Emergency....paging Doctor Beat!

As May draws to a close the new Con-Dem coalition has really been only engaging so far in shadow boxing with regards to the massacre of public services that they will carry out to pay for the bail-out of the banks. Indeed to salve their consciences the Liberals and Clegg have stressed the progressive nature of the reforms of civil liberties .Indeed Clegg has said this "will be a government unlike any other".

6 billion pounds of cuts were announced last Monday by the now resigned but "dignified" copyright British Media Right wing Liberal Democrat Laws. But the ominous date is the upcoming June 22nd "Emergency Budget".

The formation of an unlikely coalition behind closed doors and an emergency economic programme reminded me of a passage in the Shock Doctrine on Bolivia. In 1985 Bolivia became a laboratory for neo-liberal economics. Not unique but unlike Chile where a bloody dictatorship brought in the Chicago Boys to carry this out on the crushed bones of the Allende regime. This time however it was done after an election.

The Presidential election of 1985 had been inconclusive but both candidates were locked away to discuss the economy. The "left" candidate Paz a sort of Peronist figure emerged as Presidente. He was then in his 80s and had been a long standing figure in Bolivian politics But the important point was that along with his emergence there was announced a cross party economic programme called Decree 21060 (passed in a one-r) - drawn up by Jeffrey Sachs an unelected American academic advisor - later a critical figure in the reintroduction of capitalism in Russia .

This programme (which noone had voted for) included mass privatisation, huge price hikes of basics and an opening up of the economy to global capitalist forces. 20,000 miners lost their jobs, Oil and bread prices went sky high. It was the ultimate shock therapy. Although there was much resistance it took another generation for the political impact to hit of President Evo Morales and his Movement for Socialism administration (elected first in 2005).

Back to GB and all the rhetoric post election is that things are much worse than anyone imagined. Managers across the public sector are using it as an excuse to justify excessive cuts amongst staff.
So a cobbled together coalition in the national interest may use its majority to get through an economic programme that was not endorsed in any election. Austerity and Emergency Budgets have been passed in the last couple of years.
Ireland: Public Sector pay cuts and big taxes on the lowest in 2009 - provoking public protests and a swing to the left in some elections. Spain passed its austerity budget by 1 vote on May 26th icluding a 5% pay cut and a freeze in pensions. The trade unions have called a public sector strike for June 8th.
So the real fight against the coalition will become clearer after June 22nd - though the way they will sell it may be rhetorically different because of the Liberals. For example if there is a sizeable rise in Capital Gains Tax this will be promoted as a tax on the rich - it is already provoking opposition from the Tories bristling at the coalition - the Daily Telegraph have launched their own campaign. But I would guess in Bonapartist style this will be coupled with some outrageous attack on the public sector.
How the opposition will manifest itself is hard to see as the left are so weak at the moment but the battle lines will be clearer post Emergency or rather shock.

Inheritance of Loss: Disintegrating Dreams.

A dream-like description of disintegration. I read this as I saw it was going to be on the BBC World Service Book Club. I also really enjoyed other Indian Booker winners - God of Small Things and White Tiger.
This work is quite different to those with a few significant exceptions as outlined below. It is thoughtful, well written and eventually quite engaging. Overall though there is an aloofness here which means you can't fully absorb the situation unlike Arundhati's Roy work or the frenetic pace of Adiga.
Part of that could be due to its setting which is the literal misty foothills of the HImalayas where Everest is a dominant omniscient presence and country borders mean little. The setting of the study of the three main protagonists is Darjeeling in West Bengal and an uprising of the Nepalese population there in the 80s. Bhutan, Tibet and Sikkim are also nearby.
This insurrection actually happened - something I was not aware of and the demands for Gorkhaland are still ongoing apparently .
Funnily enough both Roy and Adinga also deal with Indian rebellions - the birth of the Maoist movements in the 60s and the contemporary Naxalites respectively. However I never felt an understanding of why these Nepalese were fighting unlike the other works. This is not helped by the dreamlike landscape and the lack of certainty in the time setting of the work.
It is strongest when it speaks of the weakness of the individual's autonomy in the context of broader struggles and happenings. This is seen in the insurrection but also in the forelorn adventures of one of the character's sons travails in the underworld of American illegal immigration.
There is also a nice turn of phrase throughout - each chapter is broken up in a series of vignettes really. I think this is a nod to poetry but this is not done as successfully as Roy.
The other link with Indian literature is the continual use of nature metaphors and similies - in fact a dog is almost a full character. This is done well.
So a distant work in many ways that ultimately has a fairly hopeless take on humanity. Unclear why it won the Booker but worth a read.

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo - unconvincing.

Unconvincing. I recently watched Paul Merton's documentary about Hitchcock and the big man stated that he only ever made who-dunnit and he immediately regretted it. This was for the reason that the audience either say "I knew it was them" or say "that was a bit of a shock". No other emotional responses are possible, That's one of the problems of this book because for all the hype surrounding it is a basic piece of traditional crime writing. Much like the novels the protagonist reads throughout - although they are on the left-field side of that genre- mainly female writers. There is no experimentation with narrative structure.
The only other book which is mentioned is Laserman - a non fiction account of a Far-right Swede who acted as a sniper killing immigrants in the early 90s. This fits into the novel and Larsson as he was an active anti-fascist and member of the Fourth International. The setting and explanations of Swedish capitalism, politics and history were the bit I enjoyed most. Like all crime writing the novel involves a lot of exposition but this socio-political stuff was good. Doesnt really take any prisoners though for those unfamiliar with it - expect a lot of mentions of the Left Party, Olaf Palme etc. This is the best written part of the book In some ways similar to Iain Banks, not as good though. The family saga element of the book is also very closely related to Banks last novel.
But what undoes the book for me is the characters and the attitude to gender. Ostensibly it is an attempt to expose male violence towards women in all its forms. The Swedish title of the book was Men who hate women. Interesting to see if it would have been a worldwide phenomenon if they kept that title and didnt use the sexy imagery of the book cover. There are many examples of it - rape, domestic violence, flashing. However the scenes involving the most graphic attacks to me are observational rather than empathetic.
I do think male writers can expose violence against women - Jonathan Coe did it brilliantly in his last novel - but in a more subtle way. In this context they are gratuitous. I think this is because there is a revenge fantasy element to the book. Salander, the eponymous heroine, is a victim of all sorts of abuse but gets her own back in a sense. I think she comes across as a bit of a symbol or cipher for these broader themes. The male hero Michael an investigative journalist (jailed for libel which I didnt know they could do - so you do learn a bit about the Swedish legal system) also manages to sleep with 3 of the female characters with apparent ease which to me seemed unfeasible and tagged on. Given the book is meant to explore the relationships between the genders it falls down on that. T
The book falls away badly in the last two parts - with some virtually unreadable dialogue about techy stuff. There is a sad element with Larsson's death predating their publication but it does mean that there is no possibility or re-writing or editing. The exposing of the villain is disturbing to no real end. The last chapter is pure corn.
A massive hit - perhaps among techies in particular because it is really set in their world - but I think a very flawed piece of work. So absolutely no desire to see the film nor read the other parts of the trilogy.

Keats: Long, sad but brilliant

Keats by Andrew Motion

A huge slab of a book which delivered much more than I expected. I was interested in the whole poetry scene of Keats' time after reading the Age of Wonder book which showed the impact radical scientific discoveries had on all aspects of life including art.

But I didnt know much about Keats or his work outside the famous lines. But this well researched (and referenced) book - at times akin to a major academic work - had me hooked.

I was perhaps less surprised at the brilliance of Motion's writing - he is himself a poet after all - as I was with the political context of the work.

The revolutionary nature of the times - the aftermath of France 89, the rise of Bonaparte, the Chartists, crushing of reform and the Peterloo massacre all play their part. In fact it is part of Motion's thesis that Keats' politics are underplayed in traditional appreciations of his work. Later 19th Century works were particularly bad for this. It's a pretty convincing argument though when you look at the vitriol heaped upon him by the right wing throughout his life and the company he kept,

For he did have a big bunch of mates - it is sometimes a little difficult to keep up with them all but through meticulous detail Motion does outline the tension and "politics" of maintaining friendship in a large group.

I was really blown away by Keats' work though especially the explanations given by AM - there is quite a technical aspect but not insurmountable. I liked the way Keats used Greek mythology and paganism as the ideal society (which was quite a common thing at the time apparently) - hence the endless nymphs and naiads etc! Motion's writing on "To Autumn" and the work itself is spellbinding.
Keats attitude to poetry was complex - it was unclear if he saw poets as a sipher of higher pastoral (?) powers or as a document of life put in a different context. He was not a realist at one level - which critics have cited as an absence of political dimension, a point more or less destroyed by Motion. In some ways it reminded me of Engels' description of feudal socialists in Socialism Utopian and Scientific - which was highlighting a similar period.
His relationship with Fanny Brawne (this book is the basis of recent movie Bright Star) is dissected warts and all. It is hardly a romantic ideal indeed Keats had extremely confused and in the modern sense messed up attitudes to women and abandonment. His mother had left him and his family early in his life. There is also some speculation that part of his weakness was due to a lingering veneral disease caught when he was studying to be a doctor,

The last few chapters are very sad but bring the themes together. A lot of Keats' work was over blown in a teenage angsty way but he was only 25 when he died. Also never consummated his relationship with FB which I assume was pretty frustrating! He also was only 5 foot a point which seems irrelevant but lead him to be insecure throughout his life. A point Byron (who comes across as a bit of a tosser here) exploits.

In many ways a tragedy but one which produced wonders. Have now ordered the collected poems for by bedside.

Fool's Gold: Review.

An enthralling race through the anarchy, selfishness and ultimately vandalism of financial capital. It puts the last decade of capitalist "development" in context and is taut as a thriller in its last couple of chapters.
Although many of the processes are complex Gillian Tett explores the foundations of them well so even if you get a little bit lost you have the basic understanding of what the bankers were getting up to.
Her journalistic style makes it readable but I would criticise the referencing which is patchy. It seems to be trying to nod its head to academic work (Tett studied anthropology prior to FT journalism) but not fully engaging with it. The references either should have been ditched or more fully developed. Perhaps the latter could not happen because of speed of publication as it is pretty contemporary.
Though Tett states in the conclusion that she is angry over the mayhem unleashed by the banks her prose does not really reflect this in the way say Naomi Klein would. Understandable given the different politcal complexions but this position is a boon here. Taking a fairly diffident style in reporting the banks dealings in credit derivatives as they get more and more ludicrous is actually pretty effective.
I am not 100% sure why she chooses to focus her discussion through the prism of JPMorgan and she occassionally falls into the trap of character biography of some of the protagonists (see Robert Peston review from last year) but normally pulls back from the brink.
It definitely deepened my understanding of how the banks pursued profits through essentially gambling on losses and defaults, hedging their bets, swapping risks and expanding credit exponentially. It made me angry and I will use it for future reference.
One quote to show the madness - when the sub-prime mortgages started to default in big numbers in 2006 the banks actually increased their exposure to it : " Between Oct and Dec 2006 banks issued a record $130 billion in CDOs alone double the level of a year ago and 40% were created from sub-prime mortgages". And they wonder why people dont trust the banks!

In Cold Blood - A Neer Day Treat!

Not the first way you would think of spending New Years Day reading about a multiple murder in Mid West in the 1950s but I am really glad I did.

An incredibly well written book which although based on a real-life incident is an example of how to write experimental narrative. Using multiple voices - witness statements, materials from the killers, newspaper articles, academic journals to explore amorality. It was labelled "New Journalism" but it is more indicative of a modern novel.

The sense of location is strong - funnily enough it reminded me of two non - fiction books I have read in the last few years - Collapse and Fast Food nation which although about very different topics gave a similar picture of the Mid-West in the States - the people, landscape nature of the environment.

As a form of combining fiction with real events you are never sure when Capote is expanding on the truth or simply making it up. But he is such a good writer that is not a hindrance - only I suppose if you wanted it as historical document. A criticism is that Capote got too close to murderers but the narrator's voice is quite absent - Capote is only directly referred to at one point near the end of the book. This occurred to such an extent I wasnt sure if he was present at the execution - he was apparently.

Moral ? Well it's definitely not a campaigning book against a miscarriage of justice it does show the mess society and families can make of people or how supportive it can be. It also shows the randomness of brutal violence - like being struck with lightening as the investigating cop calls it. Very influential and I am intrigued to read Capote's other material.

The Age of Wonder....indeed.

An incredibly readable document of a period of time I knew very little about. Ostensibly a study of the intense period of scientific development between the late 18th and early 19th Century. But offers a lot more than that. It explores the intimate links (sometimes literally) of the Romantic poets of the time and the Scientists or more accurately Natural Philosophers of the time. In particular the Shelleys, Keats, Coleridge - of which I think Holmes has written biographies (not read them but am now tempted). There is a lovely intertwining of verse in the context of various scientific developments. It introduced a lot of poetry I was not really aware of.
It also is really a study of knowledge being in the hand of an elite and the tension that brings. Should there be a broadening out of this or kept in the hands of an elite. At this time there seemed to be a slight broadening of knowledge in the relatively new British state from the aristocracy to slightly more middle class geniuses - personified here by William Herschel and Humphry Davy(pictured). But what I like is Holmes introduces a whole new generation of young Turks who challenge these modest advances.
It is also a time of revolution - American, French, industrial which is a constant background though never dominating the discussion. It is telling how men of science fell into the nascent capitalist state - Mungo Park becoming seemingly reluctant imperialist adventurer. Davy developing his lamp in the face of major industrial change - one of the best chapters of the book I think.
By combining quite indepth personal details of several individuals with societal and artistic context the work comes across as very full. Radical politics are examined - notably with the intriguing figure Dr Beddoes in Bristol. But equally aristocratic machinations are explored representing the dichotomy of the day I think.
A great platform to explore this era - with a very inviting bibliography. Holmes is also a brilliant writer if perhaps a little inconclusive. One to keep if only for the excellent quotes