The Colorado Kid

Wilson's Weblog Posted on by

by Stephen King, 2005, Audioworks (Simon & Shuster), read by Jeffrey DeMunn

This book was very pleasant to listen to.  The characters are wonderful and the reading by Jeffrey DeMunn captures their Down-East Maine accents very well.  Because the entire book is a tale that is spun through the dialogue of two old newspaper men and a young girl sitting over coffee, it is almost essential that it be listened to rather than read.

My only criticism is that the ending of the book is quite unfullfilling.  Too bad, because I was looking for more. 3 1/2 stars

Telegraph Days

Wilson's Weblog Posted on by

by Larry McMurtry, 2006

I listened to this audiobook on a long, three-day trip from Florida to New England and that is the only reason I finished it.  This effort by Larry McMurtry is feeble.  It is an attempt to portray the life of Nellie Courtright, a supposedly beautiful, crafty, and brave female in the town of Rita Blanca starting in the year 1876.  The book relates her adventures and her encounters with virtually every wild west character that one can imagine: Buffalo Bill Cody, Wild Bill Hickock, Billy the Kid, General William Sherman, the Earps, Jessie James, etc.

The primary problem with the book is that it is BORING.  While I listened to it I found myself continually waiting for something at least a little bit interesting to happen.  Instead, McMurtry managed to make even supposedly exciting events extraordinarily uninteresting.

I understand that Wallace Stegner was one of McMurtry’s teachers at Stanford.  Wallace must have rolled over in his grave when this book was published.  Stay away. one star

Blame Us

Wilson's Weblog Posted on by

I sent the following letter to the Naples Daily News (Florida) and it was published on April 12, 2008, except for the last sentence:

I am amazed at the misdirection of blame for the primary mess that has befallen Florida.

For example, The Naples Daily News published an editorial a few weeks ago implying that the Democratic National Committee is to blame for the disenfranchisement of Florida primary voters; and many articles and letters to the editors are of the same opinion.

I have another view of who caused the problem. We, the voters and citizens of Florida, are to blame. Through our elected senators and representatives (Republican and Democrat) who passed this bill, and our elected governor (Republican) who signed the bill, we moved the Florida primary from March where it rightfully belonged to January 29, 2008. Both the Republican and Democratic National Committees which, by law had the power to set the rules, had already established that a primary election on January 29 would lead to the disqualification of delegates. In the case of the Republican primary, it didn’t really matter because John McCain won the nomination by a wide margin. In the case of the Democratic primary, the action by our elected legislators and governor has resulted in the disenfranchisement of Florida voters.

The media has reported that some Florida legislators were “livid” and were “fulminating” about the DNC’s position. The media has given the true culprits a pass. They are, in fact, we the voters and our elected officials.

We should all take responsibility for the fact that we again blew it as we did in 2000.  We should do this by rightfully pointing the blame at those legislators who supported this bill and the governor who signed it into law.

Moscow, 1812, Napolean’s Fatal March

Wilson's Weblog Posted on by

by Adam Zamoyski, 2004

This book is an extremely well-written account of Napolean’s invasion of Russia in 1812.  In addition to a very readable style, I also liked the author’s overview of the political situation in Europe prior to the war, both from the French perspective and the Russian.

The author takes the position that Napolean didn’t have a clear plan for what he intended to accomplish by the invasion.  He let events control him and his actions rather than the other way around.  On the other side, the Russians didn’t have a clear strategy to deal with the invasion.  What appears to be a concious strategy of retreat to suck the French into the interior of Russia in the dead of winter was rather a series of decisions to back off because the Russian army was not prepared to fight at a particular time of location.  The sum total of these decisions or non-decisions appears to us today as a brilliant strategy.

Perhaps the only downside of this book is having to wade through a lot of gruesome detail of the misery that the French officers and soldiers endured during their retreat.

A lot can be learned from the study of this campaign about the consequences of invading another country without a clear plan of what you want to accomplish after you are there.4 1/2 stars

The Screwtape Letters, How a Senior Devil Instructs a Junior Devil in the Art of Temptation

Wilson's Weblog Posted on by

by C.S. Lewis, 1959

This book was fun to read as it is extremely clever.  The book is a series of letters from the senior devil to his nephew who is just breaking into the business.  In many of the letters he is very critical of his nephew’s shortcomings in dealing with his subject and is eventually furious at him for “letting him off the hook” when his subject moves more toward becoming a true Christian.

While the book was extremely clever, I felt it was much more insightful regarding contemporary morality than it was regarding Christian beliefs.  The focus was on how the devil could tempt his subject away from being a “good” person and corrupt him into becoming a “bad” person.  If you are trying to discern the roots of true evil or the nature of unwavering faith, I don’t think you will find the answers here. 3 1/2 stars

Evolution and Why it Matters in the 2008 Presidential Race

Wilson's Weblog Posted on by

There has been much discussion lately regarding the religion of a particular candidate for president.  Also, many groups are using the issues of abortion and gay marriage as litmus tests to determine if a particular candidate is, in their view, qualified to be president.

I don’t believe religion, abortion, or gay marriage really matter as long as a person is not too aggressive in imposing his or her beliefs on others.  Those particular issues are all based on a particular set of values and beliefs.  It is very difficult to discern which set of values and beliefs is “correct”, “true”, or “valid” simply because they are values and beliefs.  A good person, in my opinion, can be a Mormon, a Catholic, a Protestant, an Evangelist, a Jew, a Muslim, etc.  Likewise, a person of good character can be pro-choice or anti-abortion, or a good person can be for or against gay marriage.

 A person of good character can also either accept or reject the theory of evolution.  The difference, however, is that evolution theory has been substantiated by over 100 years of scientific knowledge and thought.  There are certainly some holes still left in the theory and if an individual ignores the bulk of the evidence and wishes to give more weight to his or her beliefs regarding evolution, I have no problem with that … unless the individual is the President of the United States.  The office of the President requires a person who can weigh the evidence and facts of each situation and make rational decisions as to the best course of action.  I don’t feel that someone who does not accept the theory of evolution fits that description.

The office of the President sometimes requires that the person who occupies it be able to make quick, rational decisions under extreme pressure.  Can somebody in that office who does not even accept the evidence in favor of evolution make good decisions in complex situations such as the Cuban missile crisis?  I would question that.

I ordinarily don’t like litmus tests to determine if a candidate is worthy of my vote for President, but when a candidate professes to reject the theory of evolution, I think that is where I will draw the line.

The Rising Tide, a Novel of World War II

Wilson's Weblog Posted on by

by Jeff Shaara, 2006

This book wasn’t as good as I expected as it didn’t hold my attention, especially in the first part of the book.  I expected a bit more suspense as in the case of his father’s book on Gettysburg, but it just didn’t seem to deliver.  I found the reading to get better as I plowed through it and I eventually finished it.

The book was extremely well researched, however, and it provided me with knowledge of the Africa and Sicily campaign in World War II, something I knew nothing about. three stars

Shark River

Wilson's Weblog Posted on by

by Randy Wayne White, audiobook narrated by Ron McLarty, 2001

This book was pretty enjoyable.  I believe the author lives on Sanibel Island and he uses the island as the backdrop for this mystery.  The plot is just okay, but the characters are pretty easy to warm up to, and White provides a great deal of information on the habitat and environment of Southern Florida.  His scientific passages sometimes detract from his story-telling, but they can be enlightening if you have an interest in the area.

One thing I really liked about the book was that the author used foul language only on a very limited basis, something that seems unusual in today’s crop of mysteries. three stars

Tishomingo Blues

Wilson's Weblog Posted on by

by Elmore Leonard, audiobook narrated by Frank Muller, 2001

Don’t bother with this book!  Elmore Leonard was recommended to me by an individual at a cocktail party so when I was planning to drive to Florida this year, I picked up the audio book at the local library to listen to on the way down.  The only saving grace on this one is that I wasn’t wasting my time since I had to drive anyway.  The characters are awful, the plot is weak, and there is nothing else that I can find about this book that I can recommend.  The narration was okay, I guess, but that’s about it.  I don’t think I will pick up any more Leonard books in the future. 2 1/2 stars

Parish Priest, Father Michael McGivney and American Catholocism

Wilson's Weblog Posted on by

by Douglas Brinkley and Julie M. Fenster, 2006

This book describes the life of Father Michael McGivney and his efforts in the founding of the Knights of Columbus.  The book is a somewhat tedious biography of an individual but it does provide some interesting information on the history of the Catholic Church in 19th century America. three stars