What Would the Founders Think?

What would our founding fathers think of today, Election Day 2012? Author Ron Chernow talks about it:

Washington did take public opinion into account. In fact, during his first term as president he made a tour of the Northern states and a tour of the Southern states because he wanted to hear what people had to say about the Constitution and the new government. So, he wasn’t oblivious to public opinion, but it wasn’t a situation where you had poll numbers on an almost hourly basis that you’re consulting.



People might disagree with him, and they certainly did, but they never felt that they would be betrayed by him. There was an extraordinary sense with all of the early presidents of authenticity, that is, what you saw was what you got. These were not people capable of that kind of guile. That mystic bond I don’t sense with either Obama or Romney.

Author Jon Meacham also answered the question what Jefferson would think about modern elections: “Let’s stipulate that this is an unknowable question. That said, Jefferson loved big political fights, and while he often said he disliked controversy, in many ways political strife was the air he breathed. So he’d enjoy this dash to the finish.”

Sound of Blood, by Lawrence De Maria

I’m half ready to become a big fan of Lawrence De Maria just on the basis of having read Sound of Blood. The other half is ready to cast him into utter darkness for a couple mistakes that seemed to me bush league.

The story concerns Jake Scarne, a New York private eye with military and police experience. Jake is no Philip Marlowe, smoking a lonely cigarette in a seedy office. Jake recently moved into the big leagues. He has a nice office, a beautiful secretary, an expensive apartment, and a babe-magnet car. He’s approached by a wealthy man named Sheldon Shields, who believes his son Josh has been murdered. Josh was a reporter working on a story about a mysterious Australian business tycoon, Victor Ballantrae. Jake’s investigations lead him into a world of corruption, violence, and sex. They also introduce him to Alana Loeb, Ballantrae’s associate, a beautiful, seductive, dangerous, yet strangely sympathetic character. Continue reading Sound of Blood, by Lawrence De Maria

Feedback for the Professor

From the Bulletin of the New York C.S. Lewis Society’s July/August 2012 issue: In an article entitled “Between Friends,” Pastor Mark Koonz provides extracts from reminiscences by George Sayer (who wrote the Lewis biography, Jack), in which he recounts a visit by J.R.R. Tolkien to his home in the summer of 1952. Tolkien was depressed, having had his The Lord of the Rings manuscript rejected by several publishers.

To entertain him in the evening I produced a tape recorder (a solid early Ferrograph that is still going strong). He had never seen one before and said whimsically that he ought to cast out any devil that might be in it by recording a prayer, the Lord’s Prayer in Gothic, one of the extinct languages of which he was a master.

He was delighted when I played it back to him and asked if he might record some of the poems in The Lord of the Rings to find out how they sounded to other people. The more he recorded, the more he enjoyed recording and the more his literary self-confidence grew. Continue reading Feedback for the Professor

Poetry and Memorization

Professor Hunter Bakers writes, “It is interesting to read about education in the 19th century. One encounters a former emphasis on memorization and recitation. I suppose that method is considered inadequate now and we have moved well past it.”

I think memorizing is important. It’s recommended in the Trivium at early ages, because kids like to rattle off quotes. They are little parrots at that age.

77 Shadow Street, by Dean Koontz

One thing that can be said for Dean Koontz is that he likes to mix it up. His characters may tend to look similar (as what author’s don’t?), but he likes to experiment with his stories. 77 Shadow Street, I think, is unusual among his books in featuring quite a large cast of characters and constantly jumping the point of view from one to another. I wish I could say I thought the experiment was a great success, but I wouldn’t call it a total failure either.

77 Shadow Street is the address of an exclusive residential apartment building, something like the Dakota in Manhattan, home to a number of wealthy and/or famous people. They include a drunken ex-senator, a stock broker with military experience, a single mother who writes hit country songs, a female novelist raising an autistic daughter, a retired lawyer, a working hit man, a famous geneticist, and others. When they first begin to notice strange phenomena in their building—lights, vibrations, and strangers appearing and disappearing in antique clothing—they aren’t alarmed at first. Until the whole building is transported into a future time where the world is depopulated and strange life forms stalk the hallways, intent on turning them all into something other than human. Continue reading 77 Shadow Street, by Dean Koontz

Reformation Day, 2012

Personal note: I told you a while back that the Viking Age Club and Society of the Sons of Norway, my reenactment group, was being considered as the subject of a reality TV show. We got the final word today that the production company has not been able to find a buyer for the project. So that’s that.

I told another member a while back that my feelings on the whole thing were mixed. For my own sake, I’d like it to happen so I’d get exposure for my novels. But for the sake of the young people in our group (and we have a fair number now), I hoped it wouldn’t happen. Because fame in your youth is one of the worst disasters that can happen to you.

All for the best, then.

Today is Reformation Day, so as the Lutheran caucus of this blog, I think I ought to say something about it.

I direct you to this post at Anthony Sacramone’s Strange Herring blog, if you have a taste for tall grass theology. Anthony is underappreciated as a theologian, and I think he nails the point of the discussion.

In overview:

It starts with a link to a post from Russell Saltzman, a Lutheran pastor, over at First Things. He considers a recent article by Carl Braaten, a noted theologian of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. Braaten sees no reason why Lutherans should not be allowed to commune in Roman Catholic churches, giving a long list of things that Lutherans and Catholics now agree on. Saltzman, taking exception, points out that women’s ordination is a serious and sufficient disagreement.

Then, in the comments, a Catholic priest points out further, more fundamental differences in how Lutherans and Catholics understand the very nature of the church.

Finally, Anthony himself notes that all this still misses the point. He expounds a number of differences from the Lutheran point of view. Especially in terms of the doctrine of justification.

I agree with him entirely.

But what amazes me is that, as a conservative Lutheran, I even agree with the Catholic priest far more than with the ELCA theologian. I far prefer an honorable opponent to a shifty ally.

I think Luther would have agreed.

Many Literary Critics Are Vampires

Columnist Ruth Dudley Edwards joined a panel discussion on Bram Stoker’s Dracula and was reminded what she hates about the fruitcakes who populate many humanities departments. “Now, it’s not that I don’t know that the wilder fringes of academia are populated by the ignorant, mad or just silly: indeed several of my crime novels are savage about the lunacies of humanities departments. But every time I revisit that world it’s the sheer stupidity and tunnel vision that gets me cross.” (via Books, Inq.)

Netflix review: “The Last Detective”

One of our commenters, a while back, mentioned The Last Detective, a British semi-comic TV series starring Peter Davison, whom many readers will remember from All Creatures Great and Small, and as the first youthful Doctor Who. (Personally I liked him best as Mr. Campion, but that series didn’t last long.) Our commenter found the show depressing. I can understand this. However, I stayed with it and found things to like as well, though I can’t say I loved it all in all. The program is based on a series of detective novels by Leslie Thomas.

Detective Constable “Dangerous” Davies (his first name is never divulged) works out of a police station in Willesden, a North London suburb. His nickname is one of those antonymic male jokes, as in “Little John.” He is a laughingstock in the force. His superior, Inspector Aspinall, explains in the first episode that Davies is “the last detective” he will ever send on an important job. Apparently he testified against some other officer in an unspecified matter, and has been reduced in rank.

His personal life, which takes up a lot of screen time, is also a mess. He’s separated from his wife Julie, whom he adores, and lives in rental lodgings with an eccentric landlady in the first season. He spends most of his free time with his Irish friend Mod, who flits from job to job to unemployment, and reads a lot, generally coming to all the wrong conclusions.

Dangerous Davies is intended, it appears, to be a counterpoint to all those suave, omnicompetent TV detectives we see in other series. Davies has a life more like yours and mine, and the writers spare him none of those little indignities so richly distributed by life. Each episode opens with a short vignette in which he tries to do his job in a decent way, and gets rewarded with mud, torn clothing, personal injury, or public humiliation. He turns his eyes to heaven and carries on.

The series has an inherent weakness, I think, in the fact that it’s clear that Davies is not only a very competent cop, but the only non-idiot on the squad. Again and again he figures out the puzzle, but his reputation never seems to rise. (In one episode he actually takes responsibility for one of Insp. Aspinall’s errors, saving him a demotion, but even that doesn’t seem to buy him much.)

I think you could work out a Christian message in this. Davies is a man with a servant heart, who dies to himself daily and expects no reward for good work. Still, it’s kind of aggravating in the aggregate.

I thought the final, fourth season was the weakest, and it was probably time to draw the curtain on it. One positive development in Davies’ personal life was gratifying, but the writers seemed to be running out of ideas. One episode in particular, in which Mod got involved with a beautiful young Russian woman (that’s the sort of thing that TV writers love to invent, although it’s deadly to credibility) involved the series’ only moment of nudity (that I recall). Also, in another episode, Davies makes a “brilliant” suggestion to the forensic technicians which, I believe, ought to have been one of the first things they’d checked for.

The series is mostly unobjectionable, all in all. But if you’re prone to depression you might want to look for cheerier fare than this dark comedy.

Carrying Seedlings in a Bucket

Tree Seedlings

Andrew Peterson talks about discovering a poem by Wendell Berry. “Just a few days ago my kind neighbor Tommy gave me permission to harvest a few maple seedlings from his property and I spent an afternoon replanting them around the Warren with these same hopes for the blessing they might be to my children’s children. Once again, the sage words of the Mad Farmer gave me a clear picture of what it means for us to be keepers of his creation, standing amidst a breadth of old beauty that we didn’t ask for and don’t deserve.”

Skipping Around the Bible

Kathy Keller, wife of New York pastor and author Tim Keller, reviews Rachel Held Evans’ new book, A Year of Biblical Womanhood: How a Liberated Woman Found Herself Sitting on Her Roof, Covering Her Head, and Calling Her Husband “Master”, asking some hard questions about the book’s intent. Keller writes, “Evans wants to show that everyone who tries to follow biblical norms does so selectively—’cherry picking’ some parts and passing over others. She also says she wants to open a fresh, honest dialogue about biblical interpretation, that is, how to do it rightly and well.” But Evans apparently cherry-picks on her own, some of it for humor’s sake, some of it seriously.

See many positive reviews on Amazon.