Back to the Past, and Back to the Future

This article, Time Travelers: Please Don't Kill Hitler, caught my attention this morning, for obvious reasons. What better way to catch the eye of a history buff than to mention time travel and killing Hitler?

The specific of not killing Hitler is just a general prohibition about not changing the past, as it will change the future. Well, duh.

Doesn't everyone know that? Aren't we all aware of an event in our past that has lead us to where we are?

Personally, I can point to several events, seared... seared into my memory that have made me who I am, and how, Robert Frost-like, a different path would have made all the difference.

Yeah; so?

20-20 Hindsight is not the most optimal method for re-examining our past. Very specific events put us in a position to make a specific decision, and changing that decision would require changing the circumstances; it would not be logical to think we would change our decision without a change in the circumstances.

Years ago I read Ray Bradbury's, "A Sound of Thunder", and the concept fascinated me. The idea that the life or death of one individual creature millions of years ago would change the world we live in. This idea was also dealt with in a Star Trek, the Next Generation  episode, Paralells, where a character gets caught in a time fracture, and all of the various possible histories form that time fracture become not just possible, but active. In the final scene, all of the possible futures are gathered together, hundreds of thousands of variations, just before the fracture is corrected, and the original, I don't think anybody says correct, time line is restored.

One of the questions asked in the article, and answered in some of the comments, is what would you do with a time machine?

Can you imagine being able to revisit yourself at one of those decision points, shades of 2015 Biff visiting 1955 Biff and changing his future, and having a decision that effected your life changed? Would the one visit do it? Or would that single change open up a broad range of new decisions that would need guidance from the future as well? That decision you made at 18 about college or a job is changed, and now your future self is worse off than you are now. Or were then. Or were before you started messing with things,

Or that decision to buy a new car at 25, a decision that you thought didn't turn out so well, is changed; so you continue to drive the beater, until that accident that you walked away from in the new car, leaves you paralyzed in the old one?

So many decisions; so many futures. And imagine the effect on the 25 year old you. First you have to accept that the geezer in front of you is actually the future you, and then you have to accept that his advice to not purchase a new car is valid, and then you act upon it, only to be revisited by the same geezer, this time in a wheelchair, telling you to forget the previous advice he gave you, and now he wants you to buy the new car? Do you believe him this time? How many more trips will be required to get your future to turn out the way you want it to?

Isn't that kind of what we have tried with our children? We see how our future has turned out; we see where the bad decisions were made, and try to force our children to make different choices than we did, so their future will turn out better than ours. We are that old geezer, hawking different options than what the geezer made in his youth, and having just as much faith that the decisions made will be correct for their future.

So; do we try? Do we attempt to steer our children down a different course than we took, not knowing for certain that future events will play out to detriment or benefit, based on that decision?

Besides, we may remember as a pivot point some choice we made, but it may have been a completely different decision, one we see as a good choice, that may have actually have not been so. Or it may be a choice we made, long since forgotten, that has had more effect of our current selves than we may know.

Kind of like stepping on a butterfly, 80 million years ago. You never know how it will affect the future, if at all. 

Sometimes a Book is Just a Book

I recently read Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follet. I am still trying to make my mind up about the novel in some respects.

Parts were a fascinating read; others parts I found less interesting, particularly the parts that seemed cribbed from a Penthouse Forum Magazine. Every chapter seemed to have a part that should have begun “I really never thought it would happen to me, but…”  The worst part was the end.  It literally felt like the author ran out of enthusiasm for the book and just wrapped it up somehow. Through a thousand pages a given character would act a certain way, with certain motivations. In the last 80 pages all of that went out the window.

Am I glad I read it? Yes. But I won’t bother with the sequel and I won’t bother to read it again. How’s that for a ringing endorsement?

As briefly as the plot of a 1,087 page novel can be described; a small, fictional medieval English Monastery and its village build a cathedral. The book chronicles the arrival of the master-builder to the site and the various political and financial maneuverings that both enable and stymie the construction. That also includes the personal lives of the various characters; the Prior of the Monastery, Prior Phillip; the builder, Tom; his family-children, step-child and wives; the local Bishop and the local Earl. 

This is where I found my first fault; only one or two of the characters were well rounded, even the essential ones. If they were evil; they were never nice to anyone. If they were good, they never had a bad moment. Until the last chapter.

The second fault was the lack of detail on the construction of the Cathedral. For a book about the building, you would think a few of the 1087 pages could be spared for a few details on the actual construction or maybe a description of the various trades involved. But then the author would have had to drop one of the forty or fifty sex scenes that seemed to plague the story. I was beginning to think someone had actually slipped me a copy of 50 Shades of Grey. Based on this book every Cathedral in Europe physically went up without a hitch.

Well, until they fell down. Which, of course, this one did. The primary crux of the story was the change between round and pointed arches; a discussion that took place with minimal interruption of the characters lives and even less explanation of why this was such a sea change in public building. They did discuss how the pointed arch allowed for taller churches with more windows, but more history of development between the round and pointed arch would have been apropos, especially given the pivotal place in the story given to the pointed arch.

Bear in mind, in most communities the Church was THE public building. There were no public halls or municipal buildings like town halls. The Church was the town hall; it was the center of the community and the gathering place for every purpose.

Pillars does reflect that, and in some ways is a fascinating look into Medieval England, in the years immediately following the Norman Invasion and during the period of Anarchy after Henry I death. The history seems to be correct, albeit with our fictional characters thrown into the mix. And one of the fictional characters being thrown into the mix suffers a non-historical fate. But, since he really wasn’t a part of the history, and his fate is almost required by the story, so, no harm, no foul. At least in this case.

But there were a lot of other fouls; illiterate builders use multi-syllabic words; the language itself is not even remotely like Norman English and the characters seem to be able to speak both native English- akin to German- as well as Norman English- very French-like- with equal ease and without fault. There also seemed to be an acceptance of quite a few cultural items without comment, almost as if we should be as familiar with the methods of Medieval Dress and Buildings as we are with modern ones.

These can be written off as poetic license; liberties taken to insure a smooth flow and readability of the story. And I would be willing to agree; if elements of the story itself didn’t constantly remind me of a Harlequin dime romance.

Let’s take the character of Waleran Bigod. When we first meet him he is an archdeacon to the Bishop of Kingsbridge, the fictional location of the Cathedral. His first act in the book is to scheme with the hero of our story, Prior Phillip, maneuvering Phillip into agreeing to support Bigod to replace the current Bishop. Later it becomes evident that the Bishop was already dead, a fact Bigod was hiding from the world. This is just the beginning. Bigod is constantly scheming, lying and dealing, not only as an arch-deacon, but as a Bishop as well. His scheming never lets up, and includes the ordering of the murder of members of his diocese, with absolution granted prior to the act itself.

And then in the last few pages he repents and becomes, almost literally, a kind, saintly old man. Which in itself is not a problem; entire books are based on the reasons behind a character’s motivations for changing himself. But here the motivation is lacking. Maybe it’s there, and I just missed it. But the change is similar to Saul’s conversion on the road to Damascus, without the intervention of the Lord’s lightning.

Set in an era when The Church ran everything, and being ex-communicated was almost a death sentence, only Prior Phillip seems to be truly devout. Monks in the Monastery do their best to avoid devotionals or anything relating to their religious duties and most of the main characters, most of them deeply involved with building a Cathedral, the highest concrete form of worship, seem agnostic at best, and atheist at worst.

As I said early on; it was a fascinating read in parts, and I am glad I read it.

I am also equally glad I didn’t buy it.

‘Nuff said.

Life Imitates Art

I just can't help myself. This year the elections are following O Brother, Where Art Thou? so closely its uncanny.

Just after the Republicans had a couple of Hispanic speakers at their convention- Governors and Senators- the Dems pull up the Mayor of San Antonio Texas as a speaker.

Reminds me of this scene:



The Money Line is of course:
Junior O'Daniel: We could hire our own midget, even shorter than his.
Pappy O'Daniel: Wouldn't we look like a bunch of Johnny-come-latelies, bragging on our own midget, doesn't matter how stumpy.


And since the Republicans had a speaker who has changed sides because of Obama, the Dems had to have one too. The Repubs had Arthur Davis, the Democratic Representative who seconded the nomination of Obama 4 years ago.

The Dems had a Former Republican Firefighter. Is that the best Party Traitor they could find?

Throwing up their midget, no matter how stumpy. I tell ya, this year the parodies are writing themselves.

6-6-1944

Today is June 6th.

66 years ago today the Allied forces landed in France and began the end of the Third Reich.

Every year on this day I watch The Longest Day. I read the book of the same name by Cornelius Ryan many years ago and have enjoyed the movie for the last few years since I found it on tape.

Its often said that Freedom isn't free, and sometimes I think we are too far away from exactly how high that cost is.

When every family had at least one son or daughter in uniform and everyone knew at least one Gold Star Mother we knew the cost of freedom and weren't willing to let it go cheaply.

Now, we don't know the cost of Freedom, or the price of getting it back. Ben Franklin said those who trade liberty for security deserve neither, and I really don't think we have either at this point.

Each day we lose a little more liberty, for the sake of security, but are no more secure than we were the day before, and maybe less so, because we are now prepared for what the enemy was doing, not what they are doing, but because we have 'done something' we have a false sense of security.

The stories about D-Day- even those produced when a film was supposed to entertain- help put that cost in perspective. Unlike Saving Private Ryan , which manages a realism in both language and gore that The Longest Day lacks, I think Ryan lacks the comprehensive historical overview Day has. And the lack of realism makes for a better story.

I want to review the events of D-Day; not be traumatized by them.

So take a minute today and remember the cost of freedom.

And then ask yourself why we have placed such a low cost on its loss.

Thunder Road

If you have never seen Thunder Road it is one of those movies that has some great scenes and over all is pretty entertaining. Robert Mitchum stars as a moonshine runner in the (for the 1959 movie) present day; his runs from Harlan County Kentucky to Memphis to deliver 250 gallons of White Lightining are the basis of the story.

Running from the law is routine; its when the 'shine runners also need to start running from a Memphis crook that things get dangerous.

Filmed in black and white- you can also see some of the early transitional changes in the chases scenes, as the stunt co-ordinators went from horses to cars. Or maybe I am just seeing that way because of way they car chases are staged reminded me awhole lot of '50's TV western posse scenes.

Next time your looking for a way to spend a Saturday evening,or a rainy afternoon, pick up a copy. The opening 5 minutes will get you hoooked.

D-Day; The 6th of June

Yesterday was June 6th; the 65th anniversary of the D-Day landings.


I did what I always do on June 6th. I watched ‘The Longest Day’.


I don’t know if there is a more accurate movie about D-Day (‘Saving Private Ryan’ doesn’t count- D-Day is a part of the movie, not a focus), but then, I haven’t seen them all. I do know you’re not going to find a more entertaining one.


I am a history buff, and one of the problems I have with the way history is taught is the initial focus (like when your in 2nd grade) on Who, What, When, Where. The Joe Friday approach; Just the facts ma’am. And memorize them; you WILL be tested.


And then everybody wonders why by 5th grade the kids hate history.


Not that the facts aren’t important, and some dates SHOULD be carved into your memory (July 4th, 1776; April 8th, 1865; December 7th, 1941; June 6th, 1944 and September 11th, 2001 for examples), but it is the bare rote style that kills an interest in history just when a lifelong interest could be nurtured.


Which is why every year I watch ‘The Longest Day’, and when they were younger, encouraged my kids to watch it with me. Some years they did, some years they didn’t.


And sometimes I catch them watching it without me.