Popular Posts

23 July 2012

Book Review: Savvy


SavvySavvy by Ingrid Law
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

A great conceit, great characters within a great structure and a good story bogged down by a writing style that borders on the preciously overwritten.  From the opening paragraph;

"I had liked living down south on the edge of land, next to the pushing-pulling waves.  I had liked it with a mighty kind of liking, so moving had been hard - hard like the pavement the first time I fell off my pink two-wheeler and my palms burned like fire from all of the hurt just under the skin."

Thankfully, I either got used to it or Law calmed down the metaphoricsimile a tad and though I rolled my eyes a couple of times at the language, it usually didn't get in the way of the story.

And sometimes it created deep insight;

"'I'm not perfect, Mibs.  Nobody's perfect.  I just have a knack for getting things right.  Maybe that looks a lot like perfect sometimes.  Besides you'd be surprised at how many people dislike spending time with someone who constantly gets things right.  It's not always an easy way to be.'"

"Maybe we all have other people's voices running higgledy-piggledy through our heads all the time.  I thought about how often my poppa and momma were there inside my head with me, telling me right from wrong.  Or how the voices of Ashley Bing and Emma Flint sometimes got stuck under my skin, taunting me and making me feel low, even when they weren't around.  I began to realize how hard it was to separate out all the voices to hear the single, strong one that came just from me."


"When something like that comes along, whether it's an accident or a savvy or a very first kiss, life takes a turn and you can't step back.  All you can do is keep moving forward and remember what you've learned."


View all my reviews

22 July 2012

Book Review: 1861 - The Civil War Awakening


1861: The Civil War Awakening1861: The Civil War Awakening by Adam Goodheart
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I love history but it is rare, even for me, to pick up a historical tome and not be able to put it down.

This is one such tome.

Goodheart takes nine seemingly trivial situations/happenings/ideas from the year 1861 and weaves them into a tapestry of such strength and conviction that the reader is rather gobstopped that the authors of the various and sundry other books she's read on the topic of the American Civil War did not expound or, even mention, these subjects.

Goodheart starts with Fort Sumter but presents it as a prologue;  it's not the story.  It's really going to be a culmination of one story and the impetus of another.  And for a third it will only be a minor detail.  And so on.

But on to the real story;  the story of how the Union was willing to tolerate slavery to save the Union.  How Lincoln would have happily continued to abide by that compromise had events allowed him to.  How Garfield, who would become a president so reviled for his civil rights fervor that he would be shot because of it, started out as a professor and preacher who was ambivalent about freeing the slaves.  This I'd heard about before.  But Elmer Ellsworth?  The Zouaves?  Jesse Benton Fremont? The telegraph and how it affected the war?  Thomas Starr King?  The uprisings in St. Louis and the German heroes? Benjamin Franklin Butler setting the ball rolling towards emancipation by employing a legal loophole that most thought laughable?  Fort Monroe and contraband? Lincoln's 1861 July 4th address to congress?  If I'd heard of them, I'd forgotten them.  And Goodheart makes them unforgettable.  Indeed, he makes them sea changes in a year that determined how we'd wage war and how we'd wage peace.

Goodheart is a travel writer and writes a Civil War blog, so his prose is engaging.  Certainly, there are probably some staid historians out there who would frown at his parenthetical references and his periodic exclamation points and his inside jokes.  For this reader, however, the style made the subjects inherently interesting.  Goodheart paints a picture.  And he doesn't hit you over the head with footnotes (though the book is highly researched and referenced).

Goodheart makes the most remarkable connections throughout the book;  take 1861 comet, for example.  In riffing on the effect of the astronomical occurrence on the course of human history, Goodheart writes,

"So much had changed in the past few years - even the past few months.  Fixed truths seemed to be casting themselves adrift; familiar stars departing from their orbits.  Revolution, in the sense that astronomers at Washington's Naval Observatory used the term, meant something stately and predictable, an orbit tethered by the gravity of the sun.  Elsewhere in the capital city, of course, the word meant something quite different;  elsewhere in the nation, different things still.  Until recently, America's own revolution had come to seem like a fact moored safely to the ever-more-distant year 1776.  That was now no longer the case.  It blazed again across the sky, a thing of wonder and terror, still uncertain in its import."

And Lincoln, who has the reputation of brilliance because he jotted the Gettysburg Address on the back of an envelope?  Well, he took three months to draft a message to congress in 1861.  He wrote.  He rewrote.  He pondered.  He tested his message.  And after those three months, he emerged, no longer a railsplitter on the rail but a man decided and firm about the steps he needed to take to assure the fate of the nation.  Goodheart writes,

"Although he might not have scribbled his 1863 address on the back of an envelope, as legend would have it, it should be no surprise that he wrote it fairly quickly.  Lincoln had already done the hard work of the Gettysburg Address, the heavy intellectual lifting, in 1861.  The two intervening years would go to pare away the nonessentials, to sculpt 6,256 words of prose into 246 words of poetry.  When people like Emerson had criticized Lincoln for spending so long toiling over the Independence Day message, they did not understand that the president, in doing so, had in a very real sense been fighting the war.  Through his lonely Emersonian struggle, all those torturous hours alone with his thoughts and his half-filled pages, he had been arming himself for the terrible conflict ahead.  Again and again over the next four years, those who knew Lincoln would express their amazement at his lack of self-doubt, his tenacity in staying the course-so different from the early weeks of his presidency.  But once he had written his address to Congress, Lincoln never again needed to ask himself whether he should be fighting or what he was fighting for.  With these large questions settled, the smaller ones of how to fight often answered themselves.  The proper resolution of the Sumter crisis, which had tortured Lincoln in March and early April, seemed almost obvious in retrospect.  Reasoning backward from the principles he articulated on July Fourth, he could not possibly have behaved any differently.  Reasoning forward, much of his course ahead was clear."

The whole book is full of a-ha moments arising from facts and situations forgotten by large scale tellings of history.

And reading it in an election year, when the country seems just as polarized as it was then, was an exercise in "the more things change, the more they stay the same."  I wish the lesson of history - those who do not learn it are doomed to repeat it - held more sway with our current leaders and politicians.  For them, I close with Goodheart's words about the sudden sense of purpose of the Union after Fort Sumter;

"The attack on Sumter forced Americans everywhere to pick sides; to stand either with the flag or against it ... Northerners chose to stand with it.  And that expression of national unity, in turn, became the strongest possible argument for the Union itself: for the idea that the flag could shelter beneath its folds Americans of many opinions and temperaments, and that disagreement need not mean disunion.  The pure wordless symbol of a piece of cloth could represent both the deepest traditions of American radicalism and those of American conservatism."




View all my reviews

04 July 2012

Book Review: The Historian


The HistorianThe Historian by Elizabeth Kostova
My rating: 2 of 5 stars

Boy did I get suckered into this one.  I remember when this came out;  it was everywhere.  I'd just had a baby so I glanced at it several times and thought "That would be a fun DaVinci Code kind of read when I have time someday." Never picked it up.  Never even looked very carefully at the cover.

Then we bought a Nook so that we could travel with our precociously well-read 8 year old without hauling a steamer trunk of books along with us. I was perusing the e-books available at the library and this popped up.  "Perfect!" I thought.  "I'll read this on vacation!"

But wait. It's about VAMPIRES?

How the hell could I have missed that?

I'm about 2/3rds of the way through;  finding it ponderous, convoluted and stodgy but still engaging because of Kostova's ability to evoke a sense of place.  You can almost smell Istanbul. In a good way.

But what editor anywhere thought it would be a good idea to faithfully fictionalize a scholarly article about a 14th century travel log?  Zzzzzzzz.

And, wait.  Vampires?  Really?

And now I'm done and feel the need to edit the whole damn thing so that it has a sense of pacing and story arch.  

And, really? One lucky shot was enough?

BUT I did, in fact, read the whole thing, so that's saying something, I suppose.


View all my reviews

13 June 2012

Book Review: Regarding the Fountain


Regarding the FountainRegarding the Fountain by Kate Klise
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Delightful.  Truly delightful.

And being mired in an organization where I am charged with being creative while balancing that creativity on a general ledger and booking a profit, I found particular joy in the exchanges between Florence Waters and Walter Russ, the principal of the school.

Principal Russ requests, "Product: drinking fountain.  Style: plain.  Price: modest."

Florence Waters answers, "You sound just like the author of that little book of directions that came with my blender."

I left this book wanting to find more strength to be a Florence Waters in a world run by Walter Russes.


View all my reviews

Book Review: The Lemon Tree


The Lemon Tree: An Arab, a Jew, and the Heart of the Middle EastThe Lemon Tree: An Arab, a Jew, and the Heart of the Middle East by Sandy Tolan
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Whenever I read books like this, I wonder about the men who sit around in secret rooms, redrawing the world's boundaries.  It never goes well but people keep doing it.  The founding of Israel is one such moment in time.  

This book focuses on one house and two families that call it home;  this is the microcosmic metaphor for the whole larger quagmire.  The Jew acknowledges that she stole the Arab's home but cannot go so far as to say he can have it back.  It is not enough for the Arab to hear that the Jew admits that wrongs were perpetrated;  nothing short of return is good enough.

There is no middle ground.

And if there is no middle ground, there is no resolution possible.

The Lemon Tree presents the history of the land interlocked with the smaller histories of two families caught in the whirlwind sociopolitical change told through the lens of a house that means so much for so many reasons.

The book is eminently readable.  It gives no answer.

But at the end, the Jew plants a new lemon tree in the courtyard of the home which used to be the Arab's home but was then the Jews home and is now a school for Arab children in the heart of Israel.  "This dedication is without obliterating the memories.  Something is growing out of old history.  Out of the pain, something new is growing."

And that is all we can hope for.


View all my reviews

29 May 2012

Why Visiting Mr. Green?



Why Visiting Mr. Green?

If I had to grandly declare a theme for our 2011-2012 season, it might be “How we, as a society, treat ‘difference.’”  In Avenue Q, a motley assortment of puppets accept one another and work, in their own small ways, to make the world a better place.  In Beau Jest, Jewish parents struggle to accept that their daughter may not choose to marry within the faith.  In Tommy, a young man struggles with a burden that makes him close himself off to the world, and the world reacts in a variety of ways.  In the Laramie Project docu-dramas, issues of tolerance are viewed through many lenses, and reactions to these views are explored, dissected and pondered.

On the surface, Visiting Mr. Green doesn’t really fit in with this theme; it’s an odd-couple comedy about a crotchety old man and a young, upwardly mobile man caught in the corporate gerbil wheel.  But boiling underneath the light-hearted one-liners are themes of persecution, group identity and what one generation can expect or demand from another generation.  Mr. Green and Ross have nothing in common.  Yet they have everything in common.  It’s all in how you look at things.  Both have allowed difference to stand in the way of living and loving.  And both need to find a way to come to terms with that.

From the first line of the play, Ross and Mr. Green confront their difference (that’s the seed of the comedy), but as the play progresses, the characters embark on a journey leading them to confront their sameness.  Suddenly we’re in a deep, heart-wrenching drama.  They are both Jews, but that is not what makes them the same.  In fact, they seem to occupy polar opposite ends of the Jewish spectrum.  As Rabbi Tsvi Blanchard has written, “Jewish identity is made up of choices. We pick, consciously or otherwise, from a sort of identity menu that offers us options for behaviors that we understand as ‘Jewish’ because we see them as ‘Jewish things to do’ or as ‘done in a Jewish way.’”  So Ross and Mr. Green are both Jews, but their shared Judaism doesn’t really share anything.  At all.

And that’s a very potent metaphor for the larger theme of the play; we are the same, yet we are different, yet we are the same. 

Although the characters are Jewish, the core learning in this play is that people are the same everywhere. Everyone knows someone like Mr. Green, and everyone knows someone like Ross. Their specific characteristics make the story interesting, but their human-ness and their individual struggles are universal.

We all face challenges.  You may face the same challenges I face but for different reasons. You may face different challenges than I face but for the same reason.  But we all face challenges.

Tolerance comes from knowing that. 

Acceptance comes from understanding that.

Visiting Mr. Green is a blueprint of how we can move from hatred to dislike, to tolerance, to acceptance and, in the process, learn not only how to heal ourselves but also to mend the lives of those around us. 


Krista Lang Blackwood
Director of Cultural Arts
Jewish Community Center of Kansas City

17 April 2012

Why The Laramie Project?



Why The Laramie Project?
In 1993, five years before Matthew Shepard was beaten and left to die, a rock was thrown through the window of a home displaying a menorah in Billings, Montana.  The people of Billings rose in silent protest and paper menorahs appeared in windows all over town.
Nothing much changed for Jewish families in Billings in the aftermath of this event. Nothing much except the reassurance that there were people in their town who had a deep capacity for compassion.
Sometimes nothing much is a whole lot.
The most straightforward statement of the principle of compassion in the Torah is Leviticus 19:18; “you shall love your neighbor as yourself.”  This ethic of reciprocity, this “golden rule,” is said to exist in every world religion.  
And that’s fitting because the question of how to treat others is a universal human question.  In a Jewish context, the ethical approach to compassion is referred to as “accomplishing a mitzvah.”   In its most literal meaning, to accomplish a mitzvah is to carry out one of the 613 Commandments of Sinai. But Jewish texts and teachings take the notion of a mitzvah further; any act motivated by spontaneous kindness toward another person can be considered the moral equivalent of one of the original Commandments. Translated this way, mitzvah means “good deed.”
In Pirkei Avot, Rabbi Ben Azzai is cited as saying, “Run to perform even a minor mitzvah, and flee from sin; for one mitzvah leads to another mitzvah, and one sin leads to another sin; for the consequence of a mitzvah is a mitzvah, and the consequence of a sin is a sin.”
Run to perform even a minor mitzvah.  Sometimes nothing much is a whole lot.
The problems of the world are huge and overwhelming.  Watching the evening news can be bewildering; story after story about the human capacity for hate, greed and violence.  Hate is complex.  It’s big.  It can seem unconquerable.  The power of The Laramie Project lies in the fact that the plays don’t gloss over that complexity, that largeness, that invincibility.  The Laramie Project plays face it all head on.  They don’t pretend to heal the wound with a contrived set of pat answers; instead they rip the scab forcefully off the wound and leave the audience free to decide how best to heal.
Perhaps one way to heal is to walk out of this theater newly resolved to do good deeds; to re-enter the world determined to find ways to accomplish a mitzvah.  Even tiny good deeds can make a difference; holding open a door, smiling at a passerby. And if you pay enough attention to the world around you to smile or hold open a door, chances are you’ll be well-placed to notice opportunities for more good deeds. 
Sometimes nothing much is a whole lot. 
There’s a story in the Talmud in which a young man walks up to Rabbi Hillel and promises to convert to Judaism if the Rabbi will teach him the whole Torah while standing on one foot. Hillel lifts one foot off the ground and replies, “What is hateful to you, do not do to your comrade; this is the whole Torah in its entirety; the rest is commentary: go learn.”
Go.  Learn. 
And, as Plato said, be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.

Krista Lang Blackwood
Director of Cultural Arts
Jewish Community Center of Kansas City