Francis Perkins: the best "man" in FDR's cabinet

This book starts out with a bang.

1933. FDR has just been elected president. "He inherits the worst economic crisis in the nation's history. An era of rampant speculation had come to an end. The stock market had collapsed, rendering investments valueless. Banks were shutting down, stripping people of their lifetime savings. About a third of workers were unemployed; wages were falling; tens of thousands homeless. Real estate prices had plummeted, and millions of homeowners faced foreclosure."

This reads like the headlines in today's newspapers.

Back to 1933..."People took out what were called 'bullet' loans, which were interest-only loans that buyers were told they should refinance in three or five years. Lenders told home buyers not to worry; homes were rising so fast in value that it would be easy to refinance into another loan."

Sound familiar? Too bad people didn't remember this didn't work in 1933 and so why would it work in 2008? Thank you Alan Greenspan!

I just saw Michael Moore's new film "Capitalism, A Love Story". It needed some editing, but told a raw story. He shows footage of families being evicted from their homes because they haven't made their house payments. Part of me asks, "so why did they borrow so much money, it's irresponsible" but now I'm asking what kind of banking system purposely loans people money they know they'll never be able to pay back just so they can make a processing fee. So who's to blame? Where's consumer protection?

But what about Francis Perkins? She worked for protecting the laborer at a time when conditions were awful. She's a gutsy lady. After graduating from college against her family's good advice she moves to Chicago where "immediately upon arriving, she reinvented herself. She changed her name, her faith and her political persuasion."

If women are all about change she did an amazing job.

More later, I have to go feed the cats...

Outliers: The Story of Success

I was a little worried this book was going to another "dress for success and destroy your competition" kind of book. instead it works on many levels and ultimately has a story that is personally relevant to most people.

In the first chapter, Malcolm Gladwell, tells the story of a very successful ice hockey team. He points out most of the members of the team have January birthdays. The ice hockey league uses Jan 1 as a cut off date for eligibility which means a player born in Jan will be "bigger and more coordinated players, who have had the benefit of critical extra months of maturity". These kids will always have the advantage in their league and then go on to try out for college and/or professional teams. They will be the "successful players".

Gladwell suggests, why not have a second team that has a birthday cut of June 1 so you'd have a second group of "successful" players. Why not increase the success. Why do we always set limits?

Culture in the cockpit. The other really memorable chapter describes how the culture of a flight crew can impact the success of a flight. He tells the story of a disasterous Korean Airlines flight that ends up with the jet crashing in to a mountain. The pilot had flown the same route recently and he was tired. His crew gave hints that things weren't right but since he was the captain, "in charge" he wasn't obliged to listen to members of his crew. The "culture' in other Korean cockpits was studied and changes were made so the crew communicated in a more professional manner.

I liked this book because in the end Gladwell tells the success story of his own mother. She was a black born in Jamaica but by good fortune and work she was able to travel to England for "formal education". He's emphasizing a person's success is built on relationships with people, work and lots of time luck, good fortune...an important "ingrediant" we don't have any control over.

This book offers a variety of stories. I've picked out the three that made the biggest impact on me. Someone else could read this book and take away a different experience.

And then we can always end by asking "so what is the definition of success? Is it the same for everyone?"

Buddhists in 1880's Boston?

"The Great Wave" is full of all kinds of surprises. I had no idea New England intellectuals fell in love with Japan after the Civil War and looked there for spiritual and artisitic inspiration. Benfey writes "In these days (1883), when a large part of Boston prefers to consider itself Buddhist rather than Christian." And New England had been the birth place of Transcendentalism and the Unitarian church. Maybe those long cold winters give people the more time to think about life, death and why are we here.

Benfey points out the the appeal to Buddhism and it's simple, stark look at the world was a reaction to the greed and glitz of the Gilded Age. I would imagine most people were hurting badly after the Civil War and questioning the values of our country.

Our book tells about the journeys of Americans to Japan, including authors Henry Adams and Herman Melville. In return we learn about Japanese citizens, Kakuzo Okakura and a young sailor, Manjoiro, who make the journey to America and how it changes their lives.

Apparently there was such a run on Japanese art so when Henry Adams finally arrives in 1886 he complains, "Japan has been cleaned out...Kakimonos are not to be got...Fine old porcelain is rare and dear. Embroideries are absolutely introuvable. Even books seem scarce." All the "good stuff" was back in Boston.

It's told that at this same time Japan was anxious to modernize and learn American technology so they were happy to shed some of the old items. They were "fighting off isolation and forging a new modern state".

Reading this book made me think of the opera "Madame Butterfly." She marries an American naval officer, abandons her Japanese religion in an effort to become an American. In one production I saw broadcast the Butterfly actually wears Western clothing after she is married to Pinkerton. It really emphasized how she was trying to change and take on a new culture. Unfortuantely Butterfly falls in love with a tenor so things always end badly.

More later

Land of the Distant Father continues...

Call me an optomist. On page 244 Anna receives a pair of pearl earrings from her father for her 17th birthday. She takes them to a jeweler and she's told they are worthless fakes. I think she should have gotten a second opinion. Why would he bother to send a pair of cheap earrings all the way from Shanghai? Her Dad may be an unstable jerk, but I don't think he's cheap. Also he's sending a gift to impress his daughter. Why wrap up trash? And think of the postage?

If I ever meet Bo Caldwell I'll ask her if she thinks the earrings are real or fake.

I find I'm more interested in the father character over Anna and the mother. Evil is always more interesting to read about than good. When I studied Milton's "Paradise Lost" at UC Berkeley we talked a lot about how Milton makes the devil so interesting, likable, "fun to be with" as opposed to God who is no fun at all. Hard to make "good" appealing.

Imagine if Anna's father was a nice guy. Left Shanghai on time so he could live with his family in sunny Pasadena. Not much of a story. More like a 1960's TV sitcom a la Father Knows Best. Besides, he has to be "bad" so he can change, abandon his old ways, appreciate what he has and go on to be a good person. Redemption.

The only insightful, intersting thing we hear her mother say is on page 237 after she and Anna go to a restaurant in Shanghai and see Joseph with another woman. Anna comments the woman is not pretty. Through her mother says, "Your father loves beautiful women. The fact she's not a beauty tells me he must truly care about her."

So does this mean her mother thinks of herself as just another shallow, beauty queen. We don't get to know a whole bunch about what drives Eve. Sad.

The Distant Land of My Father

By mistake when I first listed this book in our calendar of titles to read I called it The Land of My Distant Father...I think this works , too.

Prologue. I was thumbing through the book and began the prologue. As the publishing marketing people write, "I couldn't put it down."

Don't we all want to find mysterious papers or diaries our parents have written so we come to discover that our dull, boring parents are really exciting, smugglers with a past in Shanghai.

I have thrown away all my old diaries because they are pages and pages of boring, mundane drivel. Sometimes launching into lists of things I must do. Most of the writing is about loosing weight. If I had spent as much time writing fiction or poetry as I did about loosing weight my books would fill a library.

I suppose this is why I am blogging. But I will not bore you with new plans for my weight lose. I think I have given up. My body now has a mind of it's own. It's not listening to me anymore.

Back to our book. I was getting a little bogged down with all the location information about Shanghai. It was awkward. Screaming, you see I did my homework. I know old Shanghai. Information to hang the plot on. Location. Color. Sense of place.

So why does Anna's father take her to HongKew "to look at a piece of machinery?" Her mother has said not to take her out since the last time he was arrested and taken away. An upsetting incident for everyone.

Prove to himself, things are OK. Normal? Anna's father told her, "It was good for me to get out, and there was no reason for any American to be afraid."

If her takes her, things will be OK. Not logical since he was arrested the last time they went out together.

Prove to Anna life in Shanghai is "normal". But it wasn't. "My father's expression told me that this was not at all what he'd expexted and I was immediately terrified. I'd heard too many whispered stories not to be, and a part of me expected to be bayoneted on the spot."

So her father believes the old fortune cookie advice, chaos presents opportunity. It is also usually dangerous.

I hope we get to learn a little bit more about how his mind works as the book progresses.

Enjoying the book!

Chez Panisse

I haven't quite finished the book but I'm amazed Chez Panisse survived and still serves meals. It definitely is the product of a group effort, a family.

The opening night in August 1971 was a disaster. There were plenty of diners but not enough food.

"There were still fifty people waiting in the street. 'I'm sorry, ' Alice called to them. 'We just don't have anymore food. Come back tomorrow.'"

It sounds like they had never cooked the duck recipe they were serving so the timing was an unknown quantity. The sauce reportedly contained cigarette ash from the chef, Victoria Kroyer, a UC Berkeley philosophy graduate who liked to cook at home. Ah-h-h the perfect person to hire for a new and ground breaking restaurant.

Even from the beginning it seems Alice Waters is picking people with skill but she will be able to call the shots, pick the menu items and have the final say.

Surprising Jeremiah Tower lasted as long as he did. I'm amazed at his ability to cook on a diet of champagne and cocaine. They must have had a lot of cooking accidents, mitts and sleeves on fire. But great food.

I'm going to read JT's book about all time called "California Dish".

More to come...

present meets the past...

History. I like the idea of a man, an historian, reconstructing his grandparents lives because they seem more interesting than his own and perhaps he would learn something about himself. Comparing the past and present characters is a wonderful device. Sometimes the voice seemed awkward (so here I am judging the wonderful Wallace Stegner but isn't this what blogs are all about?) when Lyman is trying to put words into his grandmother's mouth or imagining what she might be thinking but I guess I got used to it. It stopped bothering me.

Stegner did get in trouble because he based his grandmother's character on a real artist/writer named, Mary Hollock Foote. He was accused of plagiarism. I recently read that he felt he "borrowed" these relatives.

Living in the Old West. This book gives a vivid account of living in the "old west". I read it years ago and the one scene that stayed in my memory is the stage coach ride to the New Almaden mine. For the first time I really thought about how uncomfortable and dirty travel would be. In later parts of the book there is more train travel but even that must have been pretty uncomfortable.

What does it take to succeed in the Old West? I think Oliver is a sympathtic character. So what did it take to suceed? Education, connections, skill or just lots of luck. He has some great ideas, the cement process and the irrigation plan in Idaho. He just doesn't have that luck part.

Mothers doing what is best for the children. I can really appreciate the drama Susan goes through when she has to constantly put her "family" ,the children first in her plans. A job for Oliver in South America is out of the question because she didn't feel safe taking a small child there. A wise decision or not? Who's to know.

Stegner writes about his own life: " By getting scarlet fever, I had balked my father's dream of going to Alaska and digging up the baseball-sized nuggets. Then there was a bad time. You (his mother) left my father , or he you; nobody ever told me. But Cece (his older brother) and I found ourselves in a Seattle orphans' home, put there while you worked at Bon Marche"

Mrs Elliott accuses Susan of running Oliver's life: "Of course you make the decisions. You tell him how his life is to go. If you didn't, you'd be up in the Andes right now." Does she run his life?

The big dream. Oliver has big ideas but they just don't work out. Is it his personality? Ideas before there time. What's going on here? Should he have given up on the Big Ditch long before he's beaten down and drinking too much?

Forgiveness. So will Lyman forgive his wife? Susan and Oliver live in Grass Valley together at the end of their life.

"But he never forgave her." I said. "She broke something she couldn't mend. I all the years I lived with them I never saw them kiss, I never saw them put their arms around each other, I never saw them touch!"

That's really sad.

Western Literature. "and you will find that it is a book not about the place but about motion, not about fulfillment but about desire. There is always a seeking, generally unsatisfied."

That just about sums it up.

WOW! What a great read.

JML