Welcome to two guys, one book. I am Brian joined as always with Tim Tim, of course, and this week's book is Calypso by David Sedaris. It's my pick. Why did you pick it Brian? Why did I pick it? Well, I felt like we needed a change of pace. We've been reading all these downers. We got Virginia Woolf and then we got a cancer book and then book about Russia, you know spoiling the election. So like we just need something different and David Sedaris is an author I had known about for a while, and I've seen him talk numerous times and think he's entertaining guy, not seeing him in person. So yeah. Yeah not seen him in person. But seeing him on like TV interviews that kind of thing think he's a funny guy. He's got a bunch of books out there and they're just kind of anecdotal stories about his life and his family and I just picked this most recent one. Have you read anything by him before? I have not. No, so I didn't know quite what to expect but I kind of figured I just knew he. He read I've seen him read excerpts from his book in there always normally centered around his life. So I kind of knew it was doable in that sense, but I liked it. I enjoyed it. I thought I was a easy read a fun read it's broken down into 21 different chapters about any and each chapter has its own theme or Vibe, but he talks about. A lot of different things throughout the book that kind of our repair come up throughout all the stories. So were you surprised by anything when you read this or is it kind of what you expected? Um, I don't know. I guess I didn't really have that specific of expectations. So it didn't really exceed or fail in that regard. I enjoyed it and I felt like it was seems like a very personal book. He goes into depth about his sister suicide and then his mother how his mother died in her 60s or something when the kids were just becoming adults so they had a big impact on the family and it seems like their mother might have been an alcohol. Well was an alcoholic so, you know talking about that stuff made it, you know, intriguing and and engaging but I felt like there were sometimes I just laughed out loud. I mean like I'm not usually one to do that when I'm reading people will say, you know, a certain book is funny or what not and when I read it I may not laugh out loud at me like it. I may still like there's not many very rarely do books make me laugh out loud. And this one did it because I really enjoy David Sedaris. I think he's a funny guy. Yeah, so well, what did you think I love this book? Oh, yeah, I'm glad you picked it. Yeah good. We did need a change of pace for sure and you were thinking of a book of his to choose and then I was also listening to like the fresh air. He did her interview recently promoted the book and you heard about it too and you were like, why don't we just do this newest? And you know how I feel about newer books. Like if it's new it must not be good. Let's read these classic but it's not the case. This is new and it's great and I Tried reading a David Sedaris book a while ago and I couldn't really get into it. I think I was in like early college or something and it probably depends at where you at where you're at in your life. How at what extent you appreciate it or it can relate to what. I'm talking about but the way he like weaves together sad things and funny things. I think it's just super well done. Mmm Yeah, I think it's well written and it just and I and having seen him read excerpts from his past books. It's like I can almost picture him reading it. Did you get the audio book for that it book? Yeah, that's great because it was a him reading. It was him reading it. Okay, well good and a couple of the stories were actually in front of a live audience. So you get you got their reactions like in real time eyes. It's really funny. Yeah. So yeah. Did you have a favorite little story? Let's see. I mean I had to review because like you said there were so many things that he kind of weaves in. In and out throughout all his stories that I had to go back and then be like, oh which one was you know, I don't know if a specific story stands out. It's more like little moments inside each of the stories. But what about you? Did you have a favorite? I just going down the list here. I liked his Stepping Out which was his him being a slave does Fitbit and like going and picking up garbage along the English Countryside roads where they lived. I liked Calypso where they cut out the tumor from his body and and to feed it to a turtle is pretty weird. Yeah, that was weird and then Untamed. Which was about they had a fox in their backyard named they named it Carol and I thought that was kind of cool intersection of nature. I like I think foxes are cool just in general. So I like I kind of wish I could have a pet fox. I guess this is why I like that one. Yeah, and I think the one and then I think my favorite one was probably and while you're up there check my prostate. Which is a about him the David Sedaris does not drive. He never got a driver's license and so he but he was fascinated with like road rage and how other drivers yell at each other and their own car, you know, and he's like, so he when he's travels abroad he was getting. The Bunga the bulgarians and the hungarians like their versions of what do you say in your car to swear somebody out on the road and I thought I have a few quotes from that that I think that was pretty good. Yeah, but yeah, like you said there's a lot of little things was it. Is there any particular moment stick out to you? So I just loved how he wrote about like his the Dynamics with his family and with Hugh his long-term lover. So. Who is your favorite like what was your favorite relationship to hear about because he talked about like him and his dad a lot. Yeah, him and Hugh, his sister's. Yeah, he comes from a family of six. Right? Right. Well, yeah that and but now we are five, right? Yeah, because which I thought was an interesting chapter about his sister’s suicide. Um, I guess I kind of liked his relationship with his siblings. And because he talks about how over time you can develop different dynamics with different siblings throughout your life and I have found that to be true and kind of in very interesting because I have two older siblings and how we have grown up into adulthood. It's my relationship has evolved with both of them. Especially the older one who's significantly older any like eight years apart is a big difference when you're 10 and 18 but like when you're in adults, it's not that big a deal and it's just nice to have an adult relationship with both my siblings. And so that I think is the one I his relationship with his siblings. I enjoyed. What did you think about his family life? Like when they were younger like when they were all little kids? Well, I mean I did that didn't really stick out to me a whole lot. Do you remember just it's a that bits and pieces like he was talking about how his dad would kind of just hang out and watch TV or something. But like they all kind of competed for their mom's attention and she was a really good Storyteller. So you kind of got the sense that he developed that skill. Just kind of being around her growing up. True. Yeah. I yeah now that you mentioned that I do remember that. I did read the book. but no. Yeah, I mean that and I think that's that was an interesting point because. He I feel like he definitely got a storytelling skills from his mom and it seemed like he was much closer to his mom and his dad when he was younger. Yeah, a lot of my favorite Parts in the book were parts of this Dad where it's like they don't really know how to communicate with each other. But whether it's like through music or just being together at the house, they find a way to get along, you know, his dad's kind of like a far-right Republican and he's super liberal. They just Clash a lot. But as long as they don't talk too much, they okay with each other right? Right and him and his sister Amy. They seem like they're pretty similar and get along well and she's in some stuff. I've Seen Her Like She's the voice of someone on BoJack Horseman. Oh, yeah. I know you don't watch that show. She was in like she was like the lead in Strangers With Candy back in the day. Really? Yeah the lead. Yeah. She was candy she was. That was Ellen Page wasn't it? I think it is like hard candy. Yeah, one thing of Strangers With Candy. I would have been surprised if you would really remember that one that was like an obscure show on Comedy Central. I don't it was about high school and Stephen Colbert was actually on it. Oh, okay. Yeah. And so yeah, Steve and Amy Sedaris, I think both like work together a lot in the early years. Yeah, but I kind of like yeah Amy Sedaris is in a bunch of other stuff too. Oh, she's in Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. Is she? Yeah. She's the crazy friend of Jaclyn who's like, yeah Super Rich. Yeah and like and like just. Starved for attention. Okay. She's kind of like she's a minor character, but she has funny scenes things. She plays like an amplified version of herself, perhaps. I don't know her personally, Tim. Yeah, but like through David's stories and sounds like she's a little quirky. Yeah over the top too. It sounds like they eat. Every one of the Sedaris family is a little quirky in their own. Well, it's to me it felt like a Wes Anderson movie come to life. Yeah, you know, like they've all got their flaws and like quirky Parts, but somehow they get along. Yeah, that's a good way of putting it. Yeah. Was there anything you didn't like about the book per se. If I had to say maybe towards the end some of the stories kind of would run together a been. Like I loved it overall and but. Thinking back. It's a little hard to distinguish that story from the other one because to me they all felt pretty similar. Right? So I think by the end you you know, you have a good grasp of all the things he's talking about like the beach house and the turtle and and his relationship with his dad and Hugh and stuff. It's like, I mean it there are themes throughout the whole book that that I think going into it when you're starting. The rest of the chapter keep makes it more unique but then towards the end. It's kind of everything kind of gets blended together, which is fine. That's why even though it's not a long book. I kind of took a while to read because I would just read like one story before bed or something. I think it's better to break it up instead of binge read this one so you can kind of appreciate it in doses. I agree and I actually read it the opposite way. I've been binged it. I was flying so I just. Was able to zip through a pretty good and I was on vacation to so I just read one after the other because like I just like them so much but I think your way was a little better to absorb each one and just enjoy it and then you know like you don't need to burn through it, right? Yeah. So you were laughing on the airplane and people are looking over I was thankfully thankfully Megan was beside me so she could you know, it wasn't like it wasn't a stranger. Speaking of that. I just want to read one quote real quick. Yeah, because it's relevant so Hugh his long-term partner. Said he would like read his manuscripts and stuff. And so he said Hugh who is good at spotting typos and used to do so for his father a novelist, was reading the manuscript for the first time whenever I heard him laugh, I'd ask what's so funny should 5 or 10 minutes passed with no reaction. I'd call out. Why aren't you laughing? That's hilarious? Yeah, obviously, I mean, I think David Sedaris recognizes that he is a unique individual and with his own quirks, and I think he. You know. Should displays them in all their glory and I think that's the way it should be. You know, like we're all human we're all flawed and but yeah, he's pretty open about he’ll you know be pretty up front with some of his shortcomings and be self-deprecating about it. But the way he describes Hugh was pretty funny because they do seem opposite and a lot of you don't think he's really proper and kind of just as manners and things like that. But yeah, it's funny. Yeah, I like I think I thought they had a big they seem to have a good relationship. I don't you see like I don't I having not read them before. I don't know if I mean, I'm sure Hugh pops up in his other books as well because he's been writing for so long, but I'm probably there's probably a time before you that he started writing. I would think. I don't know but it doesn't makes me want to go back and read him more. Yeah, I'm curious how similar in different his other books are. I'm sure it's a lot more family stuff and but maybe some focus more on his like relationship with Hugh or some focus on his relationship with Amy or whoever. To me this one felt like it felt like he was traveling a lot and he had some good stories from on the road and then he would go to the beach house and his home in England it seemed like. When he’s talking about Hugh, he was talking about a lot in their home in England, but then the beach house in North Carolina was where their whole family would congregate and then he would talk about his dad and his siblings and all that stuff. And in fact Emerald Isle is where they have the beach house. My family has vacationed there twice. Really? Yeah. Well not like it. I mean, I think I vacationed there when I was like, 8 and 14 or something like that. I don't know. That's his ballpark guessing but it was fun. I liked it. Yeah, we gotta be I mean, I mean he was like when he was describing all the houses all lined up on the beach with you know, their kitschy, you know, beach-themed interiors. That's exactly what it's like and all of them have names that are kind of corny. But by the way, can we talk about his house name on when he buys the beach house he names The Sea Section which I thought was awesome, but as he is, yeah so out of those pretty good. He likes to amuse himself a lot which is it. Yeah. Oh, yeah, very it does a lot of puns. But my favorite part of that chapter, I won't go crazy with the quotes but there's just one more. That's what we could we could just start doing quotes. Yeah. Is about the beach house again, so I said I told myself when I was young that one day, I would buy a beach house and that it would be everyone's as long as they followed my Draconian rules and never stop thanking me for it. Yeah, that's good. That sounds like something you would say. Yeah, this is this house is for everyone but you have to do exactly what I say. Yeah, never stop thanking me. Yeah. I mean, yeah, I like this book. I thought it was, you know, entertaining and funny and like you said, it was a good blend of the funny with the sad. Because he would talk about you know, his mother's alcoholism and but then like tell funny stories about her as at the same time and but I feel like that's kind of like a good attitude to have towards life is you know, it's not always going to be warm and fuzzy and happy but and in sad times it's okay to crack jokes, you know. Life sucks at times, but there's no need to be serious all the time either. So like I feel like that it feels like he and his family. Have a good. Kind of like attitude about life. It's how I would say. Yeah, it seems like his writing is a way to process all of the stuff going on in his life to yeah, and she'll like I feel like it's a good book but like it maybe doesn't stimulate them the deepest of conversations, you know. I mean it. Talk about relations. We can talking about shopping clothes shopping in Japan because there was a chapter about that which I thought was kind of interesting, but I know like I think you know, Yeah, well what you said about the sad parts having more weight or something. I think I have a really good quote on that. So yeah, yeah, okay. And I'll edit all this shit out too and I find when I'm shopping to it's only two pages. I don't go too crazy. No, that's fine. I think. Okay. Yeah, this is it. I highlighted it too okay, so and I think in the chapter like just to give some context he was talking to Hugh about like how he's saying. He's always negative. Mmm, David. So he says is it my fault that the good times Fade to nothing while the bad ones burn forever bright memory aside the negative just makes for a better story. The plane was delayed, an infection set in, outlaws arrived and reduce the schoolhouse to ashes. Happiness is harder to put into words. It's also harder to source much more mysterious than anger or sorrow, which come to me promptly whenever I summon them and remain long after I begged them to leave. Yeah, that's a good quote. That's pretty good because it's so true too because like the negative aspects of Life do stick with us more and he also said that the happy happiness is harder to Source. I think that's true too. Because like we we can have a perfectly good day and we feel happy but like we're not sure really what the made it a good day. Some days are just I don't know, you know, like a unless you're actually going to an event or. You'll having something major in your life happen, you know like yesterday. I had a good day and I just want to work and went rock climbing and so nice and some new hobby. You're like, yeah, so I mean that was a great day. But like so like I guess I could Source it like going rock climbing made it a good day, but work made it a good day too. So like I don't know. I'm rambling. But like every story requires conflict though for it to be captivating. I think like if everything we watch on TV or read in a book was just like they were happy and nothing bad or stood out that they like overcome then it’d be boring. Yeah, right. Well, I think we I think we just hammer out quotes because I think they'll generate a lot of discussion yesterday. Like well, first of all, like one of the first parts of the book that made me laugh out loud was was this opening chapter? Yes. My hair is gray and thinning. Yes, the washer on my penis has worn out leaving me to dribble urine long after I've zipped my trousers back up. But I have two guest rooms. I once I read that in the first chapter, I was like, all right. It's like I mean cuz he's getting older in age. I mean, he doesn't he talks about where he is in his life and just I can already tell you're going to choose the more vulgar quick and graphic. Yes but then also like that same chapter. He talks about having guest rooms. That means people can come over and visit which is. But then he also finds that he just kind of hides in his Studio office a lot of times when he does have company just to kind of get away or sometimes just the act like aloof person and then he comes back in like in the middle of conversations and I that's one thing I love. I love like eavesdropping on random people and just hearing little stiff stupid just hearing little bits of their conversation and being like what on Earth because like. And so that's what he's talking about. And then here's the quote: That often happens with company. I'll forever wonder what a guest from Paris meant when I walked into the yard one evening and heard her saying many goats, my might be nice or otter still when he was father Sam came to visit with an old friend he known from the state department. The two had been discussing the time they spent in Cameroon in the late 60s, and I enter the kitchen to hear Mr. Hamrick say. Now was that guy a pygmy or just a false pygmy? I turned around and headed to my office thinking I'll ask later. Yeah, just the way he liked recounts those things is so funny. Yeah. Yeah, but what you were saying about like visitors and stuff reminded me to of that. I think this is at the end of that chapter. He says when visitors leave, I feel like an actor watching the audience file out of the theater and it was no different with my sisters. The show over Hugh and I returned to lesser versions of ourselves. We're not a horrible couple. We have our share of fights the type that can start with a misplaced sock and suddenly be about everything. I haven't liked you since 2002. He hissed during a recent argument over which airport security line was moving the fastest. That's a good one. I laughed out loud when I read that. It makes you wonder what happened in 2002. That was like his next line. Yeah. Yeah, and I think just the way he picks up on. like he's a good observer of human nature and. You know our Tendencies or whatever, you know, like he's fascinated. He like would say crazy things to get a rise out of people at book signings or whatever. He would like guess their sign or something and sometimes they could be right and they'll be like, oh my goodness. How do you know, you know and like, but they didn't they didn't know that the 10 other times he guessed it was wrong, you know, and and he just I just. I admire that because I could never do that. You know, I'm the could never be won to say stuff to strangers just to get a reaction out of them and he's like who cares it's a stranger. You'll never see him again and you're probably and you're right. But but then this then this talking about families are yeah, so just the way hold on. I'll just read my quote that so he talked about his family. This is from the chapter now we are five. Take those kids double them and subtract the cable TV. That's what my parents had to deal with now though there weren't six only five and you can't really say they're used to be six. I told my sister Lisa. It just makes people uncomfortable. I recalled a father and son I'd met in California a few years back. So are there other children I asked. There are the man said three who are living and a daughter Chloe who died before she was born 18 years ago. That's not fair. I remember thinking because I mean what's a person supposed to do with that? You know, like he's so true. I mean he's so dead on like you can't I mean people do bring up stuff like that in casual conversation, but what's the other person supposed to do like? Oh, I'm so sorry that 18 years ago, you know you suffered through that but like. Well, he has so he's pretty blunt. And able to get away with saying these things that we can't and like every day. I'm ready. It's almost like a Larry David - yeah, but yeah, I think with like he'll get bored during book signings and stuff. That's why he has to start guessing people’s signs and just kind of yeah, that's what he said. He and there wasn't one thing. He's one of his stories. He and Hugh were traveling. In Hawaii on vacation and he had to sign a bunch of inserts or something or they were just blank pieces of paper. But what they would do is they would insert them into the book as it was being printed. Which I never thought of before like I thought like some the author would if this if you get a signed copy of a book I would I always thought that the author actually signed the book but he was just signing pieces of paper that then got inserted into the book. Which I thought was interesting. I don't know. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, so I mean that's something I would have never thought of but I'm sure after you sign your name like he had a sign it like 5,000 times or something crazy. Yeah. Oh really old. Yeah. Who's turn to do quote? I got one. Okay, he was talking about how Jesus is always portrayed as this handsome white, you know, ripped person in all art ever. This is the quote. What would happen I often wonder if someone sculpted a morbidly obese Jesus with titties and acne scars and hair on his back. On top of that, he should be short five foot two at the most sacrilege people would shout but why? Doing good deeds doesn't make you good looking. Take Jimmy Carter, Habitat for Humanity's and do a thing for those tombstone sized teeth of his. That was pretty harsh. Yeah. Yeah. Like I said, you can say you can get away with saying they said oh, yeah, but like I feel like he he says. Things on his vet I think. People think about like but we know it's not polite to say, you know, I don't think he he is politically politically correct at all, David Sedaris, and I think that's a good thing because I think that makes his writing more interesting. I wish like when you see him perform live people are like read his stories. Because it sounds like people are really it's really engaging show like people laugh and cry and he's telling us stories and I'll say things Off the Cuffs as well really well and it almost seems like a return back to like, you know an earlier time when people just go around like orator or yeah, like how many people really do that? Like, yeah, I'm like musicians and stand-up comedians. But like, you know, a lot of people just going around telling stories right right now, that's true. I think that's. Pretty cool that he can do that. Yeah. I like to see him. He's on tour this year already tried to get yeah. Okay not all right here now around here, huh speaking of religion though. This one was funny. So he's in North Carolina a lot. Right? That's where his beach house is. So that's where you grew up to. That's right. Yeah. That's where his Dad lives there. Yeah, so he says. Increasingly at Southern airports instead of a goodbye or thank you cashiers are apt to say have a blessed day. This can make you feel like you've been sprayed against your will with God cologne. Get it off me. I always want to scream quick before I start wearing ties with short sleeve shirts. That was a good one: yeah. I have one more quick one to follow up on that sure he says because he flies a lot around talks. He says: As a business traveler, you'll likely be met at your destination by someone who asks, so, how was your flight? This as if they are interesting variations and you might answer the live Orchestra was a nice touch or the first half was great, but then they let a baby take over the controls and it got a little bumpy. And in fact, there are only two kinds of flights ones in which you die and ones that which you do not yeah. Yeah. Alright, so another one that I found interesting about family Dynamics. And then then Partners romantic partners that join the family later on. So this is quote: Hugh was there as well and while he's a definite presence, he didn't figure into the family dynamic. Mates to my sisters and me are seen mainly as Shadows of the people they're involved with they move their visible in direct sunlight, but because they don't have access to our emotional buttons. Because they can't make us 12 again or five and screaming, they don't really count as players. And that is so true too. I highlighted that as well. Yeah because I can I know for a fact that I resort to my like he said 12 year old self when I'm around my siblings and with my family at like the holidays or something. I mean, it's like it's not I mean. It's good and bad at the same time. You know it but it's true that when other people join the family it changes the dynamic but still it's not a bad thing. Yeah. Yeah. I just think it's probably intimidating for anyone dating the Sedaris like this huge family and try to fit in and keep up with them and at their jokes and everything. Yeah, I thought. His other aggression it was another one of his sisters right Gretchen. Yeah, it's funny. He talked about just like sitting out by the pool with them and getting a tan and kind of like talking and gossiping or kind of making fun of people or something. He said he said I meant to recount my recent battles with Hugh and his mother to tap into the comfort and outraged that only my family can provide. But just as I open my mouth Gretchen sat up and said lazily almost like someone who was talking in her sleep. Do you remember my old boyfriend Greg? Sure. She lit a cigarette and took a deep draw. He used to drink the liquid out of tuna can. The story of my argument was insignificant now dwarfed by this larger and infinitely more fascinating topic. I let go of my anger all of it and lean back on the beach blanket feeling palpably lighter, giddy almost feeling of related, oil or water? I asked Gretchen lean back as well and brought her cigarette to her son blistered lips, both. That's just the well well written exchange. That is that's very well done. Yeah. I think this was in that same chapter you said about the south people in the South saying have a blessed day. He was going around. He was just observing the different idiosyncrasies of the English language that people say in conversation and. But then he got to this point and this made me laugh. A lot of our outlawed terms weren't. Oh, I think I should I think he and his sisters I think had a list of terms that they could just nix that or he and his friend. I think we're saying that certain terms have been used to Ad nauseam and they should be outlawed. All right. So here's the quote. A lot of our outlawed terms were invented by black people and then picked up by whites who held onto them way past their expiration date my bad, for example, and I've got your back and you go girlfriend. They're the verbal equivalence of sitcom grandmother's high-fiving one another and on hearing them I wince and feel ashamed of my entire race. He's like self-aware of oh, yeah like that. Oh, absolutely now, Yeah his relationship with his dad was very interesting. I related more to his relationship with his siblings. So that's why I found that one a little more intriguing to me because but you know, he does have a very dynamic and you know. Yeah complicated relationship with his father. And so one thing he would do is he would like pick fights with his dad or do stuff like almost uncontrollably just to irk his dad and one thing was he would clog the toilet. And so this is the quote here. He would clog it with the cardboard part of the role of the toilet. You are going to reach down into this pipe and pick out that cardboard roll. My father said. Then you are never going to flush anything but toilet paper down this toilet again. As I backed away, he pounced. Then he wrestled me to the floor, grabbed my hand, and forced it deep into what amounted to my family's asshole and there it has been ever since, sorting through our various shit. It's like I froze in that moment with the same interests as that 11 year old boy, the same maturity level, the same haircut, the same glasses, even. I thought that was a pretty good. I think that moment probably did have a big impact on him because he's using it as a metaphor to basically his whole career is writing stories about sorting through his family shit. Yeah, and so, I'm sure that had a big moment for an 11 year old kid because he the dad literally took the toilet off the floor to figure out why it was so clogged. Yeah, and then but then later in that chapter he talks about how he did get along with his dad when it came to music. He said music is the only way I didn't rebel against him. I felt like that was a cool moment because like it didn't seem like any of his other siblings liked the same music as their dad, but he did. I thought that was neat. Yeah, it's like I think I've experienced this along with a lot of my friends. I don't know if you have but like with dad's it's kind of hard sometimes to click or like to talk about just anything or relate sometimes and I think that's really clear with him and his father like they're so different but with music, they didn't have to talk or anything. They could just kind of like both appreciate and listen, so. Now when you say that like that, it reminds me of the movie City Slickers where one of the characters says the like, I mean like they the men are talking about sports and baseball and they get criticized like come on you guys are grown adults, you know, why is baseball that important to you or whatever and one of the guys says that like well when I was like, I guess when I was a teenager and and. Fighting with my dad every, you know, almost every day. It seemed like baseball was the one thing we can communicate actually have a conversation about and I think that's true in life on many levels is that there are a variety of things that that people can find common ground on and that maybe calm the seas of the relation of their rocky relationship. Yeah, like for him. It's music for him and sports my her, you know and just yeah so different people my movies or art and another capacity or polyp. Maybe they like politics and talk about that or who knows. What else? Yeah. but when he talks about his mother and how like close he was with her one quote that kind of stood out to me was. Our mother was the one who held us all together. After her death we were like a fistful of damp soil loose bits breaking off with no one to press them back in. Just a short quote but it's pretty powerful like showing her impact on his life, right? Is that a metaphor the soil? Yeah. Yeah because I was I was I was having this conversation what's difference between a metaphor and analogy? I was like well metaphors more like abstract or more than an analogy is like a specific. This is like this but then like isn't that a simile I like well, yeah, I mean, I know this is off topic. No, I'd like an analogy. Yeah, like he was as fast as a cheetah. All right, that's a simile. I don't think analogies and similes are mutually exclusive. Okay? But a metaphor is more like this represents that like in an abstraction action. I believe it's been a while since I took. Okay, let's show you that's it. All right. So an analogy can be a simile and vice versa. Okay. I'll keep that in mind we’ll look it up later. Yeah one thing what oh another story I liked was I'm still standing because it was about. He witnessed the guy shit his pants in the airplane and yeah on airplane and then he got like food poisoning or something and he was sick for like a couple days. And so this is the quote. I liked. I'd hope that by the following morning I'd be back to normal, but there was no change. I'd gotten up three times during the night and was still passing a paint cans worth of rusty water every two hours or so. Where on Earth is this coming from? I wondered my eyes did I break stores of liquid hidden in my neck, my calves? I just like yeah, I didn't think the vulgar ones, Tim. There’s a pattern here. Yes. Laughs oh, we've all been there. All right, we want with their on the toilet like it's a sec. Yeah, but at all the while like I like throughout that that chapter or story. He's having the runs and he's in the airplane and he's like petrified of actually reliving his worst night or greatest humiliation. And then the Fitbit is still telling them to get up now. It's time to stand up. Yeah. yeah, that whole Fitbit chapter was funny how he. He got so obsessive about it like he at first had to get like 10,000 steps a day. And then I want 30. How much did he get up to like 60. It was insane. Yeah. I mean like I was worried. Oh my goodness. Yeah. But it's funny like him talking about that and then shopping as well. He kind of has these like obsessive Hobbies but they're not as like like everybody's got their thing like he says, My sisters and I refuse to feel bad about shopping and why should we? Obviously we have some whole we're trying to fill but doesn't everyone and isn't filling it with berets the size of toilet seat covers, if not more practical than at least healthier than filling it with frosting or heroin or unsafe sex with strangers. Yeah. It's a good one. Yeah, that is very good by putting. Yeah, and then just one more thing on that chapter is like news in Japan with like I think two of his sisters and shopping at these weird stores. The things and he's like even though we don't physically look that much alike when we're all sitting at this table wearing these ridiculous outfits that we are more alike than anyone. Yeah. Yeah part. Yeah. Yeah, it was good. Yeah, I yeah, I am realizing now that I had a lot of the gross quotes. Yeah, you have all these family ones. Well, yeah, it's okay the the takeaway is anyone could take something away from yeah David Sedaris. There you go. Whether you're into the gross things, right? The more deep right meaningful moments. Yeah, so I will just. I got I got to read off some of these insults because this is and while you're up there check my prostate was the name of the chapter and he just again is fascinated by these insults that other countries used to, you know, in road rage incidents. Some of them were: a cancer whore. May you build a house from your kidney stones. I shit in your mother's mouth. And he's like does it get any nastier than that? And I forgot I don't have the context for this one. All I did was highlight it. This is another one: shove your hand up my ass and jerk off my shit. So that was like a German I think and I think something got Lost in Translation. He's like he even said that it must sound different in their native like yeah sound quite so clunky. I just got ya. Yeah, that was a good one. Yeah, so I'll end on that one, but no like I felt like and then the last chapter was entitled The Comey memo and I thought it was interesting because like. he kind of here. I'll find it. I didn't highlight its before I printed this out. So. I'm just. yeah. Yeah, so he just says. There are things I avoid talking about with my father now, politics for instance. He's always operated on the assumption that I don't know anything, can't know anything really, the issues are far as far beyond my grasp as they are for the chimps in the calendar he gave me. Sure one might pull a lever and a voting booth, but there could be no actual thought behind it. The fight we had following Trump's election had been particularly ugly and we could easily have it again every hour of every day. I don't want to though. Don't want what could be the last words we say to it each other to be ugly. So now so I'll end on that note because like ultimately at the end of the day he wants to have a good relationship with his father. Yeah, and that's admirable despite their differences and worldview and outlook and everything, right? I had a one more about his father. Yeah, maybe I'll do this one that kind of goes off that he says well, While I know I can't control it what I ultimately hope to recall about my late in life father is not his nagging or his toes, but rather his fingers and the way he snaps them and listening to Jazz. He's done it forever signifying much as a cat does by purring that you may approach. That all is right with the world. Man, oh man, he'll say in my memory lifting his glass and taking us all in isn't this just fantastic? Yeah. Yeah, it's always good to have those pleasant memories that you can recall on somebody that even if they're still alive, you know what he's talking about it. A lasting memory hole have forever which is nice. Yeah, like when he talks about his sister Tiffany who committed suicide you can sense like his regret that towards the end. He didn't really try to have a relationship with her that she kind of burned them all so much in the past that it was hard to be close to her, but he still had some regret about it. Yeah, and that that is a difficult situation. I am fortunate that I do not have to go through something like that where a family member has become for whatever reasons unreliable or. No. Yeah, it sounds like she had mental illness or something. You did. Yeah, doesn't make it easier. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. I guess I have one more kind of funny one just ended on a happy note. So Hugh and him were arguing about something and he says why can't you let people change this is akin to another one of his questions asked. Why do you choose to remember the negative rather than the positive? I don't. I insist thinking I will never forget you giving me such a hard time over this. Yeah, it does. Yeah again, it definitely seemed like Hugh and David have a have a pretty pretty strong bond. Yeah, I'm pretty yeah, but yeah, I again I like the book ready for rating time. Yeah. All right. I give it a 4 out of 5 Stars. I really liked. Yeah, it was good. What would it have to do to be a five for you? Good question. I just don't know I don't think it can. I don't think this type of book can be a five for me because I just feel like. I don’t know, I mean maybe if all of maybe if all the little things he weaves throughout the story like hit all the right notes for Me. Maybe maybe then it could be a 5 like I don't know. You know, I like the turtle thing, him feeding his tumor to the turtle. It was funny story. But like, you know, okay, I mean. Like I said, I enjoyed a siblings relationship more than his father. And so like I guess it all those themes throughout the book all were spot-on for me then I would maybe give it a 5. Why do you ask, do you were you close to giving it five know? I know it's actually between four and five. Okay, I think yeah, I guess the last thing I'll say like what I take away is that anyone who has like some troubled relationship with her father, sister, Mother, whoever like I think you can find something to relate to him and what he's talking about and everybody has relationships and then issues and whatever. So I like that about it for me. Like I said earlier like it felt a little repetitive and towards the end a lot of the stories kind of ran together. So if they kind of stood out a little more than I probably would give it five but it's a great book. Oh, yeah. I definitely recommend it to ya. So what we're reading next time, too. Next book is The Laws of Human Nature by Robert Greene. Okay, how far you and then 20% Yeah 25 right anymore. No, have you look great. It's a long but it is a long time we'll get to it eventually. Yeah, so go to our website two guys one book.com comment on anything you want literally anything and we might read it on air. Until then, keep reading.
The Road to Unfreedom by Timothy Snyder
Hi and welcome back to two guys one book. I'm Tim and I'm Brian. Yes, because they said in the intro Yes. What are we reading this week Tim? This week's book was the road to unfreedom by Timothy Snyder. Yes, and it is about Russia, Ukraine and the United States. I would kind of classify it as a recent history book like a modern history, right? How what would you say? I agree recent history, especially pertaining. It was a lot of details about Russia and Ukraine and Russia invading in annexing Crimea and not just like what happened and everything but also the politics behind everything and also more into the depth of the Russian mentality when it comes to politics post Soviet Union and that have led up to this feeling of isolation almost I would say that you see these used slowly picking up all these Eastern European countries that used to be part of the Soviet Union. Russia is now lashing out trying to protect their interests and invading Crimea was. One of them and then it goes go into details about the 2016 presidential election, which were interesting and yeah, just like it was written by Timothy Snyder's a professor and storing specializing in Eastern European affairs so seem like very credible guy very knowledgeable and there are a lot of notes at the end of the book to to back up what he was saying because that was my thing is like as I was reading it. I'm like this guy's like. I feel like at times he was reporting certain things as fact when I didn't really see the connection of the dots, but I did the note section in the back. I just glanced at it briefly, I did not go into detail, but it led me to believe that. Before we go too deep into it. No, that's fine . Now that was a good kind of summary of what he was going for. But I think first I'll just say what made me choose it and then we can do our first impressions. So I think it's just an interesting set of topics with Russia Ukraine United States how everything kind of is interconnected. The role of Russia's influence on our elections, our presidential elections, their interference in the EU with Russia the UK and brexit Germany refugees. There are so many different factors here and I feel like he did a pretty good job of covering a lot of them and I do have my critiques of the book. But what is your overall first impression of it?. It's this this book I have an internal conflict with this book because I like the subject matter. I respect the author for being a knowledgeable person. But like I felt like it was kind of. Kind of drug on a little bit repetitive. I felt like honestly, this should have just been a like a New Yorker article. Instead of a whole book so but I mean I still appreciate it and learned a lot about what was going on, especially the Ukraine bits because that was in back in 2014. I don't remember all those details. I don't remember even the whole Russia Ukraine thing being that big of a deal in America, you know, so. I mean to it was I was very much glad I read it. Yes, but felt like there were definitely some flaws. I think that's a fair critique. There were times where it felt a little like it was dragging to me the Ukraine section. Although it. I found I found it interesting. I also thought it was maybe a little longer than it needed to be because I think he was just setting the context for. How those strategies and tactics Russia was using were applied to the US and the EU but to me the most interesting chapter was at the end when he was talking about the influence on the U.S. Politics and we both live in the United States. So we're biased in that regard, but for me, I was kind of like waiting for that material to come. I completely agree, the last the end of the book I found the most fascinating. Where he goes into the details of how Russia used their a similar miss-information campaign that they used in Ukraine and they duplicated that in America and how we were just totally oblivious to the Ukraine situation. So we were not prepared to handle the rush attack during the 2016 presidential election. And yes, I did find that the most interesting because he had I felt like that was where he backed up. All the rhetoric he was talking about with a little more substantial information about you know, the social media followers of different sites, you know, and so yes, I found the end much more interesting because like the beginning is like the very the very very beginning is about this. Politician Ilion or something or maybe not a politician. He was like an exile of Soviet. It's like during during the Bolshevik Revolution. He was exiled to Germany and like wrote about Soviet the Soviet political theorist. Ya think ya know ya. Well done Tim. So the people know and he influenced Putin like years later, even though a lot of Putin's philosophies were different you could kind of take that and then form it into propaganda for modern Russia, right? So I I mean I think. So the fact that we enjoy the last end of the book is that in part because of all the groundwork Snyder lays in the first third in the middle of the book going into full detail almost singing long-winded at times about how Russia did all this stuff and he was dropping so many Russian names. Could you keep them all apart? I am I mean keep them separate and it's tough. Yeah, it's tough. I think it yeah if the book was a bit shorter and focused more on that material in the last chapter. I think I would have found a more captivating but in general I do think he did a good job of picking important topics and then piecing together some of the history. One other critique I had though was I think he does oversimplify some things a bit and he uses this sort of abstract language such as the politics of inevitability versus eternity. Yep, and we'll go into that. And like unfreedom, how would you just like in my mind? I don't even know what that means. I don't know if he ever expressed explicitly defined the road to unfreedom. What is unfreedom. That is a good question Tim. I don't think he explicitly says what he means by the road to unfreedom like America is slowly going down the path of Russia with our misinformation and not trusting facts and rhetoric. You know people telling blatant lies and getting away with it because no one trusts what's true anymore and but like that's almost like the road to untruth more than the road to unfreedom. But I guess that he's saying that that ultimately leads to authoritarian governments, but you're right. He doesn't say that very much at all. He he beats us over the head with his this inevitability versus eternity stuff. Do you fully understand that? Well, I mean it just seemed to me like I guess I guess my thought about that is should we explain it first? Yes, explain it first now. Okay. I picked a couple of good quotes from the beginning. Okay, so inevitable, it's hard. It's hard. Okay inevitability. He says Americans and Europeans were guided through the new century by a tale about the end of History by what I will call the politics of inevitability a sense that the future is just more of the present that the laws of progress are known that there are no Alternatives and therefore nothing really to be done. In the American capitalist version of the story nature brought the market which brought timocracy which brought happiness in the European version history brought the nation which learned from war that peace was good and hence chose integration and prosperity. That's inevitability inevitability of one for eternity eternity. He says hmm. Okay. So he says in power eternity politicians manufacture crisis and manipulate the result in emotion. To distract from their inability or unwillingness to reform, eternity politicians instruct their citizens to experience elation and outraged at short intervals drowning the future in the present. In foreign policy eternity politicians belittle and undo the achievements of countries that might seem like models to their own citizens. Using technology to transmit political fiction both at home and abroad eternity politicians deny truth and seek to reduce life to spectacle and feeling right. So, what does that mean? That's the thing. They're they're sort of broad definitions. So I think he wants us to consider them more as concepts than a definite. But the general idea I think is interesting because like if you think about inevitability with Americans Europeans a lot of us probably and it's somewhat arrogant point of view is just that everybody will evolve into our way of life with capitalism, democracy and it's just not that simple like with China they've ended up doing very successful in their own way without following our sort of path. So yeah, I actually got another quote that I think help help explains that more as well. Within inevitability no one is responsible because we all know that the details will sort themselves out for the better. With eternity no one is responsible because we all know that the enemy is coming no matter what we do. So, I mean, they're very similar, but just yielding two different results like. My impression is that inevitability means that like, what is that like things will ultimately end up working out things will be okay in the end. Eternity to me is why bother, an individual can't do anything against the eternity politics of history. That just means that the person doesn't matter that things are always going to be. The enemy is coming no matter what we do. So that's a good way to put it. I think it's sort of like the sense of complacency in both areas. So either things are going to end up how we expect or there's nothing we can do right? So so it's rather Bleak I think both of them. I feel like. I feel like I don't know. I didn't that didn't resonate with me the inevitability eternity whole bit didn't resonate with me and I feel like he had to keep explaining what he meant over and over like, oh, here's an example of The Eternity politics that Putin does and and as I get it that's all kind of a point of the book, but I feel like if. If someone if he was more imaginative with coming up with a better way to describe the difference between the west and Russia and maybe like I said before maybe it could just be condensed to like a New Yorker article and not you know have to be a whole book. I feel like that's what drag bogs down the book at times as him just going over and over again this difference between eternity and inevitability. It felt like there was a tension between whether he wanted this to be a historical book or a philosophical book or a political like Theory Book, right? So it's like he couldn't really decide which genre, you know, he was going for. I guess you can almost make the argument that say we're still this is like a living history book almost because it is a lot of stuff that's so recent. Like even Ukraine Russia invading Ukraine was just 4 years ago presidential election is two years ago. So like we're still living in the aftermath of those very current events still so we don't know how things are going to shape out. So I guess he's that's why he's kind of melting the history with the current political Theory to kind of. I guess try to as almost as a warning to say like hey, these are two paths. But like I said, I don't feel like these are the only two paths it is just like I said, it just it's kind of complacent like either way inevitability or eternity. Both options make me as an individual feel like there's nothing I can do and I feel like he should have maybe offered a third route. I agree. I think his thesis though is that we need to take on responsibility and try to see past these two mindsets, but he doesn't really offer what that looks like. No, he doesn't. Yeah, so I mean which yeah, which is too bad. So a little over simplified maybe but let's talk about, you know, some of the details in the book and what interested you, okay? I don't want to skip over Ukraine because I know a lot of that is important. But just I mean, yeah, I mean like that did really piqued my interest at the same time. I was reading about the Ukraine stuff and being interested. I was still like glossing over the Russian names like okay, it's just one guy. Oh, he's talking about this other guy. Now who said these things it's just seemed like. It seemed like he went into detail about the different Russians because he's an expert he knows all the different Russians. But to me, I I keep in touch with current events, but I don't know all the these Russian guys in the Russian government or on Russian TV. And so I just, you know, you get the gist of it that yeah in Russia. They were having a spin campaign to spin it like. Oh the russian-speaking people in Ukraine are being persecuted. So we have to go into Ukraine and help them out. But like I didn't I just got bogged down in the weeds sometimes yeah the names and everything just hard to keep us engaged. But what I did take away from that chapter that I thought was interesting was just Russia’s tactics in general with Ukraine how they would send people unmarked and uniform in uniform. Which is very unlike many other past Wars it seems and so and then run Putin would just like deny that there's a war going on. Which is just it's really crazy that you could have this Mass lie that everybody knows is not true and that still deny it in public. It's like there's these different realities and it's like they just flooded the news with so much fiction and so many storylines of what's going on so that people get sort of bogged down and exhausted about the day-to-day what's actually happening. Right, so and he touched a little just a little bit briefly because it wasn't the point of this book. But when Putin became a rose to power after Boris Yeltsin like the whole chechnyan War. Was kind of fabricated we when Putin Putin got appointed to prime minister and most of Russians were like who's Putin who's this prime minister under Yeltsin and then they had the Chechen War. Cut and there's a whole good Frontline documentary about this Putin's rise to power or something like that. I think is what it's called. That this Chechen war was pretty much fabricated by the Russian government. So that Putin could become a strong figure to the Russian people and that he would then succeed Yeltsin as president and he was also at the same time a friend of Yeltsin so. He would be okay letting Yeltsin off the hook with some of his more like Yeltsin did some like embezzlement or something like that. I'm not sure that I figured the details but like they needed somebody who was a friend of Yeltsin but needed somebody to promote in the eyes of the Russian people and he touched that only briefly but I found that fascinating because Putin has been. Conniving yeah on many fronts from a long long time. I think I saw a documentary a long time ago. And I remember it was very good something about like they claim the chechens were doing these terrorist attacks or things like that and they get like whether or not that was true. They used it as an opportunity to seize more power and Putin specifically. Well, I mean it was I mean, it was pretty much untrue because like there was. Like witnesses that saw Russian officials leave one of the buildings that that was supposed to be bombed but the bomb didn't go off and they found this bomb and that then they apprehended somebody and he was a Russian operative and also liked it. I mean, it was pretty much fabricated by the Russian government and which is despicable and well, I guess. Should I watch my language on this podcast in case Putin is happened to I think we're not on his radar as far as they can't find us right me to go baby personally if we were Russian citizens, we'd probably be found. Yeah, and we're gonna um, but anyway, so that's just a little bit but so yeah some Putin's been doing this for years and yeah, he can blatantly lying public because they control the media and they can just. You know control what the Russian population see and hear. And yes this and this book made me thankful that I live in America with the First Amendment and the freedom of the press. I think we do take for granted the freedom of speech because you can't just speak out the same way and in Russia or say certain things. I think when one part of the book he mentions that the Russian Supreme Court has ruled that it that Russian citizens can go to jail for posting like historical facts about World War 2 that Russia doesn't like right, which is crazy. But that's the way it is. Yeah, it's unfortunate. Well, let's just think of our list some of the things he's involved in as far as it was like the early 2000s to 2010 era. So he. Supported brexit. I don't know without moscow's help in the propaganda campaign if that would have happened. He supported all of these separatist movements like the Scottish movement I think was one and I didn't really know much about that. But and then just these candidates like Le Pen in France and then in Germany, which I thought was just crazy is that. He’s helping Assad in Syria bombing whatever supplying military things to help produce more refugees because he knows Merkel is going to take them in and that will destabilize things and then regardless of how well they integrate he's going to use propaganda to make it look like these are like very dangerous refugees and terrorists and things like that. Isn’t that crazy? He is bombing. He's helping Assad bomb Syria to create more refugees to go to Germany where he will put out more propaganda against refugees. But it's all a zero-sum game, which is so crazy. It's like Russia can't be as strong as these other countries. So their whole strategy is weakening these Western countries. Yeah, I'm that. It is absolutely right and that is pathetic. Well, I mean, it's we have to give him credit that it's working. I’m not admiring it. I'm not objectively like okay, he's got to look at what's happened with brexit with Trump. I mean, yeah, they've done they've done. Well, I guess from their side. Yeah. Yeah. So yeah, they they've been involved heavily and throughout Europe and trying to destabilize Western Europe and then. Like I said before like Eston- like other Eastern European countries are joining the EU Lithuania Latvia Estonia. I think there are some other ones and then in 2013 Ukraine was up to trying to get their act together to join the EU and that I guess I did learn more about the EU because it's not. there's no like there's nothing. The benefits of the EU the countries get to join the EU to be trade partners with all these other countries, but they have to I think I have a written down so I'll find it here in a second, In order to join the European Union, these countries had to demonstrate their sovereignty and specific ways that Russia had not; by creating a market that could bear competition, an administration that could Implement EU law, and a democracy that held free and fair elections. So to get in to for the for the economic and Security benefits of joining the EU. EU has these benchmarks that countries must meet in their own country to get to be able to join the EU and I think that is a clever way of doing it. I never really knew like exactly what determines the country get it in the EU and why some countries are in other countries are not. Did you know that Switzerland is not in the EU? I don't know you would have thought Switzerland would be but I think it's because they’re neutral on everything that they don't even join any organization but besides that little side note, but but I learned more about what the EU uses as a standard let countries in and join their organization. And so in 2013, Ukraine was getting their act together to try to join the EU and Russia saw that as. Almost like the Domino Theory U.S. had in Vietnam. Like if Communism spread to Vietnam the no topple and go to all these other countries. Russia felt like well if Ukraine goes to EU then that's right on Russia's doorstep. The Russian citizens are going to want free and fair elections. They're going to want you no more equal economy where the rich don't control like there. There was multiple times. He said that Russia was the most unequal country in terms of wealth distribution, which I mean, I believe it from what I other other sources I read and hear about the all the Oleg arcs in Russia. So I found all that interesting as well. Yeah, they make a crazy amount of like oil money and health but something about the inequality is. So they like try to distract their population. I think by just focusing on like the west and blaming them for things but in the US like we have an inequality problem as well, but it's a little because it's such like an emphasis on a meritocracy and capitalism and things like that. It's hard to. To wrap our heads around it, I think and to find Solutions, but you could argue that a lot of the economic issues are the reason that helped Trump get elected like his performance in but Midwestern states, especially and how the local economies and people are kind of struggling right? So I think there's a pattern there right? But yeah, but but it's interesting because like Russia does not target the US on that grounds, right because there's so much worse. They target the West on are more social Liberty socially liberal stances particularly in gay and gay rights that that's kind of one thing that he said that they equate Russia was equating the West with you know, sodomy at one point to us so that everything associated with the West including democracy got a smear campaign because the West is all about sodomy. It was crazy how much Putin like sexualized things in general is he would just in natural or national dialogue interviews things like that. He would just have just a really homophobic perspective and a lot of things and use that as a way to filter into the propaganda associated like you said like West with this, right right, and that's really sad. Because I think I'm sure it's not been good for the Russian people who are lgbtq. but anyway so solely so then Ukraine wanted to join the EU so that and that's kind of what motivated Russia to act and invade Crimea and use all these tactics in Ukraine that the author goes into detail about. And then is the very next step and he talks about Paul Manafort a little bit and Yanukovych the president of Ukraine who he said it way. It's kind of ironic that the country invading Russia invaded Ukraine and the president of Ukraine flees to Russia the the country invading Ukraine, but that's what happened and then then the brexit vote happens and then 2016 presidential election happens. So he talks about how Russia need to needed to create this fiction of trump the successful businessmen and this has been going back for years before the 2016 presidential election that Russian Banks and Russian businesspeople were laundering money through Trump Tower condos and things like that and. Helping build the Trump Tower in SoHo and giving Trump a proceeds alike the profits when he didn't really do anything other than just let his name be on the building. So he talks about all that background to Russians supporting Trump kind of propping him up. And then he goes on to be The Apprentice has The Apprentice TV show is successful that way and then eventually becomes a presidential candidate and I think. I don't know. I don't know if it is it can be known but my question is did Russia did Russia support Trump, give him all this money and everything, in the anticipation that he could become president? I don't think that's very likely. I just think they gave him money and help support him because he was such a predominant American figure. That they felt like if they keep giving him money and feeding him money, then they're he's gonna owe him like there. He's going to be in their pocket for some day like The Godfather. Some day, and that day may never come, I will call upon you to do a service for me. You know, they'll own him. So do you think that Russians really thought that Trump could one day be president or that they were just feeding him money just to have. I think they underestimated how well he ended up doing in the elections. And I think like we underestimated. Yes the people who would vote for him. Right? So there are just so many factors here. I think that led to his election we can go into those but as you were saying, I think it's more that they were just getting him in their pocket and to pay like, Have something on him for later on but his whole campaign was about sort of this polarization sort of violating these norms we usually go by I mean, there are times a couple of times. He like suggested not that discreetly that someone should like murder Hillary Clinton just like I hope the Second Amendment people just like crazy stuff. Yeah, and that's like, you know third world like dictatorship type tactics. And it's pretty scary and I didn't I don't think they thought he would actually win and if he didn't win he said he might not take the election results seriously, which is a huge Norm to violate exactly. I mean, that's just it they ate the Russians were just wanting to upset the apple cart in American politics and boy did they. I mean en and Trump would have done that even if he would have lost I agree. But the funny thing is that might have backfired in the long run really in so here my perspective Okay, so. And I've heard other people talk about this sort of as well. So it's not yours. It's something I've heard and I relate to and I'll expand on it. But basically like they didn't think he would win. So if he didn't win then there's still be all this tension from that base of supporters that that voted for him. So it's almost like this cathartic thing that they let these people who felt underrepresented and under empowered got someone elected and so their voices heard in the mainstream now and like they showed the elite globalist. Whatever blah blah blah, and then really what's happening though is like Trump's popularity ratings in the Republican party and all of that stuff has really damaged them in the long run. So even though he's got he got elected and he's had these few years one might argue that in the long run maybe it's helped our country sort. It's like a virus that you get stronger by dealing with it, you know like vaccine or yeah, I got you. But yeah, I kind of agree with that because like it's Trump did Lucy the presidential election would we have learned all about the nefarious doings of the Russian trolls and online all that stuff? I think we are much more aware now of what information across the internet can do and the fact that Russia was a big player in our on our 2016 presidential election. And if he Woulda lost maybe we don't know all those specifics so we're not as aware so they can do it again in the future. I think I did see a report that like 2018 the midterms was pretty pretty secure. So like I have I have confidence going forward that we know will be better prepared in the future to handle what may come whereas it trumpet a loss maybe would have but it would have been still lackadaisical and Russia would have been able to influence our our populace that but still. Yeah like with Facebook like would they have been held as accountable as they have been without him actually getting elected and and yeah, they some things he mentions in the book. It's like it's crazy that they didn't catch some of this stuff or act upon it. Oh, yeah, there are there are. There are several times when he talks about Putin and the Russian media and stuff the practices that they go they have there and I'm like same thing could be said for Trump. It's kind of sad. Well part of the flaw in our system is that with the Internet it's all about like an attention economy. He mentioned so it sort of thrives on these emotion appeals to our emotion to make us angry or whatever. We're more likely to share something Clickbait type thing and Facebook didn't do a good job of regulating that and because they're not editors Tim. Yeah, you're really a tech company. They provide a platform. Yeah. I am being very facetious in my tone. Well, it's like it's kind of were all part of the problem though is because we let all of our local newspapers sort of die off is what he mentioned which I sort of underestimated that as a factor, but. You don't read that quote about that's a good quote. Yeah, go ahead and porters check finally here. It was a good one. Where there are local reporters journalism concerns events that people see and care about. When local reporters disappear the news becomes abstract. It becomes a kind of entertainment rather than a report about the familiar. That's a great quote. Oh absolutely and he has several nuggets like that in this book that don't even really pertain to Russia per se but are very, very powerful because that is that is so true. It's so unfortunate. Well, it's a shame that people. And us included don't really want to pay for news. It's like if things are out there, we'll just get them on the Internet until we don't have to pay for News. Why would we Tim that's capitalism 101, right? Like if you can get something for free why pay for it. But is it Facebook news, or is it propaganda? Clickbait it have to be a where consumer of news online and. Some places charge you a monthly subscription to view the website now and I feel like that's totally fair. Does that automatically validate their news? You could say no because anybody can charge a subscription for a website, but I feel like. if that is a source you trust. Which I think is most of them are valid. So go ahead and do. I think they just need to evolve and find a better business model. I know that's an over simplified approach, but think about it think about like music streaming right like with music streaming, you know, everybody wanted everything for free just because it was the easiest way to get music but then you get like Spotify you pay a subscription but with news like I can't subscribe pay for the Economist, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, local news here this edited, you know, like how many subscriptions are there going to be it? A little heart like it's one thing to have one subscription for one music source with Spotify or Netflix and movies. But like how many news subscriptions are you going to get? Well, you can make the argument may be that you'd only need one if you read it thoroughly and it like, you know, the Cincinnati Enquirer. I mean you could have an online subscription there. It will give you the local news and we'll probably have AP articles. About World stuff. Would it be the most in-depth? Maybe not but do you need all that? I would I would argue that and say that you could get by with one news subscription. Are you paying for any news right now? I actually am what is well, I mean, I do get a magazine too foreign policy FP. Yeah, you're more informed than the average citizen. I think well, thank you. And you read the magazine website to they're actually going to feature me in a little blurb on their website because I filled out a survey and first person to fill out surveys is the blurb. That's cool. What is the survey about? It was just like a customer survey. Like are you are you pleased with FP and the website then the magazine? What do. What do you like what you don't like that kind of thing. So I sent a little blurb. I just fill out the survey to do them a favor and then they emailed me back like a month later saying hey, we're going to feature your is okay. We feature your responses on some of our Publications. I'm like sure that's cool. Yeah again easy as advertising. Yeah exactly. I subscribe to Fortune Magazine to like, I feel like so you're saying online subscriptions from news. is still a work in progress. It could be better for the consumer like and I noticed this was video streaming to is it starting to get a little bloated where you have you have to pay for Prime and to keep getting Netflix sling whatever but people don't want to have ten subscriptions going but like Prime they make it part of your shipping package. That's like a creative way where it's yeah, but I feel like it's gone. I feel like it's only going to get more you're going to have Disney you already have ESPN plus but Disney's going to have one. You know Apple might come out with their streaming server a streaming service. So like it's I mean an HBO has one so like you what do you do? You you sign up your credit card to get it charged once a month and you forget about it and you can go on there and watch as much as you want. Well options are great, but also consumers want simplicity and not to be charged bang bang bang like a million times or different things. I mean, they'll find a balance I think eventually but. It's not substantive sustainable to have infinite subscriber platforms. I think but you're reaching the lawn niche of the market the long tail where Niche markets like there's like a $5 a month horror movie streaming that looks you know, like there's like things like that. Yeah, so but yeah, I agree that I feel like there is ice on my argument is that it's only gonna get worse before it gets better, too. And I but I agree that I feel like there will be something after all this subscription. It takes time. Yeah. Oh absolutely. See who's going to stick around. One last thing I'll say about the news though is that I think it's good to have a variety of sources because each one sort of inherently like leans left or leans right a little bit for the most part and. And so if you have a balance then you can kind of way those biases and so I think instead of subscribing to there should be an option like a bundle, you know, you bundle cable. Why don't you bundle newspapers and you pay x amount for that. That would be the best consumer option. I don't know maybe that is the thing. I just haven't heard of it, but right that would be cool. It's a good question. I just came up with a new business. Yeah for all five of our listeners. Yeah, startup gold bundling news sources one subscription you get to the top articles. I think I'm on to something. I think you're onto something will be I think it'd be tough because I think you got decades of culture between newspapers of competition. I'll be tough to find them. Once it would be willing to bundle together. I agree that makes sense, but they need to evolve and you know, I agree. We can move on anyway, so yeah, so then eventually we are we like yeah, so Putin invades Ukraine. We don't really give a shit and so we're not ready in 2016 when Russia attacks our presidential election. So end of story. That's a good summary. Yes. What I will say that I'm mentioning Paul Manafort at the end of that chapter isn't good transition to the chapter about Thrones because it's just insane that this guy becomes the Trump's campaign manager. It's like how blatant can you get Russian ties? No. Oh, but he wasn't he wasn't with he wasn't with Trump for very long Tim, so, you know, nothing absolutely nothing. You know, there's no connection. It's amazing though their campaign. Yeah, he just bought a lot of fancy rugs. There's so much like orwellian doublespeak. So crazy gone is there but the ties to the Trump family are crazy. Like I didn't realize so like selling Trump property like you said in the tower for years and like mobs, so they're laundering money that way and then like Deutsche Bank or whatever. Is that how you pronounce? Deutsche Bank Deutsche Bank, they so they're the only bank that would lend him money because he was so in debt and then they also lent money to like Kushner, Jared Kushner and then like right before the presidential right and then they he had a firm that donated a bunch of money to like Facebook and Twitter and stuff. So it's like they're sort of got a got a hand in that area. So and then and here's something in the. In the half year between his nomination as the Republican candidate and his victory in the general election. Some 70 percent of the units sold and Trump's buildings were purchased not by human beings, but by limited liability companies. That's insane. 70% of the unit saloons buildings were purchased by llc's. which he's not like these are like condos and yeah, how is that possible? It's like legally. Are like the Russian oligarch buying a property for like 30 million more dollars and it's worth. It's like how obvious do you have to get right? Just to mention again on the ties to Russia. So if you think about like. Who's the guy Jeff Sessions met with Russians Rex Tillerson secretary of state was appointed like best friend of Russia. Like seriously, I think I know that was seriously the title isn’t it when he was when he was Exxon see it CEO. Yeah. Yeah, and then he became Secretary of State and our secretary. Like that's a period where so many diplomats like positions weren't being filled. So he just did a terrible job it seems and just all of these different appointments like Michael Flynn people are just having these really strong connections to Russia. It's very concerning. Yeah. So anyway, I think the molar Mueller more molar molar investigation is wrapping up. So it'll be interesting. I were to see where it goes. Everyone thinks their wrapping up. You think it was still going on for a while. I mean. Yes, I do. I think it'll still be six months. At least I had and my concern is that one of my co-workers asked like well, by the time this thing gets done is people are people going to care and I think there will be a lot of people that say hell, yes. Well, then there'll be the middle of the road people that are like yeah, what is taking so long, you know, why can't they wrap this thing up and I am. To me that that I'm not one of those people but I feel like there is some sentiment like that. So. my I am I am pessimistic that the Mueller investigation whatever it turns out is going to be taken with with the gravitas that it needs to be taken with because I feel like people are just going to shrug it off like they shrug off everything else Trump says and does. That's very cynical perspective. But let me just offer my thoughts here. I think he waited until after the midterm. So it wouldn't be politicized work as much that being said. I wish there were still a timeline where it's like the end is in sight. He's going to come out with information now, it seems like it's getting to a point in time where impeaching almost doesn't make sense because you can just wait for the next election and I'm hoping there will be enough bombs drop that. I know it seems like people are apathetic to a certain degree. But from what it sounds like with Cohen and how much he's been talking. It seems like there could be some pretty heavy stuff. That'd be hard to ignore and Manafort was playing this game of like maybe I'll get a pardon or maybe I talk. I know I think he's betting on Pardon but probably going to be out of luck. So. The final thing I'll say I think is that someone put this well that they said Trump is like a spectacle like an Entertainer and like The Apprentice the show is really popular but eventually people got tired of it and it seems like people are getting tired of trump the spectacle at a certain point. It's like, you know, you get sick of the seeing the same thing over and over again on the news even his fanbase even though they might might or might not agree that he's full of crap. Just seeing him day in and day out trying to stir up drama and polarization. I think will grow old. So that's my hope. I hope so. I hope you're right, Tim, but I'll still be cynical. I'll be The Optimist here. Yeah, okay, we can do credit going to close down. I just I just there's some other good ones like the local reporters one was good. All these are all from the end. So I'll start. Sure all this is a good one. All right, like all immorality eternity politics Begins by making an exception for itself. All else in creation might be evil, but I and my group are good because I am myself and my group is mine. Others might be confused and bewitched by the facts and passions of history, but my nation and myself have maintained a prehistorical innocence. Since the only good is this invisible quality that resides in us, the only policy is one that safeguards our innocence regardless of the cost those who accept eternity politics do not expect to live longer, happier, and more fruitful lives. They accept suffering as a mark of righteousness if they think that guilty others are suffering more. Life is nasty brutish and short the pleasure of life is that it can be made nastier more brutish and shorter for others. This you go only this talks exactly what you said earlier. That is that Putin Russia Putin Russia can't be like the west and America so they want to bring everybody down to their level. That at one point I think he says that Russia is playing a negative sum game. Whereas I may be losing but you're losing more and that's all that matters. And that's this is why I'm cynical Tim. Okay. Okay fair enough. That's okay. That's a good quote. Yeah, I like it because like you said, it's the negative some it's not even zeros. No. Yeah. They're actively harming these countries. Getting in their way of policies and things why not improving lives life in Russia there just. What's the opposite of improving they're they're dragging other countries down without lifting the Russia up at. So like as a Russian citizen you wonder how their perspective what it's like and how they can support the government or to what extent they weighed the benefit of opposing the government versus just going on with their lives, but the propaganda arm of Russia just so powerful that let's not focus on how unequal the wealth is here. Let's just focus on all these other countries and blame them for that. But one interesting tangent, I thought was worth going on. I heard the You Know Who Wants To Be A Millionaire the show? Yeah, the Russian version. They had to take out the ask an audience question or option because people were actively giving the wrong answer to sabotage the person because they didn't want them to win the money my goodness. Yeah, super interesting. Yeah is fascinating. It was like a sociological experiment. It is must yeah, but it's just if you think about it, like culturally it's just compared comparing Russians with the United States or something. That's just how they see other people. They don't want this millionaire to have a bunch of luck they want I mean that's a simplification but you know, I mean, I think it does it is a window into the psyche of the average Russian. So speaking about eternity have one quote sure be good. If Russia could not become the West let the West become Russia if the flaws of American democracy could be exploited to elect a Russian client than Putin could prove that the world outside is no better than Russia were the European Union or the United States to disintegrate during Putin's lifetime. He could cultivate an illusion of Eternity. That's a good one too. Yeah, I mean there were glimpses when I kind of understood why he called it an eternity politics, but still I feel like you could have come up with a more imaginative. He needs like a branding expert to help him out here. This is a little tip that I found interesting for. This is about brexit. All right, 419 Twitter accounts that posted on Brexit were localized to Russia's internet research agency. Later, every single one of them would also post on behalf of Donald Trump's presidential campaign about a third of the of the discussion of brexit on Twitter was generated by Bots and more than 90% of the Bots tweeting political material were not located in the United Kingdom. That's crazy. Isn't that crazy? It's the same accounts that were helping brexit were helping the campaign and like they weren't even trying to like create new ones. They're like, hi. There said no one's watching. Yeah. This is all because because this is all, you know written out and on the internet that we could go back and view it that the time we had no idea. That's just it no one was watching from their perspective is it that they didn't create separate accounts because they didn't think they'd be found out or just like they're so Brash that we don't care we're doing this anyway. Could be bit of both I would think you know that at Twitter account, Tennessee GOP or something. Yeah, that's an example of that. Okay, you only read it off. Yeah. Sure here somewhere. I got a couple things some more about social media. All right. So the first one you said, the Russian version of the Tennessee Republican party had ten times more Twitter followers than the actual Tennessee Republican Party. 10 times. That's crazy. And here's another one. Despite all this the Heart of Texas Facebook page had more followers in 2016 than those of the Texas Republican party or the Texas Democratic party or indeed both of them combined. Everyone who liked followed and supported Heart of Texas was taking part in Russian intervention in American politics designed to destroy the United States of. Yeah crazy. I'm getting fired up man. So let's talk about it for a second. Alright, so talk about what those those accounts. That's what I'm saying. You have to hand it to Russian propaganda for success. Absolutely. Like I completely agree like they got they got they put us in check. They didn't put us in checkmate. So we were able to get out of it, but now we're now we're playing behind. And we got it. We got it. We got to catch up and we got to be aware and you and what you said before is absolutely right. It is on each individual. It's a it's a it's a conundrum. It's a it's a definitely. how do you does there need to be an education campaign? How do you get the individual to do the work? Because there's so much misinformation out there. Yeah, if you are one of these users who fell for this propaganda, I think many of them won't even admit it. Would they even know Tim would they even know? Well, if you told them this is a fake account you spread or liked fake and information would they even admit it or a great little bit? Well you would have to you would have to literally hand people a screenshot of their account with a like or share with a with the Heart of Texas account, but people people people don't remember that they won't remember that but you would have to confront them and say look at this you shared this account and and with you so you're saying is that with a even a minute? I would say that they wouldn't even know that they. I'm not yeah, I'm not saying the memory is the issue. I'm just saying like the campaign and everything politics these days is so like polarized and people are so stuck in their biases that psychologically. I don't know if many of them could bring themselves to say they might just say like, oh that was fake or that's fake news that's doctored up something because they can’t see that possibility or if they can't if one more thing if they can't do that then what they do is they it's like what about-ism where they just deflect and focus on because I'll say this to like people in Ohio and possibly not too far for me be like, oh, this is crazy. Have you thought about this? Maybe not in that calm tone? But then they'll be like well, what about Hillary's emails or something just like we weren't we're not talking about that. Right? What about ism is a disease in our society. Yeah, because it is saying that two completely different things are equal when they have no real connection whatsoever and sometimes it might be legitimate. Where are you bring up one thing and they're like, well, what about this? And so there are times when there are dominoes that fall that one thing leads to another and can create a quagmire or something what we're what you're absolutely right is that people always deflect and talk about something else that is wrong when. Two wrongs don't make a right. Well, no one wants to admit. They were wrong for our that they like to fake account correct propaganda. So are you saying that these people would do it willingly or almost like reflexively? Mmm, it's an emotional response. I think so reflexively almost is what you're saying. Like they like they would be almost so caught up in their emotional connection that they have to their beliefs and politics that they won't even be able to recognize that they had a contributed to the spread of those Russian propaganda. Their ego and psyche I don't think it'd bring themselves to admit it. Even if the facts are there. Okay? Okay, I agree with you there. I thought at first you were saying like people will be would be aware that something is going on in still still refuse to say that they contributed in it because they were embarrassed or something like that. Well that too, you know, yeah, but I feel like if people truly get a their eyes open to this kind of stuff. I feel like they would want to just. They won't even have to make amends or anything. Just going forward from this point on have your. Have your eyes open your ears open and be and be on the lookout for a fake stuff and stuff that if it doesn't smell right, you know, it's probably B.S. My sense is that people are starting to realize how toxic these conversations are like it's good to like have political discussions if they're calm but if we're just like spewing our hatred and just hate both sides, that's we're not going to heal or evolve. Oh, no, I completely agree. But the thing is that that. Politics has taken root in almost like the emotional centers of our brain to the point where we identify ourselves in this Society with our beliefs about political issues and we will let those political issues determine how we vote and determine what we choose to believe and what we choose not to believe and I think that's dangerous and I do agree there needs to be more willingness to view the other side's perspective to work together. Especially and and not be so your identity is not who you vote for your identity is not your political party. Your identity is so much more than hat and I feel like. people need to recognize that and be accepting of everybody and just take a break from the news for a while. Yeah, it's way for news Cycles. Not not only okay. You got some more quotes. here's something. and this was. the author writing about this Russian guy named Dugan d-- u d-- i n i kind of forget who he was but Dugan stole the show with his passionate case that only a United far-right could save Europe from gay Satan. And that's the kind of rhetoric that that fuels what we just talked about this this division in humanity between us and Them versus right and left and it's just completely sad and and I even made a little note about that that. Fear is very very powerful and I did not mean to make political generalizations, but it seems to be that like racism xenophobia people that get so afraid of people that are different from them. that. The people that politicians and media have used that fear to motivate people and fear is one of the most powerful emotions we have so there is nothing really as powerful to counterbalance that. That was my and so thus, you know, all these politicians and media people that that fuel fan the Flames of that fear. It's gaining Steam. And the rest of us were like, oh we need to do something to stop that and and. like I could be really hokey here and say that love is the only thing that can counterbalance that but like it just seems like there's no again then my cynical side comes out and be like. Well, there is no love anymore in the world. So just so everyone knows Brian has had one beer and it he's talking like he's had 10. I know I for some reason tonight. I think we should all love each other. Yeah, I mean it just I agree with you. Rhetoric matters. I know people say, oh he just he didn't mean what he said, you know, but at the end of the day. You rhetoric does matter because it's just sets the tone of what is acceptable as a society and what is not and we just have to take a stand put our foot down and say that you can't say certain things. We have the freedom of speech Yes, but you can't. say that you can shoot somebody in the middle of Fifth Avenue and not lose a single vote. You can't say that Mexicans are rapists. And I'm and I don't you know, anyway, I agree with you. Yeah, I think this is a very important topic but I know we are very much digressing. No. No, I want to talk a little more about this. Okay, I think yeah, like you're saying the fact that he could get away with racist comments with these comments about like you're just mocking like a disabled person just crazy basic human things that you think are out of. How could anybody's campaign survived because he never apologizes. He just courts attention at all costs but so on some level were all to blame because we take in this Media news cycle, whatever gets the most attention whatever gets the most hits is whatever it causes the most outrage. So he's just playing the system. Right? But one more thing I would say is that it goes on both sides that the name-calling and the the terms and things like that. There are these like. Pretty high-level liberals who will call people in the Midwest and south rednecks and white trash and things like that. And so I agree with you that all those like racist remarks are terrible. But at the same time you have to understand the perspective of a trump voter is that people in this area the part of the country they think oh it's the coastal elites calling us flyover country. Like that our lives don't really matter that sort of thing. So it's like, oh we'll show you will elect this person, right? All right couple things about that. I completely agree that liberals can be just as bad as the far Right and I mean just as bad and but I would also have to say that no president has ever said has no president has had the rhetoric that Trump has had. And I think that is very very in public. You're right. The Nixon tapes were pretty bad I guess but and I would also say that. the midwesterners feeling feelings about the coastal Elites. How much of that is anchored in legitimate comments and how much is fanned by the media? And I'm not going to say that the media is solely responsible for that the midwesterners thinking that the coastal Elites don't think anything of them because it's true because there is some. Resentment that liberals think that people from Nebraska and Iowa and all the other midwest states or just like yeah rednecks or whatever like you said, but but but my other put my greater point is the one that we never had leaders of our country to be saying these things and that is where we have to draw the line. Right as a leader his character leaves so much to be desired. Yes, he does. Someone made a meme the other day of like the seven deadly sins and he just like had a picture of him and body and each one like lust sloth greed Envy but one okay, I'll transition out of this topic by saying there was this correlation between Midwestern states in the opioid crisis and states that voted for Trump and I don't think that's a coincidence, you know. So I'll just mention this quote. He says the association between declining health and Trump voting was strong and important states that Obama had won in 2012. But which Trump took in 2016 such as Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania when life is short and the future is troubled the politics of Eternity beckons. So it's like these people I just think they feel at a loss like both parties are kind of ignoring them. So they just say why not go for this Outsider who's at least acknowledging us and our suffering. And of the to politics that he talks about in The Book of inevitability and in eternity when you're faced with despair, you're going to go towards eternity. You're just going to bend that direction because despair you have no hope. And you're like, well, let's just go with Trump. Let's just do it. Let's get the an outsider in there and shake things up in Washington. But I just think I don't know if we want to go down this road, but Bernie Sanders as a populist was appealing to a lot of people even if you think his policies were unrealistic, even if you could argue he damaged the Democratic party's chances in the real election if it were Sanders versus Trump, I want to think more people would have gotten behind Sanders then Clinton because to me what she represented was not it wasn't getting a lot of people excited. It was just like here's another Clinton. Here's someone who doesn't really care about me. It's just she comes off kind of fake and that's unfortunate. Yes, I agree because I feel like she is actually a good governor of you good person to have in government. But you're right she comes off as insincere and that's unfortunate. She had the experience and she had I think she would have been a good leader. Right especially relative to Trump. It's just yeah about rallying people and being someone they can do you think. Part of me also thinks that the 2016 presidential election was a pendulum swing due to having our first African-American president. I think that's a factor and it's crazy like the Russian propaganda how much they played up the birth certificate thing. It's like they're just trying to for years and years just doing resentment. So they're feeding into that whole mindset. And then with like Sanders and Clinton at the convention. It's like they release these hacked emails and things like that. So with Donald Trump jr. Meeting with Wikileaks and all of these actors are kind of. Conspiring together here. Mmm. or this is when the last quotes I have but . So on October 7th Trump seemed to be in trouble when a tape revealed his view that powerful men should sexually assault women. 30 minutes after that tape was published Russia release the emails of the chairman of Clinton's campaign, John podesta, thereby hindering a serious discussion of Trumps history of sexual predation. So that's a good example, I think of how. We couldn't focus on this huge glaring flaw of his or controversial incident because they're keeping the news cycle going by saying. Hey, look at this other thing. Well, it's what about ISM practical? Yes, though. It's a sir. Yes. Absolutely distraction. Yeah, there was some other good ones. There was an interesting quote. Puerto Rico has more inhabitants than 21 of the 50 American states, but it's American citizens have no influence on presidential elections. How crazy is that? That's messed up right there there. They are American citizens. What's their legal the their country? Okay, they should have representation. John Oliver, I think had a good special on this or segment on Puerto Rico statehood. Yeah. I'm pretty sure and then when you talk about like the hurricane and things it's like we barely really helped out as a country. So Trump adopted the Russian double standard. He was permitted to lie all the time. But any minor error by a journalist discredited the entire profession of Journalism. Isn't that sad? It should worry everybody how much he attacked journalists in general, and then here's the laundry list of Trumps stuff and eternity politician defines foes rather than formulating policies Trump did so by denying that the Holocaust concerned Jews, by using the expression son of a bitch in reference to black athletes, by calling a political opponent Pocahontas, by overseeing a denunciation program that targeted Mexicans, by publishing a list of crimes committed by immigrants, by transforming an office on terrorism into an office on Islamic terrorism, by helping hurricane victims in Texas and Florida, but not in Puerto Rico, by speaking of shit hole countries, by referring to reporters as enemies of the people American people, by claiming that protesters were paid and so on. And so on like that it's just. There's always something new like every week with Trump. So if you actually compiled all the shit he said and stuff. It's just pathetic. It's exhausting to it is to keep up with so here. This will be my last quote. Okay. In the end though freedom depends on citizens who are able to make a distinction between what is true and what they want to hear. Authoritarianism arrives not because people say that they want it but because they lose the ability to distinguish between facts and desires. There's your road to unfreedom Tim. That's good. That's good. People get complacent. They don't take responsibility. And we devolve into authoritarianism. Yeah. Can I say one more quote? Absolutely. Okay. This is my last one. So, okay. He says in the Russian model investigative reporting must be marginalized so that news can become a daily spectacle. The point of spectacle is to summon the emotions of both supporters and detractors and to confirm and strengthen polarization. Every new cycle creates Euphoria or depression and reinforces a conviction that politics is about friends and enemies at home rather than about policy that might improve the lives of citizens. Trump governs just as he had run for office as a producer of outrage rather than as a formulator of policy. See so true. That is so true was a professor of outrage producer producer. Yeah producer of outrage because it's like what policy has he done the tax bill and I was actually credit that was mostly Congress. He just signed the damn thing. Yeah. It's just we all need to find a way to move past this outrage culture as practical culture. I am heartened by history because the 60s and 70s weren't were tumultuous as well Nixon. We had a president resign because he was going to be impeached anyway, so. And then, you know Vietnam War and civil rights movement and everything. So. what the past two years have taught me is that history is cyclical and we will get through this. But what this book taught me is not to be complacent and to be a knowledgeable consumer of news everywhere, social media included. That's a good take away. All right, I think the main thing for me is just to have some empathy for both sides of the political spectrum, recognize how big of an influence the political propaganda machines were right influencing us, and try to just take a step back and not be so emotional and try to move forward rather than stay stuck in this eternity. Yeah to of unfreedom. All right. Yeah. So Tim. Yeah, what would you rate this book? Are we doing half Stars? I never do we ever design. Oh, I don't want to do half Stars. Okay one half star ready. Let me guess. You're going to say. Why don't you go first? Well, I'm conflicted. Yeah, because I found this topic and this I found that the subject matter interesting so and out of respect to the author. I'm going to give it higher than what I should. I'm gonna give it a three. As a book it's probably the one. Oh, yeah, I mean that I mean like that that is a little harsh. That's a little harsh. This is probably the longest discussion we've had. I know this is a long as this session we have because it's been it has been a launching pad for to discuss what's going on in the world because it is very relevant, right but. I would not recommend this book to anybody unless they were really interested in Russia. And like I said before I think it's just been a long article in New York or something. I think books have more staying power though. Like I just I disagree with this one. I do not think 10 years from now this one will. I mean because this is such a this is about stuff that's just happened. So in 10 20 years. I don't disagree with you that this could have been a news article. All I'm saying is that physically a book can be on the Shelf in 10 years. Whereas most articles seem to be pushed to the back burner. You don't ever think back on articles you read years ago doing well. Maybe I'm a foreign policies subscriber, I fill out surveys. All right, whatever. I was stuck between three and four. Oh, okay, I think because of the topics because of the time we're living in these are important things to read. I wish he had made it more accessible to people to say here's what you should really take away from it right said of the all the Ukraine stuff. I know it's really important for context but. It's more of just a warning. It's what do they call that when it's story? Cautionary tale it is a cautionary tale with no solution or plan of action going forward other than just to be aware of this. Russia. Yeah, it's important though. It is. I'm not saying it's not important. I'm just saying it could have been better. Yeah, I give it a 3, okay. Okay. So next time next book will be Calypso by David Sedaris will be my pick a happy one and finally, yes, but all right, so we're done. Yeah, I'm those as a good talk.
When Breath Becomes Air by Paul Kalanithi
Two Guys, One Book
When Breath Becomes Air by Paul Kalanithi
Welcome to Two guys, One book where two friends tackle the reading list one book at a time. Okay, welcome back to two guys one book. I'm Tim join with Brian. Today's book is When Breath Becomes Air by Paul Kalanithi. How do you say his name? Sake Alan? Ithi Colony that yeah well anything and this was Brian's pick. So yes, Brian. Why did you choose this book? Oh, well, this book is about a neurosurgeon who gets cancer and then he unfortunately passes away and a little back story about me is that I had have had Hodgkin's lymphoma. And went through an ordeal of my own and so it was something that I was curious about reading and because I've heard good things about it and I see why. It's a it's a very good book well written and I enjoyed it quite a bit. So, some of the things he wrote about were very applicable to my experience going through Hodgkin's lymphoma, so I was very I consider myself fortunate because I did not have to deal with the level of cancer that he had to deal with. But unfortunately that is something that people have to deal with it from time to time. So that's why I picked it. I liked it a lot. Did you have any preconceived notions coming into this one going into it? Yeah, I mean I knew the subject matter was going to be kind of heavy but I was impressed. I thought it was really good. There's no yeah. Yeah, he's not it's I well I don't think anybody that's a neurosurgeon is it is a typical person like it takes a lot of hard work and determination to become neurosurgeon, but this Paul in particular he started. He said his academic career in English or literature and he was a big so like I feel like starting his academic career in English influenced him to become a good writer. And so I feel like he was kind of the perfect vessel for this experience to happen to so that he could articulate it in such a beautiful way. Yeah, I like hearing about his upbringing to and now his mom would get him to read all these books when he was a kid kind of like adult level books and with kind of heavy themes but it really helped make him well-rounded and get a sense of literature and philosophy and all these different areas. So yeah, I was impressed by his writing for being a neurosurgeon. I mean, I wouldn't say it's like one of the top tier writers, but for how skilled he is at in the medical field to also be this good of a writer. It's. That's pretty cool. Yeah. Oh absolutely and I'm like, yeah, he looked he rattles off the big list of books that he read as a kid as like that's like some of my favorite books and other ones that I've been meaning to read so it's like it was a perfect. I definitely highlighted that section and took notes like those were gonna be some of my books. I'm going. Yeah read eventually but um, but little brief overview, it's it's got a little prologue where he kind of discusses how this all began. And then he goes back. The first section is In perfect health, I begin. Were he talks about his upbringing in Arizona and and how he became a doctor and how he went through school and wanted to do English first because his dad was a doctor and his brother were both his brothers doctors or just one of them. I think they all were all doctors. Yeah. Yeah. And then so he talks about his background and then when he gets diagnosed in the story or in he goes into the second part of the book called cease not till death and then he writes up until he passes away and then there's an epilogue written by his wife which I thought was very touching as well kind of a good way to wrap things up. It wasn't very long. I felt like it was a quick read. I tore through it in no time it helped when I had a flight but um, yeah, his wife's epilogue was impressive. I thought like she came off as very caring and compassionate and just as good of a writer as he was he was I'm sure we'll have some quotes from that later on but just to go back to the cancer real quick. So he had lung cancer right which he never smoked or anything, which is crazy that. For the fair amount of people who never smoked and still develop it and he's only in his like 30s when he got it. Yeah, I think earlier admitted to mid 30s. I think it was. Yeah, but I actually know somebody else, a good acquaintance of my parents who got lung cancer and he was never a smoker either and I hear that that is to get lung cancer and have it not be in a nonsmoker. That's like. Not a very good cancer to have like that is very aggressive and hard to treat and get rid of cancer. So what was that Hodgkin's lymphoma? Like how did that work? I don't really know much about it. Well, it's the cancer of the lymph node system, which is the lymph node is are nothing you really think about in your bodily functions from day to day, but I think the part of the immune system, I even forget it was a while ago, but no like so I I felt a lump in my armpit which is where some lymph nodes are and then I'll when I went in for scan. I had them in my neck, my armpits, and down in my chest and back and abdomen so I kind of had them all over but they were all really small like that's one cool thing about my experience was that the doctors were very open and. To communicate everything with you and I even saw all my scans and what so like because if you're going through something like that, they are not it sometimes when you go to the doctor for a regular checkup, you kind of feel like sometimes they're just going from one person to the next and you know, but in my experience that the oncology doctors are particularly caring and open to address anything that you may have on your mind and willing to give you their best what they can offer. I know one thing about me was I wouldn't I at the end of my cancer treatments. I went into my oncologist with some existential angst and he he did his best to try to help address some of that but. You know that wasn't really his forte. So yeah dressing there's a lot of existential talk in this book as well who could go into but just to talk about the doctors real quick. What struck me in the book was how much uncertainty I guess there was when it came to medical decisions like when he's describing his own residency as a neurosurgeon and then talking about his diagnosis and how different specialists wanted him to be treated. It was like a lot of them ended up disagreeing about what was wrong in the best way to address it things like that. So a lot of it felt very subjective and kind of crazy to me how disorganized it kind of was but it's good that your experience you had a good kind of relationship with your doctor, right? And and and I think that goes to show just how aggressive and nasty his health condition was. Whereas mine was a pretty routine Hodgkin's lymphoma and they have a regimen of chemo drugs that they give that are pretty consistently good with treating that Hodgkin's lymphoma. So and also there's the difference between Hodgkins and Non-Hodgkin's or as Hodgkins is a just the most popular form of lymphoma. So they know how to treat it the Non-Hodgkin's you get in the different variations that are Maybe. More aggressive or not as well studied and I think in the author's case here that lung cancer spreading to all his other organs created problems that I think you're right that were not a one-size-fits-all solution, you know, but different things were happening so different Specialists that deal with immunity Knology or I don't know I can't even. You know, they he was rounding off how many doctors were in that room that one time towards the end and it was pretty substantial like four or five different doctors of different Specialties and they were all wanting slightly different things. And so yeah, I agree that it did seem in this case that it wasn't it was more subjective because there is no cut and dry solution for scenarios that were as bad as what Paul was in. That's what makes this whole these events. So. Frightening and frustrated I think is uncertainty. It's like he never really knew how much time he had left and found out it's a terminal illness, but does that mean he has a few months or a few years? You know, what should he do about his job. He's been training to be resident surgeon for years. He's in a relationship. He talked about some of his like marital issues and whether or not they should have a kid things like that. Oh, yeah that that that is entirely frustrating and I think. But there's nothing you can do about it and doctors are incredibly smart dedicated hard-working people. But yet even they can disagree on how to handle things or they can't give you a straight answer because they just don't know like that's what one part of the book was that he was talking about how he didn't know how much time he had left when it was really bad. And so what was he going to do like give me a month? I'll just. Do nothing. Enjoy life. Give me three years. I’ll write. Give me 10 years. I'll go back to surgery or something like that. I think it was one part was one quote. He said so that is an and and I found interesting in what and when he was going through his treatments and whatnot. He was wanting the doctor to like given the statistics of it or something and she wasn't she wasn't going to and. because. And I and he mentioned how doctors can't really say like when a doctor says, oh he has six months to live. They can't really say that with certainty, you know, so when somebody lives nine months or a year after the six months come and go a person's like, oh those doctors don't know what they're talking about. But when really, you know, they're just making educated guesses, right? He wanted to know a statistical range. Yeah I have. About this much time to this much time, but I don't think she wanted to give him that frame of reference. She just wanted to kind of take things one day at a time and make progress as much as they could. But yeah as far as like meaning and identity and and navigating that whole experience, I just can't imagine because yeah, like I said, he's did this whole surgical residents like he spent like a decade of his life preparing to be neurosurgeon. He has he's like grand plan. And it's just crazy to think about how that can come crashing down and just like, okay, like who am I now like, how do I Define myself who I'd be like me mentioned like existential angst going to a doctor with that. It's like they're training the medical side, but it's probably hard to help you with that as much right, right. Yeah. but yeah as he talks about lot about like philosophy and in the book and his views and. It's that's what makes him such an interesting subject in this case is that he has that background literature philosophy. He went through this experience and well, he was fascinated with death, right which I have meaning and death right because he he felt at first that like literature was you know, the way to people who have written throughout history about life and the experiences that we all. Go through in life can can find Reflections on how to get meaning out of life through literature. And then so that's how he initially went to literature and then you realize well from the biology from the biological point of view. The the brain is where we create the meeting where we process everything. So if he learns everything about the brain, maybe he'll know more about you know, Get more glimpses in the meaning of life through science and medicine through that way. So I found it interesting how his his philosophical approach to life led him down literature first and then down the medicine field later and I know I can appreciate that as going through Hodgkin's lymphoma has shaped my views of life and death and meaning and all that stuff as well. If I had one critique of the book. And I mean no disrespect sure sure, as you know, yeah everything him and his family went through. Yeah, there are times when maybe it fell a little repetitive some of the language used about his vocation. I guess it's calling because he would say like neurosurgeries the worst industry to go into but I was called by a higher. You know what I mean? Right? I think what he said was I think neurosurgery is not good job. It's a calling. Like if they people don't go into that form of stressful medicine because of the money or the hours or this whatever they go into that because they feel called to do that work and and he mentions that yeah, but also people interested in the brain and curious how it works. Then it just seems like it's a very Noble profession and I have a lot of respect for anyone who does this sort of thing, but. At the same time. I think it's hard to distinguish the line between sounding a little self-important and you know, I have to find something to critique. Yes, of course, you do once again, no disrespect right-handed. But like I see so that you feel like him was kind of stroking his own ego saying. Here I am. I am called to do this great work. It's lousy on my body. It stresses me out both body and mind but it's a calling that I am compelled to do and I wouldn't have it any other way. Part of me felt that yeah at the same time. He's must be very intelligent and it worked like those hours and this kind of subject material like I have all the respect in the world for that. So. Just so was that the main critique you had you have any others. Um, I don't know. I think like I said as a writer, I wouldn't say he's one of the best writers I've read but the fact that it's his not main profession or the thing that he was doing I feel like is that some excuse? I thought he was a great writer. I think he's a good writer. Yeah. I mean, he's not like Hunter S Thompson or Virginia Woolf that we’ve read so far. See I would say I would almost. I enjoyed reading him more than Virginia Woolf. All right. I enjoyed this book more than that. I'm just saying. As a so that's it. That's a that's a good question that we stumbled upon. Is it the book itself or is it the writing and how do you differentiate between the two like, you know, yeah, I mean. This could be a philosophical Rabbit Hole to go into but I think the general heuristic I was going by that like old books are always better. I'm sort of starting to rethink that with it because like this is newer. I like it better than a lot of the older books I've read is it just because the book is old doesn't mean it's good just because the book is new doesn't mean it's bad. Right, you know, less. Well good. I'm glad I'm glad you've come to that realization trying to be flexible in my mental habits. But now it's a it's a beautiful book and and yeah, like we've talked about the epilogue with his wife really helped round it out. I think and add more depth and context of the whole thing. Yeah. I wish it was a little longer but you know, I mean he only was writing it for the last. However months or a year, so he wasn't he when he was first diagnosed. He was more motivated to get back into the operating room and getting back to seeing patients and all that stuff. Yeah, so I get I applaud him for doing that. I think a lot of people would have totally understood if he would have just done something else like just be a professor or something like that or I don't know what else he could have done. You know, I have mixed feelings about his decision to go back as a surgeon while he's diagnosed and undergoing treatments because on one hand. It's like. Is it selfish because you could should be spend time with your family doing this and that but other the other on the other hand, it's like this is your identity. This is what you feel important doing. You should do this because it makes because makes you feel good and on the other hand, so many hands. The other other hand. Is it is he doing a disservice to patients who aren't getting a doctor at their best, but he had like residents to back them up during surgeries. But yeah, I didn't I mean. I guess I never realized the how many tiers of people that are in different stages of their medical career because you have like residents and yet Med students and then residence and doctors and attending and like I didn't quite fall. I don't I'm not a craft. Yeah it is I mean. Yeah, but what struck me in general was how intense the OR is like brain surgery. It's like they're sawing people skulls open just kind of like removing tumors and doing all these things and some of the stories he mentioned like there was a kid. They removed a tumor in the front of his brain. And then it sort of like affected as hypothalamus or something. So that's controls. It's like your impulse control part of your brain and then he was fine in the short term but then years later came back and had all these like behavioral issues. So I just it's just seems like so much pressure as a job. You never know what the right decision is for sure. It's not cut and dry like you said and what the consequences would be down the line from the patient their family. And the stress of a medical resident like they work insane hours one of his friends had committed suicide. Yeah, and as I think based on patient or like the sleep deprivation, they go through it just seems kind of insane. It doesn't really make sense. In my opinion. I mean, I guess you want to it's like training for the Army where you go through hell to get hardened so that you can handle anything that comes your way but. Like going through 48 Hours of sleeplessness I just think is unrealistic. Like just have more people on staff. Yeah to handle that. You know, how do you function as a person? I like no idea you help people you can how do you think clearly know that makes sense to me, but I was listening to I think it's like a TED Talk podcast while ago and they were talking about how the person originally during the formation of this program was like on cocaine. He was like doing these hours like one of the first physician residents whatever and. I forget the whole story but basically the person who can work 15 hours shifts was on cocaine. He set the bar and uh, yeah, so just hop Doctors up on cocaine. Not arguing for that. I think their hours should be way Rush order, right but it's just interesting because we yeah, I mean because yeah, he talks about I mean, I know we're not doing quotes but like. Alright, didn't she see that? I always thought that I only had one year left and residency that I loved her and that we were so close to the life together. We've always wanted that's the thing about going through med school and all this other crap is they have to suspend, you know, their their adulthood almost because there is scraping to get by they're working terrible hours and going through all this stress. And for what like. At the other end they'll be doctors and they'll make a lot of money and that's wonderful. But like. in Paul's example, he didn't get that. Nothing in life is guaranteed, you know to put yourself through the hell that doctors have to go through med school and residency and all that stuff. Is it worth it in the end? A lot of them. Most of them probably say, yes, but. I don't think it was for Paul. I mean maybe it was for Paul because he got to at least help people. In the end he got to perform the surgeries in the OR of on brains and spinal issues and whatnot. So maybe it was worth it for him. But like. well, his plan was kind of to do surgery for like 20 years brain surgery and then be it brain research scientist for like 20 years through this very very long-term plan. And he had the idea like you said is all about making short-term sacrifices for that long-term pay off. But it's tough. When something like this comes up out of nowhere. It makes you think like plans were things we’re thinking about doing in the future and just like, well should we focus more on day-to-day stuff because he talks about a friend who had a car crash was in a car crash and just all of a sudden is gone. It's like he's like comparing his cancer to that sort of sudden accident and just saying like, you know, is it different? Like how do we how should we live our lives based on these circumstances and so right? Yeah, I know for me when I was going when I was diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma I had no plan. Because I was already I already had a job. I was surveying full time. You know, like I was the one school. I was my first adult job couple years into that job, and then I get this diagnosis and at that time I didn't really was I I was just two years into my new job. I didn't really was thinking about like. Getting my professional surveyors license or what would I do ten years from now I had no idea, you know, it wasn't even thinking about that and then the diagnosis comes along that I just have to get through the treatments to get better and then it was like a big void of like now what? That was for me. So like I had no plan like this this guy did of letting out his whole career ahead of him, but. What my personal experience did was it made me reassess everything. Yeah, everything that I was doing and shakes your life up. And then yeah, how do you transition right then out of the what other aspects of his experience do you relate to or like oh that you went through that he went through as well like you did chemotherapy. Hmm. I just did chemo. I didn't do any radiation or anything else. But but one thing he writes. In his book, I mean, he literally I think stole it from yeah, this guy literally stole my line in his part. He says as a doctor, I knew not to declare cancer is a battle I'm going to win or ask why me? (Answer: Why not me?) That's kind of what I thought too is like. You know, there's nothing this is what led me down the my path of stoicism. Is because I didn't think about why me like I was journaling at the time when I was going through my treatments for lymphoma. And so that helped me get through it and I was journaling about like why literally I was journaling. Why not me, you know, somebody out there gets cancer every single day. I mean it sucks. But so why was why would I think that I'm above that? Why do I why do you think I'm special that I wouldn’t you know get a cancer diagnosis? I realized that once I did have the cancer diagnosis asking why me did no good because it was completely out of your control and that's what stoics focus on what you can control and what you cannot control and you can't you can't let yourself get emotionally worked up over things that you cannot control. I couldn't control my diagnosis. All I can control was I was going to go to every doctor's appointment. I didn't care. My work schedule. Thankfully I had a good employer that worked with me too. So I could go out on my doctor's appointments. I was going to do everything I could to get better. That's all I could control. I can't control the diagnosis. You know, I didn't deny it. You know, I didn't what are the five stages of grief. Like, I don't know denial anger bargaining acceptance or there's someone other than their depression. Depression for me was last. But anyway, so like yeah this guy, I think anybody who has been diagnosed with cancer, especially I think would glean a lot from this book if anybody even been close to somebody with cancer. I think would would get a lot from this book to especially during the wife's part of the end. But yeah though this there were several things that just rung so true. To me in this book that. Yeah, I mean that's why I liked it so much. Yeah, and I definitely recommend this to people anybody like you said, it's like the whole Why Not Me philosophy is why should we be the exception to these terrible things that happen and could happen to anybody. Most people are going through some kind of struggle, you know, right that we who knows exactly right? Um, but just that experience and what you went through what he went through. How did like your personality change or like your outlook on the world from that? Oh, well for me, I I was already thinking more about death at that time because my grandparents have passed away both of them within the year and while the two that were left of the four that I had and so I was thinking a lot about their death and then I get this diagnosis and I'm thinking about my own death and so it's just. It just made me more. I sought out. Well, first of all, I got through the the treatment chemo treatments and then I was depressed and so I had to get myself better to focus on that. So I had I went to counseling I tried to just get out of that apartment and do things to just I don't know distract myself or just. You know, so I wasn't moping around in my apartment all the time. And then so I had to get myself better first, but then as I was gradually getting better, I was more interested in philosophy and existentialism and stoicism and stuff like that. So I just made me. It increased my appetite for analyzing humanity and death and how do we derive meaning out of our life? So, I mean, I don't know like if that is something that I would have naturally been drawn to as I got older or you know, or would this diagnosis. Or I would I'm not even cared about that. I think I would have a little bit. I don't think I would have swung so sharply to the philosophy section in Barnes & Noble, but but like so I try to enjoy the little things in life. I don't get worked up over things. I can't control like I said earlier. So but then again, you know, I've always been a laid-back guy so I kind of feel like. I felt like I was a young healthy 27 year old when I was diagnosed so I could easily tackle it and and that's what when I went to the waiting room and saw all the old people because I was the youngest person there by far everyone else was because unfortunately, it's just, you know, as people get older they get, you know are more susceptible to I just seemed like most of the cancer patients there were 50 or older. So I was definitely the youngest one that I saw. I did see another young guy there when I was wrapping up my treatments. It was kind of unfortunate but um, but no, so I just. I felt like I could easily handle it that for some strange reason one thing I thought was if me going through Hodgkin's lymphoma prevented somebody else going through it then I can handle it. It was weird. But yeah, it's interesting cuz he I don't know how you know. Would I be different today? If I hadn't gone through that probably but how different I can't really say it's hard to say. Yeah, that's what I was wondering because you are laid-back guy, but I don't know if that was just from having more perspective now and like not letting little things bother you as much because you've gone through this. I think yes, I've always been laid back, but I would I would before I think I was very much more neurotic like I was more concerned about what other people thought. That I was I'm always been an introvert and but before I would obsess over what people thought or oh crap, I said some stupid or you know, things like that where now I kind of don't stress about that stuff as much because if someone thinks I'm stupid, so be it. I think Abraham Lincoln had a quote. It's better to remain quiet and be thought of as a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. Yeah. Yeah. I mean it's kind of cool but it's good justification for being quiet. Yeah, right, right. Just just you know, you don't have to. prove yourself or Justify yourself to anybody if you don't want to. But what you said about not getting worked up about things kind of goes back to the whole stoic approach is not letting your emotions right harness your. Behavior and way of thinking right. I just one quick quote to tie into that. Yeah, because when he got his not when he got his diagnosis, but when he found out he had a really large tumor and towards the end that was really reinforcing the fact that this was terminal he says, He's looking at like the scan. He says: There it was a new tumor large Philly my right middle lobe it looked oddly like a full moon having almost cleared the Horizon going back to the old images. I could make out the faintest trace of it a ghostly Harbinger now brought fully into the world. I was neither angry nor scared. It simply was. It was a fact about the world like the distance from the Sun to the Earth. Yes that resonated with me too, good selection there Tim. Yeah, because he's absolutely right. There's that's completely out of his control. It's it is what it is that that phrase gets a little overused in my opinion nowadays. Many people say it is what it is kind of like sometimes I mean, it depends on the context because sometimes people say that like throwing their hands up saying what can you do it is what it is. Like there's no point in trying or whatever but sometimes it is what it is is appropriate because. You can't change something. Yeah, it sort of has been repeated ad nauseam, but when it's used in a defeatist way, it's sort of annoying. Like he said but when it's used to just acknowledge. Like that's the reality. I'm going to handle the best way that I can I like that approach. You want to go over one just go over more quotes shirt because I think this will I think I think this book is particularly has a lot of quotes that I think will stimulate other conversations. I mean one thing I just like the way he wrote. Because in Arizona he talking about his child in his upbringing and going to college. He didn't really have a well. Anyway, I'll just read the quote. I felt less like someone preparing to climb a career ladder than a buzzing electron about to achieve escape velocity flinging out into a strange and sparkling universe. So that's kind of how he felt leaving Arizona going to school. He didn't really have a plan at that point, but. You don't need one. That's just it you go to school you figure it out. That's my his life path to was interesting because he was in that it's like a small town in Arizona. But his like Mom really wanted him to have the best opportunity opportunity. So he would like go miles and miles and take SATs. He ended up at Stanford. He studied in Cambridge for like a year to where else would he go? Yeah, I think Yale and then back to Stanford grad school. So, you know, it's interesting cause his parents are Indian. Right. Now what I think is Dad his mom's Tibetan or no? I'm sorry. I'm thinking about somebody else. I think there are some sort of different. Anyway from Central southern Asia. They lived in New York with Purdue prestigious. Primary schools and whatnot. So that's that's where he was born in New York. And then they moved Arizona and the middle of nowhere and so his mom was concerned. He didn't have this nice high school. What is he going to do? So she kind of flung herself in the PTA and getting the school up to Snuff. And yeah, he would go miles to study for the SAT and all this. I was impressed by her as Gander. Yeah out how he talked about him. Yeah. Yeah how much he sacrificed or would do. I'll go ahead and read the first quote how the book opens because I think that sets the tone pretty well. So this is from Baron Brooke folk gravel. I don't know but that's who said it. All right Baron. Yeah, that's who said it. Anyway, how do you become a baron? He says, You that seek what life is in death. Now find it air that once was breath. New names unknown old names gone, till time and bodies but souls none. Reader then make time will you be but steps to your eternity. Yes. So it just combining his love of like poetry literature man and his experience right? I think that is a good way and that's where the title comes from. So, huh? Yeah when breath becomes air oh, I just thought this was funny. He was in med school. Cadaver dissection is a medical rite of passage and a trespass on the sacrosanct engendering a legion of feelings. From revulsion exhilaration nausea frustration and awe to as time passes the mere tedium of academic exercise everything teeters between pathos and bathos. Here you are violating society's most fundamental taboos and yet formaldehyde is a powerful appetite stimulant. So you also crave a burrito. Yeah, you can see his sense of humor kind of come. Yes. That's something his wife mentioned in the epilogue is that he's just a really funny person. Yeah, and and I think she's mentioned it in a way that was kind of lamenting that it didn't show up enough in the book, you know, like it showed up in places like that which I appreciated. But she made it sound like he was like, he was very much a jovial person and. Yeah, it's a tricky tone to send with this book like how much humor do I throw in how much philosophy how much this and that I think he did a good job balancing. Oh, yeah, and another thing I appreciated in the epilogue was that she mentioned how he talked about their marital problems like before the diagnosis. I think just because of the stress of med school and things like that then just that ability to be vulnerable and despite what like, you know his family or whatever. It might have been thinking impressive to me. I like this quote. He's talking about brain surgery and as a neurosurgeon, he says To the patient and family the brain surgery is usually the most dramatic event they have ever faced and as such has the impact of any major life event. At those critical junctures, the question is not simply whether to live or die, but what kind of life is worth living? And he goes on to talk about like do you want to sustain your loved one tubes and things right in this vegetative state? Yes, that's where I lost be kind of comes into right? I think I think I had I picked up on the tail end of that because I have a quote here. The possible long painful and only partial recovery or sometimes more likely no return at all the person they remember. In these moments, I acted not as I most often did as death’s enemy, but as its ambassador. Because they have when they're hooked up to machines and and not no sign of Ever Getting function back. You know, is that how that person would really want to live. It's so hard to say. It's like so many personal beliefs come into it and you have to think about what the family wants and what's best for the individual. Right. I don't even know where to start like. Yeah. So, okay. Well, I just had a few one liner quotes. The Angst of facing mortality has no remedy in probability. I like that one because no matter what you're going through like when my Hodgkin's lymphoma had like a 90% survival rate, right? So I knew that you know, I was chances are I was gonna be okay, but that did not help my angst of facing mortality, you know, so I felt like that was spot on regardless of what the statistics are, right? It's still what you're going through another one liner quote that I like is: If the weight of mortality does not grow lighter, does it at least get more familiar? My answer to that is yes because. Death is death. Right the you know, the weight of that. Is the same whether you're nine or 90, but for me at least having gone through Hodgkin's lymphoma. I do feel like it becomes does it get does it least get more familiar? I would say, yeah. But not like not in a bad way. Not like I'm good. I'm not unafraid of death. I'm still afraid to die, but I'm fascinated to think about it and talk about it. And I think that's one thing. that we as a society of not. I don't. You know, yeah, I know. I know you're well, I think I know what you're saying. Yeah, that's what so his wife in the epilogue also said like we had this death avoiding culture, which I think is really a good way to put it because America in particular like the United States I think is so much focused on like what's new fresh future thinking like present. I don't know what I'm trying to say. But basically we tend to suppress death and not think about it as much as I think a lot of other cultures do and we don't respect the elderly probably as much as many other cultures. Like I was watching this one show where this guy goes around the world like various tribes and things like that like a documentary thing and they kept like some courses like way after they died because they have this very prolonged like funeral ritual and they sort of. I don't want to say drag it out, but they like, you know, they really make. It's like paying respects an appreciation of that person's life, right? Yeah, right and whereas we tend to like sweep things under the rug and try to repress a lot of dark times. I think a lot of other cultures have better appreciation of death and how that plays into their perspective in life. I think is important. I think grief is something. Yeah that we don't address enough in America. I think you're right. I think you hit on good point that other societies have coping mechanisms to I don't know if it's lessening the grief or maybe it's helping to confront the grief. So it doesn't fester underneath the surface. Like I think you're absolutely right sweeping under the rug people when just get it over with don't think about it. Don't even talk about it. Don't bring it up. They don't even address it and that's can't be healthy That's not healthy and I mean. Taking a Side Track Manchester by the sea is a film that came out recently in the last couple of years and I feel like that did a wonderful that film’s about grief and I know you haven't seen it. Right but that it is a hundred percent about grief and it was just so well done that everyone handles it differently and that's okay, but to be healthy about it you need to address it and. I feel like this is what another thing that you can take away from this book is that I feel like the Kalanithi family definitely addressed, you know, the impending events that we're going to happen to their family and they decided to have a daughter. Well a child it happened to be a daughter. I think that was that was great and and he wrote Paul wrote that it provided him with so much joy as at the end of his life. And so I mean there's so many I think there's so many life lessons and take away from this book to. It seems like he handled everything with a lot of integrity like his wife said and the family in general. Hmm. But yeah, when if you recommend this book to other people a lot of them are like oh wait he gets cancer and dies. Like I don't want to read that that just sounds depressing right? That's like I said like not really a healthy reaction because you need to like these things happen and the more you internalize that and are aware of it. I think even though it's like tough to hear about the suffering it kind of broadens your perspective of what people go through you have more empathy. In the future you have more compassion. So I think you've found something very very good there that I think people who go through grief address their grief and confront it do have more empathy and compassion for others and again when you know, I think I think I think well, that's just all right, maybe not a hundred percent certainty. But I feel like that could be a benefit is if you address grief and that increases your empathy and compassion and I think that will just make you more in touch with your own feelings and emotions and doesn't everyone benefit when people are more in touch with their feelings and emotions. That's my view. Yeah, it's just healthier. If you acknowledge these things going on and then let them affect you and just mortality in general. Knowing that we all have this finite time limit and sort of accepting it is it changes how you live your life you're less likely to I think to get caught up in some kind of dead-end career or relationship something if you don't feel is right. You're probably more inspired to change once you sort of reflect more on your mentality and stuff. Absolutely. Absolutely. It's like the good place when you just earned points, if you can if you know your if you know your you're out there earning points for Good Deeds, you'll more likely to do you see the last time I got caught up? Yeah. Okay. Well, I saw the one where there they beat all the demons in the bar right was that but that the main thing was the guy who was doing the point thing where he's like, here's the best guy in the world because he lives so selflessly. It just showed how ridiculous it is to a hundred percent sacrifice your life for like everything else. Yeah, that was funny. There's a healthy balance. I think. Oh, absolutely. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah, it's a good show. Oh, yeah. It is philosophies. All right. Yeah, they were talking about determinism and Free Will in the good place. I loved it. I absolutely love it. on yeah pretty heavy. Yeah. All right. Um, all right, so when he's going through the treatments. This is quote here A pattern developed over the weeks. The malaise would slowly ease, normalcy returning just in time for the next treatment. That was a hundred percent my experience is I got treated every two weeks every other Thursday. So I get treated Thursday feel somewhat. Okay, like Friday, but then Saturday Sunday Monday was just out. And slowly come back the next week Tuesday, Wednesday Thursday. Okay. Go back to work a little bit of you days and the next week and I'll be like, okay. All right, and I work with few more days and then go back and get treated again. I mean it was just up and down up and down up and down. Yeah, so I mean and so I dressed I've addressed a few of the things that resonated with me, but I feel like that's why anybody can read this that has gone through something. They would read something else or resonate with them and I think that's the beauty of literature and books and art in general is that it doesn't resonate with anybody the same way and that's perfectly fine. That's the whole point of art is just to get a reaction just to or if it's if there's even if there's no reaction. That in itself is the reaction is something doesn't resonate with you then. It doesn't. Everybody has some form of suffering right if it's not cancer. You have your own tragic. And then you have like friends and family have gone through maybe cancer. And yeah, I think it gives you more understanding maybe of what they do reading something like this. Like even though it's a different diagnosis than you different part of the body. It's still parallels in how in some of the things you went through. I like this passage because some people might think. When you have a terminal illness just like, you know, go live it up do your bucket list that sort of thing. You know what I mean? Yeah. No, you're absolutely right. Yeah, but this kind of gives the other angle, okay. okay. Time for me is now double-edged every day brings me further from the low of my last relapse but closer to the next recurrence and eventually death. Perhaps later than I think but certainly sooner than I desire. There are, I imagine, two responses to that realization the most obvious might be an Impulse to frantic activity, to live life to its fullest to travel to dine to achieve a host of neglected ambitions. Part of the cruelty of cancer though is not only that it limits your time, it also limits your energy vastly reducing the amount you can squeeze into a day. It is a tired hare who now races and even if I had the energy I prefer a more tortoise like approach. I plod. I Ponder. Some days I simply persist. Yeah, that's a good one. Yeah, because you can't Yeah a hundred percent. It saps your energy. I mean you're not just going through the treatments or whatever that you have to do, but. Just going through the stress of being sick having a life-threatening illness and and that is not you're just not going to want to go skydiving or you know, hike the Appalachian Trail when you have that on your mind, you know, it's just it's a hundred percent right. It's hard for me to imagine like the stress the emotional burden the personal burden sometimes like financial people without insurance things like that. Like so many different factors that kind. How do you imagine having making time to your bucket list when you have all these other things going on. One thing that I was interested in my experience. Well was it came to diet. When I was going through chemo. I especially the day of I didn't know what I would feel like eating but I talk to one person. I was I was in a group saying you know with what I'm going through. I just been eating whatever the hell I want because who cares, you know, I'm going through chemo I'm going to eat a whole package of Oreo cookies if I want to and the other person was like really you'd want to like eat. A hundred percent healthy food to like help your body and like I never even thought of that, you know, where as if different people, you know have different priorities when it comes to that kind of level of stress. So on one hand, I took the approach of eating a bunch of junk food and whatever I wanted whereas other people would want to take the more holistic route of treating their body as well as they can. In the meantime while they're going through all these treatments and I totally see both routes right. Please tell me my Indulgence of of junk food was okay. It's ongoing. I don't think it has stopped. We go out a lot to Shadow don't ya? I think I know what you're saying like everyone has different. And I get from your perspective. I probably do the same thing like you just want to enjoy life. Like I'm going through all this stuff stuff. Like why not just have the extra dessert and I think they even said that somewhere in the booker like some interview I listen to is just. Why pass up on dessert like enjoy your life and these things that go along with its right? That's it for your family moderation why Compounders? All right, so I'm going to read my favorite quote of the book. I forget what part of this book this what of the book it was, but I'll just read it. One chapter of my life seem to have ended, perhaps the whole book was closing. Instead of being the pastoral figure aiding a life transition. I found myself the sheep lost and confused. Severe illness wasn't life-altering. It was life-shattering. It felt less like an epiphany - a piercing burst of light Illuminating what really matters - and more like someone had just firebombed the path forward. Now I would have to work around it. That, favorite quote of the book. That's exactly what it's like it's not life altering its life shattering. You just have to pick up the pieces. It's a great passage. Yeah, I think the last sentence is particularly impactful because now you have to walk around it means when he says like it's empowering, you know, like this is what I'm going through. I have to find a way to deal with it, right? Yeah, someone firebombed the path and he has to work around it. I'm just you just have to find your way like a my I think a Maya Angelou quote. We find our path by walking it. Just drop that on you. Heavy stuff. That is good. I like that. Yeah, he kept quoting like Samuel Beckett. I think yes Mantra that. He would say I can't go on I will go on. Yes, things like that over and over. He quoted like TS Eliot to from the Wasteland or something. Oh, here's one thing I do bring up a good little topic is in the book. He says at her this woman had passed away 82 years old woman passed. At her autopsy. The pathologist would have would be shocked to learn her age. She has the organs of a fifty-year-old. So that's something that I've always been interested about is what if there is something special about you and me that is totally mundane and not that exciting. But wouldn’t you still want to know? Like this 82 year old woman died. And her autopsy. The pathologist says she has great organs organs of 50 year old and that's great for this 82 year old woman. I mean, unfortunately she died like we're all gonna die. What if there was something purely unique about you Tim not just in your body, but also in how you view the world or what you do, you're the best Nintendo switch player in the world and you and there's no way you know that. Would I want to know. Well, of course, you would want to know right but like there's there's got to be something about everybody. That's I guess that is my little nugget that I hold on to when I think about. Every singular person has something special about him. You know, we are all our separate beings on this planet just living trying to live each are our own lives, but deep down there's gotta be something special about everyone. No, I think that's a great like sort of lesson to impart. That might be a little ideal to it is it is totally idealistic. It doesn't it doesn't fit with my existentialism and my stoicism per se but like but there's maybe it no does because everyone can can existentialism is you can choose what is Meaningful in your life. And so everybody can have something special that they choose. That that is their meaning that get make some special. I think that's no I totally agree and to tie back into the book like he the author I think was very special because who else is like training neurosurgeon and as good of a writer as he was with this literature background, he's very unique individual in that sense. And even though he didn't live into his 40s and make those contributions that he could of in the medical field, he's still passed on this book this Legacy and I think that's really impressive. Absolutely. He contributed in this way. Unfortunately that you know, his life is shorter and his wife and daughter now. I hope they can I don't know It's gotta be rough. But I hope they can still find happiness and appreciation for the time they had with him. It sounds like I mean his family is still very supportive. I'm sure of her and she sounded very strong and they made the decision to have a child knowing the circumstances. So I think yeah, I think she'll be all right. Yeah, I can end my quotes with this one from her actually the epilogue so this is his wife saying this is Lucy Kalanithi. Nathie kind of an EP Colony thing. Yeah. Sorry. Sorry. She says Paul’s decision not to avert his eyes from Death epitomizes a fortitude we don't celebrate enough in her death avoiding culture. His strength was defined by ambition and effort but also by softness, the opposite of bitterness. He spent much of his life wrestling with the question of how to live a meaningful life and his book explores that a central territory. Always the seer is a sayer Emerson wrote. Somehow his dream is told somehow he publishes it with solemn Joy. Writing this book was a chance for this courageous seer to be a sayer to teach us to face death with integrity. Amen. Yeah, good stuff. Yeah. Are you ready to face your own death Tim? No. I'm not either but all right. So, what would what rating would you give the book? 4 out of 5, okay. You can say if I'm going to say five. You're biased. So be it. I mean, yes, I don't care. I love this book. I burned through it read it. I mean, I know it's a little shorter, but. I ate it up it was it. Like a pack of Oreos. Yes like a pack of Oreos. Is that all right? I think that's a good way to it's a great book. Yeah, highly recommend. Yes. Yes. So what's our next book Tim the road to unfreedom by Timothy Snyder. Another new one because we establish that old books are bad and new ones are good. Now that's funny you the complete 180 how everything old is crap. The Odyssey, crap. You know, I live in extreme. Yeah, anyway, go to our website two guys one book.com. Feel free to comment on anything you like literally anything because nobody does but that's okay. All memes. Yeah. Yes keep reading keep keep reading
To The Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf
Two Guys, One Book
To the Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf
Hello and welcome back to two guys one book. I'm Tim and I'm Brian and today we read or we are discussing To the lighthouse by Virginia Woolf written it was published in 1927. I think I think that's right. Yeah late 1920s. Mmm. So pretty old but consider to be a classic. Yeah. Time’s top 100 write novels or something. Hmm. What were your first impressions of the book? Well, I mean, I never read Virginia Woolf before and like we said it's considered a classic so reading it I didn't really I kind of well, I did read a little synopsis saying it's not really plot-driven. It's more about her writing and diving into the minds of her characters, but with that being said you want to do you want to give a synopsis of it? Before the impressions? Well, yeah. Well like I mean did I have any preconceived notions coming in starting this book? Not really. I just knew Virginia Woolf was a famous author , okay, but we'll do a quick pots. I mean, did you have any preconceived notions coming into this when I'm in first impressions as far how you thought overall?
Why'd you pick it? Why did I pick it? Yeah. Okay. So first of all, we haven't read that many female authors yet. You have picked any Brian. I've only picked one. Yeah, right and we’re only on like book eight. Yeah, that's true. It's this is an early early podcast and my - I'm preemptively showing people that were not sexist. I'm just kidding but. She seems like I mean, it's very famous book and she's a famous author. I thought it would be like Sylvia Plath a little bit. Have you read Sylvia Plath? I’ve read The Bell Jar and I like the fellows are Lively. Yeah. I have not that's her only book. Right? So you're panicking is her only book. Yeah. Yeah. She wrote a lot of poetry. There you go. But yeah, okay, so. Yeah, I guess just because it's like a classic country like a classic book. I don't know. I I I think that's a good choice for picking it because they're Classics for a reason but I also like reading them and then making up my own mind as well. Yeah. Yeah, I'm not going to be objective. Yeah, right. It's also like philosophical people's that was like yes, very philosophical book in a lot of ways. So we're both into that thought. That would be interesting. Okay, so quick summary. Yes, this will be hard because there's not much pot on the basic overview. Is that the main characters or so it starts with these two parents Mr. And mr. Ramsey and they have eight children and their at of house where they have some guests as well. And basically it's just a lot of dialogue between them and talking with the kids and some arguments and things like that eventually like they grow older. Mrs. Ramsay dies. Like two of the kids die one in world war one. So this is taking place partly in World War one and they talked about going to the lighthouse in the beginning and then eventually they go to a lighthouse that's honestly like a whole story more or less. I might I'm not officially go to the like, yeah, and there's a little more to it. But like right I mean, it's not it's it's in the Scottish Isles it takes place in the Hebrides off the coast of Scotland which are like an archipelago islands and it was like their vacation home. Not where they live permanently, where they would go to vacation and I think like the book is split up into three sections. The first one is just them at the vacation home wanting in the little boy James is wanting to go to the lighthouse but they can't because the weather is bad. And then they have dinner with everyone there and at their house there and then the second part is called time passes, which was short as a shorter part very eloquently written not so much in concrete details of what happens. She more elaborates. She has very nicely written prose about like an analogy to how time passes like. Different things or something and then in between there she says, oh Mrs. Ramsey dies. Oh Andrew dies and Prue dies. And then the third part is called to the lighthouse and whichever one comes back to that vacation house in Scotland and then James and cam, the Son and Daughter the youngest son and daughter, go with Mr. Ramsey on a sailboat to the lighthouse and then there's these other characters that aren't the Ramseys like Lucy Briscoe and was like a painter. Yeah or wannabe painter. I didn't sound like she was very good. She doesn't have to be good. But yeah. So yeah, there's a bunch of other ancillary characters in there, too, but. I think the whole reason this book is a classic is because it dives deep into the inner thoughts and feelings of the characters and I think at a time when maybe not many authors were doing that and it it was very interesting. Yeah, I think. If we consider it in the context of when it's written and that time period it's a little more remarkable maybe or groundbreaking. But to me the style felt kind of disorienting because it's hard to follow when everything is so like stream of conscious. Yes. That's a good way to explain it. Yeah, so I wish there was a little more plot. I wish it was a little more straightforward but. If you're prepared for that going in then it's a good reason she writes well like it's well written. Oh, absolutely. Yeah. Yes, her prose is very well done. And that it really I'm not an English major. So forgive me but like, she actually uses metaphors a lot like in describing time or thoughts like the waves on a Shore something and so maybe that's fitting that they're on an Island on the coast of Scotland and very very much a lot of water and Beach and nature kind of like metaphors to time passing or or emotions or other things like that. It's a lot of imagery and it's very like poetically written I would say but so many commas, like it’s hard to find when a sentence will end because like an entire page will just be comma comma comma right? Oh, it's it. It's. Yes, she's writing and then inserts as a phrase and another phrase with him that phrase about the previous phrase and just yeah, it is at times difficult to follow which makes made me at times just kind of skim and not really absorb. You know what she was saying or what she was trying to get across. I think English Majors would love this book because you can you can drill down and dissect these sentences and what she's getting at and what do these metaphors mean and and all of these things because she goes into Mrs. Ramsay and mr. Ramsay and their relationship and then James’ relationship with both his mother and his father and and just all kinds of stuff. You can really get into it pretty hardcore. But I also found that you can also see in this writing because we know Virginia Woolf drowned herself and was dealing with some sort of manic depression or something so you can. I'm sure that people can analyze those aspects of her writing as well. Yeah, there's a lot of angles that to look at this or different ways to see it. I think how did she kill herself? She walked she like she drowned herself like so like she like loaded her Pockets up with rocks and stuff and walk down in the ocean. pretty intense. that is intense that it's not the way I would do it. I'm not going to commit suicide. Okay. Well, but yeah. Yeah, it'll be it'll be over shortly run podcast final of the Season. Yeah, so I mean. This is one of those books where. Do you appreciate the book for how it's written or the story it tells or perhaps the characters or you like what? You know, like what is it about? I mean, this is I mean this is different for everybody and I think every book is different because you can like you can like book A because it's a good story and it kept her interest and it's a page-turner as they say, you know, like Dean Koontz, John Grisham, I think those guys are good at just turning out book after book with a good story that keeps readers interested and that's why they're so popular. I've never read either one of them really so I can't critique them. But maybe they're not, you know, they're not considered. Maybe John Grisham has some good quality books, but like Dean Koontz isn't considered an all-time great author, but he's a best-selling author. So like if you like book A because of his great story, that's great. If you like book B because it's you know, eloquently written by not a good story, you know, like so. like I used to I don't really have a particular book. I like, you know, I when I read a book, I neither know whether or not I like it, Do you have a particular way you Trend like when you're reading a book do you like a book? That's it has a lot of story and a lot of deep character development or do you like a book that is just well written and you can picture it in your mind? That's a good question. I think the more we've been reading books for this. I think characters are pretty important to me like the development of character and the arc the story arc and how it affects them how they grow and learn lessons along the way I think that's why what made this book little hard for me is because it doesn't really go that much in depth into the individual characters. It kind of jumps around a lot. Yeah, but the did you find any particular characters that. Like for me I felt like James was the most evolving character or maybe cam because they were the ones with their father in the third part of the book to the lighthouse when they're sailing to the lighthouse and we can she die, Virginia Woolf Dives deep and deeper into their thoughts and feelings about their relationship with their father, which I found interesting. If not, they weren't quite relatable to me because like Mr. Ramsey was very harsh father. He was not very loving he felt like I mean we'll get to it when we do our quotes, but he was like a philosopher something. He was a published author about philosophy. So he was more worried about how he will be remembered and that life is fleeting and So he kind of left his he didn't he didn't show overly he didn't he wasn't overflowing with emotions towards his children. And so then James at times had hatred towards them which I can't relate to personally because I personally like my dad but you know, I found it interesting how I'm I guess that was the biggest character development and maybe Lily Briscoe as well. Lily was the painter in the first part of the book who they thought she was going to marry somebody but she didn't and then she came back years later with Mr. Ramsey in the children after Mrs. Ramsey died. And then with Lily you get you see her grief over Mrs. Ramsey's death, which I found interesting to explore that and Virginnia Wolfe has some very elegant phrases in there. Dad was a good character because really yeah, I mean not a good. Let me clarify, the guy not a good person but a good character because he was more fleshed-out than a lot of them like the fact that he was this metaphysical philosophy Professor. So he's like highly esteemed and that Mrs. Ramsey like appreciates him and stuff. But like yeah some of the kids resent him and he's he has these like existential crises sort of throughout the book. And wondering how his legacy is going to live on and he needs that validation from like his wife and sort of the confidence to keep going. So I think he was a little more well-rounded as a character just more ways to look at him, right? So yeah, that's a good point. He was he was a more developed character than most in the book as well. Yeah. So what was your favorite part of the book the book? So one quick thing I'll say about the style since we're sort of catching on that sure is that I think as a book I enjoyed it more as an audiobook than reading it because it is so stream of conscious like the and Nicole Kidman narrated it so that was pretty cool. Okay. Yeah, she has a nice voice. Yeah, but just because the way it's red, it feels more like a it's like a dialogue in your head almost is how a lot of this is written. It feels like Virginia Woolf just like thinking things up and then and in the place of some of the characters she's thinking things from their perspective. And yeah, and I think taking it in context for the time in the 20s for female author to write about a wife's perspective of the relationship of and being a mother in Miss from Mrs. Ramsey's point of view in the first part of the book. I felt is was probably pretty revolutionary at the time. I can't imagine there were many female authors writing about being a wife and a mother to you know, yeah. Well, it's interesting because she's like has this reputation as a feminist author, but then Mrs. Ramsay as a character. It was basically like she's like, oh being a mother is the best thing a person can do. I mean like that's great. I took a hundred percent appreciate that but she seemed a little one-dimensional as a character. So interesting to me, I mean at least sort of in the beginning I think. Parts I like about her is that she would like stick up for her kids, I think and then also criticized them if they were being jerks to like other people. So she was like, I think she was a good mother but it's strange that you have this feminist author whose, you know celebrating that role of a mother so much right right, but I think. I took it as this way because there were there were some when I read some quotes here in a minute that maybe like you said, she's Virginia Woolf is supposedly a feminist I know icon, right? Maybe not maybe icon is too strong but of a feminist period but at times her writing does not come off like person of of a written by feminist. So I took it as may be viewing giving Virginia Woolf the benefit of the doubt and thinking about her personal issues and maybe she was down on herself. Her Depression was manifesting itself through her writing that you know, Women like at one point Mr. Ramsey says looking at Mrs. Ramsey. I wonder if she's understanding what she's reading. Probably not. And like little things like that and we're maybe Virginia Woolf is manifesting her negative views of herself through her writing, you know, which I that's just complete speculation, but made me at least give her Virginia, Virginia Woolf the benefit of the doubt because I know her personal issues. Yeah, I totally know it's possible. I think writing trying to think out of phrase this, writing a character like her husband who says things like that. Maybe that's her way of almost poking fun at the issue or just observing it in a way. Like I think she's a very observant person to the way she writes details in general. It's very like detail-oriented. So when she has characters say those sort of off the cuff not politically correct things. I wonder if it's for a reason like that. In my Kindle version. This is the first book I read on Kindle officially. Congratulations. Yes. Thank you. So I have all my notes that I highlighted here, which is awesome. But I'm not I'm not a hundred percent certain that I'll read everything on Kindle. But anyway and the Kindle version I have there's a quote at the end. They have a several quotes of by Virginia Woolf and one of them is. If you do not tell the truth about yourself, you cannot tell it about other people. So I like that quote and I feel like what we're talking about is touching on that. Maybe maybe you're right. Maybe she's telling the truth about herself, but also then, poking fun and telling like being kind of sarcastic or ironic in the way that Mr. Ramsey views his wife. Like all men just think women are are simple minded. Yeah, I feel like it's hard to know what an author's intentions are in general like yes, and I agree with that. It's like a lot of English seminars or just sort of theorizing and sometimes they actually are really confident that an author is trying to say this thing and it's like. Nobody really knows a hundred percent. I mean unless like in an interview her dad was like this is what I meant, but I don't know how many interviews there are for the record, right? And I think I think that's why English Majors love this book is because they can speculate till the cows come home. Yeah, and there is nobody that can really say otherwise, you know, and I think that's. I think that's what makes this book a considered a classic. I think that's perfectly fine. Do I think it's a classic? I don't know. I mean I liked it. But I mean. yeah, what was what would have made it a better book in your opinion? That's a good question. More action car chases. Yes. Yes, not enough shooting ice. There were no shootouts in this book. Now you can you believe that the like they should have rather light out. Oh, yeah. Well considering the last book I read with a lighthouse was annihilation. Remember that movie enough? Yeah, that's a very into it. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. But anyway, this was better than Annihilation any time, what would have made this book better for me? Good question. I don't there's not an easy answer to that because I think this book is just so vague in what happens. You know, there's no I mean a lot of it is kind of just talking about life and the meaning of existence and and you know the death of Mrs. Ramsey. Mr. Ramsey in the kids finally going to the lighthouse years later. It's just about Human Relationships, but. I think she could have done more. I don't know more about the relationships, but I guess that vagueness is part of the beauty is, you know her allegories or metaphors or whatever our kind of what draws people to it. Yeah, not so much me. Yeah, I mean, I know it's very well written don't get me wrong. I like the book. It was well written. But yeah, I'm just not one to, yeah, analyze the words. Yeah, I mean I was a little disappointed too. But I think other people have compared this to like Ulysses by James Joyce, you know, which is. And I haven't read it. But my understanding is that it's also told from like the perspectives of multiple characters and their points of view and that sort of style so maybe some parallels there. But yeah, it's just for this one. There just wasn't much of a story, not a lot of character development, just not allowed to keep me engaged I know is written in like the 20s and then it has these like it's well-written and good. Imagery whatever wasn't wasn't The Great Gatsby written in the 20s or 30s something like that. Yeah, probably the 30s didn't take place in the 20s. Yeah, the Roaring Twenties like I mean, that's a great book. Yeah, right. Yeah. I mean like that I think is universally liked that's what I was thinking like Tolstoy was written Mmm Yeah before this and like right kept my attention when I read like, you know some historians. All right, right. So I mean there. Yeah, I don't know. Maybe this is just the book for those that love the English language, you know and love analyzing every sentence and breaking it down and being able to subject-- whatever they want on the meaning behind the things I can't quite articulate what I'm trying to say. Either can Virginia Woolf. Yeah, that's good. Anyway, do you want one of the quotes because you can go ahead you have more quotes than me? Well, I mean, all right, so I'm gonna start with this because this is what I think the book is all about this one little quote. And this is this is the this is what I'm going to actually analyze the sentence. All right. So this is the quote that I have here. As if to be caught happy in a world of misery, was for an honest man, the most despicable of crimes. So let me break that down. As if to be caught happy in a world of misery, was for an honest man, the most despicable of crimes. So this world of misery I think is what Virginia Woolf is how Virginia Woolf views the world. and I think her being an honest man or woman is the highest virtue you can have in this world of misery. So but being honest, you can't be happy because if you're caught happy in a world of misery, you're not being honest. To be honest in the world misery is to recognize the world is crap. But if you're happy, then that constitutes as a crime and I feel like that can be an that can set the tone for this whole book because no one's really happy in this whole book. They ever at least the adults. Mr. Mrs. Ramsay some of the other adult characters view the world as the kind of a bleak and like unforgiving place. And mrs. Ramsay laments the fact that children have to grow up and they'll never be happier than when they are as children. Because they all view the world as misery and if they're happy that's actually like you're not being authentic to the world. So that's might as well be a crime to be happy. Yeah, so yeah, so I mean that's that's like this whole book in my opinion. It's just a world of misery. Pretty happy stuff. So so yeah, I think going off that there's something and I looked online about like this book too because I was trying to round out my thoughts and opinions and someone was saying how a big part of this was just showing how subjective reality is and that's kind of the philosophical side of this is like there's not one objective truth. It's all told from these different peoples these different characters perspectives and like with the backdrop of world war one and all this like depressing things going on. It sort of fits into that historical context and then you bring up a good point because like Hemingway wrote a lot and after World War one right in like. That's like The Lost Generation for Europeans or British. Right? Looks like fought in World War II and stuff, right? Yeah. It's not fought in the Spanish Civil War. Oh, yeah, but like, I think there was this overarching tone after World War One of like, oh my God, what did we just go through. Humanity is on the like was stretched pushed to the brink and how are we ever going to come back from that and it's perfectly understandable. Um. Yeah, I don't know where I'm going with this. But but I think that has to the gloomy factor of the writing which is again understandable. But I think what you had on it is also right that people's perspectives are so subjective that reality to one person is not reality to another and I think you're right that is has a lot to do in this book. Because like even James the youngest in the first part of the book, he's six years old and then she has talks of here like had there been an axe handy a poker or any weapon. That would have gashed a hole in his father's breast and killed him then there and then James would have seized it. So like even when he's 6 he's filled with anger towards his father and you know, his father may not be particularly a bad person overall. He's just not very loving and emotional two is six year old son. But that creates this animosity towards them that never goes away because in the third part of the book when they're sailing to the lighthouse, his son is fixated on steering the boat the sailboat because he knows if he slips up one little bit his dad's going to say something and he doesn't want to have to deal with his dad. Yeah. He's got issues. Yeah loads of issues. Yes, this quote kind of ties into what we were just talking about. She says how this is from mrs. Ramsey's perspective talking about her kids. Strife divisions difference of opinion prejudices twisted into the very fiber of being oh that they should begin so early. Mrs. Ramsey deplored. They were so critical, her children. They talk such nonsense. She just talks about how they were like criticizing. I think it was either James or someone else at the house and like inventing differences between them and just sort of yeah that kind of ties in the subjectivity thing. And yeah, mrs. Ramsey from her point of view. She. yeah just doesn't want our kids to grow up because in this quote here. Oh, but she never wanted James to grow day older or Cam either. These two she would have liked to keep forever just as they were. Demons of wickedness, angels of the light, never to see them grow up into long-legged monsters. It's because I feel like and then she goes on to say like. And so she went down and said to her husband, why must they grow up and lose it all never will they be so happy again? And he was angry why take such a gloomy view of life. He said it is not sensible. For it was on and she believed it to be true that with all his gloom and desperation. He was happier more hopeful on the whole than she was less exposed to human worries. Perhaps that was it. So mr. Ramsey was more concerned with like greater existential thoughts and he got angry when she didn't want her children to grow up and have to deal with adulthood. And so he seemed to be more happier thinking about these Grand existential thoughts than she was worrying about her kids losing their childlike naivete. Yeah. Honestly, it makes him sound kind of like an asshole not to be like, you know judgmental but I think to have eight kids and be a mother worried about them makes sense, but he it sounds like he kind of has like a fragile ego hmm went very much. So I'm talking about. What is it? So I think this is from his perspective. He says something like. The very stone one kicks with ones boot will outlast Shakespeare. His own little light would shine not very brightly for a year or two and would then be merged in some bigger light and that in bigger still. So he's having this like existential crisis and wondering about Legacy and meaning and it's like why not just be a better dad, you're eight. And that's what Legacy is what he says then. That was a good bit of work on the whole his eight children. They showed he did not damn the poor little Universe entirely. So like his contribution is just refer making them. Yes, that’s good. So is that Virginia Woolf like kind of taking a stab at shitty father? That's a good point. That could be because like where was the code? Here’s one quote: an unmarried woman has missed the best of life. And this is my my little note I added is I guess women authors can be misogynist. Yeah, but but you know, you know, I didn't really think about is she writing tongue-in-cheek there. Yeah. That's what it's possible right? You're right. I guess it is possible. It was well to do our research. Well our huge fan base can reach out to us. I mean we don't like yeah it just it just. Here's the quote. Mr. Ramsey's thinking this. Go on reading. You don't look sad now. He thought. And he wondered what she was reading and exaggerated her ignorance her simplicity for he liked to think that she was not clever not book learned at all. He wondered if she understood what she was reading. Probably not, he thought. See ya. He’s just an asshole. Yeah, so I guess I guess I didn't think of it that way I thought. I thought Virginia Woolf was writing what she believed males thought of women. And you're suggesting that perhaps she is showing she is displaying the absurdity of that men think women are so simple minded and kind of tongue-in-cheek. I think I think that's possible. I mean, I’d like to think I would like to think that it would like to think you're way better. But I don't know I mean. Even a go one more step like further down that is so he's this like abstract philosopher right kind of in his own head a lot. And then she talks a lot about how ordinary stuff is important and things like that. Right? So it's almost as if part of the message of this book is saying that we need to like appreciate the ordinary more and not as much these like Grand ideas that we overthink things like that. I had a quote that sort of goes off of that. Okay, she says one wanted she thought dipping her brush deliberately to be on a level with ordinary experience to feel simply that's a chair that's a table and yet at the same time. It's a miracle. It's an. So she's like brushing her hair or something and just thinking like appreciating these simple things. And some of the good writing I enjoyed was the third part of the book after mr. Mrs. Ramsey dies. Mr. Ramsey is kind of feeling a little a little extra self-pity and he goes to Lucy. Who's there painting she kind of wants to be left alone, but he just wants like recognition for his sorrow. They stood there isolated from the rest of the world his immense self-pity, his demand for sympathy, poured and spread itself in pools at their feet and all she did, miserable sinner that she was, was to draw her skirts a little closer around her ankles lest she should get wet. In complete silence, she stood there grasping her paintbrush. So he was being vulnerable. He one of this cell he wanted this acknowledgement for the sorrow. He was in for mrs. Ramsey's death and Lucy just didn't like I that visual like of the pool of sorrow, and she just hiking up her her her skirts a little closer around her ankles. It's did not get wet. It's like, you know, that's what my quote wasn't going off of is that yeah, there's dipping her brush her paint brush brush. Oh, yeah get some of these are out of context. Yeah. That's the one thing about the Kindle you highlight what you want. Yeah, and it all then you email it to yourself in this nice form. But you lose the context that you it was in. Yeah. Well, you can go back to the page or you can type a note along with it, right? Yeah, I gonna have to type more notes because yeah a lot of stuff. I like it when I'm reading it. But then when I go back and just read the quote itself out of context speaking about a context, I found a quote here. That just doesn't make any sense. Oh, here's a weird one. And all the time she was saying that the butter was not fresh one would be thinking of Greek temples and how Beauty had been with them there in that stuffy little room. Yeah some about butter. So like the previous sentence something about not fresh butter, and then she goes on timeout Greek temples. I don't know how to interpret. Yeah, I don't know either. Okay, I can read one more about the professor's sort of mental breakdown not break down but sort of existential crisis. He goes on to say: If Shakespeare had never existed, he asked what the world have differed much from what it is today because the progress of civilization depend upon Great Men is the lot of the average human being better now than in the time of the Pharaohs. Is a lot of the average human being however, he asked himself the Criterion by which we judge the measure of civilization possibly not. Yeah, like these great things by Shakespeare the pharaohs like is the average person better off than then I think so. Looking at this now probably I would hope so yeah, okay, but okay. So if Shakespeare hadn't existed, would the world be that much different? Mmm. I think he said a lot of influence on culture and stories and things like that. Oh, yeah as a general idea. Yeah, just but like then then, you know, there's that saying that if you put you know, what a bunch of monkeys on typewriters eventually they'll crank out Shakespeare. So like I don't think that means that anybody could do it, but does that means somebody else would then emerge from history as an a great influencer of of drama and comedy and plays and just social commentary through art? Yeah, because I think that's what Shakespeare did a lot. I think the bigger point is like what does it mean to be a great man? And what does it mean to society to like to be a great person and contribute and what effect does that have and how does that affect like the greater culture? And is he wondering is that the only way to have a meaningful life? He’s asking is the lot of the average human the Criterion by which we judge the measure of civilization. Maybe not. I mean he's just kind of going back and forth in his mind. It's just who knows but this was a good few pages I think of him just sort of like what is that called when you're stuck in your head like he's overanalyzing everything. Okay. Yeah. Anyway, you had a quote. Yeah. Um, I think this was Lily Briscoe painting again in the third part of the book. What is the meaning of life? That was all. A simple question. One that tended to close in on one with years. The great Revelation had never come the great Revelation perhaps never did come. Instead there were little daily miracles, illuminations, matches struck unexpectedly in the dark. Yeah. That was my favorite quote. Oh, was it really that? Yeah. Yeah. So I think this is. The complete inverse of what you said about? Mr. Ramsey. Mr. Ramsey's wondering about great works and great Deeds Done by humans to advance the lot of the average human. Where's this is just saying instead. They were little daily Miracles illuminations matches struck unexpectedly in the dark. It's the little things that we. That we will cherish through life that surprise us that illuminate us that yeah. Yeah. That's what I was saying about like the ordinary stuff. Remember she was right? No, I mean, I think yes, I think we're. yeah, we're on the same page that yeah, just you know, like like this books implies is that we have different perspectives, so our realities are slightly different based on you know, it's subject is subjective. But we are we roughly share the same ideas about the book. Yeah. Do you have any more quotes I was going to end on that one honestly. Was it really? Well, I mean that was my yeah, but you should do some more if you have some way. I might have only two more. I mean I did appreciate. II mean I guess I guess my favorite part of the book was Lily Briscoe painting in the third section and her thoughts about the meaning of life and death and mourning. Mrs. Ramsey. I felt like that was. for me what I that's what I when I connected the most was when Virginia Woolf was going on about her stream of Consciousness and her mindset. Because I didn't really connect with mr. Ramsey. I mean I felt like he was a little bit of a chauvinist egotistical. I mean self-centered guy, but I think that's kind of what she wrote him as. Right? Yeah. I think so. Yeah, I mean I didn't say I wasn't saying I connect with him either. It's. I think he has his characters just like more fleshed out I guess is what I wasn't sure. Yeah. All right. You got it. So yes, here's my last quote. This is Lily. Like I said my favorite part painting on the shore and the third part of the book. Oh the dead, she murmured, one pitied them, one brush them aside, one had even a little contempt for them. They are at our Mercy. Mrs. Ramsay had faded and gone, she thought. We can override her wishes, improve away her limited old-fashioned ideas, she receives further and further from us. I specially like the improve away her limited old-fashioned ideas because when someone dies and passes away we. We don't dwell on their faults, which I think is healthy. We don't want to when someone passes away we miss what do we miss? We missed what we liked about them what we loved about them. And I think that's the thing is like we kind of just gloss over, you know, the negative sides of people. I think one example is the founding fathers, you know people. They were great men very insightful and and full of courage and wisdom to found this country. But at the end of the day, they owned slaves, you know, so overall but I know there's 200 years since then but still, you know, we like to improve away their limited old-fashioned ideas. And that's what we do with people pass away. She's talking about mrs. Ramsey in that passage right? It's maybe the old-fashioned ideas is that clean is to that like matronly role now could be because Lily Briscoe you not to it started really or Lucy I think was the was it Lucy? No losing. Well regardless I've been calling her Lucy this whole time. Yeah. Okay. She I think mrs. Ramsay wanted her to like she's like trying to set her up with another character in the book some guy and she's like wouldn't take to him like she wasn't interested. That's just yeah, so maybe that's kind of the Lily Briscoe is the heroine of this book. That's an oversimplification. Yeah. I know if you're Virginia Woolf like feminist Heroes. That may be what you're saying is like you can choose Lily's route. And even though mrs. Ramsey was like a great mom. You don't have to like do that if that's not your right path or something. Exactly. Sorry. So, what did you write this book out of 5? Yeah. Why don't you go first because not a final is how but all right. I'm giving it a three. I'm giving it a 3 out of 5 because at the end of the day I do feel like it was well written. That's it. That's it as like because the. if anybody else wrote this book, or if it was it would just never be famous if it wasn't so well written. So yeah, so 3 out of 5 for me. Yeah, I would give her three too. Okay, because. I didn't it didn't really Captivate me. No, it didn't but that’s not the point. No, I was a borderline two I was I was thinking about two out of five and I'm like no, this is really well written there. Are there are there are more beautiful moments in here that I just not quoting now because there's just nothing to add. It's just it's just beautiful prose in some instances, you know, and. So I like there's plenty of spots I could highlight and just quote. You know, we're just being the best audience for this too. No I mean and that's fine. I mean, I think that's all point is you want to read stuff that you would normally read or get out your comfort zone and reading. Yeah. So the point is reality is subjective. Yeah. Our opinions are not Universal, but what is reality there? All right. So good pick Tim. I give you credit for thank you including diversity into our yeah, you got to learn. Yeah, I will soon so all right. So we both rated it 3 out of 5. Our next book is picked by me, Brian. It's when breath becomes air. Oh, yeah. It's gonna be another happy one Paul something. Yeah, I don't forget the author's name will have it for next time. so look for our next visit our website. twoguysonebook.com. To comment on books that you like or dislike and we'll share them on air. If you get them in we got we have our next several books posted up there. So feel free to check them out and there are so many comments right now and there's limited space. So you have to you have to really get in there to get your comments. Oh, yeah. We're just running out of that's how the internet were Marie. Yeah, we're limit. Yeah get on it. Alright until next time. Keep reading
Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke
Hi, welcome back to two guys one book. I'm Brian. I'm Tim - I said I wanted to be like this just time. We'll figure it. Yeah. So this week Brian chose rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C Clarke. Yeah. Why did you choose it Brian?
Because it's I want to read more science fiction because I like science fiction and Arthur C Clark is you know, I went on the Mount Rushmore of Science Fiction authors. He did 2001 A Space Odyssey. That was too mainstream. So I just kind of researched into what else he wrote and this one sounded interesting. So this is why I picked it. I know it took you a while to get through it because you're not a science fiction reader? Do you want to try to give your synopsis of the plot and then I can elaborate upon it again?
Yeah. Yeah, I'll say it did take me a while to get into I don't read sci-fi that often or fiction in general but especially sci-fi feels a little like nerdy, but I'm nerd too. So I should appreciate it. Yeah, basically it's like the year 2077. I. No, I think it's later than that. I think it's like 2130.
Okay, you're right. Yeah, it was I remember that year stands out because that's when they started the meteorite hit like Italy somewhere and then it cause like huge Devastation. And then that's when they started building these spaceships to like confront things that come into orbit to prevent another tragedy. So that's when like, it kind of sets the stage and then yeah, 2130 or something. Basically, they encounter like what they think might be another asteroid but it turns out to be this like crazy floating thing and another world. I don't know you describe it, right.
It is a flying cylinder through space that is flying along. It is laterally like a cylinder on its side. Flying through space like a Pringles can. Yes, that's perfect. Because it was many many kilometers long and had a good size diameter to and it was spinning while it was a Pringles can basically rolling across the floor was what Rama was and but it was going through space obviously so because like, I'm fascinated to get your perspective on this because.
Would you say that this book that this story there's a lot that happens? Really you would say that. Oh, you're asking me. Yes, I'm asking your opinion. Do you think this book? No. No, I don't think about that much happened. And I think this is where I think that we're gonna have a good discussion because I think we can Branch off on several different toxic topics like extraterrestrial life and and space exploration and and you know, just Pringles.
Yes Pringles. Yes, I agree. There's a lot of directions we could take this conversation, right? But it's funny. You mentioned that not much really happened in general because. Someone else I was reading there like review of the book and they said it just felt like one big tease that hurts. Like there's never really a payoff.You keep waiting. They keep encountering this mysterious planet and trying to find more about it that and okay.
So you think Rama is a planet not a spacecraft.
I mean do they ever explicitly say? No because it's an alien. Object like somewhere between a planet and a spacecraft right? Can I kind geek and elaborate a pilot the Pringles can that is Rama?
It I found this book so fascinating because this is a purely original idea. Right like I've never even heard of this before where. Essentially the Pringles can is hollow inside or Rama? Rama is hollow inside the enter it from like the what they call the north plane and they stay along the axis and what so since Rama is spinning.
It's hollow inside it that centripetal force gives it a sense of gravity on the inside where they come out. I mean like I don't even do it justice. I'm. But think they come in the axis of the rotation of the drama. They enter Rama and there at this this bottom of this bowl and they look out and they just see this the the whole length.
They don't see it obvious because it's dark at first when they go in there and they see this whole length of the of the Rama just expanding before them. And there's these they do everything in threes. And so they have these three stairways leading. From this bottom of this bowl, but they are radially outwards and as you go along the stairways though, the rotation of Rama creates that gravity effect to where you can walk along the inner walls of Rama and look above you and see across the diameter.
You can see that cross the diameter of inside Rama and it’s not sky, but it's the other ground like it reminds me of the end of inception or not Inception, Interstellar. I get my Christopher Nolan movies mixed up where they leave Earth and they created their like in this spaceship and it's kind of like they kids are playing baseball and they hit a ball and it goes up and it cracks a window like up on the side of the circular space ship so. I mean, I just felt like the way Arthur C Clarke explain things. I found it so fascinating that that there was this hollowed-out cylinder with its own gravity and then eventually as it gets close to the sun heats up and the ice in the middle of the cylinder that runs radially inside the cylinder melts, and there's some sort of water and then life and then there's weather on the inside a storm happens. The astronauts have to seek Shelter From The Storm they get out of drama, but then that when they go back in then, you know, things are then light the lights turn on and these little they call them by biots, which are little bike.
Biots. Yeah, bio robots biological robots or something and that are basically groundskeepers for the inside Aroma and I just had this I could picture is so clearly that this this massive ship. I mean and everything he did it because like Arthur C Clarke is like a scientist a legit scientists and you just write then you wrote books as well.
So like all the science makes logical sense that And it was I just found it very compelling. Yeah, you studied physics, right? Yes. Okay. Yeah. I thought that physics were interesting like you were saying how it's a cylinder and you can walk around and it was funny. They talked about the explorers like would freak out a little bit that it because they'd be walking and then see like upside down.
Yeah and like it resist that urge to feel like they're falling or that sense that yeah, so oh, yeah, I just. I just found this there's like an ocean. Yes cylindrical, right the cylindrical sea. Yes. Thank you. That is about halfway down the Rama that the runs it but you know just circles the midpoint of Rama so to speak and so they only stay on the North half and you know the South half they don't even really get to because of the it's the such a big Cliff by the cylindrical sea so they don't even.
They explore that a little bit with some sort of like pedal bike thing that flies because like that's the beauty one thing. I found fascinating was that at that axis of rotation inside Rama, there was zero g because you're still in outer space and it's and that's the rotational effects of Rama aren't felt there and it just I just felt like that was so creative and imaginative that.
I just dug it. Yeah, I think you have to give Arthur C Clarke some credit for being that creative while still maintaining the scientific grounding that it is a little bit realistic, I guess right someone degree in general. I like the idea. This small team going up to confront this massive thing like the unknown and not really knowing what to expect, you know, knowing that they could risk dying by going out there, but trying to discover more about this this thing.
So I like that aspect of it just like the adventure side and the yeah, I also liked the United planets like that part where they had this basically Council back that was meeting at Mars. Basically, like the instead of the United Nations, it was the United planets and they even mentioned like sometimes I'm like, oh man a hundred some years ago.
They had the UN with all the countries on Earth and we can't imagine how complicated that would have been because the United planets was only ours 9 like Earth Venus. No. No, there's no one on Venus because it's so gaseous. But Mercury Earth Moon Mars had people on at the different asteroids in the asteroid belt and like on a couple moons of Jupiter and Saturn so I thought that was a cool aspect of it too that we were that he in his in this story humans are colonizing other planets to a point where people have prejudices from based on who were planet they’re from just like they would today from what country they're from and all that stuff.
Yeah, and each planet has its own characteristics to or like people from. Like Mercury like that's like a powerful Planet. So they're more aggressive and I wondered if he was trying to reflect like geopolitical realities in the real world, you know, like yeah this planet represents this nation and how they act like. Yeah The Mercury people might have been more maybe the Soviets because this wasn't drinking in the early 70s was when it was written time of the Cold War, right?
Yeah, so. So you're just not a science fiction guy, huh? I mean, okay. I'm trying to think sci-fi. I liked in the past like right. I liked Ender's Game. I know that's more like young adult kids. But like I thought that's like creative and exciting read. Honestly. I know I've read others but like.
I don't know. What's like your favorite sci-fi. Well. Wow. Well, you see that's just it I think. My favorite sci-fi are like all the dystopian books. Okay, I mean that because that's science fiction to like Fahrenheit 451 Brave New World. Yeah I mean because it's taking science and more. It's more of a societal look on science fiction.
Yeah. I see syfy's more space stuff, right and I think but I think science fiction if you just look at what that means. It's just taking you know, What the human capacity for science, maybe and exploring that what it could be in the future. Yeah, it's kind of broad and I know but it has the very strong space connotations and I think that that is only natural.
But but what about. Forget about books though Tim. What about movies and or TV shows that you just don't even really grab watch those. It just reminded me of annihilation that we saw not too long ago. Yeah. No, I I'm not trying to like hate on either one because I know we kind of made fun of the movie.
Yeah some extent but the part I did like about the movie is that it was like Natalie Portman and these like three other women going into this unknown thing and trying to find out more about this alien presence. Which had in that regard I found the parallels and I like that aspect of it right?
You're right. And and that's a good point is there were parallels there especially because in Annihilation, well the book because they didn't really talk about the pit in the movie but the book there's a big pit that she goes down and she gets infected in the pit or whatever but it's similar. It's cylindrical, you know tunnel going down and the cylindrical Rama as well as parallels there.
Yeah, I guess but yeah, but yeah, but yeah, do you even have you ever seen Star Wars? I don't even yeah, okay, but like you're not I like it. Okay, that's fine. I don't know. Yeah, that's a raving review from him Star Wars little. Okay, so I mean because I've read this book in like a week because I was just.
The chapters are short. I was compelled with you know, what were what were we going to learn about Rama next? Like I felt like we were along with the exploration team. Yeah. It's exciting that he kind of kept you on edge in that regard. But like at the same time, there's not a big payoff. It's not like I didn't feel like this followed a good Arc with a satisfying conclusion.
You're right. We didn't even really say How It Ends right? We I just that's the the what hooked me was Rama. His explanation about this giant flying cylinder. So I guess we still haven't finished our debate is Rama a planet or a spacecraft. What do you say to Tim? I don't there's no answer in the book.
Yeah. I say it's a spacecraft because like essentially what happens is Rama comes through our solar system. All the humans are freaking out because we're afraid that this is going to, they're going to attack us. So the people from Mercury who I think he could he cleverly called him. Let her means because like Hermes Mercury were the same, you know Greek or Roman and so the Mercury Hermes on the Hermiens on Mercury fired a bomb or missile at the a trauma because they were afraid of of the ramens coming awake.
And because because we said all these little by biots are biological robots, they didn't really have intelligence. They just kind of performed routine tasks. And so all the humans were worried that romp the rama's inside we're going to suddenly awake and then we'd be all screwed wasn't it? Also that mercury like relied on the Sun a lot further industry.
And so yeah. This was a big part. It's like so.
This is what the justification was for launching the bomb is that they thought Rama the planet was going to like interfere with the orbit or block them their son of reception. You know, right? Yeah, I forgot about that. They thought that Rama was going to park itself in the solar system. Yeah and screw us all this.
Yeah from a nation's perspective that's like blocking off a resource or something. So they're like, that's the threat to our way of life type thing. Yeah, but ultimately what happens is. Rama gets so close to the Sun that that Commander Norton and his crew have to have to evacuate and I like that they were the ship's name was Endeavor and they talked about Captain James Cook and that link there I think it was cool. But basically Rama they think are they I think they were going to they weren't sure if they were going to park in the solar system, but then they thought well they were going to use the sun to kind of gain momentum and then leave the solar system, but it's acting Rama skirts the Sun and almost goes into like within the part of the sun to really get a slingshot and zooms out of our solar system. So basically Rama just comes we hitchhike on it a little bit explore inside then we then we get off when it's too close to the Sun and then it swings around the Sun and leaves the solar system.
And I think that this does I think this is it in a series I think so it's a series but I don't think he wrote it originally with that in town guy. Yeah. This is another thing I liked about the book was because I never really thought about this aspect of alien life. because the aspect I'm referring to that in this book is we see alien the existence of alien life.
It's within our solar system yet nothing happens, you know. Every other story we think or read about or scenario that we can hypothesize about life is like or at least for me I think about aliens intelligent life or if aliens out there. They're just not intelligent enough to travel to our solar system yet aliens are highly intelligent and just haven't gotten here yet or they're super intelligent and have observed us from afar and realize we’re bumbling idiots and are never going to come here, you know, like and then if you project that into all the science fiction movies and books and everything is like there's always some interaction between humans and Aliens when whenever we whenever we discover that they're really out there.
There's always some interaction. Here there was like no face-to-face interaction with the actual Ramans it was just all their little. You know robots. Those are those Ramans though. Like I don't think so. I think they because didn't they like dissect one and say like this is this is robotic but it has a molecular level to the base of the structure of How It's Made so they kind of feel like it was kind of designed by somebody else.
So yeah. So, you know, like that's one thing I never even thought about is like just and I think there's some quotes in here that I highlighted that that reflect that fact that that we just we see them but then they're gone before we can interact or learning more from them. Yeah along those lines I thought it was interesting to hear it that planetary committee people debating how they should handle the situation and I thought what Arthur C Clarke did a good job of was making it a realistic debate or discussion of what these people would say like their concerns their ideas about what could happen they talk about how like in the past if an alien civilization, you know, it hasn't happened before but when like Pizarro met the Indians or something, they're different like voyagers met other civilizations it usually didn’t end well, right right. So right there just saying this doesn't have a good president. Yeah precedent pressure in the past. so yeah, I thought that was interesting. Yeah. you think about the commander Norton? I like him. I mean like there was not much character development. No, but. What we learn about them is interesting and like I think one of the guy that leads the United planets or the chairman of that is like a hundred and fifteen years old and so like he also hypothesize about that about longer life expectancy.
And then Commander Norton has two wives. One on earth and one on Mars. So that's interesting Arthur C Clarke was trying to normalize polygamy. Yeah. Yeah, one thing I found interesting them to is two of his crewmates. On the Endeavour actually shared a wife so he did have it go both ways where but so yeah written in the 70s right after the 60s. Yeah, yeah free love and all that stuff. So yeah, maybe Arthur C Clarke was just a swinger is that sad? That is that the highlight of our episode is Arthur C Clarke was a swinger. That's my biggest take away. Yeah. Now the part was funny when it talked about him having two wires because it said he would send like a video message.
Uh, but he would keep a generic enough to like apply to both of them. It's really okay, honey. I'm doing good. Yeah, just keep it really um General. Yeah. Yeah, that was good. But as a commander he talks about always like putting his team first like protecting his team. So when people go off on like side expeditions, You know cares about them and stuff.
So he sounds like a good leader and a captain. So yeah, I thought so too. Oh and one of my I mean like I'm just I was just so fascinated by the concept of inside the cylinder because like because when they came through they're coming along the axis. And so when they came through the hatch they were looking out down a cylinder. But as they went along the curved plane, they eventually flattened out and so at one point somebody at that hatch had to like throw a can down to the captain and he just basically chucked it and it kind of like bounce bounce it and rolled like for a couple kilometers just down the gentle slope, you know until it finally reached camp and I found that but like from where his point of view was it was up and to the left.
But he tossed it sideways and it rolled, you know, it's just I can't even I can't even do it justice because it's just it's just yeah, you really got into this. I did I did I did and that just the idea of Rama. Yeah fascinated me. I guess I just had trouble with the lack of character development.
That you mentioned. I mean other than describing Rama. I don't think there's nothing else that really happens. Yeah, I will give you that. I mean. Not a book filled with action, but there I'm about like you never know what to expect though. That's the thing as I enjoyed. Yeah, cause you never know what discoveries they're going to make about Rama next.
I can appreciate that. I just wished he like fleshed out some of the characters more like when he talks about like James Cook the Explorer he talks about how Commander Captain Norton was really like into him and his story and that even though he was like one of these. Not Conquistador, but like, you know voyagers who maybe colonized places.
He wasn't like as evil as the typical one or something. So he's trying to like emulate him and just this General theme of Adventure and exploration. I like that aspect. Yeah. Yeah, definitely because we went to the moon 69, right? So this is like not long after that. It's right. Writer he's right.
Yeah the setting. Yeah, I never thought of that before but you're right like, you know, they would have still probably had Apollo missions when he was writing it. That would be way more advanced by now. Wouldn't you wouldn't you if space travel was was more like was possible for us. Would you go live on Mars if there is like no risk of the issue.
Well, yeah, like in this book they talk about like travel between Earth and Mars is like travel from here to Europe. You know, I think Mars is overrated. Really? Yeah, I know okay on the surface that's kind of a blunt stupid statement. But like we keep hearing about how people like Elon Musk are like obsessed with it, but he just read all these sci-fi books when he was a kid.
So I think he's just got this idea and said and he's like way smarter than me. So I'll trust that he knows what he's doing but like living on the moon I think is more realistic is what a lot of like scientists. And in general there's so much we can do on Earth still to make it better instead of trying to like make an atmosphere on Mars but it sounds hard as hell like to do.
So why not just like use all of your intelligence and resources but like do some right? Yeah. Yeah. Sure. You're one of those I was too hard. I don't know what I mean. Why would you go to Mars? It sucks out there. There's they probably need surveyors on Mars. Is this a sign to I'm a surveyor, so I don't know I mean.
I mean, it's not even close to the realm of possibility. So I don't even have to make that decision. You know, I think that's that's the thing. It's like, if something is completely out of the realm of possibility than you you would be more apt to say that you would do it right like given the chance Tim.
Would you climb Mount Everest? No, okay. I mean that's a bad example, you know, I mean like I don't know if you could head a movie studio would you do it? It sounds stressful. Yeah, I think it was like something something more within the realm of possibility than living on Mars, you know, I mean when you like yeah, like giving an option of something completely unknown unattainable.
I just can't tell if you when you offer me a hypothetical situation if I have to deal with all the negative things and I guess think about the fun aspect of right right, but no, I mean there are people who are born when the first planes took off. Yeah. He lived to see the, you know, go to Mars so.
Well Moon, you got yeah, sorry the moon. So yeah, there are things today that could seem unreasonable but still occur, right? Yeah, and then that's you bring up a good point that there are people that were born saw the first flight and then saw us land on the moon in their lifetime. So there's no wonder that they would expect us to have flying cars by now, you know and come on.
Where's our flying cars? Wouldn’t that be disastrous though? I mean some people can even drive on a two-dimensional Earth. Let alone flying around in the sky. Yeah. Yeah. But anyway, we're I mean ya know it is interesting or like hoverboards. Hmm, I guess yeah. Yeah. Alright. Here's another question.
Do you believe in extraterrestrial life that there's something out there in the universe? There probably is okay. So you're just basically saying that from your statistical mines that the law of averages says there's got to be something else out there in the universe, right? Yeah. What do you think?
Oh I agree. Do you think do you think you don't believe in that UFOs? And yeah a UFO is an unidentified flying object. Yeah, I believe some final checks her own head. Okay. Are you asking me if I believe aliens have visited us? I don't know probably not. I agree with you there probably not.
Yeah, I just think it's pretty egotistical to think that aliens would go out of their way to come here and visit us, you know. Maybe they want our water. Or it's like in signs when they come here. You see the movie signs a long time ago, but they were like allergic to the water. Yeah, that's why I was so funny said it was like the biggest pothole and yeah, just cause I like him as planets like mostly water and water kills us and Night Shyamalan.
It's just a master of was that when he started to go downhill, I think that was wasn't my sixth sense. Yeah. But a nice kind of surgeon back isn't anyways, I haven't seen his new movies. I haven't either but here the good okay. Um, what did you think of the simps? Do you know just what I'm talking about there?
That was like the monkeys who had like human capabilities. Yeah, it's funny how we kind of mentioned it but didn't like elaborate that much. I know he did. He didn't it was it was a little weird like apparently they bred these monkeys and I think they bred them over time and cloned them to so they were sexless but they could perform remedial tasks to maintain the spaceship and they were strong.
Yes like that. Yeah. Yeah, but they couldn't handle being in the space suit so they could only be in the spaceship. Which I thought was odd. Yeah, I'm just I'm just going over things that just piqued my interest. Did you want to do quotes?
I can start with blend that and I liked how I mentioned earlier with the asteroid hitting Italy hmm after that. He says after the initial shock mankind reacted with the determination and a Unity that no earlier age could have shown. Which is just a simple sentence, but it's kind of a cool idea that it.
It takes one big thing to get everybody United but then once that happens for more together sort of right? Yes. I thought I I'm glad you brought that up because that was a that was an interesting plot Point as well as that like that was the Catalyst that kind of help them explore space more and set up the the space.
They didn't call it space force did they, space guard. Excuse me. Yeah, it was based guard. And then that eventually led to the United planets and all this stuff. So. yeah, do you think they're all right. How about this for a hypothetical question? Will there ever be a moment like that that can actually unify humans worldwide?
I don't see why not. I mean if there's like a meteorite asteroid or some climate change-related thing, I feel like. That could get people on the same page. Okay, it reminds me of okay the movie The Martian. Did you see the Martian? Okay. Well, he's all right. That's my fire. Yes. Yeah like that. Did you read the book or I didn't read the book.
I just looks pretty good. So good. Yeah, so. One part I liked is that he's stuck out there, you know on Mars and China like helps bring him back. They like offers their resources or whatever. So that's an example of just like International Unity based on this like existential issue. Yeah, I would view that as temporary though.
I don't think there will be I don't think there will be anything that will that will unify humans worldwide to the point where everyone will just band together. why are you so pessimistic? I'm a realist so cynical. Yeah, maybe I am a little more cynical this week, but well, I'm. If I could just read one more thing to build off of that.
No, he says a hundred years earlier a much poorer world with far fewer resources had squandered its wealth attempting to destroy weapons launched suicidally by mankind against itself. The effort had never been successful but the skills acquired then had not been forgotten. Now, they could be used for a far nobler purpose and on infinitely faster stage. No meteorite large enough to cause catastrophe would ever again be allowed to breach the defenses of Earth, so began project spaceguard.
yeah, that kind of sets the stage for yes. It does. Yes ran very well and he's a very anti-nuclear person. I think it's pretty clear. Yeah, and yeah written in Cold War times.
and here's here's a little example of how Arthur C Clarke can explain the world insane Rama much better than I can because the guys are descending the steps getting out to the plane and here this after storm and they hear this noise. They're like that's a familiar noise. And it was the sound of falling water.
So there was the origin of the sound they had heard descending from some hidden Source in the clouds three or four kilometers away was a waterfall and for long minutes they stared at it silently. Almost unable to believe their eyes. Logic told them that on this spinning world no falling object can move in a straight line, but there was something horribly unnatural about a curving waterfall that curved side ways to end many kilometers away from the point directly below its source.
I got another quote in there okay, here's another one. They're sailing on the cylindrical see they create a makeshift raft to go out and and see if they can if there's any place along the Steep Cliff to climb up on the other side, but the cylindrical sea runs, the whole circumference of the inside of Rama.
So there's no way around it, but. So they can look up and see the sea directly above them to. So, all right. Every time Norton said to himself, I feel that I've grown accustomed to Rama it produces some new Wonder as Resolution hummed steadily forward it seemed again and again that they were caught in the trough of a gigantic wave.A wave that curved up on either side until it became vertical then overhung until the two flanks met in a liquid Arch 16 kilometers above their heads. Despite everything that reason and logic told them, none of the voyagers could for long throw off the impression that at any minute those millions of tons of water would come crashing down from the sky.
That's pretty cool. Yeah, so like I mean things like that that help that just. Arthur C. Clarke helps me anyway visualize the world so so complete and I guess that's the thing is like sure there's not much character development or action or that nothing really it's a tease nothing really happens from Rama but like he goes into good detail.
That's so visual for me like sometimes books can try to explain things and I'm reading them and it sounds nice but I don't see it in my head. You know, I but for this one I could see it so clearly like I was there on the raft looking up and seeing this huge ring of water that I'm on and just being completely baffled about the physics behind it all so yes. Yeah, he does a good job of describing it but he doesn't fall into the Trap of like over explaining things like some authors. He leaves enough room for like the mystery of it to be interesting. I felt like he had some good passages as well. Like just like short ones like this is where I think Johnny pack or something was his name one of the crew members flies a little like flying bicycle down the radius. Or down the axis of Rama to get to the South End he flies over the cylindrical sea and many tries to fly back, but then he's crashing but as he does, so he actually he felt little fear and this surprised him for he had never thought of himself as a particularly Brave man. It was almost as if he were watching the struggles of a complete stranger and was not himself personally involved.
I feel like. in times of Crisis sometimes people. Act in ways that surprised even themself because it's kind of like an outer body experience or something yeah, like that guy that character was an Olympic Athlete or something? Yeah. Thanks. Olympics are saying yeah the lunar Olympics. Oh, is that what it was? Yeah, that's right. They sent him out on a little Expedition. That was cool.
Okay. I like this quote about Captain Norton. He says Norton had once visited the ruins of an Aztec Temple and the feelings he had that experience now came echoing back to him Amplified a hundred times. Here was the same sense of awe and mystery and the sadness of the irrevocably vanished pass, yet the scale here was so much greater both in time and in space that the mind was unable to do it justice after a while it ceased to respond. Norton wondered if sooner or later he would take even Rama for granted.
I thought that was boring now. Yeah for being a scientist guy. I think Arthur see Clark's pretty good writer, too.
Yeah, you get this sense that he just likes the idea of Adventure to and like these past Travelers and oh, yeah I always liked the in history learning about the Explorers Columbus Vasco de Gama Magellan all those guys did I mean maybe that did you have interest in that?
It's go. Yeah. I was really interested in. Yeah. I know a lot of them turn out to be really terrible people. But like that's the whole thing about history. You hold him to today's standards and everyone's a terrible person before 1900, right? That's why he mentioned James Cook though. I think is that.
As far as those guys go he was in his Terror. Yes. He was more fair to his crew and to the natives he met and and all that stuff. Yeah, so true.
this was a little something I thought was funny the commander gets a message like a message comes in someone, you know prints it out and gives it to him and then. Slowly and thoughtfully, he walked across to the improvised life support complex and dropped the message into an electrosn the brilliant flare of laser light bursting out through the crack beneath the seat cover told him that the demands of security were satisfied. It was too bad, he told himself, that all problems could not be disposed of so swiftly and hygienically.
Because he's talking about a toilet. Yeah, either it in the toilet and the electrosan like. Vaporize their waste it's like little things like that enjoy to yeah in general his tone was kind of like dry had some dry humor to it. he would throw in those little funny parts to break up the serious part.
Right and Commander Norton this is after Mercury launches a missile heading towards Rama and one of the commander Norton's crew members comes to him and says that they can have a plan to go out like go out into space do a little solo Mission and disarm the missile and so commander Norton's weighing the options of does he make this does he do this and be a saboteur and disarm the missile and upset potentially the whole United planets at the same time saving Rama or does he just ditch Rama Let It Be exploded and see what happens but this was the passage: to act or not act, that was the question. Never before had Norton felt such a close kinship with the prince of Denmark. Whatever he did the possibilities for good or evil seemed in Perfect Balance. He was faced with the most morally difficult of all decisions. If his choice was wrong he would know very quickly, but if he was right, he may never be able to prove it.
And so that made me think of like. not just history, but even. Personal lives like I've had this thought many times. It's like we never really know we rarely know when we're close to disaster, you know, like if oh dang, you know, we're driving along and we don't catch that yellow light we stop and it's red or like oh darn, but what if we if we made the yellow light maybe at the next intersection, we would have gotten hit and then an accident, you know, like things like that.
I mean that's that's just a random act but like sometimes when you have to make a tough decision and you can't make up your mind, there's no way to really know sometimes that you made the right or wrong decision in life. And that can be frustrating but it's part of life. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. I like that he had some like morality issues here and there like heavy decisions like that, right? This is the guy defusing the bomb. This is Norton weighing the options of should he play order him to follow through with his plan to disarm the bomb or should he call him back and say no you don't do it since a big kind of just say I'm in that context, right?
It's like upset Mercury and Disturbed the world order or because Mercury just by destroying it. It's like you could upset the civilization that may be back home or it's like in general the worry was that they're going to destroy this knowledge and you know past civilizations.
oh, yeah, so speaking of the people on Mercury he says. They were respected for their toughness and Engineering skills and admired for the way in which they had conquered so fearsome a world, but they were not liked and still less where they completely trusted. At the same time it was possible to appreciate their point of view. The Hermians it was often jokes, sometimes behaved as if the sun were their personal property. They were bound to it in Intimate love-hate relationship as the Vikings had once been linked to the Sea. The Nepalese to the Himalayas The eskimos to the tundra. They would be most unhappy if something came between them and the natural force that dominated and controlled their lives.
So yeah, that made me feel like this is this like space politics thing where they were so dependent on the Sun that they were going to Nuke. This uninhabited space world to not have it risk interfering, right? Yeah. That's what that was. Well done. Well
alright, so this is the towards the end when Arthur C Clarke is describing how Rama is approaching the sun rounding the sun like almost dipping into the Sun a little bit dude, slingshot itself out of the solar system.
Faster and faster Rama was swept around the Sun moving more swiftly than any object that had ever traveled through the solar system in less than 2 hours its direction of motion had swung through more than 90 degrees. And it had given a final almost contemptuous proof of its total lack of interest in all the world's whose peace of mind it had so rudely disturbed.
Like I didn't give a shit about the rest of the solar system like just gone so that's why I view it as a spaceship because I view the ramens programming this path picking our son out. As a good slingshot point to get to some other Final Destination and I don't mean those shitty like 90 movies if yeah, yeah.
maybe I guess it explains like the biots they weren't really interested in the people, right? They would just kind of like pick apart their equipment or try to. See what everything was but they didn't care that much about the individuals. So. I've got one more quote.
I could give I think this kind of summarizes my favorite aspects of it. So he says I think this is the Olympic Athlete guy who was on the sky bike and kind of went on this little sub Adventure, right? Because it was a dangerous. It was kind of side missions. so he crashed before he said your quote he crashed on the south side of the Rama and he came to the cliff and they had him jump off the cliff that was like 50 kilometers high and then land in the water because they calculated the terminal velocity.
He would reach is it would be a little less than on Earth because Rama had a lower gravity. So it wouldn’t kill him if like held his shirt above his head like a almost like a parachute to increase the drag and that's pretty cool. Yeah part that be cool to see in a movie. Yeah. I was looking on YouTube of like four clips about this and it's like Morgan Freeman producing a movie about rendezvous with Rama.
Yeah. This is like four years ago. So I think it's just. Production hell or it's not going to happen. Yeah, it'd be hard. It'd be I think it would be hard. I mean because they would they would if they had made a movie they would have to do something more to keep the story interested because there's no way like like you said there's not really a payoff.
I don't think they can make a movie that just doesn't have a payoff, you know, right like even Interstellar has kind of an open ending like with the the future of humanity and all that stuff, but it's ultimately about Matthew McConaughey's character and his daughter you have you seen Interstellar? I've seen it yeah, they probably have to add some stuff to it to make it more acceptable to audiences make it more satisfying but it's a little refreshing to read a book that doesn't follow a formula because so many books are very really predictable.
So the fact that it doesn't have a payoff is frustrating but it's kind of like you respect that it's different. Oh, I I totally liked it. I was not particularly frustrated with the way it ended I felt. I felt it was kind of refreshing because it was like I said a concept I never thought about before that aliens would just do a flyby and we'd see them but aliens don't care because they're off to bigger things.
Yeah. I'm sorry to interrupt or no, it's all good. So he says. Yet if there were no hazards there would be no achievement. No sense of adventure. Millions of men would gladly have traded places with him. Now. He was going not only were no one had ever been before but also where no one would ever go again. In all of history, he would be the only human being to visit the southern regions of Rama whenever he felt fear brushing against his mind he could remember that.
Yeah. That is good one. Yeah, and it's going would you like to say that you've been somewhere and no one else has ever been. Is that possible now? That's it?
I don't think it is any more right unless like you get technical and like because there's volcanoes in the Pacific. So like if they reach above the sea level then it's technically an island so you can just go there and be like, hey, I'm on an island. So I've done it I've yeah, yeah. Yeah.
I mean if you've gone to some like obscure cave or like. You know natural location, even though you're not the first person it's still it's a cool feeling to think like not a lot of people have been here, right? So right, you know, I'm getting kind of feeling did you ever read Robinson Crusoe?
I don't think so. Okay. I remember reading that. I was younger and really loving it too because that time he was deserted on a Caribbean island in the Caribbean I think and. Yeah, and so he thinks he's alone, but maybe he's not he's not. Well, we'll see. But anyway back to this book. Yeah, this is my last quote.
I liked it because it's at the end and it's Commander Norton. He had succeeded on this Mission beyond all reasonable expectation. What his men had discovered in Rama would keep scientists busy for decades. And above all he had done it without a single casualty, but he had also failed. One might speculate endlessly but the nature and the purpose of the Ramans was still utterly unknown. They had used the solar system as a refueling stop, a booster station, call it what you will and had been spurned it completely on their way to more important business. They would probably never even know that the human race existed. Such monumental indifference was worse than any deliberate insult.
That's a good. Yeah, I like that one because I mean that's. I guess. I've always had this Cosmic perspective not always but I have a cosmic perspective of I guess just where humans are in the universe because. This stems probably from my religious background me going to church every Sunday growing up Mennonite rather conservative, shielded, kind of out of touch with I guess mainstream culture and Society a little bit.
So as an adult, I you know had to re-examine things as I grew up and don't really know what's out there or what's beyond this universe. I believe in a higher power, but I feel like humans are limited in our capacity to try to process what God could be. So we have kind of developed what suits what makes sense for us humans to rationalize and think about it.
So I have always wondered about. not just other life in this universe, but beyond the universe what is out there? I do believe there is something bigger than humans, but I can't say that we have all the answers. And so to think about aliens not even you know dignifying us with an insult. Like he says just sheer indifference makes me think about the human place in the universe and Beyond and is. is I think. An interesting thought like it thought exercise for me. I think you know, it would benefit most people to think a little more about, bigger, on have a bigger broader perspective of human beings than just, I know I know it's hard, you know, you have to go to go to work you guys make make some money to provide for you and your family and whatnot.
I always think there's time to contemplate bigger things. Maybe that's why I like science fiction.
Most people aren't as enlightened as you Brian. They don't all of this Cosmic perspective. Hi. Yeah, you're right. Yeah. I know. No, but as another enlightened person, I think you're right now, I think that's a great quote.
Wrap things up because it's a very humbling thought that the aliens are just passing through like don't even take us seriously enough to because we like as a people as stemming out from the individual family culture civilization everything we see ourselves as the center of like the universe and just to think that there's so much more out there that.
We're not even on their radar of like these other beans that's it is very humbling feeling. So yeah.
Yeah, so we shouldn't get caught up in all this like, you know, BS and right I guess that's what I'm getting at your yes. Thank you, Tim for for helping me find a direction because yes this it I don't mean people should like wallow and say, you know humans are to the suspect on a on a blue planet in the middle of those gigantic Universe, you know, no. I think that all human all Humanity has a common Destiny in the universe like what happens on Earth affects every one of us. So while you may be having a shitty day because your boss is hard on you or You you have to go to the doctors or or some other inconvenience, just I hope people can realize that in the grand scheme of the things it does really matter. I’m about to be a fatalist, just don't sweat this I guess that's the thing is I'll leave you with this. Don't sweat the small stuff, enjoy being around the people you like and people you love and big kind All Humans because we're on it together.
It's good advice. Yeah. All right. I started to Rapture wrap it up to him. Yeah. What's your rating? Oh right rating. I give it a five man. I loved it. I loved it. Yeah, I know. I mean I thought about a 4 because like, should I reserve my five-star ratings for book I like that are my all-time favorites like Brave New World and Catch-22 in those.
I don't think I can because like a star a book I book I should be able to write a 5 Rigby rate of five star and not have it on my like top 10 list, you know, because then that's going to limit my five stars, but you know what for how how much I read it how fast I read it. I was constantly hooked.
Go into chapter to chapter. I can visualize the inside of Rama so well in my head thanks to Arthur C Clarke subscriptions that yeah 5 out of 5, you're going to give it like a three or two. No, no, you give it to I'll give it I give it a 3. Yeah, I think yeah, like I can appreciate it more having discussed it with you and I like how much you you took away from it, but just.
As someone who appreciates more story arcs and character development. I felt like those were just too lacking for me. Right and I think that's a totally valid critique of this book. Yes, but I also think that what you said first is that you listening to me helped you appreciate the book more. I'm I kind of like that about our podcast here is that we we discuss it and it helps shape our views of the book because like you and that's all point is to read books and talk to talk about them to other people and yeah, so because one person's perspective is not always enough. Yeah. Yeah, so go to our website to guys one book and let us know what you think guys one book.com. Next book is to the lighthouse by Virginia Woolf.
Yes, I haven't started reading it yet. I think you have I have but this is this is one of your pics it's one that I chose. So it will be a good one this time just kidding. I'm just kidding. I like this book. I would I would recommend rendezvous with Rama you would like. I just don't read sci-fi that it's really just my personal.
Okay note to self never pick sci-fi again. Yeah, or if you want to make me angry, don't let me get angry. If I want to make you angry I’ll make it read another Malcolm Gladwell book. Yeah what it is like a Sci-Fi Malcolm Gladwell. Probably the worst just all right. Oh, yeah, Virginia Woolf. Yes, very nice. Yeah. I think it's like ranked like in the top 20 of all novel.
Yes very well regarded. Yeah. Yeah should be good looking forward to it. Yeah. Until next time keep reading keep reading keep reading. Is that how we're good?
The Moviegoer by Walker Percy
Hello again. Welcome to Two guys one book. I'm Brian. I'm Tim. And today we are talkin about Blink by Malcolm Gladwell or blink the power of thinking without thinking. This is a book I picked. I selected this book because I've always wanted to uh, read a book by Malcolm Gladwell. I have never read one of his books, but I am a fan of his podcast Revisionist History.
I enjoy hearing the stories he tells through that and wanted uh, see what his books were about and I think Tim was going into this with a heavy dose of skepticism about this book, but essentially I'll give you overview. essentially, this is a book about human beings our ability to process things within our subconscious to make determinations or decisions without us really even realizing that we've made up our mind already or And the determination I don't think okay. Whatever. Sorry no its fine. Like all right. So how would you describe this? All right, so I uh, I tried preparing for this.
I think more than you did. Um, I have laid out, he put three tasks like in the first chapter the first task is to convince you that decisions made quickly can be every bit as good as decisions made cautiously and deliberately and then the second task of blink when our powers of Rapid cognition go in disarray they do so for a specific and consistent set of reasons and those can be identified and understood and the final task is to convince you that our snap judgments and first impressions can be educated and controlled.
I couldn't have said it better myself. All right, right, so going into this. Did it it was it exactly what you thought it was like, what was your first what was going into this? What was your mindset? Like this is bull crap. He's just twisting the facts and stories to suit The Narrative that he wants. so going into this I sort of pictured Malcolm Gladwell as a pop scientist or pseudoscientist with these kind of mainstream books that aren't necessarily contributing a lot of like depth or great research and I sort of still think that. There were parts I liked the book definitely but on the whole I still wasn't very impressed. And I know I came in with some prejudgments, but I'll explain in depth as we go along why I think the way I do. What do you think that the book?
Oh, I liked it. like I said, I'm a fan of his podcast so. It was very interesting to see how he writes very much like he talks and I and I appreciate that because like I think we have a sense that books are like they can take time to craft their words and their then their structures of their sentences and what they want to say.
And get it very precise and I think maybe I think he probably does that for the podcast as well as he knows what he wants to say and how to deliver it. And so I guess it's just it's similar process that he has for book and podcasts so they sound very similar and I appreciate that but he does it in a way that I think makes it sound natural and organic and he does a lot of research.
I mean like, all right. All right. Research being a relative term because he's not the one in a laboratory, performing experiments. He reads about scientists and people doing experiments and then he goes and talks to them and tries to explain to us what these mean and what could this, you know, uh, tell us about human beings.
Right. He's a good writer. I appreciate his style. I think he does have a way with words that is effective and well done. But as far as the research my biggest gripe with him is that he's uh a writer right by background and it's like he's masquerading as a social scientist or a psychologist and drawing these conclusions and sort of cherry-picking the studies.
Across different domains and trying to weave them together and connect them to suit his narrative which some of that might work some of it might be accurate, but I was just skeptical of the whole thing. I knew you were. Yeah, not everything but a fair amount so okay.
Um, no, I mean. I was not skeptical I was not I did not have any negative. You believe everything in this book? No, I mean no like but I feel like I don't think there's a that that's a bad thing. If you do believe everything in this book, but that's just it I mean,
he's collecting experiments and research done by others in a manner to help try to explain how human beings make decisions. And these are the ones he chose to group together. So I I guess I can see your point about how he is. He could be seen as cherry-picking but I feel like he is selecting ones that he truly believes relate to each other and compliment each other's research and anecdotes to explain how human beings think.
And we can give specific examples of my studies. But I think my biggest problem with these is that a lot of them are just sort of isolated studies with small sample sizes that haven't been repeated. So to just, you know, take one here and one there.
It feels like you could find just about any study to justify any point of view. That's what I felt was not scientific about this. Sure but I think like that that's how the research gets started. Like they don't have I mean they do that they do enough. They have enough of a sample size to come up with a hypothesis of why the results they're getting or whatever but you know sure they might some things might need further exploration, but I also feel like these are published results in.
I would assume to be reputable, uh Publications that Malcolm Gladwell is finding these through so that I mean any of us, uh section of notes in the back at the book. I'm not saying they're not credible. I just think um, he studied if there are some one else could write a book and pick all the opposite ones, studies of that Malcolm Gladwell chose and come up with a completely different narrative. It's called a wink. It was stupid. Yeah, how long were you waiting for that one, but you could make the opposite but because he does just take one study to like justify one point of view. Yeah. I mean, yes, I did feel like it did get into the weeds a little bit about.
All these names of all these different people doing all these different studies, but I felt like he did a good job of referencing them later. Like he didn't just say the person's name like so and so believe this he said so and so who did this study that you remember from three chapters before also said this.
So one note about that. That's another thing that sort of bothered me because I know I'm coming off as pinky he threw so many stories in to hear that. I think his message would have been better if he just focused on the ones that were that could have been the most important and then when he tries to reference ones from earlier he’ll reference one from the first chapter in the last chapter and it's like it's hard to just place every detail.
So sure. I mean I can. Yeah, empathize with you there that uh, sometimes he starts talkin about. what was one? he started he was talkin about Paul Van Ripper and the Millennium challenge but then he goes then talks about improv.
So I mean kind of like, you know, I wanted to know more details about the Millennium challenge I guess but. Uh, he that wasn't the point the point was, focusing on how he managed his team during the Millennium challenge. It jumps around a bit with a little disoriented right? Sorry didn't disorienting but uh to his credit he is a good Storyteller and I think he's good at um, setting the stage and introducing the characters and his language of describing them, but.
Why don't we just go through a few examples of studies? We liked and didn't like okay, I might yeah drill down I mean. So is that what your that was your focus is like you were some of the studies you liked and some that you didn't is it was at the thing like your least favorite part was a certain study and your favorite part was another study or was it kind of like just the way he intertwined things or it's a combination?
There were studies I like and ones I didn't like and then I do have kind of issues with the overall approach they took but I think it might help if we just dive down and studies and then sure piece it. Oh, that's fine. So like what's one you liked or didn't like and why? Oh, I like the Pepsi challenge.
Really that was my least favorite. Why is it felt like oh simple and like corporate branding like, you know, It's just like But like everyone remembers the Pepsi challenge. I well I mean the idea of okay. Okay, you might be a little young a big part of my life. I think it was like yeah 80's 90's or whatever.
But anyway, I like that because I mean it kind of well, I like it for reasons that aren't even really what this book is about. It's just about personal preference and how. Taking a little sip. Well, I guess that's kind of what this book is about a small it is your beef too. If you take a small sample size of Pepsi people like Pepsi better than Coke, but if you're going to drink a whole can of it or buy a case of it to take home have in your fridge.
You're not always going to like the sweeter, Pepsi over the the coke, right? Yeah, well, it's like you were saying initially this story about a little bit out of place with the other ones because a lot of them were more social scientists oriented and then this was more like business.
Yeah, but this one was in the chapter about that musician and I think that whole chapter was about what do people like what do consumers like right and the same reason like all the music executives thought this musician Kenna was very good, but he didn't rate well with the public and so how can we trust what the public thinks they like like if the public thinks you we you know, there's marketing teams out there all across the country for on multiple in multiple branches of consumerism that pole consumers to see what they like and don't like but when asked directly do they even really know what they like and don't like.
Because then he went on after the Pepsi challenge thing. He went on about margarine versus butter how margarine had to be yellow because people were used to spreading yellow things on toast. And so margin was initially white and they had to change it to yellow and then it would could sell better. The Brandi I think was another one.
Well one Brandy company was clearly in the taste test better than the other but when he put their bottle side by side, The other one was doing better because I had a fancier bottle look more like a brandy bottle than the better tasting Brandy. So like it wasn't a true reflection of what the book is about thinking instantaneously.
But it's just about like do we even really know what we like and don't like when given the chance to rate something. Yeah, I can understand his issue with market research and how they try to come up with a simple opinion of a product to give a story about it, but it's not always that easy to break down or whatever but like in other parts of the book he touches on like social justice and health care in these pretty heavy topics and I think it undermines it a bit to just go into like this consumer world.
That's a little dry sure. Yeah, I mean I could make the argument that he used, rounding it off, in multiple Fields. So it's not all just Healthcare and and social sciences. It's also marketing and PR and stuff like that. I can understand that. To me, It felt a little scattered sure and.
But as far as what you mentioned about Kenna the musician, I have a rant about that go go. So did you have you heard of before I looked up? No, I haven't I have I have any other. Yeah, I looked up some of his music. Okay did not like it. Um, like you said, he in the book Malcolm Gladwell said Kenna, uh was really liked by these music Executives, but the General Public couldn't get into him maybe because he wasn't easily assigned to certain categories. Like was he hip-hop or jazz or R&B or whatever and um, so he's saying like, Oh, even like Fred Durst from Limp Bizkit said he was the top music. I'm like what the hell does Fred Durst know? Like, why would he even put that in your book?
It doesn't so it was really strange and I looked up his music and like yeah, he's just like not I don't think he's good. And he does have a following like they were musicians who don't get publicity who end up getting huge especially with the internet these days and this was written in like early 2000s.
So it didn't take into account like people going viral or whatever. So I felt like that whole chapter that whole section pretty silly so so okay. So did it miss did it completely miss the mark for you because it was written 15 years ago and missed out and it didn't factor in to how people can be famous on the internet because in early 2000s you didn’t even know.
Well, it's like how you were saying. He says this guy Kenna didn't become popular because you know people can. Find a way to categorize them and it's like no he didn't become popular because he just sucks and his music sucks. I mean shouldn't play music. Sorry Kenna. He like donates all these nonprofits and stuff.
So I think it's a good person. But I did I did YouTube one of uh song of his. You can like it was that one that was added in like what do we know? We're not Fred Durst. All right, I mean, all right. So that was just one. I don't know. I I can't say I had a favorite study or or anecdote he talked about.
I mean, I don't know or at least favorite. Did you have one that specifically stood up the Pepsi challenge was your least favorite for real? Yeah. Okay. Well Kenna probably yeah. Okay, Kenna that whole chapter. What was your favorite then? I really like towards the end the one about blind auditions for um, like symphony orchestras.
So it used to be that very few women if any would get in. Um, Get into an orchestra because the judges were all like men and the conductors and they would come out and play the instrument and even if they sounded better than a male musician, uh, the inherent biases wouldn't let them get um into the show.
So they started doing blind auditions just like behind a screen. Made me think of that reality show The Voice or whatever that music show like American Idol, but their backs are turned which is pretty gimmicky. But like it's a good idea because then you're not judging them. I watched the whole season of The Voice and I liked it. I’m judging you now, their chairs turn around.
Yeah, I mean Adam Levine and Blake Shelton the dynamic they have their makes the show. I mean and then later they can steal people and I mean, it's it is much more involved. And I do like the fact that it is a blind audition. Yeah. Yeah, and I like that part of the book too. Yeah, so I thought that's a good like it connects to his message the thing in general about his message though as he starts off.
Like I'm going to show you why quick, uh judgments are good and we should trust our like quick instincts and then he gives all these examples about why we shouldn't well, I mean the evidence was against that I feel like that. I don't think he explicitly said that we should always trust our gut initial instinct when we. But it's like the first story is about the statues that experts can tell are fakes instantly and he's kind of leads into the book and it's called blink.
Like it's supposed to be like blink of an eye like yeah have you should trust your hunch more something right? And I think that's that's what he's getting at is yes, trust your hunch more but in that same vein your hunch through social being socialized may be biased like those conductors in the orchestra.
Their initial hunch was to be biased against women. So trust your hunch, but also, analyze your hunch and make sure it's not misappropriated against a certain people or certain things because you have that other bias but it wasn't that clear cut to me when to trust when they analyzed.
Yeah, because I don't think there is a definitive answer. Hold on. I highlighted something about okay. so he says when should we trust our instincts and wind should we consciously think things through on straightforward choices deliberate analysis is best when questions of analysis and personal choice start to get complicated when we have to juggle many different variables than our unconscious thought processes might be superior.
Now. That's very general. It is like straightforward. All right. What is that? And then? You know questions of analysis and personal choice, like that's everything. I just feel like his language is so broad and then he tries. And in general you just tries to be more profound than he is where it's like okay trust your hunch, but sometimes don't oh really profound Malcolm like changing the world here it’s pop science and pseudoscience Brian. but counter that how that I tried reading like, Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman, which is like, A lot of research more research oriented and that one like some I think it would know about Prize or something.
Like he did he won a Nobel Prize for he’s an economist. Yeah, like Behavioral economics or yes, right and and he references him in the book to Malcolm Gladwell references Daniel Kahneman. But what I'm trying to say, this book was more well-written than that. It's more story to story oriented. That one's a little dry.
It's more dry and kind of harder to get through. Okay, so I will say he's a good writer. I just don't necessarily like his approach. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Um another one I light was the wedding the marriage expert who could who could watch. Just two couples talking about their relationship and predict like 90 percent certainty whether or not to be married 10 years later or something like that.
I like that study as well, but I'll also say he didn't elaborate on a lot of the statistics like how many people that he analyzed the get that 90% metric or like, you know what I mean? Sure but like so you want the more nuts and bolts you want to know the details of. Why is Malcolm Gladwell trusting this study? But we just want to accept it at face value, right?
But I mean, I feel like you could always go and find more about it. Yeah, and I think I think what you said comparing this book to Thinking Fast and Slow brings up a good point is that Malcolm Gladwell is a journalist and he's a writer. David Kahneman or Kahneman Daniel Kahneman, Daniel Kahneman. Is an economist or behavioral Economist by trade and I think that's where you see the different styles of the books. And he is a Storyteller so he is not going to get bogged down with all those details in the study, you know, and I don't I personally don't need them to I'm I'm fine accepting the fact that this marriage expert could predict with ninety percent certainty other couples would be married or divorced later. Yeah. I'm just wary of him extrapolating from one small isolated study a big conclusion to apply the like, you know, everything that's all but go into the marriage study more because I like I did like that one, right? Oh, yeah, I and they had um these different emotions like they each second of the video they like.
Graded the man and the woman with a specific emotion and like they had them ranked or they just had a numbered 1 through 20. So for shorthand that people could just write down numbers for each second with like, you know, he'll he was Defensive with then he with a slight contempt, but then he then he shielded it by deflecting or something like that, and I found that very interesting and how I think they boiled it down to what they call the four horsemen.
So for this marriage, um, the 20 different emotions that go on in these interactions the boiled it down to the what they call the four horsemen defensiveness, stonewalling, criticism, and contempt. And in fact, there was one emotion that he considers most important of all and that is contempt.
So if one of those existed in the relationship Dynamic it was very likely to I think I think it was that it was that contempt persisted. Not just the existence of contempt like it persisted throughout I think. But your saying if if there was one of those four or a combination of those four, it was a likely to work out.
Yes, correct. Yes and condemned was the worst. Yes, and it makes sense someone in a relationship. It's probably going well. And they said another thing that I found interesting was, for interactions they need to have a five-to-one positive the negative ratio. Which I found was kind of heavy in the positive.
But I guess that makes sense, because you want continuous positive feedback when you're communicating with somebody or living with somebody or married to somebody so that you know, you maintain the comfort of knowing you're on good terms and things are going well. It's an interesting study.
I just wish it were replicated more and uh more transparent. So you want this book to be basically twice as long. No, I don't need like study study study, but I just want like not this one guy and his little lab out here. I'm just supposed to believe that this is the case. Well, I'm guessing that's what he was trying to get at. Malcolm Gladwell wasn't taking multiple studies with marriage counselors and reviewing them.
He was taking one study of one marriage counselor and one study of a tennis coach who could predict when people are going to double fault and the story of those art experts that knew the statue was a fake the moment they saw it. He’s just laying out these examples in different fields by different people that show that their gut reaction is genuinely the right one, but then he also shows, With the brand study and then the Warren Harding effect.
I'm basically saying my point is that instead of focusing on the very specific topics. He is taking multiple topics from various fields.
And trying to thread a common theme and I think you're saying is that you just don't buy it that all these different topics have that same thing. I'm just skeptical. I mean, maybe he's stretching at times but some of the I'm just skeptical of taking the study and then extrapolated and cherry-picking but also a lot of these studies it's kind of common sense like, you know an expert in tennis might have a hunch about when someone might double fault or an expert in marriage counseling might be able to tell the signs of like, you know, so like that's not entirely as profound as I thought he made it out to be.
Yes, that's true. But I think yeah, but doesn't I think at one point doesn't he go through the marriage videos and when he knows what to look for like that's his thing is like if people are coached they can know what to look for and I think.
I mean another part I want to talk about is is the police chapter. Well, let's talk about Warren Harding. Oh you want to talk about Warren Harding first? I did like that. You have some more. Well Warren Harding error is basically people thought he looked like a good presidential person because he was like handsome and kind of tough looking or something and so he became a politician eventually became president and he was like a terrible president.
So that effect just applies to a whole bunch of different things where it's like in business like. Tall people get promoted more become CEOs and things like that. And yeah, like I think that's worth noting and it's something to um to discuss. Yeah, but so yeah, I found that interesting to this CEOs are like 6 foot average height when the average height of a male's like five nine or something like that.
So that doesn't that doesn't have any weight in you're like you're like, oh well. There's not enough studies of about CEO’s height to determined that. I just said it. Okay. All right identify this story. That's enough data. Okay for me. Okay, there's a pattern here. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, but we can talk about the police.
I mean, yeah, I like the war in hard. I think he's from Ohio did yeah. Yeah, proud of that. I know I don't think so um, But yeah, um, so the police story basically someone uh gets shot because these policemen acted quickly and they thought he was a criminal and he was just like pulling out his wallet and he was uh, just sort of scared of them because it was two guys have undercover cops like approaching him and they thought he was being suspicious and in a panic shot him.
Right, right. Yeah. That was I mean I like the part of the book and I think I have several quotes from that section. I think I'll bring up what when we do our favorite quotes, but it just was you said this book was written early 2000s, but it's still resident that part still resonates very much today.
And I think that was where he was so Malcolm Gladwell in the first part of the book was talkin about these experts in statues and tennis and marriage counseling. To point out that these experts can tell in a blink of an eye that whether you know, something is good or bad and when it comes to police officers and in situations, I think he he addressed that by I felt like his tangents in that chapter were very relative because he went on to talk about autism after he brought up the cops story and how people with autism do not pick up on facial expressions and cannot judge a person's feelings based on their physical appearance. And then he related that to first-hand accounts of police officers and stressful situations and how they just become face-blind. I think is the way said and so I found that fascinating especially the autism thing about because he said the highly functioning person with autistic Behavior.
Was watching a movie a very dramatic movie who was Afraid of Virginia Woolf and then like during emotional moments. He was off watching a light switch or something else on the screen and as a person who doesn't know about much about autism. I thought that was very interesting. Then also then leading into the first hand accounts of the police officers and how they kind of go face blind and then how officers he also had a little bit about.
When they do when I forget what Police Department it was but they were they were following they were tracking the police officers like how they interacted with people and how they followed their training and most of the time they were good but then like leading up to a highly stressful situation, they would be bad.
And so that would put them in the position to have to react quickly and possibly make wrong decisions. And then he particular points out to uh police officer that says like he the police officers were, you know recounts his encounter with a 14 year old who is pulling out a gun from his pants, but he the police officer could tell by the 14 year olds facial expressions and by language that he could have he could take another second.
He doesn't have to shoot him. He doesn't have to shoot him. And then eventually the guy put the gun down. So I that chapter to me was very, I guess you could say it was powerful because it still was resonate today and how you know, we're so quick both sides the people who the people who support police officers no matter what and the people who side with the victim no matter what.
Um, they are always quick too, Uh accusations on the other side, whereas this book really highlights the fact that in those split seconds, it's what's going through your mind. So is so fast and the events passed by so quickly that you just react and it doesn't really mean that you're a bad person either side, you know. I agree, but I also think it's not defending those officers because.
Right. I'm not saying you're saying that no, but the thing is he also mentioned that they did things that were wrong. Like they shouldn't have gone out and approached. This guy who was just hanging out on his doorstep, because what he noticed or what he uh wrote was that they didn't put themselves in his shoes like his perspective, right like just because he's panicking doesn't mean he's guilty of something.
He's just nervous about these people, chasing him or something. So, That's what I thought was interesting. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. I I didn't mean to say that I defend either side the cops in that main story about about what seven seconds in the Bronx. They definitely messed up.
Yeah, but just because they mess up it's so unfortunate that when police officers mess up that people get seriously hurt or potentially die because they're human, you know, everybody is human and we all make mistakes and and. And just because you make such a grave mistake. That's why I am never going to be ever thought about being a police officer, and you know doesn't mean that that they're racist but at the same time, some people need to recognize the fact that there are implicit bias, you know in everybody and just because you have it and I think that's the downside is that.
Sometimes people when they worry about having an implicit bias, they don't want to acknowledge it because acknowledging that means oh you secretly hate certain type of people. They're not even saying that you hate people. It's just our world around us were surrounded by, these views of a male a white male, you know.
We're surrounded by these white male Christian views of the world that can't help but affect how we view the world around us and just because you have implicit bias does not make you a bad person, but I think you need to acknowledge that still. Yeah. I mean, yeah, he's trying to get at that.
We all have subconscious biases whether we realize it or not and that's kind of going back to the blind audition example of Symphonies where even though a conductor might not be biased against women like consciously that just because maybe he's only played with male musicians or thinks of men has better musicians or playing like certain instruments like the French horn that he thinks they're better so. And connecting that to like the social element to um, he talked about how we should have blind uh courtrooms and at the same as blind auditions, which I think is really smart. Actually, I like that idea a lot because it's about removing those biases like a jury would have looking at the um perpetrator victim or whoever and then basing their sentence on that or their verdict guilty or not guilty.
So instead of seeing the victim, they should or the perpetrator they should be separated and should be blind because then you're not, you know, it's not being based on like Race or class or whatever right? I found that so fascinating and like that's like the very end of the book like in the afterward.
Yeah, and you're absolutely right. I think that's the way things should be done because there is a disproportionate amount of minorities in the prison system, uh in relation to their you know ratio of the population. Why that is, I mean, I think you're absolutely right they just. Remove the perpetrator from the courtroom and like he said they communicate through email or through uh, uh intermediary and handle things at way and remove the name or just remove any indication of their race or class because class has a big thing to do with it to or whatever so that the decision can be made completely impartially.
I agree. Because he says justice should be blind so. And it seems really easy like what it's just like a social thing holding us back from changing are like tradition or whatever. I think I think it's heavily steeped in Tradition because like isn't the isn't in the Constitution like you have a right to a fair trial trial like a jury of your peers.
Yeah. They're like face. Yeah, right. I don't know. I just I I think I think that I mean you talk, I mean that's ingrained in the Constitution or the way the country was founded so. I think that is definitely part of it. That's why it's been such a part of our culture for 250 years. We can update it. I think it'd be fair.
Oh, I completely agree. But like come on. I mean in the state of the data management. Yeah, but are we ever gonna have another amendment to the Constitution because because there's just not to be an amendment to the Constitution never right? But but you're touching on a little bigger point though, like will there be another amendment to the Constitution?
I don't think there will be because. No government wants to admit, no Congress is willing to admit that the constitution needs changing when that's the whole point of the Constitution. There’s like 30-27. I think right but still when was the last one was it I forget I don't even know. This is not a civics or government.
Yeah, let's go back to the but. Yeah that that afterward about the Blind Justice should be blind was that was my favorite idea from the book and I think he had a great point. Yeah, um so new quotes or yeah, we can I'm good to go to quotes now. I guess one thing I'll start out as saying is maybe not a direct quote.
But he mentioned that his style is kind of like an intellectual adventure story, which I think is a good way to capture it this genre so I thought that was a good way to describe it.
Well, I mean this was in the I think first chapter about the marriage counseling but then he says he talks about thin slicing is as terminology for basically taking a very thin little sample size. And trusting that that represents the larger picture, I guess this is your biggest. This is the whole beef you have with this book.
Is that all he all Malcolm Gladwell is doing is thin slicing and saying that with our hunches we can trust our hunch a lot of times and so he says: thin slicing is part of what makes the unconscious so dazzling, but it's also what we find most problematic about rapid cognition. How was it possible to gather the necessary information for a sophisticated judgment in such a short time? The answer is that when our unconscious engages in thin slicing. What we are doing is an automated accelerated unconscious version of what Gottman the marriage counselor guy does with his video tapes and equations can really be understood in one setting. Yes it can and so can lots of other seemingly complex situations.
Yeah, but it's just what okay, you know what in the marriage chapter the yeah-but was it was one of their little passive-aggressive things that people do did you catch that because yeah because. You act like you're agreeing but you're really disagreeing. It’s a good thing we're not married or not married to his book. What bothers me is his definitive tone because he'll say like that's what allowed Gottman to understand marriage in x amount of seconds.
It's like he just he sounds so sure about it when I'm saying. Oh, no, Tim. I completely agree. Your gripes have validation, but you just grab about everything. I'm just gonna I praised the book a lot of ways. It just bothers me when anybody's too confident. Yes. I know like any kind. It's just because you're so insecure about everything you just. I'm saying that he could have more humility in his approach.
He's not even a scientist. He's a journalist. The world needs more scientists. Oh god. so this quote is actually him quoting Freud, but I think it explains his thesis better than he did. Oh, you're using the Freud quote at the end towards the end. Yeah. Yeah. I like that one. Go ahead. Uh
When making a decision of minor importance, I've always found it advantageous to consider all the pros and cons in vital matters however, such as the choice of a mate or a profession. The decision should come from the unconscious from somewhere within ourselves in the important decisions of personal life. We should be governed I think by the Deep inner needs of our nature.
So yeah, I mean basically it just boils down to trust again.
Yeah. We've all heard that advice right he um, you know verbalizes it well or articulate it. Well, yeah. Yes he does
here's a good one. I think this is about there was these two ladies he had lunch with that work food critics or food, professional food tasters or whatever and he was so he was like, where do you go for lunch with people who are you know, their job is to taste food, and he when he talked about the lunch which sounded great but here was another quote I liked
Our unconscious reactions come out of a locked room and we can't look inside that room. But with experience we become expert at using our behavior and our training to interpret and decode what lies behind our snap judgments and first impressions. It's a lot like what people do when they are in psychoanalysis. They spend years analyzing their unconscious with the help of a trained therapist until they begin to get a sense of how their mind works.
I think that might be my favorite quote of the book. That and the Freud quote Yeah, because yeah because that's what he's getting at is that these instantaneous thoughts these of thin slicing a small sample and we come up with a conclusion do we know that that conclusion is definitive?
No, but a lot of times our gut is you know, what our mind processes in nanoseconds that we would process over. I think he has another quote here that just because we are taught that you know decisions made with a more information take more time to come up with a definitive answer are more thorough than snap decisions.
But this is saying that our unconscious can make these. Decisions so fast for us. There's like inside a locked room. So we have to take the time to analyze why we think that so fast and is that right? and then finally here for people who do spend time in psychoanalysis.
They spend the years learning about themselves and their brain and like this is where Do you trust your gut or maybe you have an implicit bias and maybe you don't have to adjust for things where you don't want to jump to conclusions because you may be wrong and this is where I think that determining when to trust your gut and when not to comes in like he's saying just be aware.
But do you think in general in this day and age to trust your gut is good advice with how quickly people are getting like angry and how heated intense the atmosphere is. The whole point of thinking fast and slow a lot of those studies are basically showing how people are bad at judging statistics and have all these biases that cause them to make assumptions that are very inaccurate.
And so and you see that a lot in the political environment people come up with these crazy, um opinions and ideas. So I think it's almost a little dangerous advice to be like we should trust our gut more. Yes, I agree. Um, It can be dangerous to say trust your gut in these times but I think also that Thinking Fast and Slow I haven't read the book but Behavior economics focuses on mass people the mass Society, right and that mass Society is gonna.
Behave rationally and take the best course for their bottom line or whatever, right? No. No, it's all about how people believe behave exactly. I mean that's that's the whole that's why he won the Nobel Prize though is because all economist's thought that when given time that's why I'm getting that is that's why he won the Nobel prizes because he turned it on a head that said no people don't behave rationally because they believe whatever they believe and then act upon that.
So you're right. I mean, I don't know where I stand on all this but like I'm just trying to say this is what Malcolm Gladwell saying. Yeah, you know at the end of the day, I guess all I'm saying is I wish he made it a little more clear cut about trust your gut in these situations and be more skeptical in these ones.
I know he touched on it, but I think he could have touched more on it. I don't think you can I don't think you can say like an XYZ trust your gut but ABC don't. Because I think everybody's different it's about it's about introspection about who you are and do have the expertise to say like I can't go to the uh, the was that the museum in LA that bought that statue I can't go to that museum.
Look at that statue and say it's a fake because I don't have the expertise and I can acknowledge that I don't. But you know, If you if you spend time to analyze how you process things and learn about yourself. Then maybe you know that yes these things I feel certain about I feel certain that when I go to Chipotle I'm gonna get the same thing.
You know, you're an expert on. Yes, right. I can trust my gut when it comes to Chipotle, right? But, I can't trust my gut when I'm going to look at a statue. I guess one counter-argument though is even with experts in certain areas. A lot of the time they can get sort of um tunnel vision and then not be open to other ideas.
You know what I'm getting. Sure sure. I mean that's what the museum kind of got into trouble with is that they had all the scientific stuff. They sampled the marble and it had aging on the surface or whatever, they did the scientific stuff. Right that was ton of one thing in all these experts are saying another okay.
I can think of a good case study. I think that illustrates this point so remember the healthcare one, um chest pains. Yes. So basically, um in when patients would go in for chest pains a lot of the time it wouldn't get diagnosed as at risk for a heart attack. So this one Hospital started focusing just don't like three or four just a handful of like main factors and it turns out that those are the most important factors.
So they were better at accurately diagnosing potential heart attacks, which makes sense. But then he sort of says you don't need any of this other information. It's not useful just focus on this set of information, but to me, it felt like a false dichotomy where it's not like more information is bad.
It's just that this is. This should be weighted more like these three factors and then it saves the doctor. It frees them up their decision-making ability to focus more on the patient and like connect with them. So it makes sense in a way but I don't think more information is inherently bad just because some information is more important. But I think I think people fall victim to information overload though.
And so I there's a quote here about the heart stuff the heart attack, warning signs stories in the same chapter is the Millennium challenge with the military and so his whole point in that chapter was that more information is not always better that The Blue Team the good guys were taking time to have all these meetings and discuss and analyze all this data where the red team Paul Van Ripper was letting guys go out and shoot from the hip and just trust their gut and then he talked about the heart attack, checklist there as well. And he says, extra information is more than useless.
It's harmful. It confuses the issues what screws up doctors when they are trying to predict heart attacks is that they take too much information into account. And you think that is BS. Right? Okay. Let me let me quickly expand in my point. So I agree information overload is an issue and that more information isn't necessarily always better.
But for him to say more information is harmful just as a statement is just sort of absurd because like that doesn't make sense. It's just about how you interpret the information and how well it informs your decisions and how you're acting upon it right but. But that heart checklist thing was vital because it gave doctors specific things to look for and so they could disregard the noise, if they had other things pop up that they you know, all they knew that it was those four things to admit the person in the hospital and that is valuable. Yeah, but okay, let me give you this perspective. I agree but. Yeah, but um, so if you had an algorithm predicting, uh someone at risk for a heart attack, so you're just going to ignore this information and never think to include any of these finer details when to unbeknownst to us.
There are things that contribute to a heart attack that we have no idea of and for us to neglect that and say nothing else is important. I feel like we might be missing out on stuff that could help inform our um prediction. Okay, you're looking at a purely from a data point of view, right? I mean, yeah kind of and I guess I guess his whole point is the fact that doctors are smart people.
They know they they take in all that information and they try to analyze build a picture when really all they need really need to do is worry about those four things because. I mean like and he also says it's not to belittle what doctors do it's because like we don't know what to listen for when we are listening to somebody's lungs that are filling with liquid because their heart is failing or whatever, you know, yeah, we don't know how to do that doctors have the training to do that.
It's just they have to it's just pointing out the important things that supersede all the other data. I found it interesting how it was hard to get a lot of doctors on board with this approach because everyone's kind of got their ego or Pride to deal and they say it can't be this simple as these three things.
I have to come up with a conclusion like on my own which is not to say every doctor is like that but like, um, in any job or role you want people want to feel kind of autonomous and. oh, yeah, like they're independently coming up with some and if and another point is like if doctors are making the decision and signing off on it.
They want to make sure that there are certain in their mind. So it just I think it also took a while for them just to trust that. Oh, these are the only things that you need to worry about because like you said they wanted to take in all that data. Yeah. Yeah. My only they now take away point is just let's not neglect more information to the Future.
That could be like, you know what I mean? I know what you mean. You have another quote. Um now you go ahead you sure all right now, all right. So this was about this was in the afterward because he was talkin about Chancellorville. We didn't touch on that one yet about this general for the in the Civil War. general for the union had Robert E. Lee basically surrounded and outnumbered but Robert beat him because he was just more confident and I don't yes more experience and could just outwit the union general. but so this is where he talks about the second lesson in blink, but I feel like this can. I'll read it
Understanding the true nature of instinctive decision-making requires us to be forgiving of those people trapped in circumstances where good judgment is imperiled.
And that I instantly think of the police the story because we have no idea what it's like to be in that situation. Now granted, they put themselves in a bad situation and nowadays they're having more training and things to go along with that. But yeah, we just gotta be empathetic and forgiving and realize that just because someone has implicit bias doesn't make him a bad person and people need to be more accepting of themselves if they have implicit bias. Because if they acknowledge it they can get training to improve upon it and I think that would solve a lot of issues. Yeah, and it's not always implicit bias though because if someone is pulling out their wallet and it looks like you see a dark object and it's night time, then you might assume it's a gun when they're just trying to show you their ID or something.
So. Yeah, but I agree that a lot of it is implicit and right right. And it's just about being forgiving to other humans when they make human errors and even if those errors hurt people, unfortunately. One of the things I thought was interesting was that between one officer squad cars and two officers squad cars the one officer one's getting much fewer situation like, um, you know incidents right which I mean it makes sense because like. They probably wouldn't put themselves in those situations as much just out of like their own self-preservation, but also in general they're nicer to people so as a police force, you might think two officers together safer and more they think things over better but one is really more.
Um, easygoing probably wouldn't put themselves at risk for ya something. Yeah. Good point. I'm glad we brought that up because that was a point. I found very much interesting in the book. I think that's worthwhile. Yeah Malcolm. Okay, one more. Uh, I don't think I have a specific quote from this but you mentioned this earlier that autism part and the facial recognition.
I thought that whole section was interesting. And uh, also there were these scientists who studied facial recognition in general and they could tell certain emotions based on the position of your eyebrows or lives. And then I watched some videos of them in like yeah, really?
Yeah, it was really cool because uh because they would have a subject and tell them to like furrow their brow and move like this here and that there and like I like tried it and you start feeling sad instantly depending on how they position your face or like, you know, there's all these subtleties to our motions.
It's not as simple as happy sad whatever it's just you know contempt or like some specific emotion, depending on very certain parts of your face. And then to talk about people with Autism, you know on the other side of where they just can't recognize anything at all that facial blindness.
I thought that was interesting. Yeah. Yeah that whole facial section was very interesting as well. I mean, that's just I I mean, I like this book because it just was had a lot of little interesting tidbits through it. and. What was the I had a thought about the facial one. How when the two guys were studying all the movements the face can make they noticed that when they were during a section when there are making a repeated sad or angry faces they were having lousy days. It just goes to show how you know, we like I think he says in the book. We assume that our feelings dictate, our internal feelings and emotions dictate how we look and act and feel when in fact we can you know manipulate our feelings based on how we look and act and feel and that's what those scientists discovered when they were doing all the sad and and depressing faces they felt sad and depressed. It's just helpful to be reminded that the fake it till you make it mentality of like if you put on a positive if you sis stand up straight and smile and try to be jovial maybe that can help you get through a bad day or you know uplift your spirits when needed. So thanks Mister Rogers.
I just kidding. It's very inspiring but I just feel like I've been so I mean I didn't mean to harp on the police. The police um topic so much but it was something I found very meaningful still today. It's an important topic and yeah, definitely still I wanted more uplifting to yeah. Yeah, that's good.
I emotions follow facial, um, you know cues or positioning but at the same time how relevant is that to Blink or the overall message of the black thrown these interesting tidbits, but it's like does it connect to the larger thing? Well the facial the facial. Movements section was having been I think led to the autism one which helped explain that police or people in stressful situations become face blind.
And so they can't read he was basically saying you like in stressful situations, you can't always rely on yourself to be able to read other people because yours just in tunnel vision, so to speak or something like that, but. His words were I think police officers become temporarily autistic.
He literally said that which first of all, insensitive, but also it just sort of that's him as a journalist making some overarching scientific assumption. Oh he was yeah, he's a journalist. He's allowed to be a little expressive with his language Tim. Is that a crime?
No, I don't know. All right, should we do rating? You have any more quotes? I think I'm all quoted out. I think I think I think we do get I think we touched on pretty much every section. Yeah, I think I covered what on that was good. So what do you want to read it? Well, it was my pick. I picked this book.
I'm glad I picked it. I wanted to read Malcolm Gladwell and I’m glad I did now but yes a lot of interesting stories, but to me, it's still three out of five. I just. That's you know, I I think he's a good writer. It's just I think maybe some of his other books. I might like better. We'll see.
Outliers, David and Goliath. I think I think I think David and Goliath would be one that I think I would like I haven't read anything else, but I mean probably won't all right. I'm torn between two and three. Yeah, you wanna cop out? You can cop out if you want like.
Um, you said no half I did say no, but that's just more of a personal Maxim than it is. Well, that's so you don't choose 3 and 1/2 so you don't choose 7 4 6 and 8, but I feel like with two and three it's like it's a big difference. Yeah, so like five out of ten is still a rating 7 out of 10 is a cop-out.
I mean I see so I know through and half Stark is the new rule. I just I I really overthinking this I just blink and just use my gut reaction. Yeah, Tim did you learn nothing from the book? Pretty much. What did you learn? Oh, man. I I'll just say I'll give him credit for bringing these topics to the mainstream pop culture.
I had a lot of critiques but at least he's getting some ideas out there. Yeah, but still, all right, let's find him. Uh, what are we next time? We are reading a book called the Moviegoer by Walter. I think um Walker Percy is a walker. It might be. I don't know. It's it's a book that I feel like has flown under the radar for a lot of people me included.
I just saw it on someone's like recommended reading list and it sounded really interesting and we both like movies a lot and its set in like New Orleans. Um, so I should be a good book. Okay? Yeah, and yeah, I'm looking forward to reading it because our class what do we like really last? Oh, we are last couple of not been fiction.
This is going to be a fiction, right? So yeah, it's gonna be nice to change it up and then uh, yeah go to our website. Two guys one book dot com and you can read the books with us leave comments and we'll discuss them. Yes, absolutely. Thanks for listening. All two of you. All right, is that good? Yeah, okay.
Blink by Malcolm Gladwell
Blink by Malcolm Gladwell
Transcript below:
Hello again. Welcome to Two guys one book. I'm Brian. I'm Tim. And today we are talkin about Blink by Malcolm Gladwell or blink the power of thinking without thinking. This is a book I picked. I selected this book because I've always wanted to uh, read a book by Malcolm Gladwell. I have never read one of his books, but I am a fan of his podcast Revisionist History.
I enjoy hearing the stories he tells through that and wanted uh, see what his books were about and I think Tim was going into this with a heavy dose of skepticism about this book, but essentially I'll give you overview. essentially, this is a book about human beings our ability to process things within our subconscious to make determinations or decisions without us really even realizing that we've made up our mind already or And the determination I don't think okay. Whatever. Sorry no its fine. Like all right. So how would you describe this? All right, so I uh, I tried preparing for this.
I think more than you did. Um, I have laid out, he put three tasks like in the first chapter the first task is to convince you that decisions made quickly can be every bit as good as decisions made cautiously and deliberately and then the second task of blink when our powers of Rapid cognition go in disarray they do so for a specific and consistent set of reasons and those can be identified and understood and the final task is to convince you that our snap judgments and first impressions can be educated and controlled.
I couldn't have said it better myself. All right, right, so going into this. Did it it was it exactly what you thought it was like, what was your first what was going into this? What was your mindset? Like this is bull crap. He's just twisting the facts and stories to suit The Narrative that he wants. so going into this I sort of pictured Malcolm Gladwell as a pop scientist or pseudoscientist with these kind of mainstream books that aren't necessarily contributing a lot of like depth or great research and I sort of still think that. There were parts I liked the book definitely but on the whole I still wasn't very impressed. And I know I came in with some prejudgments, but I'll explain in depth as we go along why I think the way I do. What do you think that the book?
Oh, I liked it. like I said, I'm a fan of his podcast so. It was very interesting to see how he writes very much like he talks and I and I appreciate that because like I think we have a sense that books are like they can take time to craft their words and their then their structures of their sentences and what they want to say.
And get it very precise and I think maybe I think he probably does that for the podcast as well as he knows what he wants to say and how to deliver it. And so I guess it's just it's similar process that he has for book and podcasts so they sound very similar and I appreciate that but he does it in a way that I think makes it sound natural and organic and he does a lot of research.
I mean like, all right. All right. Research being a relative term because he's not the one in a laboratory, performing experiments. He reads about scientists and people doing experiments and then he goes and talks to them and tries to explain to us what these mean and what could this, you know, uh, tell us about human beings.
Right. He's a good writer. I appreciate his style. I think he does have a way with words that is effective and well done. But as far as the research my biggest gripe with him is that he's uh a writer right by background and it's like he's masquerading as a social scientist or a psychologist and drawing these conclusions and sort of cherry-picking the studies.
Across different domains and trying to weave them together and connect them to suit his narrative which some of that might work some of it might be accurate, but I was just skeptical of the whole thing. I knew you were. Yeah, not everything but a fair amount so okay.
Um, no, I mean. I was not skeptical I was not I did not have any negative. You believe everything in this book? No, I mean no like but I feel like I don't think there's a that that's a bad thing. If you do believe everything in this book, but that's just it I mean,
he's collecting experiments and research done by others in a manner to help try to explain how human beings make decisions. And these are the ones he chose to group together. So I I guess I can see your point about how he is. He could be seen as cherry-picking but I feel like he is selecting ones that he truly believes relate to each other and compliment each other's research and anecdotes to explain how human beings think.
And we can give specific examples of my studies. But I think my biggest problem with these is that a lot of them are just sort of isolated studies with small sample sizes that haven't been repeated. So to just, you know, take one here and one there.
It feels like you could find just about any study to justify any point of view. That's what I felt was not scientific about this. Sure but I think like that that's how the research gets started. Like they don't have I mean they do that they do enough. They have enough of a sample size to come up with a hypothesis of why the results they're getting or whatever but you know sure they might some things might need further exploration, but I also feel like these are published results in.
I would assume to be reputable, uh Publications that Malcolm Gladwell is finding these through so that I mean any of us, uh section of notes in the back at the book. I'm not saying they're not credible. I just think um, he studied if there are some one else could write a book and pick all the opposite ones, studies of that Malcolm Gladwell chose and come up with a completely different narrative. It's called a wink. It was stupid. Yeah, how long were you waiting for that one, but you could make the opposite but because he does just take one study to like justify one point of view. Yeah. I mean, yes, I did feel like it did get into the weeds a little bit about.
All these names of all these different people doing all these different studies, but I felt like he did a good job of referencing them later. Like he didn't just say the person's name like so and so believe this he said so and so who did this study that you remember from three chapters before also said this.
So one note about that. That's another thing that sort of bothered me because I know I'm coming off as pinky he threw so many stories in to hear that. I think his message would have been better if he just focused on the ones that were that could have been the most important and then when he tries to reference ones from earlier he’ll reference one from the first chapter in the last chapter and it's like it's hard to just place every detail.
So sure. I mean I can. Yeah, empathize with you there that uh, sometimes he starts talkin about. what was one? he started he was talkin about Paul Van Ripper and the Millennium challenge but then he goes then talks about improv.
So I mean kind of like, you know, I wanted to know more details about the Millennium challenge I guess but. Uh, he that wasn't the point the point was, focusing on how he managed his team during the Millennium challenge. It jumps around a bit with a little disoriented right? Sorry didn't disorienting but uh to his credit he is a good Storyteller and I think he's good at um, setting the stage and introducing the characters and his language of describing them, but.
Why don't we just go through a few examples of studies? We liked and didn't like okay, I might yeah drill down I mean. So is that what your that was your focus is like you were some of the studies you liked and some that you didn't is it was at the thing like your least favorite part was a certain study and your favorite part was another study or was it kind of like just the way he intertwined things or it's a combination?
There were studies I like and ones I didn't like and then I do have kind of issues with the overall approach they took but I think it might help if we just dive down and studies and then sure piece it. Oh, that's fine. So like what's one you liked or didn't like and why? Oh, I like the Pepsi challenge.
Really that was my least favorite. Why is it felt like oh simple and like corporate branding like, you know, It's just like But like everyone remembers the Pepsi challenge. I well I mean the idea of okay. Okay, you might be a little young a big part of my life. I think it was like yeah 80's 90's or whatever.
But anyway, I like that because I mean it kind of well, I like it for reasons that aren't even really what this book is about. It's just about personal preference and how. Taking a little sip. Well, I guess that's kind of what this book is about a small it is your beef too. If you take a small sample size of Pepsi people like Pepsi better than Coke, but if you're going to drink a whole can of it or buy a case of it to take home have in your fridge.
You're not always going to like the sweeter, Pepsi over the the coke, right? Yeah, well, it's like you were saying initially this story about a little bit out of place with the other ones because a lot of them were more social scientists oriented and then this was more like business.
Yeah, but this one was in the chapter about that musician and I think that whole chapter was about what do people like what do consumers like right and the same reason like all the music executives thought this musician Kenna was very good, but he didn't rate well with the public and so how can we trust what the public thinks they like like if the public thinks you we you know, there's marketing teams out there all across the country for on multiple in multiple branches of consumerism that pole consumers to see what they like and don't like but when asked directly do they even really know what they like and don't like.
Because then he went on after the Pepsi challenge thing. He went on about margarine versus butter how margarine had to be yellow because people were used to spreading yellow things on toast. And so margin was initially white and they had to change it to yellow and then it would could sell better. The Brandi I think was another one.
Well one Brandy company was clearly in the taste test better than the other but when he put their bottle side by side, The other one was doing better because I had a fancier bottle look more like a brandy bottle than the better tasting Brandy. So like it wasn't a true reflection of what the book is about thinking instantaneously.
But it's just about like do we even really know what we like and don't like when given the chance to rate something. Yeah, I can understand his issue with market research and how they try to come up with a simple opinion of a product to give a story about it, but it's not always that easy to break down or whatever but like in other parts of the book he touches on like social justice and health care in these pretty heavy topics and I think it undermines it a bit to just go into like this consumer world.
That's a little dry sure. Yeah, I mean I could make the argument that he used, rounding it off, in multiple Fields. So it's not all just Healthcare and and social sciences. It's also marketing and PR and stuff like that. I can understand that. To me, It felt a little scattered sure and.
But as far as what you mentioned about Kenna the musician, I have a rant about that go go. So did you have you heard of before I looked up? No, I haven't I have I have any other. Yeah, I looked up some of his music. Okay did not like it. Um, like you said, he in the book Malcolm Gladwell said Kenna, uh was really liked by these music Executives, but the General Public couldn't get into him maybe because he wasn't easily assigned to certain categories. Like was he hip-hop or jazz or R&B or whatever and um, so he's saying like, Oh, even like Fred Durst from Limp Bizkit said he was the top music. I'm like what the hell does Fred Durst know? Like, why would he even put that in your book?
It doesn't so it was really strange and I looked up his music and like yeah, he's just like not I don't think he's good. And he does have a following like they were musicians who don't get publicity who end up getting huge especially with the internet these days and this was written in like early 2000s.
So it didn't take into account like people going viral or whatever. So I felt like that whole chapter that whole section pretty silly so so okay. So did it miss did it completely miss the mark for you because it was written 15 years ago and missed out and it didn't factor in to how people can be famous on the internet because in early 2000s you didn’t even know.
Well, it's like how you were saying. He says this guy Kenna didn't become popular because you know people can. Find a way to categorize them and it's like no he didn't become popular because he just sucks and his music sucks. I mean shouldn't play music. Sorry Kenna. He like donates all these nonprofits and stuff.
So I think it's a good person. But I did I did YouTube one of uh song of his. You can like it was that one that was added in like what do we know? We're not Fred Durst. All right, I mean, all right. So that was just one. I don't know. I I can't say I had a favorite study or or anecdote he talked about.
I mean, I don't know or at least favorite. Did you have one that specifically stood up the Pepsi challenge was your least favorite for real? Yeah. Okay. Well Kenna probably yeah. Okay, Kenna that whole chapter. What was your favorite then? I really like towards the end the one about blind auditions for um, like symphony orchestras.
So it used to be that very few women if any would get in. Um, Get into an orchestra because the judges were all like men and the conductors and they would come out and play the instrument and even if they sounded better than a male musician, uh, the inherent biases wouldn't let them get um into the show.
So they started doing blind auditions just like behind a screen. Made me think of that reality show The Voice or whatever that music show like American Idol, but their backs are turned which is pretty gimmicky. But like it's a good idea because then you're not judging them. I watched the whole season of The Voice and I liked it. I’m judging you now, their chairs turn around.
Yeah, I mean Adam Levine and Blake Shelton the dynamic they have their makes the show. I mean and then later they can steal people and I mean, it's it is much more involved. And I do like the fact that it is a blind audition. Yeah. Yeah, and I like that part of the book too. Yeah, so I thought that's a good like it connects to his message the thing in general about his message though as he starts off.
Like I'm going to show you why quick, uh judgments are good and we should trust our like quick instincts and then he gives all these examples about why we shouldn't well, I mean the evidence was against that I feel like that. I don't think he explicitly said that we should always trust our gut initial instinct when we. But it's like the first story is about the statues that experts can tell are fakes instantly and he's kind of leads into the book and it's called blink.
Like it's supposed to be like blink of an eye like yeah have you should trust your hunch more something right? And I think that's that's what he's getting at is yes, trust your hunch more but in that same vein your hunch through social being socialized may be biased like those conductors in the orchestra.
Their initial hunch was to be biased against women. So trust your hunch, but also, analyze your hunch and make sure it's not misappropriated against a certain people or certain things because you have that other bias but it wasn't that clear cut to me when to trust when they analyzed.
Yeah, because I don't think there is a definitive answer. Hold on. I highlighted something about okay. so he says when should we trust our instincts and wind should we consciously think things through on straightforward choices deliberate analysis is best when questions of analysis and personal choice start to get complicated when we have to juggle many different variables than our unconscious thought processes might be superior.
Now. That's very general. It is like straightforward. All right. What is that? And then? You know questions of analysis and personal choice, like that's everything. I just feel like his language is so broad and then he tries. And in general you just tries to be more profound than he is where it's like okay trust your hunch, but sometimes don't oh really profound Malcolm like changing the world here it’s pop science and pseudoscience Brian. but counter that how that I tried reading like, Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman, which is like, A lot of research more research oriented and that one like some I think it would know about Prize or something.
Like he did he won a Nobel Prize for he’s an economist. Yeah, like Behavioral economics or yes, right and and he references him in the book to Malcolm Gladwell references Daniel Kahneman. But what I'm trying to say, this book was more well-written than that. It's more story to story oriented. That one's a little dry.
It's more dry and kind of harder to get through. Okay, so I will say he's a good writer. I just don't necessarily like his approach. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Um another one I light was the wedding the marriage expert who could who could watch. Just two couples talking about their relationship and predict like 90 percent certainty whether or not to be married 10 years later or something like that.
I like that study as well, but I'll also say he didn't elaborate on a lot of the statistics like how many people that he analyzed the get that 90% metric or like, you know what I mean? Sure but like so you want the more nuts and bolts you want to know the details of. Why is Malcolm Gladwell trusting this study? But we just want to accept it at face value, right?
But I mean, I feel like you could always go and find more about it. Yeah, and I think I think what you said comparing this book to Thinking Fast and Slow brings up a good point is that Malcolm Gladwell is a journalist and he's a writer. David Kahneman or Kahneman Daniel Kahneman, Daniel Kahneman. Is an economist or behavioral Economist by trade and I think that's where you see the different styles of the books. And he is a Storyteller so he is not going to get bogged down with all those details in the study, you know, and I don't I personally don't need them to I'm I'm fine accepting the fact that this marriage expert could predict with ninety percent certainty other couples would be married or divorced later. Yeah. I'm just wary of him extrapolating from one small isolated study a big conclusion to apply the like, you know, everything that's all but go into the marriage study more because I like I did like that one, right? Oh, yeah, I and they had um these different emotions like they each second of the video they like.
Graded the man and the woman with a specific emotion and like they had them ranked or they just had a numbered 1 through 20. So for shorthand that people could just write down numbers for each second with like, you know, he'll he was Defensive with then he with a slight contempt, but then he then he shielded it by deflecting or something like that, and I found that very interesting and how I think they boiled it down to what they call the four horsemen.
So for this marriage, um, the 20 different emotions that go on in these interactions the boiled it down to the what they call the four horsemen defensiveness, stonewalling, criticism, and contempt. And in fact, there was one emotion that he considers most important of all and that is contempt.
So if one of those existed in the relationship Dynamic it was very likely to I think I think it was that it was that contempt persisted. Not just the existence of contempt like it persisted throughout I think. But your saying if if there was one of those four or a combination of those four, it was a likely to work out.
Yes, correct. Yes and condemned was the worst. Yes, and it makes sense someone in a relationship. It's probably going well. And they said another thing that I found interesting was, for interactions they need to have a five-to-one positive the negative ratio. Which I found was kind of heavy in the positive.
But I guess that makes sense, because you want continuous positive feedback when you're communicating with somebody or living with somebody or married to somebody so that you know, you maintain the comfort of knowing you're on good terms and things are going well. It's an interesting study.
I just wish it were replicated more and uh more transparent. So you want this book to be basically twice as long. No, I don't need like study study study, but I just want like not this one guy and his little lab out here. I'm just supposed to believe that this is the case. Well, I'm guessing that's what he was trying to get at. Malcolm Gladwell wasn't taking multiple studies with marriage counselors and reviewing them.
He was taking one study of one marriage counselor and one study of a tennis coach who could predict when people are going to double fault and the story of those art experts that knew the statue was a fake the moment they saw it. He’s just laying out these examples in different fields by different people that show that their gut reaction is genuinely the right one, but then he also shows, With the brand study and then the Warren Harding effect.
I'm basically saying my point is that instead of focusing on the very specific topics. He is taking multiple topics from various fields.
And trying to thread a common theme and I think you're saying is that you just don't buy it that all these different topics have that same thing. I'm just skeptical. I mean, maybe he's stretching at times but some of the I'm just skeptical of taking the study and then extrapolated and cherry-picking but also a lot of these studies it's kind of common sense like, you know an expert in tennis might have a hunch about when someone might double fault or an expert in marriage counseling might be able to tell the signs of like, you know, so like that's not entirely as profound as I thought he made it out to be.
Yes, that's true. But I think yeah, but doesn't I think at one point doesn't he go through the marriage videos and when he knows what to look for like that's his thing is like if people are coached they can know what to look for and I think.
I mean another part I want to talk about is is the police chapter. Well, let's talk about Warren Harding. Oh you want to talk about Warren Harding first? I did like that. You have some more. Well Warren Harding error is basically people thought he looked like a good presidential person because he was like handsome and kind of tough looking or something and so he became a politician eventually became president and he was like a terrible president.
So that effect just applies to a whole bunch of different things where it's like in business like. Tall people get promoted more become CEOs and things like that. And yeah, like I think that's worth noting and it's something to um to discuss. Yeah, but so yeah, I found that interesting to this CEOs are like 6 foot average height when the average height of a male's like five nine or something like that.
So that doesn't that doesn't have any weight in you're like you're like, oh well. There's not enough studies of about CEO’s height to determined that. I just said it. Okay. All right identify this story. That's enough data. Okay for me. Okay, there's a pattern here. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, but we can talk about the police.
I mean, yeah, I like the war in hard. I think he's from Ohio did yeah. Yeah, proud of that. I know I don't think so um, But yeah, um, so the police story basically someone uh gets shot because these policemen acted quickly and they thought he was a criminal and he was just like pulling out his wallet and he was uh, just sort of scared of them because it was two guys have undercover cops like approaching him and they thought he was being suspicious and in a panic shot him.
Right, right. Yeah. That was I mean I like the part of the book and I think I have several quotes from that section. I think I'll bring up what when we do our favorite quotes, but it just was you said this book was written early 2000s, but it's still resident that part still resonates very much today.
And I think that was where he was so Malcolm Gladwell in the first part of the book was talkin about these experts in statues and tennis and marriage counseling. To point out that these experts can tell in a blink of an eye that whether you know, something is good or bad and when it comes to police officers and in situations, I think he he addressed that by I felt like his tangents in that chapter were very relative because he went on to talk about autism after he brought up the cops story and how people with autism do not pick up on facial expressions and cannot judge a person's feelings based on their physical appearance. And then he related that to first-hand accounts of police officers and stressful situations and how they just become face-blind. I think is the way said and so I found that fascinating especially the autism thing about because he said the highly functioning person with autistic Behavior.
Was watching a movie a very dramatic movie who was Afraid of Virginia Woolf and then like during emotional moments. He was off watching a light switch or something else on the screen and as a person who doesn't know about much about autism. I thought that was very interesting. Then also then leading into the first hand accounts of the police officers and how they kind of go face blind and then how officers he also had a little bit about.
When they do when I forget what Police Department it was but they were they were following they were tracking the police officers like how they interacted with people and how they followed their training and most of the time they were good but then like leading up to a highly stressful situation, they would be bad.
And so that would put them in the position to have to react quickly and possibly make wrong decisions. And then he particular points out to uh police officer that says like he the police officers were, you know recounts his encounter with a 14 year old who is pulling out a gun from his pants, but he the police officer could tell by the 14 year olds facial expressions and by language that he could have he could take another second.
He doesn't have to shoot him. He doesn't have to shoot him. And then eventually the guy put the gun down. So I that chapter to me was very, I guess you could say it was powerful because it still was resonate today and how you know, we're so quick both sides the people who the people who support police officers no matter what and the people who side with the victim no matter what.
Um, they are always quick too, Uh accusations on the other side, whereas this book really highlights the fact that in those split seconds, it's what's going through your mind. So is so fast and the events passed by so quickly that you just react and it doesn't really mean that you're a bad person either side, you know. I agree, but I also think it's not defending those officers because.
Right. I'm not saying you're saying that no, but the thing is he also mentioned that they did things that were wrong. Like they shouldn't have gone out and approached. This guy who was just hanging out on his doorstep, because what he noticed or what he uh wrote was that they didn't put themselves in his shoes like his perspective, right like just because he's panicking doesn't mean he's guilty of something.
He's just nervous about these people, chasing him or something. So, That's what I thought was interesting. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. I I didn't mean to say that I defend either side the cops in that main story about about what seven seconds in the Bronx. They definitely messed up.
Yeah, but just because they mess up it's so unfortunate that when police officers mess up that people get seriously hurt or potentially die because they're human, you know, everybody is human and we all make mistakes and and. And just because you make such a grave mistake. That's why I am never going to be ever thought about being a police officer, and you know doesn't mean that that they're racist but at the same time, some people need to recognize the fact that there are implicit bias, you know in everybody and just because you have it and I think that's the downside is that.
Sometimes people when they worry about having an implicit bias, they don't want to acknowledge it because acknowledging that means oh you secretly hate certain type of people. They're not even saying that you hate people. It's just our world around us were surrounded by, these views of a male a white male, you know.
We're surrounded by these white male Christian views of the world that can't help but affect how we view the world around us and just because you have implicit bias does not make you a bad person, but I think you need to acknowledge that still. Yeah. I mean, yeah, he's trying to get at that.
We all have subconscious biases whether we realize it or not and that's kind of going back to the blind audition example of Symphonies where even though a conductor might not be biased against women like consciously that just because maybe he's only played with male musicians or thinks of men has better musicians or playing like certain instruments like the French horn that he thinks they're better so. And connecting that to like the social element to um, he talked about how we should have blind uh courtrooms and at the same as blind auditions, which I think is really smart. Actually, I like that idea a lot because it's about removing those biases like a jury would have looking at the um perpetrator victim or whoever and then basing their sentence on that or their verdict guilty or not guilty.
So instead of seeing the victim, they should or the perpetrator they should be separated and should be blind because then you're not, you know, it's not being based on like Race or class or whatever right? I found that so fascinating and like that's like the very end of the book like in the afterward.
Yeah, and you're absolutely right. I think that's the way things should be done because there is a disproportionate amount of minorities in the prison system, uh in relation to their you know ratio of the population. Why that is, I mean, I think you're absolutely right they just. Remove the perpetrator from the courtroom and like he said they communicate through email or through uh, uh intermediary and handle things at way and remove the name or just remove any indication of their race or class because class has a big thing to do with it to or whatever so that the decision can be made completely impartially.
I agree. Because he says justice should be blind so. And it seems really easy like what it's just like a social thing holding us back from changing are like tradition or whatever. I think I think it's heavily steeped in Tradition because like isn't the isn't in the Constitution like you have a right to a fair trial trial like a jury of your peers.
Yeah. They're like face. Yeah, right. I don't know. I just I I think I think that I mean you talk, I mean that's ingrained in the Constitution or the way the country was founded so. I think that is definitely part of it. That's why it's been such a part of our culture for 250 years. We can update it. I think it'd be fair.
Oh, I completely agree. But like come on. I mean in the state of the data management. Yeah, but are we ever gonna have another amendment to the Constitution because because there's just not to be an amendment to the Constitution never right? But but you're touching on a little bigger point though, like will there be another amendment to the Constitution?
I don't think there will be because. No government wants to admit, no Congress is willing to admit that the constitution needs changing when that's the whole point of the Constitution. There’s like 30-27. I think right but still when was the last one was it I forget I don't even know. This is not a civics or government.
Yeah, let's go back to the but. Yeah that that afterward about the Blind Justice should be blind was that was my favorite idea from the book and I think he had a great point. Yeah, um so new quotes or yeah, we can I'm good to go to quotes now. I guess one thing I'll start out as saying is maybe not a direct quote.
But he mentioned that his style is kind of like an intellectual adventure story, which I think is a good way to capture it this genre so I thought that was a good way to describe it.
Well, I mean this was in the I think first chapter about the marriage counseling but then he says he talks about thin slicing is as terminology for basically taking a very thin little sample size. And trusting that that represents the larger picture, I guess this is your biggest. This is the whole beef you have with this book.
Is that all he all Malcolm Gladwell is doing is thin slicing and saying that with our hunches we can trust our hunch a lot of times and so he says: thin slicing is part of what makes the unconscious so dazzling, but it's also what we find most problematic about rapid cognition. How was it possible to gather the necessary information for a sophisticated judgment in such a short time? The answer is that when our unconscious engages in thin slicing. What we are doing is an automated accelerated unconscious version of what Gottman the marriage counselor guy does with his video tapes and equations can really be understood in one setting. Yes it can and so can lots of other seemingly complex situations.
Yeah, but it's just what okay, you know what in the marriage chapter the yeah-but was it was one of their little passive-aggressive things that people do did you catch that because yeah because. You act like you're agreeing but you're really disagreeing. It’s a good thing we're not married or not married to his book. What bothers me is his definitive tone because he'll say like that's what allowed Gottman to understand marriage in x amount of seconds.
It's like he just he sounds so sure about it when I'm saying. Oh, no, Tim. I completely agree. Your gripes have validation, but you just grab about everything. I'm just gonna I praised the book a lot of ways. It just bothers me when anybody's too confident. Yes. I know like any kind. It's just because you're so insecure about everything you just. I'm saying that he could have more humility in his approach.
He's not even a scientist. He's a journalist. The world needs more scientists. Oh god. so this quote is actually him quoting Freud, but I think it explains his thesis better than he did. Oh, you're using the Freud quote at the end towards the end. Yeah. Yeah. I like that one. Go ahead. Uh
When making a decision of minor importance, I've always found it advantageous to consider all the pros and cons in vital matters however, such as the choice of a mate or a profession. The decision should come from the unconscious from somewhere within ourselves in the important decisions of personal life. We should be governed I think by the Deep inner needs of our nature.
So yeah, I mean basically it just boils down to trust again.
Yeah. We've all heard that advice right he um, you know verbalizes it well or articulate it. Well, yeah. Yes he does
here's a good one. I think this is about there was these two ladies he had lunch with that work food critics or food, professional food tasters or whatever and he was so he was like, where do you go for lunch with people who are you know, their job is to taste food, and he when he talked about the lunch which sounded great but here was another quote I liked
Our unconscious reactions come out of a locked room and we can't look inside that room. But with experience we become expert at using our behavior and our training to interpret and decode what lies behind our snap judgments and first impressions. It's a lot like what people do when they are in psychoanalysis. They spend years analyzing their unconscious with the help of a trained therapist until they begin to get a sense of how their mind works.
I think that might be my favorite quote of the book. That and the Freud quote Yeah, because yeah because that's what he's getting at is that these instantaneous thoughts these of thin slicing a small sample and we come up with a conclusion do we know that that conclusion is definitive?
No, but a lot of times our gut is you know, what our mind processes in nanoseconds that we would process over. I think he has another quote here that just because we are taught that you know decisions made with a more information take more time to come up with a definitive answer are more thorough than snap decisions.
But this is saying that our unconscious can make these. Decisions so fast for us. There's like inside a locked room. So we have to take the time to analyze why we think that so fast and is that right? and then finally here for people who do spend time in psychoanalysis.
They spend the years learning about themselves and their brain and like this is where Do you trust your gut or maybe you have an implicit bias and maybe you don't have to adjust for things where you don't want to jump to conclusions because you may be wrong and this is where I think that determining when to trust your gut and when not to comes in like he's saying just be aware.
But do you think in general in this day and age to trust your gut is good advice with how quickly people are getting like angry and how heated intense the atmosphere is. The whole point of thinking fast and slow a lot of those studies are basically showing how people are bad at judging statistics and have all these biases that cause them to make assumptions that are very inaccurate.
And so and you see that a lot in the political environment people come up with these crazy, um opinions and ideas. So I think it's almost a little dangerous advice to be like we should trust our gut more. Yes, I agree. Um, It can be dangerous to say trust your gut in these times but I think also that Thinking Fast and Slow I haven't read the book but Behavior economics focuses on mass people the mass Society, right and that mass Society is gonna.
Behave rationally and take the best course for their bottom line or whatever, right? No. No, it's all about how people believe behave exactly. I mean that's that's the whole that's why he won the Nobel Prize though is because all economist's thought that when given time that's why I'm getting that is that's why he won the Nobel prizes because he turned it on a head that said no people don't behave rationally because they believe whatever they believe and then act upon that.
So you're right. I mean, I don't know where I stand on all this but like I'm just trying to say this is what Malcolm Gladwell saying. Yeah, you know at the end of the day, I guess all I'm saying is I wish he made it a little more clear cut about trust your gut in these situations and be more skeptical in these ones.
I know he touched on it, but I think he could have touched more on it. I don't think you can I don't think you can say like an XYZ trust your gut but ABC don't. Because I think everybody's different it's about it's about introspection about who you are and do have the expertise to say like I can't go to the uh, the was that the museum in LA that bought that statue I can't go to that museum.
Look at that statue and say it's a fake because I don't have the expertise and I can acknowledge that I don't. But you know, If you if you spend time to analyze how you process things and learn about yourself. Then maybe you know that yes these things I feel certain about I feel certain that when I go to Chipotle I'm gonna get the same thing.
You know, you're an expert on. Yes, right. I can trust my gut when it comes to Chipotle, right? But, I can't trust my gut when I'm going to look at a statue. I guess one counter-argument though is even with experts in certain areas. A lot of the time they can get sort of um tunnel vision and then not be open to other ideas.
You know what I'm getting. Sure sure. I mean that's what the museum kind of got into trouble with is that they had all the scientific stuff. They sampled the marble and it had aging on the surface or whatever, they did the scientific stuff. Right that was ton of one thing in all these experts are saying another okay.
I can think of a good case study. I think that illustrates this point so remember the healthcare one, um chest pains. Yes. So basically, um in when patients would go in for chest pains a lot of the time it wouldn't get diagnosed as at risk for a heart attack. So this one Hospital started focusing just don't like three or four just a handful of like main factors and it turns out that those are the most important factors.
So they were better at accurately diagnosing potential heart attacks, which makes sense. But then he sort of says you don't need any of this other information. It's not useful just focus on this set of information, but to me, it felt like a false dichotomy where it's not like more information is bad.
It's just that this is. This should be weighted more like these three factors and then it saves the doctor. It frees them up their decision-making ability to focus more on the patient and like connect with them. So it makes sense in a way but I don't think more information is inherently bad just because some information is more important. But I think I think people fall victim to information overload though.
And so I there's a quote here about the heart stuff the heart attack, warning signs stories in the same chapter is the Millennium challenge with the military and so his whole point in that chapter was that more information is not always better that The Blue Team the good guys were taking time to have all these meetings and discuss and analyze all this data where the red team Paul Van Ripper was letting guys go out and shoot from the hip and just trust their gut and then he talked about the heart attack, checklist there as well. And he says, extra information is more than useless.
It's harmful. It confuses the issues what screws up doctors when they are trying to predict heart attacks is that they take too much information into account. And you think that is BS. Right? Okay. Let me let me quickly expand in my point. So I agree information overload is an issue and that more information isn't necessarily always better.
But for him to say more information is harmful just as a statement is just sort of absurd because like that doesn't make sense. It's just about how you interpret the information and how well it informs your decisions and how you're acting upon it right but. But that heart checklist thing was vital because it gave doctors specific things to look for and so they could disregard the noise, if they had other things pop up that they you know, all they knew that it was those four things to admit the person in the hospital and that is valuable. Yeah, but okay, let me give you this perspective. I agree but. Yeah, but um, so if you had an algorithm predicting, uh someone at risk for a heart attack, so you're just going to ignore this information and never think to include any of these finer details when to unbeknownst to us.
There are things that contribute to a heart attack that we have no idea of and for us to neglect that and say nothing else is important. I feel like we might be missing out on stuff that could help inform our um prediction. Okay, you're looking at a purely from a data point of view, right? I mean, yeah kind of and I guess I guess his whole point is the fact that doctors are smart people.
They know they they take in all that information and they try to analyze build a picture when really all they need really need to do is worry about those four things because. I mean like and he also says it's not to belittle what doctors do it's because like we don't know what to listen for when we are listening to somebody's lungs that are filling with liquid because their heart is failing or whatever, you know, yeah, we don't know how to do that doctors have the training to do that.
It's just they have to it's just pointing out the important things that supersede all the other data. I found it interesting how it was hard to get a lot of doctors on board with this approach because everyone's kind of got their ego or Pride to deal and they say it can't be this simple as these three things.
I have to come up with a conclusion like on my own which is not to say every doctor is like that but like, um, in any job or role you want people want to feel kind of autonomous and. oh, yeah, like they're independently coming up with some and if and another point is like if doctors are making the decision and signing off on it.
They want to make sure that there are certain in their mind. So it just I think it also took a while for them just to trust that. Oh, these are the only things that you need to worry about because like you said they wanted to take in all that data. Yeah. Yeah. My only they now take away point is just let's not neglect more information to the Future.
That could be like, you know what I mean? I know what you mean. You have another quote. Um now you go ahead you sure all right now, all right. So this was about this was in the afterward because he was talkin about Chancellorville. We didn't touch on that one yet about this general for the in the Civil War. general for the union had Robert E. Lee basically surrounded and outnumbered but Robert beat him because he was just more confident and I don't yes more experience and could just outwit the union general. but so this is where he talks about the second lesson in blink, but I feel like this can. I'll read it
Understanding the true nature of instinctive decision-making requires us to be forgiving of those people trapped in circumstances where good judgment is imperiled.
And that I instantly think of the police the story because we have no idea what it's like to be in that situation. Now granted, they put themselves in a bad situation and nowadays they're having more training and things to go along with that. But yeah, we just gotta be empathetic and forgiving and realize that just because someone has implicit bias doesn't make him a bad person and people need to be more accepting of themselves if they have implicit bias. Because if they acknowledge it they can get training to improve upon it and I think that would solve a lot of issues. Yeah, and it's not always implicit bias though because if someone is pulling out their wallet and it looks like you see a dark object and it's night time, then you might assume it's a gun when they're just trying to show you their ID or something.
So. Yeah, but I agree that a lot of it is implicit and right right. And it's just about being forgiving to other humans when they make human errors and even if those errors hurt people, unfortunately. One of the things I thought was interesting was that between one officer squad cars and two officers squad cars the one officer one's getting much fewer situation like, um, you know incidents right which I mean it makes sense because like. They probably wouldn't put themselves in those situations as much just out of like their own self-preservation, but also in general they're nicer to people so as a police force, you might think two officers together safer and more they think things over better but one is really more.
Um, easygoing probably wouldn't put themselves at risk for ya something. Yeah. Good point. I'm glad we brought that up because that was a point. I found very much interesting in the book. I think that's worthwhile. Yeah Malcolm. Okay, one more. Uh, I don't think I have a specific quote from this but you mentioned this earlier that autism part and the facial recognition.
I thought that whole section was interesting. And uh, also there were these scientists who studied facial recognition in general and they could tell certain emotions based on the position of your eyebrows or lives. And then I watched some videos of them in like yeah, really?
Yeah, it was really cool because uh because they would have a subject and tell them to like furrow their brow and move like this here and that there and like I like tried it and you start feeling sad instantly depending on how they position your face or like, you know, there's all these subtleties to our motions.
It's not as simple as happy sad whatever it's just you know contempt or like some specific emotion, depending on very certain parts of your face. And then to talk about people with Autism, you know on the other side of where they just can't recognize anything at all that facial blindness.
I thought that was interesting. Yeah. Yeah that whole facial section was very interesting as well. I mean, that's just I I mean, I like this book because it just was had a lot of little interesting tidbits through it. and. What was the I had a thought about the facial one. How when the two guys were studying all the movements the face can make they noticed that when they were during a section when there are making a repeated sad or angry faces they were having lousy days. It just goes to show how you know, we like I think he says in the book. We assume that our feelings dictate, our internal feelings and emotions dictate how we look and act and feel when in fact we can you know manipulate our feelings based on how we look and act and feel and that's what those scientists discovered when they were doing all the sad and and depressing faces they felt sad and depressed. It's just helpful to be reminded that the fake it till you make it mentality of like if you put on a positive if you sis stand up straight and smile and try to be jovial maybe that can help you get through a bad day or you know uplift your spirits when needed. So thanks Mister Rogers.
I just kidding. It's very inspiring but I just feel like I've been so I mean I didn't mean to harp on the police. The police um topic so much but it was something I found very meaningful still today. It's an important topic and yeah, definitely still I wanted more uplifting to yeah. Yeah, that's good.
I emotions follow facial, um, you know cues or positioning but at the same time how relevant is that to Blink or the overall message of the black thrown these interesting tidbits, but it's like does it connect to the larger thing? Well the facial the facial. Movements section was having been I think led to the autism one which helped explain that police or people in stressful situations become face blind.
And so they can't read he was basically saying you like in stressful situations, you can't always rely on yourself to be able to read other people because yours just in tunnel vision, so to speak or something like that, but. His words were I think police officers become temporarily autistic.
He literally said that which first of all, insensitive, but also it just sort of that's him as a journalist making some overarching scientific assumption. Oh he was yeah, he's a journalist. He's allowed to be a little expressive with his language Tim. Is that a crime?
No, I don't know. All right, should we do rating? You have any more quotes? I think I'm all quoted out. I think I think I think we do get I think we touched on pretty much every section. Yeah, I think I covered what on that was good. So what do you want to read it? Well, it was my pick. I picked this book.
I'm glad I picked it. I wanted to read Malcolm Gladwell and I’m glad I did now but yes a lot of interesting stories, but to me, it's still three out of five. I just. That's you know, I I think he's a good writer. It's just I think maybe some of his other books. I might like better. We'll see.
Outliers, David and Goliath. I think I think I think David and Goliath would be one that I think I would like I haven't read anything else, but I mean probably won't all right. I'm torn between two and three. Yeah, you wanna cop out? You can cop out if you want like.
Um, you said no half I did say no, but that's just more of a personal Maxim than it is. Well, that's so you don't choose 3 and 1/2 so you don't choose 7 4 6 and 8, but I feel like with two and three it's like it's a big difference. Yeah, so like five out of ten is still a rating 7 out of 10 is a cop-out.
I mean I see so I know through and half Stark is the new rule. I just I I really overthinking this I just blink and just use my gut reaction. Yeah, Tim did you learn nothing from the book? Pretty much. What did you learn? Oh, man. I I'll just say I'll give him credit for bringing these topics to the mainstream pop culture.
I had a lot of critiques but at least he's getting some ideas out there. Yeah, but still, all right, let's find him. Uh, what are we next time? We are reading a book called the Moviegoer by Walter. I think um Walker Percy is a walker. It might be. I don't know. It's it's a book that I feel like has flown under the radar for a lot of people me included.
I just saw it on someone's like recommended reading list and it sounded really interesting and we both like movies a lot and its set in like New Orleans. Um, so I should be a good book. Okay? Yeah, and yeah, I'm looking forward to reading it because our class what do we like really last? Oh, we are last couple of not been fiction.
This is going to be a fiction, right? So yeah, it's gonna be nice to change it up and then uh, yeah go to our website. Two guys one book dot com and you can read the books with us leave comments and we'll discuss them. Yes, absolutely. Thanks for listening. All two of you. All right, is that good? Yeah, okay.
How to Live by Sarah Bakewell
How to Live by Sarah Bakewell
Okay. Hi, this is Tim and Brian today's book are at this week's book is How to Live by Sarah Bakewell and it's about the philosopher Montaigne or Montaigne going to the audiobook. I think the audiobooks wrong personally because what do they know? Yeah. Correct. This is the School of Life on YouTube calls him montane.
How do you watch the school? Yeah, man. He really prepared for this. Well, I didn't watch it. I didn't watch the video in preparation of the interview. I was discussing the book incidence. I just I was I was going down a rabbit hole of YouTube and I just saw the one book about the book of life for Montagne and I clicked on.
And they said Montagne. I'm like that's good enough for me., so I chose this book to read which I don't know if you're happy about it or not. We'll find out. We'll see, and I chose it because I thought it would be interesting to learn about. I don't know didn't know much about him going into this and, like his work stuff kind of stood the test of time they've been around for a while.
So I wanted to kind of see what all the hype was about Montaigne. So you've heard of this guy before the book, right? I had not. I didn't know that no idea existed like vaguely knew him. Okay,, and I've read like bits and pieces or he's kind of quotable. I think like a little aphorisms like Ben Franklin type stuff.
Oh, yeah, that's definitely. Yeah, so did it live up to your hype - what you hoping? Not entirely. I was a little disappointed. I'll be honest. Oh really? Because yeah, even though he's really well. He's pretty interesting and there were parts of the book. I enjoyed on the whole. I don't think it was tied together that well or like super captivating.
I know it took us longer than usual to read. This is a bit of a slog. I don't know what you think. Yeah, I mean it was it was rough go for me. I mean, it's summertime we have stuff going on. I mean I got I got sidetracked with family reunions and whatnot. So,, yes part of part of the reason was my delay in reading the book.
But, yeah, I liked it. But like I respect the author because it's like a history book. It's not like a biography right, you know and. You know the title I think is a little misleading for sure because it doesn't really like that the table contents looks pretty intriguing, you know, how to live in 20.
What does it say in one question in 20 attempts at an answer. So and the table of contents is 20 chapters and so each one is like, uh little catchy little phrase of how to live like, Survive, love and loss, use little tricks and you know, uh convivial like so the table contents of the chapter setup leads me to believe that like, each one is going to have a little like going to be wrapped up like with Montaigne aphorism. Like you said. Yeah that. Convey that, you know relates to each one each of the chapters, but then she got talking about how Montagne was read centuries later and I'm like and she was name dropping all these people.
I was like, I don't know who all these people are. Like, what do I care? You know, I mean, like I feel like if someone was big fan of Montaigne and had read his essays because that was his main work was his essays. If someone was a fan of his essay, so I think they should read this book. Yeah, right, don't you agree or not?
You should have read some going into this. Well, I mean, I don't know it might have been a different experience a little bit. It could have been it could have been. I thought that she did include more of his writing in the actual book instead of like you said just kind of talking about the historical aspects of it, which it's important to have some like context and stuff for the time.
But like if you're going to just mention the essays again and again, That he wrote, you know, the famous essays then why not include more of them and actually have that direct source. I mean she did a lot, you know, they were at least in the printed version there were, you know, a little paragraphs a little segments of her directly quoting from the essays.
I'm not saying she didn't do it, but she also kind of rambled about historical stuff that wasn't always like all the Kings and the wars of France, right? I mean, yeah, I agree. I mean it definitely ramble and I mean it was interesting at times. Yeah, I say that with upward inflection because I thought it was interesting maybe like but on the whole it didn't I it was interesting but it but it dragged on right way to put it.
Yes, especially towards the end. Yeah. Yeah, and I can understand some extent of the context because like. This was after the reformation and kind of the Renaissance the plague was happening. So all of these things were influencing his life and like the wars between the Catholic and Protestants. So that's part of the reason he developed his sort of like philosophy of just I don't know.
What how would you summarize it? Like living in ordinary life and just living simply, um observing the world around you and trying to like. Put yourself in other people's shoes and perspectives things like that. Yeah. Yeah. I think that wraps it up pretty well. I mean, he was very much a stoic and a skeptic right and then she and I like that part where she talked about his upbringing and his background and what he read and what he found interesting and shaped his worldview and I very much like that because it was a lot of stuff I like too.
I feel like if I was to read the essays, I think I would enjoy them. but I don't I haven't read it one day probably I mean, but I feel like I think I think she does do a good job of giving the like she explains the events that happened in Montaigne's life that led him to kind of view the world this way.
Yeah, and so you're right she didn’t explicitly always, she quoted the essays some but not, you know, not all the time and but I think that's what it was and at the end of the day it is. And but it was more history Laden as well. So I mean it was just it was just kind of rough to read at times.
Yeah, and there were times where I thought she might have been stretching with her assumptions because it's like this guy was 500 years ago. How do you know like what events led up to think in certain ways a lot of that is just sort of guessing on your part. Right? Right. Yeah, I agree. I just wish there were more kind of synthesis of his ideas synthesizing.
Here were the different things that he thought and I combine these into a way that is new and interesting. I don't know how much we would have got versus reading the essays dry clean versus reading this book. Right but I think that's why she kind of goes into the history of things because it sets up the world in which he lives in which he because like if he if we just read the essays that's a sit.
I mean, we don't I we haven't read the essay right? So maybe you know, Maybe there's stuff in there where he kind of rambles on were like, well, what's he talking about? And then maybe she's supplying more context for those right? Because he I mean that's all the essays were. We're just a bunch of his digressions and ramblings,, which.
I'm sure we're very eloquent you know 1500s French guy. Well, it was almost like she couldn't decide if this was going to be biography history book or self-help book because the time, you know, like it comes off like a self-help. Yeah the title and the lead up to 20 ways live your life.
Right? But I wonder if that was almost like an intentional misdirection almost like a meta point because a lot of his essays she described as being., starting out with a certain topic and then not following that kind of progressing and I wonder if she did that intentionally. Maybe I'm reaching there.
She may have or maybe you know people have viewed the essays as such a, you know, a Monumental work that affected them so deeply that she was going off of that, I guess quality of the essays that people found so good is that, you know, it's their reading and it's like their experience.
He's experiencing what they're experiencing even centuries later. And so because people have such a profound relationship with the essays, maybe she's leading that in the how she wants to portray Montaigne's life as well. Yeah. Yeah, well a lot of self-help books probably make to over too many like overarching points or kind of big declarations and his whole life is just like as she describes it saying things like I don't really know what I'm talking about.
But here's what I noticed about this or that so observations and then these kind of disclaimers like but who really knows right? Right. I kind of like it's more humble than the average like philosopher. Oh, absolutely. Absolutely and I and I you know, That's something I think we could I think that's one thing that makes Montaigne.
So, um relatable is that you know, these great philosophers like Socrates and Plato and all of them are like, you know seems so wise. Like I don't I don't you know, I haven't read much Socrates and Plato but like they I mean they don't seem like they they're ones to have doubt right, you know Montaigne is like what have like she's I think she mentioned the specific of the write a paragraph about how he used the world and at the end he said like or maybe not I don't know, you know, like and I kind of dig that, you know, because like Montaigne at the end knows that he's just experiencing the world through his lens and who's he to say that other people view things the same way as he does, right and one thing was him and his cat, he views the world from his cats perspective and I thought was cool. I enjoyed that. They're a big parts of this book talking about his sort of views on animals and.
Talking about like thinking things from an animal's perspective like dogs and cats and there's just really funny because yeah, you don't hear philosophers talk about a bunch. But it's like yeah, maybe certain animals are smarter than us in certain ways and that they can perceive reality differently or something, you know, the kind of mention that, yeah things like that.
Yeah, but yeah, the skepticism really came out and some of the quotes like,, All I know is that I know nothing and I'm not even sure about that. That was a good. I've heard the first part of the quote Socrates, but then the last part,, kind of makes it even better. I think yeah. So yeah, the three philosophies were stoicism skepticism and epicureanism that sort of guided his life right. Stoicism and epicureanism I guess we're similar in some ways that it was like trying not to let your emotions. Take control of you too much and to try and live in the present or big parts of them. I think wasn't there a difference the way they dealt with that find how to live in the present., I think stoics were like always thinking like things could always be worse right and epicureans.
I forget like they were I forget the details more positive. I think in general like she compared stoics to like boxers. Uh epicureanism missed to, like martial arts Zen Masters kind of something like that because Stokes yeah, they would visualize maybe the worst case scenario of something that could happen and try to like Replay that scenario in their minds and prepare for the worst.
So just toughen up and epicureanism were kind of more about. They put a positive spin on things. I guess there's more to it. But yeah, I know that was like, you know in the first third of the book that I read like three weeks ago. So forgive me for not remember those Yeah. Well, yeah, that was definitely I mean, yeah, do you have any favorite like specific chapters or anything? do you know do you remember or definitely the philosophy one? We were just talking about apart stalking about the animals., those are honestly to in my most favorite because I like those philosophies and I like animals besides that I don't know. Do you have a favorite one or like a favorite lesson?
No, it was definitely the philosophy one where yeah where yeah, we go into the details of how Montaigne what Montaigne read to help shaped his worldview, which I found very interesting. but then you know, like as I was slogging through the book this week trying to finish it. The part of the end I really enjoyed was this
Marie De Gurney a oh the yeah, she was the young girl that invited him to their home. When he was in Paris one time and he visited him and she was because she read his original essays and became a super fan and he she became a doctor daughter of Montaigne, right and then after his death, she then edited his last version of the essays and I kind of I found her refreshing because even 1500 France like she you know was.
I'll kind of a feminist right and I and I thought that was kind of cool. I didn't expect to be reading about Montaigne and have a strong female character, you know, because it seemed like his wife and his mother and his daughter. I mean like he didn't really even go into they talked about their with his relationship with his mother and wife's, yeah, but kind of like how they each had their own.
He and his wife had their own Tower and the home. So like how much did they really, get along. I mean they seem they seemed amicable and that he/she very much, took care of his remains after he died as a show of, loving respect. But, yeah, but to read about this, this young girl, then that takes on his work and helps edit it later.
I thought was pretty cool and how she's kind of a Spitfire and wasn't going to adhere to the patriarchy of the 1500s but as best as she could sound like she was like. Had a crush on him or something or that he probably like yet had was attracted to her. But he was just so old she came like right that's what that's what the author kind of alluded to is that like, we're not really sure how Montagne felt about her at first, like maybe he was trying to he would when they're trying to hopefully seduce her and then she wasn't having it and he's like, okay fine.
You'll be my adopted daughter. That's that creepy to go from one to the other. But yeah, yeah, that was cool character. I'm caring person. Well, yeah, and then so she kind of translated an edition of his book, right which she didn't she added as she added. Yeah, but that I mean that raises an interesting point which is like throughout history depending on the era and the person whoever translates or edits an addition will have their own kind of spin to it, right?
So yeah, that's what I mean. That was the whole. Like chapter 17 or 18 in there. It was a whole chapter about how the English seemed to always like Montaigne because they were Protestant country. And so the Montaigne was never band and they had a good translator of Montaigne and, they considered him as English as any other author.
and yeah how it's interesting over centuries how at different times and depending on the translation or editing of the book, people can view it differently and you know, like I guess that was interesting but like I mean the author did extensive work, I give kudos to the author for all the research she did for this book because I mean that was very detailed but like I didn't.
Don't need all the details. I mean that's why I say I reiterate the fact that if I was a fan of Montaigne and the fan of the essays then I find this book more interesting. Yeah, because then it shows the evolution of work that's hundreds of years old and how it can evolve. Yeah, it's funny you mention his wife because.
I remember reading in a small part where and he got this from Socrates originally to marry a difficult wife because then you're testing your kind of ability to deal with adversity. You're living what you're practicing What You Preach? Yeah big very much. Yeah, I think I told my dad that once like Socrates married a really difficult life so that he could like live up to these.
High standards and testing himself and he's like, that's a bad idea. Yeah, probably. Oh man. Yeah. But he wasn't like a super lofty philosopher. He's just kind of like an everyday prison which at the time it probably was more significant because like a lot of people these days right about everyday stuff.
But like at the time you weren't really supposed to write unless you did these Grand things or something. Oh, yeah. So yeah, it was more unique probably. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. I think that was refreshing of during that time as to have somebody who wrote just about everyday life because yeah, it's Got to Be.
Like you said, there's plague going on. There's civil wars in France, you know life is pretty lousy, right? I mean and to have only people write books that talk about these lofty ideals, you know can seem rather over everyone's head. I mean like who cares about that when you're just trying to stay healthy and feed yourself and not get killed.
Yeah,, but, Yeah, but writing about everyday life as Montagne did I think did adhere himself to, The Peasants or normal more everyday people of the time had like a sense of humor throughout. Yeah considering the dark times was but like you talked about the English people being a fan of his which was also interesting and they said maybe even, Shakespeare was like influenced by him, which is pretty cool as well. Yeah, that was cool. And then then like the next paragraph in that chapter. She talks like some guy had this crazy conspiracy where Francis Bacon was originally was actually the author of some Shakespeare plays and Francis Bacon was the author of the essays like at the same time.
Yeah. I mean it was like flimsy stuff like how in Shakespeare's plays. They talked about a lot about mounting mountains Mount which could be mounting montane, which is the French guys. Yeah, right. I mean super-stretch. so, like I mean little things like that. I didn't think we're needed but I guess she had to fill the book.
Yeah, but yeah, it's sort of guessing if he was if Shakespeare really was influenced by him. But you could say like Montaigne thought a lot about from thanks from a lot of people's perspectives and Shakespeare is good at like put it in self in these different characters’ shoes, or at least the works attributed to him.
Yeah, but all these like other popular figures, like Nietzsche grader. Can you chose really influenced me whatever. Yeah Nietzsche whatever and like I think Rousseau or like. Various philosophers, but then there is people there were people like Descartes or Pascal who were like angry about him thinking about the world of a cat's perspective like they were really I know all about it.
Oh man. It makes me so happy to think about these like serious philosophers getting. I know it by this guy thinking about how a cat Lincoln right and you know Montaigne would have thought that was hilarious like that. That's one thing. I do feel like I got a good appreciation of Montaigne from this book.
So I do feel like that. She does a good job of, making me appreciate him right as a thinker and a person. so yeah, Montaigne would have been. Would have been laughing about I'm like, why are you guys thinking so seriously?
Yeah, you don't want to read the essays now. I mean, I feel like I don't know what I would what I get more from the essays now. I mean, I feel like the main parts I kind of get that you get the gist of it, right? Yeah. I feel like reading the essays now would just be slogging through a lot of discourse to find the Nuggets that I find interesting.
Yeah. And maybe this book already has polished the nuggets for me. So I don't have to do all that. It sounds like he used writing as a way just to think through things. Like as he was writing was like a stream of Consciousness style where I don't know how captivating it is to read because he'll just be bouncing back and forth probably.
So, I think one time she says that he goes on length about sneezes. Yeah, right.
but Io think it's fascinating how he was brought up initially because when he after right after he was born he was sent to a peasant family for the mother of the peasant family to be his wet nurse and I learned what I went was it wet nurse is actually is because you know, she would breastfeed him until he was about one.
And then he came back to the house with his mom and dad but they had a tutor there who would teach him Latin. So his first real language was Latin that his dad spoke a little of and his mom hardly none at all. So, like his first six years of his life was basically him talking to his tutor and a little bit of his dad.
I mean and not really I mean that's got to be a crazy way to bring up a kid. Yeah, but I mean. But it seemed to set them up well for Education because he's excelled in school because he knew Latin really well and then he then proceeded to have a successful, um political career after that too. Well what she talked about a lot was his upbringing was like a Montessori type education to where the dad would give him a lot of freedom to kind of do whatever he was interested in right just study his own I think.
So, that's kind of what I took away from it and that kind of plays out and it sold her life as well because he would get kind of bored easily. And if he didn't want to do something he just like wouldn't do it. He kind of came off like as lazy or irresponsible sometimes like the rest of his family would like have to pick up the slack maybe but you know, maybe that helped him as a thinker yeah.
Yeah. What else what else yeah, I guess I just wasn't I wasn't prepared for a full biography and history lesson. Yeah, that's what kind of slow mode and so on my reading down. So, what do you recommend this to people here to be like know what you're getting into?
Yeah, you got to know what you're getting into., thanks a lot, Tim. Picking the right. So like every page at least less depressing. Right? Right. So yeah, I agree. It was less depressing. I mean you had people you'd Civil War and people dying in the plague. And all kinds of nasty stuff and how he dies is terrible like he gets a kidney stone infection and then his throat and then his whole body swells up including his throat and then he slowly suffocates to death.
Yeah, that's pretty bad. But he also I mean, yeah, that's terrible. But like in the early part of the book she talks about how he had a near-death experience like nearly falling off of a horse. So and then he like came back from that and he said it wasn't that bad. Every wasn't a scared. Right, which you wonder I don't know.
I know I know that that kind of kicked him off on this whole philosophical Journey that he and on because he didn't really write before then and, I do like that, you know, she led the book with that right because that was such a Monumental event in his life that that was really the Crux of this whole work really.
And his best friend dying. Yes. Love had that French. Very pretentious way of saying yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I tell you what, there were a lot of French names in here may otter French stuff. Yeah. One slogged through it one more funny thing about him right in the horse. Yeah in general because he was like a pretty short guy.
She said he would ride the horse to look taller. I'm like just he came off like he was always trying to like stuff. It's kind of funny, but it didn't sound like height the height was too much of an issue back then right? I mean, yeah, I mean she was yes shorter than I think the average person but I guess it is what it was what it was it was it was just funny that like, oh man though, but yeah, it does not make me want to have kidney stones man.
Nobody wants to have kidney stones like. Yeah, he was yeah, I and like I think she made a comment that was one criticism of some people like in later years. They were like does he have to talk about his urination so much for like, you know, if you're having kidney stones and you're just writing in your essays of whatever you're thinking about that's going to be on your mind, you know, like I can't imagine having kidney stones and then be like, oh write about, you know, the beautiful weather or something whatever is going on at day and I was like no me.
Freaking penis hurts Jesus. Should I not say that? You can you can he's supposed to be family-friendly? Yeah, but I mean that's just like he writes that way because that's he writes. What's on his mind. Whatever the hell? Yeah. Exactly. And that's the whole point. Yeah. Did you have favorite quotes?
You want to do favorite quotes? Yeah, man. You got one. Yeah, of course. I always a big recruits. This is early on a lot of my quotes. I found were the separate paragraph that she so from quote from the actual essays as I found a lot and this is just one early on about just what Montagne says.
He says if others examined themselves attentively as I do they would find themselves as I do full of inanity and nonsense get rid of it. I cannot without getting rid of myself. We are all steeped in it one as much as another but those who are aware of it are a little better off. Though, I don't know.
I should just end all my sentences.
Although I don't know.
Yeah, okay. So, I can give one about like animals that we were talking about. Sure. Sure., here we go. So, he says we humans persistent thinking of ourselves as separate from all other creatures closer to God's than to chameleons or parrotfish. It never occurs to us to rank ourselves among animals or to put ourselves in their minds.
We barely stopped to wonder whether they have Minds at all. Yet for Montagne it is enough to watch a dog dreaming to see that it must have an inner world just like ours. And he talks about like a dog and dreaming and thinking about running after like a rabbit or so. Yeah. I did like that. I got another one about animals. Should we stick to the animal things? Yeah, go for it.
There is a certain respect and a great duty of humanity that attaches us not only to animals who have life and feeling but even to trees and plants. We owe justice to men and mercy and kindness to other creatures. That may be capable of receiving it there is some relationship between them and us and some mutual obligation.
So you like the hippie stuff. I do like just love nature man. I love hugging those trees.
I also found it interesting how Montaigne would like he was fascinated with like. Well, like how you respond to a mob or something like that, you know because like he was he was robbed a couple times but one time bandits overtook his party and he basically told them that if they take him for ransom, they're not going to get any money and he was blunt with them and then they talked it over and let him go.
and. You know in times when there's thieves and robbers all throughout the countryside. He has his compound completely unlocked. I think there was a quote in there about when you have your place completely unblocked and open for all because he welcome people to his place too.
You give the impression that there's that you've nothing to hide right And then therefore nothing to valuable psychologic. Yeah, right. Like if you like to keep something valuable in your home leave it out in the open because if somebody comes to Rob your house though Overlook that that things sitting on the table because they think your valuables are hidden in a drawer somewhere, right?
Yeah pretty like it comment. Yeah. I don't know. Common sense but it's smart like kind of human. Yeah psychology or understanding how people are right. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I got one. All right. So this is TS Eliot describing Montaigne. Yeah. So he says, of all authors Montaigne is one of the least destructible you could as well dissipate a fog by fleeing hand grenades into it for Montagne is a fog, a gas, a fluid Insidious element.
He does not reason he insinuates charms and influences or if you reasons you must be prepared for his having some other design upon you then to convince you by his argument. So and she kind of goes on to say like he neither argues nor persuades. He just seduces right like he turns the reader without making this kind of Grand overarching Point.
yes, I definitely highlighted a lot in the chapter about his philosophy, and what he read chapter 6 when how to live answer use little tricks. I mean, it's basically saying that the thought that the ability to enjoy life is forwarded by two big weaknesses lack of control over emotions and a tendency to pay too little attention to the present and then in Montaigne goes on to say.
Do not seek to have everything that happens happen as you wish but wish for everything to happen as it actually does happen. And your life will be Serene. That's good. That's kind of the Latin like Amor Fati. Yeah. Oh, yeah, she mentions that several times in the book of Fate. Yeah, and she also said like we're closer. And it's obvious when you think about it, but like we're closer to him and history than he was to the Greeks that crazy. Like it makes sense for like to really contextualize that it's like wow. We are a lot closer to him and history but we both draw from all that.
Yeah, and to think that he lived before like you America was even close to becoming a country, he lived when they were still colonizing the new world. Like, I mean, it's just it's mind-boggling and then I did like the little nugget that I think early in the book. She talks about the Civil Wars in France kind of came at a bad time.
Well, I mean, let me let me rephrase that the Civil Wars in France. Came at a time when exploration was happening in to the new world and colonization was happening. And so France kind of missed the boat literally about colonizing the new world. So we speak English, south of here speaks Spanish and Portuguese and you got French Canadian French Canadian.
Yeah French Canada, that's about it, so a France had their shit together. Maybe we'd be speaking French right now. I said, you know what I'm saying? Like yeah. Yeah, they had a lot of their own internal stuff working through. I mean we allied with them at one point. Oh, yeah, I mean they got their stuff together later.
But like yeah, I just find that interesting that that domestic disturbances in France caused them to miss out on a., uh worldwide political geopolitical, you know movement that was happening. Yeah, but then out of all the turmoil and stuff. They have like the enlightenment where a lot of French thinkers were Enlightenment thinkers, and then they would go on to influence like, you know, like American philosophy sure, like there was some things that came with that but then they still had like the French Revolution and everything right there.
Still dark times ahead. Oh, yeah, so I'm just thinking purely from. Colonization Point yeah, you know, yeah, I'm not saying that France didn't have big impact on Society world, you know society and greater thinking,, you know advancements. Right, but just purely in settlement of geographical regions.
They kind of missed out on because they had their own stuff though. Colonists did a lot of bad things. Yeah. I'm not I'm not they really missed out. Well, it is taking over people's land. I understand what. Oh, oh, yeah, here's something about his leaving the doors unlocked of his place and not not keeping a microscope on his servants and whatnot.
He said yet it seemed to him better to lose money occasionally than to waste time tracking every penny in watching his servants tiniest movements. that's just be like Montaigne had a good outlook on life. It's pretty laid back.
I got another one. Okay, go for it. All right. yeah, this is Montaigne direct Montaigne.
I have seen no more evident monstrosity and miracle in the world than myself. We become habituated to anything strange by use and time. But the more I frequent myself and Know Myself the more my deformity astonishes me and the less I understand myself.
I think I found my favorite quote of the book. That's your favorite. Yeah, it's got to be because he's so true that we become habituated to anything strange by use and time right and, you know go off on a tangent here. That movie we saw sorry to bother you. the squeeze the character squeeze at the end.
He says when something outrageous happens and when people don't know what to do the abnormal over time becomes normal, right? And this is what Montaigne's saying to as we get used to anything by using time, but ourselves. We're so intimately attached to who we are but yet we can look at ourselves in different situations and different chapters of our lives and we're totally different people.
yeah, I guess the whole idea of normalization is that you're so close to something day after day. They don't kind of see the forest through the trees I, which has a good point and in general it sounded like he was. Opposed to habit for that reason because you get so caught in your own point of view and that's part of why he talked about jumping into other people's perspectives, which you know is a pretty Timeless lesson just like put yourself in someone else's shoes and try to see the world from their point of view and you can do that with your with your past selves too.
Or yeah, or cat. Yes or cat Tim. Okay. Yeah, I think I can do
but like. I just found this this another little tidbit.
I found fascinating is people who really looked up to Montagne and his essays and one of them was Stefan Zweig who was an Austrian Jew who fled Austria during the Holocaust of course and then bounced around a couple countries and ended up in Brazil and like. Where he didn't really feel like he fit in he was glad Brazil took him in with open arms, but he found in Montaigne some Solace, but then he ended up killing himself.
He and his wife like decided to kill himself. But this is what with said, um
extracted a series of general rules from the essays and these are his rules. Be free from vanity and pride. Be free from belief disbelief convictions and parties. Be free from habit. Be free from ambition and greed. Be free from family and surroundings. Be free from fanaticism. Be free from be master of your own self. Be free from Death life depends on the will of others but death on our will our own will.
And then then like the next paragraph the author says that he like took some poison or something. He and his wife committed suicide. I'm like damn that's depressing. Yeah, so like yeah, I think those lessons some pretty well, uh his philosophy.
I don't know if I agree with all of them. I don't know right of course, I mean, but like knowing this Zweig gentleman's position where he was exiled, From his homeland and I think he killed himself before World War II was even over so like he had no glimpse of Hope on the horizon. I just can't imagine being that you know in such despair.
Yeah. Well, I guess one thing I like about reading in general is that if you find an author who matches a thought that you had or felt they couldn't articulate. That's like a great feeling and so I think a lot of people find that in Montaigne because he does capture these everyday things pretty well and it was interesting like throughout time how it meant different things to different people or like groups of people.
She talked about how like the romantics the Romantic Era saw the certain way then like 19th Century, 20th Century each had a different like Virginia Woolf. Oh, yeah. That's really loved. Yeah, and then here's another quote highlighted that kind of touches on your point there because like Mont the author says Montaigne you knew that his own work would keep going through the same Mill for as long as it had readers meaning it would be changed over the years and all this stuff and what Montaigne says of that.
And able reader often discovers and other men's writings Perfections Beyond those that the author put in or perceived and lends them richer meanings and aspects.
So exactly what you said is like we find in authors what we can't even articulate ourselves, but then this goes another step further where we read into authors Works what we get out of it.
Is sometimes not even with the author intended but that's so fantastic about reading and art in general at the whole new dimension to yeah. Yeah. It's like makes it a shared experience to like we think of eating this kind of a passive thing but really like taking an idea and then, you know combine it with your own thoughts.
Yeah and how you can read something in one moment of your life and have it mean one thing. Yeah, and then years later. If you read you know revisit that work, it may have a whole new meaning or completely different meaning or have no meaning at all anymore. Right? And so, you know, you can get you can you can get you know, you can have all kinds of feelings about that.
But you can just still appreciate it for what it was at that moment in time, yeah, that's why it's interesting to record these because it can go back and be right can't believe I thought I can't believe I made Tim read Blood Meridian. All right. Did you have your favorite quote?
So I think this sums it up pretty well. Okay. So I like this quote and then her short explanation that follows it. If you fail to grasp life, it will elude you if you do grasp it will leave you anyway, so you must follow it and you must drink quickly as though from a rapid stream that will not always flow the trick is to maintain and kind of naive amazement at each instant of experience.
But as Montagne learned and one of the best techniques for doing this is to write about everything simply describing an object on your table or the view from your window opens your eyes to how marvelous such ordinary things are.
Yeah. Yeah, and I think yeah just the constant theme of him riding all the time and then it helps you see the world differently.
It's like once you once you put your thoughts on paper and then reflect on them, it just helps you become I think more objective and NC. Get a broader perspective of the world, right? Yeah, I think that quote does wrap things up. Very nicely. Yeah, because I think I think that's what this book in particular is about.
It's about Montaigne writing just writing whatever he wanted and then the author is explaining what's happening in the world around them. You know, I think the essays themselves. I think are more of a personal thing because your view your reading Montaigne's thoughts and his views on the world.
And this book that we read is basically describing Montaigne's writings in the context of the world going on around it. And that's just it that's what you said is like. You know life will elude you no matter what so you can do this drink from the stream while flows. Yeah. Yeah keep running, but I guess I do appreciate more of the context of it after talking it over because that's really what this book adds is the backdrop for his writing and maybe part of the reason why he wrote what he did.
Do you have a rating for this book?, so that being said after going over the good and bad thing. Yeah, then we thought I think. I will give it every doing three like stars. Yeah, okay. Yeah stars rating whatever. I know his five or ten. It's about a five. Okay, three stars. Yeah, same here three stars on five would use today.
Even if I said, yes, okay, I write it down first. Oh really like a blind like, okay. This is I'm going to say for myself. So I mean, I don't want to., I mean really for me most of the time it's going to be on a 3 3 level scale. Yeah, I'm probably going to do a lot of twos threes and fours unless we read a book.
I really hate then it'll be a one but a book. I got a really love the book to give it a 5. Yeah, you know, so it's going to be a lot of two threes and fours and this is a I think it's solid three. I mean, I think my tardiness and getting it finished made me doubt it and be like well, maybe it's a to because I didn't enjoy reading it that much but I think I appreciate very much what the author did in this in this book.
Is she collected all the I mean events in the world and the interpretations of Montaigne after his death and all that stuff together and I think that's what's Very admirable and I think definitely for people who like Montaigne or like the essays that I think this is a must read for those people.
What do you recommend it to like your friends and family saying like if you really like philosophy and some history and yeah, then you'd probably enjoy it. But for most people the average reader, I think he could pass. Yeah, I agree. So with that being said, we're on to our next book, right?
Yeah, what's her next book? Come on Tim, it's my choice. I'm choosing a Malcolm Gladwell book. I didn't I never read Malcolm Gladwell before I'm just a fan of his podcast. But now I'm reading them. We're going to read blink. I think he's overrated. I know that's going to be serious fireworks, you know, maybe my mind will be changed as I read the book and I'll say oh maybe I had these unfair preconceived notions, but I've seen like lectures by him and I.
You know heard bits and pieces of his podcast bits and pieces but it's like that's enough for me for you to make your mind. All right, Lee judge something like montane. He'll be around 500 years from now. Oh my goodness. Nobody will be around five around physically but like, I knew what you meant. I didn't mean physically.
I like I think but you could say that about a lot of social science stuff. I think a lot of modern intellectual. People are kind of Imperial. I'm very I'm very ephemeral damn it. But now he probably had some good ideas and I don't know what get into a next time. Well, yeah. Yeah stay tuned.
But yes, but please go to our website two guys one book dot com and make your comments there if you have any yeah read the next book with us and then. You can be part of the experience. Yes, we have the next couple books posted up there. So you can check out our reading this coming up got a lot to read.
Oh, yeah, all we do. All right. Thanks for listening.
Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy
Welcome to two guys one book. This week we're talking about Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy. I picked this book. It's a Brian pick certified fresh. Right? No, I picked this book because I just like Cormac McCarthy. I've read the road and No Country for Old Men and just like his style writing, and brief synopsis of Blood Meridian.
We follow the main protagonist is just called the kid, in his adventures in Texas and Mexico in 18-49 1850, and he gets caught up in a gang called Glanton - is one of the characters, the leader of the gang, and they go around basically hunting for Indian scalps because they get paid for them.
It's just a lot of violence and nonsense and then you meet crazy characters like the judge and other people in Glanton’s gang and then shit happens, Glanton gets killed and then the judge and the kid have a final showdown. So Tim. Yeah what you think of this book?
This was the most graphic book I've ever read in my life. Nothing even comes close. Yeah, why did you make me read this?
I slightly regretted it myself actually. Yes, like I said, I liked the road. I like No Country for Old Men. They weren't my favorite books, but I just like how McCarthy writes. With that being said, I don't know why I picked this book either. Because reading reviews online, it's supposed to be really good, but it left me wanting a lot more. Well, it's on the time like top 100 books or something. Like it's really well-received. For some reason. I think it's overrated. I mean, there are good parts to it and we'll get into that but well, the way I typically read is I start a book and then it takes me a while to get into it. But then once I'm into it, I zip through the second half. This was like the complete inverse of that. I started reading I was really enthralled because we kind of bounced around with the kid in a couple different adventures like he.
As you know, basically a vagabond in Texas, he gets caught up with this Captain White I think was the character's name - and then they get attacked by Apaches and then he's bound he's in jail and then all that leading up to it I found interesting because it's like we were following the kid right as soon as he gets caught up in the Glanton gang.
They just go on and on about their travels across the desert left and right and killing Indians -Apaches are not Apaches or just anybody that comes across their path. And I'm so conflicted because the story…I didn't really care for it because like once he got up with Glanton’s gang. I completely lost interest.
It was the same thing droning on over and over but at times I found McCarthy's prose very, beautiful and actually really well done. So is it solely considered a good book because the writing is good and not so much the story?
That's a good point. I think the language he uses is very interesting and the way he writes sentences in general is definitely unique. But plot-wise this did leave a lot to be desired. It did bother me that it started off following the kid and then just stopped kind of like the whole chunk of the middle of the book, and then it kind of comes back to him towards the end and then it started getting engaging again for me. I got more into the book again. But it's just strange to start off with a character and then just kind of move on to these other just violent scene after a violent scene and all of these. Crazy killings, right?
So all he basically describes is them killing or traveling through the desert. There was Glanton, the kid, and the judge and a few other characters like Toadvine and the ex-priest right? That's it. I mean there was black Jackson. I remember black Jackson to because he was memorable in a few scenes but there was no character development at all. it was just reporting what happened. It was basically one long very well-written newspaper article.
I think it would have been a better book if it just followed the kid because he's like a 16-year-old kid or however old he is and goes and joins these crazy Indian hunters and It's a wild ride, but I don't know why he chose this approach.
But well, you know, this is actually based on true events, right? Yeah Samuel Chamberlain. Yeah the account of riding with a Glanton gang was a real person. The judge was…there's some uncertainty of if the judge was a real person or not. But when the Indians attack them there towards the end and killed Glanton. I was kind of like glad right, you know, like he had it coming a bastard. They all are really, they don't really say like what the kid does as part of the Glanton gang, you know, they do they just talk about the gang as a whole and he talks about Glanton or the judge doing some things individually, but all the violence is kind of perpetuated by the whole gang as a body so we don't know what the kid was all involved with, but I would loved it if there could have been time for conflict - like the kid having a conscious as being part of this group. He could have expanded on that maybe and created more internal monologue of what the kids thinking and to provide some conflict along with that. There is not a good character development and you could argue maybe it's part of his like sparse writing style that you just it's implied.
Yeah, there are moments where you feel like maybe he's showing the kid having compassion and maybe going against the norms of the Glanton gang - but on the whole he kind of was just going along with whatever they're doing.
You make a good point because as I look back on The Road and No Country for Old Men there wasn't really much character development there. And you're right but there was more of a compelling story I felt like.
I agree … I read the road a long time ago, and the interesting thing about his writing is that at the beginning is a little hard to get into because he doesn't really do dialogue with like quotations and like he said and she said it's more just like this long strong on sentence actually like that.
Yeah. I mean that's one thing that I'm drawn in McCarthy is… McCarthy is a perfect example… and I always like using EE Cummings as an example too - of how your English teachers are full of shit, because those two guys don't do capitalization or commas or anything like that Cormac McCarthy doesn't do quotations around what the characters are saying and very little, apostrophes for contractions, but it's still wonderfully written - both McCarthy and cummings and so English has all these rules, just like, Society putting the rules. Okay. No, but from the man, but so that's one thing I always hated with English growing up in school was that it imposed all these rules on you yet there are famous people that don't abide them and that's fine. It's just you got to acknowledge that.
Maybe that's like what sets them apart though. That's one of the things that right like he's the master of the run-on sentence is how I would the thing about this book. I really liked was he wrote it almost like he was talking about it from the mid-1800s.
Yeah. I kind of like that your first couple pages and getting into it was a little. Hard to read them halfway through you're just reading along like it's no big deal.
It bothered me some of the words. He used were just so like obscure that you'd have to get out of dictionary. Like what the hell is that even really?
Yeah. I didn't care that much. I just kept thee context. Oh my god get this book done, gotta keep reading. Don’t try and look out for that word cares what that means. He was just gonna kill the character in the next page anyway. Yeah. All that violence.
It was too much. Did it get to you? Yeah, like I can handle a fair amount of stuff. But like I wouldn't recommend this book to anybody remotely squeamish because, there are times when they would kill children in these terrible ways. I don't even want to repeat the scenes but and it just felt like too much. You can make your point in the book without taking it this far. And I guess another issue I had with this was he would randomly throw in some sort of philosophical point made through one character like the judge or someone like that, and it felt like it was stretching or trying hard to be profound.
I don't know if you agree or disagree, but it just didn't seem to have a strong philosophical message. To warrant all the violence or no plot.
No. I took it as just a bleak view of American History, and I get roped into this all the time because I love Westerns like as movies, but they kind of glamorize the Western past. It was a bleak time. And this was even before the Civil War. So I can't fathom what it was like to live in that era. So, I mean, I guess you could make the argument that he was just showing how the true nature of the wild west and how stark it really was, but he didn't come out right and say like he just left it out there. He didn't balance it with anything like you said, like the judge was a proponent of some philosophical thoughts but at the end the judge was just a crazy character.
Anyway, well, it's interesting you say that. I think you're right that a lot of Western fiction does maybe romanticize the past or oversimplify the dynamics of it. So in this book the main characters are either American or Mexican or Indians, like Native Americans, and at different times they're all acting terribly. Right? So it's not this black-and-white thing where it's like a good versus evil… sort of framing of the whole environment. Compared to a lot of other Western stories. I feel like a lot of other Western stories…there's a definitely a hero and definitely a villain but yeah this one everyone's kind of shitty.
And so you could argue the bleakness is intentional the lack of applaud is intentional but a book like The Road had a bunch of better premise for a story. It's like a father and a son trying to survive and it's like post-apocalyptic world with a Western bend to the tone.
But I think that one thing I enjoyed - the World building that he did in that one. In this one it was just like… a lot of going over the desert and some bushes and all they passed under these trees and saw another charred wagon burning ash, it just seemed a little repetitive and yeah just kind of hard to struggle through the second half
I started out highlighting these parts where he's describing the nature, the mountains and the moon and stuff and like, oh, it's really beautiful. But yeah towards the end. It's like, alright, you've said this in of different way 100 times.
So literally the exact same thing happened to me. I noticed that the quotes that I was highlighting and making. Throughout the whole book. They take a most of them the first half of the book. Because by the time I'm halfway through they almost become repetitive and old. Yeah, I mean, they still might be beautiful but it's like, okay, it's I'm like ready for something else, you know? Yeah. I mean, I can only read so many things about the rising in the East and setting in the West - like I know that already, yeah moving on right? But there's like no real other quotes other than him describing the scenery.
So just to give some context for what this reminded me of you've seen Inglourious Basterds right in Tarantino a little bit. It reminded me of how like Brad Pitt's character Lieutenant Aldo Raine recruiting a small group of soldiers to go get scalps of people Nazis in that scenario. It's a little more clear cut that like, You know these Nazis have the bad guys and we're gonna go get their scalps. But in the same way, it's like the one guy is recruiting, these kind of mercenary soldiers to go kill these Indians, because I guess the Mexican towns wanted to feel safer so yeah, that's a good that's a good point. but Inglorious Basterds was so much more fun.
This could have been a lot more fun of a book. I mean it wasn't going for that but right, it just made like yeah, did you have any little parts within the book that you liked a little story here a little way. He described that or whatnot that he found interesting or captivating probably scattered throughout here and there but towards the end I really liked when it was just him trying to escape the judge. The judge started coming after him because they were kind of stranded and he got injured and I guess they're both trying to survive with these Indians surrounding them.
The judge wanted his pistol, right? Oh, yeah. He wanted the gun, the kid wouldn't give it to him. And that was just really suspenseful series of events and it's just a more interesting story like this. They were fighting together and now they're kind of like opposing each other.
So I was interested in that portion. That's all right. I'll come I'll go back to a few of the other things. I like because I want to expand on that judge and versus because you're right. I guess if you take out all the boring stuff that he talks about the Glanton gang and just focuses on the kid. I like that. That would be a good short story, the stuff of the beginning he goes off of the glanton gang and then at the end the shit hits the fan and the judge in him tracking each other in the desert act on that very captivating. Yes. then I also liked him following the kid as he grew up.
And on the west coast and how he kind of just briefly talked about and bounce around town to town or what not. But then at the very end, he meets the judge again. And what was your interpretation of the end? Do you want to summarize what happens first?
All right. Yes, I'll summarize what happens. Basically the judge has gold any buys Toadvine’s hat and he wants to buy the kid’s gun, but the kid says no because the kid is worried that he's just going to take the gun and shoot him. So I think that's why so the kid and ex-priest book are in the desert and then all of a sudden the judge is out there, after them - so the judge is after the kid and the ex-priest because I think he wants the pistol right? But then the kid and the ex-priest hide. They let the judge go the judge basically shouts out saying I know you're hiding but you can come to your senses and we can work out a deal but then that's last week see the kid goes back to Texas later when he's in middle age or whatever and then he sees the judge at some bar where they're showing a dancing bear on the stage.
Someone shoots the dancing bear, but then the judge and the kid goes back and forth about I don't know. What do they try to get philosophical? Yeah, they try to get philosophical and it's kind of just rambling and you're not really sure what they're talking about, but then eventually the kid then goes.
And sleeps with prostitutes and comes down and goes to the outhouses and then there's the judge there and they say basically like the judge wraps him up. Then that's the last we heard of the kid and then the judge is there dancing on the floor of the bar then later.
And yes, we are led to believe that the he kills the kid. I don't know why he kills the kid. Is it just because like in the desert after the Glanton gang is broken up. I understand he wants the pistol because he wants to defend himself or kill the other guys whatever, I understand the judge wants to pistol but like years later to run into him again…I don't understand the motivation for the judge killing the kid right unless that's just it - there is no motivation. The judge is just a heinous creature one Yeah one interesting part about that is that they describe all of those deaths and graphic detail except the kid at the end.
Yeah, they just kind of, you know, leave it to your imagination, but they do have the people coming to the outhouse next right? Like, is that occupied and someone says I won't go in there and then they open the door. They're like, oh good. God Almighty. Yeah, and so like -I did Google a little bit and that's one thing they said is like the so violent of a book but yet maybe it's the atrocities done to the kid are so brutal that you can't, you know fathom them but like I don't know that seems like a cop-out to me…
It wasn't Cormac McCarthy that said that it was other people analyzing the work and I guess that's my main thing is like when people analyze art in general. I guess I'm going more broad. They seem to presume what the artist was trying to do. Unless the artist actually explicitly says it how can you presume that you know?
Yeah that that's kind of what I'm getting as a cop-out for like, oh we have this whole violent book. But yet the end the kid, he doesn't explain what happened to the kid. Well, I mean do we really need to know what happens to the kid? So I think I understand what you're saying. We can't just assume we understand what the author was going for.
But just to observe that contrast where he describes everything in graphic detail up to that point. It's just interesting to note that he chose that different approach right? So maybe there's a reason to it maybe not it's a little maybe it was because we were following along with the kid ran like all those other atrocities were a little removed because a lot of the times they were just nameless Indians or Americans or Mexicans just being slaughtered right which was gruesome, but we weren't following them. I guess. I mean there were some gruesome moments within the gang but you're right maybe because we're following the kid at the end of the book
To go back to the judge though, it seemed to me with everything is character represented that he was just his symbolic figure in the book representing man's violence and propensity towards terrible things. And a lot of the dialogue throughout the book indicates that. I have quotes to the go into, we usually say that at the end then so I don't know if it doesn't matter.
You remember when he talks throughout just like about war and about how wars are sort of natural and righteous and just so it seems like he's sort of representing man's worst instincts and nature.
Okay, he says at one point “Moral law is an invention of mankind for the disenfranchisement of the powerful in favor of the week. Historical loss of births at every turn.” So he's just saying that moral law is just as an arbitrary thing and at their core people are these violent evil creatures.
That's kind of how I interpreted it. Okay. Yeah by that, I mean I guess look at it through that lens then you're right he doesn't need a motive to kill the kid at the end he's just the agent of chaos of human’s violent nature,
He is definitely unique as a character. The way he talked he knew like multiple languages. Yeah. Well, they made him seem like this almost Immortal figure who had lived across generations and knew all these languages. And just to highlight this part of the end, the kid sees them across the bar and he says,
“Watching him across the layered smoke in the yellow light was the judge he was sitting at one of the tables. He wore a round hat with a narrow brim and he was among every kind of man, herder and bullwhacker and drover and freighter and miner and hunter and soldier and peddler and gambler and drifter and drunkard and thief and he was among the dregs of the Earth in beggary a thousand years and he was among the scapegrace scions of Eastern dynasties and in all that Motley assemblage he sat by them and yet alone as if he were some other sort of man entire and he seemed little changed or none and all these years.”
Yeah, you see the devil. I mean, that's another theory…Okay I'd buy that right, and then at the end he's like kind of dancing on the tables and just acting wild right so there's a lot of biblical like imagery in this book and references in general, but I don't know if he's literally representing the devil, or if it's just like I said like Mankind's worse instinct. Like how terrible people can be - because some of the things he did in the book… there's one point where they kidnap like an Indian like an Apache kid, and then they're all just kind of like playing with him by the fire and then he just left with him and killed him for no reason so well look it was basically pedophilia. Here's the pedophile. Yeah the judge. Yeah, so he would have sex with like this Indian kids and then killed him.
Yeah. Yeah, it is but that's like I mean - when you think about the worst things a person can do that's what he's doing in all these situations but he's also like scientifically documenting nature as he goes. He had some line that was like “whatever exists without my knowledge exists without my consent.”
Remember? Kind of weird. I don't know, the more we talk about this, the more I’m on board with him being the devil. I actually kind of like that view, rather then trying to rationalize his actions as a man, or like you said just the thought of violence beyond a man.
He's not just compared to every other character in this book. He's a whole different being whether that's meant to be the devil... He just like I said, all things terrible, but also just the spirit of war and blood and gore - he said one line at one point that was like, “Only that man who was offered up himself entire to the blood of war who has been to the floor of the pit and seen horror in the round and learned at last that it speaks to his inmost heart only that man can dance.” and then he's just starts dancing.
So in terms of interesting characters, I guess we could say the judge very much dwarfs the kid. Yeah, and I was into the dynamic between the judge and the kid as well. But that's why I like the end of the book so much is because it did focus on those two, right and yeah because the kid is almost like the reader's perspective.
I mean a little bit - like he's the one going along this journey and you're kind of following in the line, I guess but during the whole Glanton gang shenanigans, we don't really know what the kid is up to. Well, I wonder if there's a reason for that - like he didn't want us to focus too much on the kid’s atrocities.
Sure. I mean, by not buying not saying what he did along with the gang. Yeah, then at the end we’re more empathetic to the kid. That's true. Yeah, and he is a kid, right? Like he said young teenager. You could argue he's almost forced him this situation. He wrote, parts of the book where it was like the kid pulling an arrow out of someone's leg, one of the other gang members,
Was the kid was supposed to kill one of the injured guys, right didn't he left him there? Yeah, the trying to hire or defend him, but that can't be an accident that like didn't highlight the kids killing as much and then he did highlight those moments. So there was an effort to show some empathy toward them I guess so I would have liked more of an effort or more of glimpse until like I mean, I think he could have showed.
If we - if the reader was to go along with the kid, he could have gone into the kid’s psyche a little more and like showed him conflicted as being part of the Glanton gang. I caught with these guys I would die with on my own out here, but these guys are doing horrible things, just explore that a little bit.
Yeah, but that's his style is like that whole minimalist approach which is like you read between the lines. I guess so but this is maybe too much right? I mean the kid would kill people like he killed guys in a bar and stuff. There's so much violence in general like every time they went to a bar.
You're just like shit's about to hit the fan like people are gonna die. I'm like, I don't think that was an accident either. Bar violence is almost the pinnacle of senseless violence and one person would say the wrong thing and then all these people would die and I think the fact that he kept going back to that type of scene again and again and was just like driving this point home.
So I mean like there were parts of the book I enjoyed that really, the way McCarthy writes is so captivating. some things that come to my mind are the initial Apache attack when he was when the kid is with a Captain White. I think that was great when they basically they disguise themselves as Animals part of the herd or something they jump out and just slaughtered the Americans.
I thought that was fast the way those written was amazing and because there's almost an entire page. That was just one sentence. And yeah, somehow it keeps your attention with this incredibly vivid imagery of these Apaches or whatever coming down the hill and so like you can just picture it. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. Yeah and like even some of the violent scenes I felt were captivating like. There were two men named Jackson. There was white Jackson a black Jackson and black Jackson beheads white Jackson, right?
Yeah and that paragraph where he describes the head rolling off and on the ground and blood spurting from the stump of his neck. I just found that captivating for some morbid reason. So like if this book was written by a less talented author, there's no way it would reach the popularity or acclaim that it has.
It's not as highly regarded based solely on the storytelling. based on the story alone. It's based on the author's way with words definitely. It's just is it worth the drain to get through? Yes, like I agree. It took us a while to read other books just because you can't really binge read it.
You're just like, oh Jesus like every other page I like what you put in the website is like “Brian picked this book because he likes to read about people suffering.” Right and when we were recorded half way through the book and I'm like, that's right. Yeah a depressing Western. Yeah, but there was some definitely good spots in there that like they were parts where you're just like wow, that's beautiful sentence.
I don't know how he wrote that and maybe that made it worth reading. I don't know at least it's another book off our list. That's true. And if you want to go over some more stuff that we do quotes. I can start since we just talked about that. He’s coming down the hill.
So the first sentence in that description is that he sees them coming, to the initial troop that the kid is with and the author describes them as “A legion of horribles, hundreds and number half-naked or clad in costumes addict or biblical or wardrobe out of a fever dream with the skins of animals and silk finery and pieces of uniform still tracked with the blood of prior owners.”
And then he goes on for like ten more line and you're just like it's so well done. Yeah, definitely. And a lot of stuff I was drawn to as well. It was just little things, a sentence there in the middle of him rambling on about something and then stuff like this when he describes just them being out in the desert.
“The shadows of the smallest stones lay like pencil lines across the sand and the shapes of the men and their mounts advanced elongate before them like strands of the night from which they ridden like tentacles to bind them to the darkness yet to come.” Yeah. That's really good. Yeah. I can't think of any author who writes quite like that.
Yeah. I guess that's why I'm drawn to him with The Road and No Country for Old Men. I liked but not loved, I wouldn't say any book of his one of my favorites, but just the way he writes so damn good and engaging, and does it overcome the other…. Yeah, but this book was a struggle the other two.
It was fun to read but this one was a struggle. yeah just to go off of that like a little sentence. He would describe the nature as like. “a thin shell of a moon lay capsized over the jagged peaks,” that's a good little sentence or a quick one, “lightning stood in ragged chains far to the south silent the staccato mountains spoken and blue and baron out of the void.”
Yeah. What was up with all that lightning there was like lightning all the time. That's why I don't know. I felt like every time they were riding for a number of days. There's always lightning rolling down the hill sounded good. Yeah, and then one time when the kid and somebody was stranded in the desert a group of Mexicans came by and they said in broken English the Mexicans were talkin to the kid and they said “when the Lambs is lost in the mountain, he said they is cry. Sometimes come the Mother sometimes the wolf.”
Okay, I like that quote with you going for the well, he's basically the Mexicans basically telling them that when the lamb is lost. It's a metaphor. The lamb is lost in the desert the Lambs gonna cry. Sometimes the mother comes sometimes it's the wolf.
So the Mexican they let them go. That's okay. They basically the warning them that like, if you make a ruckus out here when you're stranded. Okay. You don't know who's gonna come along. Yeah, it's like a parable. Yeah, I like that. Come on Tim. I had to explain that to you?
Come on, honestly, It’s like you were zoning out that I just hit off of it and parts of the book. Yeah. Absolutely. I completely understand. this is one of those books where you can just kind of skim two or three pages and not have that sink in or if you're in another state of mind when reading it stuff can really stick to you and I find it interesting how we you know, I like doing this quote thing where we pick up our favorite parts of the book because.
Whether I'm reading it intently or just kind of my mind tends to wander when I read. Yeah, so if I'm reading a couple pages when my mind is wandering, I'm not going to remember those as much I'm still gonna get the gist of what's going on, but that's why I think it's so fascinating that different people read the same book and it's different things stand out to them take everything away from absolutely. I like hearing your favorite parts because yeah, maybe I missed it or just overlooked it on my first read,
Here’s one about mountains again. “The jagged mountains were pure blue in the dawn and everywhere birds twitter and the sun when it rose cut the moon in the west so that they lay opposite to each other across the earth the sun white-hot and the moon of pale replica as if they were the ends of a common bore beyond whose terminals burned world's past all reckoning.”
Who comes up with shit like that? I'm like, yeah. I see I agree. His language is beautiful. But like there are times when I thought he was also stretching a bit like going overboard. Oh just like you didn't just trying to little too hard. Yeah, he went to that well few too many times.
Yeah. I mean, I loved it. But you gotta like find the balance. Right? Right. I'll do one more and it's kind of a long one…So this is when the kid got separated from the Glanton gang and he's just kind of on his own and I think they had just been attacked or something.
So he's like often the distance and he says talkin about the kid. “He moves North all day and in the long light of the evening. He saw from that high rimland, the collision of armies remote and silent upon the plain below the dark little horses circled and the landscape shifted in the paling light and the mountains beyond brooded and darkening silhouette the distant horsemen rode and parried and a faint drift of smoke passed over them and they moved on up the deepening shade of the valley floor leaving behind them the shapes of mortal men who had lost their lives in that play.He watched all of this past below him mute and ordered and senseless until the war in horsemen were gone in the sudden rush of dark that fell over the desert.”
Yeah, I remember that passage to that was good. I think that was another time when I was captivated is when the kid was by himself.
Yeah trying to catch up to the gang. And yeah, and that was seen it from his perspective. Yeah, but just to like say one more thing about that is it's an interesting view because so much of the book is them having this firsthand warring experience, but in this passage, he's watching it from a distance.
So if you could just picture it just like these two armies clashing and over the horizon and not even knowing like who it is, but just seeing how senses the looks kind of in the zoomed out view thought that was a good sure. Yeah. one I liked was when Glanton's gang passed another gang of Mexicans.
They were peaceful at least they didn't kill him this time. they passed each other and then uh, “And so these parties divided upon that midnight plane each passing back the way the other had come pursuing as all travelers must inversions without end upon other men's journey. That's good. Yeah, and just another part of this book I like I don't there's no quote or anything--but well, I'll read a quote here. It's when I think the kid is getting told a story by somebody how the judge how they came upon the judge and the desert initially they were low on gunpowder and he basically created gunpowder. Do you remember do you remember that part?
Yeah where he followed bats into the cave and got the guano from the bat the bat dung and then mixed it with saltpeter or something and then but then they had to piss in it as well. So the guy's telling the story. We hold for our members and at it we went and the judge on his knees needing the mass with his naked arms and the piss was splashing about and he was crying out to us piss man piss for your very souls.
That's just I mean, yeah the judge is interesting character. I will say that I mean it's just., I wanted to like him more but like you said he's done so many terrible things that I mean, I guess that's this point though. I think that example you read is just how he would sprinkle these moments of levity throughout here and there I don't know if you remember when planting was getting his gun from.
Like an arms dealer type person and so he's trying it out and he just shoots every animal. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's like the light I didn't say the quote but it was like and the cat just disappeared shoots a cat he shoots to go and then a Mexican woman comes out of her house and they tell her to go back inside you just picture this crazy guy and shooting everything in sight.
So I feel like that was I mean, it's like ridiculous but not that was funny. Yeah, and I was fascinated. It seemed like the pistols were the main weapon because thinking about this was before the Civil War and so the they still bear what was that called muzzleloading mostly loading rifles right or so like the pistols with the revolving action, you could get five or six rounds off relatively quickly.
It seemed like they at that time he was purchasing. High-powered pistol or revolver? So it seemed like that was the weapon to have which I found interesting. Yeah, I guess I don't know as much about the context of what the most desirable artillery is because you have Native Americans shooting arrows at you, and then there's people would.
Sorry, I think lancers and then there's the rifles and then pistol probably would be the most desirable. Right right and I also did like that part when black Jackson got killed like black Jackson was killed at the ferry that they commandeered and he was the first casualty of the Indian onslaught that eventually broke up the Glanton gang.
I feel like that that whole scene right takes an arrow through the abdomen and then in the groin he's stumbling there and then he gets clubbed. He was like by the river. Yeah. That was well written. Yeah, so I was more than happy to see Glanton and the gang meet their demise. Well, it's weird to have this group of characters who make up so much of the book and then you're so happy when they're getting killed and because it's like you've been following them around and you don't really know him that well like I mean, sometimes he would give a number about how many were in the Gang.
I think I named all the characters, even the remote peripheral ones like Jackson. There were no, I think they were like 20 or something in the gang. Yeah. okay. There was a good number. I just felt like there, as far as he would actually talk about. Yeah, he kept it on purpose nothing.
Yeah. I guess I was just one more thing. I wanted to mention, So remember when just before the kid goes on this whole adventure if you want to call it that down south the reason he's going is because he got in a fight with a Mexican bartender, right? He kills his bartender.
And then this guy the original Captain, hears about this and wants to recruit him to go to Mexico to kill Mexicans, right? Like that's his angle. And so this is just part of the like there's not a lot of dialogue in this book, but this is part of this long section where the captain is trying to convince this kid to go to Mexico.
So he says, “I don't think you're the sort of chap to abandon the land that Americans fought and died for to a foreign power. And mark my word unless Americans act people like you and me who take their country seriously while those mollycoddled in Washington sit on their hind sides unless we act Mexico and I mean the whole of the country will one day fly a European flag Monroe Doctrine or no”
So it's just interesting to see this mindset where you can see it throughout American history.
This kind of like expansionist like, ‘take over territory before another country gets there’. But then this Captain is the one who dies very suddenly and in not a glorious way and the kid even calls him a fool not long after that and regrets ever going along with him. So I think Cormac McCarthy was trying to highlight the flaws of this kind of the expansionist mindset and this kind of mentality cool.
Yeah. I mean through that point I was still engrossed in the book, it was until he got with a Glanton gang. Yeah. Well this launches you into that whole journey, right? You're like well all this crazy stuffs gonna happen, but then it just drags on it gets repetitive.
Yeah, so, all right ratin time. Yeah good. Well, I'm conflicted because. Cormac McCarthy is a great writer, but I'm gonna be harder in my reviews now. I'm this is a 2 out of 5 out of 5. Yeah. Wow, two out of five man. I mean, I had to sit down and make myself read the second half until I got to like you said when the Glanton gang got busted up.
Yeah. It was the kid against the judge that was interesting again, but. Yeah, I gotta be harsher with my reviews is what I've decided, Midnight in the Garden of Evil. Yeah, I don't want to relive that please. I'm gonna be I'm gonna start being harsh with my reviews and I think McCarthy is a great writer.
This is nothing against his legacy or his work. I just think Blood Meridian is a 2 out of 5, I give it 3 out of 5. Okay, I think. The more I sort of chew on this and research theories online, I think about like the judge what her represents…What all the violence might have been trying to highlight.
I see maybe there's more depth to it that I might have overlooked and in addition to the good language and stuff. I still don't love the book. I wouldn't really recommend it to people. It's so violent and hard to read. I agree. I think this has more depth to it than the average novel.
Yes. But plot-wise left a lot. Right right. Not a lot of character development. Yeah. So, sorry Tim read this one, but I'm glad I it was on my list for a while. So I'm glad I got it done. And alright my challenge to you then is to find a better Western. Because that hard come on just like I found myself like I was digging the first half.
Yeah, it was like, a kid going out to Texas and the wild west and all that stuff. So I haven't read many westerns wrong if I don't think any so if you find a good legitimate Western, right? Yeah, we’ll do another Western eventually I think. We're trying to mix it up a lot everytime.
Yeah, so we got plenty of time.. What are we reading? Next? Next book? How to live, a life of Montagne and it's by Sarah Bakewell, this British… I guess philosophy writer and she's just kind of summarizing.
I don't know if summarizes is right word. But like, going through a lot of Montaigne's essays and writings which are pretty famous and extracting the life lessons from them and it's supposed to be good. I'm excited. I feel like I'm too I think you'll be a nice change of pace from Blood Meridian. Yes complete opposite.
Yeah. Blood Meridian is how to die. This is how to live something, refreshing and yeah. Nice to right thanks for listening and go to our website two guys one book your thoughts. Yeah. I mean we're trying to make this a social book club thing. So you can see everything we're going to read in the future and then join her book club and leave comments and then we'll like talk about them in the episodes.
So to everybody who's listening not very yeah all five of you Mom and Dad. Yeah. See you next time next time.
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas by Hunter S. Thompson
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas by Hunter S. Thompson
Okay. So for this episode we're going to be discussing Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas a Savage Journey to the Heart of the American dream by Hunter Thompson and Ralph Steadman. Well, Ralph Steadman did the illustrations, right? Yeah. What do you think about the illustrations?
Oh, I love the illustrations. They're pretty cool. Oh, yeah, and you got them in your Audible version? Yeah, my Kindle. Excuse me. Yes. So how do they come through? Did you get him as you're going through the book? Yeah, it's the same. It's the same as hook. Yeah. Yeah it’s all black and white, right?
And they for me in the print version. They didn't always line up to what the story was talking about. Like sometimes the illustration was a little ahead or behind. I think they kind of just fit in right where they could know that it was like that. Yeah. Yeah, but the style of it kind of complimented the story well because it's very like out there and interesting.
I don't know. Oh, yeah, very surreal and added another dimension to the story, right? Yeah, but why'd you pick this book? I thought it would be an interesting book to read. Something that I wanted to read for a while. I've heard bits and pieces of his quotes from essays or letters and things like that.
And I know he's a good writer like I like his style. So, I thought I would just read this. It's kind of a classic, modern classic I guess, I mean I think you're right there, modern classic. Yeah but you haven't read anything else he did before…I know he's done like Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail. This is kind of like his right tagline now, but what were impressions of the book?
I liked it. I liked it a lot. Once I gave in to the drug-induced, rampages they go in the middle there with that stuff about Lucy, that artist from Montana or whatever. I didn't get the point of that and that's when it bothered me like, I think the speaks to a larger drug culture whereas, if a person is hallucinating and they're just doing it to themselves or just experiencing themselves. I think that's one argument that the drug people have is that like, I'm just doing it to my own body, but then like but with drug addicts or you know, people who are on drugs it always affects other people. And then that's where I was conflicted because these two guys were just being crazy on these drug rampages, but then all of a sudden there's another girl and they're kind of stringing her along as well and I didn't really like that. But what that did is it help me suspend like, okay. There's no story to this. But like what did you think of this story?
I would say my first impression of the story itself. I didn't love it. I didn't think there was much of a story but that's kind of the point right is that it's all about the drug outbursts and things like that. But I agree with what you're saying. I thought they were kind of assholes throughout the book to various characters. Sometimes it was funny. Sometimes it went too far.
Right? But he wasn't trying to like glorify himself. He didn't paint himself in a great light. I don't know what he was going for exactly. But no. Yeah. I did not feel like if this was Hunter S. Thompson being himself and just like kind of taking on a pseudonym for the hotels and being in Vegas or whatnot.
He doesn't sound like that great of a guy but I don't think that's the point, not the point but like that's part of the story is that these guys aren't that there's more just for the experience and along for the ride and just explain the drug effects, side effects of the drugs that they're taking.
Yeah, but it's a little wild. I wonder how much of it was autobiographical. I think a fair amount. It seems like it. I don't think you can make some of the stuff up. I mean that one of my favorite parts was the drag race with white car. First of all, I liked how they call it.
The first car they got was a red convertible called the shark, the second one was a white Cadillac called the whale. I like that, but then when they're drag racing with these Oklahoma cops and his attorneys puking out the side streets along the side of the car tearing down the Vegas Strip. I thought that was entertaining. I enjoyed those types of stories. But as far as substance of a story throughout the whole book…
So the overall story, just in like a sentence is basically him, Raoul Duke, which is Thompson and his attorney. Dr. Gonzo or whoever he really is, goes to the desert there covering stories.
The first one is like a motorcycle race right now. The second one is a drug conference with a bunch of cops, district attorneys, in Las Vegas. Which I think is an ironic place to hold a conference about drugs with the District Attorney's America in Las Vegas, right? He had some line like I thought the drug culture should be represented here.
Yeah, and this book is kind of broken down into little stories about they take this drug or they're in this hotel and they do this or that or whatnot. He's always on the quest for the American dream, but one thing I like, well I found entertaining was Dr. Gonzo his attorney in the bathtub of like green water with a knife and then he like attacks him or goes to attack him, and he wants like Jefferson Airplane and played on the tape cassette player and is just bugging out right? Just freaking out Hunter S. Thompson or Raoul Duke. I thought that was very sharp with the visualization. I can picture that in my mind very well.
Yeah, they kind of showed the good bad and ugly. I guess of the drug. Like they showed the fun kind of silly parts, but also this dark side where they're like get violent and unpredictable and pretty weird. And so that mix and then and then it just kind of you know each so it goes to cover this motorcycle race, then goes to cover this drug conference all the while tripping on all these pills and drugs and stuff that they have in their cars.
And then he just kind of leaves Las Vegas, right? There's what's the end. He goes to Denver like covering something else in Denver. I didn't get they left it open-ended. Yeah, I mean it didn't have a narrative so too much so it didn't have to follow a logical conclusion at the end.
It was funny though. He wanted to like just buy a dog like a Doberman. Randomly, and he was trying to buy a gorilla towards the end. Remember that? Or like an ape. He was trying to like by an ape. Oh, I haven't fly home with him, but did the monkey like bite up? Yeah, like attack somebody it was violent, but he was just talking about trying to bring it on the plane and then just pretending it was like his son or something just like, oh, he's sick don't mind him.
Those parts are entertaining to me like. How crazy he was. Yeah, I mean so that yeah that definitely held my interest and it was a quick read, shorter book, because I don't think they had much substance to make it longer. But, I mean did it make you want to do drugs?
Uh…no, I don’t think so. It’s too much, the characters are just too much. Oh, yeah. I mean like he talks about like not sleeping for like 60 hours at a time straight or something like that. It's crazy. I never want to experience that right? They get into some funny situations, right? But what's the cost you know, to there bodies. Or their eternal souls!
Yeah, all right, but just in general, I thought his style of writing was really good. Like he had these pretty poetic sentences that just had a nice flow to them almost like just a bouncing cadence or something. Yeah. He's definitely a good writer. Yes. I can appreciate him for that and just that unique style.
Like I can't think of someone who's quite like him in terms of how we wrote or what he wrote about. This work is very original and I think especially when it was a published.... I want to say late 60s early 70s, maybe well you talked about something about the 70s.
Oh, yeah in the story. I don't know exactly when the book was published. I think the events might have happened in the early 70s. Okay, and I feel like there. I mean, I didn't grow up during that time. But I feel like this would have spoken to people it was I think it was a very contemporary book and that's why it's held up, because at that time I think it was very relevant and very original. I think that was the big thing about the 60s, originality and being hip.
Well a big theme in this book, it felt like was the end of the 60s and transitioning into the Nixon era because he mentions Nixon quite a few times and he just hates him and I like I looked up have a couple interviews with him and he just says like Nixon stands for everything he just hates so, it's interesting to see the contrast between the 60s culture and the 70s kind of mentality coming.
What did you think about the chemistry between Raoul Duke and his attorney? I thought it was I thought it was entertaining and I thought you know, it seemed to kind of go back and forth like I said, the attorney was in the bathtub then he appeared with a knife. He was going crazy andattacking.
Raoul Duke another time all Duke was driving through a fence and cross the runway to get them to the airport or something like and so he was freaking out. I mean, in causing his attorney to the flip out. So I feel like it was a good give and take where depending on who is on what drug at any given time one person was more crazy than the other.
I did have a very clear picture of when he talked about the attorney in the closet vomiting and his shoes and being caught by the maid that walks in the door. Like I thought that was an entertaining scene as well. You just feel bad for those poor people who get caught up in the crosshairs, but they like pretend to be cops or something and pretend they go into this whole like scenario about how they're undercover and like trying to do a drug bust when they're the crazy people.
It's pretty entertaining how creative they can be. They talked about like people now they were cutting off heads, decapitating people. That was so funny though! Because they're kind of messing with this cop at the conference and they're saying people on drugs are crazy.
They're cutting each other's heads off or cutting other people's heads. And then the guy is from like Georgia and he's freaking out, and then he's like so what are you guys doing to like fight this crime, and like well, we started cutting the criminals head totally fucking with him. It's really funny.
But I like how the attorney would preface so many of us sentences with “As your attorney…” and then just like give some advice that had nothing to do with anything. Yeah. I thought that was entertaining and they were eating like a bunch of grapefruits. They have like 10 grapefruits with them
Yes. think they also did that with a soap from the first hotel. They left and all this soap. Yeah, or whatever packed in the car and the grapefruit think every time they were hotel service. They have grapefruit. Oh, yeah rum and grapefruits or something like that.
Yeah, and then yeah when he's on the airplane going to Denver at the end of the. book The stewardess is alarmed by him cutting the grapefruit with this large hunting knife. Yeah, he's like, oh don't worry. This is just a grapefruit, gonna be healthy. In the movie, I never saw the movie, but Johnny Depp is I'll Duke and Benicio del Toro.
Yeah, it's a good cast. I mean, I would be curious how it is. I mean, I feel like they could be pretty true to the book and the movie might be good, but I haven't seen it. But I watched the trailer after reading this and it looked like they had done a good job. I know it's gotten mixed reviews and I think it's sort of a cult movie just because it's like Johnny Depp and because of the subject matter.
I don't know if it's actually a good movie. But I like the cast it seem like they've played the parts one.
Oh one thing I thought was interesting was his chapter titles. They were kind of like long and rambling, I guess like a lot of us style but you know, like most people's chapter titles in books are just like a short brief simple description, but his kind of had these, I don't know, chaotic nature to them, right?
It was just kind of schizophrenic almost like we just pick a couple phrases and mash them together, but then. They were what the chapter was about like I would go back out of a chapter and go back and read the title and like oh the title makes sense now right now, it's this this and this, you know, yeah, but yes, it was very cool.
I like when people label their chapters, I don't like just the one and the two… I mean most books, like 99% of books through the just the one and then two and whatever. Oh, it depends on the author and the style. Like it's just a small thing that makes him original I think and said he does this sort of thing, but yeah in general his tone was very like manic and crazy. But then also that poetic side to it too. Like I don't think there are a lot of people like this in history, who are that eccentric and like out there but still pretty good writers, stylistically.
Very good. I think I think it's tough to maintain that being so out there and eccentric, but still come up with some very precise sentences. That really are good literature. Yeah, like he saw things in a certain way and he captured them in a unique way.
I saw this documentary about him way back and I remember him talking about reading like Hemingway and loving that style, which a lot of his books were like kind of autobiographical to and he did these sort of crazy interesting things. But he talked about even just like typing his books, Hemingway's books on a typewriter just to feel how it felt to write something that good which I thought was interesting because you're kind of internalizing that physical motion of typing something.
That’s interesting. I would have no never thought like almost like playing the notes of a musical piece. You're typing the words of Hemingway trying to train your brain. I mean it makes sense because people practice piano practice instruments, but nobody like types. It feels weird but it kind of makes sense.
Yeah, he's from Louisville Kentucky, you know that. Yeah, he like grew up here and it's just like a trouble k-kind of I think and then moved out West or something.
I would think he would have a trouble but yeah, no offense to the Thompson family. I'm sure they're lovely people but I'm sure Hunter S. did have some problems with authority... I like how he was friends with like Bill Murray throughout his life Bill Murray played him in some movie one of his books.
I think a while ago Buffalo something. but I remember in the documentary. Bill Murray was telling Johnny Depp before playing him in this movie. you got to be kind of careful because once you kind of take on that persona of Hunter, he never really goes away.
Yeah, I thought that was interesting because when you think about Bill Murray, I mean he's definitely his own person and very like, unique but he you can kind of sense he draws maybe a little bit from Hunters personality. If not directly. He kind of respects it. Were they similar in age?
I don't know. I think Hunter S. Thompson was older though. Probably he died a few years ago. I think there are videos of him on YouTube just like shooting guns with Conan O'Brien and stuff. Did you see that? He would like shoot guns at his neighbor's and just like do these wild things.
Yeah and as much as he hated Nixon and authority he still kind of loved America. For some reason, I just remember him saying like I don't think there are that many places where I could be myself like this and have people like him. I mean that's just it like he is looked at as total, you know anti-establishment and you had all those cops in that district attorney convention in this book were you know, the quintessential square model citizens that respected the law and authority, and all that stuff was the complete reverse of all what those district attorney stood for.
But yet the District Attorney's would assume that that person is despicable. He's not what America stands for really. They both are. Both of them are exactly what America stands for… It’s the fact that you can be opposite ends of the spectrum and coexist and do your own thing, you know, and as long as you're not, harming others you can live your life in America.
So I think that spot on that Hunter S. Thompson I don't think could be Hunter S. Thompson in another country, right? Or another time, another era… I feel like the 60s and 70s were kind of what made him him as well. Yeah, he would probably offend too many people today.
But this book is classified as counter-culture. But in a lot of ways, it's just like American culture. Like you said these two ends of the spectrum. and I think Las Vegas is an interesting setting for this too because they talked about it a lot and it highlights a lot of parts of American culture too. You have these people trying to just get rich gambling and then he kind of comments on everybody looking the same and just kind of greedy looking for money and yeah.
Have you ever been to Vegas? I’ve never been, no. Does this book make you want to go to a little bit? I mean, I wouldn't say that he paints it as in the best picture. On one hand he'll say like as long as you tip big then you can be whoever and do anything, you know, so he's saying they're welcoming if you kind of respect the place, but then it's like, you see that crazy side to it. You see the violence and the greediness so part of me wants to go but what about you?
Oh, I've been to Vegas one time and it's fun. but like I didn't feel like this book was about Vegas per se. I think it was more like he said the counter-culture of the time and I think Vegas was just the environment in which his antics took place this time that he told the story. I feel like Hunter S. Thompson could easily have written this and been in like San Francisco or LA or Miami or yeah. I don't know. I feel like it's not about Vegas, but I think he used the city itself and its unique culture to kind of highlight some of his themes or messages. Sure, yes, I agree with you there.
You're right. You're right the fact that people are trying to get rich and gambling at all hours of the day and just it's nonstop…and he talked about the American dream so much in this book, right? And what is the American dream? It's such an abstract concept when you think about the traditional version.
It's like get a house and car and kids or whatever. And the way he describes it, it’s more like that sense of freedom and just doing whatever you want. I guess that rugged individualism type of thing. So it's a broad concept. But I like when he was talking about California in general - he would talk about just driving along the coast and how it was like a special time and you go to any city and anything could really happen.
I mean you had like a very. Special set of people living there at the time the artists and the musicians and things like that. I did like his references to pop culture and I found myself Googling different people. He just mentions in passing, you know, like oh so-and-so type character and I'm like, who is this? So many boxers..
Yeah like fighters. Yeah. Many quotes, songs from the day and even like a guy that was an actor on some Crime TV show on at the time. Yeah, I mean just like obscure little things like that. I dug it because it helped take me to that place in time, right? it helped create the context of the early 70s and where those obscure references for the time.
References of the day, talking about the music especially and I think people reading it when it was published would have known exactly what he was talking about.
One interesting part too towards the end: he talks about like the Hells Angels and stuff for a bit which he joined at one point, right?
I did know that. Yeah, so there's that whole side of his life and those stories, but he talked about how it was kind of a shame that the hippie culture and the Hells Angels didn't really join forces… like the whole left was just too disorganized and that kind of paved the way for Nixon in his eyes.
I didn't pick up on that paving the way for Nixon but I definitely heard his lament in the fact that yes the hip, what did he call them, the long hairs? And the yeah Hells Angels. couldn't come together because they ultimately did agree on a lot of core principles. But I'm sure that was something that was very relevant in that time and that would have struck a chord with a lot of people.
Yeah, they had these leading figures like he mentioned Allen Ginsberg and famous authors and poets and things trying to like rally people together, but one more thing about the transition from the 60s to the 70s. He talked about the rise of downers drugs. Yes, instead of psychedelics and things that they were doing. It was very weird. I think it's sort of a big thing because the downers are really about pacifying people, and I don't know that much about drugs, but like they make seem like with psychedelics..that people think of them as like mind-expanding and eye-opening and things like that. And of course there's a dark side…
Yes, I thought that was very interesting how he put it he saw the evolving use of drugs and even said like, these people at this conference drug conference District Attorneys are clueless there 10 years behind the time. They're still focusing on just marijuana when there's all this other stuff and like you said he was talking about how people are doing more downers and the psychedelics are fading out.
I thought that was very interesting how maybe that has led to where we are today with opioids and heroin. Painkillers. where it started back in the 70s? Okay, we're due for resurgence and like psychedelic drugs. it seems like there are some pretty high-profile people, like I hear a lot on other podcasts today, interviews with scientists and researchers saying that these can help treat addictions. They can treat PTSD with something like shrooms and, I don't know peyote or something. I don't know. I don't know things like that. Yeah, I know we are not up on our drugs.
Yeah forgive us. But I think there are benefits but I think you're also right there because I think everything is history cyclical. Right? So I think Millennials are coming around to the more mind-expanding drugs to kind of you know. Open their minds eye and get a broader perspective of the world and humanity and all that stuff. You know that the hippies would have been all about and I think you're definitely right that I think we're going to be in a resurgence for the psychedelic drugs, going forward, which I don't think is a bad thing. Well, we'll see what happened now. I think we can get lessons from the past to not take it this far.
But when you think about like Nixon and his War on Drugs and those effects still come today like decades later and people are recognizing that that was like…like they just decriminalized marijuana possession in like New York and they're just slowly evolving and yeah, and that's just, I think this would have been very hard book to write at any other time.
I feel like it was one of those where history and author kind of just…like I always wonder what I would be like if I was born in a different place or time, you know? Yeah but Hunter Thompson was born in the right place and the right time.
That's like even though the story isn’t great. It almost doesn't have to be because he did these entertaining things and he captured something special and wrote it well, and didn't dwell on anything for too long like he was beating a dead horse...Yeah, I felt like it moved at a good pace.
It flowed from one thing to the other the chapters were quick. But yet still, carried, the overall story whatever how loosely the story there was of this in this book, it still carried from chapter to chapter and just I felt like it was well done without being too descriptive or to mundane, he kept its sharp with good allegories yeah, he had a good energy to it.
And yeah good pacing everything like that. And just a fun way of writing about the world like you said about the cars being sharks writing the red shark through the desert, it's just a very poetic sort of think about your life or something. I think right off the bat because he was right in the rich shark through the desert like he said, but then like he was he was the driver and then also in these bats come out of nowhere and like I need to pull over so you drive.
Somebody said I thin. It's like, okay, this is gonna be, this is gonna be trippy because pick up a hitchhiker and he's like yelling at him. And yeah, it sets a tone early and I think I like that it set the tone early. You knew what you're getting into and it maintained it throughout the whole story without getting boring or monotonous or without dragging.
Yeah. They just dive right into. It's almost like we're The Hitch-Hiker and we're joining them on this journey, not to get too deep. No, no get deep! Yeah because we're just joining them on that journey but…
So this was a movie with Johnny Depp. Yeah, and then there was another movie called The Rum Diary I think was based on another book right?
That was the first book he wrote. Yes, and Johnny Depp played him. He was in Puerto Rico. Yeah. I actually saw them movie. It was good. I didn't read Rum Diaries. Yeah, I imagine for the movie wouldn't be as zany as this one, but it's definitely, it's interesting.
I really like how he wrote this book but judging Hunter Thompson as a person I may not. You know and it's that point where you have that with art or with sports you have people that you may admire their work but not like the man or woman. Yeah, how do you feel about that? That conflict you have…
I'm torn a little bit. On one hand I respect it. I mean like my personality. I'm sort of a people-pleaser. So I think when you see someone who just doesn't really care. It's a little. It's entertaining to see like in that interview. I watched him online. He was sort of like not putting on any airs or trying to connect with the people filming him.
He thought they were being he thought it was inauthentic to have the cameras and things like that, and he just kind of said what he felt so he didn't try to be a different person like he wrote with his own unique voice and he didn't apologize for it, right? Yeah true. I guess that is admirable and I think I can take it at face value that I just like.
His writing and not have to worry about whether I actually like him as a person. Did you like dislike him as a person? Well, I don't know much about him. Right? I mean just based from this book. I don't think so. Yeah, I mean no offense to Hunter S. Thompson. I mean, I enjoyed the book, but it doesn't sound like he was the nicest person.
Yeah, and but they don't try to be likeable, like I said…Yeah, I think that's good. I don't want them to I don't think it's the same book if they try to be likeable .
But it was just like a lot of abuse on your body to take all those drugs. I can't imagine like one of the first passages in the book is just we have 75 pellets of mescaline and they just name like drug after drugs.
No, I'm like oh LSD marijuana everything. Oh, man, so it's a lot but it's fun. It's a fun read. What would you rate it? You wanna do the rating right now? Let's do it. I would give it a 4 out of 5 Stars. I would too. Yeah, I agree 4 out of 5 Stars. I liked it. Yeah, once I suspended my expectation of a story and was along for the ride, which would happen early on.
I enjoyed it was it was a fun read. I think you just got to go into this with an open mind not take it too seriously and just try to appreciate the adventure of it, right? And some social commentary sprinkled throughout. It's good.
Do you want to take turns reading quotes? So just how we talked about the starting off the book that first quote to open the first chapter says “he who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man.” was a quote by. Dr. Johnson whoever that is, but I thought that set the tone well - how they kind of go crazy throughout the book and they're not trying to meet any societal expectations or something. They just kind of use the drugs to lose themselves and see what happens.
Towards the beginning as well, “But our trip was different. It was a classic affirmation of everything right and true and decent in the National character. It was a gross physical salute to the Fantastic possibilities of life in this country. But only for those with True Grit and we were chock-full that.” I felt like that was a good launching point, you know, I mean wasn't the very beginning but it was like the second or third chapter. That's a good one.
Going off that he also says “Every now and then when your life gets complicated and the weasels start closing in, the only real cure is to load up on heinous chemicals and then drive like a bastard from Hollywood to Las Vegas.”
That one is a good one. I forgot about that one.
Do you have more quotes? Oh, yeah. I mean, I love this one. When they go to check in the hotel for the first time in Las Vegas. And I think takes some drug before they go into hotel and then, Raoul Duke, the narrator, “Right next to me a huge reptile was gnawing on a woman's neck. The carpet was a blood-soaked sponge impossible to walk on it. No footing at all. Order some golf shoes, I whispered. Otherwise we'll never get out of this place alive.”
That cracked me up. I just had that visualization of a blood-soaked sponge as a carpet and his rationale when he's high on drugs is like, okay, we need golf shoes or else for knocking out of here.
I remember he had to wear shoes when he went to the bathroom because it would just have like, glass, drugs and vomit.
So I have fun quotes than I have kind of deep ones. It's just sort of a mix. Mix them up! All right, I think this book is very quotable. Yeah, it really has it has a lot of good little one-liners and also paragraphs where I didn't quite know what all to highlight because I felt like it was all pretty good.
Yeah, and you could have a sentence that would go like five lines just one. It would be really well-written.
So one thing he said was “San Francisco in the middle-60s was a very special time in place to be a part of. Maybe it meant something maybe not in the long run but no explanation. No mix of words or music or memories can touch that sense of knowing that you were there and alive in that corner of time and the world, whatever it meant.”
Yeah. I mean, I think the hippies ate that shit up. All right? No they did. That's like that's exactly what I mean. Like it's not about material possessions or our social status, it's about being. And what was the acid? Uh, Timothy Leary saying drop in tune out, uh to turn on tune in and drop out.
Yeah. That's what to do that just exist right here now in space and time and enjoy yourself. I think that hurt them though in terms of like organizing, and that's why they lose elections can't organize something. Oh, yeah too much dropping out turning on. Uh, yeah. Yeah, if you're in the moment, you don't plan ahead right?
Right, then you’re just like “Fuck Nixon got elected.” Yeah, you’ve got to find a balance. Yeah, when they actually do get in the Las Vegas. They go to the Circus-Circus Casino. I like that casino with like everyone gambling on the floor on then net above them and trapeze artists are going haywire up above, but then he talks about just he's on drugs again, then he says, “We will close the drapes tonight. A thing like that could send a drug person careening around the room like a ping-pong ball. Hallucinations are bad enough, but after a while you learn to cope with things like seeing your dead grandmother crawling up your leg with a knife in her teeth. Most acid fanciers can handle this sort of thing.”
I mean, I just saw that and then a paragraph later. He says “No, this is not a good town for psychedelic drugs, reality itself is too twisted.”
See Vegas, he talks about Vegas a lot, you're right. All right. Yeah, but no I like his vivid imagery. Yeah, I'm literally picturing my grandma Priscilla crawling up my leg with a knife in her teeth, you know doing what I don't know. But yeah, you shouldn't do LSD probably.
Well did you know have favorite picture? A favorite picture? I mean off top of my head, I'm not sure. There was the one of the attorney like vomiting in shoes in the closet, which is pretty good actually. Yeah, but my favorite one was when he sneaking out the hotel the first time it's real simple just him with a suitcase and like tiptoeing with a hat and a hat on and a cigarette.
Oh, I feel like that's one that you don't need context for, just purely as a picture. I like that. Yeah, even though the pictures are kind of few and far between and not always right after a logical place, I feel like they do add a lot to the story because they're so original - and the book is so original so they go together well, Right.
Okay, and here's another one when he's in a casino and. On drugs, of course. “All right now off the escalator and into the casino big crowd still tight around the crap tables, who are these people these phases where do they come from? They look like caricatures of used car dealers from Dallas, but they're real and sweet Jesus. They're a hell lot of them, still screaming around these desert city crap tables at 4:30 on a Sunday morning, still humping the American dream that vision of the big winner somehow emerging from the last minute pre-dawn chaos of a stale Vegas casino.”
I love that passage. Yeah humping the American dream right?
And you can just kind of picture those people in there desperately doing slots, slot machines and trying to get the big win.
You're right Vegas was very much a part of this book…Well, that's but it's like a microcosm of America. Yeah, right. So it's not like it's not always specifically Vegas, but just representing the country
This one's pretty good. I don't know if I'll read the whole thing, but he just talks about how the 60s were coming to an end with Tim Leary as a prisoner and Bob Dylan clipping coupons and Greenwich Village, the Kennedy's murdered by mutants and just naming these icons as symbolizing the fall the 60s.
Oh, yeah. I can't imagine living through those times, you know, my parents did but, it just seems chaotic look back and see what went on in the late 60s, right? Turning over into the 70s and you think about all of these icons who just died drug overdoses: Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, or like with alcohol or whatever.
That's a part of it. That's part of the culture, or like a reason that it kind of started coming to an end. it wasn't sustainable right? You got another one. Yep, I think this is when his attorney leaves the first time and he's left with the red shark and all the contraband in it. And then he's getting paranoid about having all the illegal drugs in his car. He says “sympathy not for me, no mercy for criminal freak in Las Vegas. This place is like the army the shark ethic prevails. Eat the wounded. In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves. The only final sin is stupidity. Yeah l liike that one.
Yeah, that's a good stuff. It's sort of like this wild-west culture and you think that was reflective more of Las Vegas or more of that time period. I mean that idea of freedom being first and foremost is an element of the culture. Right but also the setting of being in the desert and being Las Vegas is highlighted more too I think. I agree.
I did like the part where they were on the way he was on his way to take the attorney back the airport and he was talking about running through the Peruvian airport and getting. Like tackled by the cops there and they were yelling like stop the crazy Gringo or have any proceeds to drive his car through the fence and down the service road and drop off his attorney as he basically kicks the attorney out of the moving vehicle.
Yeah, okay, this I feel like this will sum it up. So you want me to, or you got anything else? You guys know, I'm good.
Okay. history is hard to know because of all the hired bullshit. But even without being sure of History, it seems entire.
Let me start everything at all. Right. So just to preface this club. It kind of sums up the book in general and his views on the 60s coming to an end, um and all that so.
“History is hard to know because of all the hired bullshit. But even without being sure of History, it seems entirely reasonable to think that every now and then the energy of a whole generation comes to a head and along fine flash for reasons that nobody really understands at the time and which never explain in retrospect what actually happened.”
I mean, right. It's like we can pick out pieces here and there to kind of think about the hippie culture and it's good parts, the bad parts why it didn't last - but at the same time it's like no one can really summarize everything and it was a very unique time and who knows all the factors that went into it.
Right? And I would say that it's one of those things where you can cherry pick certain things to come up with a narrative if you want to come up with one. But I think what he's saying is exactly what you said. It's so broad and it's kind of like lightning in a bottle it just kind of happens and you don't really know what caused it or can explain, its effect on society at large but it's just, just enjoy it.
Yeah, and maybe that's why he wrote the book in such a non-narrative style is because he's trying to say that this is just a chaotic time and. Nothing, is that simple as like this, straightforward linear thing, right? I dig it. Good book Tim. Cool Choice. Yeah. I liked it. So next one.
I'm choosing the next book: Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy. Have you read anything by him by phone? I have I have read the road and No Country for Old Men. I read The Road a while ago. Yeah, so looking forward to. Yeah, I started it. You didn't start it yet. I'll be ready. Better be. Alright. Good episode.
Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil by John Berendt
Transcript:
[00:00:00] Tim: Welcome to Two Guys, One Book. This is Episode 2 where we are reviewing our first book Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil by John Berendt, which is a nonfiction book. It's kind of a murder mystery, but it also has a lot of funny moments and interestingly character profiles.
It takes place in, Savannah, Georgia. And a lot of crazy things happen. So Brian is going to talk about why he chose this book and wanted to read it.
Brian: Yeah. Well first I didn't know it was nonfiction. I thought it was a fiction book. It was recommended to me by my brother. He recommended it to both me and my sister because my sister went to Savannah last year and he said, oh there's this great book about Savannah, makes you want to go there, and if you've been there it's even better. So yeah more than happy to knock this one off my to read list.
Tim: And it makes me want to travel to Savannah.
Brian: Yeah? Okay. That's my brother said but yeah, not so much really. Yeah. I'm okay. but yeah, so the book is about a journalist from New York who lives in New York and then he travels to Savannah for [00:01:00] vacation. He liked Savannah so much. He stays there more and more often on for several years and then one of the prominent characters he meets commits murder and he claims it's in self-defense, but he goes on trial for first-degree murder and that first couple get overturned by the Georgia state supreme court after he's found guilty spends a couple years in jail, and they get overturned again. And then eventually the fourth time around he gets found not guilty.
And the journalist is the narrator of the book he talks about all the people he meets in Savannah, he goes in the history of Savannah a little bit. And Jim Williams is the main character who kills his handyman / lover Danny Hansford in self-defense and is eventually exonerated and it's based on a true story.
Tim: So it's all centered around this murder but throughout the story, there's lots of interesting character profiles and fun situations and circumstances, so we'll talk more about that.
Brian: So what was your first impression Tim? That makes you want to go to Savannah?
Tim: The people in general I thought the characters were [00:02:00] really fun in that sense. I'm just talking about overall as a city. It sounded cool the way he described it.
The book itself? I was disappointed. Yeah. Because it sounds like this is going to be this dark suspenseful murder mystery book from the title from the cover everything leading up to before ´ reading this but I just didn't get that feeling actually reading the book.
I didn't feel much suspense. I didn't feel much excitement. It was just like oh there's a murder that happened and then. Here's Savannah and I like the Savannah parts! Savannah sounds cool. Lots of interesting characters. But I mean, what do you think?
Brian: Yeah. I mean, I agree. It was not a murder mystery air quotes around mystery, you know, it was just an interesting character story. Some things were entertaining and I enjoyed the book, you know, I felt like it took me a while to get into it. He had all these different stories about different characters at the beginning and [00:03:00] then the murder happened then for me that's when it got interesting is the murder happens in all these trials and everything going on, but I thought there would be more to all the character stuff in the first parts that would materialize the later half of the book and I just didn't feel like that really was the case.
Tim: So by background this guy is a magazine writer right? And it feels like he's good at these short profiles on people but as far as tying together a whole narrative, having structure I just don't think he really pulled it off.
Brian: Dang, alright - I mean he won a Pulitzer for nonfiction writing... So if there's not a murderer this never happens,
Tim: Yeah, it felt like he couldn't decide if he wanted this to be a murder mystery or a comedy because he had all these funny parts. I don't know. I mean authors mixed genres sure but it just felt like he was a little bit scattered.
Brian: Yeah, I mean, I liked it. I guess.
Tim: You liked it? I enjoyed it. I just didn't love it. All right.
Brian: Sure. Oh, I think that's an accurate statement.
Tim: I just feel like I was [00:04:00] misled in terms of what this would be like.
Brian: I did watch the trailer for the movie then and the movie looks terrible. I mean like a quintessential mid-90s, oh my god Kevin Spacey. Yeah, John Cusack's the narrator the author in this and they have Jude Law as Danny Hansford.
Tim: It looked like they followed the story though. Yeah, it did like how would you classify that as a movie? What genre would you put that in?
Brian: That's a tough question.
Tim: That's the thing, this had no clear feel to it.
Brian: You're right. I think it is too anti-climactic for a movie.
Tim: There's no suspense up to a murder just like "Oh, and then there was a murder and here are some other things that happened.
Brian: I thought it was interesting how during the third trial I think with the bags over Danny Hansford's hands to take them to the lab to get a gunshot residue test on, how the police are adamant they put the paper bags around the hands at the crime scene and then no the person at the ER put the plastic bags around the hands, which I thought that was interesting, you know how the gunshot residue could have rubbed off in the [00:05:00] ambulance ride over and then when she put the plastic bags on it created a state of static electricity that could even further remove it. I thought that was interesting, but is that climactic?
Tim: The whole last like fourth of the book is trial stuff.
Brian: Then like Voodoo Witch Doctor stuff. Yeah. We forgot to mention that. Minerva was the voodoo priestess that helps Jim Williams out casting spells. I guess it's the South and I guess that's part of Savannah I kind of dug one part of the voodoo thing. Was that at the very end when they go to Danny Hansford's grave like trying to make amends to the deceased. Yeah that I kind of dug, you know, like I get that but all this other stuff but the roots and then yeah and going to Dr. Buzzard, apparently Minerva's lover was Dr. Buzzard who died and I do have to say, Dr. Buzzard is a good name for a voodoo practitioner. I did like that. Alright Tim, so what we're some parts you actually liked?
Tim: I would say the characters were my favorite part specifically Joe Odom. I loved him as a character. He's like the [00:06:00] quintessential Southern gentleman and just the most charming character like you'd ever heard about I thought I mean what were your impressions of him?
Brian: I didn't really think he was entirely necessary.
Tim: Oh my God. He was like the biggest redeeming quality of this book.
Brian: I liked Jim Williams more than Joe. I was more about Jim Williams, not necessarily like him. I just felt like he was more intriguing because like his antiques, then we find out like he acted in self-defense. Yes, but like his story wasn't quite what he first led on for us to believe that eventually when Danny Hansford went to shoot Jim. The safety was on so nothing really shot at him so Jim another gun, shot Danny before you get the safety off. Yeah, and then he just fired Danny's gun, to cover it up.
So I thought that was compelling. I mean Joe Odom, he was just kind of like a vagrant who jumped from house to house and like he didn't pay anybody, wrote bad checks, just a piano guy and [00:07:00] just...
Tim: So you're coming at this from more of the crime perspective of the book you're interested in that angle.
Sure. I'm interested in these random people like Joe Odom because it was funny how we could kind of talk his way out of any situation. He was giving bad checks to everybody but like everybody still kind of loved him and he was sort of the life of the party he played the piano and people would come through his house like just hundreds of tourists and just sounded like a fun guy a fun character in the book.
And we can agree to disagree. Jim Williams - I don't think he brought much to the table as a lead. He was just sort of this rich guy. I don't know man ordering all these fancy antiques, but he was the one that committed the murder, you know, like that doesn't inherently make someone interesting though. When the whole book is pivoted on that.
Oh, but you're right. I am focusing on the crime aspect. Yeah. I'm not yeah as an individual right assume. He [00:08:00] didn't do a murder right into a murder. Yeah, like still think he's interesting. Yeah, but yeah, I don't know all yeah.
Tim: I liked Emma the singer. Okay, they called her the lady of six thousand songs.
I thought she was kind of a fun side character. just music in general seemed like a big part of Savannah life, partying and drinking they kind of like to enjoy themselves. They talked about Johnny Mercer a lot which did you know much about him going into this the singer.
No, I mean I knew he he was a singer and songwriter and he very popular in his day.
No, he did that song Moon River in Breakfast at Tiffany's. Yeah, or he wrote it and Audrey Hepburn second. But yeah, so Jim Williams lives in his house. I'm saying and Breakfast at Tiffany's right? I think so we can look it up later. It's irrelevant. Yeah. But anyway, Jim Williams lives in Johnny Mercer's old house.
Brian: It wasn't Johnny Mercer never [00:09:00] lived in that house, if you remember in the book they said. That was the thing that the tour guides got wrong was that Johnny Mercer never actually lived there, his great-uncle did or something like that Attica. Yeah. So his family had lived there but not Johnny.
Tim: Yeah, but everybody who lived there was like proud of Johnny Mercer and his you know kind of status there. Right? Right,
Brian: The other famous person from Savannah the Conrad Aiken the the poet. I don't know him. I only heard his name before but then the story they talk about him. He was the one where his dad killed his mother and then committed suicide and then they both buried and his parents are buried in Savannah that he moved away became a poet but then in later life he moved back and lived next door to his child at home where that happened. Yeah, and he got buried in the cemetery. I did like that one when the author's just first get into Savannah like I think Miss Harty, says I'm gonna take you to visit the dead and I I like cemeteries, so I can appreciate that aspect then she takes him to the cemetery where Conrad [00:10:00] Aiken is buried and Johnny is buried and all that stuff and eventually where Danny Hansford is buried.
Tim: Oh, yeah. That's the cover of this book, is there in the cemetery that statue.
So another character I really liked was the Lady Chablis.Okay, is this drag queen just a really big personality and it's funny to see her interact with the narrator who just on paper, he doesn't sound like the most interesting guy. He's just this guy from New York who needed some excitement in his life. So he goes down south but this drag queen just was really entertaining very like kind of standoffish and but fun, like kept things light sure.
Brian: Yeah. I do like her, her motto she got from her mother. Do you remember that?' Two tears in a bucket motherfuck it.' yeah. I love the one part where we first are introduced to the Lady Chablis and she talks about how she changed her name to Chablis, when she, you know, what was your name before that? She's like Frank.
I did like that [00:11:00] part too and you're right I feel like she really spiced it up like yeah, I mean like, you know, yeah, there was a lot of interesting characters which yes, I think she was definitely the most memorable.
Tim: But in no way was she really related to the crime?
Which made this feel like a disconnected book to me like I loved her as a character, right but it's probably two stories. Right?
Anyway, yeah, one interesting character was Lee Adler who's kind of like Jim Williams' rival in the town. It just struck me that there is a lot of like behind the scenes competition and sort of people vying for status and things like that in the community.
What do you think?
Brian: What did I think of Lee Adler, I I personally didn't see the point of him. Honestly. You didn't I mean, I guess as Jim Williams' rival sure and I guess by talking about Lee Adler he went into the history Savannah and a little more about that fine, but
Tim: [00:12:00] let me give my take. Okay, so. It's interesting how they talk about him trying to come off as like this holier-than-thou figure because they would bring him to Washington talk about how he's like restoring housing for like poor communities and things like that. But it seem like it's all sort of for show. He didn't seem like a really genuine guy, but he was also like Jewish and kind of scorned by the typical Savannah lifestyle.
So I feel like they were using him as a character to give some contrast. And he also paid the lawyer who was Prosecuting Jim Williams' case like supported him
as district attorney. Yeah, he paid money for his campaign to be District Attorney. He did. Hey, but he's I mean, it's pretty clear. He's like, yeah, he's very supportive of him.
Brian: I'm very much picking up that you were solely in this book for the characters pretty much. do you have any of those little ones so you're just you're just going over your favorite characters right now and when Kelly, uh, any other ones that stuck out to you at all?
Tim: Um, no, I thought those were the ones that had the [00:13:00] most of the story.
Brian: Oh, yeah, I see so you are you are viewing the characters, the random characters that we met along the way, you are viewing them as what they added to the story.
In terms of just making things interesting like this book is just showing how eccentric people in Savannah can be and I think the author did a good job of highlighting that so that's what I liked about it
All right, we can we can disagree. Yes, you know, we can blend some things because it's appearing that what you liked about the book is what I disliked about that book
You disliked the characters?
Brian: No I I'm not saying that I disliked the amount of characters, right?
I felt like it was a distraction. I felt like Emma Kelly, we followed her on a day when she goes around singing and playing piano and all these places. Yeah. It was like for like 10 pages. I was like, what was the point of that? Lady Chablis. I like just because her entertainment factor right, but she didn't like you said, she didn't add anything to the actual story and Leah, I guess.
Is there to provide like you said the context of like giving Savannah [00:14:00] some depth that yes, he might be doing this for selfish reasons, fixing up old homes, but he's also Jewish and maybe not accepted by the people of Savannah. so I kinda get that, but like Luther Driggers?
Yeah fluorescent fish and follow around him and Serena Dawes, like what's the point of that?
Tim: He's entertaining how quirky he was like he had flies that he kept on a string. Yeah, okay, I'm quirky too! Oh, I'm quirky.
Let me pose a theory here. Okay, I think that I wish the book had just chose to be solely about the characters and not even dealt with the crime stuff and you wish, from your perspective you're saying all these characters were a distraction from this crime element and I can understand that but I just think we'd rather see the book have taken separate directions.
Brian: And I think that's what makes the book then is like what is it trying to be? Yeah, and I think I think for some people who are just along for the ride, they might [00:15:00] like it more than us, but I think you're right.
I think we took two different routes you the character around me the crime route. And I guess we didn't appreciate the other side.
Tim: I think it's the author's responsibility. I think he should have been a little more deliberate in his route. It was 400 pages, 400 pages and he couldn't it was too much.
Brian: But like you said he's a newspaper reporter guy like I kind of feel like. That is how this is written. Like you said in shorter and shorter bits about characters and and yeah a bunch of articles strung up together.
I just didn't see the point of a lot of these characters.
But what I I did enjoy was the very small characters we got to meet like, the two I'm thinking of is Mr. Glover who still walking the dog? Like that was a short little thing that makes Savannah's seem quirky.
So his dog had died but he was he was he walked the dog for some rich guy.
Yeah, the rich guy died and left in his will that [00:16:00] Mr. Glover should get paid every week for walking his dog until and then the dog died. Yeah and the guy and Mr. Glover goes to the judge and says well judge the dog died. I guess you don't have to pay me each week to go walk the dog and the judge was like well, what are you talkin about Mr. Glover? I see the dog behind you right now. And as long as he's there you keep walking the dog will keep paying you. Yeah, everyone around town. He doesn't have anything. he's not walking a dog but everyone in town and asked him if he's walking the dog. He's like, yes, sir. Come on Patrick.
Which first how do you feel about human names for animals?
Tim: You're getting sidetracked...
Brian: I know but like that's what I found. Interesting is the dog's name was Patrick. I think that's fine. You think it's fine? Yeah, what do you name your pet? I don't have any pets. Have you had pets that's I had a cat growing up an orange cat named Marmalade. Okay, that was it. So any pet named human name, you're just totally against, that's what really gets just a little odd. That's all.
But so I'd [00:17:00] like mr. Glover and then the other one I liked was a little short thing. Where the author goes to another store where there's an owner that sits in like the corner and never moves and then there's a salesman that walks around the store helping customers and taking inventory and everything and the salesman has one eye he has a "carefully applied arc of purple eyeshadow that blazed like a lurid sunset on his left eyelid." And so he had this mascara on his left eye and his eye any and because he is a crossdresser but he knows that the owner never moves from the corner of the office. So he only does half his face and walks like a crab around the office.
So that the owner only sees half his face and the owner knows that he does it but the owner doesn't care, he's a good worker. I thought that was a cool thing you know? Little asides. Yeah. Yeah, so I mean but like that's just if you're gonna have [00:18:00] characters that are going to show examples of the quirkiness of a town like Savannah, that's all you need.
You don't have to follow Emma Kelly for 6000 songs, or Luther Driggers trying to have fluorescent fish in a tank it didn't move the story a long now and just for how long they dwelled on it, right? Correct? I'm sorry. We got sidetracked. but there was a still a lot of things I liked.
Yeah, I mean, I guess I'm big on the opening of a book and I just liked how he described Jim Williams and on the very first page "he was tall about 50 with darkly handsome almost Sinister features. A neatly trimmed mustache hairs turning silver at the temples and I so black they were like the tinted windows of a limousine. He could see out but you couldn't see in." so I kind of dug that and a few other things I like when he would talk about when Jim was in jail, and one of the cellmates was acting like a dog.
Haha that was so funny, I wrote that down. Yeah, that was hilarious. Do you want to [00:19:00] describe the will like so Jim is in jail after being convicted for murder the second time I think and and waiting an appeal.
and he spends like two years in the county jail and he's kept in the cell with uh how do they put it the homosexuals in the mentally? Unstable. Yep, and so he has a telephone he calls and does business on the telephone but one of the cellmates came in who acts like a dog barking and on all fours and lifted his leg and peeing on things and one time he was on a phone trying to sell or buy antiques.
And then this guy the the cellmate was barking like a dog. He's like, oh, that's just my Russian wolfhound. Then the cellmate changed octaves and started barking higher. And then June was that's my other dog the Yorkie and he's like Won't someone please put the dogs out in the garden! And the other cell mates all tackle the guy barking the dog and I could just have that picture of like almost like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest where they're all just getting it up on some mentally unstable [00:20:00] person and having them shut up.
but no Tim I could tell that this guy was an intellectual from New York, you know, one of those coastal elites, so I have a quiz for you to him. Okay. Can you tell me what these words mean the definition of some of these words because there were some words in here that I honestly had to look up, you know, that's a bonus to reading is that you expand your vocabulary and you want to become more well-read, right? Yeah, so I have words here that I had to look up and I want to see if you know what they mean obsequious oh stubborn stubborn unyielding. Wow. Nice Tim imperious that's when I had to Google to you. I forget domineering and the haughty manner dictatorial overbearing and uh appropriate opprobrious. I don't know opprobrious is to convey or Express opprobrium.
An opprobrium is the disgrace or [00:21:00] reproach incurred by conduct considered outrageously shameful because he was talking about I did like this thing at the end with Jim Williams is back home after being down not guilty. He's back home and he's sorting through the cards of in and out for his big Christmas party.
and I like that because it gave the author a way within the story to kind of review what happened to these characters, I mean, like you said this was several years of Savannah life. And so Jim Williams was going to put on this party for the first time in years, and he would have the people he would include within the party on his in pile and the people you would exclude on out pile and he would go through these cards.
Luther Driggers here Serena Dawes and then he came to Joe Odom and he thought about Joe Odom and his financial troubles and woes and he split up with his woman Mandy I think and then he put Joe in the in pile because he knew that Joe Odom would put on a good face despite the opprobrious, glances from the other, [00:22:00] partygoers.
Yeah. So I did I like that little bit how he could kind of recap the story what happened with the characters through Jim's Christmas party.
Tim: Yeah. The Christmas party was a good way to catch everybody up on what people are doing but maybe he didn't need to use these big words all the time New York words.
but the Christmas party was funny. There's one scene where it just kind of goes from conversation to conversation from different people one of the parties one year, and it's just really funny because everybody has some. Interesting backstory. it's funny everybody's rich but kind of crazy and everybody has a gun just with them but they're all drinking a ton of alcohol.
Another thing I liked was you know, what the very end Minerva and the narrator, are going to the graves at Bonaventure Cemetery and they're going to try to assuage Danny Hansford's spirit. let Jim be but then they there's a little thing he says "we passed the graves of bonaventure's two most famous residents Johnny Mercer and Conrad [00:23:00] Aiken Mercer's Epitaph affirming the Hereafter in which Angels Sing Aikens raising the Specter of doubt and a of destinations unknown."
I thought that was cool. The two most famous people from Savannah buried their their gravestones reflect two different views on the afterlife and I think that was good and evil Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil. Yeah heaven in hell dichotomy of Life. Yeah. Yeah. anything else you liked about.
Well, just to talk more about that voodoo. I thought it was funny like how specific it would get because the witch woman Minerva. She'd just be like, did you have a a quart jar with a label on it and nine shiny dimes and like dove's blood or something just like really specific stuff. I just thought it got pretty funny.
Oh you like that it was it was entertaining. I was like, this is ridiculous. And I think the author is describing it and kind of a tongue-in-cheek way. also a character I thought last one I'll talk about it is Sonny Seiler the lawyer the [00:24:00] second lawyer he hires, you know, because he's like this really intense kind of football guy and he owns the Georgia Bulldog like the mascot.
It was was his dog, which was so funny. Yeah. Yeah, and so they were like a four Ugas that he had like over the years. But he just like was obsessed with his Bulldog. I think Uga 6 by now, probably but I don't know. I mean I mean, yes didn't add to the plot but it's funny. Sure.
Brian: I guess I'm comparing it slightly to another book. That I really really like is Catch-22, and Catch-22 has a lot of interesting characters, but they all contribute to I I feel the overall Arc of the story. They're all intertwined within the storyline. I felt like a lot of these characters were introduced in the first half of the book.
We never hear from again, or if we do they're not in anyway relevant to the story.
Tim: It was just a choppy, kind of storyline. Yeah, not a lot [00:25:00] of flow to it. But anyway, so what do you want to move on to next?
Brian: Well, what do we want to elaborate on when we disliked?
I mean, it was mainly for me the characters and like I said in the first half it's fine like if they want to establish zany characters, that's fine. took me a second to get into it because of all the characters.
I was wondering where this is going and once the crime happened I was. An interested to see what would happen. but then after Jim was in jail for those two years when we talked about him being his cell and trying to conduct his business from the jail cell he says Savannah forgot about Jim and then he was going on these tangents about the Savannah College of Art and Design or that one woman who daughter was she wanted her to be ballerina, but she turned that vehicle officer.
I was like that's another like five to ten pages where I didn't really see what the point of that was. I mean, it could have been him. Just trying to pad the book to make it a little thicker for I'm sure his editor didn't want, you know, just 250 pages on it.
He probably wanted to something longer
Tim: but he wrote this over the course of [00:26:00] like eight years or something and he's only written like one other book. So I just don't think he's like a writer this is it I well that's harsh, a novelist. Yeah.
Brian: Because I mean I I know I mean that's one thing I'm hesitant about this is I don't want to critique people too. Harshly. Yeah, because this guy's a better writer than I am a lot of people like this book. Yeah. It's a best-seller. Yep, one Pulitzer whatever, you know, but yeah,
Tim: so can we talk more about Savannah? And because I think drew people to this largely. Yes, so some interesting things about it.
it's laid out in this kind of square pattern like these different squares. and then you have these Spanish moss trees or this cool kind of vegetation.
so it's just got a unique feel to it. I guess the southern feeling and then so they said Savannah was a coastal town? So they're used to like hosting people and so they're friendly and social but they're also sort of in their own world.
Like they don't want to be part of a bigger thing than themselves and I think that's what makes the [00:27:00] place interesting right?
Brian: I did like the very end talking about Savannah, he says, The ordinary become extraordinary eccentrics thrived every nuance and Quirk of Personality achieve greater Brilliance in that Lush enclosure than would have been possible anywhere else in the world.
I think that and that very much comes across in this book with these characters. Yes, they are very much, engrossed in the world of Savannah don't care about anybody really outside of Savannah. He goes at lengths to say that Lady Chablis is really the only one that even travels outside of Savannah and goes through the other towns nearby.
it seems like an interesting place.
Tim: Let me read just the last line because I think it kind of goes off of what you're saying. the author says for me Savannah's resistance to change was it Saving Grace the city looked inward sealed off from the noises and distractions of the World At Large it grew inward to and in such a way that its people flourished like hot houseplants tended by an indulgent Gardener.
I think [00:28:00] that's a good line. Yeah. I did enjoy that that is well, but and it was just funny how much everybody just like partied there and gossiped
I looked at an interview with the author on YouTube and he talked about gossip too and how big of a role that was in the town because he said that they gossip more than anywhere else he's been to. And that kind of encourages strange behavior because it's like the stranger you are the more people are going to talk about you. So they sort of appreciate their eccentrics. Whereas if you're just a weird person in like, I don't know around here then you're sort of shunned but there they kind of encourage it. You know what I mean?
Sure sure I mean, I like that enough about the characters but Savannah likes their isolation. they're friendly to tourist it sounds like but they don't want to just be like every other place.
Brian: They're friendly to tourists.Yeah not transplants them move their is that I mean impression. Yeah, because yes, they're welcoming to [00:29:00] tourists because they know tourists will come and go but anybody who come my impression was that if anybody comes from the outside, it takes them a while to get part of the social structure that is Savannah. Yeah, it's a small place and they want to preserve their kind of dynamics. I think. Yep.
so do you have anything else you want to do? Did you like Lady Chablis at the debutante ball? Yeah. That was also didn't move the story along. No, but but I entertain I enjoyed that as well. Yes, so just to give a brief description. She goes to this like black debutante ball, which will the narrator does he's invited.
Yeah the narrator and he tells lady Chablis he's going and she wants to go along but he's kind of like no, I'm just go to this by myself because these are. These are uh dignified individuals. Yeah, and she crashes crashes it hard. Yeah, it's funny like she keeps it low key at first but then she gradually just kind of you know does a big fuck you to the whole thing [00:30:00] and it's funny.
Tim: Yeah to her. It was Rebellion. I think against these black, neighbors of hers who were seemed like maybe they were trying to assimilate to the mainstream culture. Whereas she's someone who still like proud and independent, I think she was sort of resentful of them sure was my feeling.
Brian: Did you notice? Lady Chablis plays herself in the movie. That's her. Yeah photo. Yeah. Wow, I guess she asked to I think in the I mean, I don't think like who do you cast? Yeah. You know a black drag queen. Yeah. it's funny that Clint needs to a directed this I wouldn't have pegged as the Director.
Well that was still early in his directing career. Did he direct Unforgiven? I think that was like his first it's hit or miss with his movies. Let's be real. Yeah. did you see how they did Minerva in the in the movie and the trailer it looked very much weird
I feel like they made her just be like a cooky, zany person when I feel like they could have done something darker. Yeah. I mean, that's just my...
Tim: They could have given her more depth. It [00:31:00] looked like they made her sort of this really silly character. which a lot of the voodoo was silly my my sense and you kind of touch on this I think is that a lot of the voodoo was sort of rooted in like a therapeutic element where she would say something about how Jim Williams had to forgive Danny or be on good terms with him.
And even though there's all the metaphysical stuff is probably kind of nonsense, but just this sense of Making amends or forgiving these people. I thought that was interesting.
Brian: Yes. I agree. That's the part I liked that was my big takeaway and especially at the end when she's going to the cemetery to give Danny Hansford some Wild Turkey or whatever pores and on his grave.
Yeah, and you know, yes, that's the part I did with the voodoo. But yeah, the saw the other all the other stuff was like. Like how much the bad she put on like the judge and the da and that stuff that real like okay. Yeah all the curses. Yeah, we're a little much I [00:32:00] mean, it just goes to your part of the story that you like with the characters.
Tim: Yeah, so starting to wrap up, this was our first book review so I know it's going to be kind of choppy. We're still learning our our craft and I think that's okay.
Brian: Yeah, and so, yes, we want to include more input from our community of listeners.
Hopefully in the future. Yeah. All zero of them right now. What's that? Yeah. So yes, if you wanna tell us what you think of Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil. You can still comment on our website by all means. we will definitely read those. and yes, we want to incorporate more viewer or listener input in the future.
So the next episode will do is Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas by Hunter S. Thompson? Yeah looking forward to that. Yeah. So, we want to give a final rating on Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil? Let's wrap it up. Yeah, you sure. Okay. All right. So we're going to include zero or is it just one to five one to five?
I think ones low we probably won't review zero [00:33:00] but now right. Yeah. So 1 to 5. You want me to go first? Yeah, three. Really? Yeah. What are you gonna say? You're not gonna say five know three or four. I was thinking three too, huh? I'm surprised, why did you act surprised then? I thought you're gonna dog the book some more.
So yeah, I was gonna go three. Yeah because. Yeah think that attempt three out of five. Yeah 5. Yeah, I think that's appropriate. It's a three book. Yeah, it is. It's fine. It's not bad. No, it's just didn't blow us away. Right? I think it is entertaining if you want to just good casual read.
Yeah. I think this is your book, I don't think it's gonna grab you with suspense. But like you said there's a lot of characters that keep you entertained. And yeah.
Tim: If you read this you'll learn about an interesting city. You'll read about some eccentric people.
And there's a murder that's fine and nefarious [00:34:00] goings-on but yeah, so. I'm glad we're getting this thing started.
I'm glad to get this book check off my to read list, even if it's a 3 out of 5, that's still a worthy book to read. so I'm looking forward to Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and your explanation of why you're making us read it. All right, we can say over the next episode.
Yeah. So I'm looking forward to that and please leave your feedback on our website and let us know how we can improve in the future. Absolutely.