Volume 2, Issue 2: 4 up, 4 down
I’m making a slight tweak this time around. I will share the books I’ve just read, but also the set of books that I plan to read next. They can end up changing based on various influences, but it is likely I push through on most of them. This way, if you’d like to read along and discuss at the end, it opens up the possibility. I did that with a few friends on 3 of the books I am reviewing today, and I really enjoyed that ‘de-brief’ of sorts once when we finished. I read a book I would prefer not to review, The Madness of the Crowds, so let’s see how I did at staying out of the prickly topics. Hope you enjoy this round of reviews, and as always,
Please share with friends, family, and colleagues!
Sign up here for the newsletter or click the follow link on the Book Jam homepage to receive notifications when I publish an article.
Quichotte, Salman Rushdie. Fiction
Quichotte is a metafiction, a story within a story, that draws intentional parallels to the famous Don Quixote by Miguel Cervantes (one of the most respected fiction books ever written). This book is a nod to the modernity of Cervantes’ plot, albeit being published in the early 1600s. Quichotte follows a flailing Indian-American spy-novel writer, Sam DuChamp, who writes about a delusional Indian-American man, Ismail Smile, who has fallen in love with a famous Bollywood-turned-Hollywood star and has an imaginary son. The book switches between chapters detailing Sam’s life and his personal struggles and chapters that are from Sam’s book. Pace is an important part to making a book readable. The first 50–60 pages are about keeping the names straight and distinct between the two ‘realities’ (but as you eventually see, there is a reason why he wants you to struggle with the distinction at times), but from that point forward the book begins to trot and then to cantor and then gallups to the end. It is full of social commentary on xenophobia, drug addiction, technology addiction — but it doesn’t overwhelm what is also meant to be a very entertaining book. Before this book I had really own known about Rushdie from the ‘Fatwa’ episode from Curb Your Enthusiasm. There is a reason he can attract such vitriol, because he is a powerful writer with a strong novelistic flair. I look forward to getting into more of his work.
Say Nothing, Patrick Keefe. Non-Fiction
I remember reading Seamus Heaney poems in high school, and feeling how devastatingly raw his portrayals were of car bombings and devastations from such a recent era, in a place that is part of my heritage and a place I am also a citizen. But it still felt remote, and the history jumbled. Keefe’s book changed that for me, bringing a clear evolution and precise account of The Troubles, a conflict (or war, depending on who you speak to in Ireland) in Northern Ireland between a miltarised group of Catholics, known as the Irish Republican Army (IRA) fighting the British controlled government in Belfast (predominantly Protestant). This story draws you in with a specific story of Jean McConville, who was abducted by the IRA and was never found — one of the 8 ‘disappeared’ personsduring this conflict. Although it revolves around this personal account of Jean, it then weaves in key IRA members — Dolours Price, Brendan Hughes, and Gerry Adams — in such a way that leaves the reader invested in all personal trajectories and at times forgetting the horrific nature of their actions. This is a testament to Keefe’s skill with storytelling through the structure and pace of the book, but all the while staying with the facts.
The first half of the book shoots out like a rocket, brings you into the scene of the McConville murder and then has you invest time into the fascinating resurgence of the IRA. The second half brings the reader through the raw and conflicting emotions of the peace deal and the aftermath it left on the people of Northern Ireland. There is a lot of valuable history to absorb from the book and the incredible convolution in sorting out such muddied histories. Definite thumbs up.
The Madness of the Crowds, Douglas Murray. Political
This was a tough one for me. My friend recommended this as a counterpoint. I really enjoy reading a spectrum of views and following the constructivist mentality to knowledge acquisition. But this one didn’t do it for me. I am inherently NOT someone who likes to dicuss politics with the exception of with very few people. I think it has warped us and simplified us into 2 buckets — right and wrong, smart and stupid — depending on which side of the aisle you sitting. We can do a better job at appreciating one another for so much more than their political party. And I think to some extent, Murray is arguing that people should be seen for more than their identity, and that identity politics does more harm than good. He focuses on different types of identity politics that are prevalent today: gay (Murray is gay), race, feminism, transgender. He believes they are creating a culture of exceptionalism (‘we are not only marginalised but we are better than others’), cultish/outcasting (‘if you are gay and you are republican then you can’t be part of the gay crowd’), among other negative behaviors. And that before creating a herd mentality that polarizes factions of the population, that it might be better to have scientific measurements before asserting claims, such as whether or not children at the age of 13 should be able to switch genders without parental consent (which is a current practice in some health clinics but widely contested in court).
The problems I find with his arguments are 2-fold. First, he writes long chapters about each one of these topics, and he uses many many anecdotes — several of which when I research lacked the true weight with which he portrayed them — that accumulate to a diluted case. Second, his argument that it causes an overcorrection feels like a soft and unanalytical conclusion. What is an overcorrection? What pace would he like change to occur? There is a debate to be had about the pros/cons of identity politics, and one that will have rational/logical arguments on both sides but I don’t think Murray came close to a dialogue. He instead focused on generating fear and projecting his personal disquietedness that doesn’t seem academically balanced. He makes claims of racial equality that feel well out of touch. He goes to the poles to discredit groups, and although some times the extremes within these groups may portray extremism, it shouldn’t mean we stop making progress on equality of treatment and equality of opportunity.
The Spy Who Came In From The Cold, John le Carré. Fiction
First time reading a le Carré book. I feel slightly weird that I hadn’t yet read one his spy novels, I think it was strangely because I loved non-fiction growing up. If I even try to summarize the plot I will leave both you and myself confused. Very simply, it is set during the Cold War and you have a British agent, Alec Leamas, who has one last mission to pretend to be a defector with the desired effect of discrediting a known East German super-agent. It is a fun, entertaining, quick read and I think a great introduction to le Carré’s work. This is his third spy novel, and known as the one that demonstrated his maturity in writing complicated yet engaging thrillers. There isn’t a word that went by that I did not create an accompanied visual scene of the events. It doesn’t fit into any top list for me, but I found it a fun and worthwhile read between two non-fiction books.
Other media forms
Podcast, Don’t tell me the Score, Stoicism: Ryan Holiday
Stoicism is a wonderful philosophy to embody at all times, but especially during COVID-19. An enjoyable 1-hr podcast on some of Holiday’s advice on practising stoicism.
What’s up next
A bit heavy on the non-fiction this time around, but if any of these pique your fancy, pick up a copy, read along, and reach out if you want to discuss!
