Listen, My Children...

Over-criticism

OxBlog (now in color!) points out a review of Mao that, while justifiably criticizing him, criticizes him poorly:

Here's how: the issue isn't so much that their sum total judgment of Mao is unfair, but rather that they distort or neglect important aspects of both Mao's life and modern Chinese history by describing everything that happens as the result of Mao's evil intentions (and the stupidiy of others who didn't perceive them).

For example, Kristof hits on this point quite well when he observes that

[Mao] is presented as such a bumbling psychopath that it's hard to comprehend how he bested all his rivals to lead China.

Although you'd think that Chang & Halliday would present most other Communists as being almost as evil as Mao, they actually present them as surprisingly naive or even well-intentioned. Even those such as Chang Kuo-t'ao, whom they describe as savvy and ruthless, ultimately wind up making incredibly stupid and suicidal mistakes during their confrontations with Mao.

It's the same thing I once told a flock of bloodthirsty militants over at the Hinduunity.org message boards (ahh, haven't been there in a while...) -- once it starts to sound irrational, your criticism, however justified, will be discarded, ignored, or taken as altogether unjustified and incorrect, which really isn't what you're going for.

(Eh, who blogs on spring break?)

Frustrating Typos

Anyone know what that typo at the end of Chapter 3 in Dorothy Sayers' "Gaudy Night" is supposed to read?  I have a feeling it's supposed to be Greek but just didn't make it through... same with another typo near the end of the book.  So frustrating ... and even in Amazon's "search inside this book" it only draws up the page with the same typo. 

The Modern Memoir

Yet again I am reminded why I love The American Scene.

British Poetry

In the spirit of the "Cholmondeley" poem provided by Mr. Derbyshire awhile back, I present this, from Dorothy Sayers:

There was a young student of Caius
Who passed his exams with a squaius,
     Ere dissecting at St. Bartholomews
     Inward St. Partholomews, such as St. Heartholomews
To discover the cure of disaius.

Book Review: In Our Hearts, We Were Giants

I have been reading a book by that name, the story of a Hungarian Jewish dwarf sibling performing group sent to Auschwitz (can't be too many people that fit that category...).  Whereas You Can't Go Home Again, by Thomas Wolfe, is an exquisitely well-written book with a plot I find not interesting at all (but I keep coming back to, because it's so well-written), this book is poorly written, with repetitive adjectives, poor use of semi-chronological flow, and somewhat too much editorializing for a history book, but has a fascinating subject matter.  I'm generally willing to pick up any WWII books (German / Jewish subject or not) I see at Half Price -- Hitler's Willing Executioners is next on my reading list -- and am not overly picky as to the content; I'll read nearly anything.  There are many interesting parts in this book, aside from the story of the family itself.  I'd never heard the criticism of Israel's use of Holocaust reparations money to purchase military equipment rather than give direct aid to concentration camp survivors, for example.  It did take on a certain tone towards the end, however, a tone I've come across before: everyone is against us, Europe's against us, Israel's against us, nobody gives us enough attention, Holocaust museums are exploiting people's pain, getting to (21st century) Auschwitz by train is wrong, eating there is wrong, talking there is wrong, buying books about it is wrong (this in a book about it), but tearing down the buildings is also wrong, not telling people about it is wrong... in short, nothing that has been done about Auschwitz / Holocaust memorials has been done right, but we have no suggestions for improvement.  (Similarly, one fellow in PBS's Auschwitz panel last spring who said it was wrong to say there were any lessons to be learned from the Shoah, because that would be getting something good out of it.  The rest of the panelists disagreed with him, though, saying you kind of do need to be able to learn from the past.)  I suppose I just prefer constructive people to destructive ones, who provide complaints with no suggestions.

In all, an interesting book; I just wish someone else had written it! 

The More Things Change...

Quote of the day: from Joy Street, by Francis Parkinson Keyes, written 1948, takes place 1938-1944.  Context: a young man is entering a "progressive" law firm that hires lawyers from outside the Boston elite and is discussing it with his elitist in-laws.

    "The firm's now taking in juniors from several different groups that haven't been represented in the leading law firms here in Boston before and --"
    "Dagos! Shanty Irish! Sheenies!"
    "Wops is the more modern term, I think."

History Repeats Itself

I go about looking for a post I wrote on my work at the Ransom Center at UT, and I find this post by Andrea Harris from two years ago. While scanning to see what made it pop up in Google, I think of various responses to the points raised and regret that it's generally not the thing to comment on a two-year-old post. But, regret must be thrown off -- because I'd already made those comments.

Now off to write a review of The Mind of the Maker, which I'd promised someone a month ago, and of which I was just reminded by other comments to that post. Fascinating how things go in circles. Or perhaps, how I go in circles.

A note to editors

If you're given a draft of something, and it has a big note at the top saying, "sorry about the odd random italics, but my printer's strange, and it can be fixed," if you then go mark every single instance of wrong italics in red and write notes next to them, it doesn't really give confidence that you're actually paying attention.

Link of the day

Can the Germans Be Reeducated?

Reasons for disliking authors

Seen on the Chicago Manual of Style's Q&A page:

Q. I have often disliked authors in the habit of introducing a statement with “Firstly” or “Secondly,” and so on. Are there any good rules on this or should it be banished from usage?

A. Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (which Chicago follows) seems just fine with “firstly,” and “secondly.” And according to this discussion at a Random House Web site http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20010629, they are perfectly pedigreed adverbs. So I guess you’ll have to find another reason for disliking authors.