Category Archives: book reviews

Book Review: The Letters of J.R.R.Tolkien

JRR Tolkien wrote three great works:

The Hobbit, 1937
The Lord of the Rings trilogy, 1954-55
The Silmarillion, posthumously 1977,

and a few lesser tales related to his invented mythology, a hots of professional essays, papers, and speeches, and his collected letters. Let me say right off that I enjoyed The Hobbit, but disliked The Lord of the Ring, bogging down in the second half of The Fellowship of the Ring, and not picking it up again. Someday I will finish it, when many things more to my liking I have read.

I was predisposed to dislike Tolkien from my college experience. IN Butterfield Hall, all the guys I disliked because of their politics, alcohol consumption, or drug use raves about him. I concluded that Tolkien wasn’t for me, and gave him no more thought until reading a biography of C.S. Lewis. Still, I read nothing of Tolkien’s until the movies came out and decided I should read the books.

Fast forward to March 2009, when I was in Kansas City to present a paper at an engineering conference and, as is my out-of-town-habit, sought out a bookstore. In a seconds bookstore on Metcalf Ave., I found volumes of both Tolkien’s and Lewis’ letters. I left the bookstore poorer in cash but rich in literary acquisitions.

I found Tolien’s letters [The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien: Selected and Edited by Humphrey Carpenter with the assistance of Christopher Tolkien, 1981, Houghton Mifflin Company] fascinating. many dealt with publishing and writing. Beginning with Letter 9 (in the book, which excludes many of Tolien’s extant letters) written on Jan 4, 1937, we learn about The Hobbit, already in production with mainly the maps and illustrations to finish. He was greatly concerned about the American edition, especially the illustrations: “…let the Americans do what seems good to them–as long as it was possible…to veto anything from or influenced by the Disney studios (for all whose works I have a heartfelt loathing).”

This is an example of what I tend to call “Oxford snobbery” in Tolkien. It was just against Americans, but against anyone who tried to analyze his works. Tolkien commented to friends and publishers about negative reviews. He corrected those who misunderstood his invented languages. He corrected misconceptions about the mythology of Middle Earth, main after The Lord of the Rings appearance, and sometimes advised his correspondents not to worry about it.

Certain themes continually show in the letters.

  • The importance of literature: We all need literature that is above our measure–though we may not have sufficient energy for it all the time. April 1959, to Walter Allen
  • His health issues: I was assailed by very considerable pain, and depression, which no ordinary remedy would relieve. …We (or at least I) know far too little about the complicated machine we inhabit…. 31 July 1969, to Christopher Tolkien
  • Friendship with and criticism of C.S. Lewis: But for the encouragement of C.S.L. I do not think that I should ever have completed or offered for publication The Lord of the Rings. 18 Dec 1965 to Clyde S. Kilby; It is sad that ‘Narnia’ and all that part of C.S.L.’s work should remain outside the range of my sympathy, as much of my work was outside his. 11 Nov 1964 to David Kolb

I have much more to write about this, but my post is too long as it is, and I need time to collect some more thoughts. Look for a second post.

Book Review: "The Chimes" – a novella by Charles Dickens

It was 1843, and Charles Dickens’ latest novel, Martin Chuzzlewait, was not selling well–at least not by Dickens’ standards. So for another project to make some money, Britain’s most popular author wrote A Christmas Carol and got it to the market fast. It didn’t sell wildly, but made its author a little. More importantly, it established an important tradition: the Dickensian Christmas, and over twenty years of Christmas books and stories.

The next year Dickens wrote The Chimes, as he had A Christmas Carol, seemingly in off moments between his regular novels being written chapter by chapter just in time to be serialized, and rushed it to print. It is the story of Toby “Trotty” Veck, a day laborer/porter, aged into his sixties. He spends every day on the streets, in the shadow of a church, waiting on someone to have him deliver a letter or small package for six pence, or maybe a shilling.

From the church the chimes peal, keeping Toby company and speaking to him according to his mood. Toby Veck is poor, and almost alone. His young adult daughter, Meg, is the only one close to him. She brings him a hot lunch of tripe and potatoes, and they sit on the doorstep of Alderman Cute for Toby to eat. The gentleman passes out his door with two equally corpulent friends. They upbraid Toby for eating tripe–“the least economical, the most wastefull…consumption”–and finish what’s left on Toby’s plate. The, as Richard comes, the man Meg has just said she it to marry on new Years Day, the alderman advises Richard he can do better and not to marry Toby’s daughter. He does, however, engage Toby to deliver a letter to the local Member of Parliament.

The book then follows Toby’s actions that day and a dream he has that night. Toby delivers the letter to the MP, learns it contains orders to incarcerate a certain Will Fern who is down on his luck, meets and encourages that man and befriends him. He makes a midnight visit to his beloved chimes, and while among them falls into a trance, or perhaps a dream. He see things in Meg’s future, in Richards’ future, and his new friend’s future, and even his own future. The book ends with “all’s well”, as Meg and Richard marry on New Years Day, Toby’s new friends–Will Fern and his adopted daughter–come to live with him.

Although counted as a Christmas book, Christmas is never mentioned. All events look forward to New Years Day, which is close at hand. After reading A Christmas Carol many times, and seeing umpteen dramatic presentations of it, plus the many modern adaptions, almost anything else Dickens wrote about Christmas will be a let-down. And this one was. I found it difficult to follow Toby’s dream/trance, and all that was happening. Perhaps I didn’t read it as closely as I needed to. The language is slightly archaic, and the physical and social circumstances unfamiliar to a 21st Century American. None of these badly so, but perhaps they added up to hinder understanding.

The characters are not as well developed as in other Dickens books. The alderman and the MP are bad guys. Everything they do works against the poor, yet they call themselves the friends of the poor and justifying various anti-poor actions as being in favor of the poor. Each one makes a single appearance in the novella, so perhaps Dickens did not have enough space to fully develop them. This book is much more social commentary than A Christmas Carol, something Dickens put in many of his books. The rich and powerful are bad, the poor and downtrodden are good. No in between, no mixtures, no offsetting qualities. I haven’t read much Dickens (that is reserved for retirement), so I don’t know if his novels have better developed heroes and villains than this one.

Should you read this? Probably, if you can find it without plunking down a bunch of money. It should be in any collection of Dickens’ Christmas writings, and is probably available on-line. It’s good to branch out from his best known Christmas story. Next Christmas: The Cricket on the Hearth.

Book Review: Foxe’s Book of Martyrs

I’m not sure where I acquired this book, Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, by John Foxe, Whitaker House, 1981, ISBN 0-88368-095-5. Perhaps at a garage sale, for it does not have a resale shop sticker. I bought it because of the subject matter, not from prior familiarity. Who wouldn’t want to read about those who went before us in the faith, and who suffered the ultimate price for that faith?

John Foxe wrote this record of the saints’ suffering from about 1550 to 1563. He continued to modify it for years after until his death in 1587, adding anecdotes and more stories. These were difficult times in England. King Henry 8th took his nation out of the Roman Catholic church when the pope wouldn’t grant him a divorce. His heir, the boy king Edward VI, continued on the same Protestant path under the influence of regents, but died at age sixteen. His half sister Mary became queen in 1553, and for the five years of her short reign through domestic affairs into turmoil as she restored Catholicism and attempted to purge Protestantism with threats, coercion, imprisonment, and execution.

Foxe lived through this, though he spent the Mary years in exile. So the book is concerned mostly with the martyrs of that era. One long chapter covers martyrs of the first three centuries of Christianity. The next covers Constantine–not because he was a martyr but because of his impact on Christianity. John Wycliff is next, again not for martyrdom but for persecution and impact.

After this are chapters covering the martyred and the persecuted of the late 15th and 16th centuries, a parade of names both familiar and not: Oldcastle, Huss, Tyndale, Luther, Hooper, Taylor, Latimer, Ridley, Cranmer. Some chapters cover a number of martyrs in short fashion, such as those from Scotland and those many burned at the stake at Smithfield near Newgate.

Foxe, in his narratives, concentrates on the period after arrest of the “heretic”–the subsequent attempts to turn the prisoner to the Catholic faith, perhaps some words in defense or the refusal to recant, then the actual execution. Almost nothing is included about what led to the arrest, or of the martyr’s earlier life. That’s probably as it should be, but it leaves me a bit unsatisfied. I’d like to know more about how these men and woman developed the beliefs and convictions that allowed them to face the flames without fear and with joy.

I left the book having disgust for Queen Mary, and sadness that such things as trans-substantiation and the mass and the authority of the pope were once thought important enough to kill for. The most uplifting part was the testimony of the saints, who maintained confidence and steadfastness in their beliefs, who joined the ones that an ancient writer declared “faced jeers and flogging, …were chained and put in prison, …stoned, …sawed in two, … put to death by the sword…went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated.” For all of these received something better, planned by God.

Is this book a keeper? I’m not sure at this point. It is almost source material for other writing. But I think probably not. Should you read it? The language is archaic, as is the organization (lack of subheadings, extremely long paragraphs), so it is a difficult read. But, yes, if you have an opportunity, read it and be enlightened.

Book Review: From The President

I came of age during the Watergate era, both literally and politically. In November 1972, helped along by a national law that lowered the voting age in national elections, I stepped into a voting booth in Cranston RI and cast my first vote for president. I voted for Richard Nixon. The Watergate scandal was a gnat buzzing in people’s ears, pushed about by a press that hated Nixon. It was not till five months after the election that it erupted to the point where heads rolled, and it was another year and then some before Nixon resigned.

Out of this scandal was the fight over Nixon’s presidential papers. The courts wanted them. The press wanted them. Defendants wanted them–even more so than prosecutors in some cases. Yet history had said that a president’s papers from his years in office were his own, to be done with as he saw fit. Destroy them, put them in a library, suppress them, edit them. They were his. The need for Nixon’s papers caused a long legal battle that was not resolved until 1987. The papers became available in 1988.

Bruce Oudes began the process of going through the released Nixon papers, which went into his book From The President: Richard Nixon’s Secret Files. Oudes’ title is almost yellow journalism. The files were not secret because they all contain salacious material that showed what bad dudes Nixon and his cronies were. They were “secret” simply because Nixon thought they belonged to him, as those of his predecessors had belonged to them. But Congress passed laws, the courts upheld them, and Oudes and countless like him got the papers.

The lengthy Introduction to the book is excellent. Oudes describes the fight for the papers and how the national mood was pretty much to give nothing to Nixon. Oudes describes how the files amounted to 1.5 million pages, which he culled through to produce a book of 640 pages. It was a massive work, and obviously everything could not be included. With such abridgement, achieving a fair balance is difficult if not impossible. The editor’s prejudices must show through.

The papers focus heavily on Chuck Colson and the political maneuverings he orchestrated. In fact, the papers as a whole are mostly political. A small minority deal strictly with governing. The China trip, for instance, is covered in memos that discuss the political ramifications of the trip but not many that discuss what that trip would mean for the world and for US interests. The years 1973 and 1974 are under-represented, 1974 badly so. It was as if the Administration quit producing memos on January 1, 1973.

Despite these faults, I found the reading fascinating. It was sort of like the business correspondence I read every day. Seeing how the Administration sought to manipulate the press was eye-opening. The reaction to a bad press consumed many memos. The Vietnam War was the backdrop to everything, but the memos described the happenings on the home front, not the battle front.

I was disturbed to see White House employees–Coulson, Buchanan, Haldeman, and others spending time producing memos purely about politics and the 1970 and 1972 elections. I was not pleased to see how my tax dollars (well, mostly Dad’s tax dollars) go to politics rather than governing. Perhaps it is not possible to achieve a complete separation of staff so that some work on politics, some work on governing, and each is paid by monies from an appropriate source. Still, it was bothersome.

It’s a good book, and well worth the $2.00 I paid for it used at our local thrift store. If you have a chance to find it, read it. The memos themselves are unfiltered history–original source material–though of course the selection of the memos make the book a highly filtered flawed history. This one is not a keeper. It will be in the next garage sale, where I hope to make back half my investment.

Book Review – The Presidency of George Washington

This was not in my reading pile. However, after I finished Robertson’s Harmony of the Gospels, I wasn’t quite ready to tackle the next book in the pile, which is Steinbeck’s East of Eden. But I had in the pile of books on the end table between Lynda’s and my reading chairs a thin volume she picked up somewhere, The Presidency of George Washington, by Jack D. Warren, Jr.; The Mount Vernon Ladies Association, 2000, ISBN 0-931917-34-4. Warren is one of the major modern editors of George Washington’s papers, which will run to twenty or so volumes when done. Actually, since that was written in 2000, that editing might be done by now, I’ll have to check.

This book is a cross between scholarly and popular. Warren’s work is almost all from original sources, both Washington’s outgoing correspondence, and some incoming. Official state papers were another source, as were newspapers and pamphlets from the period.

I suppose I haven’t read much about George Washington’s presidency. I remember reading a book about the first Congress, which would have touched on it, but that was long ago. Washington’s main task was to start the new nation off on a sound footing and hold it together. Fears of it splintering into multiple nations was real. The government under the Articles of Confederation was a disaster. Already sectionalism and partisanship were beginning, as the agrarian South and the commercial North distrusted each other, and the growing West distrusted them both. The national debt was sky high as a result of the revolutionary war. Some of the problems he had to face were:

  • Establishing precedents for almost everything, and to do so in a way that befitted a representative republic, to downplay fears that the American experiment would fail and a monarchy would be the result, also in a way that made the nation respectable to the European monarchies.
  • Establish sound government financial policies.
  • Provide governance for the lands west of the Appalachian Mountains.
  • Avoid being drawn in to the European war that started as a result of the French Revolution, which happened just a few months after he took office.
  • Sooth over the conflict between his two most important cabinet members, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson.
  • Establish the national capitol somewhere.
  • Give his citizens reason for hope that they could truly govern themselves.

I think we tend to forget that the government established by our founding fathers in the Constitution, after trial and error, was a huge experiment. At that time no such government existed. The British parliamentary monarchy was much different government. Perhaps Washington’s biggest task was simply to prove that the experimental government would not collapse. That it didn’t collapse is shown, in Warren’s words, to have been much the result of Washington’s leadership in those crucial first eight years.

The book is only ninety-six pages of text, with four pages of end notes, two of suggested reading, and a decent index. The book reads longer than its pages, however. The margins are somewhat small, and few illustrations are used. The scholarly language does not lend itself to a long session of reading. I was able to get through a chapter a night, or at times only half a chapter–if I waited until too late in the evening when my brain couldn’t handle it.

This one is a keeper. I’m not sure whether I will ever read it again, but it is a good reference book, and perhaps I could pull some articles from it, or use the footnotes and sources as springboards for additional research. If you run across it, get it and read it. You won’t be sorry.

Book Review: A Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ

No, this is not the harmony that I’m writing. This is the one prepared by A.T. Robertson, published by Harper & Row in 1922. The book I picked up at a thrift store (for a dollar) was printed by H&R in 1950.

Dr. Robertson’s work was based on that of Dr. John A. Broadus, published in the mid-1890s. Robertson was a student of Broadus, and took over and expanded on his work whenever some discovery of a new Biblical text came to light, or when new textural criticism better explained the difference between the different gospels.

I bought this book after I had finished my own harmony, while working on appendixes and passage notes (still an on-going, off and on effort). The is a parallel-column harmony. Neither Broadus nor Robertson believed that the texts should be interwoven, for to do so would eliminate the distinctness of the language each gospel has. My harmony is the interwoven type, with each gospel compared to the others and the different texts blended into one (hopefully) seamless narrative. But I thought this would be a good book to review to see how the chronology of the professors compared to the chronology I came up with (with the assistance of some study Bibles).

The book does a couple of things I like. First, it is not based on the King James Version, but rather the Revised Standard Version. This is still difficult to read compared to my preferred NIV, but it’s an improvement. Next, it gives the Gospel of Mark the left hand column, believing, as I do, that Mark’s gospel was the first one put in final form, and that Luke and Matthew used Mark as one of their sources. Next, it does not waste a lot of blank column space when less than four gospels cover an event. If only one covers it, the text of that one utilizes the full width of the page. If two cover it, wide columns are used. If the number of lines needed to show parallel passages differs greatly, narrow columns start out and then wider or full width is used later. This is all done in such a way that the reader has no problem figuring out which gospel contributed which text. Not only does this save paper, it makes reading much more enjoyable.

The end of the book contains a number of discussions, equivalent to the appendixes I’m writing, to explain decision making that went into the Harmony. This is in addition to many footnotes added to passages to clarify, cross-reference, and explain something in a way that doesn’t require a long note at the end. In these end discussions, Robertson explains not only the way he thinks the harmony should be but also the main competing theories, and explains why he chose the route he did.

I did find a couple of negatives with this book. First, the font is small, very small by today’s standards. The main text is probably an 8 point font, Robertson’s footnotes 6 point, and the RSV footnotes 5 point! Too small on many evenings for my $5 reading glasses from Dollar General. Next, Robertson (probably after Broadus’ example) is overly concerned with exact dates. One of his notes goes into considerable length to discuss what year Jesus was born in; another into what year he began his ministry. I’m not really concerned about the exact year so much as the exact order of events in Christ’s life. Then, the footnotes and end discussion are perhaps too brief. Many decisions on order of the gospels, for example how Matthew seems to be non-chronological whereas Mark is chronological, could have been much better developed.

I found this book most useful in explaining Jesus’ movements. When was he in Galilee? When in Jerusalem, or Judea? How does Jesus’ statement in Luke chapter 9 about going to Jerusalem make sense in light of all the rest of the material in Luke 10-21? How did Jesus’ trip to Tyre and Sidon happen relative to other departures from Galilee? These relative movements are nicely explained. I will have to review my chronology and see if I need to make any adjustments. Of course, Robertson doesn’t agree with some of the decisions I made. I probably should re-think those areas, but I won’t. I feel pretty strongly about some of those.

This is a keeper for me. It would be a good book for anyone who is a serious student of the Bible to have.

Book Review: “Team of Rivals”, Part 2

I’ll just add a few more things to what I wrote in yesterday’s post.

I always look for faults in book, either in the writing, the organization, the failure to communicate–anything–and report them in my reviews. I’m hard pressed to find any in this one. If there is one, it may be that it paints Lincoln as a man with almost no faults.

Maybe it’s just that he was so adept at managing his cabinet (which is, after all, the purpose of the book) that it appears he did so faultlessly. If from reading this it appears Lincoln had a fault, it might be that he was too slow to act in many instances. However, that could also be seen as a virtue, depending on your point of view. Today we might all wish our president moved a little slower on some issues. Lincoln sometimes seemed to move agonizingly slow on some things. As Doris Kearns Goodwin says, he tended to be a good judge of popular opinion and not move far ahead of it. He waited for popular opinion to catch up with events and with what he wanted to do. Then, when he made his move, the public would seem to be behind him.

The role of the press is carefully brought out in the book. Today, with all the talk of media bias, we tend to forget that in Lincoln’s day newspapers were biased and unashamed of it. The Democrats had their newspapers and the Republicans theirs. Each reported in a partisan way. Between them, the balance was struck.

One lack I felt as I read the book, which could not be helped due to the limitations on the subject, was being totally cut off from what was going on in the South during the war. We are presented the North’s side of things, but have no idea what the South was doing, thinking, feeling, wishing. That cannot be helped, for the South was not the subject of the book. Still, I might rather the book had run 50 pages longer and we had a few more paragraphs now and then about the Southern viewpoint and activities.

The last chapter, which deals with Lincoln’s assassination, brought me some new information. I had no idea that this was a plot among several people and that Seward and Vice President Andrew Johnson were also targets, and that Seward’s assassin was almost successful. I thought the book well pointed out how Lincoln’s death was a tragedy for the South. The same plodding forbearance Lincoln demonstrated during the war would have served the South well during Reconstruction, and possibly eliminated much of the animosity that even now exists between the two regions.

Edited in on 26 June 2009: Kearns has an odd way of handling notes for sources. Well, to me it is odd; possibly it is a standard method for this type of publication. The book is heavily dependent on a large number of independent sources. Rather than use footnotes, Kearns uses endnotes, not at the end of the chapter but after the end of the story. However, she does not provide a superscripted note reference at the location within the text. Rather, where the notes are, she quotes a short piece of text, eliding much, and indicates the source. This, I suppose, is less distracting then those having those superscripts. A typical page of text would have ten endnotes. However, I like footnotes, even more so than endnotes. I would rather have the superscripts on the page, letting me know this material was taken from some primary source. I am more likely to check the note than with the method Kearns uses. This, of course, is an incredibly picky comment.

As I said in my last post, the book is well written, highly readable yet scholarly, and did not at all seem as long as the page numbers indicated. Read it. You will be better for it.

Book Review: Team of Rivals

On Monday I finished reading Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, 2005 Simon & Schuster, ISBN 0-684-82490-6, a non-fiction book by Doris Kearns Goodwin. The book totals 754 pages, not including extensive notes, bibliography, and index. As I mentioned in a previous post, I expected this to be a two month read, or seven weeks if I could find more time to read on weekends. Well, I completed it in five weeks and two days.

The reason for my better progress? The combination of a well-organized book, easy reading that was at the same time scholarly, and an interesting subject. I found I could ready twenty pages a day without any trouble. On weekend days I did thirty to forty. I wouldn’t say the book was a page turner; few history books are. But it treated the subject matter in such a way that it was perfect for me.

The book begins on a day in May 1860 when the Republican convention in Chicago was to select their candidate for the presidency. The four main candidates–Seward, Chase, Bates, and Lincoln–were in their respective home towns, waiting on the outcome. In those days candidates never attended or even addressed their convention. The opening chapter tells something of how the four men pursued the nomination. Then chapters 2 and 3 go into their lives leading up to that point, and chapters 4, 5, 6, and 7 cover the last decade or so leading up to the convention. It isn’t until chapter 8 that we return to Chicago and see how Lincoln’s team bested his rivals. Thus the book is in a D-A-B-C-E order.

Beginning with chapter 8 the book runs in chronological order, covering the Lincoln presidency in considerable detail. As could be expected from the title, the primary subject of the book is how Lincoln put his chief political rivals on his cabinet, and then how it was his personality and leadership style that molded them into a team that carried out what he wanted to do with the nation. Lincoln’s style was one of quiet perseverance and charm. When faced with a disagreement with any of his cabinet, he resolutely forbore the arguments in favor of the opposing position, then with charm and quiet persuasion was able to bring the colleague around, or on occasion slightly alter his own position based on the logic of the other guy’s.

This was no Harry Truman, who would tell his cabinet, “Here’s what I’m going to do. Talk me out of it if you can.” They never could. Nor was this a Teddy Roosevelt, speaking softly but carrying a big stick. Lincoln carried no stick at all, according to Kearns. He entered the presidency as a relative unknown, painted by the Democrats as a rail-splitter. In fact, a few months into his first term someone in power said, “We have voted for a rail-splitter, and that’s what we got.”

As the opening battles in the Civil War went against the Union, everyone questioned Lincoln’s forbearance with non-performing generals. The radical side of his cabinet questioned his toleration of the conservatives, and the conservatives did the same concerning the liberals/radicals. The abolitionists declared Lincoln a friend of slavery, and Southern sympathizers declared him an abolitionist. Somehow, through his incredible forbearance and his refusal to become flustered or angry, Lincoln prevailed and the Union was saved.

Kearns does a masterful job at weaving this story. She tells how Lincoln used diversions to reduce his stress level and allow him to keep focused, diversions such as the theatre, the opera, carriage rides, weekends away from the White House, and simple evenings spent with friends where he could spin his yarns. He became good friends with his chief rival, William Seward (Secretary of State), and the two spent much time together not necessarily discussing government business.

It was not so with Salmon Chase (Secretary of the Treasury). Kearns describes how Chase constantly baited Lincoln, either purposely or just as a consequence of planning to unseat Lincoln in 1864. Lincoln stood for much abuse from Chase, refusing three times to accept his resignation. When he finally did accept it (to Chase’s surprise), the timing was perfect and the rest of the cabinet, the Congress, and the nation understood it was for the best.

Tomorrow I’ll cover a few more items, and summarize the review. For now I’ll say this read is well worth the cost of the book and the hours you will dedicate to it. Don’t take a chance to pass this up.

Book Review: Burnt Sienna, by David Morrell

On Friday I finished Burnt Sienna, 2000, Warner Books, ISBN 0-446-51964-2, a novel by David Morrell. This is the second of Morrell’s novels I’ve read. The first was The Totem. That was a medical thriller. This was…I’m not sure what genre to put it in. A thriller, I guess.

Chase Malone had been a soldier, having piloted helicopters in the Panama invasion of 1989 and come away from that scarred. Yes, he was wounded, but more importantly he wound up with a dislike for authority of any type. Thus he left the military and took up painting–not houses, as a landscape artist. In ten years he won some renown, and some collectors would pay as much as $200,000 for one of his works. He lived in Cozumel, right on the ocean.

Derek Bellasar, who lived in France, tried to hire him to paint two painting of his wife, one a facial shot and one a nude. Malone turned down the commission, because of his problems with authority. Malone didn’t know Bellasar was a powerful dealer in illegal munitions. Bellasar quickly began interfering in Malone’s life, closing his favorite restaurant and buying his property out from under him. One of Malone’s ex-army buddies showed up. Now working for the CIA, this man talked Malone into accepting the commission, going to Bellasar’s estate near Nice, France, and finding out more about his operation.

The other part of Malone’s assignment was to get Bellasar’s wife out of the compound. It seemed that Bellasar had had three prior wives, all as beautiful as the current one, named Sienna, but they all died in mysterious circumstances about the age of 30, when the bloom of youthful beauty first began to fade. Right before each of them died Bellasar had hired famous artists to paint them, facial and nude.

The story began somewhat predictably. I found myself trying to anticipate the plot (the curse of a wannabe novelist) and being successful at it. I predicted Malone would fall for Sienna, that he would get her out, and how he would get her out. However, all this happened by about the middle of the book; obviously I had miscalculated. Morrell continued to weave his story, giving additional predicaments for Malone to work his way out of. I won’t say much more so as to not give away more of the plot.

The book is an amazingly easy read. Chapters are short, typically two or three pages. Sometimes a chapter break is not even a scene break. Morrell’s writing is spare of excess verbiage, except perhaps in some of the weapons scene. He keeps the story moving. He keeps the plot twists coming. He avoids gratuitous sex and violence. I read it in a little over a week, despite the limited time I had to give to reading. The twenty-five pages a day I had set as a goal was too easy, and I did more than that most days.

I recommend this book to any who like thrillers. It has a few swear words, but it they are sprinkled in very naturally, not gratuitously at all.

Book Review: Mark Twain’s "Letters From Hawaii"

I found this book, Mark Twain’s Letters From Hawaii, (Edited by A. Grove Day, c. 1966, The University Press of Hawaii, Honolulu, ISBN 0-8248-0288-8, Pacific Classics Edition 3rd printing 1979), in a place where they sell used books, either a thrift store or a garage sale. I put it midway through the first half of the reading pile I put together last August, and came to it in mid-March. I read a little of it in February, on that business trip to Phoenix, but read it mostly over the last two weeks (when I wasn’t distracting myself with the letters of Tolkein and Lewis).

Mr. Day begins his Introduction with a question some of my readers may be asking: “Why should anyone today want to read the travel letters written by Mark Twain from the Hawaiian Islands more than a hundred years ago?” I chose the book because I want to read more of Mark Twain’s works. Why not this one? And of course it was cheap, an oldish paperback at a used book sale. It’s been decades since I read Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, the only two things by Twain I’ve read. I downloaded a book from the Gutenberg Project, Letters of Mark Twain, Volume 1, but I haven’t done anything with it to date.

Why indeed would anyone want to read this? It’s history. It captures Hawaii in a snapshot in time, 1866. Twain was 31, before he achieved literary fame, and was working as a journalist in Nevada and California when he wrangled himself an assignment from the “Sacramento Union” to travel to Hawaii for several months and write a series of travelogue type letters for publication in the newspaper.

The letters he wrote are full of information and humor. He described the scenery, the people, the government, the missionaries, the agriculture, the inter-island travel, the volcanoes, the commerce. He created an imaginary travel companion, Brown, who became a foil for Twain’s epee thrusts.

While Twain was in the Sandwich Islands (as they were still mostly called at that time), two newsworthy events happened. The crown princess, who was to become sovereign queen upon the death of the king, herself died at age 27. Twain’s description of the month-long mourning and funeral rites tells much about the people. And, while he was there, survivors of the clipper ship “Hornet” arrived at the island after 43 days in lifeboats following the burning and sinking of the “Hornet”. Twain’s account is gripping (to use an over-used word, but it works in this case) as he tells how the men survived and made it across the miles to Hawaii. That one letter did much to begin Twain’s rise to fame in the States.

I could give many examples of how Twain’s humor comes through. I’ll just give this one, about his inter-island trip on a small, coastal ship. “The first night, as I lay in my coffin [how he described his berth], idly watching the dim lamp swinging to the rolling of the ship, and snuffing the nauseous odors of bilge water, I felt something gallop over me. Lazarus did not come out of his sepulcher with a more cheerful alacrity than I did out of mine. However, I turned in again when I found it was only a rat. Presently something galloped over me once more. I knew it was not a rat this time, and I thought it might be a centipede, because the captain had killed one on deck in the afternoon. I turned out. The first glance at the pillow showed me a repulsive sentinel perched upon each end of it–cockroaches as large as peach leaves-fellows with long, quivering antennae and fiery, malignant eyes. they were grating their teeth like tobacco worms, and appeared to be dissatisfied about something.”

With such colorful language and use of metaphor, Twain paints his pictures of the beautiful Sandwich Islands. The book is well worth the time to read, if you ever come across it. I don’t know about going out of your way to try and purchase it, however. Would it be worth full price at a bookstore, if you could even find it? Probably.