Book review by Dennis D. McDonald

My parents, near-working-class white-collar workers who came from families damaged by the Great Depression, didn’t think much of Ike. To them Ike represented solid old-style Republicanism. His fiscal austerity regarding pay raises to government workers seemed to fly in the face of the post-World War II economic boom that everyone else was experiencing. I was thus quite interested in reading what Thomas has to say about Ike, having enjoyed his Sea of Thunder so much.

Thomas’ thesis is that Ike kept the world from sliding inexorably into a civilization-ending World War III through deft avoidance of direct conflicts with China and Russia. He makes a good case for this so-called “revisionist” view, but I’m left wondering about the things that aren’t really explored here, questions such as,

• How could the man who led the Allies to victory In Europe and kept the world from perishing in nuclear hellfire have been so reluctant to confront Sen. McCarthy more directly? Thomas discusses McCarthyism but does not really try to get at why Eisenhower was so unwilling to spend political capital opposing him.

• As a military man, why did Ike tolerate the “wild west” behavior of his CIA? Was it because he liked the results, preferred deniability —- or was it because he was so “aloof” he didn’t really know what was going on?

• Did Ike have any sense that his insulation from common people and his circle of millionaire friends would have repercussions on his presidency?

Thomas doesn’t try to answer such questions given the focus of this book on nuclear gamesmanship. That’s understandable but it left me wondering how much credence to give to the overall assessment of Ike. With his emphasis on nuclear war and the “big games” represented by China and Russia, Thomas seems to be re-promoting the “great man” theory of history, given his portrayal of the critical role Eisenhower played in keeping the peace.

Definitely, Eisenhower was one of the key players who, in the vast geopolitical game of nuclear chess in the 1950s, collectively rolled the dice away from Armageddon. Yes, Eisenhower was a key player, but so were outsized egos like Kruschev in their own pushes to obtain total destructive force. Could you then argue that it was the network of all these players acting together that collectively decided not to push the red button? (For me one of the scariest parts of the book is the depth of discussions about using nuclear weapons to help the French at Dien Bien Phu.)

I definitely want to read more about this era and its politics. Obtaining an understanding of the times, and a more complete picture of Eisenhower, requires more attention to domestic issues as well as international. I wonder, for example, what the link is between Eisenhower’s reputation for “aloofness” about domestic issues and the cards-close-to-the-chess nuclear machinations that are Thomas’ theme?

Was he bored with domestic politics and the economy having been involved in saving the world during WWII? Was he not really invested in issues of social and economic justice given his socially isolated upbringing?

Thomas hints at these topics but, frustratingly, this reader was left hanging, despite the great amount of research and interviewing that obviously went into this fascinating book.

Addendum: I really enjoyed Thomas’ extensive Acknowledgements section. I also wonder what Richard Bissel would have said about Thomas’ (negative) characterizations of him?

Book review copyright (c) 2013 by Dennis D. McDonald

Tweet

Book review by Dennis D. McDonald

I enjoyed the story, the characters, the history, and the movement back and forth in time. I also understood the SF and fantasy references. 

I read the book at the suggestion of my daughter who served in the Peace Corps in the rural Dominican Republic. Having visited her there I had some sense of what urban and rural conditions are like in the DR ranging from lush tropics to crowded metropolis. That helped. I was also able to recognize and appreciate the underlying and overt racism that figures throughout the book.

Filming this book as a movie would be a challenge. Lost would be the frequent literary allusions, plus an English-only audience might be put off by the frequent Spanish. While I don’t speak Spanish, the Audible production I listened to was excellent. Interpreting meaning based on context was rarely a problem as Spanish is used frequently throughout the book.

My main impression: everyone has a story and a family history. We should take the time to listen and learn about the people we meet, especially when they come from somewhere else. Until we do that our judgments about them are incomplete. 

Review copyright (c) 2013 by Dennis D. McDonald

Tweet

Book review by Dennis D. McDonald

This book is a meandering and personal exploration of the history and industry surrounding ambergris. It says a lot about the people touched by this odd whale-generated substance that at times has been more valuable than gold. 

In Kemp’s book both history and a personal journey — he makes no bones about his personal obsession to find some ambergris of his own — are intermingled with profiles of ambergris seekers and those involved in the highly specialized and sparsely populated industry that has long existed on the periphery of the perfume industry.

It’s an oddly touching book. The author bounces around modern day buyers and sellers, lone wolf secretive ambergris “prospectors,” whaling museums, and frequent trips to walk along the beach after high tide.  It seems disjointed but is worth a reading if the unusual interests you.

Copyright (c) 2013 by Dennis D. McDonald, Ph.D. Dennis is a Washington DC area consultant specializing in collaborative project management and new technology adoption. His clients have included the US Department of Veterans Affairs, the US Environmental Protection Agency, Jive Software, the National Library of Medicine, the National Academy of Engineering, Social Media Today and Oracle, and the World Bank Group. His experience includes the management of projects involving the conversion or migration of financial and transaction data associated with large and small systems. Contact Dennis via email at ddmcd@yahoo.com or by phone at 703-402-7382.

Tweet

Tweet

Book review by Dennis D. McDonald

I’ve been interested in reading about the human brain ever since a family member had successful brain surgery. Given that my consulting frequently touches on Internet related issues, combining brain- and Internet-related topics in a single book seemed like a “no-brainer” to appeal to my interests.

The theme of this book is that the Internet is at an early stage of development and is not unlike how a child’s brain is also at an early stage of development.

How this relationship plays out in the book was not clear to me. Yes, the concept of “connections” is common to both brain development and the Internet, yet this yields little more than a rather general recommendation that we need to take care of and manage these connections so that they develop in a positive way. That’s nice but the same recommendation could be made without forcing a comparison of the two.

I do admit being impatient with this book, for two reasons.

First, the scientific and technical information presented seem greatly oversimplified, especially the information about the brain. In the past I have found that when technical topics are oversimplified they can become  difficult to understand and susceptible to misinterpretation due to over-use of explanatory similes and metaphors. I think that happens here. A lot of interesting ideas are pursued in only a cursory fashion. (This might also be a function of the shortness of the book.)

Second, the comparison between the developing brain and the Internet is unconvincing, in my opinion. While they both have superficially similar design features related to networking and the fundamental importance of “connections,” their respective circumstances of development and control are very different. With the brain we have millions of years of evolution. With the Internet we have decades of human intervention via electronics and telecommunications.

I’m just not convinced by this book that forcing a comparison of the two is very productive. That said, if you buy the concept of the coming  “singularity,”  perhaps you could eventually make a case for more similarities between the two once the Web achieves a level of self-awareness and autonomy, but that is not really explored here. Till that happens I’ll continue to believe that science has only scratched the surface of how the brain operates. We still have a huge amount to learn about how to heal the brain or to influence its development.

Postscript

This is a “TED book” issued as an e-book. These are short books issued every two weeks and are usually under 20,000 words in length. The TED Books web site is here. Is the TED brand being overextended through too many outlets? Based on this book perhaps that is the case. Alternately, perhaps just too much is being attempted here in just too short a form. Still, this book does give the reader a lot to chew on and an eclectic bibliography is supplied at the end.

For more of my “science” book reviews go here.

Copyright (c) 2012 by Dennis D. McDonald, Ph.D. Dennis is a Washington DC area consultant specializing in collaborative project management and new technology adoption. His clients have included the US Department of Veterans Affairs, the US Environmental Protection Agency, Jive Software, the National Library of Medicine, the National Academy of Engineering, Social Media Today and Oracle, and the World Bank Group. His experience includes the management of projects involving the conversion or migration of financial and transaction data associated with large systems. Contact Dennis via email at ddmcd@yahoo.com or by phone at 703-402-7382.Tweet

Book Review by Dennis D. McDonald

The Audible download of this book became a slog after a while. I kept with it since it is very educational. Sacks’ last few books have been somewhat disappointing to me. This one seemed to ramble a bit too much. What it was lacking, I think, is a theory or model to tie together the different hallucinations discussed in the book. Recognizing the similarity and differences among the different hallucinations discussed in the different chapters is a bit of work, especially when you are listening and not easily able to page back and forth.

That said, the overall effect is to make the reader realize the commonness of different forms of hallucination and how many more people than expected may be experiencing the types of things discussed in the book. Sacks does weave science, literature, and observation together in a very entertaining way. I am left with a desire to read more in order to better understand some of the scientific issues he touches on. 

My fundamental takeaway: paying attention to what you are paying attention to is something you should probably do more of. Asking yourself the question, “How do I know what I just heard/saw/tested/smelled is real?” seems like a good question to ask. Many things happen between the time something is sensed and the time you consciously become aware of it. Understanding more about such processes should help to answer the question, “How do we know what we know?” So in that respect this book is quite good and quite accessible at the same time, even though it seems a bit overlong.

The narrator of the book I downloaded from Audible is adequate. I didn’t enjoy the attempts at non-English accents which sounded amateurish at times.

Review copyright (c) 2012 by Dennis D. McDonald, Ph.D. Dennis is a Washington DC area consultant specializing in collaborative project management and new technology adoption. His clients have included the US Department of Veterans Affairs, the US Environmental Protection Agency, Jive Software, the National Library of Medicine, the National Academy of Engineering, Social Media Today and Oracle, and the World Bank Group. His experience includes the management of projects involving the conversion or migration of financial and transaction data associated with large public systems. Contact Dennis via email at ddmcd@yahoo.com or by phone at 703-402-7382.

Book Review by Dennis D. McDonald

I haven’t tried to read anything by King in over 20 years. The last time I tried I found his writing to be pedestrian and uninteresting.

UNDER THE DOME is different. I fell into reading this 2009 novel almost by accident and got hooked quickly. I vaguely remembered that Roger Ebert liked it, and that counted for my interest, I think.

It’s a splendid tale. It’s down to earth, funny in parts, but regularly just plain scary. The flashes of violence and cruelty are unsettling. The everyday physical details are well placed. There were almost too many characters to keep track of, but I got used to that. The main characters stood out and that’s what’s important.

Seeing how a small town can descend into chaos and savagery is tough to watch. Identification with the characters is important as a way to get through the tough parts. 

I don’t think the female characters are s well fleshed out as the males. I see the basic personality outlines and sense that King develops a directory of characters along with their physical and psychological traits, then refers to this repeatedly as he writes. The women, young and old, just seem a bit stereotypical to me.

That said, I am in awe of the storytelling here and the management of plot threads. King builds the main characters bit by bit and we see into their souls — the males, for the most part. The total experience is gripping, original, and awful to contemplate.

Review copyright (c) 2012 by Dennis D. McDonald

I bought this at my local birding store on Fern Street, One Good Tern, here in Alexandria VA. I figured if they only carried one insect guide it would be the one they thought best, and I was right. I had read all the field-guide-to-insect book reviews and had come away totally confused.

Everyone admits right from the start that you can’t possible cover all North American insects in a single portable volume so I was expecting great selectivity in whatever I chose. This one is very easy to use and to browse, and it’s packed with useful information about insect groups.

My only complaint: I’ve become spoiled by the quality of images on my iPhone 4S and I take and post a lot of nature photographs. The color illustrations in this book are good but lack the detail of a high-quality digital display. But overall this is a great field guide.

• Review copyright (c) 2012 by Dennis D. McDonald
• This review also posted here on “GoodReads”: Kaufman Field Guide to Insects of North America by Eric R. Eaton
• View all my GoodReads reviews

This book addresses all aspects of death from the vantage point of the U.S. War Between the States, a massive orgy of carnage that took place on U.S. soil between 1861 and 1865.

The causes of the war are not the focus here, nor are the long-term results. While the author speculates on how the War changed our national view of death and war itself, her primary focus is the direct impact of death on soldiers, their families and communities, and the institutions of  the day including organized religion, spiritualism, fashion (!), undertaking, veterans’ care, medicine, and literature.

The author’s focus ranges from the particular (e.g., family members haunting battlefields to locate and retrieve the corpses of loved ones) to the general (e.g., how such massive horror was viewed and to some extent justified by the organized religions of the time).

The author quotes liberally from personal letters and contemporary newspaper accounts. Some stories are clearly heartbreaking, as in the desperate attempts by some volunteers to communicate circumstances of battlefield deaths to family members in search of closure. Some details are shocking, as in the treatment of by some Southerners of post-war Northern attempts to organize and create dignified grave sites before Spring plowing on former battlefields would forever disrupt human remains.

Hovering over all is the massive scale of death and destruction visited by the War. Post-battle piles of corpses, amputated limbs, and the stench of decaying humans and animals still appall us but in those days were new to agrarian economies familiar only with community militias that were being introduced to rapid developments in previously unavailable weapons and technologies.

I do know one thing: after reading this book I don’t think I’ll ever be able to watch a Civil War battle re-enactment with any sort of detached amusement or, heaven forbid, nostalgia.

Review copyright (c) 2012 by Dennis D. McDonald, Alexandria, Virginia.

I have also published this review on Goodreads here: This Republic of Suffering: Death and the American Civil War by Drew Gilpin Faust
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

In the mood to read something scary? This book will make your hair stand on end.

The author describes the end of the Cold War from the perspective of the US and Soviet/Russian efforts to reduce and/or eliminate nuclear and biological/chemical weapons.

The degree of detail is awesome and reflects declassified documents as well as many interviews with individuals from both East and West who were personally involved in negotiation and inspection efforts on both sides.

This book is convincing evidence of the ability of humans to contemplate doing evil things in the name of country and self preservation. In that sense the Soviets/Russians get the short end of the stick given how they hid and repeatedly lied about their biological war developments even after promising to dismantle them.

Reagan is given his due for contemplating nuclear disarmament but as the story plays out we are made aware of his administration’s many missed opportunities in the face of Gorbachev’s surprising initiatives. We are also made acutely aware of how rotten the Soviet economy was due to poor planning and the seemingly endless resources being devoted to warfare and defense activities.

Gorbachev is given  great deal of attention as realizing the rottenness of the Soviet system and the need for reform, starting with reductions in the insane amounts of money being spent on redundant weaponry.

One thing this book made me realize is how little attention we members of the “public” devote to understanding the profound issues our government has to wrestle with. Hoffman gives credit where credit is due in identifying the contributions individual legislators, bureaucrats, and Soviet defectors made to taking necessary actions to reduce the dangers from nuclear and biological weapons.

He also points out the value of the personal relationships developed between scientists from East and West in reducing mistrust and the veil of secrecy the Russians maintained long after the Soviet Union crumbled. The current crop of conservative “government is bad” sentiments promoted by so many US politicians is a slap in the face of the many people, some of who are named and credited clearly by this book, who day in and day out promote the interests of the American people by engaging with difficult issues outside the U.S.

Another impression this book leaves the reader with is perhaps the most disquieting of all: what has happened to all the nuclear and biological weapons and resources developed and stockpiled by the Soviet Union that were so poorly protected and accounted for before its collapse? The few instances of Iranian attempts to gain access to Soviet technology and expertise suggest that there must to this day be much much more going on regarding anti proliferation efforts that are rarely reported on by the media. We need to pay more attention to these efforts given the scariness of what small amounts of fiissionable or bio-war materials could do in the wrong hands.

Review copyright (c) 2012 by Dennis D. McDonald

I’ve done a lot of reading about WWII and aircraft history. I approached this audiobook — borrowed from the Alexandria Public Library and downloaded to my iPhone — thinking it was probably going to go over some familiar ground. It does, but there’s a good enough mix of strategic and tactical detail to keep this armchair historian interested.

The author provides a very good overview of the role of aircraft in bludgeoning Japan into submission. While never minimizing the role of seapower in strangling Japan’s WWII economy, Stillman documents Allied land and sea originated air war efforts, the centerpiece being the role of the Boeing B-29.

The mechanical failings of this aircraft and its initial ineffective utilization from China for high altitude bombing are succinctly documented, as are the increasingly effective tactics of moving to lower altitude incendiary bombing under the guidance of LeMay. Eyewitness accounts from land and air are woven throughout the text in just the right amount to balance the strategic context being provided.

This is not an elegantly written book, but it is a good introduction to understanding what happened as the Allies turned their attention to Japan. As with other books such as Max Hastings’ RETRIBUTION: THE BATTLE FOR JAPAN, 1944-45, I was again amazed at the scale of what went on during that war. Overnight tens of thousands of civilians were incinerated as, literally, hundreds of bombers flew overhead, buffeted by evil smelling fiery updrafts from square miles of cities in flame. It’s difficult to comprehend from this point in history. That’s enough of a reason to make sure books like this are available.

Book review copyright (c) 2012 by Dennis D. McDonald

Hastings tells the story of the final year of the Pacific War from multiple perspectives. Much of this will be new to people whose awareness of Chinese, British, and Russian action against the Japanese is low.

For me two factors stand out.

First, Hastings is unflinching in his portrayal of Japanese militarism and its responsibility for so much suffering among both its enemies and the Japanese people themselves. Hastings details the brutality of Japan in dealing with both military and civilian opponents. His description of the self deception and inaction on the part of the Japanese government, maintained long after logic had determined the war was unwinnable, represents one of the most criminal behaviors ever committed by a government against its people.

Second, reading this book one cannot help but be impressed and ultimately horrified by the sheer size and scale of the War in the Pacific. Also true of the war in Europe and on the Eastern Front between Germany and Russia, the scope of people, casualties, distances, equipment, hardware, and supplies involved is simply staggering for those of us who have grown up with more “limited” wars.

Dealing with this scale were people who brought with them all their own naturals strengths and weaknesses. Some rose to greatness; others blundered. Hastings is especially tough on Chiang Kai-shek of China and Douglas MacArthur of the US military and describes how they put their own political  interests ahead of the interests of their own people and of winning the war. Regarding Chiang, Hastings repeatedly accuses Roosevelt of naivete in his dealings with Chiang and China. Regarding MacArthur, Hastings is a bit less clear about why MacArthur’s superiors tolerated his megalomania and seems to suggest it was due to his superior intelligence and salesmanship, not to his military performance.

This is a great book and is well worth the time it takes to read it. 

Copyright (c) 2012 by Dennis D. McDonald

This book covers the development of British science from the time of Cook’s famous voyage (which stopped at Tahiti) up to Darwin’s Beagle voyage. It concentrates on a few key luminaries (the Herschels, Davy, Mungo Park, Faraday, Banks) and at the same time explores  the relationship, sometimes synergistic, between art and science.

The author does much more than recite famous findings and mythical “Eureka!” moments. Instead, he interweaves tales of the plodding nature of experimentation and observation with personal relationships, societal developments, thoughts about religion, personal rivalries, and the clear advantages that moneyed upper classes had in pursuing scientific work. Still, he never loses sight of the science. The tales of William and Caroline Herschel’s astronomical work is especially enthralling.

Also fascinating is the negative perspective of the dangers of science as represented by Mary Shelley’ Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. The much-accepted intermingling of science, art, and literature addressed in this section is quite telling and makes one wonder why there is not more cross-fertilization today. Or perhaps it would be more correct to say that there actually is more intermingling of art and science today than ever before simply because the tools of creation are so technologically dependent.

Review copyright (c) 2011 by Dennis D. McDonald

Book review by Dennis D. McDonald

Why I liked this book:

1. Every page contains something new (to me).
2. Many chapters include historical information about how our knowledge of the sun has grown over the ages.
3. There are several exciting examples where advances in one field have impacted advances in other fields (e.g., spectroscopy and understanding solar composition).

At a profound level this book readably demonstrates human intelligence and creativity at their best. Berman’s historical approach highlights how our current understanding of the sun has grown over time despite the often primitive nature of instrumentation and computation technology. I guess the combination of creativity + discipline + data + imagination is hard to beat, whether you live in the 21st Century or the 17th.

One more thing: Reading this book makes me look forward to June 6, 2012.

Book review copyright (c) 2011 by Dennis D. McDonald

Tweet

Book review by Dennis D. McDonald

This is the third or fourth Joe Pickett novel I’ve read. It’s not one of the best. There are the deft characterizations, interesting sub-plots, recognizable real world family relationships, and realistic depictions of Wyoming’s landscape. But this time the plot machinations are too visible and the denouement comes with a courtroom surprise worthy of an old Perry Mason TV show. (I’d be interested in hearing the discussion that took place between Box and his editors about whether or not to actually mention the name “Perry Mason” in the text.)

Intermixed are political swipes at the Federal government and its energy policies and constant disdain for fake cowboys and transplants seeking to make it in Wyoming. (People dependent on tourism are always disdainful of the people who bring money into the area, it seems.)

All in all, I like reading these novels. Having visited this area with my family I think it’s one of the most beautiful places on earth and the folks are great. Box describes that beauty, its wildlife, and its residents with uncanny flair. But there’s just too much going on in this novel that makes me think that, having plotted out the book on a whiteboard, he ended up with a tangled area on the right hand side that he couldn’t resolve without introducing one too many coincidences. But on the positive side he doesn’t put Pickett’s family in danger again, which is something I appreciate.

Copyright (c) 2011 by Dennis D. McDonald

In the U.S. edition it’s spelled “Agincourt.”Nick Hook is an archer in Henry V’s army. The events in this novel go from 1413 to 1415 and follow Hook as Henry’s army invades France to assert his claim to the French throne.

Hook is not a nobleman, he’s a small town boy, a  peasant, and he regularly suffers — and metes out — the indignities of his low position. But he’s raised from childhood to learn the longbow — and Henry needs archers. 

How Nick finds himself in the army, how his family’s feud with another local family follows him to France, and how both the good and the evil of the Church at that time assault him or help him, all culminate on the killing fields of Azincourt in France. There Henry’s army wins an incredible victory based on luck, cunning strategy — and archery.

Real life events are intertwined with the novel and the author provides an afterword where he describes where he has strayed from history. We get a lot of detail about food, armor, weapons, arrows, armor, siege warfare, mud, and the carnage of medieval warfare.

We also have a variety of characters included who don’t always come off as convincing or real. The author’s strong suit is not characterization, it’s telling a story with a lot of detail and action as realistically as possible. He succeeds in that, even though his writing style is not what I would call colorful or artistic. His meat-and-potatoes writing style gets the job done in a clear and action oriented fashion.

Overall I enjoyed this novel greatly even through the scenes of warfare tend to drag on. But the reality and grittiness of an exceptionally famous military campaign from the perspective of a footsoldier is told splendidly.

Review copyright (c) 2011 by Dennis D. McDonald