A lot of markets have a prominent luxury segments. We can buy clothes, cars, bathroom tiles etc. which signal to others that we're not too stupid or lazy to make good money, not too cheap to just hoard that money, and not too tasteless or socially clueless to spend it on "the wrong things". There is really no luxury market for books, though. There are valuable first editions, signed books etc, sure, but that's a collector market, not a market for brand-new luxury goods. I suppose there must be some fancy limited editions which cost a lot, especially of art books, but they're a tiny fringe of the market.

The odd thing is that there used to be a market for "luxury books" only a few years ago - expensive encyclopedia sets and atlases signaled that one has money and education. That market has been destroyed completely by digital technology - first Encarta, then Internet seach engines. I suppose that's a good thing. We have plenty of other ways of signaling wealth and the world isn't a worse place because one of them vanishes. We can still use books to signal our taste and refinement. (And, of course, a few of us might actually use them as reading material, too.)

Music is kind of similar - though big stars' concert tickets cost a lot, their albums and band shirts cost about the same as those of less popular singers, not ten times as much.

Well, I suppose I should post about something other than music sometimes... let's try one of my least favorite subjects for a change - politics.

It's normal to worry about being ruled by corrupt, selfish and stupid scum; I worry more about being ruled by honest, noble and intelligent people. Sure, it's very unlikely, but when it does happen it can lead to the worst of disasters.

Admirable people in politics are so rare that to find them we turn to fictional characters. The one I am thinking of now is Lord Philip Ivywood, that appreciator of Post-Futurist painting. He is the main villain of G.K. Chesterton's The Flying Inn - yet unlike most villains he is a very admirable person who keeps his word to a couple of criminals even after one of them shoots him, and travels to London before recovering from his wound in order to fight for his political cause. He genuinely believes that what he does is good, especially for the poor. The worst things he does are not revealing some of his plans which he knows would cause controversy, and let a political opponent fall into a drunken sleep which prevents him from making a speech. This makes him far more dangerous than his black-hearted servant or even Dr. Meadows, the philosopher turned milk merchant whose beliefs are probably even more absurd, but whose criminal enterprise and less admirable persona limit him to imposing his ideals on a single village. Lord Ivywood, on the other hand, nearly ruins all of Britain - not because he is evil but only because he has modern beliefs and has the intelligence, character and charisma to achieve his agenda.

Here is a thirdhand quote from Greg Cochran about intelligent leaders:

What really matters in a leader is not being smart, but being right. Who was smarter? Warren G. Harding or V.I. Lenin? I'm sure Lenin could have beaten Harding in chess, but I definitely would rather have lived under Harding than Lenin. Harding was kind of a dumb bunny, but his prejudices and instincts were much more reasonable than Lenin's, who was wrong about everything.

It's perhaps a good thing that Lenin was murderous scum; if he were of more noble character, he might have done a whole lot more damage. He probably wouldn't have accomplished much evil at all if he were a lot less smart. As for Harding, he's still at the game of politics and speaking out on the issues that matter.

A romance by Lee Wilkinson (At The Millionaire's Bidding) was one of the earliest I've read. I was delighted, coming across another novel from her in a library sale, going for three books for a pound. It resonated with me, that story. The conflicted and innocent heroine, the peeling away at layers of truth from both our heroine and hero, his protection of her and forgiving her sins. Her conflicted sexual discovery of strong attraction and love, as opposed to settling for the first man -- her current fiance -- who'd offer her a mere dream of a future that proved so deceptively false. Her childlike exploration of a grand stately home that she felt connected to with the guidance of our hero, making it feel like destiny. This image of her covered in the light from a multi-coloured, mullioned window remarking how it felt like standing in the very heart of a rainbow. There was a plotted and planned reason for her feeling that way. The mix of woman and man, fairytale and realism, yin and yang. It came together perfectly in that book, which I still remember very well, years later.

There's this concept I've heard is recognised in literary theory. A book is as much shaped by the author as the person reading it. I realised reading A Vengeful Deception would have a different flavour for me. The author's voice doesn't seem to have changed. She seemed to be using the same formula for many things, while the characters were still unique and alive on their own. She kept up with the times, the book was more sexual than her writing before and more aware of the changes in women today: more sexualised and less easy to trust.

I was reading it in a much more clinical way, thinking about what the author was doing and comparing to my previous novel. Noting which behaviours were likely and which were not in the personalities of the protagonists. Noting the dynamics between our hero and our heroine, his suspicion of her, his regret, his joy at discovering someone like her, her helpless attraction to him and me understanding the reasons for it better. But strangely, I was also more likely to believe in the coup de foudre our protagonists were struck with. While on one hand it wasn't the same mysterious magic for me, on the other hand it became quite believable. Yes, it is me who has changed.

What a paradox: believing in love and its true nature more caused a slight loss in its sparkle in fiction for me.

Other things changed too. Previously, my imagination would be captured in the sense of daydreams and wistfulness. Each hero would be a template from which to add or build a fantasy, perhaps not as myself but transplated into the mind of the heroine. Now I am separate from them. Their struggles and emotions activates remembrance of my own experiences: bittersweet, real and three dimensional in a way that cannot be captured in the space of the written word. I see how the hero compares to the template of real life men. This man's in charge of his world, cautiously distrustful, intelligent with perhaps emotions not completely controlled by his judgement. Ah, yes, that sounds familiar.

I knew intuitively, when young, never to try and impose fiction on the real world. In fact the very nature of fiction as a separation from real life experience was the foundations of its appeal to me. Escape and inspiring creativity, giving me a colourful world in contrast to the real world which I found strangely tasteless and unappealing.

Daydreams.

What I never dreamt of was that shades of reality can and do surpass fiction. In a positive way.

Realism is not being a pessimist. It is seeing the world for what it is: rich in pain, rich in possibility. With both giving value and meaning to the other, as evidenced in this story in some ways.

• Amazon here (UK) and here (US).
• Better World Books(US): they ship free in the US, eliminate their carbon footprint, raise funds for literacy and are part of the B corporation.
• The Book Despository who offer free shipping worldwide from their base in the UK.

Animal Farm: US, UK, and for poor people.
George Orwell

Animal Farm is among the most influential books of the twentieth century, and its simple allegorical basis is one of the most inspired. It is hard to understate the legacy of the book, which was written in response to the then nascent rise of communism in the east, but since has effortlessly transcended the context for its birth; for those witnessing the constant Platonic cycle of democracy into tyranny it will provide comparisons that are eternally forthright, pertinent yet childlike in their whimsical persuasion.

It happens that a coup is staged by the animals against their incompetent human owners. The pigs, more intelligent by their nature, naturally become the new leadership class by claiming rule over the rest of the farmyard. The basis of the book would be a more simple polemic against dictatorial rule - a cynical description of political revolutions led by a corrupt leadership who pervert popular interests - were it not for this deft allegory of the farm. Thus, the political overtones remain as mere joyful inferences, the scenes are made more imaginative, and our empathy with the unfortunate farmyard beings is something more compassionate, not pitiful. The book would be suitable for a child, yet will confer wisdom upon readers of any age.

George Orwell is almost constant with his incisive observations of corrupt political interference and distrust of the crowd. What reoccurs throughout is how seemingly benevolent motives can become wickedly pragmatic to suit those in power, as internecine debate breaks down leadership consensus and the democratic process stymies automaton efficiency. There are many brilliant examples of this inexorable unravelling, a memorable one being the “tractor production” statistics announced by one of the pigs to placate the rest of the impoverished animals.

The characters all follow historical and archetypal similitudes. The understanding of these characters’ qualities is mostly immediate; the role of the sheep is not hard to figure out, for example. Coming to precisely recognise some of the allegories will take experience of and exposure to the disheartening processes of the real world. However, a deep study of what Orwell was referring to is not necessary; the traits of his characters are of course self-evident for all.

From the time you pick it up until the end you will enjoy your time reading this book. The simple fairy tale style is innocently appealing, yet the themes it encompasses are vast: crowdism, technological idolatry, indoctrination, corruption, patriotism, totalitarianism, democracy and many others. The book finishes despondently, as per Orwell’s intent; as in 1984, it was never his job to provide us with a happy ending. The fruitless conclusion serves only to further imbue us with the kind of healthy cynicism this book tacitly promotes.

This novel seems to be the third in a series. However, a lot of detail -- tiresomely and more than necessary -- is given about the previous novels. Warning: Spoilers ahead.

It is a trend within historical romance novels to give their heroines an independence and a way of thinking that is so at odds with the spirit of their times as to be often anachronistic.

This is so prevalent within historical romance novels that 'trend' seems to be a misnomer. It is more a trope, a cliche, a given, even.

Our heroine establishes herself quickly as one of these heroines. This is evident in many ways later in the novel but the immediate symbol is in her attire when we are first introduced to Her Feistiness: boy's clothing. Cross-dressing as a boy is another device that often appears within historical romances. We find that our heroine is on the run: escaping the oppressions of her abusive patriarchal household of course. In order to do this, she must cross-dress: reject her feminine self and play at being a man ineffectively. It is a ruse that is easily seen through. As much as she would want to, a woman cannot masquerade as a man.

Our heroine is also familiar with swordplay and she loves horses. She rides horses better than any man (with the exception of our alpha hero.). In keeping with female empowerment, this and her other qualities of which an example is "courage", win the admiration of our hero and -- later, in a memorable symbolic scene -- his people. She is also crappy at housework. This is meaningfully remedied later, at the same time she comes to terms with her desire for our hero and herself as a woman.

The hero himself is ridiculously perfect. He rides horses better than her, for one. His riding horses better than her is not enough to sufficiently elevate his status above our heroine. He impressively is the best at riding horses while hating doing it. He hates riding horses because he is afraid of heights. Of course, this "fear" does not stop our alpha hero from scaling a cliff to rescue our heroine. Why let a little thing like fear of heights stop him doing that?

Now why did our not-so-empowered-after-all heroine end up at the bottom of a cliff? (A fall she somehow survived with a bruise or two that took her all of a day or so to recover from.)

Get this: She was so focused, so intent, on escaping the evil patriarchy that she ran herself off the cliff.

Ladies and gentlemen, she ran off a cliff. She didn't notice it there.

Now it gets more ridiculous:
Who was she running from?
Our alpha hero.
Why was he chasing her?
In his words: "There's nothing for you to be afraid of. Noone's going to hurt you. I'll see you safely to wherever you're going and -- " Despite this, he still gets kicked in the nuts. She also knew he was telling the truth, because she has a magic power.This magic power makes her able to tell when people tell the truth. She's empowered, she literally has a magic power, okay? Isn't that what 'empowered woman' means?

So she knew there was little chance of harm occuring and she ran off a cliff anyway. Why did she do this? This is the best explanation she has to offer: "Surrender is for the craven and the meek."

That a blatant, irrational mistrust and fear of Men/The Patriarchy/the Y chromosome leads a woman to literally run herself off a cliff is a beautiful analogy for the mess a radical feminist might purposelessly make of her own psyche.

The conflict between our heroine's desire for complete freedom and her desire for our hero dominate the emotional drive behind the novel. Of course, this is a romance novel and she must resolve it, understanding that complete freedom is in surrendering to what she actually wants: the hero.

Of her own free will, the heroine loses her virginity to the hero (who -- for the record -- resisted mightily and really wanted her to stay a virgin. But what can you do if a determined naked woman assaults you in your sleep, literally impaling herself upon you when inevitably aroused? Cry rape, maybe?). Ironically, no less than the threat of death persuaded her to actually marry the same man upon discovery of the fact that he's foreign [Norse to her prissy Saxon] and, in fact, the actual betrothed she was supposed to wed. Silly truthteller! He's perfect, you stupid bint! As the hero himself points out on at least one occasion, she has very little common sense.

Beautiful symbolism in this, again. What she is running away from proved to be what she actually wants.

That brings us back to just how boringly perfect our hero is:
Greatest living warrior in all the land? Check.
Perfect figure? Check. (This is in fact the reason our heroine raped him; she espied his perfect figure and was unable to contain her misandrist sexual objectifying lust).
Takes charge and takes no bull, recognising bull without the advantage of truthtelling powers, while our heroine has trouble even with them)? Check.
Indescribably wealthy? Check.
Loves women and reasonably gentle to them? Check.
Endless experience with aforementioned women? Check.
Never Felt This Way Before with our heroine, despite these women? Check.
Universally (almost) loved by his people? Check.
Manages to be perfect despite, as a child, being a helpless orphan with a lone brother to protect him? Check.

Aside from the troubles suspending disbelief, he's boring in some ways. He could have used some depth and room for development. His one unique quality is being 'skald-souled' [a reference to skaldic poetry], fascinated with stories and legends. This novel does have some fun historical and mythical references. It's not clear what time period this was set -- no dates -- except that what could be called Anglo-Saxon territory was raided by Danes and there's a King Alfred forming an alliance with the Norse. There's also a place called Mercia in existence which according to wikipedia sets the time period at somewhere between 527 to 919 AD.

I like Ms Litton's voice which has sparkling description and charged, believable dialogue bringing her characters to a life they shouldn't have had. She does cross into modern lingo a bit much, maybe e.g. why is a Norse dude going 'what the hell' in his mind? He doesn't believe in hell per se, does he?

I really loved how our hero treated our heroine overall and the way they develop. I see potential in the voice: I believe this is probably not the author's best and she could do better with different material.

• Amazon here (UK) and here (US).
• Better World Books(US): they ship free in the US, eliminate their carbon footprint, raise funds for literacy and are part of the B corporation.
• The Book Despository who offer free shipping worldwide from their base in the UK.

Do you like nature but hate environmentalists? In A Moment On The Earth, Tuesday Morning Quarterback and my favorite leftist Gregg Easterbrook reminds us why environmentalists are so despicable. He begins by reminding us that nature is a lot tougher than we tend to think (even those of us who have expended great efforts trying to eradicate weeds), has survived conditions far worse than mankind could ever create, and far from having a "correct" state is always changing - and far from being in retreat is currently growing stronger and more lively.

Although the author praises the environmentalist movement's actual accomplishments of gaining influence and making the world a cleaner and nicer place to live, he points out that the environemtalists themselves are not proud of these and expend great energy pretending that they've never accomplished anything and things are steadily getting worse everywhere. The consistent pattern of overblown rhetoric aimed at spreading panic gets exposed and criticized with example after example. The reader also gets a long list of success at reducing various categories of pollution and preserving natural areas. Environmentalists also get criticized more briefly for attracting misanthropes and that especially dangerous subtype of misanthropes known as socialists. I wish those who want humanity to live in medieval or Stone Age conditions also got hammered too, along with those using environmentalism as a substitute for religion. It's much more productive to see such criticism from someone who strongly believes that environmental problems are serious and need to be addressed, rather than from autistic libertarians or right-wingers.

Not that the picture is all rosy; much work remains to be done, especially in the Third World. Based on the track record so far, though, the author believes that even the current doom scenarios of greenhouse gas levels and human population will be resolved much more quickly and inexpensively than anyone imagines. After all, this is what happened with all previous doomsday crises. An interesting but scary point Easterbrook makes is that environmentalism is just about the only area in which progressive ideology has actually managed to accomplish its goals; certainly compared to attempts to wipe out racial inequality, alcoholism or Christianity (just to pick a few random examples), eradicating pollution has been a smashing success in developed countries. Progressives should therefore point to their successes in order to win more influence and funding for their other programs. Well... I certainly hope they don't, but I see why doing so would make sense.

Towards the end of the book things get metaphysical and spiritual; inevitably, this part is the least convincing. It is mercifully short, though, and does contain some very valid thoughts, such as the idea that man should soon advance from the stage of protecting nature from his own actions and start protecting nature against natural phenomena such as extinctions, asteroid and comet strikes (one of Easterbrook's longstanding obsessions), and in the distant future even the lifecycle of our Sun. Inbetween those, though, we get some not-so-convincing ideas such as genetically engineering predator species to become vegetarians so we can have a kinder, gentler nature.

The main message of the book's nearly 700 pages is best summed up in this quote:

Rather than being a corridor of instant doom, environmental control is a tunnel with a bright, beckoning light at the end. Programs work; nature recovers; societies that invest in ecological protection see benefits within the lifetimes of those making the investment.

To put that at a more human scale: it sure is nice to only need to wash my windows twice a year instead of having them covered in soot in a couple of months. And to think that to get there all we really had to do was get rid of central economic planning which also made everyone a hell of a lot wealthier.

This book has been out for over a decade and sadly has apparently had zero influence; environmentalists are still the panic-spreading misanthropes they've always been. And why not? Prophesying doomsday makes you respected even when the prophecies prove completely false, after all. I doubt I'll live to see an optimistic environmentalist movement that's proud of its accomplishments and grounded in reality. That's a shame...

A sincere thank you to the person who recommended this.

I cannot do this book justice in a review. There are so many different things that make this novel special. I feel like this is the kind of book that makes essential reading for any thinking person. Depending on your context, this could be life changing and provide a certain clarity to your thinking.

If I had to offer a criticism for someone interested in reading this, I would say it can be a bit dry if you want non-stop action. There's discussion of equipment, tactics and battle and there are descriptions of training and little interludes of human interaction.

How does a boy become a man? Amidst training to be a starship trooper, our protagonist finds out, forming his identity and finding purpose. Endless questions are explored, relevantly within the context of suspenseful science fiction action: To what extent is society responsible for an individual and what forms them? To what extent is it attempting to work against the intrinsic grain of what an individual is capable of? Who should hold power and how?

It seems quite clear that there is a collective social responsibility for crime and debauchery. Acknowledging this does not absolve individuals of their actions. It means that it is a social responsibility to train thus prevent a person from straying and punish wrongdoing harshly. Softness and a lack of conditioning results in a descent into a path that will result in greater destruction. What occurs to me in illustrating this is the great harm an individual born with insensitivity to pain can inflict upon themselves, resulting in e.g. death. If it were possible to engineer an individual born to be insensitive to pain, that would be an undisputed cruelty.

The same applies to those who are not taught well and early to understand that for each socially irresponsible action, there is a real and threatening consequence.

Still, another question is raised: Given the potential for abuse of such a system, who should decide what a socially irresponsible action is?

That component is a less simple issue to determine.

That component is but one dimension of the issues explored by our narrator. His first person voice is slightly accented and colloquial: a man shootin' the breeze with one of his boys about old stories and snapshots of his life including the larger issues they made him wonder and have epiphanies about. He came to deeper realisations and understanding about ideas he only knew theoretically. He feels perhaps that he's an unremarkable boy made into a rather remarkable man by the choices and expectations influenced in no small part by the special people surrounding him: his friends, his family, his fellow men-at-arms and his teacher of History and Moral Philosophy.

We are human beings. We are unique individuals and yet, also the product of our crowds. Each individual has collective responsibility and the collective has responsibility to each individual.

I will leave you with one quotation included in the novel, chosen from Islam's holy book:
"...whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind."

America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It
Mark Steyn

"Civilizations die from suicide, not murder." This quotation from Arnold J. Toynbee opens up the first chapter in Conservative Mark Steyn's provocative book about the decline of the West. It suggests two things: First, the greatest enemy of the West today is civilization exhaustion, or the lack of will to defend its founding traditions and principles. Second, weakness is, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, "a provocation" to imperial forces. Steyn's story takes place in the midst of a Europe in economic and demographic collapse, contrasted against an American super power slowly coming to an end.

Steyn's main thesis is that Europe has succumbed to suicidal demographic trends, essentially forcing it to invite mass immigration from North Africa and the Middle East to finance its unsustainable Social Democratic welfare State. Combined with native culture denial, an impotent civil society, and the multicultural doctrine of cultural relativism, Europe is, according to Steyn, giving in to the new great enemy of radical Islamism. The follow-up question to this scenario is obvious, and explained by the title: Will America have to stand alone to defend Western values against radical Islamism?

The answer is a sad but truthful "yes." America is a unique player in the West in that it hasn't (yet) adopted the European welfare model, has not yet entered the demographic decline, and has resisted the ideological suicidal virus of cultural masochism. To back his thesis up, Steyn arms himself with demographic figures, analyses of Islamic radicalization pre- and post-9/11, and an impressive historical knowledge of the relationship between the East and the West. His conclusion is startling and is likely to force many anti-Americanists and multicultural dimwits in Europe to alter their views about their own future.

This is a horrifying book to read, because there's actually little hope in the struggle to preserve what's left of Western civilization in light of the enormous challenges we face. But most worrying of all is what Steyn, with sardonic wit and cruel facts, describes as the real enemy we need to battle: the spirit of resignation. "The end of the world as we know it" is the world post-WWII, created for a short period of human history. Despite its negative aspects, it's what keeps our empire going -- but if we don't confront the realities of our time, our moment may not survive our generation.

Our recently published translation of Finnish ecophilosopher Pentti Linkola's "Can Life Prevail?" is quickly drawing attention from academics and intellectual environmentalist groups alike. For those of you who haven't ordered the book yet, but want to know more about what it's all about, EVFIT ("Health and fitness in an evolutionary context") provides an excellent summary intended as an upcoming review for journal publication next month:

This book is a translation from the Finnish of 35 essays and articles written between 1989 and 2002 with the author adding a preface in 2004. They begin with the author’s reflections on nature and the human impact on nature, drawing heavily from the author’s 50 years of ornithology-centred travels on foot, bicycle and rowing boat through Finland. As the book progresses, the author’s focus shifts from describing and lamenting the damage to Finland’s ecology and humans’ separation from nature to advocacy of what he feels his whole country needs to achieve real sustainability, healthy citizens and a rich biosphere.

In his native Finland, the only country in which his books are published, Pentti Linkola (b. 1932) is a controversial figure. Can Life Prevail is the first collection of his writing to appear in English.

His ideas will be no less controversial in Australia if this book is discussed here. He tackles ecological problems as a biologist driven by a “love of life”, not as a politician. He outlines what he believes must be done and leaves it for others more adept in the political sphere to implement a successful transition. Although all of Pentti Linkola’s proposals are fully consistent with the aim of achieving long-term environmental sustainability, few – if any – feature in the green manifestos we are familiar with. If nothing else, Linkola reveals to us the ideological constraints we have imposed on our planning for more sustainable biophysical arrangements.

This is really worth reading. Please contact the site owner to provide comments and criticism.

Pride and Prejudice
Jane Austen

It’s like a silly fairy-tale, unreal, and containing characters without natural emotions. At least that seems to be how most people who are not Jane Austen geeks usually describe "Pride and Prejudice". Fair enough; we’re surrounded by the English countryside by the turn of the 18th century, soaked in polite conversations and tea-drinking. And at a distance, the plot is not all that exciting: A Mrs. Bennet wants all of her five daughters married to (preferably) wealthy and good-natured men. At a ball the family encounters a few specimens, one of which is Fitzwilliam Darcy, whose pride repels them all despite even his wealth and fine heritage. Darcy, in turn, is disgusted by the low status of the Bennets. They get off on the wrong foot, to say the least – and things get worse. Soon, however, Elizabeth Bennet, the smartest of the daughters, catches glimpses of the true nature of Darcy ...

Well, that sounds predictable enough, as the worn point of this novel – even from its title – is for us too look beyond what we see first-hand. From here Austen’s satire of social classes makes most critics revel in a rather tiresome anti-hierarchical interpretation – and pretty much stop at that. But this story is so much deeper and can easily be seen from a different point of view: It’s not opposing shallow prejudice in the "because-we-are-all-equal-inside" kind of way – Austen is brainier than that. Intelligent people, like Elizabeth and Darcy, may get dismayed by how most people are scheming actors of foul character or simply incompetent rabble, and so they become more suspicious of their fellow men. But Austen declares we shouldn’t give up: we may find the most excellent rare gems underneath that pile of drivel – if you’re brilliant enough yourself, that is.

It’s also very easy for us to hate successful people these days, when all we see is superficial morons on top. This is where Austen gives us some hope to hang on to: In order to overcome the mistake of despising anything that might make us jealous, Austen uses her sly sense of humour, imaginative dialogue and beautiful use of words in a way that makes us love these qualities in any person and shows that while it’s not "OK" to suck, truly great people can be victorious without any hard feelings. All you need is appreciation of beauty – and beautiful is what this love story is, quite contradicting the on-going revenge of the ugly and the dumb of today.

So fairy-tale or not, humanity needs this book. Not only because it’s what I would call first-class sophisticated entertainment. After turning the last page we are left with an immense heart-warming feeling. For once, this is not because the underdogs won. Austen teaches us to have loving hearts yet critical, discriminating eyes. With her help we can – without feeling cruel – easily justify our happiness when the unselfish and strong characters that deserve it the most win each other.

Selected Short Stories of William Faulkner
William Faulkner

I remember reading these stories way back, but only long after I'd finished reading them did I ponder the essence of their meaning. Faulkner's work unfolds as fragments of a larger historical past, mainly dealing with the then-current issues in the old South of America. Part of what made him the greatly admired author he is, is his frequent use of the spoken language of America's different minorities. Together with typically local scenery and culturally defined situations, Faulkner's world is geographically and historically interesting in its own regard.

But what lies behind his literary work is obviously the upholding of Southern ideals and principles. "Barn Burning" is a story of a family moving to a new place to live. The cataclysmic secret revealed later on is that the father turns out to be an arsonist. Faulkner describes with desperation how the relationship between the father and the son changes after this becomes known, effectively setting the principle of honor against the biological ties of family. The short story "Honor" especially emphasizes the broader view of Faulkner's literary world, where personal principles transcend the horrific challenges of everyday life.

Faulkner also touches politics in novels like "Two Soldiers," where the dark realities of war are again contrasted against family values. "Dry September," a more racially charged novel, unfolds as a morbidly violent war between white and black townsfolk, making it one of the more shaking experiences of this collection. But perhaps the most revealing, yet most metaphorical tale is the well-known "A Rose For Emily," in which the Southern tradition is losing its power through a sinister story of love and death. This is Faulkner at his best.

You read William Faulkner not only to understand the past, but to situate yourself in the present age. His artistic work is full of wisdom, integrity and moral courage. These are the decisions we all make in our lives and it'd be beneficial for more people if they got to know this Southern master of the short literary format. Essential reading, period.

Can Life Prevail?
- A Radical Approach to the Environmental Crisis
Pentti Linkola

Pentti Linkola is the kind of thinker that surrounds himself with controversy. Commenting on the school massacre that took place in Finland in 2007, Linkola, as always, took the opportunity to flame the press:

- The massacre was too small. In the long run it doesn't help shooting some fellow students. What is needed is a larger movement to reduce the population.

It doesn’t get much more upfront than that, does it? But Linkola, despite appearing in the media as some kind of ultra-radical green troll, is far from the bitter old man people make out him to be. If this was previously unclear, he certainly presents a different side of his persona in his latest book, "Can Life Prevail?" The book is a collection of articles and shorter essays spanning more than a decade of radical environmentalist thought. The topics range from childhood reflections, food hygiene, and bird watching to deforestation and terrorism. Social issues neatly tie into politics, and vice versa.

Far from being a simple propaganda pamphlet, Linkola's writing is full of warmth and wisdom: the importance of growing up as a fisherman together with his family, his strong passion for birds and forests, and how he and his wife have travelled on bike through Europe. In short, Pentti Linkola is a man who has lived and seen the things he talks about. He's not just another trendy green trying to cash in on a political trend; Linkola lives environmentalism. He's protecting a heritage, or as he puts it himself: "Fighting for forests means fighting for Finland. If the forest is flayed, Finland is flayed."

The essence of Linkola's ecophilosophy, which he calls conservationism, is to view man and nature as one and regard ecosystems as holistic entities. Each entity as a whole carries a value higher than the individual value of its parts, and any part may be sacrificed to protect the value of whole. He convincingly applies this argument to society and describes how the technological, economic and industrial expansion is pushing away wilderness and species. His plan to stop ecocide is simple: roll back human expansion to sensible levels and return to a local, practical and simpler lifestyle in harmony with nature.

To back his views up, he cites tons of examples, addressing how serious the deforestation crisis in Finland is, how the import of foreign animals and the growth of predators have driven entire species to the brink of extinction, and how the Finnish agriculture is rapidly shrinking. Linkola, to be fair, is cynical about the situation. He recognizes that a population ruled by utilitarian democracy, in which political leadership panders to popularity and individual desire, will always satisfy special public interests instead of looking at the cold reality. Linkola's answer to our current society is a centralized government mercifully controlling its citizens, cutting down on technology and economy, and focusing on building a foundation for culture, education and practical knowledge.

Does it sound fascist, socialist and oppressive? It is. And Linkola isn't afraid of saying it. It's hard to tell whether he's trying to set new standards for environmentalist debate or if he's actually serious about his "ABC of the Deep Ecologist." Maybe it's ultimately irrelevant. As Brett Stevens notes in his insightful introduction, at the end of the day, Linkola's main motivation seems to be uncompromising love. He is, after all, not a bitter old man, but a surprisingly idealistic, warm-hearted and sharp thinker. Most of what he says, although it would force even the most radical green-leaning liberal to back down, is close to what many of us would call traditional common sense. We only have one planet. One life. We need to protect the biodiversity that inhabits this Earth, or else we fail as a species on what is possibly the most important mission before us. Linkola's cry, "Can Life Prevail?," does not just ask the question--it provides us with an answer to how we can win.

The War of the Worlds
H. G. Wells

The War of the Worlds is perhaps a more subtle book title than most people have given it credit for; for never definitively referenced and at the heart of the book's expansive theme of interplanetary warfare, lies a battle fought by sentient beings against their own planets, as they attempt to disassociate development from environment. The two combatant species have with varying zeal removed themselves from nature’s grasp, and both end up struggling equivalently as a result.

The actual basis of the story is simple enough, yet at the time of writing was rather a novelty: aliens from Mars conspire and attempt to conquer our planet Earth. From this premise follows a short novel led by a precise and measured narrative, stylistically reminiscent of a documentary, but never remaining plodding nor lacking in rapport or pace. There are rare occasions where Wells adds unnecessary flourishes but this does little to detract from the reader’s enjoyment.

Plenty of evocative scenes are described where one’s imagination is given much to exercise upon - a rise of belligerent alien machines and their subsequent terror and dissolution of human civilisation is quite naturally a rich license - and the several protagonists happen to be very well defined and offer their own distinct dilemmas.

A philosophical sceptic as he was, one suspects that H.G. Wells often uses moments and characters in the book to shrewdly play the Devil’s advocate; intermittent sections of speculation around themes presented by the alien domination crop up here and there, from the perspective of one character or another. At one point the provocative question arises: what to do with the weak during life under extraterrestrial rule?

Life is real again, and the useless and cumbersome and mischievous have to die. They ought to die. They ought to be willing to die. It’s a sort of disloyalty, after all, to live and taint the race.

However it is not the weighty existential subtext that makes this book a worthy read. More ostensibly than that, this is an entertaining, gentlemanly novel with an interesting concept, and I recommend it to anyone on that basis.

The Epic of Gilgamesh

People often refer to the Bible when they assert a historical context, but what they forget is to anchor the Bible, especially the Old Testament, in its proper mythological context. But what context is that? Well, unsurprisingly, it's immensely diverse. But if you really want to get to the root of it, you need to become acquainted with the ancient Sumerians and their religion. The central literary achievement of the Sumerian religious culture is without doubt the epic of Gilgamesh (read it online here)--a fragmented but largely recovered piece of literature that is humanity's oldest.

The story is divided into series of adventures in which we follow the Sumerian king Gilgamesh and his personal journey to self-enlightenment. He starts out as a ruthless and sexually frustrated ruler, upsetting the people of Uruk, where he reigns. Eventually the gods are forced to intervene and send down a creature named Enkidu. Enkidu is not yet a man, but thanks to some sexual activity with the local whore (children, go to bed!), he transforms into a human being.

The epic unfolds with great interest as Enkidu and Gilgamesh, after some macho fighting, team up to create fame for themselves. Disobeying the usual warnings from the elderly, they decide to kill the demon Humbaba. Of course, with some divine power, they succeed, but after having pissed off Ishtar, who's hot for Gilgamesh, the gods decide that the brave heroes must pay with Enkidu's death. Gilgamesh mourns his best friend and realizes he, too, will die.

Gilgamesh decides to seek immortality out of sheer desperation, which eventually leads him to the god Utnapishtim. During this encounter Utnapishtim spells out the classic Flood myth - which later became part of the creation myth of the Old Testament - and brutally informs us that death is real for every one of us, period. To say the least, Gilgamesh feels let down, but no less than twice is he offered immortality by Utnapishtim. Of course, Gilgamesh fails to live up the requirements to achieve this, and so he changes his perspective on life.

The existential conclusion echoes with Sumerian spiritual stoicism: don't worry about death, make sure you become a decent citizen, and protect your culture and civilization at all costs. Gilgamesh is finally free, despite death. The epic of Gilgamesh is a wonderful story and a deeply humanitarian remnant of a once great civilization, before it was occupied by foreign tribes. The language in the epic is surprisingly simple and modern, yet it's written in such a way that the adventures unfold like poetry.

If I had to pick my personal bible, this is it. It's condensed common sense in an entertaining and artistic form, so down to earth that it speaks truth undogmatically, but it’s so intriguing and at the same time so mystical that the best parts remain mysteriously inaccessible. The older I get, the more I find myself reading parts of this epic now and then, if nothing else to remind myself to make my life count as much as Gilgamesh did. When you fully understand this epic, you will begin to regard the Old Testament as merely a historical and mythological sequel.

G.K. Chesterton's writings range from comic poetry to religious apologetics. Somewhere near the middle of that spectrum are quite a few mystery stories, the best-known of them featuring Father Brown, a priest whose knowledge of the souls of sinners allows him to solve crimes which puzzle the police and detectives. The title character in The Man Who Knew Too Much, one Horne Fisher, similarly solves mysteries not through logic and deduction but through unusual insight. He is a member of the English aristocracy who is connected to all the most prominent families in the land and keenly understands the world of politics, though he stays on the sidelines as an observer for reasons explained towards the end of the book. The stories in the book takes place over several decades of his life, so it does not strain credibility too much to think he might find himself in a few situations where someone important turns up dead.

Good mystery stories aren't just about mysteries, of course, and in this case the book is mainly about the way politics really work. As Fisher says about himself:

I am the man who knows too much to know anything, or, at any rate, to do anything. I don't mean especially about Ireland. I mean about England. I mean about the whole way we are governed, and perhaps the only way we can be governed. . . And Sir Walter Carey is Prime Minister of this country, which he would probably never have been if the truth had been told of such a horrible scandal in his department. It might have done for us altogether in Ireland; it would certainly have done for him. And he is my father's old friend, and has always smothered me with kindness. I am too tangled up with the whole thing, you see, and I was certainly never born to set it right.

The tone of the entire book is similar. England's leadership is full of scoundrels of various sorts and politics is a dirty business and a hopeless tangle. The mystery is always solved, but the criminals are never actually punished, and are often allowed to get away because it is not only necessary but absolutely imperative to avoid great disaster. I don't want to give anything away here, but the "who done it" often turns out to be less important than the "why it must be covered up".

The stories paint an extremely unflattering portrait of a deeply corrupt ruling elite, and it's surprising how little difference there really is between the English landed aristocracy of Chesterton's time and today's global educated meritocracies. I have previously mentioned a passage which, if rewritten in contemporary English, could be straight out of Stuff White People Like. I also got a similar feeling reading Chesterton's novel The Flying Inn, but where that book takes its shots at progressives and their ideology, The Man Who Knew Too Much attacks ruling elites in general, from politicians of all parties to financiers and military heroes. It is not, however, entirely hopeless. Deeply flawed men, even murderous men, can still do great things for their fellow man, and in a time of true crisis a few of the worst scum may find some nobility and honesty at the bottom of their black hearts.

In addition to paper editions, the book is available as an Etext on Project Gutenberg.

Live and Let Die
Ian Fleming

After having been branded for life physically and emotionally by the Russian counter-intelligence organization SMERSH in "Casino Royale," barely escaping with his life, James Bond proceeds to his second mission as a British spy. Researching the recently discovered circulation of expensive and rare Spanish doubloons on the American black market, Bond travels to New York in order to investigate a black criminal warlord, said to supply the market. The tracks lead him eventually to Mr. Big, a member of SMERSH, funding the organization through wealth believed to belong to an ancient treasure in Jamaica.

This second installment of Fleming's internationally successful Bond-series features some heavy reading. In fact, very few of the Bond movies actually match the Bond character described in Fleming's novels ("Casino Royale" from 2006 coming very close). James Bond here is a cold, brutal and complex spy - rarely charming, but slightly psychotic and often driven by instincts and desires. As a result, this makes for an intense and exciting reading experience, building a lot of tension from the excellent storyline, which evolves gradually and logically.

Safe to say, the women are still attractive, and the scenery is still memorable; in fact, Fleming is quite good at painting landscapes with his sharp story telling, possibly more so than in the first novel. And, not to forget, the nemesis is an intelligent but mentally depraved and brutal enemy. There's quite a lot of raw, physical descriptions in this novel that add up to pretty graphic violence, unsettling enough to compete with the movie. Yet it's skilfully condensed, as if written by a journalist, but with all the imagination and gritty action you expect from a serious author.

This is simply a well-executed and intense piece of reading with both character and intellect. While I recommend all of you to begin by reading the first installment, this sequel can be read as an independent story. Fleming's world is populated by the idols, organizations and politics of his career, but also effectively echoes a bizarre cold war atmosphere into our time. "Live and Let Die" is a solid introduction to such a world, convincingly close to our own, but in fantasy and personality Ian Fleming's own.

It's good to know that some people can write intelligent things about the nature of genius without advocating murder in the process. Genius is what happens when a lot of hard work meets superior ability and turns it into an extremely high level of skill, and Robert Fulford summarizes the process nicely.

Boyd draws parallels between the theory of evolution and the work of artists - Homer, Dr. Seuss, whoever. Natural selection, motiveless and unconscious as it is, nevertheless follows certain patterns. Again and again it randomly sets in motion possible solutions to problems of survival, fails, then starts again, re-using whatever elements have proven valuable. "In time, it can create richer solutions to richer problems." Put that way, evolution sounds exactly like the work of a writer.

Dr. Seuss's genius, as Boyd sees it, was the product of a brilliant artist who was also a tireless worker. Boyd contends that literary genius arises, in a perfectly naturalistic manner, through familiar Darwinian processes. A genius tests ideas, discards many, concentrates on a few. Like evolution, literary genius "does not know quite where it is going until it arrives there, usually after a long cycle of generate-test-regenerate." It builds on partial discoveries and then arrives at lasting solutions to problems no one could have formulated in advance.

In his youth Theodor Geisel [Dr. Seuss] found it easy to make people laugh. "He turned these into his speciality: he worked and worked and worked at play." He was a superb problem-solver, like evolution. He spoke to the world's desire for meaningful forms of play and provided (as Boyd eloquently puts it) "the pleasures of amused surprise."

There's an anecdote about Jascha Heifetz who was supposedly told by an admirer "I would give my life to be able to do what you do on the violin" and answered with a stern "I have, madam, I have". If that really happened, Heifetz told the truth - he had to give his life to sound like he did. However, that's only half the truth - if that anonymous woman had sacrificed as much as he did, she would more likely have ended up really good rather than great. Fortunately once in a while natural ability meets tireless practice and we get someone truly extraordinary such as Heifetz or Dr. Seuss.

The New Cold War: How the Kremlin Menaces both Russia and the West
Edward Lucas

In August 2008, Georgia launched a large-scale military attack in the separatist region of South Ossetia. Shortly after, Russian combat troops began firing into Georgia with full military response, which escalated a long conflict between the pro-West region in South Caucasus and Russian-backed Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The Western response was largely condemning, but surprisingly soft. The European Union was simply baffled: Is Russia returning to its old Soviet patterns?

In his latest international best-seller "The New Cold War" (descriptively subtitled "How the Kremlin Menaces both Russia and the West"), Central and East European correspondent of the Economist, Edward Lucas, attempts to answer that complicated question. Dissecting Russian domestic politics, Lucas aptly recaptures the Russian regime history from Gorbachev to Medvedev, giving special attention to Putin's rise to power and the changes he immediately began applying once in office.

The ex-KGB agent, today enjoying public support greater than any previous Russian leader, is sketched as a cold pragmatic with a clear vision. When in office, Putin broke with Yeltsin's world of corruption and inflation by cracking down on oligarchs, nationalizing vital industry, taking advantage of the spike in oil prices to boom the economy, and reviving a patriotic pro-Russian agenda. The message: Russia is yet again a player in world politics to count on. Over time Putin has made drastic changes in Russia, improving the material and economic condition for millions of middle class Russians, and dethroning the country's worst corrupt handlers.

But Lucas tracks with impressive clarity and research how Putin, despite the positive domestic changes, at the same time has reversed the Westernization seen during Gorbachev-Yeltsin period and instead opted for what Lucas persistently characterizes as "crony authoritarian capitalism." While the West regards law, justice and market economy as ideals, Russia uses them as methods to increase its power influence--the West is idealistic, Russia is pragmatic. Indeed, Putin prides himself as someone who has done away with Yeltsin politics, which he regards as a sell out to the West, and instead chosen state nationalization of industry, media, public life and foreign relations. Lucas describes the product as a return to Soviet-style governmental oppression.

For those who are skeptical of such an assessment, Lucas brings forward loads of evidence, news and research, which will baffle many. Oppositional media is bought out by the government, its prominent figures either put out of business through "tax evasion" excuses, or outright hunted--and in some cases, killed. Strange "bomb practices" complete with stolen cars and mysterious inside terrorism adds up to something that could have been taken out of a 20th century comic book. Vital companies like Gazprom are seized by the government, youth camps glorifying Putin are set up, public life socialized, and bureaucracy running rampant. Corruption is dealt with if it displeases the Kremlin, otherwise left to its own fate. It's a scary insight into a modern Russia taking a different path after decades of repressed totalitarianism.

The effects of the Putin regime change are therefore a double-edged sword: while the middle class is better off than ever before, foreign investment is increasing, and private business life is beginning to thrive, the same sectors of society taken for granted in the West as free and competitive-based, are kept in check through state power, circumventing law and policy by helping or oppressing what it sees as good or evil to the Kremlin. The Yeltsin-era runaway inflation and corruption are finally beginning to reverse, but in turn, the Russian citizens are seeing their private and business life once again going back to centralization, regime dogma and Mafia silencing of public dissidence.

When discussing Russia's international relations, Lucas describes how Russian nationalist economics use clever business interests to buy assets in vital Western energy industry, in effect using Europe's liberal market economy to boost its own geopolitical power. Money, Lucas argues, is the new weapon Russia uses to exploit a morally divided West, too confused and weak to respond to the crimes Russia commits to property rights and public interest. It's a pragmatic game Putin knows how to play, but which leaves Europe impotent and stranded. The problem becomes more complex when EU internally is divided over how to approach Russia's business methods; Lucas exposes German top leaders using high power to strengthen ties with the Kremlin, disregarding European interests to satisfy personal goals. Add EU members like Germany and Italy supporting a soft approach to clear Russian policy breaks, and the situation appears to be more bleak than expected. Russia, like China, is taking the West for a ride, and no one dares to complain.

If any message is central to this book, it's how Western naivity has led to it become divided by foreign ill-spirited intentions. The new Russia is a self-preserving, authoritarian, soft mafia state looking after its own interests only, playing the international market game after its own rules, because it knows it can. If this isn't made clear by the domestic analysis Lucas applies to Russia, it certainly becomes self-evident by the way the Kremlin treats ex-Soviet republics like Ukraine, Estonia, Poland and Georgia. Russia wants to seize control of the Caucasian and Balkan regions in parts where it still enjoys moderate to high support, and use that power against the remaining regions. Scenes like the uproar outside the Russian embassy in Estonia, the gas game played to Ukraine and the "peacekeeping" methods used in South Ossetia to later claim protection of "Russian citizens," appear with clarity in their deviantly humorous form.

Lastly, Lucas sums up his case by carefully plotting the foreign policy of Russia, which currently is trying to consolidate power with common enemies to the West (Iran, China, Venezuela) and building counter-NATO organizations heavily emphasizing Russian energy domination and its new ideological platform "sovereign democracy." A very well-plotted chapter is also dedicated to the pipeline politics played between Russia and the West, where Russia's Nord and South Stream compete with West's Nabucco and Transcaspian pipelines--a fascinating but critical power play between the regions. The complexity of the situation appears to be greater than first thought. Lucas therefore ends his book by describing how the West can still win the New Cold War, in effect proposing an end to anti-American sentiment in Europe to unite it and America in order to strengthen transatlantic relations and resurrect moral courage to resist Russian pressure--the only way to win the power game and save its civilization from inside bankruptcy.

But isn't the Cold War over, we ask? Lucas agrees: the former Cold War played on military terms is over. Russia's military might is still there, but not strong enough to pose as a serious threat to the West (although it gladly props up regimes like Iran with nuclear capability). Instead, Lucas suggests we are in a period of a New Cold War, where we face the same power play scenario, but on different terms and with different weapons. Russia's new methods are economic and geopolitical. It's mission: divide Europe from America and split up EU internally until it's too feeble to resist espionage, energy domination and self-invented policy making from the Kremling Hq. It's a strategical war where super powers don't flex nuclear muscle, but use bully politics to make their bid. The Fukuyama vision of an end to empire war after WWII has turned out to be a facade, and Huntington's vision is finally proven right: super powers are once again colliding, but in ways much more refined and thought-out than in the past.

Lucas, defending a liberal democratic and free market-based West, is unapologetic about his stance, but at the same time balanced. There is no Russophobian sentiment taking over real analysis. Lucas, to his credit, is not only a brilliant journalist and a well-researched writer, but also a great polemic. Some will disagree with his own ideological position; Lucas mentions that groups who defend Russia will be those who currently champion anti-Western (including anti-American) sentiment, but as he insightfully points out, the enemy of our enemy is not necessarily our friend. While the West must stand under scrutiny and criticism, those who see a saviour in Russia are by Luca's account seriously mistaken (p. 278 f.):

It may well be that individualism and materialism are an inadequate basis for a happy life; that corruption and influence-peddling in Western political systems may be an indefensible distortion of the principles on which they are founded; freedom may conflict with justice or stability. But that is not the same thing as taking the Kremlin's claims about its own system at face value. Such a balanced approach would be absurd.

Western self-criticism doesn't equal a biased view on Russia, either for or against. Lucas therefore separates himself both from Neoconservative paranoia as well as anti-Western critics in favor of Russian pressure on the West. As a result, "The New Cold War" is an essential read for anyone who is interested in understanding the domestic and international politics of modern Russia. For those concerned about the health, freedom and international status of the Western civilization, there is no shorter guide to understand the mechanisms by which we are systematically and ruthlessly being fooled into disarming our own power and independence. Polemically sharp and well-informed, Lucas' account resurrects Huntington's "clash of civilizations" theory in a critically current context, desperately calling for Western unity.

Corrupt together with its publishing arm Integral Tradition present the hottest book on environmentalism and deep ecology this year: Pentti Linkola's "Can Life Prevail?". A brand new English translation of the latest work by this internationally famous ecophilosopher from Finland, including an exclusive foreword written by our columnist Brett Stevens.

Linkola, being one of the few honest environmentalists of our time, suggests greenism is nothing but a trend, and that in order to save our ecology, we need to drastically reduce the world's population and simplify society to reflect a natural lifestyle in harmony with the natural order. "Can Life Prevail?" could be his ground-breaking work that will shock trendy green organizations around the world and finally legitimize the controversial question of overpopulation.

Read more about Pentti Linkola and his philosophy here. Read Alex Birch's review of the book here

Synopsis

"WITH THE TRAIN OF CIVILISATION hurtling at ever-increasing speed towards self-destruction, the most pressing question facing humanity in the 21st century is that of the preservation of life. Can Life Prevail?, the latest book by Finnish environmentalist Pentti Linkola, provides a radical yet firmly grounded perspective on the ecological problems threatening both the biosphere and human culture. With essays covering topics as diverse as animal rights, extinction, deforestation, terrorism and overpopulation, Can Life Prevail? for the first time makes the lucid, challenging writing of Linkola available to an English-speaking public.

“By decimating its woodlands, Finland has created the grounds for prosperity. We can now thank prosperity for bringing us – among other things – two million cars, millions of glaring, grey-black electronic entertainment boxes, and many unnecessary buildings to cover the green earth. Wealth and surplus money have led to financial gambling and rampant social injustice, whereby ‘the common people’ end up contributing to the construction of golf courses, classy hotels, and holiday resorts, while fattening Swiss bank accounts. Besides, the people of wealthy countries are the most frustrated, unemployed, unhappy, suicidal, sedentary, worthless and aimless people in history. What a miserable exchange.”

Buy it at Amazon

Order your copy today!

Softcover edition

Product details
Binding: Softcover, 208 pages
Publisher: Integral Tradition (2009)
Language: English
ISBN: 978-1-907166-00-6

Hardcover edition

Product details
Binding: Hardcover (cloth with dustcover jacket), 208 pages
Publisher: Integral Tradition (2009)
Language: English
ISBN: 978-1-907166-01-3