New Fiction

I don’t usually read much fiction. My reading tastes tend towards history and other nonfiction. But I seem to be on a British fiction kick lately; I’ve just read two new novels in a row, both by British authors. In fact, I’ve read five novels this year, which is a lot for me. I think owning a Kindle has made me more adventurous in my reading tastes, because I can download a sample of almost any book that seems interesting and try it out for free.

Anyway, as for the British fiction I’ve just read:

The Sense of an Ending, by Julian Barnes, is a great little mystery-box of a book. It’s very short, fewer than 200 pages, and I read it in an evening. I’ve never read a whole book in an evening, or even in a weekend — I’m a slow reader — but this just flew by. It’s a wonderfully constructed story about the unreliability of memory, and you have no idea what it’s all about until the end.

Then there’s The Stranger’s Child, by Alan Hollinghurst, which I just finished today and is a little more problematic.

I’m not sure what to think of it. It’s beautifully written, filled with wonderful little observations about the way people speak and comport themselves, but the writing is not paired with a sufficiently interesting story.

It starts out good, with tantalizing hints of a forbidden same-sex relationship, but — for an Alan Hollinghurst novel — the relationship isn’t explored deeply or explicitly enough. Still, I kept with the book through its time changes, and after about 150 pages I became more absorbed and was glad I’d stuck with it. I enjoyed the middle section the most, set in the late 1960s, because it focused on a budding romance between two appealing gay men and had a nice “comedy of manners” feel. But from there things went downhill; most of the last 150 pages consists of someone conducting interviews with various people for a biography. There is no sense of narrative propulsion, just one plodding interview after another. And because the biographer is trying to solve a mystery that we, the readers, already know the answer to, there is no suspense, either. I know “plot” isn’t really the point of this book, that Hollinghurst is trying to say big things about 20th century Britain, the art of biography, homosexuality, the class system, and so on. But there needs to be a good story to keep you reading, and there isn’t really enough of one.

At least there is the writing to fall back on. The descriptions of a middle-aged woman playing the piano and an elderly woman writing out a check at the bank are little gems, and there are plenty of nice social observations. Yet the book is at times over-written. At certain points I wanted Hollinghurst to stop describing the hidden shades of meaning in what a character was saying and to just get on with it already.

The book doesn’t exactly fly by, so if you’re in a hurry, look for something else. But if you don’t care so much about plot and are in the mood to slow down and enjoy some fine writing, this might work for you.

A few years ago I read Hollinghurst’s The Line of Beauty, which is a nice satire of Thatcherism in 1980s Britain, and includes a memorable scene where the gay young liberal protagonist accidentally meets the Iron Lady at a rich person’s house party while high on the cocaine he’s just snorted upstairs. That one was a little short on plot, too, but it didn’t feel as long as the new book.

I wonder what to read next.

Quote

“Going into a retreat is really about breaking down the constructs of ‘you,’ ” he said. “The whole idea is for you to take a very close look at the you you have become in your mind. The you you are in your real mind isn’t necessarily the real you.”

Getting Far, Far Away From It All [NY Times]

JFK Assassination 48 Years Later

Today is the 48th anniversary of the assassination of JFK, which means it’s the day when all the conspiracy theorists come out of their holes.

I don’t think there was a conspiracy at all. It seems pretty clear from the preponderance of the evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.

And also, here’s a logical exercise:

There are tons of JFK assassination conspiracy theories out there. But if any one of the conspiracy theories is true, that means the rest of the conspiracy theories must be false. All but one of these conspiracy theories — all seemingly backed up by reams of circumstantial evidence and sinister occurrences — must be false. Because they can’t ALL be true.

Think about that. Most of the JFK conspiracy theories, by virtue of logic, MUST be false.

Once you realize that most of the theories must be false, you realize how silly this whole endeavor is. Because if we can conclude that all but one of these seemingly carefully argued conspiracy theories must be false, then there’s no reason to believe any of them at all.

If you examine any historical event through skeptical eyes, you will find seemingly strange occurrences, weird coincidences, and things that don’t appear to add up. If you examine anything down to the fractal level at which the JFK assassination has been examined, you will find something unexplainable.

I think the reason so many people under 50 believe the JFK assassination was a conspiracy is because the idea that it was a conspiracy is part of our cultural zeitgeist. They’ve been told it must be a conspiracy, and therefore they believe it is, because, “Hey, doesn’t everybody think so?”

No. Everybody doesn’t.

Stephen King, 11/22/63

I don’t read much fiction, but when I saw that Stephen’s King newest novel was about a man who travels back in time to try and stop the assassination of JFK, I knew I had to read it. I’m a sucker for a good time-travel story, and I’ve long been interested in the JFK assassination, so this was right up my alley.

Well, it didn’t disappoint. Not only is it a thrilling read — it turns out to be a great love story, and very moving. It’s a long book — 850 pages — but I read it in a week, which is very fast for me. Whenever I had a free moment I just wanted to dive back into it. I started it last Saturday and finished it last night.

Time travel is my favorite sci-fi genre, because I love the theoretical implications. You really wouldn’t be able to go back in time without changing history. If you live in the past for any extended period of time, you’re going to have to eat and drink things, and buy stuff, and live somewhere. What if you buy something and that means, somewhere down the line, that the store runs out of stuff that some other person was originally supposed to buy? What if you rent a motel room and it turns out that someone else was originally supposed to rent it? What if your mere presence on a street has some micro-effect on the steps a man takes as he walks down that same street — either because he has to walk around you or merely notices you — and those micro-contortions cause the sperm inside him to jostle around slightly differently than they originally would have, so that when he impregnates his wife, a different sperm inseminates the egg, and an entirely different person is born?

You just never know.

11/22/63 doesn’t go quite that far. But at any rate, it’s terrific.

The only other Stephen King book I’d read before this was The Stand, a long time ago, and I only got about 1/3 of the way through it because it was too long. I’ve tended to dismiss him as a pop-fiction horror writer, but I really enjoyed this book, and I may have to read more of them now. Maybe I’ll work my way backward and read Under the Dome soon. (But right now I have a backlog of books to read. I still want to read the Steve Jobs biography.)

Also, it was refreshing to read a brand-new book. My reading interests are quirky, so most books I read are a few years old. It was nice to read a book that just came out.

Oh, and incidentally: the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination is November 22, 2013. JFK was assassinated on a Friday, and the 50th anniversary will also, somewhat creepily, be a Friday. And Friday is the day when movies are normally released. So maybe 11/22/13 would be a good release date for a movie adaption of this book. Just saying…

On Glee

Glee drives me nuts. It has some nice moments, true. But to get to those moments you have to wade through an enormous amount of ridiculousness.

Here are some things I hate about Glee:

(1) Blaine’s bow ties. I viscerally loathe Blaine’s bow ties. When I see Blaine wearing a bow tie, I feel almost… angry. Bow ties are for suits. You do not wear bow ties to school. You do not wear bow ties with plaid shirts or polo shirts.

But it’s not that I’m some fashion maven. Far from it — I tend to dress pretty plainly. And I think that’s the issue: I don’t like it when people try to get attention for themselves by dressing outrageously. Why can’t you just trust that people will get to know you and find out what a unique person you are? Why do you have to proclaim your individuality so aggressively?

From a production standpoint, I do not understand why the show’s costume designer thinks Blaine looks cool this way.

I also hate almost everything Kurt wears.

(2) The extremely unrealistic musical performance process makes me batty. I know, it’s just a TV show and I should just relax and enjoy it. I’m not usually one to point out plot holes in other shows, so I don’t know why it bothers me so much here, but it does. Maybe it’s because I did musical theater in high school.

If the production of “West Side Story” is opening in a few days, why are Rachel and Blaine standing around a piano instead of in a full dress rehearsal? And why aren’t they off book? And how did the musicians get permission to change the orchestrations? (And as Matt pointed out, why did they perform the film version of the show instead of the stage version?) And why did it take them several weeks to put together a production of “West Side Story” but they were able to throw together “Rocky Horror Picture Show” overnight? And why doesn’t anyone ever need to rehearse anything? And what the hell kind of glee club is this in the first place?

(3) The ridiculous plot points regarding adoption and congressional elections and a splinter glee club.

(4) The wildly uneven character writing. What are we supposed to think of Mercedes, who hides her extreme insecurity behind some diva attitude she learned from watching movies and other TV shows? Are we supposed to feel sorry for her? Are we supposed to dislike her? (Because I kind of do.) Or is every gay viewer just automatically supposed to love her because we’re all supposed to be stereotypical gay men and identify with divas?

Gee, you seem to dislike this show so much. Why do you keep watching?

Aw, heck. Because there are some good moments. The Kurt/Blaine/Sebastian plot last night was great, and it was nice to see Kurofsky again.

And the music performances, as ridiculously overprocessed as they are, are fun to watch. Sometimes.

There’s a good show hidden inside Glee. It’s too bad you have to dig so hard to find it.

Watching the Critics

Last night Matt and I went to see Queen of the Mist, a new musical by Michael John LaChiusa, starring Mary Testa, and produced by the Transport Group. The show is performed in a small school gymnasium, and the 100-seat audience is arranged on two sides of the gym, facing each other, in four rows of 12-13 people each.

Before the show, Matt wondered if any theater critics would be there, since the show is opening in just a few days. Sure enough, a few minutes before 8:00, I looked at the half of the audience that was facing us and spotted Ben Brantley, the New York Times theater critic. And then, three seats over from Ben Brantley, Matt noticed Roma Torre, theater critic for NY1’s On Stage TV show, which we watch every weekend.

They fascinated me. I probably spent half the show watching them watch the show. Every so often they would scribble on notepads. I tried to gauge their opinions of the show from their facial expressions, but it was hard; they both had these thoughtful, close-mouthed smiles while watching. I couldn’t tell if they enjoyed it or were just being polite.

As for my opinion: it was a decent show, but I found it a bit boring. The plot is thin; it’s about Annie Edson Taylor, the first woman to go over Niagara Falls in a barrel and survive, which she did in 1901. LaChiusa’s music was very nice, and Mary Testa is always great to watch. But the show could have been about 15 minutes shorter.

I find myself feeling that way a lot lately: most recent shows I’ve seen seem to run about 15 minutes longer than I want them to be. I don’t know what that’s all about.

The Walt Disney Family Museum

We visited the Walt Disney Family Museum in San Francisco earlier this month, and weeks later, I still keep thinking about it. Not only was it a moving experience, but it also gave me a new metaphor for thinking about a life. About anyone’s life.

The Walt Disney Family Museum was created by Walt’s family as a place to tell the story of Walt, as distinct from Disney the company, and it’s owned by a private non-profit, not by the Disney Corporation. In order to maintain that distinction, it’s located in San Francisco, rather than in Disneyland or Walt Disney World. Walt’s daughter, Diane Disney Miller, didn’t want people to rush through the museum between theme park visits; she wanted people to take the time to explore Walt’s life. In fact, the museum seems much more oriented to adults than to children.

The museum is located in the Presidio, an enormous, beautiful park, and as you walk toward the museum, the Golden Gate Bridge looms in the background.

The two-story building is divided into 10 galleries. Unlike most museums, where you can wander around and see things in any order you wish, there is only one way through this museum, as it tells the story of Walt’s life chronologically, gallery by gallery — sort of like a theme park ride. Each room is filled with fascinating historic objects — the first drawing of Mickey Mouse; colorful paint jars used by Disney animators; a two-story multiplane camera — and there are also plenty of sound recordings and video installations along the way. The museum starts with Walt’s birth and childhood, and then you follow the story as he reaches greater and greater heights: the creation of Mickey Mouse, the Silly Symphonies, the first full-length animated film in history (Snow White). After the lows of World War II – culminating, for the Walt Disney studio, in a labor strike against Walt — he regroups, taking his first steps into live-action films. You learn about his newfound love for miniatures and model railroads.

And then you enter the centerpiece of the museum: an amazing, two-story gallery covering Walt’s greatest decade, the 1950s, when he opened Disneyland and began his groundbreaking weekly TV show. The highlight of this gallery is a stunning scale model of Disneyland, known as “The Disneyland of Walt’s Imagination.” It’s not historically accurate; it doesn’t depict Disneyland at any one particular time, but is more of a composite Disneyland as Walt wanted it to be. Matt and I probably spent 10 to 15 minutes just looking at this model — we’d been to Disneyland itself just two days earlier, so it was especially cool to examine the model.

After the model, you can see clips of Disney’s TV show and the later live-action movies, and explore exhibits on Mary Poppins and Disney’s contributions to the 1964/65 New York World’s Fair. And then… in 1966, Walt dies, way too early, at age 65. There’s a TV clip of an obituary, and a wall of newspaper cartoons expressing sadness over his death.

I had no idea what to expect from this museum, other than that it was a must-see for Disney fans. It was a very profound experience. We wound up spending four hours there, and I didn’t even listen to all the audio or watch every video clip. In fact, somewhere around 1938, in the middle of the Snow White exhibit — not even halfway through the museum — my eyes began to glaze over. But then I got a second wind, and I was riveted again.

I’ve read two biographies of Walt Disney, so it was a weird experience to travel through a physical representation of his life. I felt like I was exploring a book brought to life. It also made me think of a recent article in the New York Times about how to memorize things: one trick is to conjure up a 3D model of a house in your mind and then mentally place the things you want to remember in specific locations throughout the house. Walking through the museum, I felt like I was in someone’s mental map of Walt’s life. I can remember things about his life much more clearly now.

And it makes me wonder what my life would look like if it were laid out as a building. I’m 37, the same age Walt was when Snow White came out. How far through the exhibit of my life would I be right now? How much is behind me and how much more looms ahead? Is there a fantastic two-story gallery in my future — filled not with fame, but with wonderful experiences?

I loved the Walt Disney Family Museum. I hope I can visit it again sometime.

Year of Travel

A year ago today, Matt and I flew to Orlando for a week’s vacation at Walt Disney World. This past Saturday, we got back from a vacation to Disneyland and San Francisco, thus ending a big year of travel for me. Due to an unusually high number of work and personal trips, I traveled more in the last 365 days than I had in many years.

In the past year I’ve visited, in chronological order: Orlando, Florida; Chattanooga, Tennessee; Houston, Texas; Charlottesville, Virginia; Montreal, Québec; Kiawah Island, South Carolina; Santa Fe, New Mexico; Bethany Beach, Delaware; and Anaheim and San Francisco, California.

I really enjoy traveling. It takes me out of my daily routine, and I enjoy visiting places I’ve never seen before. When I travel, I really feel like I’m living.

I hope to keep doing it.

California Here We Come

Matt and I are going to California on Sunday for a week’s vacation. We’re spending two days at Disneyland and the rest of the week in San Francisco.

I’m excited about our trip. First, Matt’s never been to the west coast, so I’m looking forward to vicariously experiencing his first trip to California. Second, while I’ve been to California a few times, I’ve never been to Disneyland! I’ve been to Walt Disney World in Orlando a few times, and I’ve even been to Tokyo Disneyland. But I’ve never been to the original Disneyland in Anaheim, opened in 1955, the only theme park Walt fully designed and had a chance to visit.

Matt and I went to Disney World last October, a little less than a year ago. So we will have been to Walt Disney World and Disneyland within the same year. (Not quite like visiting them within the same 24-hour period, but still pretty cool.)

The only thing I’m bummed about is that the Pirates of the Caribbean ride will be closed, because it’s supposed to be even better than the one in Orlando. I’m also a little worried that our time there will be rushed. We were originally just going to go to San Francisco, but then a few weeks ago, Matt suggested that since we were going to California, maybe we could go to Disneyland too. It sounded great to me. So we added it to the beginning of our trip, kind of as an afterthought. Fortunately it’s one of the least crowded times of the year, and we don’t necessarily need to see the stuff that’s duplicated in both parks, so we should be fine.

And oh yeah, San Francisco should be fun, too…

On Steve Jobs

I got my first home computer in 1982. It was a present for my ninth birthday. My dad picked it out.

It was not an Apple computer. It was a TI-99/4A, from Texas Instruments.

A few years later, we got a home computer for the entire family.

It was not a Macintosh. It was a PC.

I was never a Mac person. I grew up on PCs. When I went to college, my dad got me a Windows box, a 486. In law school, I got a laptop with Windows 95 on it.

In 1999-2000, I used a Mac while working as an editor. I worked at a very small company — four employees — and my boss was totally a Mac person. The Mac I used at work had OS 8, or maybe it was OS 9. See? I don’t even know which OS it was. I didn’t particularly like using it. I was a PC person.

When OS X came out, it looked really pretty. I started to think I might want to get a Mac someday. But I was a PC person, and it seemed like switching to the Mac would be a pain in the ass. Plus Macs were so expensive.

I didn’t get my first iPod until December 2005 — the 5G, the first video iPod. I got my first iPhone, the 3G, in November 2008.

Finally, just over a year ago, in the summer of 2010, I bought my first Mac — the 21.5-inch iMac.

And I love it.

I wish I’d grown up on Macs. I’m free associating in my head right now: the mid-80s, the Macintosh, the 1984 Summer Olympics in L.A., Diff’rent Strokes and Family Ties, Ronald Reagan, the Star Wars trilogy, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Gremlins, a booming economy, optimism, being a kid, elementary school, computer labs, the Smurfs and the Superfriends on Saturday mornings, G.I. Joe and the Transformers on weekdays after school…

It seemed clear when Steve Jobs stepped down from Apple six weeks ago that the end was near. But it was still a shock to see the headline. Right there on the screen of my iMac, of course.

He was 56? That’s way too young. And yet sometimes I couldn’t believe he was only 56. He’d been around forever, for so long, that he had to be older than 56.

I’m sad that he won’t get to see how technology develops over the next few decades. He should have lived another 20 or 30 years. He should have been part of it, inventing the iTeleporter (nah, too long a name: the iPort?) or something nobody can even think of today.

But then again, he wasn’t an inventor. He didn’t create things out of thin air. He just made certain things the best things they could be.

The future was supposed to be about flying cars, and jet packs, and Dick Tracy-ish wristwatch communicators. Well, we still don’t have flying cars or jet packs. But we do have those crazy futuristic communicators, although we carry them in our pockets, not on our wrists.

I am not in love with my iPhone. But there are times when I use it, or just look at it, and I think: wow. Look at this elegant little device and the dozens of things it can do.

We are totally living in the future.

Thank you, Steve Jobs.

Watching TV

Lately I’ve been nerding out with a terrific book: Watching TV: Six Decades of American Television, by Harry Castleman and Walter J. Podrazik. It’s an incredibly detailed history of American television, organized season by season. The first three chapters cover the invention of TV and the beginnings of TV broadcasting, and after that, each TV season is covered in great, engagingly written detail, one chapter per season, from 1944-45 all the way up through 2009-10. (So far I’m up to 1978-79.) Most chapters are about 7-8 pages long, but the book is 8 1/2″ by 11″ and the text is in two columns per page, so on ordinary-sized book pages, each chapter would probably be about 20 pages long. (The chapters have neat titles, too. Here’s an explanation of each chapter title.)

The season-by-season structure lets you follow the story of TV over the years: the rise of the networks, the completion of the coaxial cable that allowed live TV from coast to coast, the move of TV production from New York to Hollywood. You can follow the flow of broadcasting trends over the years: TV experimentation in the 1940s, variety shows and anthologies and Westerns in the 1950s, action-adventure shows and rural escapist sitcoms in the 1960s, smartly-written CBS sitcoms in the early 1970s, and so on. You can follow the changing fortunes of the big networks: CBS was king for the first few decades of TV, but in the mid-70s ABC suddenly rocketed to number one with entertaining escapism like Happy Days, Laverne & Shirley, and Charlie’s Angels. (That’s where I am right now.)

The book also covers government regulation of TV and the rise of public TV and cable TV, and it touches on national and world events when relevant. Did you ever wonder why network prime time runs from 8-11 pm (7-10 pm Central/Mountain), except for Sundays when there’s an extra hour? Did you ever wonder why TVs used to have both VHF and UHF dials? It’s in this book.

Each chapter also has a prime-time grid of the networks’ fall schedules for that season, as well as a sidebar listing some important events from the season.

This will sound silly, but I love this book. I’d always been a TV history nerd, but I didn’t know this book existed until a year ago. (It’s actually an updated edition; it was first published in 1982). I haven’t loved a book so much since The President’s House, a two-volume history of the White House, covered chronologically by presidency, that I read a few years ago. I guess I enjoy incredibly detailed, information-packed, well-written chronological narratives about topics I’m interested in.

Yeah, I’m a nerd, and proud of it.

Romney, Kerry, McCain

Just a quick post on politics:

Even though Rick Perry jumped into the presidential race and immediately grabbed the lead for the Republican nomination from Mitt Romney, it seems possible that Romney can regain the lead and get the nomination. The more Perry campaigns and debates, the more he seems to fall in the polls.

It seems to me that Romney in 2012 is going to be like Kerry in 2004 and McCain in 2008. Kerry and McCain each had an early lead for their parties’ nominations–not because they were particularly well-liked, but because they seemed electable. Their support started to waver as primary voters began to look for someone who genuinely excited them, rather than someone who just seemed “electable”: Howard Dean in 2004, Mike Huckabee in 2008. But the early front-runner managed to re-grab the lead and win the nomination.

Of course, in each case, the eventual nominee lost the general election.

Baby Tech

Last weekend Matt and I were using FaceTime to video chat with my brother, my sister-in-law, and my niece. Matt and I were in front of my iMac, so we were stationary, but my brother was using his iPad, and as he walked around the room, I watched my sister-in-law and my niece playing together. It was just like being there. I marveled that we were having this video conversation. I’m still amazed that this technology exists, something that used to seem straight out of Dick Tracy.

At one point my niece was watching me and Matt. She’s not yet two years old, and I wondered: can she comprehend this? Does she realize that we’re interacting with her, or does she think she’s watching us on TV? Or does she think we’re somehow inside the device? Is she confused by any of this?

And then I realized that she had no problem understanding that she was interacting with us. She didn’t even think about it. After all, when I was little, I watched TV and I didn’t think there were little people inside the box; I just knew that I was watching something on the TV screen. I didn’t think it was weird; I didn’t even question it. I just accepted it as part of the world.

So I’m realizing that my niece is growing up in a world where iPads and video chats and swiping your finger across a glass screen to make things happen is just the norm. To me, it’s this super cool thing that tells me we’re finally living in the future. But to her, it’s just the way the world is and always has been. She’ll grow up in a world where this technology has always existed.

What this shows me is that human beings are amazingly adaptable. In one sense, our natural habitat is the savannah, or the forest; I still feel some primeval connection to the earth when I walk through a tree-filled park. And yet I can totally take something like television, or flying in a big metal tube, or living in a big city, for granted.

If you traveled back in time, say, 10,000 years, and you kidnapped a pregnant woman and brought her back to 2011, and the woman gave birth, the mother would probably remain terrified by everything around her. But her child would grow up totally accustomed to life in the 21st century. Like my niece, this time-traveling ancient child would take iPads for granted.

The human genome is pretty close to what it was several milliennia ago. We are endlessly adaptable. It’s just so bizarre to me.

Ten Years Later

I wasn’t supposed to be in New York that morning.

I was living in Jersey City, across the river. But my last day of work had been the previous Friday, and I was taking a two-week break before starting my new job. At one point I was thinking of flying to Europe during the week of September 10, or maybe to San Francisco. Instead I decided to stay local.

The days leading up to it are encased in amber in my memory.

On Friday night, September 7, I had a falling out at the Phoenix with a guy I’d been dating for a month, because he started making moves on a friend of a friend.

On Saturday night, September 8, I had what I still consider, to this day, to be my quintessential Manhattan experience. I impulsively shaved off the goatee I’d had all summer and decided to go back into the city, back to the Phoenix, to replace bad memories with good ones. I struck up a conversation with a stranger, who wound up becoming a good friend. At four in the morning, instead of taking the PATH back home, I decided to pull a Holden Caulfield and go for a long, solitary walk through the streets of Manhattan. I wound up walking all the way up to the Upper East Side, more than 90 blocks. Along the way, I saw a plastic bag floating in the air, just like in American Beauty; I peed in the ornate men’s room in the magnificent lobby of the Waldorf-Astoria; I sat on the deserted steps of the Metropolitan Museum of Art at the break of dawn and suddenly, surreally, saw hundreds of bicyclists ride by; and, for the first and still the only time in my life, I got cruised and picked up by a guy on the sidewalk. After we walked together for five blocks, he said he was too fucked up to do anything, so we parted ways.

I finally got home at 8 a.m., Sunday morning, September 9, exhausted and in love with Manhattan.

On Monday, September 10, I decided to visit Brooklyn Heights. I took the PATH to the World Trade Center concourse, bought a banana, browsed at the WTC branch of Borders, and then took the subway to Brooklyn. In Brooklyn Heights, I came across Plymouth Church, where presidential candidate Abraham Lincoln spoke out against slavery in February 1860. I’m pretty sure I also walked along the Brooklyn promenade and admired the skyline of lower Manhattan. On the way home, I stopped at the Gap in the WTC concourse and bought a t-shirt. Then I went home.

In the normal course of events I would have gone to bed that night and woken up the next morning at home in my apartment in Jersey City. I used to turn my phone’s ringer off when I slept, so I wouldn’t have woken up when my mom called me the next morning sometime after 9:00. Would I have turned the ringer back on and checked for messages? Or would I have heard people in the street, and would I have gone downstairs to Christopher Columbus Drive and stared at the burning towers directly across the river? My street ran east toward the Hudson River, directly toward the World Trade Center, and from the street there was always such a beautiful view of the twin towers: morning, sunset, or night, they always looked stunning, and sometimes I’d think of my friend Doug Ketcham from college who worked there — I was pretty sure he worked somewhere around the 100th floor — and I’d feel bad that we never got together socially.

But the normal course of events didn’t happen. I went online, and I met a guy, and I went back into Manhattan, and I spent the night at his place on West 10th Street, just off Sixth Avenue, near the Jefferson Market Library. The next morning his A/C was on, and it drowned out most outside noise; when I heard screaming from the street, I thought it must have been a rally for one of New York City’s mayoral candidates, since it was primary day.

I left his place at about 10:45 in the morning to walk to the 9th Street PATH station and go home. But something seemed weird. There was no traffic moving up Sixth Avenue. I walked to the intersection, and clumps of people were staring south. I looked south and I saw an enormous wall of gray smoke. I assumed a building was on fire. I asked a woman what had happened, and she told me that the World Trade Center had been blown up. (She said it had been done by the Palestinians.)

To this day, I still don’t really know how my brain processed that information. Unlike most people I know, I didn’t experience the events of that morning as a series of unfolding horrors: first plane hits (accident!), second plane hits (no, terrorism!), Pentagon gets hit, first tower falls, second tower falls. Since that morning, I’ve watched the news coverage numerous times, to the point where I sometimes think that I experienced it that way. But I didn’t. For me, it happened all at once. I thought it was a perfectly ordinary day, and then I learned that Hell had occurred.

My parents have sometimes joked with me that I’m oblivious. I was never as oblivious as I was that morning.

As for the rest of the day, I wrote about that ten years ago.

Ten years pass much more quickly than they used to.

I remember talking with my best friend in 1996 on the tenth anniversary of the Challenger explosion. The space shuttle had blown up on his 12th birthday, and we used to joke about what a crappy birthday it turned out to be for him. Ten years later, we were both 22. We couldn’t believe ten years had gone by; it made us feel old. In the previous ten years, I’d moved to Japan, come back to the U.S., gone through four years of college, graduated, and become a working adult. So much had happened in his life, too. We had literally grown up in that time.

It doesn’t feel like ten years have passed since 9/11. Yes, I was just 27 then; I didn’t know Matt; my brother had not yet met his wife; my niece was not even a twinkle in someone’s eye. Nobody had heard of Barack Obama; the iPod had not yet been announced; there was no iPhone, no Facebook, no YouTube; the first “Lord of the Rings” movie had not yet come out.

So much has happened. So why doesn’t it feel like any time has passed? Maybe it’s because we still live in the world that 9/11 created. The Challenger explosion was a single event with few national repercussions besides a temporary setback for the U.S. space program. But 9/11 is with us every day, and the weird thing is, we don’t even realize it. The idea of men standing outside Penn Station wearing fatigues and carrying guns used to seem like something out of a movie, but when it happens today I don’t bat an eye. I don’t even blink when someone at a Broadway theater asks me to open my bag. It doesn’t seem like New York has changed in ten years, but we forget the little ways in which it has changed. It’s comforting how easily human beings adapt, but it’s also unsettling.

My therapist’s office is on West 10th Street, off Sixth Avenue. Once a week I cross Sixth Avenue near Jefferson Market Library and walk through the intersection where I first looked south and learned what had happened. Each year, when I go to therapy on the day closest to September 11, I walk through that intersection and get an eerie feeling.

I remember, back then, thinking that one day it would be ten years since 9/11. I hoped we’d still be around, but I honestly wasn’t sure we would be. I wondered who would be president in 2011. I wondered what the world would be like, someday in the future, when we could look back and think of 9/11 as some distant event.

I’m still wondering when that will happen.

10 Years After Pearl Harbor

As a followup to my previous post, here’s a New York Times editorial from December 7, 1951, the 10th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor. (It starts at the bottom of the left column, so you have to scroll down to begin reading.)

Even though World War II is not morally or legitimately equivalent to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, parts of the editorial feel eerily resonant today. Here are some excerpts.

DECADE OF FAME AND INFAMY

Ten tremendous years have passed since that terrible Sunday of Pearl Harbor which President Roosevelt described as “a day that will live in infamy.” …

When the American people woke up on Dec. 7, 1941, they were living in an age in which there still lingered some of the easy-going optimism of the nineteenth century. They still believed that without too much effort and too much pain things might be made to turn out all right. They knew about Hitler but many of them didn’t quite believe that he existed. They knew about Japanese imperialism but they couldn’t quite get it out of their heads that the Japanese, despite their foul record in China, wouldn’t get far in an up-to-date war.

These illusions perished along with many hundreds of men on Sunday afternoon, Dec. 7. …

… Pearl Harbor signed the death warrant of many thousands of men who did not die that day. It changed the whole lives of countless others. …

…Today we cannot look back to Pearl Harbor as men do “to old, unhappy, far-off things and battles long ago.” We lack the tranquility that might soften the ten-year-old tragedy. We lack the certainty that such tragedies will not be repeated. People in this city had an air-raid drill a few days ago. The conceivable enemy was not the Japanese and not the Germans. As we commemorate the dead of Pearl Harbor we may hope and pray that no such commemorations of a new Pearl Harbor will be exacted of our descendants or of ourselves grown older. But after ten years the struggle against absolutism is not yet finally won. …

10 Years After the JFK Assassination

Sunday, of course, is the 10th anniversary of 9/11, and I’ll probably write a more extensive post about it in a couple of days. In the meantime, I was curious to see how the 10th anniversary of JFK’s assassination was covered, so I dug into the New York Times archives and found an editorial dated November 22, 1973, which, in addition to being the 10th anniversary of JFK’s assassination, was also Thanksgiving Day. The nation was deep into Watergate. (And my mom was eight months pregnant with me.)

Here’s the text of the editorial (PDF here):

Ten Years Later

The shot that claimed the life of John F. Kennedy shortly after noon in Dallas ten years ago today will be remembered for more than the murder of a charismatic and promising young president; it marked the beginning of the end of an era filled with the ebullient optimism and confidence identified throughout the world with the spirit of America.

In retrospect, as remembrance of that tragedy coincides with Thanksgiving 1973, some of the Kennedy glitter may have been naively exuberant. The upbeat certainty that “we shall pay any price … to assure the survival and the success of liberty” around the globe seems extravagant today. A sadder but more realistic people has learned to question whether the world will ever again be this, or any, nation’s oyster – or can be made to conform to man’s noblest ideals and aspirations.

“The world is very different now,” John Kennedy said in his inaugural address. “For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life.”

More than a decade seems to separate John F. Kennedy’s world from today’s realities. The nuclear threat remains as great as he perceived it then, but to it have been added more subtle threats of an environment abused by man’s thoughtlessness and greed. The abolition of human poverty is a goal as elusive as ever.

* * *

This is not to say that the idealism with which a young President captured the imagination of so many young Americans failed to leave its imprint on national policies and individual lives. Many seeds of racial justice planted during the short Kennedy years were brought to fruition by Lyndon Johnson’s landmark civil rights legislation. When President Kennedy refused to surrender to Governor Wallace’s defiant stand in the schoolhouse door, he could hardly have envisioned last week’s ceremony during which Mr. Wallace presided over the coronation of Alabama’s first black homecoming queen.

Progress toward racial equality at home has been matched by dramatic changes in America’s posture abroad. President Nixon has removed the diplomatic blindfold that for so long ignored the existence of 800 million Chinese. A constructive new pragmatism governs relations between the United States and the Soviet Union. These are no small accomplishments to mark on this Thanksgiving Day.

* * *

It would nevertheless be hypocritical to fail to recognize the deeply disturbing changes that have reshaped this country in the post-Kennedy decade. The brutal gunfire in Dallas was to become symbolic of an increasing resort to violence. Riots and fire ravaged urban ghettos. Political appeals to ignorance and selfishness needlessly divided the nation and substituted neglect for compassion.

If America is different now, the change needs to be measured and defined in terms of mood rather than of specific events and policies. Some of the exuberance has drained away. Years of a debilitating war have sapped American self-confidence and even self-respect. No nation is likely soon again to dominate the world’s economic scene or to hold out a credible promise to make the world safe for an ideal.

Americans have come up hard against inevitable limits. Even more jolting than the limits of power are the suddenly discovered limits of resources – energy, food, raw materials, everything. Americans face for the first time the possibility of an end to growth and expansion.

America is confronted, worst of all, by a debilitating loss of confidence in its institutions. The descent from the idealism and, perhaps, the euphoria of Camelot, gradual at first, has gathered precipitous momentum. The recent political scandals have shaken the country’s faith in itself.

John F. Kennedy could still call for “a grand and global alliance” in the “struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.” The nation’s mood now calls for a more limited goal – a return to its basic principles. There are special grounds for thanksgiving today in the fact that the search for the road back has at least begun.

Why I Can’t Stand Sam Sifton’s Writing

I think it’s neat when you get to know a certain writer’s style so well that you can recognize that writer’s work without even looking at the byline.

It just happened to me. I just knew this piece about blackberry cobbler (can’t link to it directly; it’s piece #2) was written by Sam Sifton, and when I got to the bottom I realized I was right.

I know it’s not nice to say things like this, but: I can’t stand Sam Sifton’s writing. His prose is so fucking purple.

Apparently I’m not the first person to feel this way. And I found a Facebook group devoted to hating his writing.

I don’t read his restaurant reviews, but I do see his food column in the New York Times Magazine every few weeks. He’s been writing there for several months, and I’ve come to recognize a couple of his tics.

One, he uses the word “with” in an annoying precious way, usually (but not always) in the form [adjective] with [noun]:

He also likes the phrase “tastes of”:

I know it’s not nice to write to make fun of writers. But I can’t help it here. He just drives me batty.

20 Years Ago Today

Twenty years ago today I moved into my first-year college dorm at UVa.

A couple of weeks ago it was my 20th anniversary of leaving Japan for good. From Japan, my family flew to Hawaii for a week, and then we flew home to the NYC area and lived in a company-provided apartment in midtown Manhattan for a week before driving down to UVa to move me into my dorm.

Things I remember happening during that last week before college — 20 years ago this past week:

(Also, my mom saw Jerry Orbach in the laundry room of the apartment building we were staying in.)

Wow, if I could have predicted how much would happen in the subsequent 20 years…

Earthquake

So we had a little earthquake yesterday on the East Coast, eh?

Out in the New Jersey suburbs, toward the end of our lunch hour, a work friend and I had just sat down on a couple of stone benches on a patio next to our office building. He started bobbing his leg up and down, and then I started to feel my bench shaking. Well that’s weird, I thought. I asked him if he felt something shaking – he said no. So I figured our benches must have been resting on some loose tiles, and that’s why I could feel my bench shake while he was bobbing his leg up and down on his own bench. I felt another shake, but he was still bobbing his leg. So I didn’t think anything of it.

A couple of minutes later, a group of people started streaming out of the building. We thought maybe they were all planning to have a meeting out on the patio. Then one of them came up to us and said, “Did you guys feel any shaking out here?” I said that as a matter of fact, I had. He said they all felt the building shake and decided to come outside because it might have been an earthquake.

An earthquake! Of course, I immediately took out my phone and did a Twitter search for “earthquake.” People had felt it in New York! And in Washington! And in New England!

I had the same weird feeling I had during the 2003 blackout: slowly realizing that what you thought was a local phenomenon is being experienced by people across SEVERAL STATES.

I’m glad nobody was hurt, especially near the epicenter — which is not far from Charlottesville, my one-time home. Sounds like they felt it pretty hard at UVa, though.

On Rick Perry

It’s human to want to make predictions about the future, but at this point, I really have no idea whether Obama will be reelected next year. Sometimes I think he will, and sometimes I think he won’t.

And I wasn’t too worried about the Republicans until Rick Perry entered the race.

Mitt Romney? On the one hand, I think Romney is beatable in the general election. He’s like the Republicans’ John Kerry. On the other hand, if Romney did become president, I don’t think he’d be as much of a disaster as some of the other Republicans, because I don’t think deep down he’s as conservative as some of the others. (And yet, any Republican president will be beholden to the crazy Republican base and will be inevitably pulled rightward. Still, at least there’d be a chance of less insane policies from him than from most other Republican candidates.)

Michelle Bachmann? I can’t really see her getting the nomination. She’s a general election loser, and I think enough people would come out in the primaries to stop her.

But Rick Perry? I can certainly see him winning the nomination. And while part of me thinks the American people will not elect another idiotic fundamentalist Christian Republican Texas governor so soon after the last one, another part of me has zero faith in the intelligence or memory of the American people.

I mean, cripes, tons of people out there still don’t understand that raising the debt ceiling was NOT ABOUT NEW SPENDING, it was about paying back what we borrowed for already-approved spending. Which I think speaks to an enormous media failure. As great as it was to see David Gregory relentlessly press Michele Bachmann on her anti-gay bigotry yesterday, he totally let it slide when she lied about the debt ceiling.

I do have hope, though. One, the election is still more than a year away. Two, unlike one-term presidents Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush, Barack Obama is a damn good campaigner and debater.

Still, any predictions at this point would be fruitless.