part 2

As promised, I'm providing small reviews of five more books that you may enjoy. However, despite my lengthy justification for it, I'm scrapping my efforts to describe the mood or style of each book after giving the genre. The descriptions weren't really all that useful, now that I look back on them.

6. The World is Flat by Thomas Friedman (Current events, Globalization): There are an awful lot of uninformed generalizations readily proferred in many lay discussions about globalization, outsourcing, computers, and the internet in relation to the economy. Friedman's voluminous work provides a comprehensive, but accessible, explanation of the development and operation of the leveled playing field of 21st century business. Although Friedman's commentary on the current and future merits of this hyper-connected world may not be unassailable, he certainly gives structure to all of the disconnected talk about closing American factories, Indian Dell Help-Line Operators, and the powers of workflow software. Case studies are the main way Friedman presents sometimes complex, abstract concepts of business; some of my favorites were: the development of Apache open-source software, Indian telemarketers, and a start-up data entry business in Cambodia. According to an MBA friend of mine, Friedman's work is required reading for most upper-level business classes. So if nothing else, you'll feel kinda sorta smart reading it.



7. Shake Hands with the Devil by General Romeo Dallaire (Non-fiction): I decided to pick up this book after watching a film by the same name which followed General Dallaire on his return to Rwanda, 10 years after the genocide. While the film is primarily an examination of Dallaire and Rwanda after the genocide, the book is a detailed, day-by-day account of the operations of the U.N. prior to and throughout the genocide. A Canadian commander, Dallaire was in charge of the UNAMIR peacekeeping force, which, unfortunately, failed in its mission due to the inefficiency of the U.N. and apathy of the international community. The book is difficult to read, not because of graphic accounts of genocide--Dallaire mercifully spares us from numerous descriptions of atrocities--but because of the infuriating truth that the mass slaughter could have been prevented. The complacency, and even complicity, of Western nations was criminal.

8. Blink by Malcolm Gladwell (Social Science): By systematically studying intuition, Gladwell manages to incorporate modern and postmodern ideals into his examination of the human ability to know certain things quite confidently with very little information. In some situations, Gladwell proposes, more and more information only confuses the initial and correct suggestion of our instinct. Intuition enables us to make necessarily rapid decisions in everything from war to marriage to art--a few arenas in which he finds case studies. But in other situations, subconscious bias influences intuition in a manner that is destructive and even dangerous. Through understanding the dynamics of our instinct, Gladwell believes that societies and individuals can appropriately impede or release the power of intuition for personal and social betterment.

9. Piece of Cake by Cupcake Brown (Autobiography): There are plenty of autobiographies out there whose authors experienced pasts filled with dysfunction, addiction, and crime. I'm not sure that Cupcake Brown has produced the best of the bunch, but her story is surely one of the most dramatic and fascinating to read. (And, as far as I know, Oprah hasn't called her onto the carpet for any false details either.) Severely abused as a child in a foster care home and on the streets, Cupcake began drinking, using drugs, and prostituting herself before her
12th birthday. Of course, it only got worse from there. Her intelligence and tenacity eventually enabled her to become sober and successful, but most true stories about people with backgrounds like hers--I wish there were no such thing as a background like hers--don't have such pleasant endings.


10. Gang Leader for a Day by Sudhir Venkatesh (Sociology, Social Science): The only reason I decided to pick up a book with such a sensational title was because, well, Stephen Levitt mentioned Venkatesh in his excellent book, Freakonomics (also something you should consider picking up). As a graduate student of sociology at University of Chicago, Venkatesh naively wandered into a dangerous housing project on the South side to survey poor young black men. He had an extended run-in with gang members upon his arrival, but he repeatedly returned to the community and ended up befriending one of the gang's leaders. I found that the most interesting story in the book was not the naive grad. student in the ghetto, but rather the organizational structure of the gang and of life in the Robert Taylor community. Though certainly unpredictable, Venkatesh reveals that survival in the projects is not random, but determined by an alternative infrastructure and code of behavior, rather than the normative systems of mainstream culture.

bookies anonymous

There are two factors that have influenced the number of books that I have read over the last six months. First of all, while I've always enjoyed reading, college didn't really leave me much time to pick up books of my choosing. Even on the rare week that it did, I was tired of reading for class and going back to the library, just for fun, wasn't all that appealing to me. But I slowly accumulated lists of books that I wanted to read once I had the time and the space in my head. Along comes graduation, and I find not only hours here and there to read, but also an intense desire to continue improving my lil' ol' brain.

Secondly, the novelty of my commute on the CTA has worn off. For the first few months, I never brought books with me. I was happy listening to my iPod, looking out the window, watching people, and thinking about life in the abstract. During this period of time, I felt that using public transportation provides enormous potential for fulfilling reflection and even solitude. Even though I still feel this is true, I find I don't have a need for 2 1/2 hours of reflection and solitude every day (the total time I spend in my round-trip commute). Really. I don't. When I started to get bored with my iPod and people watching, I brought along books. Suddenly, I have a 2 1/2 hour block of time that I can use to read. This is a beautiful thing.

So, because of my post-college motivation and the time afforded by my commuting hours, I've gotten to read some great books. If you're looking for a good read, consider one of my ten suggested books that I've read since moving to Chicago. I'm including the first five in this post, the final five in the next. They're in no particular order; don't assume any hierarchy in their placement on the list. After the title, I include both the book's genre and its mood--or, the ideal attitude and desires of the reader as he or she completes the book. Optimistic readers looking for light, humorous fare shouldn't select The Lovely Bones, for example. Incongruities between the book's purposes and style and the reader's mood at the particular time can translate into dissatisfaction of the latter with the former for no other reason than timing. I would hate for anyone to put down a great book and never pick it up again because it didn't compliment the individual's particular reading needs at the time.

1. Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? by Beverly Tatum (Social Science; Detailed, intensive, thought-provoking--not a book that may be consumed quickly): If you're interested in the formation of racial identity, racial tensions, and the complexity of personal and institutional relationships between blacks and whites in post-civil rights movement America, Dr. Tatum's book is an essential and foundational read. She combines her scientific knowledge as a psychologist with her experiences leading racial identity and reconciliation classes; the narratives of some of her students are compelling and the best illustration of the information she presents theoretically.

2. Dubliners by James Joyce (Short Story fiction; brief, unresolved, modern, dramatic, relational, romantic, and literary goodness): The presiding theme of this collection is paralysis, and while Joyce certainly pulls you into the psychological states of these impotent characters, the beauty of the language and the characters' bittersweet reckoning with what is and what could have been won't leave you depressed. His final story, "The Dead," is absolutely magnificent.

3. The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold (Fiction; tragic, suspenseful, intense, and all-absorbing read): Although this novel may certainly be a fast read--I completed it in a day--it's not a light one. Sebold vividly describes the rape and murder of a young girl, the grieving processes of her family members as they attempt to reorder their lives after her death, and the girl's own thoughts as she watches from heaven while her family struggles. A rape victim herself, Sebold is brutally realistic about the possibility of achieving justice or normalcy after such a senseless act.

4. The Devil in the White City by Erik Larson (Non-fiction; mysterious, historical, easy reading with its journalistic prose): Between its details on the 1894 Chicago World's Fair and the horrific psychopath that haunted it, Larson's book is a 20/20 murder special and History Channel documentary combined. What Daniel Burnham and the city of Chicago achieved at the turn of the century with their creation of the White City is fascinating enough; the Devil lurking in his hotel nearby their triumph makes the book difficult to put down. Dr. H.H. Holmes, the unremorseful serial killer and con artist, was little known prior to the publication of this book, but his perversion easily matches that of any modern murderers. It is a necessary read for Chicagoans and any who appreciate accounts of good ol' American innovation, determination, and calculated homicide.

5. God's Politics by Jim Wallis (Current issues and Religion; intense political and religious fare in straightforward language): As I mentioned previously, Wallis' book doesn't entirely fulfill the bipartisan promises on its cover. Wallis does a better job of articulating the perspectives and priorities of Christian progressives than he does question the Democratic party that he is so obviously a part of. However, if you're a dissatisfied conservative, or a member of the Religious Right who would like to understand the Religious Left, I would highly recommend this book. Afraid of adopting any liberal ideologies? Mix with equal parts of Rush Limbaugh.

why so partisan?

On my facebook account, I'm listed as a moderate, and appropriately so. Well, actually no. Perhaps a moderator might be a more apt term to describe the way in which I interact with politics. Though my opinions are not nearly so shifty and poll-dependent as many of our political leaders, I often find that I emphasize conservative issues and counterpoints while with Democrats, and liberal viewpoints while with Republicans. Each group, in its sincerest and most admirable form, should be represented fairly to "the other side." It would be nice to have "the other sides"; here's to wishful thinking. I placate my liberal friends by saying that many Republicans recognize and care about the same problems that they do--conservatives just believe in different solutions. To my conservative family and friends, I expose the policies of death and destruction that our "pro-life" President has so readily implemented during his term--Iraq and torture, for example. Almost everyone I talk to about these kinds of things, by the way, is a person of faith. All sincerely claim to allow their faith to influence their politics, as it should; of course, all are partisan, if not rabidly so.
Because this is a source of frustration to me, I eagerly purchased and devoured (no, not literally, you fool!) Jim Wallis' book God's Politics whose premise has become widely known through the '04 newspaper ads that boldly proclaimed: "God is not a Republican...or a Democrat." It turns out that its premise should have been, at least in my estimation, something like: "Christians can be Democrats too." Wallis slaughters the policies of the Right without mercy, and I found myself agreeing with him a majority of the time. And like any naive believer-of-book-premises, I sat waiting, confidently at first, for him to fulfill the promises of the cover and mercilessly shred the policies of the Left. This time never came. His criticisms of the Democratic party were not really policy related. Apparently the only thing they need to do is juice up their speeches with a little Jesus. If Democrats would only recognize the place of faith within the public arena, within social movements, then, yeah, sure, God would be a Democrat.
I closed Wallis' book a little more liberal and a lot more disillusioned with Christians and politics. Just when I thought I had discovered someone, a movement even, of Christians who weren't interested in partisanship, I just found a minority group who flies under the blue flag.
Now, I understand that when it comes right down to it, we must all choose "a side." When I cast my vote in November, I cannot vote for "neither." And I cannot custom-design a candidate. In the end, we all have to make a definitive, and yes, partisan, decision, based upon which candidate most completely meets our standards in regard to policy, experience, and character.
It is not this that I find most problematic; I'm a realist and try to be pragmatic. Some Christians will vote as Democrats, some as Republicans, unless we get a sweet new viable third party (unlikely)--this is the reality of the world we live in. But I wish that our discussions about politics were markedly non-partisan. There are things that Christians should care about that Democrats don't, and things that Christians should care about that Republicans don't. These issues go beyond merely peppering your policy speeches with religious language. It seems that once good, church-going folk select their party line, they focus on the issues that their party gets right in relation to traditional interpretations of Scripture, and are mostly indifferent to the ones that their party has royally messed up over the years. Why can't Christian Republicans admit the incongruence between the war in Iraq and biblical teaching on war and violence? Why are some so zealous to endorse what we have done there? Why are Christian Republicans uncomfortable about addressing poverty within a political context? Why are Christian Democrats closed to the possibility that a large, socialist government is unsafe and ineffective? That the welfare system may not equal "taking care of the poor"? Why don't any Christians at my liberal church recognize abortion as a significant social, if not political, issue? If our core committment is to the teachings of Christ, Christians should be prepared to discuss and address issues as Jesus people first, Republicans or Democrats second.
Healthier, more honest exchanges about political issues among Christians could result not in landslide victories for one party or another, but actual change in the priorities and policies of our politicians. If Red Christians retreat to one corner clutching their two issues, yelling, "These are the most important!" and Blue Christians go to the other with their two issues shouting the same, we'll get to...well, pretty much where we are right now. Jesus really isn't a Republican or a Democrat, and if we can get past some of the partisanshit, er, you know, and dialogue about all of the issues, regardless of the party line, we might start reaching real solutions.

nothing of note

The past few days I've gotten onto my blog determined to post something new, only to realize that I have nothing in particular to talk about, other than the fact that my Mom and older sister read my blog now. This is a good thing because they are providing me with stable, loyal readership. But this is also potentially a sensitive thing because I would rather not admit all of my imperfections or describe any offensive behavior in writing for them to produce later to my own detriment. Who knows. (And, I'm sure, you don't care.)
Although I'm tired and don't have any new material, I might as well generate another fascinating list for you all to consume. With my rather indolent addiction to composing lists instead of essays, I should probably rename my blog or at least feature a sub-title that pays homage to these ridiculous collections of random fact.

7 quirkiest happenings of late

1. While at the DMV, my application for an IL driver's license was marked with an astigmatism restriction and a desire to be an organ donor, both of which I do not possess. I was fortunate enough to correct the vision mistake, but not the one regarding the use of my organs. After 1 1/2 hours of standing in DMV lines, I decided not to get back in line and to let the chips fall where they may in regard to my organs. Shoot.

2. While in a predominantly African-American neighborhood just West of Wicker Park, a young man threw a piece of fruit at my car as I made a left-hand turn. He was successful in his endeavor to hit it.

3. I am reconsidering my political affiliations.

4. Today, after a snack of toast at the family home of the children whom I babysit, I left nearly half a loaf of Wonderbread on the counter. While I was out of the house, the family dog obtained the bread, shredded the bag, and consumed its contents. I later learned that this was the second loaf of bread he had stolen in that week alone. May the god of dogs have mercy upon his digestive tract.

5. I drank a beer with my grandparents. That's right. My grandparents.

6. Due to the entertainment needs of Bryce and Angelica, I have now adopted a new persona/identity that is known to them as "monkeyman." The monkeyman has yet to be seen by anyone older than 8.

7. I am developing a killer impression of Daniel Plainview in the final scene of There Will Be Blood, sans drool and vodka. "I drink your milkshake...I drink it up!" It is probably the only attention-getting thing I know to do at social gatherings. I need to foster a greater sense of inhibition and dignity.