I really enjoyed A Town Like Alice. I'm sorry that neither Paul nor Alvin thought it was that good, but I'm not sure I can create a sufficient defense to change anyone's impressions.
The thing I liked most about Alice was the strong protagonist. I thought she was characterized quite well, put through a series of interesting and trying experiences, and yet remained an effective every(wo)man. In a lot of ways I saw one of my favorite movie protagonists in her: Andy Dufresne from Shawshank Redemption. Dealt a rather tough hand, she proceeded to give hope to those around her and constantly work to improve their situation. When she was given money, she went on to return kindness to those who had shown kindness to her, and then through her courage and vision provide prosperity to a host of people.
To Paul's point about her money being misspent from a utility standpoint, I certainly see the truth of that statement. She could obviously have spent her money providing wells throughout Malaysia; this would likely have represented a greater "bang for her buck" way of approaching humanitarian aid*. But the message I took from her actions is slightly different, and more in-line with my own feelings on charitable giving. You have a greater moral obligation to those who come into your path than those who don't. I see justification for this in the parable of the Good Samaritan. The point wasn't to help _everybody_ or to help those most in need (although those are good things to desire), but rather that it is sinful to be in a unique position to help and not provide that help.
Consider the following hypothetical: you're all alone on your way to a job interview when a plane crashes into a nearby pond. The small plane is sinking, and you can hear the voices of a few passengers calling for help. The only thing it will take to save them is to wade into the lake, swim over, and pull them out. But in the process you will ruin your expensive interview shoes (seems a little unreasonable, but go with me here). Alternatively, you could keep your wardrobe pristine, go get your job, sell your shoes, and dedicate a portion of your salary and the sale of your shoes (second hand) to buying mosquito netting to save children from malaria in Africa. As in most hypotheticals, treat this as an exclusive set of options. What is the moral thing to do?
I contend that 1) it's not clear what the moral thing to do but 2) I'd be personally swayed to save the people on the plane because I am uniquely able to help them and 3) that there's nothing wrong with that per my understanding of the gospel. Similarly, for Jean Paget the option of dedicating her money to saving people in Malaysia by building wells would be a noble sacrifice, but I think the good she did to the town of Alice is no less in keeping with the moral of the Good Samaritan parable.
I guess in the end I liked the book for two reasons. One, I just found it entertaining. The plot line wasn't strong (particularly once the war ended), but I felt like there was a good blend of tension and description and characterization. And two, I felt buoyed up by Paget's example that if you work hard and smart, regardless of the circumstances you find yourself in, you can not only help yourself but help others in the process. If I were to summarize the moral of the novel (for me) it would be that strong character and perseverance can bring happiness and prosperity not only to an individual but to all those with whom she comes into contact. That probably isn't true (c.f. Candide), but it is what I wish were true.
*As an interesting side note, I recently read a story of an Afghan village where a well was built (by USAID, I believe). After a few months the well was destroyed, but not by the Taliban or by outraged village Elders. Rather it was the women of the village themselves who destroyed it because it took away their only opportunity to gather and socialize at the river. They saw the daily treks as a break from the monotony of the day. The point of the article was the US has invested huge resources in understanding the enemy in Afghanistan, but not many in understanding the culture of the Afghan people themselves.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Some Post-Alice Book Options
I'm expecting a few more posts on Paul's book, but as I'm next on the list, I thought I'd throw out some options. You can comment on the options as you share your Alice thoughts (or lack of Alice thoughts, like me.)
Since Paul has recommended choosing books we've already read (and I'm really hoping to get Peter's approval on one of my book choices (I'm 0 for 2 so far)), here are some of my favorite books from the past year:
Born to Run: A Hidden Tribe, Superathletes, and the Greatest Race the World Has Never Seen
For all of the runners out there or those who want to be inspired to run or just read about over-the-top runners.
The Nation Fiction, but there are some interesting religious and philosophical themes to discuss.
Hunger Games From a pure entertainment standpoint, this one is hard to beat. It's a bit violent in parts, as the story revolves around a futuristic gladitorial games with teenagers. Book three in this series comes out in August.
Outliers: The Story of Success I like all of Malcolm Gladwell's stuff, but I think this is my favorite.
And if you want an option for one that I'm hoping to read, but haven't:
Who's Who in the Doctrine and Covenants I'm teaching seminary this year, and I could use all of your stories and insights.
Since Paul has recommended choosing books we've already read (and I'm really hoping to get Peter's approval on one of my book choices (I'm 0 for 2 so far)), here are some of my favorite books from the past year:
Born to Run: A Hidden Tribe, Superathletes, and the Greatest Race the World Has Never Seen
For all of the runners out there or those who want to be inspired to run or just read about over-the-top runners.
The Nation Fiction, but there are some interesting religious and philosophical themes to discuss.
Hunger Games From a pure entertainment standpoint, this one is hard to beat. It's a bit violent in parts, as the story revolves around a futuristic gladitorial games with teenagers. Book three in this series comes out in August.
Outliers: The Story of Success I like all of Malcolm Gladwell's stuff, but I think this is my favorite.
And if you want an option for one that I'm hoping to read, but haven't:
Who's Who in the Doctrine and Covenants I'm teaching seminary this year, and I could use all of your stories and insights.
Monday, July 12, 2010
A Few Thoughts
On Gambling:
I disagree with Paul's theory that gambling is wrong because it doesn't 'create something', or at least I think it's incomplete. The idea that you don't have to work, that you can get 'something for nothing', is a damaging philosophy, both religiously and for society as a whole. However, you can imagine scenarios in which gambling creates something. For example, the World Series of Poker (WSOP) is televised nationally, so this event 'creates' entertainment. Are the players at the table that different than athletes or actors?
I think poker:UNO::alchohol:caffeine. The church prohibits poker and alcohol because they are addictive, and the church is adamently against anything that limits our ability to choose. (Plus, they are associated with venues, etc. the church doesn't want to be associated with.) UNO for push-ups is based on the same principles as poker. It's a game of chance where knowing certain probabilities may give you better odds, and it doesn't create much more than entertainment. UNO is similar to caffeine in that too much of it really isn't good for you, but playing UNO and drinking caffeine don't have quite the same consequences and tendencies to overconsumption as playing poker and drinking alcohol.
Personally, I believe if we (as humans) could moderate our consumption of alcohol, then there would be no rules against alcohol and we all would have had wine at our weddings (and on Sundays?). As we can't, the church/the prophet/God has suggested we just avoid alchohol (and poker) altogether. Alcohol and poker aren't evil, but our tendency to overconsume and lose control are. And without moderation, we violate the larger principles of taking care of our bodies and work/creation.
Thus, 'gambling' on the stock market is good in moderation, but don't overinvest yourself in the stockmarket's future.
On Alice:
Peter went through a lot of work to upload the audiobook for me, and I downloaded it on my computer and listened to a few tracks shortly before my computer crashed. I wasn't that impressed with the opening and Paul's review didn't make me want to read/listen to any more. However, after all of Peter's work I want to be convinced that it's worth it to listen to the book. Anyone?
On Paul's other books:
I had already put three audiobooks on hold before Paul made his final choice. The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives was a fantastic book. As a statistician, I am a bit biased, and there were some examples in the book that are a bit overdone in statistical circles (i.e. The Monte Hall problem). Still, even statisticians overestimate our ability to control random events, and we attribute great characteristics to the person who does the equivalent of winning a coin toss and pronounce the coin toss loser a complete failure.
The Nine put Tammy to sleep after less than one CD, and I made it two-thirds of the way through Homo Politicus before becoming nauseated by the constant stream of outdated political gossip effectively designed to cause one to lose all faith in elected officials.
But thanks, Paul. It's worth 'reading' parts of a couple sloggers to 'read' one good book.
I disagree with Paul's theory that gambling is wrong because it doesn't 'create something', or at least I think it's incomplete. The idea that you don't have to work, that you can get 'something for nothing', is a damaging philosophy, both religiously and for society as a whole. However, you can imagine scenarios in which gambling creates something. For example, the World Series of Poker (WSOP) is televised nationally, so this event 'creates' entertainment. Are the players at the table that different than athletes or actors?
I think poker:UNO::alchohol:caffeine. The church prohibits poker and alcohol because they are addictive, and the church is adamently against anything that limits our ability to choose. (Plus, they are associated with venues, etc. the church doesn't want to be associated with.) UNO for push-ups is based on the same principles as poker. It's a game of chance where knowing certain probabilities may give you better odds, and it doesn't create much more than entertainment. UNO is similar to caffeine in that too much of it really isn't good for you, but playing UNO and drinking caffeine don't have quite the same consequences and tendencies to overconsumption as playing poker and drinking alcohol.
Personally, I believe if we (as humans) could moderate our consumption of alcohol, then there would be no rules against alcohol and we all would have had wine at our weddings (and on Sundays?). As we can't, the church/the prophet/God has suggested we just avoid alchohol (and poker) altogether. Alcohol and poker aren't evil, but our tendency to overconsume and lose control are. And without moderation, we violate the larger principles of taking care of our bodies and work/creation.
Thus, 'gambling' on the stock market is good in moderation, but don't overinvest yourself in the stockmarket's future.
On Alice:
Peter went through a lot of work to upload the audiobook for me, and I downloaded it on my computer and listened to a few tracks shortly before my computer crashed. I wasn't that impressed with the opening and Paul's review didn't make me want to read/listen to any more. However, after all of Peter's work I want to be convinced that it's worth it to listen to the book. Anyone?
On Paul's other books:
I had already put three audiobooks on hold before Paul made his final choice. The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives was a fantastic book. As a statistician, I am a bit biased, and there were some examples in the book that are a bit overdone in statistical circles (i.e. The Monte Hall problem). Still, even statisticians overestimate our ability to control random events, and we attribute great characteristics to the person who does the equivalent of winning a coin toss and pronounce the coin toss loser a complete failure.
The Nine put Tammy to sleep after less than one CD, and I made it two-thirds of the way through Homo Politicus before becoming nauseated by the constant stream of outdated political gossip effectively designed to cause one to lose all faith in elected officials.
But thanks, Paul. It's worth 'reading' parts of a couple sloggers to 'read' one good book.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Alice Lost Her Muchness
To quote: “Oh my word.” I chose this book partly on a recommendation of a sister in law and I likely won't put her recommendations high on my list from now on. My mom likes books like this—we call them “isha” books—about women suffering through lots of things and don't we respect them for it; we're so grateful that we don't have to suffer like them. The second half seemed like a something between a Zane Grey novel and a self help book, “A Step by Step Guide to Establish Utopia”
I understand that the author based the Malaya portion on a true story about a group of women who were trucked around for a few years in Sumatra. I didn't mind the narrator but could understand why others would think this book was lame. I rather liked the Christ symbolism even though it was downplayed and later trivialized.
Interesting that the author didn't seem to have a lot of prejudice against the Japanese—the characters seemed to judge them as individuals—but his characters accepted the discrimination toward the Aborigines.
I think the part of this book that made me think the most was the second half. The book was originally entitled The Legacy, which seems just as good a title as Alice. I like the somewhat presumptuous notion that with a few thousand quid one can create an oasis in the desert. This half of the book is based on Burkestown in Queensland, which I believe had a similar population increase. I want to believe that with enough care and drive, it could be done. It did seem to paint a simple picture of how to make life more pleasant. Part of what bugged is that it was seeking for pleasantness rather than doing the most good. I wish, instead, that Jean and Joe would have decided to found an orphanage for poor Malayan children.
Digging a well for poor people to provide them with safe drinking water is a life changer. I have an older friend who went on a service mission to Fiji and dug wells for underprivileged communities—I hope to be able to do something like that (Paul Farmer again).
While I enjoyed the book, I usually adjust my reading speed based on how interesting and valuable the book is to me, and I read this one very fast. Incidentally, I also sat through the entire movie made in the 50's. I would understand if you didn't get too far into it, and my new rule for my turn on the PVS book club will be only to pick books I have already read.
I understand that the author based the Malaya portion on a true story about a group of women who were trucked around for a few years in Sumatra. I didn't mind the narrator but could understand why others would think this book was lame. I rather liked the Christ symbolism even though it was downplayed and later trivialized.
Interesting that the author didn't seem to have a lot of prejudice against the Japanese—the characters seemed to judge them as individuals—but his characters accepted the discrimination toward the Aborigines.
I think the part of this book that made me think the most was the second half. The book was originally entitled The Legacy, which seems just as good a title as Alice. I like the somewhat presumptuous notion that with a few thousand quid one can create an oasis in the desert. This half of the book is based on Burkestown in Queensland, which I believe had a similar population increase. I want to believe that with enough care and drive, it could be done. It did seem to paint a simple picture of how to make life more pleasant. Part of what bugged is that it was seeking for pleasantness rather than doing the most good. I wish, instead, that Jean and Joe would have decided to found an orphanage for poor Malayan children.
Digging a well for poor people to provide them with safe drinking water is a life changer. I have an older friend who went on a service mission to Fiji and dug wells for underprivileged communities—I hope to be able to do something like that (Paul Farmer again).
While I enjoyed the book, I usually adjust my reading speed based on how interesting and valuable the book is to me, and I read this one very fast. Incidentally, I also sat through the entire movie made in the 50's. I would understand if you didn't get too far into it, and my new rule for my turn on the PVS book club will be only to pick books I have already read.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)