Lessons from the study of history (1 of a series)

This evening I want to write some thoughts about “what history teaches us.” It is a very important and even an enjoyable topic, but not for the reasons that so many moderns seem to believe these days. As usual I’ve selected a huge topic, but will, thankfully, use a specific example to round out the points I wish to make. To set the tone, let me say that one of the most irritating and incorrect shibboleths used today is the saying “Those who do not understand (or know) their history are doomed to repeat it.” Hardly a day goes by that some talk show commentator doesn’t feel oh so wise when he or she says this. Here are the problems with the belief that underlies that statement.

First of all, humans on a day to day boring basis need to either learn from past mistakes or repeat them. That is a proper context, the problem of learning, as my brother would say to his children “the easy way or the hard way.” If someone text messages and causes an accident, one would hope that the person learns not to text message while driving again, and to pull off into a parking area of one must. This is an example of “those who do not understand not to text message while driving because you might cause an accident are doomed to risk possibly causing another accident at some point in their driving life.” However, one could not immediately write an epic history or philosophical book that discusses “Humans learned that texting while driving is dangerous and thus, oh you people of the future, do not ever put any distracting activity in your automobiles of the future again.” How can one anticipate a country’s stance toward a human activity and foible, and use of a technology, twenty or one hundred years in advance? You can’t because you cannot anticipate the circumstances. For example, maybe a car is invented where you can sit there and text all you want like a fiend while driving and never cause an accident! I’m just making up a slightly silly analogy, but it’s a solidly accurate analogy and very useful.

So trying to shove history down people’s throats so that they “learn to never make THAT mistake again” is just plain stupid. History is important so that one can learn 1) what actually happened 2) what people actually thought, did and believed at the time 3) the circumstances and 4) as a contribution to modern day wisdom and ability to problem solve. The first three reasons are all part of what the TV character Inspector Joe Friday used to say, “Just the facts, ma’am.” History is about learning facts, and facts do include what people alive at the time thought and felt, in other words, their perceptions. When you understand the facts of history, including the perceptions of the contemporary participants, you can synthesize all the facts into an addition to your individual and societal wisdom. Being wise has many advantages. The first is that one tends to be more optimistic and be strong of heart because you understand what has happened before, and how people got through it, and how you can retain hope, even in dire circumstances, today. The second advantage of wisdom is that you are not mislead by false theories of what is actually happening today, and as both the Bible and secular literature warn that in times of trouble rumors and false prophets are rampant. When one has a solid grounding in factual history and adds that to one’s lode of wisdom, one can discern truth from falsehood or exaggeration much more clearly. The third advantage of wisdom is that you understand a wider range of possibilities of solutions to present day problems. You think of things that you and your contemporaries who are ignorant of history might never have thought about. The fourth advantage of wisdom is that you consciously or unconsciously emulate the wise leaders who have gone before you. Remember, the great virtuous figures in history became “wise” the same way as everyone else: through education and experience, including making mistakes.

Military instructors all understand what I’ve just described, and that is why key historical figures and their battles are studied in military academies. They study them so that they add 1) facts and 2) wisdom to their collective and individual skills. They do not study military history because they think that someday they may have to defend the Alamo again, and this time they “won’t get it wrong.” History and the ordinary people who comprise history is a moving target; people, life and society change. Circumstances change and society changes. For example, the Holocaust is the premier justification for the saying that I am criticizing, “Those who don’t learn from their past are doomed to repeat it.” Huh? No disrespect, but the Holocaust happened in a time before fax machines, cell phones, computers and satellite imagery. That is just one example of how precisely “the same thing” can never happen again, just from the sheer change in technology, if not in the improvement in people’s hearts. Yet we can photograph the Sudan and Darfur, and the conflict in the Congo, over and over again, and the suffering continues, just to give two examples. The idea that history needs to be studied to “prevent” the “same mistake” from “repeating” is New Age stinking thinking. History needs to be studied so that people have a common basis for the facts, so that they understand human nature and response to circumstances more clearly, and thus they can add to their wisdom that they then apply as judicious to current situations and problems that they face.

So now I will give my specific example. This afternoon I drove to the book store “Barnes and Nobles” and was gratified to find that they had (at a discounted price) a copy of one of my favorite books that I have sorely missed, because my original copy is in storage many miles away. The book is “The Personal Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant.” Regular readers know that my favorite secular history figure is George Washington, and of course it goes without saying that Abraham Lincoln has always been close to my heart. Like George Washington, Ulysses S. Grant was also first a general and then a United States President. Grant led the Army of the North, the Union Army, against the Army of the South, the Confederacy, during the American Civil War, known as the War against Slavery. Unlike George Washington, who lived in the USA as it was one hundred years before Grant’s time, Grant did not come from a landed and well to do background and instead, even after being President, was in desperate poverty. He wrote his memoirs as he was very ill and toward the end, dying, so that his family would have some income, particularly after he was gone, and he died one week after completion of them. Thus this book has come to be known as a masterpiece of American literature because it truly has no grandiose agenda, no fudging of facts or perceptions in order to look more grand or clever. Grant has left all of us a treasure of “what it was like” and “just the facts, ma’am” of a pivotal time in the history of the United States. If you want to be instantly transported into that crucial time in US and indeed global history, and be inside the mind of a truly great man (of the “ordinary man who steps up to the challenge” ilk, as was Washington), all you need to do is open this book. I tend not to read these types of books cover to cover and then put them away. I tend to turn to them regularly and just read a section. For example, I have (in storage) first editions of Washington’s letters to Congress during the War of Revolution and I would enjoy just reading one letter every once in a while to be transported in terms of perspective and the facts to the time of the Revolution, to the mind of George Washington. No student of history needs to be told of the poverty and hard conditions of the Patriot Army that Washington commanded, and how he had to beg for every scrap of arms, food and clothing from the Continental Congress. It is facts and perspective like that which anyone can read at will, reading the words of the Father of our Country as he desperately needs gunpowder as New York City is about to fall. That is history. That is why people need to learn and love history, and why students should not be impoverished of learning genuine, not agenda ridden, history in their classrooms.

By the way, I want to make another point. I am not “drawn” to certain historical figures for any of the usual flaky reasons that New Age “thinkers” (such as it is) posit about themselves and others. I don’t find historical figures interesting because 1) I think they’ve reincarnated (no one is reincarnated, as you ought to all confess to right now) 2) I have a “lesson” or “unfulfilled karma” that I’m just blindly reaching out toward 3) I’m “taking sides or making a statement” about who I am interested in or not. For example, yes, Lincoln and Grant are the Union figures. But I have and always will have a great personal and professional affection for General Robert E. Lee of the Confederacy. For a long time I enjoyed reading about the Tudors of England but that sure as hell did not mean that I was applauding or “reminiscing” about Catholic killing Protestant upstarts. As I’ve reported before, I have an even handed interest and affection toward all people of all nations and cultures, one that has been sorely tried and abused, however. Unfortunately that type of New Age stinking thinking has permeated our children’s schools where historical figures are ignored, diminished or skewed because of deliberate, and in some cases unconscious, imposition of New Age “values” and “dirty eyeglasses” (looking at the negative instead of the opposite, which is wearing “rose colored glasses”), as it were, on the ordinary people and facts of history. Honestly, I don’t know how this country or the world will survive if faith and reasoning based on facts does not return to the classroom and to day to day decision making.

So for my example, here is what I turned to read in Grant’s book this evening. I wondered, “What was it like the first time that he met President Abraham Lincoln?” I looked in the table of contents and found the event, which was when Grant was promoted to lieutenant general. Here is that excerpt from Grant’s memoirs.

From Chapter Fifteen, section “First Interview with President Lincoln.” The event described here took place in 1864.

The bill restoring the grade of lieutenant-general of the army had passed through Congress and became a law on the 26 of February. My nomination had been sent to the senate on the 1st of March and confirmed the next day (the 2nd). I was ordered to Washington on the 3d to receive my commission, and started the day following that. The commission was handed to me on the 9th. It was delivered to me at the Executive Mansion by President Lincoln in the presence of his Cabinet, my eldest son, those of my staff who were with me and a few other visitors.

The President in presenting my commission read from a paper-stating, however, as a preliminary, and prior to the delivery of it, that he had drawn that up on paper, knowing my disinclination to speak in public, and handed me a copy in advance so that I might prepare a few lines in reply. The President said:

“General Grant, the nation’s appreciation of what you have done, and its reliance upon you for what remains to be done in the existing great struggle, are now presented, with this commission constituting you lieutenant-general in the Army of the United States. With this high honor, devolves upon you, also, a corresponding responsibility. As the country herein trusts you, so, under God, it will sustain you. I scarcely need to add, that, with what I here speak for the nation, goes my own hearty personal concurrence.”

To this I replied: “Mr. President, I accept the commission, with gratitude for the high honor conferred. With the aid of the noble armies that have fought in so many fields for our common country, it will be my earnest endeavor not to disappoint your expectations. I feel the full weight of the responsibilities now devolving on me; and I know that if they are met, it will be due to those armies, and above all, to the favor of that Providence which leads both nations and men.”

On the 10th I visited the headquarters of the Army of the Potomac at Brandy Station; then returned to Washington, and pushed west at once to make my arrangements for turning over the commands there and giving general directions for the preparations to be made for the spring campaign.

Is this not a marvelous treasure, just this half of a page from Grant’s Memoirs? Stripped of what moderns would put in it of agenda and blabbing about the unimportant, it reveals many truths, both facts and perspectives. I’m sure most of you noticed what I am about to point out, but I know some of my readers are not from the USA and so I’d like to make plain some of the things I find gratifying in this excerpt.

The first is the promptness of Congress in acting in a non-partisan way to in ONE DAY approve Grant’s commission. In modern times, would not big mouth and big ego senators and representatives insist on blabbing away their opinion of both Grant and the conduct of the war? That is not to say they did not do that in the course of their normal business. But here in the middle of the Civil War, they kept separate the necessary swift actions, such as Grant’s commission, from being combined with thirst for both attention and perhaps necessary argument about the war. So Grant has preserved totally unintentionally a time that would be wonderful to see in that one respect again, when an action is conceived and completed in a matter of days.

The second is that Grant explains that even though President Lincoln and he had never met, Lincoln knew that Grant did not glorify in public speaking. This is not to say that Grant was a poor orator, but that he was a modest military man who preferred not to make speeches! Lincoln knew this about Grant in advance and in thoughtfulness of Grant’s feelings, wrote down his comments and gave Grant a copy so that Grant could compose in his mind while listening to the President what he would say in reply. That is a courtesy and more importantly a supportive thoughtfulness that is a role model that Lincoln is providing and that Grant has preserved for us to recall and to ponder. Notice too that on this occasion Lincoln invokes God; there is no escaping the heartfelt faith that all of our country’s leaders had and expressed as threads throughout all of their discourse and actions. But, of course, we know that in omitting from our schools study of the Founding Fathers and the great leaders as expressed in their own words that there is a deliberate resultant censoring of the name of God and expression of the presence and role of their faith in historical events from our students’ eyes and ears.

The third point that really stands out is the focus by both of them on the commission as a burden of responsibility, not as a glory, a “promotion” or an ego fulfilling award. This was not a change in title; this was the combining of responsibility for the Army and the placing it in the hands of General Grant. Both Lincoln and Grant focused their remarks on the gravity of that responsibility, and the confidence of the people of the nation in Grant. These were not empty words of false modesty, but preservation of the words that two men each carrying a great burden expressed at such a momentous time. Remember, they were not saying these words for “TV” or for “the public,” but they were saying what they genuinely felt according to the gravity of the situation.

The fourth point is that Grant turns all credit immediately on the troops. He calls the armies that are assembled to fight for the Union “noble” and he means it. That is in stark contrast to some today who do not speak up more clearly and sincerely in giving the armed services personnel their credit and respect. By contrast it’s just about the first words out of Grant’s mouth based on his heartfelt feelings (remember, this was a private event and no poseur self consciousness existed back then, for even newspapers had small circulation and delay in reporting events). People said what they meant and when they gave credit they meant it.

The fifth point is that Grant in turn gives all credit and glory to God, using a term that was common traditionally, which is Providence. Grant credits the troops and concludes with saying that if the Union is successful it is because of God’s will because God’s will leads both individuals and nations. Again, remember this is Grant’s ad hoc words of acceptance of the commission and once again we are treated to reading that people said what they honestly and strongly believed. Faith in God was in our nation as common, shared, strong and ever present as the air that we breathe.

I suspect that people enjoy reading all they can about what President Abraham Lincoln was really like. Paging through just now I found another meeting between the men and more “gold” for both facts and enjoyment. Maybe I’ll make a series of these excerpts for those of you who can’t get a hold of the book and would like to read some of the more interesting things that I find to share.

Book: Crazy for God, by Frank Schaeffer

I'm reading this book. "Oy vey!"

It's a very good book and a brave one. I can only imagine the asbestos underwear that the author would have needed, as he broke from what is called the "Evangelical circuit" and wrote this honest memoir of his childhood and adult crisis of faith.

The "oy vey" is because it spells out the incredibly elitist and exclusionary "faith" that is pushed by many of these Evangelicals, and why I have pointedly ignored them for most of my life thus far. Their hostility toward Catholicism obviously does not wrap them in glory in my eyes, and their spiteful sanctimonious oneupmanship of each other is also not praiseworthy. But that's the way they are, and that is why none of the famous Evangelicals were even on my radar (I'd never heard of the Schaeffers, ha ha, seriously) except for the one I admire the most, Billy Graham (Happy Birthday, by the way!) But what I do admire is where Frank Schaeffer can paint for his readers a fair assessment of the qualities of a good parent and grandparent, in a time when as those of us of at least a "certain age" well recall, there were many more good examples and role models than there are today. Even social climbing moms in those days still were, well, moms, who loved and cared for their children without making every motion of theirs a "striking a pose," as do many modern mothers or, yuck, "caregivers" do today.

I'll write a little review when I finish reading it.

From the teachings of Fulton Sheen

From the book "Praying in The Presence of Our Lord with Fulton J. Sheen" by Micheal Dubruiel, Fr. Benedict J. Groeschel, CFR, Series Editor and preface by Father Andrew Apostoli, CFR, Our Sunday Visitor, 2002.

The title of a chapter, paraphrasing Archbishop Sheen:

"His Work is Finished, Ours is Not."

Our Lord finished His work, but we have not finished ours. He pointed the way we must follow. He laid down the Cross at the finish, but we must take it up... He has finished salvation, we have not yet applied it to our souls. He has finished the Temple, but we must live in it....He has finished sowing the seed, we must reap the harvest...He has planted the wheat field; we must gather it into our barns.

(1953 from his work Calvary and the Mass).

Book recommendation: O'Reilly's "A Bold..."

This evening, while listening to the fantastic final game of the National league series (to determine who would go to the World Series), I finished reading Bill O'Reilly's new book "A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity."

I really enjoyed it and highly recommend it. Here is why. Not only is O'Reilly an interesting person with good messages interspersed in his personal life recollections, but the book is a format that I think is very valuable in these troubled times.

I think of this format as kind of "modern memoirs." They are not the traditional form of memoirs, which are like writing a biography, as they are selective and artfully "spotlight" certain life events. This makes it more interesting than a slog through either a traditional autobiography or memoirs. But more important these modern memoirs that I approve of avoid being smarmy, as in being "tell all" of one's exploits, and they also avoid being depressive renditions of abuse or other sadness in one's life.

It is not that I think that people need to be ashamed or hide the sadnesses, tragedies or abuse of their lives. But that is different than forcing everyone else to join you in your woundedness, and that is what FAR too many books do today. Modern books, especially by those intellectual giants 'celebrities,' entice the reader to share their post traumatic stress disorder. We really don't need much more of that. There's three reasons those types of books are a problem. One is that by focusing on the childhood trauma or whatever, the author genuinely forgets to share perspective about what life other than the trauma was like in your household, community and "times." People, especially the young, need to read about how other people lived on balance, since fewer and fewer people seem to be able to paint that picture. For example, O'Reilly in a matter of fact way is able to explain in his book's vignettes what actually having a two parent household where the father was honest but strict (and not abusive) is like. It seems everyone is able to write a book about how their father was absent or a drug abusing pimp. Kids and the readership in general don't need much more information on that subject. Thanks, we've all been "enlightened" and "brought into your pain" quite enough, thank you very much. What people do need is to be able to read what life was like 'back then,' as O'Reilly does so well. It used to be that millions of people (I'm one of them) could explain what it was like, the "normal" life of "regular" 1950's and 60's working class Americans. Fewer and fewer can do so, as the population ages and as their message is devalued anyway.

The second reason we don't need more "tell alls" or "victimologies" is that a desensitizing occurs, that far from being part of "raising awareness," things like child rape, incest, drug dealing parents and other tragic events become "the new norm" the more that these stories are told. Women are especially guilty of this. They took the mission upon themselves to restore the dignity of victims of abuse (not a bad thing), but they have done it in an increasingly damaging, rather than helpful, way. By the way, notice the double standard. Those women love to gain pity and notoriety via telling their "I was molested as a child" autobiographies, but hate women who tell their "I regret having had an abortion and it damaged me" autobiographies. So in a weird way that I realize is not deliberate, but has now become political, women who wanted to be leaders in "raising awareness" have actually helped "shock jock" and then followed by "the new norm of desensitizing" the very abuse or tragedy that they had hoped to be helpful about by "telling their story."

The third reason we don't need more "tell alls" or "victimologies" is that because they tend to lack proportion, since the author is using them as a "healing" or "venting" tool, they have a contagious effect on the readership. When every book you read has some child molestation story worked into it, it is hard to maintain a balance toward life. I won't name names but I read a book that was a combination cook book and life story that worked in the already frequently told and very tragic childhood rape story. I really can't say much more than that without just being so bummed out by the editor, author, fan and readership mentality that thinks that is a great idea for posterity.

So I want to praise O'Reilly's book for not just being a good read, an interesting story, and helpful to understanding the man, but also a valiant, even if unintentional, contribution to the type of book that we all need more of. O'Reilly did not milk his dad's death from cancer for every tear jerking new age philosophical moment, as far too many people I know exactly do, just to give an example. He had a few very good points to make about very sad and painful event in his life and the reader comes away with some useful thoughts in that regard without being manipulated. Throughout the book O'Reilly is revealing but with dignity, and that is extremely cool. Buy it, read it, and give it as a gift. I give it an A++ recommendation and by the way, that's with one chapter that I was not too crazy about ha, but see, that's part of being a friend, or getting to know someone, there is no need to be perfect to get an A++ in that regard.

Eagerly reading Archbishop Chaput's book

It just arrived!

"Render unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living Our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life," by (Archbishop) Charles J. Chaput, published by Doubleday, 2008.

It is visually a lovely book, and that perfect little size that I like (octavo?) Yes, I just did a quick Google search. This size is Large Crown Octavo (5 1/4" x 8") otherwise known as LC8 ('Trade' paperback or B format). (Thanks to www.writersservices.com for jogging my memory from the days back when I had the money to collect antique books!) I find this a really nice size for hardcover books, and two of my other favorite recent purchases are this size. ("Jesus of Nazareth" by Pope Benedict XVI and Newt Gingrich's book "Rediscovering God in America," plus another book I can't put my hands on right now but is a book about one of my favorite artists Chagall's works).

I want to include a quote by Archbishop Chaput, right from the first Chapter, as a reminder of the debt that is owed to the many good priests who labor in the vineyards. He did not write this section with that intention at all (he is commenting about society) but read the statistics and think about it.

"This book will not feed anyone's nostalgia for a Catholic golden age. The past usually looks better as it fades in the rearview mirror. Art Buchwald once said that if you like nostalgia, pretend today is yesterday and then go out and have a great time. I agree. After listening to some ten thousand personal confessions over thirty-seven years of priesthood, I'm very confident that the details of daily life change over time, but human nature doesn't. We've seen better and worse times to be Catholic in the United States than the present. But today is the time in which we need to work."

Wise and encouraging words and he addresses something that I keep trying to explain and often infer in my blog postings... people have always struggled with the challenges of life, and God understands that, and certainly does not expect perfection. Since my teens I have told people this quote of mine, "People are like horses; they are messy" as ways to console that it's never easy and of course God understands this. But I wanted to include this quote from Archbishop Chaput's book not only for this great social wisdom and context but also as a hat tip to him and to all the priests who labor as Confessors in the image of Christ. How many people today do not appreciate that at the same time they say, "I wish I could have known Jesus" that they can avail themselves of the sacrament of Confession and be within the reception room that Jesus established directly through Apostolic succession so that yes, people can recall the time when people could confess their sins directly to Jesus and be assured of quality "feedback" (not just kidding oneself if one is understood and forgiven or not). I worry about people who will "bounce their business ideas" off of many colleagues, yet figure that thinking to themselves "well, I sure sinned there but here, I am mentally beaming to Jesus that I'm sorry, so now I know I'm forgiven and it's all OK."

Confessor priests ARE the gift of Jesus Christ to humanity so that they can KNOW indeed in truth that "Jesus understands" and that they "are forgiven."

A great man has died today

A defender of humanity, and of God. You will remember that I recently blogged about him and recommended his acquaintance to especially the young people. Bless his soul. The New York Times says it very well here, short and sweet:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/arts/AP-Obit-Solzhenistyn.html?hp

Detailed info including bibliography:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Solzhenitsyn
snip

He described the problems of both East and West as "a disaster" rooted in agnosticism and atheism. He referred to it as "the calamity of an autonomous, irreligious humanistic consciousness."

It has made man the measure of all things on earth—imperfect man, who is never free of pride, self-interest, envy, vanity, and dozens of other defects. We are now paying for the mistakes which were not properly appraised at the beginning of the journey. On the way from the Renaissance to our days we have enriched our experience, but we have lost the concept of a Supreme Complete Entity which used to restrain our passions and our irresponsibility.[citation needed]

Influential books: The Name of the Rose

This is a book that was enormously influential, in a positive way, of the generation that read it (early 1980's)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Name_of_the_Rose

Here is the author:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umberto_Eco

***

Now, here's what you need to understand about why this book qualifies as a classic, capable of influencing a large part of a generation.

It did not have an agenda, other than the personal interests of the author, and so it has intellectual integrity. It described medieval times, monastic life, and linguistics without an attempt to slime the Catholic Church or embed alien anagrams in it. I wish I was joking but that's what authors and publishers have been doing throughout the 1990s and all of this decade thus far.

So it was an intellectual sensation when it came out in 1980, because it combined a murder mystery with a medieval setting in a Christian monastery AND had incredible linguistic and literary puzzles and allusions.

THAT book is the "father" of the modern glut of low quality and agenda driven books written by UFO believing depressives who push their delusions and bum everyone else out (plus undermine people's morality and faith) AND make lots of money doing it.

So if you want an example of how one can write an ethical and intellectual book of this nature, look back to the "original" and still the best.

And no, I did not watch the movie; some things really are not suited for the hands of script writers and celebrity stars, and really just should be read and savored.

(By the way, Eco went from militant Catholic to "not believing in God at all" while a doctoral student. Hey, all the more reason that I am showing you that such a quality book can be written without an obvious axe to grind. For example, Eco is still able to locate this classic book in a monestary and not demonize all the holy people in it just because he turned away from Catholicism and no longer believes in God. That's called being a grown up.)

I've not read any of his books since then and naturally, I have reason to suspect he has, how shall I put it, become more and more influenced by intellectuals who support his position of disbelief. So regretfully, I can't recommend any of his other books, but there is no reason not to explain to you how interesting and influential this great book of his was twenty eight years ago, since I've been on the subject of books that had integrity and were seminal to all or part of a generation at a critical moment in their development and self identity. The "children" and "grandchildren" of these books are another thing entirely, though............!

*sigh*

Book recommendation: The Bin Ladens Steve Coll

I just purchased and have only started to read "The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century" by Steve Coll (2008) NY: The Penguin Press.

Even though I am only thirty pages into it I am enjoying it and feel OK with recommending it so early.

It had a little bit of the Hollywood feel to the introduction, but that's the way most books are these days and redeems itself right away in the very colorful and authentic description of life in Yemen and Arabia in the beginning of the past century.

Special message for young people

The reading of books has diminished as both a character building activity or for recreation. Also, when books are read, they are read for different reasons than they used to be. Today books are mostly read for "escapism" and "entertainment," as in the Harry Potter novels. There's nothing wrong with that. But I think many of you young people (high schoolers, college students, and all in your twenties and thirties) have been cheated from one very valuable service of having read one or two books that really transform and inspire you.

Notice that I said one or two books. A well balanced person, whether having gone far in the education system or not, could usually point to one or two books (beside the Bible) that had a large part in shaping their character and providing inspiration. By inspiration I do not mean the spiritual mumble jumble that so many freak fake books peddles today. By inspiration I mean that often one's career, vocation or special interest in a "cause" to pursue comes from exposure to one or two books that really spoke to you. It's not the same as being a literature snob (I know a lot of them) who pride themselves on reading a lot of books. And it's not the same as finding some spiritual "answer book." I know too many of that type. Rather, I mean that a normal person reads a number of good books and one or two of them have a seminal influence in shaping for the better that person's character.

The greatest example that is a giant in American history is the book by Harriet Beecher Stowe, "Uncle Tom's Cabin," which is an anti-slavery novel that was published in 1852. It became the best selling novel of the 19th century. Let me repeat that so you grasp how huge that was: Stowe's anti-slavery novel, published before the Civil War, became the best selling novel in the hundred years between 1800-1900! It is one of the reasons the public agreed with the government to go to war-the Civil War-as the Union opposed the continuation of slavery in the USA as advocated by the Confederate states. The only book to outsell Stowe's "Uncle Tom's Cabin" in the 19th century was the Bible.

Several generations of Americans were moved by this book and had their character formed accordingly. For many people this was the only novel they read at all during that century. It's impact was enormous and many unsung heroes had their character and morality shaped by having read that book.

A second example is "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair. Sinclair is a huge socialist and the irony is that he wrote this expose of the dirt and corruption in the food processing business, specifically Chicago meat packing business, in order to trash capitalism and promote socialism. But it resonated in a way that he never imagined and was a sensation that revolutionized food and drug cleanliness and quality standards in the USA. After reading this book the public demanded some protection from the government and in 1906 the "Pure Food & Drug Act" and the "Meat Inspection Act" were passed. We literally would not have the quality of food and drug we have today (such as it is lately, but that's another problem) and the Food and Drug Administration without this book having been written. Ha, ha, instead of producing lots of little socialists, Sinclair's book produced the first generation of food and drug consumer advocates.

John Steinbeck's book "The Grapes of Wrath," published in 1939, is a mainstay of literature classes. But I mention it because it informed many of your grandparents in terms of their consciousness of the agricultural crisis in the depression produced in large part by poor and exploitative farming practices. This is an example of a novel about poor people during this time in history that informed many of your grandparents who became the first generation of those who understood the need for good land management and stewardship. During the dust bowl and the Depression farmers were not doing even the most rudimentary activities to protect and renew the very soil that they planted, things that are taken for granted today in a large part because of this book. "The Grapes of Wrath" was also a landmark book in looking at rural poverty. In a way Steinbeck wrote a book like Dickens did about industrial urban poverty in England.

My generation was hugely influenced by John Howard Griffin's book "Black Like Me," published in 1961. It caused a sensation as the author, a white man, disguised himself as a black man and documented what he experienced. This book more than any other book informed the character of the white people who read the book or who saw coverage of it on the news. Americans tend to not react to militant exposes and manifestos, but they sure understand a raw deal to an average guy when they see it from "the inside." The author was vilified by many racists for bringing the truth into the public eye in a way that could not be ignored, marginalized or denied.

On the other extreme, here is a quiet little book that was constantly checked out and read in my high school libary. "Cheaper by the Dozen," written in 1948 by husband and wife Frank Gilbreth, Jr and Ernestine Gilbreth Carey, was about a loving household with a dozen children. What resonated with so many of my peers in the late 1960's about this book is that both authors were scientists, but also having a large calling to have children! It is too bad that books like this were overrun by militant feminism who made it a "career or children" choice in the public square. It became more of a joke, or even source of embarrassment, to have many children at all, and the message of this fine book has been lost today. Now women brag about their "careers" as stand alone accomplishments, done by "deferring" having children. This book was so charming and it was no novel, it was real.

These are a few examples from my personal experience and observation about how one or two books that are honest and written with integrity can not only influence the social agenda of the day, but reach thousands or millions of people and contribute to their formation of character.

I recommend that you, dear young people, take some of the time away from the recreational or self-help/so called spiritual guru reading and ask people you admire what books shaped their character. I think your grandparents would love being asked that question, and might even faint in amazement. Do some research and read books such as the ones I mentioned here and see how they resonate. Avoid the self serving political and agenda driven books of today until you have read some of the classics that you identify as being good for you. This way you have a quality standard for more modern works that you might read.

Then you'll understand why I'm disgusted with most of the fiction and non-fiction of today LOL. It's all agenda driven rather than purposeful. Good and true authors write with a purpose, noble if possible (even if as Sinclair did, it went in a different direction tee hee), but not to manipulate the readers. Good authors point and report, and their fine work speaks for itself. Agenda driven writers try to manipulate perception and that is a horror to both truth and character development (by character I mean the reader's character, not book's characters). Most literature today, both fiction and non-fiction, tries to shape your ability to perceive the facts. They try to create a perception and a mood and manipulate that. The great quality literature does not do that.

If you read a few quality classics, such as those I mentioned in this post and others, plus through your own asking of people you know, you will have a new clean baseline of what true authorship that is purposeful but not agenda driven is like. Even if these books are out of date, if they make you feel, "Wow, this was big" and you feel a new thoughtfulness inside of you, that is a great gift. A truly great book gives you a thoughtfulness that is not manic depressive. A truly great book may show a hugely troubled situation, as those about slavery, racism, dirty food, and the depression did, but you don't want to hang yourself afterwards. You also don't come away from a book thinking you now know who is the "guru" and who is "wrong." Instead, you come away feeling mature and thoughtful. You feel transformed and like you've had a glimpse inside the truth of a situation, not because you are manipulated into what to think and how to feel, but because the author takes you authentically inside of a situation and allows you to "see." You can then come to your own "all grown up" conclusions and perceptions. This can be done through either fiction or non-fiction, if it is of the highest quality.

One book that did this for me is the set of letters that George Washington wrote to the US Congress while he was the General of the Revolutionary army. I have (in storage) two volumes published in the early 1800's (so just a few years after he died, as I recall) that reprint all the letters that he wrote to Congress during his conduct of the war. Remember, the USA did not exist yet, so there were no government offices or procedures in place. If Washington needed some gun powder in the middle of an actual battle, he had to write to Congress and ask them for the funds and the supplies. The first letters in this book are written as he sits in New York City sweating out losing the battle because he does not have enough supplies. This is not a guy who was writing letters hoping they'd be made into a movie someday so he can be rich or look good. When you read his letters you come away realizing how close we came to having no country at all, and how literally several thousand people carried the weight on their shoulders, as it happened. I thought you'd like hearing this example of the type of book I'm talking about that "did it for me."

I hope you find this helpful. If each of you finds one or two classic books that really speak to you and form your character, you will have a golden ruler of discernment that will never tarnish. You will always be able to pick up a book, or watch a film, and immediately detect its authenticity and quality. You can join me in being really disappointed a lot ha ha. But at least you won't be fooled and manipulated, and if we are lucky, you'll produce different works yourself that are a throwback to purposeful, truthful and quality authorship. The world really needs it, now more than ever, as it wallows in its shallowness and fakeness crisis.

Another book recommendation

This is for everyone, but especially for the young people. I recommend you read "Working" by Studs Terkel. It was a huge sensation when it was published in 1974 because it profiled real people doing real everyday jobs. I loved it.

One reason I think it would be good for many people to read is that it is a valuable "reset" button so you can learn about what life was like (and is still like for many "average") people before there was computers, video games, the entertainment complex, and most forms of electronic communications, including mobile phones.

I highly recommend it. There is an innocence and a dignity in these humans telling their stories of work that is lost today and needs to be regained to some degree, if it can. I think young people can be a huge part of this reclamation, for their own benefit and for society's.

Thoughts re American Civil War & my fav Grant

Like any normal human I find myself interested in certain chapters of American and world history, and not so interested in other topics. That's how sane people are; they have interests, hobbies and curiosity about some things and not so much about others.

The American Civil War was not an area that I tended to do much reading about or tourism of important scenes from the war. That's not because I was not a supporter of the war; to the contrary, I have always been an ardent supporter of the Union's cause, both to keep the union of the USA together and to defeat slavery. But to me this was familiar territory, and not because "I'm a reincarnated bozo from the Civil War era." It was familiar to me because in the 1950's and 1960's it was still taught in the schools with great scholarly detail in both history classes and in English (the literature part) classes. Kids of my era were pretty educated in the Civil War, so it did not have a mystique that would pique a collecting, traveling or lore interest. Further, a Civil War vet actually lived in my grandparents' hotel. While that was before my time by a few years, it shows that when I was growing up there was actually only one generation removed from people who remembered the Civil War first hand. It was the same for many Afro-Americans in those days whose parents would know family members who remembered slavery and the War to end it first hand.

But like most well educated Americans at that time I did have a "hero" from that time, being Ulysses Grant, commander of the Union army and later two term President. I admired Grant and was interested in him the same way one of my favorite historical figures is George Washington. I admire people who have incredible greatness of calling thrust upon them and who respond in an admirable way. These are not people who are "entitled" to "glory" or "responsibility." They are people who through patriotism, fortitude, faith and a particular set of skills find themselves with the huge responsibility of the country's very well being and existence placed upon their shoulders. It is for that reason that I've always admired General Grant. Further, he made very forceful actions to protect the rights and lives of the freed slaves; he did not drop his interest in their well being after achieving the necessary military victories. He was ahead of his time (and under appreciated).

Grant wrote a tour de force book, his "Memoirs," which I highly recommend. I have a copy in storage and picked it up several times to finally read, but didn't get the chance as yet. You can read a very excellent and balanced summary of Grant on Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_Grant

When I got my first car in college and did some bird watching and camping, there was exactly one place that I wanted to visit regarding the Civil War, however, and so I followed the map and found it. It is the courthouse at Appomattox where General Lee surrendered to General Grant. That I just wanted to see. On the way there I was touched by the small signs along roadsides marking where a certain number of Confederate or Union soldiers were buried.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appomattox_Court_House

I knew several Civil War enthusiasts. That's cool. Like I said, to each his own about what chapters of history they are interested in. But what really turns me off are the many freaks who are interested because they believe in reincarnation, and not only claim those roles for themselves but assign them to others. As regular readers know, New Age reincarnation believers disgust me and make me puke. I can't wait until it is my time in heaven and there are none of them in sight or smell, since belief in reincarnation is refuted and forbidden by God. (Again, I have no quarrel with those of legitimate traditional faiths whose belief includes reincarnation. But they are not to live as if they "know" who "they really are" and who "you really are." That is abomination under any faith).

For years I have seen a moron who likes to walk or drive past me acting out his belief that he is reincarnated Grant. Nothing puts a sane, clean and sober person more off another person than a malicious retard who defies God and assigns recycled sausage souls to his or her self and to others. That has done a huge part in eliminating my interest in any historical era or figure. These scum buckets drool over every book I buy or historic site I visit thinking "Oooh, maybe she's 'remembering' who we 'really are.'" It makes me sick how they probably cackled with glee when I bought a garnet cross shaped pin that was owned by a relative of Lincoln's. No, but God's going to remind YOU who you really are when you die and are judged unworthy for claiming souls of people while not even tending to the authentic one that you have been given.

Anyway, I hope you young readers of my blog will give American history another chance and do some reading on figures like General Grant. You'll really enjoy it if you think in terms of the enormous challenges that these people met with honor, especially in the context of the times. Ken Burns did a marvelous job with his "Civil War" series on PBS. You'll also enjoy it if you have not been contaminated by your sick parents or their friends into thinking that you need to study the historic figures to know 'who you really are.' You really are yourself, asshats: one soul, one life, one God you are responsible to, that's it.