"A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies. The man who never reads lives only one." – George R. R. Martin
I finished reading Archenemies, and I loved it! It reminded me of how I felt when I watched The Empire Strikes Back. The story was full of action and twists. I was at the edge of my seat in anticipation; I couldn’t wait to see what would happen next. The end was a cliff hanger that left me wanting the next in the series right away. Fortunately, the next book has already been published so I don’t have to wait three year for the sequel like I did with Star Wars.
It is often reported and lamented that today in the United States of America we are more divided than ever. We long for some long forgotten time when politics was more civil and less personal. While we do face unique political problems today, there never was a time of civil and less personal national politics. And the election of 1824 is an excellent example.
As I learned while reading the Jackson biography mentioned in a previous post, the presidential election of 1824 was extremely ugly. The two leading candidates were John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson. Adams was serving as Secretary of State, a role many previous presidents served in prior to being elected. Jackson was the hero of the battle of New Orleans at the end of the War of 1812. These men did not like each other at all. Adams was allied to the strict and elitist version of republicanism that the first presidents had practiced. Jackson was a man of the people. Both men struck out at the other personally in the contest, even maligning members of each other’s families.
The election was complicated by two other men running for president, William H. Crawford and Henry Clay. As a result, no candidate won a majority of the Electoral College votes. According to the constitution, the election was decided by the House of Representatives with each state’s delegation getting a single vote. Only the top three candidates were on the ballot, so Henry Clay was dropped.
Like Adams, Clay could not stand Jackson. It is widely thought that Clay made a deal with Adams to give him the election in exchange for being made Secretary of State. Jackson was the big winner in the popular vote with 41% to Adam’s 31%. Jackson even won 15 more votes in the Electoral College (99-84). Due to the machinations of Clay, Adams won the election and became the next president and named Clay as his Secretary of State.
This happened during a time in US history as more and more people were getting the right to vote. There was a philosophical shift toward popular rule and elections and away from powerful elites controlling them. As is often the case in transitional times, things were ugly. It is often said that history doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes. It certainly seems to me that our times could be considered to be rhyming with this time in history.
Most typically, I read books on my ereader. I have an older model, high resolution, eight inch Kobo Aura ONE ereader. I also wanted something slightly larger than a pocket ereader. The one I have is about the size of a trade paperback. I picked an e-ink reader because I did not want to be distracted by all the things that a tablet could do. I wanted something dedicated only to reading.
Another reason I chose Kobo over Kindle was Kobo has library integration. I can use my ereader to borrow and read library ebooks from the comfort of my own home. And I borrow and read a lot of books from the library.
Probably my most favorite feature of using an ereader is looking up word definitions. Every ereader that I am aware of includes a dictionary. So, as I am reading and I encounter a word I am unfamiliar with, I simply long press the word with my finger. Then a separate small window pops up with a definition of the word. I simply close the window and go back to my reading. This is much less of an interruption than putting my book down to find a dictionary and lookup the word. I am so used to it, I sometimes find myself reaching a finger to long press a word in a magazine article or print book.
I also carry many books with me. I read around one hundred books a year. When I finish one, I start the next one pretty much right away. So instead of waiting until I am done to find my next read, I have quite a few from my “to read” list already on my ereader ready to go. When I am done reading a book, I return it to the library and pick one of the others already on my ereader.
I also take my ereader with me. When I am waiting in line or for an appointment, I take it out and read a bit. That’s how I am able to read so much in a year. I love reading on my ereader.
We are a storytelling species. We are in the age of “Peak TV“. People are driving and jogging while listening to audio books. But my favorite way to engage with story is still the good, old-fashioned book. Or more often these days, an ebook. In short text read line by line. Not watched nor listened to. Read.
As a child I loved libraries. My favorite people in elementary school were the librarians. As a teen I walked to the library to comb through the card catalog (remember those?) to find my next read. When I became an adult I continued to visit the library to borrow books while also building quite a large library of physical books. While today my physical library is much smaller, I still use the library to borrow ebooks as well as buy new ones regularly.
And I read all genres. Literature. Science fiction. Fantasy. Memoir. Biography. History. Science. Psychology. Philosophy. Recently I began to wonder, why is reading so important to me? I have so many other choices for learning and entertainment. Why reading? I’m still working on a full answer to that question, but here are some of my preliminary thoughts.
Reading is slow. Or maybe it’s more that it happens at my own pace. Watching and listening happen at a predetermined pace. Sure I can sometimes speed it up, but for me that degrades the experience. The fact that I can easily reread a passage to clarify is part of what I love about reading. And I can read at whatever pace suits me.
Reading is broader and deeper. I have never heard of a movie that had more story than the book it was based on. Books also go to much more depth as they aren’t limited by a two hour running time. It is also easier to access the thoughts of characters in a book.
Reading is low tech. I don’t need any special tools to read a book. I can sit under a tree on a sunny day and escape to another world or learn life lesson’s from someone long dead. Even with an ebook, my ereader only needs to be charged once or twice a month, and it doesn’t do anything but let me read ebooks.
Reading is old and reliable. Books have been around for thousands of years. And books written that long ago are still accessible. I don’t need a special program to run them or read them.
But most of all, books and reading transport me to other worlds. They allow me to live vicariously through others, both real and imagined. And when I am done or take a break, I return to my real life having learned and grown in sometimes unseen ways. This is true magic that I cannot imagine living without.
I am reading the second book of a young adult trilogy named after the first book of the series, Renegades. It is the story of a world where “prodigies” discover they have super powers. The world is very reminiscent of Marvel’s X-Men. The themes involved are very similar as well. What do we do about people who have powers? What does justice mean in such a world? Who gets to decide?
The story takes place in a city that ten years previous had suffered a great battle between the villains (known as the Anarchists) and superheroes (the Renegades). The Renegades won and now are trying to put the city back together and establish society and culture. The founding members form a council that runs the city and much of the world through a sort of police force of prodigies.
What makes this most interesting is that the story is very open about questioning what it means to be the good guy. The characters start to question why an unelected group of people get to make all the rules. It is clear through the characters that good and bad, hero and villain, are not two sides of the same coin but rather a spectrum. I haven’t yet finished the book, but I am thoroughly enjoying how the two main characters are starting to question who they are and what side they are on.
Sometime in 2020, I decided to seek out news from both the left and right of the American political spectrum. I wasn’t interested in breaking news. I was looking for real journalism. I found one monthly magazine from the left and one from the right and have subscribed and read both of them since. As the pandemic raged on that year, I also started to look for a source of scientific news that was independent of politics and dedicated to the scientific method. I found The Skeptical Inquirer which describes itself as “the magazine for science and reason”. I subscribe to and read it as well.
In the January/February 2022 of The Skeptical Inquirer there is a fantastic article by a teacher who struggled with teaching science to non-science students. She was passionate about the scientific method as a tool for critical thinking. She saw her class as the best way to reach non-science majors with these tools. But she found that these students just weren’t interested in the “baby bio” class she taught. Rather than blame her students, she decided to examine her curriculum.
She came upon a study that showed the positive effects of teaching the skills of science rather than the discoveries and historical findings of science. So she changed how she taught. That made all the difference. Now not only do her students rave about her class, they leave it equipped to deal with fake news, pseudoscience, and conspiracies based on their own critical thinking and research skills.
A Wish in the Dark by Christina Soontornvat is a Newbery-Honor-winning novel targeted at eight- to twelve-year-olds. But the ideas it explores are timeless and appropriate for all ages. In one description I read it is compared to a retelling of Les Misérables. A few of the characters may remind you of that Victor Hugo classic, but it is the themes that are most similar – justice, kindness, seeing the best in others, and the consequences of our choices. It is a story of its own set in a “Thai-inspired fantasy world”, to quote the Goodreads.com description.
As I mentioned in a previous post, my sister (a middle school English teacher) gave me this book as a gift recently. I finished reading it last night, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. The characters are relatable and genuine, reflecting the inexperience, naivete, and idealism of their youth. Throughout the story this idealism is confronted with the reality that surrounds them. I don’t really want to say much more than that so I don’t spoil the book for anyone. I am not sure that I ever would have read this book if my sister had not told me about it and given me a copy. I am glad she did.
When Republicans took control of the House of Representatives for the first time in decades back in the 1990’s, one of their big ideas was that congresspeople spent too much time in Washington. Instead of living in DC, they should live in their districts. This would connect them better with their constituents and their needs instead of isolate them with other politicians in the capital. Only one problem. The same problem that seems to happen with most ideas in politics – unintended consequences.
I was in my twenties when this was happening. I remember that it seemed like a good idea. Politicians should stay close to the people they represent, right? Professional class politicians who live in DC lose touch with those they represent. But as with most things in life, it is a bit more complicated as I learned while reading Leaders Eat Last by Simon Sinek.
The idea was that because they stayed home in their districts so much more of their time, they would be more connected to the people. They would spend more time with them, hear about their issues more directly. Except that isn’t what happened. Instead at the urging of their parties, both Democrat and Republican, congresspeople spent a much larger part of their time fund raising. And because they didn’t live in Washington, they had much less opportunity to connect with their fellow representatives.
When they lived in DC, their kids went to the same schools, they attended the same school activities, they got together more frequently for lunches and dinners. In short, they got to know their fellow congresspeople as people outside of work and across party lines. This had the affect of making compromise easier to come to. They saw their political rivals as people like them that had goodness in their hearts with whom they disagreed. This gave them the basis to work things out.
Living outside of the capital, they lost this connection. With the greater focus on fundraising from their party, party tribalism became the focus of the day. This led to further polarization of our politics and to much of the mess we currently find ourselves in. Not only have our representatives reduced their focus to their party first, seeing their rivals as existential enemies, the parties themselves have encouraged this same vision for their members. And now particularly partisan people hold this same vision and idea about those who disagree with them, tearing apart friends and families.
I don’t have simple solution to this. I am not sure there is one. In fact, I think this is an object lesson in the dangers of simple solutions. After all, it started the simple idea that living in your home district as a congressperson would be much better for the people you represent and the country as a whole. It didn’t turn out that way. So it may be better to consider the second and third order effects of “simple” solutions before we implement them. We won’t always see the dangers that lurk ahead, but we may be able to avoid some of them. And spare ourselves some pain and difficulty in the process.
My sister recently recommended a book – A Wish in the Dark by Christina Soontornavat. As soon as she told me about it, I borrowed the ebook from my library so I could start reading it when I finished the novel I was then reading. But she also kindly sent me a print copy of the book. So as I went to read it, I had a decision to make – do I read it in print or on my ereader?
First I picked up the print edition. At 375 pages, it is substantial though not heavy. I flipped through it briefly. I then opened the book on my ereader and compared the first page in print to that of the ebook. The font was slightly different but largely felt the same. It was at this point that I found myself pulled rather emphatically to the ebook. And that’s where I am reading it. But I am also grateful to have the print edition.
I wondered why this might be. One of my favorite things about reading ebooks is how simple it is to look up word definitions. I definitely miss this when reading in print. I read more that one book at a time so having them easily portable on an ereader is also a big plus. But I still buy print editions of books that really resonate with me because I want to have a physical artifact that I can refer back to and readily see. For non-fiction, I also often transfer any highlights or notes to my physical book as they are easier to reference and share.
This brief experience helped me learn about myself. I prefer ebooks when I am actually reading. But for books that I love, I still need a print book on my shelf for reference, longevity, and to share. I still want and love them both.
I was disappointed by the January/February 2022 issue of Uncanny Magazine compared to my experience with the other issues I have read since subscribing in May of last year. None of the fiction in this issue really connected for me. I felt like too much was left unclear on the background of the stories. The topics were very interesting, but the execution left me feeling like the stories could have been improved.
The one piece that really grabbed me was “Gone with the Clones: How Confederate Soft Power Twisted the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy” (article available online starting Feb. 1). Briefly, the argument is that while the original Star Wars trilogy was based on WWII with the clear enemy being the Nazis and fascism, the prequels were based on the US Civil War, the meaning of which is much more messy due to the myth of the “Lost Cause”. The best part was the author’s amazing summary of how organizations like the Daughters of the Confederacy muddied the cause for the Confederacy from preserving slavery to a number of nebulous higher level ideas like states’ rights (states’ rights to do what?). Buying this issue is worth it just for this essay.