Books

On my reading list are three that I am really either currently enjoying (yeah, I know, I have a tendency to read a few books concurrently) or looking forward to reading.

• A Storm of Swords by George R. R. Martin
• Autumn in the Heavenly Kingdom by Stephen R. Platt
• Beijing Coma by Ma Jian

I'm about halfway through the first two and both are good in their own ways. Martin's book is one of the Game of Thrones series (no, I've never seen the HBO show and no intention of doing so) and I have found it to be a very interesting series. His writing style reminds me of James Clavell in how he handles each of the characters and we get any different perspectives. And since Clavell is one of my all-time favorite authors, Martin is currently moving his way up my list of faves.

I'm also about halfway through the Platt's novel which is an engaging recitation of the Taiping Revolution in China and the interaction of the Western powers at that time. Thus far, I have not found it to be a flattering portrayal but, considering the times, that should not be entirely unexpected. Though, I have to admit that I was thinking about this earlier today - how is it that so many ministers spent so much time going to foreign countries to convert the "heathens" and held such low opinions of those same "heathens" yet they were charitable "Christian" souls? Maybe I'm just simple-minded or my opinions on those who convert others to their beliefs do not easily lend themselves to being kind. However, I digress...

I recently saw a review of Beijing Coma and thought it sounded pretty good. Turns out that the local library (though not the branch I normally I visit) has a copy so I've requested it. Hopefully shows up in the next couple of days and that will be something else to enjoy.

I've tried to switch away from the history and social science books that have been more of my interest in recent years to a little more fiction in order to help resuscitate my ability to do more writing on my part. I've got about 5 different short stories going right now (on paper, no less!) and trying to finish at least one (I'm sure Heather is beginning to wonder about this). But I'll get there - have faith (ok, that does sound funny when you consider my religious views at times)!

Chinese History

I tend to hit the local library every couple of weeks or so because it's a lot cheaper than buying all of the books from the bookstore. Of course, the fact that I have no shortage of books at any time is not something that makes my better half happy at any time but it's one of the few vices (as she would see it) that I have so she's patient enough with them. And, in the last couple of weeks, I've found books on the Chinese in America by Iris Chang (just finished yesterday and an interesting read), Ezra Vogel's biography of Deng Xiaoping (just started and looks like it'll be informative - not to mention I've heard several good reviews of it) and David Cordingly's Pirate Hunter of the Caribbean, a story about the life of Captain Woodes Rogers who was what the title states. I also reserved a copy of George R. R. Martin's Game of Thrones which I've heard a great deal about and of which there is a mini-series on HBO that I've not and will probably never see. Yes, libraries are a wonderful thing and I am certainly a great believer in them.

But I sometime have to temper my enthusiasm because the library does not necessarily carry all of the books I would like to read at any given time. As a matter of fact, I started thinking about the reading selections available as they pertain to China and Chinese history. If I were to use the library as my source of all information on China, I would only know the history of China mainly from the end of the Qing dynasty through to the current day and projections on the upcoming conflict between the US and China. While I've heard vague rumours about 5000 years of Chinese history, one would not know it from the books available on China in your local libraries. Even university libraries are hardly better in this regard - I had to look long and hard for any books that went much further into Chinese history beyond the Ming when I was in college not so many years ago.

So, now I will ask the few people who actually read my blog if they have any good recommendations for books on Chinese history that extend past the Communist-imposed history or the Qing dynasty? I am truly an avid learner on the subject but feel terribly inadequate in terms of my own knowledge. Oh, and the only real requirement is that they be in English - I am probably eternally a functional illiterate in Chinese. Any and all suggestions are much appreciated. Thanks.

Time to think

I just realized that this was a draft from almost two years ago and that I had forgotten to actually publish it. But I thought it was worthwhile so making up for that error now:

Recently, I visited Monticello - the beloved home of the third president of the United States, Thomas Jefferson. Every American child learns about Jefferson as the third president and his importance in the history of the nation (not to mention, since 1998, his apparent relationship with his slave, Sally Hemings). What may not always be mentioned in those lessons is his other interests and proficiency in many of them. Or, if they are, they are secondary to the larger importance of his place in history.

But I was reminded that Jefferson truly was a renaissance man in every sense of the word. It was his fervent belief that the purpose of government was to secure the natural rights of man, the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. While this may seem natural to those of us in the 21st century, it was quite a leap at a time when the right of governance was determined by birth and those who were not so fortunate were subjected to the whims of those who were. Almost every nation in the world was run by kings and leaders whose positions were determined by their lineage, not by their ability to lead. Their people were subjected to lives similarly predetermined by their birth, but not at the lofty level of their lords and lieges. To argue that men had the right to choose their own leaders and to pursue their own lives independent of kings chosen by God was a revolutionary thought in more than a few ways.

These were things about which I was certainly aware though partly forgotten over the years. But my visit to Monticello did remind me and I was grateful for the opportunity to relearn them. I have and will also continue to relearn those lessons for they are no less important today than they were 200+ years ago.

But what caught my interest was what apparently also caught Mr. Jefferson's interest - architecture, science, history, technology and horticulture - among other things. He was an accomplished architect (I believe he designed Monticello), noted the daily weather in a diary for 50 years and filled his home with maps of the known world at his time as well as bones of animals not known in his homeland and artifacts from different cultures. His intellectual curiosity knew no bounds. Combined with that interest, however, was the desire to spread the knowledge out further. The University of Virginia, a highly regarded place of higher learning, was conceived and originated by Mr. Jefferson. Indeed, he was a man of letters (more than 20,000 if I recall correctly) who professed his love of books to his friends. Aside - I had forgotten that the US Library of Congress was founded through the generous assistance of Mr. Jefferson.

Jefferson's legacy is one of the few who can be said to be almost universal. His approach to government, not to mention his contributions to science and the pursuit of higher learning, have endured and are emulated not just in his own nation but elsewhere throughout the world. This is a man to whom great debts are owed and much praise is due. Frankly, I think the world needs another like him who can transcend his own time and similarly provide for the future.

Cultural Revolution vs. French Revolution

Perhaps it is because of my interest in China and Chinese history but I am rather familiar with the Cultural Revolution and consider it to be one of a series of tragedies that have occurred under the Communist Party. However, I find it particularly egregious that there has been very little in the way of official study that would allow for complete disclosure of the tragedy. Instead, it has been glossed over officially in China with no serious attempts at understanding what happened and why - and any attempts to do so are strongly dissuaded at best if not resulting in detention or worse. Surely the horrors, the breakdown of family and society, the destruction of historical sites and artifacts would all resonate with the victims and encourage some form of reflection to determine the causes and learn how to prevent a repeat action. Yet it is seemingly ignored in the official annals - perhaps with good reason on the part of the leadership.

After doing some reading lately on the French Revolution, I learned more of the events of that time and the horrors that were visited upon the French as a result. And what is frightening are the similarities between the French Revolution and the Cultural Revolution in China less than 200 years later. The tyranny of a few fighting for power and overthrowing the established order by seeking radically extreme views of constant revolution (Robespierre, Marat & Danton among others in Franch, Mao in China), the destruction of the monarchy in France and the rightists in China, and the breakdown of social order and its replacement by chaos and anarchy.

Yet the terror of the French Revolution is now condemned to history and its lessons learned by a population that has not repeated those mistakes. The problems of the Cultural Revolution are more known outside of China than they are in the country. There is uncertainty whether it could be repeated. Those who suffered during the Cultural Revolution either are unwilling to speak of it or are openly prevented from doing so - after all, it was in the past and "mistakes were made" but the implication is that China cannot move into the future unless it forgets the negative past. However, it is the very belief that the past should be forgotten in order to concentrate on the future that prevents China from attaining the prosperous future it foresees for itself. It is impossible to see the future and work hard to succeed when you cannot overcome the past. This is true for individuals and no less true for nations.

Unless and until China and its citizens are able to become more introspective and view their history in a more dispassionate manner - rather than the enforced, faux-positive nationalistic viewpoint supported by the Communist Party - there will be no way to overcome that past and move forward to attain the goals they have set for themselves.

Random Thoughts (during the holidays?)

Just a couple of things that have come to mind over the last several days. Naturally, none of them actually have to do with the holidays.

This little item about one of our vaunted public servants, convicted of unethical activities, is now asking for donations for his legal defense just made me stop to wonder at the unlimited gall those with power seem to have and the absolute barest regard they seem to have for the voters' intelligence. (Of course, in light of some of the people that have been elected in the US, maybe that regard is not so far-fetched, after all.) Just to make sure I have everything in perspective, a man who is paid a salary by the people that he is voted to represent then squanders the public trust by engaging in unethical activities (whether he meant to or not only causes one to wonder at his actual competence) and now is soliciting further donations from the citizens he purportedly represents to pay for his legal defense. In essence, he's ripping them off twice - at least. I'd be curious to see who actually pays into that fund. I'd bet that they're the same type of people who invest in pyramid schemes and hedge those bets with lottery tickets for retirement.

It's always funny to me how people conveniently forget, or outright ignore, history and its impact on our views of the present. A good example of this is the view of Afghanistan from a recent historical perspective. This was brought home to me when reading an article in Foreign Policy entitled Once Upon a Time in Afghanistan and viewing pictures from there dating to the 50's and 60's. Yet the pictures that we see today are the result of a nation that has essentially suffered through continuous war for more than 30 years - and still no reasonable end is in sight (in spite of President Obama's promises to the contrary). It made me wonder if someone will look at pictures of the United States (or some other highly developed nation from today) 50 years from now and wonder "What the hell happened? This isn't the United States that I know today!" It may not seem immediately conceivable but it is very possible to envision such a scenario. No nation will last forever (history has shown that to be true) and, as will all forms of life on the planet, every nation will evolve through various peaks and valleys as it develops. It's certainly worth thinking about and seeing what can be done today to avoid the mishaps that Afghanistan currently deals with.

Actually, since New Year is coming up very soon, I wonder if I should make a set of resolutions?

Nah, probably not. It's not like I've ever adhered for more than a short time to any other resolution I've made in my many years here. I will just continue with trying to do the best I can at what I do and prepare for anything that comes the way of me and mine. It's worked out ok so far, I suppose...

A positive generation?

NPR discusses how the millenial generation is more positive.

Um, ok. I guess that is not hard to believe. After all, youth is typically not yet as jaded about life and experiences as their elders. Not quite sure why this should be such a headline but it seems that some people are rather surprised by it. "OMG! Young people seem to be more positive?! Who knew?!"

But there were a couple of things that got me about the piece. First was the pervasive belief that many of them were overwhelmingly liberal (OH NO, the "L" word!) and have a positive feeling about government. I guess that seems reasonable when it is many in their generation who helped to elect the nation's first black president - an action that few who grew up during the turbulent 60's felt would happen in their lifetime. It also seems reasonable when one considers that it is the young who often change the world. The older one becomes, the more likely they are to be entrenched in their ways as well as to maintain the status quo. The young, on the other hand, tend to not only see many of the wrong and the iniquities of the world (along with their elders) but are far more inclined to want to work hard to make changes to help improve it. If we recognize that liberal, in a political context, is the antonym of conservative (more resistant to change), it seems rather obvious that they would be more liberal. Indeed, it would be much more surprising if they were not liberal.

The idea that they are more trusting of government is interesting. Earlier generations have been less trusting of government. For those who grew up during the Nixon era or the Cold War, a lack of faith in government seems completely reasonable. It is surprising that those who grew up during the Clinton and Bush 43 presidencies would have more positive feelings regarding government. But the generation that voted for hope and change may still be hopeful that things can change for the better, thus the positive feelings regarding government.

There is also a sense among this generation that things will work out for the best in the end. Despite the turmoil that exists in their lives today - high unemployment or underemployment, two wars, rancorous partisanship, less religious beliefs (though they do not apparently lack for spiritual beliefs) - they have faith that things will improve. Perhaps they have faith that the government will be there to support them and make sure that they are taken care of in the future - in spite of the overwhelming evidence of history that may serve as a warning otherwise. People and civilizations have survived, governments have not. But for those who are too young to remember and unwilling to learn the lessons of history, perhaps this is not an unusual attitude.

After all, history does have a tendency to repeat itself.