the cruel stars of the night

I just finished Kjell Eriksson's latest novel to be translated from Swedish into English and absolutely loved it for a number of reasons. There's a sense of realism to the books which appeals to me. First, as is the case with the series by John Sandford and Ian Rankin, the books is firmly rooted in a place that the author takes pains to make you experience. Though I've never visited Sweden, I can feel the October frost and see the beech trees along with the protagonist, Ann Lindell. Just as care is taken to connect her to the land so is she shown to be part of a very real, changing, social network.

Another reason why I can't stop thinking about the novel is the way in which geography and psychology come together. I feel as if I'm caught in the subtle current of a quiet, dark sea when reading. I don't necessarily know where the narrative will take me, but I want to continue to go with the flow. There's a rhythm to the novel which is different from that of other crime thrillers.

Finally, I enjoy reading a book with middle aged women at its center that cannot be classified as "chick lit." The narrative alternates between the perspectives of two smart, vulnerable and lonely women. The outcomes of their emotional struggles are very different but they are equally compelling.

The Princess of Burundi was Eriksson's last Lindell work translated in English. It's also excellent. The next one, The Demon of Dakar, will be released in April of 2008.

Very cool video from The Kills

Moral Sense

Today I was listening to my favorite history professor, Thomas Laqueur compare the holocaust to other "cleansing" events such as genocide and massacres.  He briefly discussed the atrocities committed by people in the name of country, race and religion.    Typically, I'll shake my head and wonder how people could commit such heinous acts.  But, today, I began reading an article in the NYT magazine by Steven Pinker on "The Moral Instinct" and I was reminded what I think is truly astonishing:  The vast majority of people behave decently and often admirably.  Truly morally repugnant behavior is the exception and not the rule.

In the article, Pinker discusses the science of morality.   Studies have lent credence to the existence of a universal moral grammar.  One argument goes that our principles center on certain moral spheres: harm, fairness, community, authority and purity.    Differences in behavior among cultures can be explained by differences in the way that the spheres are privileged.  Some cultures, for example, privilege fairness over community.  

I find the idea of a moral "sense" very appealing, that being moral is being reasonable.  Pinker points to Peter Singer's theory of the Expanding Circle--"the optimistic proposal that our moral sense , though shaped by evolution to overvalue itself, kin and clan, can propel us on a path of moral progress, as our reasoning forces us to generalize it to larger and larger circles of sentient beings."

It's important to reason that our moral sense can easily become muddled.   Genocide, the holocaust and massacres have been committed by people who consider their actions moral. As Pinker points out, we tend to moralize issues and then shut down discussion based on our feelings of moral repugnance.   But I remain hopeful that science will continue to shed light on the complex mechanisms that run humans and we will actually achieve some kind of moral progress.

 

Anxiety of Influence on the Web

Time and time again,  I've felt inadequate in the face of those who've had more experience or seem to have more talent.   And it's made me question my purpose to such an extent that I've abandoned my goals.    With so much information available now through the Web,  that anxiety has intensified.   All you need to do is google your speciality to find thousands of others who've been practicing that speciality longer and, seemingly, better than you.  

I guess it's the ease by which the internet allows us to connect with others that awakens one set of anxieties at the same time as it alleviates others.    Thanks to search engines, social networking, and other tools, people can find others who share their passions, background and skill.  The internet can ease feelings of isolation.  At the same, it's much harder to feel unique. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why people seem so desperate to become celebrities.  They don't feel that they can achieve any goals which would set them apart because it's all already been done.

history wth iTunes

Listening to Professor Thomas Laqueur's survey of Modern Europe through iTunes University has reminded me of how important it is to remember the past.    Time and time again, rulers have acted without regard for the past with dire results. (Just think of how partitioning northern Africa has led to political strife. ) At the same time, clinging to the past fuels the fire of endless wars.  So how can people remember without resentment?  How do people respect the past and learn from it rather than stew over it.

reelgeezers and andrew olmsted

Check out Reelgeezers on YouTube.   They are 80-something industry insiders who offer reviews of current movies.  What a pleasure it is to enjoy the chemistry between the two of them while they offer their insights.  

On another note, I teared up when I read the final entry on Andrew Olmsted's blog.  His story hit all the major news forums todays.  He's the military blogger whose friend posted his final words after his death.   

I know that much has been written downplaying the web's ability to bring people together, but it never ceases to amaze me how many lives unfold on my computer screen.  No wonder people feel they have to blog.  It's a way of weaving a story using all the narrative threads available now.

MortgageBasics