Reading “The Predator State” by James K. Galbraith.
I’m not quite done with this book yet, folks, but I have to say the ideas in this book bear much closer scrutiny.
In “The Predator State,” James K. Galbraith shows that even most of the hard-line conservatives (almost always Republicans) in the United States of America have given up on the old Reagan-era “supply-side economics” that they, unfortunately, campaigned on during the 2010 election. These ideas have been proven to be unworkable and perhaps unattainable, including the idea that tax cuts for the extremely wealthy will stimulate economic growth. (It doesn’t. Instead, all it tends to do is give the incredibly wealthy person more money to put in a Swiss bank account, or invest — usually overseas — and even investing here in the United States is problematic because of how companies are now run to maximize “shareholder value” rather than actually create good products and get them out before the marketplace and thus do some good for society.)
The American electorate was volatile and angry in 2010; I get that.
But to now have a bunch of Republicans in there saying stuff they don’t even mean — at least, I hope they don’t because if they do, that means they know less about the economy than I do (perilous thought, that) — really bothers me. And that one of those who should know better is now the new Governor of the state of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, is incredibly upsetting.
In addition, the recent “tax cut” bill that was passed actually raises taxes on those making under $20,000 a year. What sense does this make?
So, taxes have been lowered for the incredibly wealthy — or in this case, the low taxes for the very wealthy have been extended. And taxes have been raised for the poorest of the poor, those below the poverty level.
And this is supposed to be the “best country in the world?”
How can this happen in a country that’s supposed to represent fairness (i.e., “liberty and justice for all”) for all, including economic fairness?
How is this right? How is this just? How is this understandable, or make any sort of economic sense?
I mean, the old phrase “you can’t get blood from a stone” comes to mind, here; those of us who make under $20,000 a year don’t have anything extra to give the government, and those who make over a million a year obviously do except in rare cases. So if you up their percentage, say, by 2%, you’re not hurting them very much, where you’re really hurting someone who’s at the poverty level or below. (Poverty level, right now, is around $21,000 United States dollars for one person if I recall correctly.)
Unless the real strategy to keep illegal aliens out is to persuade the rest of us poor people to leave, too . . . and I think Germany, in the 1940s, proved that the strategy of kicking people out for any reason (in that case, it was due to racism/genocide) is an unproductive, losing strategy indeed.
And since that makes no sense, either, all I can conclude is that this is yet again another exercise in “framing the narrative,” trying to make what’s really going on in this country — many good people being unemployed through no fault of theirs, all of those unemployed people being unable to pay all their bills through no fault of theirs, and very little being done about actual job creation — seem the problem solely of the Democrats, rather than what it really is: a failure of leadership from both political parties.
Just reviewed “The Dragon Variation” and “Mouse and Dragon” at SBR; Comments.
Folks, here’s the link before I forget:
Now, a few comments from me (otherwise known as the peanut gallery):
These books are excellent. Truly outstanding. Magical, even . . . they get all the emotions right. All the mores right. All the cultural issues right. The language is impressive, the descriptions are just right, and the romances are conflicted, realistic, sometimes amusing and touching, all at once.
I wish I could write this like this pair of authors, Sharon Lee and Steve Miller; I truly do.
The end of my review talked about the emotional, powerful impact MOUSE AND DRAGON had on me. MOUSE AND DRAGON is about the too-brief marriage of Aelliana Caylon and Daav yos’Phelium, and is realistic in so many ways about what happens to a widower when his spouse dies that I can’t even tote them up on a toteboard. That Aelliana’s presence sticks around (more or less in ghost form) is not the most amazing part of this achievement; it’s that Sharon Lee and Steve Miller — neither of whom have been widowed as far as I know — got it right that our deceased spouses do live on. In us.
One of the issues I’ve had with widowhood from the beginning is that I didn’t know how to express my feelings over the loss of my husband beyond rage, despair, extreme frustration and loss. It’s really hard to lose a spouse when you’re only thirty-nine years old, and you’ve only had a few, short years together. Blissful years, sure. But still — far too short.
The entire story of Daav’s marriage — how he met Aelliana, in SCOUT’S PROGRESS. How he married her, then lost her, in MOUSE AND DRAGON. How he dealt with her continued presence in FLEDGLING and SALTATION — has now been sketched out. It is a stunning achievement, one that I can’t praise highly enough; it shows two extremely intelligent people who are constrained by circumstances that manage to forge a life together, then manage to keep on loving each other in a meaningful way after one of the pair’s physical death.
Daav’s solution — which I will discuss here, but I warn you it is a spoiler if you haven’t read the end of MOUSE AND DRAGON, or any of FLEDGLING or SALTATION — is to immerse himself in an alternate identity, Jen Sar Kiladi, and thus take a lover. He has a child, Theo Waitley, by his lover, who is a half-sibling of his son Val Con yos’Phelium by his wife, Aelliana Caylon. And Aelliana has stuck around; she still views herself as Daav’s wife, and despite him taking a lover (at her insistence, I might add), nothing has changed for them as far as their feelings go. It’s just that because she no longer has a physical body, she can’t meet all his physical needs.
I’ve been pondering this. I think there’s something here that might help me, psychologically, deal with something I’ve really not wanted to have to think about — possibly being with another man.
You see, Michael was the ultimate in my experience. The best husband (as I had two previous ones, believe you me, I know how good a husband he was). The best, and most supportive person, I have ever had the privilege to know, yet he was not sycophantic and would tell me off if he felt the need (which, fortunately for me, was rarely).
How do you go beyond “the ultimate?” How do you find any meaning with anyone else?
I don’t know, but I’m finally willing to at least consider the possibility that someone extraordinary — someone like Kamele Waitley was for Daav/Jen Sar — might exist out there.
I’d best end this now, or I’ll get maudlin — and trust me, none of us need that.
State of the Elfyverse: End of the Year Edition
Folks, since we’re two days away from the New Year, it’s about time I updated the state of the Elfyverse. (I think it’s been two months, maybe three, since I last did this. How time does fly.)
We start off with the in-progress short story, tentatively titled “Boys Night In.” I estimate this as about 60% complete; I have the framework for this story, and some of the jokes, but there’s something just not right as of yet. (I shall, of course, keep working on it.) Story will be, approximately, 10K words in length.
AN ELFY ABROAD — part 45 is in progress. Part 44 has been revised. Part 46 has been tentatively sketched out, in prose only . . . no detailing or jokes. (This means I’ve probably written five, maybe six thousand words since the last check-in.) Story stands at an unwieldy and perhaps excessive 255,000 words . . . very good possibility this book is going to end up being split as it’s at least fifteen chapters from the end.
ELFY — I tried twenty agents this year; two bit on sample pages. Both passed after I sent the sample pages. Two small-press publishers have shown interest; one believes ELFY, which stands at 240,000 words, needs to be split in thirds. (I’m still mulling this over.) The other believes ELFY should stand as-is, but there are other things (not of my making) that are perhaps an impediment to its release at the second small-press publisher.
Needless to say, I am not giving up on ELFY.
KEISHA’S VOW — This is an ELFY prequel, set in 1954 . . . I’ve done some editing here, and perhaps have added 1500 words since October. I’m still working out part 23, and have realized a few possible problems, but haven’t had much time for this work in particular due to working on the collaborative effort with Piotr Mierzejewski. KEISHA’S VOW continues to stand at just over 35,000 words; this novel should finish somewhere between 95K and 115K if all goes well.
Now, the state of the non-Elfyverse stuff . . . .
CHANGING FACES, a spiritual, paranormal romance set in the present day, has been re-started, and about 2500 words have been added. This work now stands at 105,000 words, and should finish by 130K.
THE GIFT, a spiritual, paranormal romance novella set in the present day, has been re-started, and about 1500 words have been added. This work now stands at 24,000 words, and I hope will finish at 40K.
Novella in progress with Piotr Mierzejewski — currently untitled, formerly titled IRON FALLS — we have about 20K words of an unformed story. A very rough first draft, IMO . . . some chapters are more finished than others, which I suppose is a saving grace. This novella is near-future military suspense, set in 2047 in Russia.
10K word story sent to Writers of the Future in September (can’t give out the title), which is fantasy/adventure. Can’t imagine this story will do well if my/Michael’s collaboration “Joey Maverick: On Westmount Station” didn’t even get an honorable mention, but I suppose it counts.
Word count for the year stands at 235,000. Not including this blog, various book reviews, writing e-mails, or anything save actual writing on projects.
I have no idea how to count all the editing of projects I’ve done for ComicsBulletin.com and for various friends, so I won’t . . . I’ll just say, “a lot,” and be done with it.
Happy New Year, everyone. (Oh, and my New Year’s resolutions? Finish CHANGING FACES at long last. Figure out why AN ELFY ABROAD is going so long and get a plan as to how to split it up. Finish THE GIFT at long last. And finish KEISHA’S VOW at long last, too. Plus find ELFY a publisher! Please?)
Posted a review at SBR for “Poisoning the Press”
Folks, if you haven’t read Mark Feldstein’s excellent POISONING THE PRESS: JACK ANDERSON, RICHARD NIXON, AND THE RISE OF WASHINGTON’S SCANDAL CULTURE, go out and grab it, right now. It is an outstanding piece of history and is possibly the most riveting, exceptional book I’ve read all year (it’ll easily make my ten-best list).
But in case you need a little bit more information, here’s my review:
My Holiday Prayers
The other day, one of my FB friends had something up that, boiled down, read like this:
“My holiday prayer: I hope those who need cures will get them, for those children awaiting adoption to be adopted, then loved deeply, and for everyone else to never have to worry about food, shelter or heat. Amen.”
I’d also like to add that dogs, cats, and other innocent animals are always in my prayers — I hope they find good homes where they’ll be appreciated and loved, during the holidays and all the days after.
Another good saying: may your days be free of care, and may your life be as long, and as happy, as you wish it to be. (That’s adapted from an old Irish saying.)
In other words, though the holidays are always problematic for me at best, I wish my friends, family and colleagues the best, during the holidays, and all the other days, too.
The Holidays are here: Reflections on Grief.
Grieving people are often wholly misunderstood, even by friends and family members. And when holidays come around, that misunderstanding tends to become magnified tenfold, if not hundred-fold . . . simply put, oft-times the “advice” you get from the well-meaning is not worth the time to listen to it.
A case in point being the saying, “You need to move on” from your grief.
Move on to what, exactly?
I mean, here I am — I loved my husband with all my soul and all my strength, and I still love him to this day. I will always love him, and I don’t see anything wrong with that — the only difference between me and another grieving widow is that it’s been six years and three months (plus a day) since my husband died, and by this time most widows don’t say anything about how much they still miss their husbands. (Widowers, either, about their wives.)
Well, I’m tired of that unwritten rule, and here’s why.
When you love someone, you tell them. Often. You do good things for them. Often. You let others know that you care about your loved ones, as often as you can get away with it, and without pushing your relationship in someone else’s face, you do whatever you can to keep that relationship alive — a living, breathing thing. And everyone understands that, so long as your spouse, or your family member, or your friend, or even your beloved pet, is still alive.
But once that person (or pet) is dead, all bets are off. Suddenly, you’re not supposed to talk about the person any more, because he or she is dead. Even though you love him or her just as much as you did yesterday, and you appreciate his or her presence in your life for as long as he or she was able to stay, you’re now supposed to say nothing because “it’s not done.”
In fact, as a widow or widower, you’re supposed to take your wedding ring off, and prepare to date someone else, or there’s something wrong with you. (Like Hell there is, but that’s another issue entirely.)
So now, you’re not only not supposed to talk about the person you love so much, but you’re also supposed to surrender your most prized possession — your wedding ring — because “it’s not done” to keep wearing it.
I have news for anyone who thinks this way: you are being ridiculous.
I can’t make your decisions for you about how you grieve, nor whether you date again, nor how soon you date again, or anything else, because that’s all up to you. (As it should be.) But I categorically refuse to let anyone make my decisions for me.
My husband Michael was the most important, most valuable person in my entire life. Bar none. I refuse to stop talking about him — about his influence on me as a writer. As a person. As an editor. As anything — because what we had together was priceless. Invaluable. And well worth remembering and honoring.
Holidays are extremely difficult. I miss my husband with every breath I take. And I want him back . . . oh, how I want him back.
But all I can do is continue on. Keep trying. Keep creating. Keep his work alive, along with my own, and of course along with anything we started together.
Holidays, to me at least, are not entirely about spending time with family, though I do a good bit of that. And they aren’t all about gift-giving (financially, that’s out), though I do think a great deal about those less fortunate than me and pray for the best outcomes possible.
No.
Holidays, to me, are about remembrance. Are about love. Are about honor, and shared sacrifice, and about dreams becoming the truth — because, you see, Michael and I made our commitments to each other around this time eight years ago today.
And I would never, ever, wish to “move on” from remembering that.
Brewers get Greinke, Betancourt . . . .
And finally, folks, for my third post of the night, I’d be remiss if I didn’t talk about the Milwaukee Brewers recent trade for RHP Zack Greinke.
Yesterday afternoon, the Brewers traded SS Alcides Escobar, CF Lorenzo Cain, and two minor league RHP, Jake Odorizzi and Jeremy Jeffress, to the Kansas City Royals for Greinke and SS Yuniesky Betancourt. Greinke is a former American League Cy Young winner (he won in ’09 with a 16-8 record), and is considered one of the best pitchers in the major leagues despite having an off-year in 2010 with a 10-14 record and a 4.19 ERA.
I’m pleased the Brewers went out and got Greinke, because this is the second pitcher the Brewers have acquired in the off season (the Brewers got Shaun Marcum from the Blue Jays a few weeks ago, trading minor league 2B Brett Lawrie for him straight up). He’s an excellent pitcher and should really help the Brewers’ rotation — and as all know, the Brewers’ main problem the last few years has been pitching. Especially starting pitching. (When the Brewers lost C.C. Sabathia and Ben Sheets to free agency, they took a major step down despite all their good hitters — Corey Hart, Casey McGehee, and of course Ryan Braun and Prince Fielder. Hitters can’t do much when the starters keep giving up around 5 ERs a game.)
But I’m not happy the Brewers parted with Lorenzo Cain; Cain had shown some power and a great deal of speed to go along with his excellent defensive skills in centerfield in his brief stint in the majors last year, hitting .308 with a robust OBP of .348 — pretty good for his first 147 at-bats.
The others — eh. I liked what I saw of Jeffress, and I’m sure he’ll have a good career if he can stay away from the illegal substances (he’s been busted twice under MLB’s anti-drug policy for marijuana use), but to get Greinke I have no problem with him leaving. Ditto for Jake Odorizzi, who seemed like a good prospect thus far — possibly the Brewers best pitcher in the minors (certainly the most-hyped), though he was still in A ball this past year.
To be perfectly honest, though, I was glad to see Alcides Escobar go; I felt his defensive play was at best overhyped (Escobar makes great plays, then muffs easy ones), especially compared to the SS who came before him, JJ Hardy (who is an outstanding defensive shortstop, possibly the best in the major leagues, and certainly in the top five when healthy), and his offense was, well, anemic at .235 with a .288 OBP and 10 stolen bases.
When I went to Brewers games last year, everyone I spoke with used the same words to describe Escobar: “Overhyped.” “Flash in the pan.” “Melvin’s an idiot — can we please have JJ Hardy back?” And I agreed — Escobar was described as “the real deal,” or “everything, and the bag of chips besides” — and he just wasn’t. (Perhaps no one could live up to that billing.)
Betancourt would appear to be a step up offensively, as he batted .259 with 16 HRs (to Escobar’s 4) and 78 RBIs (to Escobar’s 41), though he also has a very low OBP at .288. As for his defense, I’d describe it as adequate — he’s another guy who won’t make anyone forget JJ Hardy anytime soon — though as he’s not been labeled a “can’t-miss” prospect, maybe he’ll be less encumbered by expectations than was Escobar.
At any rate, this is a trade that looks very good on paper and I hope it works out well for the Brewers. I know that as a fan, I’m for it.
Brett Favre to start tonight for the Vikings — UPDATED
UPDATE: Brett Favre took a hard hit on his left shoulder (not his throwing shoulder) from DE Corey Wooten of the Bears, and has sustained a head injury. It is unlikely he’ll return to this game; as for next week, I guess we’ll all see.
Here’s the most recent story at ESPN:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5941067&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines
And here’s another one that amused me from Bleacher Report about how to finally get Brett Favre into retirement (written before this game started):
**** Now back to the original post. ****
Brett Favre started tonight for the Minnesota Vikings in their Monday Night Football game against the Chicago Bears.
I mention this for three reasons:
1) I really admire Favre as a player.
2) It’s amazing that Favre would try to play with a hand that, at last check-up, was still swollen to twice its normal size and looked like raw hamburger.
3) If the Vikings win tonight, Favre will be indirectly helping his old team, the Green Bay Packers, because the Packers lost last night to the Patriots (in a gutty, inspired performance from Packers backup Matt Flynn), 31-27. The Packers are now 8-6 and need all the help they can get to make the playoffs; if the Bears lose tonight, that will help the Packers (as the Bears are currently ahead of the Packers in the standings; the Bears’ record currently stands at 9-4, while the Vikings are at 5-8. The Packers want to stay only one game back in the loss column and have a shot at the NFC North title (the Bears can lock it up tonight if they win, or so the Milwaukee announcers said), so in a probable first, Aaron Rodgers (who sat out last night with a concussion) and the rest of the Packers will most likely be cheering on Favre and the Vikings.
Who said fact is stranger than fiction, huh?
Reviewed Jason Cordova’s “Corruptor” for Amazon and Barnes and Noble
Folks, just wanted y’all to be aware of my new review for Jason Cordova’s CORRUPTOR. I posted it at Amazon.com and Barnes and Noble’s Web site also . . . here’s what I wrote, in its entirety:
******* REVIEW FOLLOWS ********
Jason Cordova’s CORRUPTOR has an interesting premise that ties games theory, computers, advanced virtual reality interfacing, the problems of soldiering, and one tough gal together and never lets go.
I read CORRUPTOR over a year ago and recently re-read it in ARC form. It has excellent plot twists, a heroine in Victoria (Tori) Adams that’s almost impossible to describe — she’s tough, as I said before, but she’s also a typical teenager doing her best to get used to friendship and dating. And because her father has moved around a great deal due to his job, she hasn’t really been able to make many friends in real life — all of her friends play the same game she does, a game-world called “Crisis” that’s part of the mega-corporate WarpSoft, the ultimate in computer games where every possible talent the gamer in question has is used.
Because Tori is such a strong gamer, she’s both hated and feared in this game, yet she has some good friends — Raul, Stephanie, and Dylan, among others — who will not betray her. Which is just as well, as Crisis has been hijacked, and no one’s getting out alive unless Tori (on the inside) can beat the game, while her father (one of WarpSoft’s major players) figures out the identity of the hijackers and stops them on the outside.
This is an excellent plotline with some good characterization, and I enjoyed it heartily.
So with all this being said, you might be wondering why I didn’t give this book a five for “excellent” rather than a “four” for very good. The reason for that is mostly that I can’t consider this book an “instant classic,” nor can I give it quite enough to round it up to five stars for Amazon’s purposes, either. I didn’t quite believe the romance between Tori’s father and one of the WarpSoft personnel trying to figure out the identity of the hijackers, either, and thought there wasn’t enough there for more than a flirtation (especially the end of the book, where the love-interest stands there and says nothing). But these are minor quibbles.
This is a very good first novel that’s interesting, that has some really fine interplay between the in-game characters, and some believable interplay with the WarpSoft personnel, particularly the chief of security (a big, tough, former football player named Mike).
I enjoyed CORRUPTOR, and believe if you read it, you will, too.
Four stars. Recommended.
*********
Then I signed my name (as is my wont).
So why are you still sitting here? Go get it, and read it, and enjoy it! (Just in time for Xmas, even.)
Barb Caffrey's Blog 