers 65 and older has been on a near inexorable rise since 2000 or so. People are increasingly delaying retirement because they simply can't afford it. Those old people you see in grocery stores or big box stores working as clerks or greeters aren't there because they're bored. No, they need the money, thanks in no small part to the financial sector's destruction of their retirement wealth I would guess. And even among younger workers aged 45 to 54 the labor participation rate is 79.2%, which is the lowest since 1988. As I've wondered before, we may be in a situation where thanks to automation, weak unions, outsourcing and wholesale transfer of industries overseas, the US economy simply doesn't need as many workers as it did before. Period. The average duration of unemployment calculated for December was 37.1 weeks. It was 38 weeks a year ago. So it's not as if this economy has been doing well for a long time now.

The other interesting thing about the job numbers is that not only were most of the gains in low wage sectors (retailing, leisure, and hospitality) but for the first time since 2007 ALL of the net job growth went to one gender. Women. Men had a net loss in jobs. Again, this may all be "statistical noise" which will be corrected in coming months. But right now it looks to me like we have an economy that excels in creating low wage jobs and bailing out banks but doesn't seem to be able to create jobs which support a strong middle class. As usual the black unemployment rate was twice that of the white unemployment rate while the "did not graduate high school" unemployment rate was three times that of those with a college degree. And although both political parties will use this report in their battle over extending unemployment benefits again, I think this report and the mostly anemic jobs reports that came before it only support my belief that we need some radical changes in economic policies.
Growth in jobs slows sharply

What do you think of the jobs report?

If you lost your job how long could you last without a new job?

Should unemployment benefits be extended?

Movie Reviews: We're the Millers, Elysium

We're the Millers
directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber

I guess that Jennifer Aniston and/or her agent(s) would like you to know that she is still an attractive actress. Maybe this would explain in part her character's striptease in We're the Millers which echoes but sadly doesn't really live up to her similar turn in Horrible Bosses as a sexually harassing dentist. There, the storyline, absurd as it was made sense in its own wacky way. There was a point to it. But in We're The Millers, well it's pretty much just an excuse to see Aniston in bra and panties. Not that there's anything wrong with that of course (ha!) but because the story is so lacking I found the display to be pandering and desperate. This could have been a better movie but unfortunately at every single decision point it chooses to go for the cheap laugh and the lowest common denominator. Jokes around incest, gay sex, lesbian sex, sexually repressed evangelicals, underage sex and more gay sex abound. In fact these jokes are pretty much the film's meat and potatoes. It's a shame because every so often you happen to see a funny joke unrelated to the above topics or you realize that Aniston actually has pretty good comic timing, given the proper material.
But so it goes. This film was quite financially successful. There's even room for a possible sequel. I don't want to sound like I can never appreciate films like this because sometimes I can. I guess I just wasn't in the mood for that stuff when I watched the movie. As always YMMV. At its best this is like a much raunchier and lower-brow Three's Company with the usual misunderstandings and sexual innuendo. There is very little here that is subtle.


David Clark (Jason Sudeikis) is a sad sack middle aged drug dealer. At an age when the more ambitious drug dealers have long since either moved up to management or out of the drug business entirely, Dave is still working the streets selling bags of pot to all comers, including, in an embarrassing scene, a former college classmate who's happy to see him but wonders what he's still doing on the streets. Dave has a thing for his apartment building neighbor Rose (Aniston) a stripper who is highly contemptuous of both Dave's lack of financial success and severe lack of game, among other things.

When Dave has a strange unexplained attack of conscience and tries to protect another neighbor, the virginal and somewhat mentally slow Kenny (Will Poulter), and a sharp tongued homeless girl Casey (Emma Roberts) from being assaulted by local thugs, he himself becomes the victim of an assault and home invasion. Dave's entire stash of marijuana and cash is stolen. This isn't good because his ultimate boss Brad (Ed Helms), another former college buddy of Dave's, doesn't want to hear excuses about missing drugs or money. As Brad is a cheerfully manipulative sort, rather than have Dave murdered in a variety of different ways, he suggests that Dave do a pickup of a drug shipment in Mexico for him. This will settle the debt and he'll even pay Dave a small fee (small by Brad's standards) to do the job. As the alternative is to be thrown in Brad's orca tank, be beaten to death, or simply be shot on the spot, Dave agrees to the job.

Not being completely stupid Dave decides that a family traveling to Mexico will be less suspicious than a single male. So by hook and by crook he convinces Rose, Kenny and Casey to pose as his wife and children. Dave believes it will be a simple run across the border as Brad has already identified a corrupt border agent to facilitate their travel. Of course nothing goes as planned. The foursome have to deal with dangerous drug lords, corrupt Mexican police who are bent on rape, repressed horny evangelicals and of course their active and extremely profane dislike of each other. Obviously and somewhat predictably they also learn more about each other as they travel together.
There is some female toplessness, male nudity, and crude jokes virtually non stop. I laughed a few times but ultimately this demented road trip movie was only so-so for me. Take it or leave it.
TRAILER






Elysium
directed by Neil Blomkamp

Do you work hard for your money? Do you have a place to stay that is warm and dry? Do you have access to health care? Do you have money in your pocket and extra room in your home? Can you easily get enough to eat? Do you have clean drinking water? Do you make more than $2/day? Well if you do you're pretty privileged compared to a number of people on this planet, believe it or not. You didn't create this world or the system you live under but you're benefiting from it all the same. Now what if that homeless man you gave a dollar to on the way home decided that there was really no good reason why he and his shouldn't have access to all the nice things you had in your life. And he was going to come home with you whether you liked it or not so that he could enjoy such things. Would you think this good? It all depends on how you see your duty towards your fellow man and woman. Your answer might also change depending on whether you thought that you bore responsibility for this man's plight or whether he needed to pick himself by his bootstraps and do better. There is after all a point where letting someone else on the lifeboat causes the boat to capsize and everyone to die. That's no good. But neither is sabotaging all the other lifeboats but yours on a sinking ship and laughing maniacally at the people drowning for lack of a boat. Does the US and/or Europe have any responsibility to the teeming masses of India, Africa and China?

The movie Elysium doesn't bother to excavate too deeply into certain ethical questions, preferring very broadly drawn good guys and bad guys but all the same the movie definitely takes a side. It has an easily identifiable subtext around such issues as illegal immigration, equality, and health care. Although some of the villains are over the top evil, all the same a few of them have some uncomfortable points to make about scarcity and who gets what.  Anyway it's the year 2154. Earth is overpopulated (apparently mostly with darker people), degraded and half-destroyed via war and environmental problems. Everyone is poor and has poor health care. The rich people (disproportionately Caucasian though there are quite a few South Asians among their number) have decamped to a MASSIVE space station named Elysium. There they enjoy artificial gravity and atmosphere, clean water, good food, low population density and most importantly state of the art health care that can quickly cure such things as leukemia, cancer of any kind, and just about any damage to the body. Obviously this life is not for everyone. Elysium is a democracy but Secretary of Defense Delacourt (Jodie Foster) has accrued more power to herself. She takes a very hard line on "infiltrators" from Earth, preferring to kill them instead of deporting them. She uses Kruger (Sharlto Copley from District 9) to handle her dirty work on Earth. Delacourt was originally conceived as a man but I can't imagine anyone else but Foster in that role. Icy.

Back on Earth, factory worker and parolee Max Da Costa (Matt Damon) works for Armadyne Corporation, the Elysian owned corporation that builds the machines and robots that enforce curfews and act as brutal police to keep the Earth's population in line. The irony of this isn't lost on Max. He dreams of one day getting to Elysium as well as taking the (mostly unrequited) love of his life Frey (the beautiful Alice Braga from City of God) and her daughter along with him. Max and Frey grew up together but for a variety of reasons those two brave strangers never could really get it right.

As you might imagine the CEO of Armadyne John Carlyle (William Fichtner) is dismissive and contemptuous of the risks to his earthly workers. He doesn't even want earthly people to breathe on him, let alone do anything so outrageous as protest for better wages or workplace safety. This attitude is reflected in all the lower management ranks. So when a supervisor orders Max to do something risky or lose his job, Max feels he has no alternative but to comply. But doing so exposes him to severe radiation poisoning. He has 3-5 days to live. He could easily be cured if he were a resident of Elysium but he's not. So Max has nothing to lose. He's now a very dangerous, motivated and desperate man. Max goes to local criminal/smuggler/hacker Spider (Wagner Moura from Elite Squad) to get Spider to smuggle him into Elysium. But Spider has his own interests. And involved in a power struggle with President Patel (Faran Tahir), Delacourt and Fichtner lose control of something big which everyone will be interested in, but especially Spider and the brutal Kruger. It could change the entire relationship between Earth and Elysium.

There is a fair amount of violent action and sci-fi effects. I really liked Copley's work here. His character epitomizes barely restrained savagery. And if he slips his leash you had better run. I thought this was a fun film that was definitely worth checking out.
TRAILER

Robert Gates' New Book Attacks Obama

I don't know how it's handled in the Federal government workforce but in the private institutions I've worked in, often but not always, when someone decides to leave for greener pastures, there is an exit interview, formal or not. This usually depends on how "important" you are, how long you've been there, whether you're direct hire or contract and how easy you are to replace. Your boss and/or the HR department want to know why you're leaving, what they could have done differently to make you stay, if you enjoyed your time working at Penetrode Inc., whether you might ever want to return, or if they would ever be interested in having you back. I've had a few of these. Usually both sides are professional and cautious. Although you and/or your boss might be secretly or not so secretly delighted that you are finally departing, the custom is often to play things close to the vest. After all no one wants to be sued or tip their hand about a possible lawsuit. And even ignoring legal unpleasantness, usually neither the employer or especially, a wise employee, wants to burn down a bridge they might want to come back across. So the employee mouths the necessary pieties about an exciting new opportunity he just couldn't pass up and the boss says she's sorry to lose such a key part of her team but happy that her former subordinate is moving on to bigger and better things.

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates evidently decided that he would ignore those conventions in his new book Duty, which details his experiences under the Obama Administration. He himself says that he didn't really enjoy his time there. I think it's fair to infer that he didn't much like or respect many of the people he worked with. So if this book was his exit interview it was a big "F*** All Y'all!!" to his former team members.

• In a new memoir, former defense secretary Robert Gates unleashes harsh judgments about President Obama’s leadership and his commitment to the Afghanistan war, writing that by early 2010 he had concluded the president “doesn’t believe in his own strategy, and doesn’t consider the war to be his. For him, it’s all about getting out.”

• Leveling one of the more serious charges that a defense secretary could make against a commander in chief sending forces into combat, Gates asserts that Obama had more than doubts about the course he had charted in Afghanistan. The president was “skeptical if not outright convinced it would fail,” Gates writes

• “The controlling nature of the Obama White House, and its determination to take credit for every good thing that happened while giving none to the career folks in the trenches who had actually done the work, offended Secretary Clinton as much as it did me,” Mr Gates writes. In one meeting, Mr. Gates says that he challenged Mr. Biden and Thomas Donilon, then Mr. Obama’s deputy national security adviser, when they tried to pass orders to him on behalf of the president. “The last time I checked, neither of you are in the chain of command,” Mr. Gates says he told the two men. Mr. Gates said he expected to deal directly with the president on such orders.

• In particular, Mr. Gates said he was incensed by the National Security Staff and their controlling nature. “Much of my conflicts with the Obama administration during the first two years weren’t over policy initiatives from the White House but rather the NSS’s micromanagement and operational meddling,” he writes. “For an NSS staff member to call a four-star combatant commander or field commander would have been unthinkable when I worked at the White House – and probably cause for dismissal. It became routine under Obama.”

• In “Duty,” Gates describes his outwardly calm demeanor as a facade. Underneath, he writes, he was frequently “seething” and “running out of patience on multiple fronts.”

I don't think this is all that big of a deal nor is it unprecedented. Sometimes I think that everyone who is anyone in a Presidential Administration (and many who aren't) will write a book purporting to give the inside scoop and tell the "real story" of how everything went wrong when the President didn't listen to him. I'm sure that right now some intern in the event planning office is writing a book designed to settle scores. Controversy sells. But Gates' book does show that the President's initial team of rivals approach had some limitations. Perhaps the next President, when faced with the question of whether s/he should keep on a cabinet member from the opposite political party will remember Robert Gates' book and think better of it. 

Is this no big deal?

Have you ever badmouthed former employers/co-workers? 

Is it a mistake to keep people from a different party in key positions?

Do any of Gates revelations about the President's managerial style concern you?

Book Reviews: Dying Is My Business, Insomnia

Dying Is My Business
by Nicholas Kaufmann

If you like the Harry Dresden series or any of the numerous other urban fantasies about modern day magic then you really ought to get this book. I bought it when I was looking for something else. When I finally started to read it I didn't want to put it down. I think I finished it in two days. I'm sure it wasn't more than three. So I can't really give it higher praise than that. I think this is first in a series.
Trent is a "collector" for a Brooklyn, NY crime boss named Underwood. By collector I don't mean he collects monetary debts though he's done that in the past. No, Underwood sends Trent out on "special" assignments. Underwood craves information, antique, rare or legendary items, or people who can provide him leads about the first two things I mentioned. Trent usually tries to leave the rough stuff to Underwood's other primary enforcers but this isn't always possible. Underwood could care less if Trent or anyone else gets hurt in the process of collection. Mostly this is because Underwood is sociopathic but it's also because Underwood and his goons know that Trent can't be killed. Any time Trent is killed, he rises again. But the person in closest proximity to Trent dies in his place. Trent feels guilty about this and has actually started keeping a journal of the people who have died in that manner. But his memory doesn't go past a year. He doesn't know his real name or where he's from. Underwood claims to have some of that information and be looking for more. Trent is almost certain that Underwood is lying to him but he's desperate for information and wants to believe Underwood.

After Trent delivers a man to Underwood, Underwood assigns Trent to retrieve a very special box that's in someone else's possession. Trent is ordered to bring the unopened box back to Underwood without peeking inside it. And lastly, Underwood wants Trent to kill the people who currently have the box. He is particularly insistent on this last order. Although Underwood can't really kill Trent, as he reminds him he could easily make Trent wish he were dead or refuse to share information he's discovered about Trent's background, which to Trent, would be just as bad as physical torture.

Thus properly motivated, Trent sallies forth to do his master's bidding, as he has many times before. This time proves to be different. The box was only temporarily in the possession of the targeted people, a woman named Bethany and a man named Thornton. They've hidden it somewhere else. And then before Trent can find out where he and his new companions are attacked by creatures that Trent previously didn't believe existed. Trent discovers that he has abilities that he didn't know he had. He also learns, though his resurrection abilities should have been evidence enough, that magic is real. Bethany is a sorceress and possibly of Sidhe heritage while Thornton is a werewolf. And they're the good guys. Although they may not know what's in the box Bethany and Thornton are part of an organization tasked to recover and archive items of great magical power, lest they be used by people of evil desires. They (primarily Bethany) have a wary trust for Trent as he came to their aid. Trent decides to work with them for a while. He finds that the world's real history includes magic, dragons, elves, and other supposedly fanciful beings. Trent drifts away from his employer's control. He gains a certain sense of independence and morality. This is not good for Trent's health. Underwood insists that employees follow orders exactly or be severely punished. Underwood has a strange ability to locate errant employees, who usually become late ex-employees. Several competing groups launch a search for the box. Trent's new powers surprise, impress or worry his new found friends. They tell him he does impossible things. To hear that coming from magicians, werewolves, healers, dragons and vampires is something which bothers Trent almost as much as Underwood's ability to track him down. Trent's also struggling internally over whether to betray Bethany and Thornton, who initially think that he randomly found them.

The story pacing kept me interested and might keep you excited as well. It's as much a chase story as anything else. It very adroitly balances the supernatural and the noir. This is written in first person. The characters are not as important as the plot. This book moves. It's like driving down the expressway the wrong way at 100 MPH and not hitting anyone...barely. There are only a few info dumps. Given that they're fighting for their lives and more almost through the entire book , Bethany and friends don't have the time or inclination to sit down and explain everything to the flabbergasted Trent. Whether they're asking for help from a dragon who lives under NYC or trying to find a way to kill immortal knights who can shift dimensions the good guys have their hands full every page. I was very impressed and really really hope that there is a sequel. I think I've figured out who Trent really is. I'm curious to see if I'm correct.






Insomnia
by Stephen King

Nobody gets out of this world alive. Depending on how you look at it that can be a source of relief or horror. King uses both points of view in his book Insomnia.  As I age I find myself unfortunately having to spend more time in and becoming more familiar with hospitals, usually but not always, because of older relatives. When you're walking through hospital lobbies or reading books in waiting rooms you can't help but notice the older and/or sick people, many of whom can't walk, can't talk or have other obvious frailties. It's sobering to realize that if I live long enough, one day that will be me. All of us will trade youthful energy or even middle aged maturity for old aged weakness and eventually death. So you had better enjoy your youth, your health and your independence of action while you still have it because some day you won't. That said, though as the joke goes just because there's snow on the mountain top doesn't mean there's not fire down below. King builds a sympathetic and effective depiction of older heroes and heroines, who may not have the bodies or strength they once had, but make up for it with experience, empathy and wisdom. Age is not always a bad thing even if we too often see its impacts as bad. It helps that there's a lot of humor in the book. King could have cut this story in half and just focused on the pains and irritations of age and loss. It still would have been a great read and something that was non-supernatural horror. But he didn't do that. The everyday horrors of age and physical or mental weakness are mirrored by an subtle and increasing supernatural threat.

Insomnia is an older book, which for some strange reason I just recently got around to reading during my all too short holiday break. As I nearly broke my ankle doing something stupid I had plenty of time to lay on the couch and read. Insomnia has allusions to King's Dark Tower series as well as to The Talisman, which King co-wrote with Peter Straub. It could possibly also have links to It and to Dreamcatcher. These are teased out throughout the book and I didn't pick up on them at first. I'm sure there are other links and references which I missed but will be obvious to other King fans. Parts of this story also reminded me of the Madeleine L'Engle A Wrinkle in Time  and Susan Cooper's The Dark Is Rising series.
Similar to many King stories this takes place in Maine, the city of Derry to be exact. As usual, King's eye for accents and everyday conversations firmly embed this story in reality, so much so that when the paranormal starts to intrude you are just as surprised and disturbed by this as the protagonists are.

Ralph Roberts is a seventy something man who, at the book's start is losing his wife Carolyn, the love of his life, to a brain tumor. Although other brain specialists tell him it's just one of those things and probably nothing could have been done, Ralph can't help but partially blame his wife's primary physician, Dr. Litchfield, for misdiagnosing his wife's headaches. Derry's citizens are also in the middle of an abortion rights brouhaha, as pro-choice activist Susan Day is coming to speak. She is fiercely opposed by Derry's pro-life contingent, who tend to be mostly older people except for a small radical anti-abortion splinter cell led by a young man named Ed Deepneau. Deepneau is Ralph's neighbor. He's formerly someone the genially and generally pro-choice Ralph considered a friend. That is until Ed went off the deep end and brutally assaulted his wife. This action, combined with some odd, really insane, things that Ed told Ralph, makes Ralph quite wary of Ed. After Carolyn dies, Ralph suffers really bad insomnia. He can't sleep. Ralph wakes up earlier and earlier each night until he's running on 2-3 hours of sleep. And then he starts to see things, things that if he told anyone about would likely get him involuntarily committed. But these things appear to be real. And some of the entities that Ralph sees also see him. Reality and hyperreality start to merge in an adult Alice in Wonderland sort of way. And what's seen can't be unseen. What's done can't be undone. Ralph and his friend Lois, who is the only other person who has his visions, are pulled into an eternal battle fought in a number of different planes of existence.

This book is almost 700 pages. I thought the build up might have moved a little more quickly. But even a verbose Stephen King, is well, still Stephen King. Good stuff and if you haven't read it already I think it's worthwhile. Of course I'm biased as King has always been a favorite. Like few other popular writers King remains unflinching in his ability to describe the good and bad in humans. Whether it's the sudden flash of resentment we feel towards someone who cuts us off on the road, the fierce love we have for family and intimates or the suspicion we have towards those unlike us, King captures these emotions in a quite realistic way. I think I know where King, the real man, stands on abortion rights and gun control. Doubtless some who disagree with his stances might not like certain depictions in Insomnia. But it's fair to say that King the author fairly and occasionally gleefully illuminates inconsistencies and failings in both the pro-choice and pro-life positions. His characters are messy, just like real life.