Good books - Good Prices
Creu dels Molers 12
08004 Barcelona
Tel:+34 934 430 594
Email: info@lfant.biz
|
Good books - Good Prices Creu dels Molers 12 08004 Barcelona Tel:+34 934 430 594 Email: info@lfant.biz
|
|
|
Book Reviews This is where book reviews are posted for all and sundry who would like to share their opinions of books with those who are probably of an entirely different opinion and will pay no attention to you whatsoever save to call down the curses of all the gods onto your soon to be (if they have their way) unfortunate head. Be not of timid heart! I will publish your opinion and all of your friends shall be assured you are an illiterate low life. Why keep it from them any longer? I am looking for reviews on both books and writers. Often it is better to see a criticism of a writer's work complete as opposed to just a book or two of the author. I have to admit, I have not been bowled over with response. There must be at least one of you that would like to express an opinion. Remember George Bernard Shaw never put pen to paper professionally until he was appointed a music critic at the age of thirty-two! Doesn't that inspire some of you to try your hand? Can't be any worse than these efforts, can it? It would appear some bright light, one who obviously think they can do better, says these reviews are entirely too long and detailed. Fine with me! Fine and dandy! I could not be happier! I just want to see some new reviews coming in ASAP! Got it? Send your reviews to reviews@lfant.biz and we will publish your contributions. Even if they are long! I am not as picky as SOME!
Fast Food Nation - Eric Schlosser Tortilla Flat - John Steinbeck Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser To say that this book preaches to the converted is probably a foregone conclusion. It is this attitude that has resulted in much of the criticism levelled against it. Criticism that I find unwarranted. I would probably have had less interest in learning about the industry if I actually consumed their products, but there you have it. You can have my share as well if you would like. Really, I don't mind! Fries with that? The book, should you not have heard, takes a look at the history and the ramifications of the fast food industry. Less the actual fast food than the industry. Mr Schlosser, while interested in this industry, is more interested in the way it is shaping the fabric of his nation, the United States. What this book is not, is a list of horrors that one may find in one's fast food menu. There is no point where he lists horrors found in fast food. There may be a book that does this, but it is not this book! There is a certain amount of less than appetising information mostly about the abattoirs used, but it is seldom seen and fully sourced. The position taken is that the industry is a serial devaluer of the society. Schlosser's position is that the industry cares more, almost exclusively, for profit and not much about the social consequences. The position is well argued with many stories about the "good guys" in the industry. His notes seem to be complete, and his positions fair, if slightly biased. A bias that the reader need not share to find value. There are a number of common criticisms brought against this book that should be addressed. One of the first and most prevalent is that the book is "leftist." I find this a specious argument. The "right" position is that personal responsibility is the foundation of the society, responsible for the growth and power of the western culture and there is no point in whining about the hardships of the "disadvantaged." I do know how unfair that description is, but it often boils down to that in the final analysis. In an "us" and "them" world we are expected to look out for "us" and let "them" compete if they can and drop aside if they cannot. The "rightist" argument, if applied across the board, would mean the industry would be completely self sustaining, but this is clearly not the case. The industry accepts subsidies for training and even support for their franchise funding. The companies take little or no risk putting the weight of risk clearly on the government/taxpayers. Would the industry continue if it did not have these subsidies? That is not a question Schlosser has addressed, only that they use subsidies and the benefits of that subsidy is mentioned. This by itself seems to refute the argument that he is riding left wing agenda. Schlosser gives the unvarnished facts of the matter and offers sources for his positions, It is for us to either like or loathe the practice. To my thinking, if you want to keep the government out of your business, you should not have your hand in the governments' pocket. If business does not want to be regulated by the taxpayers' representatives they should not be taking tax money. My parents told me that was "eating your cake and having it" and "He who pays the piper calls the tune". I have never used those truisms before, but they do seem so appropriate. The other criticism is that Mr Schlosser is ignorant of the economic realities. I do not see it. The industry lives on a low skill/low income workforce that can be disposed of at will. As this pattern continues we see a lower skill levels valued at a lower level. Of course a job at McDonalds is not a highly skilled job. It is a no skill job. It is not a career and it does not further the employee. It is helping to create an underclass of those who are left in a perpetual spiral of working poverty, a class that will not accept their position in the world passively for ever. That trend will not stop with service industries. Computer professionals, as one example, may see their tasks simplified and see those jobs reduced in income as well as status. There is no responsibility or loyalty shown to employees. That is a fact in the fast food industry. Would it survive if it were different? The question is not discussed in this book. There is no guarantee that the high earning work of today will continue to be so well rewarded tomorrow. What will be the impact of that situation? To reduce the attraction of skills to feed a short term profit does have a social cost and that does have an economic price tag. That cost will be paid by someone somewhere. Once again, the book does not go far into the economic impacts. Schlosser gives us some bare facts and figures, all sourced. It would occur to me that if one were to consider the author to be wanting in economic knowledge, the author should have expressed some greater desire to enlighten us on economic theory. Mr Schlosser tells us what has come of a disposable social setting in other places. They see higher crime rates and reduced economic activity of all sorts and the costs of that, both physical and financial, are borne by the local inhabitants and the tax base. The same situation being repeated by the industry in other places with similar results. That may be a hot button for some but it is not an opinion nor is it stated as an opinion. Social upheaval has an economic cost, not many would disagree. When the book points out the social consequences of the industry practices that are being seen, it is fair comment and nothing more. An interesting point here is that Adam Smith, the "father" of capitalism, stated that he believed that a concentration of economic power was not conducive to a free market and if those who control the means of production get half a chance, they will do the society of us out of everything they can. I often wonder if those who claim books like this are ignorant of the economics have ever actually read The Wealth of Nations. If you want a well researched, reasonably fair look at some of the growing industrial trends of today, this is a book worth a read. It does not rant, it does give a lucid view of the fast food industry from its early days and offers the questions that we should all be asking. I was always one of the converted, and it was only at somewhere around two hundred pages in that I had the slightest urge to lose my lunch. However it was a lunch I had some twenty years ago. Drama is not my preferred reading material, I must admit. I am not opposed to reading drama, but I see so few plays and like somewhat fewer, I am hesitant to read a play I do not know and I do reread many of my favourites. "Our Town" is one of those. I must say, I do prefer stage to screen. I am fond of acting in a vicarious (voyeuristic?) sort of way and I find it difficult to come to terms with the excesses of the cinema. Cinema is larger than life and cinema actors tend to be so much smaller. On the stage there is nothing but acting. Writing does have something to do with the process, as much as the actors themselves. That is why I am writing this review. I have heard it said that a play is nothing more than a short story with dialogue added. I suppose that is true, but plays are often poorly written and difficult to read. A good actor can make the worst play great and it is difficult to ruin a good play. I have seen some dreadful versions of some of my favourites and reserve judgement on that last bit. In any case, I like to see actors acting well and do not care for the detritus of technology getting in the way. This play is set in 1901. It was first staged in the 1930's and it seems that the setting was selected to relate to the audience of the day. It harkens back to the simpler times of parents or grandparents. A time when war was remote and personal security was the norm. It is important that a time of peace and comfort was chosen for this play, still is. It was written for a time not unlike now, I think. A world of unknowns and insecurity. Entertainments today seem more concerned with the extraordinary than the ordinary. I often wonder who relates to such themes. I like the ordinary; always so much more interesting. So much more complex. There are no great events or great characters in this play. Not in the usual sense of the word, the sense that we have become so used to. It is a play about average people leading average lives in average times. Nothing to have audiences, now or then, clamouring at the doors, but they did. This play focuses on a performer/narrator. The stage manager appears as an observer who steps to the apron to tell us what we might like to know. The effect seems to draw viewers into the structure of the play adding an intimacy that I rare in any production. Since the actors need not move the entire narrative forward, each scenario stands on its own, like a set of mini plays woven together by the narrator. The play ignores time in many ways, not to the extent that we become confused, but rather as the author feels we need to know the information, we receive it. Not always meant as a comfort. Sometimes it adds poignancy to the situation or the character. . Lastly, Wilder uses the bare minimum in the way of props and scenery. Nearly everything we see on stage comes from our imagination. He uses tables chairs and, I seem to remember, a ladder, aided only slightly by sound and action. A rather interesting idea. I am of the belief that less is more in the theatre. Much more. This is a play for acting and actors and those who think, like myself, there is not enough acting done these days. Imagination is the root of the theatre. A shared root that is all too often excluding the audience. Tortilla Flat by John Steinbeck Steinbeck is one of my most favoured writers. You have been warned. This is not as critical as it might otherwise be. This book was published in 1935 and that is worth keeping in mind. The world was a very different place then. The first world war had ended recently, there was an economic boom that had dissolved into a stunning depression/recession, as well as the added problem of the heroes being of an underclass marked out by creed and language, and there were few places on the continent where that mattered quite so much as depression era California. The heroes of this tale are not admirable. They do not aspire to greatness, no surprise in a Steinbeck novel, but these guys are real bums. No ambition beyond today and there, to my mind, is the crux of the story. This is a story that reflects King Arthur's round table in a somewhat more realistic light. It follows the story fairly closely, as closely as possible in a real world twentieth century context. The book's heroes lean heavily on the concept "The ends justify the means" and its fellow traveller "The lesser of two evils." When one looks at the ways of the age of chivalry, the real ways, not the ones that Mallory and Scott romanticised, this book seems to have more realistic attitudes. Anything the heroes want, they believe they should have for perfectly acceptable reasons. They steal, but they are not thieves. They cheat but they consider themselves honest men. They have a special set of rules for this game. If one breaks the rules, then one may be a "thief" or a "dishonest" man. Much the same as the Mediaeval aristocracy justified murder and rape by the rules of birth and possession. A wonderful story, as alive today as it ever has been. The escapades of Danny and his friends breathe life to situations at once bizarre and familiar. A tale of immorality made moral in the light of personal want and greed.. As true today as ever it was. |
|
Send mail to info@lfant.biz with questions or comments about this web site.
|
![[Under Construction]](images/undercon.gif){kind=small}