Not posting

This is not a post. This is just a filler to substitute for a post.

The weather today turned out to be both rain and snow. Precipitation full of ambivalence. The radio advises me to take about twice the time I’d ordinarily plan for any travel tonight.

On the bright side, the flight is delayed. (No, it’s not on American. Bet the plane’s full of bumped American passengers, though.)

This has all the earmarks of a night in which I may not get to bed at all.

Dissing Stein and Missing the Point

Elsewhere on Britannica’s blog some folks are criticizing Ben Stein’s movie, Expelled, in context of an essay Stein wrote for the Expelled website. Robert McHenry writes:

“Darwinism . . . is a perfect example of the age from which it came: the age of Imperialism” [Stein says.]

And therefore . . . Well, he doesn’t say. This is called an enthymeme, or a rhetorical syllogism. The idea is that the conclusion gains force from seeming to occur spontaneously to the reader. This is the sort of thing that gives rhetoric a bad name.

But why isn’t “Darwinism” offered as a perfect example of, say, the Victorian Age? Or of the Steam Age? Or the Age of the Clipper Ship? Is it possible that Stein is loading the argument just a tad?

A little bit later he tells us that “Imperialism had a short but hideous history – of repression and murder.” He seems to think that the British, and specifically the Victorians, invented imperialism. This idea would surprise the Incas and the Arabs and the Spanish and the Portuguese, among others around the world. He seems also to believe that the results of European imperialism were uniformly terrible. Some were, some were not.

Somehow, I think McHenry is missing the point. Between the first quote and the second, Stein explains the therefore McHenry asks for. Stein writes:

But it fell to a true Imperialist, from a wealthy British family on both sides, married to a wealthy British woman, writing at the height of Imperialism in the UK, when a huge hunk of Africa and Asia was “owned” (literally, owned, by Great Britain) to create a scientific theory that rationalized Imperialism. By explaining that Imperialism worked from the level of the most modest organic life up to man, and that in every organic situation, the strong dominated the weak and eventually wiped them out, Darwin offered the most compelling argument yet for Imperialism. It was neither good nor bad, neither Liberal nor Conservative, but simply a fact of nature. In dominating Africa and Asia, Britain was simply acting in accordance with the dictates of life itself.

There’s a long comment thread after both essays.

Folks Still Read

Writers on Britannica’s blog are still talking about newspapers, and Colette Bancroft says Internet readers aren’t as shallow as some make them out to be.

People use the Net for a lot of silly things, but they also make serious use of it (here you are reading an encyclopedia’s blog). Remember all the dire warnings back in the ‘90s that the Net meant the death of reading? So, what do people do online? Many things, but mostly, they read. And they write. Boy, do they write. In blogs and forums and chat rooms, they pour out the words.

She goes on to mention rising interest in books and declining book coverage in newspapers.

Disney Is Kicking Up Production

Over the next four years, Disney plans to release 10 animated movies, 8 of which will be in digital 3-D. Coming up will be two princess movies, two sequels to Pixar films, what looks like an Underdog take-off, and one based on a Phillip K. Dick story.

Tags: , ,

From the Corner of His Eye, by Dean Koontz

Be easy in your ceaseless care for me. I got my walk in tonight. It looks to be the only one I’ll get this week, but it’s something. The temperature was tolerable, if I bundled up, and enough sun filtered through the light clouds to give me a diaphanous shadow.

Tomorrow night it’s supposed to rain. In any case, I’ll be running to the airport to pick up Moloch and his wife, back from China.

Which means that it’s just possible, if I hear that traffic’s bad, that I’ll skip posting altogether.

Steel yourselves. I know you can survive it.

I promise I’m not going to review every Dean Koontz novel I read, as I go through them alphabetically.

But I’m going to review the really outstanding ones. And From the Corner of His Eye definitely qualifies.

I suppose it’s possible that Koontz could produce a better novel than this. I haven’t read them all yet. But at this point I can’t imagine a better one.

This is a big, sprawling book that covers a long period of time, kind of like those Victorian novels I’ve never read, by Thackeray and Trollope.

And it’s populated by a remarkable cast of quirky, fascinating characters worthy of Charles Dickens.

And it’s built on a Sci Fi/Supernatural premise, like… well, like a Dean Koontz book.

The blurb on the inside page of the paperback is misleading. It makes it sound as if this is the story of Bartholomew Lampion. Bartholomew is certainly a central character, but he’s a baby for half the book. The story is actually about a whole network of people, all bound together by the strange effects of a radio sermon called, “This Momentous Day.”

The story begins in January, 1965. First of all (though not first in the narrative), in Oregon, a narcissistic sociopath named Enoch Cain murders his beautiful, loving wife. The next day, in two places in California, two babies are born—a boy and a girl—in circumstances of extreme family tragedy. Nevertheless each child finds a loving home and shows early signs of being a prodigy.

But Enoch Cain is out there, and he has become aware that there’s a child who he believes is a danger to him. He grows obsessed with finding that child and killing him.

Cain is an interesting character. He’s evil and does horrible things that cause great pain to people the reader has come to care for. Nevertheless, Koontz treats him to a large degree as a comic figure (he explains his rationale for this through one of his characters in the course of the book). Cain thinks he’s a genius, a connoisseur, and God’s gift to women, but in fact he’s not particularly bright, likes only the things critics tell him to like, and most people who meet him find him rather creepy. He’s blissfully unaware of this. Also his suppressed conscience expresses itself forcefully in some painful and embarrassing physical reaction, every time he commits a murder.

As the plot works itself out, and all the characters come to know one another, we observe the working out of Koontz’ premise, that just as quantum physics and string theory tell us that every point in the universe is connected, so all people are connected, and all our actions have infinite consequences—and not only in our own universe.

I loved every page of this book. I don’t think I’ve ever read a novel this long (over 700 pages) before and wanted it to be longer. As the saying goes, I laughed; I cried.

There are strong Christian elements (along with some speculation which could serve as fodder for late night discussions).

From the Corner of His Eye gets my highest recommendation.

Update: Scratch tomorrow’s rain. We’re going to get snow.

If Nature is our Mother, our family is dysfunctional.

Distracted

Chattanooga Matters (formerly the Chattanooga Resource Foundation) has a seminar from earlier this year with John Stonestreet of Bryan College on YouTube. It’s a nine part video series, and in this part, John makes a great statement. “In my view the worst thing about contemporary entertainment . . . [is that] it makes us think about things that aren’t important and keeps us from thinking about things that are. It distracts us from the real world. We are a distracted generation.”

Literature and Writing Conferences

Calvin College’s Festival of Faith & Writing is coming next week, April 17-19, in more or less beautiful Grand Rapids, Michigan. That’s quite a drive from where I live, but even further is the C.S. Lewis Foundation’s Oxbridge conference at the end of July in Oxford and Cambridge, England. That would be an experience.