What I’m reading – the New Year’s edition

It’s been several months since I’ve last listed what I’m reading.  I’ve read many good pages in that time, though, so let’s catch up with a special year’s-end edition.

The Song of Ice and Fire by George R. R. Martin.  A huge fantasy series, four books and counting, each book running from 800-1000 pages.  My kids love them, which pretty much make them required reading for me, if only so that I understand the dinner conversation.  I’ve read all four: A Game of Thrones, A Clash of Kings, A Storm of Swords, and A Feast for Crows.  The books center around a massive civil war set in a fantasy world that is a rough analog of England in the high medieval period, with some clear overtones of the War of the Roses, but with magic, undead, and dragons thrown in for good measure.

I’ve got a love-hate relationship with these books.  They are entertaining, with a vast array of generally interesting characters.  But they often lack narrative drive, they bludgeon the reader with ugly war scenes (please, George – I’ve read Barbara Tuchman’s A Distant Mirror (which I highly recommend, by the way) – I get that medieval warfare is an ugly thing, one village full of raped and mutilated peasants is enough), and much of the plot is driven by characters doing truly stupid things, which always annoys me.  Most of all, we’re already at around 4000 pages, the story shows no sign of nearing a close.

I’m a fan of large sprawling novels: I don’t believe a book really gets going until around page 800.  But Tolkien and Tolstoy both managed to tell their war stories in around 1200 pages – does Martin’s war really require an order of magnitude more?

So tentatively recommended, but there are definitely some caveats here.  Most of all, Martin, who says there’s still at least three more volumes to go, is already three years late on volume 5, and is getting a little long in the tooth.  Commit to these, and you may be committing to a series that will never reach its end.

– No such caveats for The Graveyard Book, by Neal Gaiman.  Published as a young-adult novel, I found this to be an absolute delight.

The book opens with a dark stranger called “the man Jack” stalking through a dark house with knife in hand.  Having just killed the parents and older child, the man Jack is in search of one last victim, a toddler.  But the unnamed child slips away to a nearby graveyard where he is taken in by the Owenses, a couple of ghosts, who, after arguing about who he looks like, conclude that he looks “like nobody but himself.”  Thus, they name him Nobody Owens, or Bod for short.

The book recounts Bod’s childhood raised in the cemetery by the various ghosts who “live” within, with each chapter taking place two years after the last one.  Young Bod learns much from the ghosts, including how to fade into invisibility, how to instill a frightful chill, and to avoid the ghouls and the less reputable residents.  Finally, when the man Jack returns to take care of unfinished business, Bod is ready, and the final confrontation is a delight that ties together many of the threads that sprang up in the various chapters.

I always love Gaiman’s work, and I particularly loved this one – recommended for anyone.

Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway, by Jonathan Parshall and Anthony Tully.  I was talking with a friend recently about the battle of Midway, the turning point in WWII in the Pacific, when the American navy, after being dominated by the Japanese for the six months following Pearl Harbor, finally struck back, sinking four Japanese carriers and seizing the initiative for the remainder of the Pacific war.  (Yeah, I know.  I’m a geek, with lots of geeky friends.  So?)  I mentioned a couple of the standard points told about that battle, how the American torpedo bombers came in low and were shot up by the Japanese fighters, but that put the fighters out of position when the American dive bombers came swooping down from on high to sink the carriers, and how the carriers blew up quickly because their decks were crammed with aircraft getting ready to go attack the Americans.  He gave me a knowing look and said that I really needed to read Shattered Sword, how it would change everything I thought I knew about the battle.  And so I did.

I’m happy to report that the book is excellent, and showed how wrong I was.  Shattered Sword is a revisionist history of the battle of Midway, told largely from the point of view of the Japanese forces, that challenges much of the common wisdom about the battle.  (Those two points I mention above, for example, don’t survive Parshall and Tully’s analysis.)  Apparently, much of the common wisdom was based on the writings of Fuchida Mitsuo, a Japanese officer at the battle, who wrote an early self-serving account of the battle, one that has shaped much of the American understanding of what was the Japanese experienced during the battle.  But Fuchida’s account has been largely debunked in Japan for the past 20 years, though that news hasn’t reached American historians until recently.

The book does an excellent job of describing Japanese naval doctrine, the political maneuvering in their naval command that led to the Midway plan, and the tactics and operational approaches that the Japanese navy used.  That is coupled by a detailed recounting of the day of the battle, one that covers both the military actions, the efforts of the crews of the damaged ships to save them, and detailed descriptions of what it was like to escape from the burning hanger deck of a bombed aircraft carrier.  If you enjoy military history, and thought you knew what happened at Midway, I strongly recommend this book.

Posted in books | Leave a comment

The proper care and feeding of monarchs, or Off with their Heads

I am no fan of monarchy.  In my opinion, a king is just a dictator with a pedigree.  The best ones splurge their peoples’ fortunes on absurd luxuries and launch self-aggrandizing wars.  The worst ones commit crimes of unspeakable horror.  About the best you can say about a monarch is that typical examples of the breed are lazy sorts who rarely work up the energy for a real atrocity, unlike dictators who, generally being self-made men, rarely have the virtue of laziness.

Suppose you’re in charge of a revolt that is far more successful than anyone expected, and you suddenly find yourself in possession of your king.  What should you do?   Should you:

A) Take this opportunity to talk reasonably with the king, now that his evil advisers are far away, and come up with an agreement that will allow the children to be fed and make the kingdom a better place for everyone.

B) Chop off his head.

C) Run away.  Run far far away.

C has its charms.  But kings usually hold grudges, and there’s always room in the budget for a good assassin.  So B is generally the best choice.  Revolutionaries who are also regicides occasionally come to a bad end, as happened with Robespierre.  But often, as with Cromwell and Lenin, things work out remarkably well for them.  (Of course, they often create their own atrocities, but we’ll assume that you, being the reasonable person that you are, will manage to resist that temptation.)

Under no circumstances choose A.  The king will tell you how sympathetic he is to the plight of your people, make a generous deal, and, once you let him go, send in the pikemen to stomp you and your filthy peasant revolt under their mighty boots.  How dare you lay hand on the king!  You’ll be lucky if your death only lasts a week!

(If you doubt the preceding paragraph, see the history of the Peasants’ Revolt.   Admittedly, Richard II, the king in question, came to a bad end.  But that was much later – he managed to outlive the leaders of the Peasants’ Revolt by a good many years.)

That was fun!  Let’s try another question:

The king, a jolly fellow of whom you are rather fond, offers you the post of chief adviser.  Should you:

A) Take it, of course!  Think of the opportunity to do good for your country, and perhaps make a little money while you’re helping out.

B) Tell the king thanks, but you’re too busy right now, what with all the tournaments and having to care for your lands and such.

C) Catch the nearest cross-channel ferry, and keep on going.

Here you might be tempted to choose B, but bear in mind that a king rarely takes it well when you refuse a job from him.  So C is your best option.

By no means choose A.  History is littered with the story of kings’ advisers who came to a bad end.  Consider the case of Thomas Cromwell,  Henry VIII’s chief minister whose downfall came about because the wife he found for Henry was not pleasing to the king’s eye.  Cromwell’s head ended up on a spike on London Bridge.

Why do advisers so often come to a bad end?  Because people generally want to think the best of their king.  So when the government does something bad, everyone wants to think that the good king was led astray by his evil ministers.  (Think about how many stories you know of the good king led astray by evil advisers.  Compare that to the far fewer stories of the good minister who tries to save the kingdom from the evil king.  Ever wonder why all those good kings pick bad ministers?)

A typically undocumented part of the job of chief adviser is to be scapegoat-in-chief: when bad things happen, the king often finds it useful to appease the mobs by throwing his top minister to the wolves.  And since something always goes bad during a monarchy, and since chief advisers are, in spite of their fondest beliefs, always easy to replace, they often find their heads decorating spikes in scenic locations around the capital – not the prominent position they envisioned when they took the job.

But people are too clever to fall for the old bumbling-king-bad-adviser story, you say?  Hmm, I say.  You really need to read some of the opinion pieces that have come out in the last eight years, pieces that described Dick Cheney as the evil puppeteer pulling the ignorant president’s strings.  We may not go in for divine right of kings these days (though some presidents do apparently think themselves chosen by God), but some old traditions are still followed.

So trust me: have as little to do with monarchies as you can manage.  And if by some strange chance you do find yourself in the presence of a monarch, just hope that the headsman works for you.  Because a king is a fine and noble thing, with a regal brow and a mighty cranium.  Which means that his head will look awfully good up on that spike.  A lot better than yours, don’t you think?

Posted in history | 1 Comment

Bye bye AOL community

Somewhere around 4 years ago, the team that I worked on at AOL, AOL Search, got new management, new management that I did not much care for.  So I looked around AOL and gave some serious thought about what I wanted to work on next.

AOL was in trouble – that much was obvious to any observer.  The Time Warner merger had been a terrible mistake for both companies.  Broadband was eating AOL’s core business, and none of the strategies to address it had worked out.  AOL badly needed some area where it could shine.  And while there were lots of areas that I could have worked, I wanted to be part of AOL’s renaissance – to be in an area that could make a difference for the company.  In my mind, the answer was community.

AOL had practically invented online community for the masses.  It was a leader in that area, and years before there was a MySpace or Facebook, AOL community products like Message Boards, Hometown, Member Directory, and Chat was the way for non-geeks to communicate online.

But in the wake of the Time Warner merger, when synergy was going to save the company, AOL had lost its way.  AOL had stopped paying much attention to those community products.  And so, just when new online community giants like MySpace and Facebook were becoming the darlings of the web, AOL’s community products were looking a little rundown.

But I had worked on the search pieces of several of those community products, and I thought that AOL could still be a player n those areas.  If anything could save AOL, I reasoned, it would be community.  And so I transferred into the community development team.

Alas, it looks like nothing could save AOL.  Anyway, community couldn’t do it, not the way that AOL did community.  Building a giant one-size-fits-all community product failed.  (That would be AIM Pages, which was to be a huge MySpace-style state-of-the-art profile system, on which I was overall architect.)  Because AOL had to have a huge instant hit, and community products don’t work like that.  It takes a long time and a lot of hard work to be an overnight success in the community business – you have to let the systems evolve in ways that users want.  And AOL just did not have the patience.

Meanwhile, AOL let all those good old community products wither further.

After it became obvious that AIM Pages was not going to save the company, AOL tried something new.  Kevin Lawver came up with the idea for Ficlets, and he persuaded management to let him build it as a model of a new kind of community.  Build lots of small, cool, community products, communities-in-a-box.  Go after that long tail.  Instead of building one gigantic community product, build lots and lots of little ones on top of a shared infrastructure.

But it was not to be.  Again, AOL did not have the patience to nurture something small and wonderful.  If it couldn’t bring in millions of pageviews on day one, AOL wasn’t interested.

AOL’s just announced that they are shutting down Ficlets.  This comes about a month after they shut down Hometown, AOL Pictures, and Journals.  AOL is, basically, dropping out of the community business.  They still have some products, the result of acquisitions like Bebo, but the old AOL community products, the ones that were the pioneers in online community, and the new AOL products, the ones that could have led the way to an AOL renaissance, are all being killed.

And that’s just too bad.

Posted in aol | 1 Comment

Four reflections on the election

1. For the last eight years, we have had a president who is breathtakingly reckless on policy matters.  For the eight years before that, we had a president who was breathtakingly reckless on personal matters.  The country has suffered as a result of all of this recklessness.

Is it any surprise that one of Obama’s great strengths in this campaign is his calmness, that the country is drawn to his cool level-headed temperament?  Or that it is turned off by McCain’s fiery shoot-from-the-hip attitude, an attitude that suggests another four more years of recklessness?

I think we’re all ready for a little bit of steadiness.  I certainly know that I am.

2. One thing that I find fascinating in this campaign is the phenomenon of racists for Obama.  There’s been several reports of campaign workers going door to door and being told that the resident intends to “vote for the n****r.”  Things have gotten so bad that people are finally putting aside all those wedge issues and voting their own interest, and Obama’s race is the greatest wedge issue of them all.

3. I wonder sometimes if this country would have ever elected a black man if it weren’t for the great vortex of special circumstances in which we find ourselves now.  Two never-ending wars, a financial meltdown, a never-ending stream of executive incompetence over the last eight years: it’s taken an awful lot to get people to a point where race seems irrelevant, but history has provided.  And it should be easier next time.

4. I must admit: Obama’s race is not irrelevant for me.   IMHO, race is the centerpiece of the history of America.  It has always been the dark stain on our rhetoric about freedom, rhetoric that was often written by slaveholders.  It was the root cause of the Civil War, the American Illiad.  Even today, after that great war, after the great civil rights struggles, it still lingers as a central division in American life.

The 150th anniversary of the issuance of the final Emancipation Proclamation, that great document that eliminated slavery, will be on January 1, 2013.  I want to see a black president give a speech commemorating that moment.  Nothing would better symbolize how far we have come.  Nothing would provide a more hopeful next chapter in the great tragic tale of American race relations.  And it looks like I may get my wish.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Sigh…

I just posted this as a comment on a friend’s blog.  Then I decided I liked it enough to post it here.

I’m getting really tired of seeing things happen that, having read about them in the history books, I never thought I’d see. Like:

– I never thought I’d see a presidential impeachment. Then came Monica.

– I never thought I’d see a hung presidential election. Hello, 2000!

– On a more somber note, 9/11 came close to being the bloodiest day in American history. It didn’t quite beat our Antietam, but it sure looked close for a while.

– I remember Nixon – he’s the first president I do remember.  I never thought I’d see someone challenge his badness as worst president in my lifetime. Surprise!

– Now we see what may well become the next Great Depression. I don’t think it will get quite that bad, but still.

Could we please just have a few years of calm? I’m tired of seeing hugely historical events every other year or so. All I want is a decade of peace and quiet – is that so much to ask?

Sigh.

Posted in life | 1 Comment

The first debate

First off, I’m really obsessing too much about this election.

But the first debate!

On balance, this was one of the highest quality debates I’ve seen in terms of the performance of both candidates.  They also did a good job of highlighting their differences, and both made solid cases for their approaches and world views.  All in all, I was impressed.  I did think that Obama looked calmer and more presidential, but McCain looked more in command of the minutia of the subject.  There were a few times when McCain seemed to lose his cool.  On the other hand, I think
Obama grinned a little too broadly a little too often.  Both managed to score some points off the other, though I thought Obama came off a little ahead there.  But that may just reflect my biases.

All in all, I don’t think it was a knock-out for either one.  You could imagine either one as president.

Which, under the circumstances, is a major win for Obama.  Obama looked credible standing next to McCain.  Which is what he needed to do.  He passed the Reagan test – seeing him up there, I could easily imagine him as president.

On the other hand, McCain needed to make Obama look out of place.  Really, McCain needed a solid win here.  He didn’t get it, and so, in the broader sense, McCain failed to do what he needed to do tonight.

So I call it a tactical draw, but a strategic win for Obama.  (And yes, Senator McCain, I know the difference between tactics and strategy.)

We’ll see how it all plays out, but that’s my take.

Jim Lehrer did his usual superb job.

Posted in mccain, obama | Leave a comment

Latest reading

Haven’t posted my reads in a while.  Which doesn’t mean I’m not reading…

Shut Up, I’m Talking: And Other Diplomacy Lessons I Learned in the Israeli Government, by Gregory Levey.  A memoir of Levey’s time working for the Israeli government.  Levey was going to law school in New York and getting bored, so he decided to apply for an internship with the Israeli delegation to the UN.  (Levey is Canadian, but he is Jewish.)  He was told that they did not have interns, but they offered him a job as a speech writer instead.  Thus began his career with the Israeli government, which eventually led to his moving to Israel and working as a speech writer on Ariel Sharon’s staff.  It’s a pretty funny book, largely centered on the various mistakes that Levey made along the way (including one time that he cast Israel’s vote on a UN resolution without actually knowing what that resolution was, and another time when he used the remnants of his high school French to translate a statement from the French government, a translation that ended up in several news stories, and one where he was not at all confident of his accuracy).  A funny book, though certainly light.

The Civil War by Shelby Foote.  Somehow, over several years of reading about the Civil War, I’ve never gotten around to reading Shelby Foote’s massive three-volume history.  I’m coming to regret the lapse.  Foote was a novelist who wrote a history of the war, and it is an excellent read.  Further, it reads like a novelist’s view on the war – Foote’s descriptions of the various generals and politicians read like a novelist’s descriptions, complete with piercing eyes and dark black hair.  The books mostly cover the military aspects of the war – if you want detailed discussions of the economics, you should look elsewhere.  I’m through the first two volumes now – putting the third aside for a while.  But they have been a great joy.

One note on the Foote trilogy: I’m finding a real joy in reading his take on the late unpleasantness.  It’s a story that I know well, but hearing Foote’s version makes it fresh.  I’ll also note that while Foote clearly has sympathies for the south, I don’t find them overwhelming.  On the whole, I think he presents a balanced view.  (Though he does degenerate into Lee hero-worship sometimes.  It isn’t too bad, all in all.)

Posted in books | Leave a comment

My case for Obama

My friend Paul challenged me to write a positive case for Obama. (He’s still trying to decide who to vote for, and he similarly challenged another friend to make the case for McCain.) Rather then just email it to him, I decided to blog it.

The challenge is to make the case for Obama, not against McCain, and to keep it positive. I’m going to do my best, but some of my arguments are two-edged swords: saying what I like about Obama’s approach is, in part, a criticism of what I’d expect from McCain and what I’ve seen from Bush.

That said, the following is my case.

1. Foreign policy.

I believe that the US does much better abroad when we emphasize soft power and international cooperation over hard power and lone wolfism. In general, I expect that a Democratic administration’s foreign policy is more likely to follow the soft-power/internationalist approach. And in specific, I think that Obama will do a great job in these areas – just by electing him, the US would take great strides towards greater soft-power.

I also believe that one of the worst things that a national leader can do is get his country into an unwise and unjust war. (I view this as one of the biggest failings of the Bush administration.) I expect Obama to be a lot less likely to do this than McCain.

As to Iraq: I like the fact that Obama opposed it early. I think it was a particularly stupid war, especially at a time when we had little choice but to go to war in Afghanistan. Right now, pretty much everybody, including Bush, McCain, Obama, and the Iraqis themselves, agree that the US will be withdrawing sometime in the next two years. So I don’t see much practical difference in the current policies. (It should be noted that Obama favored the timetable before McCain did, but that McCain supported the surge, which probably made it possible for the timetable without greater chaos. I call that a tie, with Obama getting extra credit for not wanting us to be in Iraq in the first place.)

And don’t get me started on torture.  That would be a hard topic on which to keep positive.  Let’s just leave it that, based on political positions in the last two years, it seems probable that an Obama administration would be far more likely to get the US out of the ugly business of torture.

2. Domestic policy.

I expect Obama’s to be less beholden to big business and to focus more on the people. I expect this to play out both in specific domestic programs (e.g., health care) and in regulation. (And I do think that we need greater government regulation. The biggest fiscal crisis of the last few years – the subprime mortgage problem – was largely due to deregulation.) I think this will also improve the chances that we’ll do something meaningful on the environment.

I also want a fact-based science policy. The Dems support stem-cell research. The GOP platform opposes it.

Over the last few decades, the Dems have shown themselves to be better stewards of the economy than the GOP. I’d expect that to continue under an Obama presidency.

On the budget, I don’t really expect either side to be great. But the Dems are more likely to tax and spend, and the GOP more likely to borrow and spend, and so I’d expect deficits to be smaller under Dems.

3. Change.

Here I’m not talking the kind of change that is getting a lot of attention on the campaign trail these days. I’m talking two things in particular:

First, I believe that the Bush administration has badly screwed up this country and the operation of this government. I believe that we need a new broom to clean up all the mess. An Obama administration would lead to changes throughout the executive branch of the government and an overhaul of many of its procedures. I doubt that another GOP administration would lead to changes anywhere near as sweeping. Thus, I think an Obama administration would be more likely to give us this particular sort of change – something that is badly needed.

Second, I think we need to get past the culture wars that are left over from the 60’s. The only way we’ll do this is by getting past the Baby Boomers as the party in power. (And yes, I realize that if you look at the birthdates and demography, Obama can be viewed as a boomer while McCain is not. But McCain was shaped by the 60’s in ways that Obama was not, and so I don’t really view Obama as a boomer from a cultural perspective.) A vote for Obama is a vote for generational change, and I think that’s important.

4. Personal Privacy.

One of my biggest issues is keeping government out of my life. I expect that Obama would be less likely to engage in invasive surveillance methods, and much less likely to support policies that interfere with personal privacy. (I’d also expect his Supreme Court picks to be more supportive of individual liberty, but I’ll deal with that later.) I don’t want government in my bedroom, and I don’t want government on my phone lines. Here again, this is a matter where neither party is perfect in my mind, but I believe the Dems are far better.

5. The Supreme Court.

John Paul Stevens isn’t going to last much longer. If he is replaced by a Republican, kiss goodbye to all of those SCOTUS rulings that support individual privacy and choice. Abortion igets the most press, but it’s far from the only issue. Do you want continued access to contraceptives? Do you want the legal right to do whatever you want in your own bedroom with another consenting adult? (And bear in mind, there are laws on the books of several states, including Virginia, that outlaw oral sex, a practice engaged in by a majority of Americans.) You have those rights because the Supreme Court says you have them, and the balance of justices is such that another GOP administration could easily lead to overturning those cases.

6. Symbolism.

I believe that the central theme of American history is race. Slavery is one of the two great sins on the American conscience (the other being our treatment of the Indians). And people still alive felt the bite of Jim Crow laws – I recently had a friend tell me what it was like to be told that he and his mother had to move to the back of the bus.

I think it would be a great and a glorious thing if, on the 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, we had a black president. It’s a symbol we need – proof that in America, anyone really can grow up to be president.

7. Obama the man.

I like the idea of having a president who is thoughtful and articulate. I like the idea of having a president who can himself craft words to convey complex ideas in a way that speaks to millions. I like the organizational talent that Obama has shown in running one of the most impressive presidential campaigns in recent times. I like having a president who can inspire Americans to do better. I like a president who can inspire youth.

Obama is all of these things.

8. Biden.

I’m extremely happy with the choice of Biden as VP. I wanted him as part of the administration – I had been thinking Secretary of State, but am happy with VP. He’s a solid choice with experience in a lot of important areas. Moreover, he has been one of the most creative thinkers in areas where we’ve had troubles of late, most notably including Iraq.

One of the most important tasks of a president is selecting the right people. Selecting Biden as his VP strikes me as solid evidence that Obama will do a good job of this.

Posted in obama | 1 Comment

More blogging by me!

I’m going to be occasionally blogging on technical matters on the new Mixx Engine Room blog.  (Mixx is where I work, for those who may not know.)  Those posts are going to be seriously geeky, so don’t be ashamed if you don’t decide to read those.  But if you are interested in how one goes about building a social news site in Ruby on Rails, check the Engine Room.

Posted in Blogroll, job | 1 Comment

Sloth

Sloth is not usually one of my vices.  But this week, well…

This past week, here at the beach, a typical day would go something like this:

9: Wake up.   Lie around in bed, talking to Julie.

9:30: Eat breakfast while reading a book and looking out over the bay.

10:00: Read while sitting on the deck.

11:00 Time for the late-morning nap.

12:30: Lunch!

1:00 Short walk on the beach (optional)

2:00 Sit on the deck and read.

3:30 Afternoon nap

5:30 Check email.

6:00 Dinner!

6:30 Read

8:00 Short walk on the beach.

8:30 Read

11:00 Go to bed.

When I comment on how little I’m doing, Julie usually responds, “Well, you probably need it.”  And boy, do I!

Anyway, I don’t want you to think I did absolutely nothing this week.  I went out sailing a couple of times.  (The wind wasn’t great, but there were dolphins in the bay one day, and the girls and I sailed with them.)  I played some RockBand with the family.  I even made it out to Mathews to see a movie one day.  And did I mention all those naps I managed to have?

Okay, so maybe I didn’t do much.  And it was everything I hoped it would be.

Posted in me, travel | Leave a comment