Better, Best and Alice

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.

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.

June Book--Alice

Based on the comments, I'm going to pick A Town Like Alice. Sorry Alvin--as a consolation, you could watch the 1950s movie on YouTube. There are a few things about the book that I feel I should disclose: the characters are rather flat; the second half is, I'm told, a little boring; and you should skim the end of chapter 7.

Homo Politicus http://www.amazon.com/Homo-Politicus-Strange-Tribes-Government/dp/0385517505 was tedious, politically biased, and felt like a tabloid Magazine featuring only ugly evil people. It reminded me, however, how much I like DC but dislike Potomac Man.

The Drunkard's Walk http://www.amazon.com/Drunkards-Walk-Randomness-Rules-Lives/dp/0375424040 felt like a well-written statistics primer until the last chapter, which was very interesting. It was interesting to have read this book prior to The Quants

The Nine http://www.amazon.com/Nine-Inside-Secret-World-Supreme/dp/0385516401#noop (ever so slightly dated Supreme Court expose, and though I've not read it, likely politically charged)

A Town Like Alice http://www.amazon.com/Town-Like-Alice-Nevil-Shute/dp/0345353749 (mostly fictional WWII story)

Right Ho, Jeeves http://www.amazon.com/Right-Ho-Jeeves-Audio-Editions/dp/1572704233/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275410088&sr=1-1
PG Wodehouse is one of the funniest people ever to have lived; Jeeves, I think, is best on audio book.