This is Our Year!

Whew, boy! Hey-hey! Cubs Win! Cubs Win!! Cubs Win!!!

Day one of the 2009 MLB campaign and the Cubs are in first place with a 4-2 victory over the Houston Astros! A lead-off home-run from Soriano, coupled with "staff ace" Zambrano hurlig 97 pitches over six innings (his control wasn't too bad, 6 Ks to only 3 walks) to get the win, followed by closer Kevin Gregg's first save as a Cub (despite giving up 2 hits and an earned run) made for an exciting opening day game.

Wrigley, a photo by rpongsaj on Flickr.

I know it is too early to start thinking about the playoffs, and after the Cubs collapsed the last two Octobers -- I don't have any right to be optimistic, but despite my common sense, I know this is going to be our year! But, with a rotation that features Carlos Zambrano, Ted Lilly, Ryan Dempster, and Rich Harden, the Cubbies will have one of the better starting rotations in the division. I think keeping the starting pitchers healthy will be the key to a successful 2009 season.

Now, I wouldn't be a true Cubs fan if I didn't have a grumble or two, so the one thing I am disappointed about is that Sam Zell and the Tribune Company still own the team. The franchise has been on the auction block for nearly two years, but it looks like the Ricketts family will be the owners sometime this Spring, but the fact that Zell is still in charge is a huge disappointment (maybe more so than the playoff collapse against the Dodgers last October).

At any rate, there is light at the end of the ownership tunnel (finally!) As Tom Ricketts, a native Chicagoan and life-long Cubs fan, stated goal is to “...win a World Series and build the consistent championship tradition that the fans deserve.”  The change in ownership can't come too soon for me.

On the field side of the equation, I am sad that we lost Derosa and Wood.  I know why the Cubs let Kerry go, but really hope that Fontenot will be able to step up and replace Derosa at second base--our losses are Cleveland's gains... That said, the acquisition of Bradley, Gregg and Miles during the off season should be interesting. Jim Hendry is either going to look like a genius, or a complete fool.  I know Bradley was a headcase in Los Angeles (and everywhere else really too), but he can produce offensively, and if Lou can get his head straightened out, so much the better. Overall, I'll say that, on paper, the off-season's plusses certainly outweigh the minuses.

Some offensive tweaks, for a team that had the best 2008 regular season record in the National League, coupled with five Cubs' starters who can be dominant, and a combination of Marmol and Gregg closing out the late innings, means we should be in very good shape this year!

I hate to say World Series title contender in April, but 90 wins should lock up the Central Division and if the bullpen can step up and save some wear-and-tear on the starting rotation, the 101 year drought will be over. I know this is going to be our year!

That is of course, if we can get past the Curse of the Billy Goat, damn you Billy Sianis! Why did you have to go and bring a goat to the World Series?!

Remembering Poppy Day

This past weekend, while I was out running errands with my daughter, she received a small red flower from a man in front of the grocery store (after I made a small donation into his collection bucket). The gentleman wished us a happy Poppy Day, and my daughter turned to me and asked if she got presents for Poppy Day (obviously confusing these gentlemen with the men who ring the Salvation Army's bells at Christmas time).

Never one to miss the opportunity to give one of my children a civics lesson, I explained to her that the armistice ending The First World War ("The Great War") was signed on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month: November 11th, 1918. I told her that we celebrate this day to honor all of the men and women who have served our country in the military, and that is why she had a long, four-day weekend.

When she asked me, "Why did the men give us a flower?" I told her that these flowers, poppies, grow all over the fields of Flanders (in northern Belgium), where so many of the men who were killed in that war are buried. I told her about the famous poem that commemorates the sacrifice of these men "In Flanders Fields" and while she can only barely comprehend these notions, she understood that the Poppy was symbolic and she proudly wore the flower on her dress the rest of the day.

After having this conversation with my daughter, it struck me that not enough people really know or understand the meaning of the poppy (as a symbol of this day) nor what our vacation day actually commemorates.

To most Americans, Poppy Day is better known as "Veterans Day" honoring all of America's Veterans. Europeans commemorate November 11th as "Armistice Day", while citizens of the Commonwealth know 11/11 as "Remembrance Day", and in Poland armistice day is also celebrated as that country's independence day.

Given that so many countries celebrate this day as a way to honor those who have served their countries as well as those who are serving, how is it that our children (and many of us) have come to "forget" the day's meaning? I could blame the usual cast of characters, our educational system, our consumer-oriented culture, generational changes, or a hugely unpopular war that makes it passé to remember Thomas Jefferson's admonition that "Liberty needs to be watered regularly with the blood of tyrants and patriots."

What is missing isn't a physical space or thing. There are monuments and reminders in nearly every corner of our towns, states and nations commemorating the sacrifices of the men and women in our military. The content of what these men and women have done is certainly not lacking. In fact with the election of the United States' first African-American president (and all of the historical comparisons drawn by our media) there is quite a bit of content and context to accompany these physical objects commemorating our veterans.

The actions that bind the content and these objects together are what are missing. When I was a child all of my friends knew what the poppy stood for. Our grandparents, parents, aunts and uncles, and teachers made sure we knew why they wore poppies to church on Sunday or on Veteran's Day. Our pastors recalled the sacrifice made by others when they called upon us for two-minutes of silent remembrance. We knew why we flew our flags on these days and we watched as military color guards raised their flags to half-mast.

Certainly, these actions still happen. But my daughter's question made me realize that they are no longer part of our society's lexicon. The ritual associated with these actions does not exist any longer. Which if not shameful, is at least a shame.

Nearly 10 million military personnel died during The First World War. The poem, "In Flanders Fields", was written by a Canadian military physician, Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, to commemorate just one of those deaths. He penned these words on May 13, 1915, in the trenches on the battlefront -- one day after he witnessed the death of his friend Lieutenant Alexis Helmer:

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

No matter if you are a hawk or a dove, for or against our current military policies, as you enjoy your day off from work or school, as you curse when you walk to the mailbox only to recall that today isn't a mail day, or hear the mournful wail of a far off bugle playing Taps at a ceremony honoring the service of those men and women who ensure our security, past and present...

Please put a poppy in your lapel, display your flag, or stop and observe 2 minutes of silence at 11:11 A.M. today and let us remember those who gave their "last full measure of devotion" -- in Flanders Fields, and elsewhere.

The Ugly American (REVIEW)

The Ugly American 

by William J. Lederer

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I first encountered this book as part of an undergraduate political science class on American politics. Among other long and dry reading assignments, I found myself thoroughly engaged in the book and looking forward to spending time reading Lederer and Burdick's work. In fact, I'd have to say that it has been my favorite book since that political science class almost 25 years ago.

I have read it at least 20 times in those 25 years (often as a source for a paper I was writing, but also for pleasure). While this is not a typical "beach read," I have re-read it while traveling and at the beach on several occasions. This past week, I was on a business trip and sleeping in a hotel room. This combination of factors is usually good for a bout of insomnia on my part, and this trip was no different. Lederer and Burdick came to my rescue yet again and provided a thoroughly enjoyable way to pass through several hours of insomnia.

The story(ies) centers on a fictional country in Southeast Asia named Sarkhan. The book's chapters compare and contrast the competence and incompetence on the part of the diplomats, politicos, military officers, and ex-pats in Sarkham. Heroes include Ambassador Gilbert McWhite, John Colvin, and Homer Atkins (THE ugly American) — all men who took the time to learn the culture in which they were being planted.

It is easy (now, with 20/20 hindsight) to see this book as a parable stemming from the Vietnam War. However, the book was written well before America stepped up its involvement in Vietnam (in 1958) and was purportedly read by President Eisenhower, and was responsible for many of the reforms that he introduced into America's foreign aid programs. The general thesis of the authors was that US diplomats (and other foreign station workers/advisors) who failed to study and adapt to the cultures they were entering were doomed to failure (or worse). Worse still, the American bureaucracy wasn't interested in the opinions of the Foreign Service staff who did study and understand the cultures into which they were placed.

Given that this book was written at the tail end of the McCarthy era, the insights of Lederer and Burdick are quite exceptional (if fact, some government agencies sought to ban the book in Asia and in many ways that (failed) effort can be seen as one of the last "scenes" of the McCarthy era). Burdick and Lederer are at once tongue-in-cheek, cynical, and satirical in their views of American foreign policy

Every time I read this book, I can't put it down. Despite its age, it is still a fine read and certainly has additional significance in today's world as the U.S. fights wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although some parts of the book are antiquated (in particular the parochial way the authors treat the few female characters -- especially the Marie MacIntosh character), that small niggle can be forgiven to a book that retains its readability and relevance 50 years after it was first published.

View all my reviews

Stranger in a Strange Land (REVIEW)

Stranger in a Strange Land 

by Robert A. Heinlein

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I remember reading _Stranger In A Strange Land_ as a young high school student in the late 70s. At the time, the story appealed to my changing state (as an adult, I think I can finally admit that the adolescent young man who read this book the first time, did so because my friends told me it was filled with lots of sex scenes). I also remember that despite Heinlein's writing found it a difficult book to read as a result I "skipped" around looking for the "good" parts (which are all in the second half of the book).

However some (other) passages in the book did leave an impression on me during that first read. Heinlein's railing against the parochialism of the Church (and the Catholic Church in particular) was certainly instrumental in shaping my views on religion and partially contributed to some of my more existential leanings (I'd also note that the criticism leveled at Heinlein for passing off his impressions/views/ideas as fact is certainly warranted).

So, when I found myself stuck in the Charlotte, NC airport for 5 hours this weekend (awaiting a 5 hour flight home to LA) I surprised myself by deciding to buy the Ace (trade paperback) version of Stranger In A Strange Land and re-read it -- in retrospect, I am ambivalent that I took the time to re-read the book.

The protagonist, Valentine Michael Smith, is a child born on Mars to two of the crew of the first human expedition to that planet; he is raised by the Martians when a catastrophe wipes out the adults of the expedition. Years later, another expedition to Mars results in contact with the Martians and Michael's return to Earth, completely innocent of knowledge about the planet. The greater part of the novel details his attempts to understand human nature from his Martian philosophical perspective (which is rather like that of Eastern philosophy); these end in his foundation of a new religion to help human beings achieve their full potential, which hitherto has been impossible because of the straitjacket of human culture.

The book makes me think, which now (that I am considerably past my adolescence) I appreciate much more. It can be slow in parts (most of the book is dialogue with very little or no action), but (and I'm not sure if it is my age, or the fact that Ace added back in 30,000 words to this edition that weren't in the copy I read 30 years ago) much more readable than the first time through.

Some parts, especially in the second half of the text, result in disturbing thought patterns, even now. The concept that all human morals are arbitrary (which is how the "Martian" Valentine Michael Smith views them) and that anything that leads one to "grow closer" is good -- also leads down a slippery slope where moral objections to murder, and other heinous things, can be downplayed (in the name of the collective growing closer). While these attacks on Western culture don't seem quite as shocking as they must have been back in the 1960s, other parts of the book are just preachy and long-winded. The international intrigue and world government sub-plot of the first half of the book are more interesting to me now than they were on my first read (but ultimately unfulfilled as Valentine Michael Smith escapes to become the messiah like character of the second half of the book).

It would be easy to write this classic of science fiction off as a novel of the hippie era and relegate it to the dustbin (and history could still do that). However, the somewhat unique premise of analyzing human culture from an alien point of view, as well as the fact that the novel forever broke (maybe bridged) the barrier between science fiction and mainstream literature, put it into the classic (must-read at least once) category. By all means, read it and form your own opinion. Or better yet, (re)read Starship Troopers!

View all my reviews

An Army at Dawn (REVIEW)

An Army at Dawn: The War in Africa, 1942-1943 

by Rick Atkinson

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This book is the first of Atkinson's three-book "Liberation Trilogy" series, which provides an overview of the campaigns that eventually led to the liberation of Western Europe from Nazi occupation.

Above all else, the book's historical narrative is so well written that it simply refuses to let the reader loose from its pages. It will be hard to put it down until the job is finished and the book is completed. Atkinson's writing is very well executed and, unlike many books covering military operations, the story he weaves is consistent, clear, and a pleasure to read.

This title covers the North African theater from Operation Torch in 1942 until the last German and Italian troops were evacuated or captured in Tunisia in 1943. The North African campaign is frequently seen as a backwater and doesn't receive the attention of the later Italian, Normandy, and Bulge campaigns. However, Atkinson's thesis is that every subsequent Allied (or at least the U.S. Army) victory would not have been possible if the Allies had not attacked North Africa first.

The author shows the US Army's maturation as the crucible of battle transforms the men of the raw American war machine from a gang of inexperienced citizen-soldiers into a highly effective, efficient, and well-led army that led the defeat of Germany's vaunted Wehrmacht in Western Europe.

Covering the North African campaign at the operational and strategic levels, Atkinson's text does a terrific job illustrating the leadership problems of coalition armies. Showing that the Allies did not just "click" because they were united in opposition to Hitler's Axis powers. The text discusses the tensions that existed between the American and British leadership and does a good job of giving General Eisenhower "his due" as the right man, in the right place, at the right time (albeit one who had to learn his job and role). That Atkinson does so, with such a wealth of intimate detail, is clearly the result of many hours of research into contemporary first-person resources -- as evidenced by the hefty section of notes found at the end of the book.

My only criticism of the book is that the graphics (maps and illustrations) are a little sparse (in particular, the maps), and while they do an adequate job of illustrating the text, I wish they were more detailed. However, Atkinson's book is absolutely a recommended read, so get a good atlas and dig right in.

View all my reviews