Top Ten Goals (Bookish or Otherwise) for 2026

Today’s TTT is “goals for 2026”.  Hmm – well, I’m sure I won’t get to ten. But first, two teases from James Madison by Richard Brookhiser:

Madison showed intelligence and humor. One evening he proposed an experiment to see how many bottles of champagne it would take to induce hangovers the next day. (No result was recorded.)

“The wine,” wrote one dazzled Federalist senator, “was the best I ever drank, particularly the champagne, which was indeed delicious. I wish [Jefferson’s] French politics were as good as his French wines.”

(1) Finish my second Classics Club. It should not be difficult: only a couple of of the books on my current list are girthy challenges (The Shahnameh and Tocqueville’s Democracy in America). The trick is getting started.

(2)  Do proper justice to my America @ 250 challenge for this year.

(3) Complete The Bible in a Year challenge following Fr. Mike Schmitz’s program.  I am currently on track. Fr. Schmitz’s approach isn’t a straight read through;  instead readers get different books concurrently (Genesis and Job, for instance) with a splash of Psalms or Proverbs at the end of the day for flavor.  It keeps one from getting bogged down in laws and “begats”.  I think there are also some liturgical calendar considerations at work: right around Easter, for instance, there’s an abrupt switch from the book of Judges for a “Messianic Checkpoint” week spent in John.

(4) Continue to avoid reddit. I’ve never been a compulsive user of social media — I use facebook and instagram very sparingly — but when I “stumbled on” reddit a few years back I found it had the same addictive and poisonous effect on me that other social media platforms have on others.  This year I decided to quit it cold turkey and am so far holding out. 

(5) More writing. Given how active this blog is, I realize that may sound like a strange goal, but I have a local history blog I created a few years ago and have done little with – including publicizing it, because  I haven’t been able to post there consistently enough to justify promoting it –  and last year I began to share a series of local-drama short stories I’d written. I don’t know that anything will come of the later, aside from my own joy, but I’d like to continue exploring that as ideas come to me.

(6) I’ve been wanting to expand my role as a local history expert for a couple of years now: to a degree, this is working insofar as I’m the go-to person for people writing books that touch on my town, but I’m wanting a more integrated expertise – one that incorporates our surrounding counties, since my town’s prominence came from having been an ‘in-gathering’ site for the region: we were the place everyone else sent crops to sell, and the place that received goods from outside for people to purchase.  Expanding this role would entail me attending historical societies meetings in those counties. I’ve begun networking with people in a couple of counties but have yet to attend a proper meeting, let alone establish myself as a regular, predictable presence there.

(7) Read Johnny Clegg’s autobiography – or rather, the first part of it. Unfortunately, we lost Johnny before he could properly finish it.  Clegg’s music was literally the first time I ever watched a movie’s credits because I wanted to find out who sang that song. (“Dela”, from George of the Jungle. Yes, I was in middle school – but I still love it.)

(8) Return to purposeful tech training. I used to be fairly intense about staying up to date with tech, but then near-death, dialysis, and transplants happened and I got thrown off — despite constantly studying during my transplant recovery. I just saw the CompTia A+ is doing 1201/1202 tests and I haven’t even reviewed all the new stuff on their 1101/1102- gen material. It wasn’t just medical issues, of course: COVID + bitcoin mining really disrupted tech prices and I don’t know that they’ve ever normalized.

(9) Re-reading. I began trying to make this a habit last year; there are books I’d like to revisit just to see how I respond to them 10-15 years later.

(10) Complete this list. Woo! I made ten!

Posted in General | Tagged , | 19 Comments

Brookhiser on Madison

Image
Madison among the rest,
Pouring from his narrow chest, More than Greek or Roman sense, Boundless tides of eloquence.

Interestingly enough, it was James Madison who prompted my interest in reading presidential biographies. Early in the blog’s history, I happened upon Founding Rivals, a history of the dynamic between Madison and Monroe: both were members of the Revolutionary generation, both were Virginias who later became president, but they were often rivals. I’ve since read one other book on Madison, but it was closely focused on his connection to the creation of the Constitution; this is the first proper biography I have tried of him. I found it a readable if sometimes overly casual review of Madison’s political life, if not the man himself.

Brookhiser’s account skips past Madison’s upbringing, though we find this modest planter quickly found himself running in the best of circles through his intelligence and obsessive work ethic. Not even a fifth of the way into the biography, we find Madison already in the role we expect to find him — the politician, serving Virginia in various capacities from the Governor’s Council to the Philadelphia Convention that created the Constitution. Madison formed close friendships with Washington, Jefferson, and Hamilton — though he and Hamilton would fall out over Madison’s opposition to the big-government policies adopted by the Federalists. (Brookhiser refers to Madison’s criticism of Hamilton as ‘nuts’, which brought out my John Adams glare of disdain. Call me a snob, but I dislike that sort of informality in a history book.) Brookhiser names Madison as the creator of America’s first political party, the Republicans — sometimes called the Democratic-Republicans to differentiate them from the modern party that was created in the mid-19th century. In their opposition to consolidated government, these Republicans were not unlike Jacksonian Democrats. I have to admire Madison as a man of principle: in the Federalist papers he and Hamilton argued in theory that there need be no fear of the state becoming overmighty, but when the Constitution went into effect Madison took the evidence before his own eyes seriously and struck back against it. He was author of the Virginia Resolution, with along with Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolution argued that the States were the ultimate arbiters of constitutionality. This was written in response to the Alien and Sedition acts of the Adams administration; when president himself, Madison exercised the power of the veto to strike down bills he regarded as unconstitutional. Probably the most memorable part of his presidency is the eruption of the War of 1812, which Brookhiser argues Madison planned poorly for. After leaving office to another Virginian, Monroe, Madison stayed up with politics, sharing opinions with his peers and eventually outliving all of the other founding generation.

This was a fair read; Brookhiser is an accessible author, but as mentioned the focus is entirely on Madison’s political life — as founder, framer, party organizer, public servant — with comparatively little about the man himself. Potential readers may take that as they will: I found it a useful review of the Founding generation’s attempts at working out govenment.

Quotations

Heroes can aspire to perfection, especially if they die young, through the purity of an action, or a stance. But the long haul of politics takes at least some of the shine off almost everyone.

We pay much less attention to James Madison, Father of Politics, than to James Madison, Father of the Constitution. That is because politics embarrasses us. Politics is the spectacle on television and YouTube, the daily perp walk on the Huffington Post and the Drudge Report. Surely our founders and framers left us something better, more solid, more inspiring than that? They did. But they all knew—and Madison understood better than any of them—that ideals come to life in dozens of political transactions every day. Some of those transactions aren’t pretty. You can understand this and try to work with this knowledge, or you can look away. But ignoring politics will not make it stop. It will simply go on without you—and sooner or later will happen to you.

As Madison read, he wrote down his own thoughts, first by copying thoughts he liked into a commonplace book—“The Talent for insinuating is more useful than that of persuading. The former is often successful, the latter very seldom” (Cardinal de Retz, a seventeenth-century French politician). As he grew older, he wrote essays that digested what he had learned. Writing extended Madison’s bookish discussions—it was a form of talking with himself.


Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

No! ….lovelost.

Image

I solemnly swear I will not write this review lovingly mocking Will!iam SHATner’s cadence. But an understanding reader will grant me at least the title? Yesterday I finished listening to Together Tonight, an audio play in which the writings of Mssrs Burr, Hamilton, and Jefferson were used to create a fictional conversation between men who in real life were sharp rivals. After discovering that it was a contemporary recording of a play called No Love Lost, which ORIGINALLY featured William Shatner, Jack Lemmon, and Martin Landau (!!), I had to see if the original recording was out there. It is. And it’s fun. The level of acting talent here is both a blessing and a curse: it’s MARKEDLY easier to tell who is speaking and who! is not, but at the same time my familiarity with Lemmon and Shatner disrupted immersion. However, the sound design in general is far easier for a listening audience, with a narrator describing things that cannot be heard. The script was more streamlined, through, only 2/3rds of Together Tonight, and the voice actors were distractingly…old. I could not listen to “Burr” talk without seeing Jack Lemmon sitting at the table in Twelve Angry Men, his white hair shining, rustling through papers. At the time of this conversation, the narrator informs us these men were all in their forties — but they sound like the silver haired retirees who gather in my city diner every morning to drink coffee, flirt with the waitress, and discuss the affairs of the world. Ultimately, I much prefer the modern Audible version, even if its versions of Hamilton and Jefferson take more time to tell apart — their actors do not overwhelm the roles, and the Audible version had some elements I enjoyed (like the characters’ interior thoughts) that were not present in this one.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Together Tonight: A Founding Fathers Triwizard Tournament

Image
Jefferson: I think the whole commerce between master and slave is despotism on the one hand, and degrading submission on the other.
Burr: But don’t you own slaves yourself?
Jefferson: I do.
Burr: No inconsistency there?
Jefferson: Not at all. I do not treat my slaves like a despot, nor are they degraded by me.
Hamilton: In fact, you love your slaves, don’t you? ….some more than others?

After listening to The Rivalry, a play based on the Lincoln-Douglas debates and delivered with aplomb by the Los Angeles Theater Works Productions company, I wanted to experience more of LATW. Then I saw this, another play based on debate and dialogue. Together Tonight draws on the writings of Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and Aaron Burr to put the men into direct debate together, moderated by a Mr. Pickering. Corwin originally titled this No Love Lost, and such a name is warranted: Jefferson and Hamilton were archrivals, and Burr was commonly regarded as a craven opportunist, dismissed by his peers. The initial topic of discussion is relations with France, the “Quasi-War” — but the conversation wanders all over the place. Hamilton even remarks on it — “Remarkable! One minute we are talking about the Masons and principles and children’s books, and the next about the variations in the vegetable and mineral kingdoms! ?”. One potential issue is that it is sometimes difficult to pick out who is speaking, at least between Hamilton and Jefferson: it took me about twenty minutes before I could reliably tell them apart. They’re both good voices — lots of gravitas — but the differences are subtle to an untuned ear or a casual listener. Aaron Burr was easier: he sounded exactly like a weasel.

The conversation’s life was quite good, to my ears, flowing naturally — hence some of the randomness — and Corwin smartly engineers space for intermission by having the chatter shift to an issue on which Alexander Hamilton takes such offense that he demands a moment to cool down. (At one point, Hamilton is so furious with Burr that I wondered if the historic challenge to duel — which killed Hamilton and excised Burr like a cancer from the body politic — would be issued there and then.) There is, in fact, an extended discussion on the merits of dueling — one that would surely have anyone with knowledge of how their relationship ended sitting on the edge of their seats with an anticipatory grin. Blessed are those with foreknowledge, for they shall be rewarded. While not as stellar as The Rivalry, this history major was thoroughly entertained by it. I may have to give that curr Burr a fair shake — there’s an interesting book called Fallen Founder I can take a look at.

Additional Note: When “No Love Lost” was originally performed, it featured WILLIAM SHATNER AND JACK LEMMON.

Okay, I’m going to have to review this twice.
Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

The Rivalry

Image

The Rivalry proceeds from an ambitious and fascinating idea for a play. The Lincoln–Douglas debates of 1858 led to Douglas being elected to the Senate, but they also allowed for a sustained public debate over slavery—and gave Lincoln far more name recognition than the Illinois lawyer had previously enjoyed. These debates were long affairs, typically consisting of hours of back-and-forth speeches. It is a testament to the nineteenth-century attention span that debates and lectures of this sort were popular entertainment. (Robert G. Ingersoll, for example, used to deliver lectures three hours long—and spoke to standing-room-only crowds.) The central issue in these debates was popular sovereignty—the doctrine that territories could choose for themselves whether to permit slavery. To Douglas, this was a perfectly sensible approach that made national policy on slavery unnecessary. To Lincoln, it opened the door to slavery’s expansion and relied on the idea that the worth of some people could be decided by the mass opinions of others.

Norman Corwin takes some of the most historically potent moments from these debates and reshapes them into a series of far shorter exchanges between the two men. These are punctuated by brief scenes in which a Republican Party leader announces events, or Lincoln encounters Douglas’s wife, Adele, on a train and they converse. These interludes are not fluff: in Lincoln’s conversation with Adele Douglas, I recognized many of the same historic arguments Lincoln made to the Little Giant himself, though delivered in a much different way — casually, rather than caustically. They also serve to give Lincoln a definite sympathetic advantage, as virtually all of Douglas’ screentime is when he is arguing (and generally on propositions current readers would object to), whereas Lincoln gets to ruminate with Adele and entertain her and the audience with his folksy stories. (Said stories are entertaining, as are his ripostes. It would be interesting to pit Lincoln against Reagan in joke-off.)

Both Paul Giamatti and David Strathairn are superb presences, and Lincoln’s humor is smartly worked in—and well delivered. I enjoyed this very much, though I have been reading about this era for several months now and am a fan of both actors; in fact, I watched films led by each of them shortly before listening to this. As someone who has encountered the debates in books such as 1858 and And There Was Light, I thought Corwin’s adaptation—rendered in a form intelligible to the modern listener—was particularly well done. While the focus remains firmly on the debates themselves, the production includes ambient effects such as cheering crowds, music, and cannon fire. While I imagine this kind of production has a small audience, it’s VERY well done.  I must say, I’m loving Los Angeles Theater Works productions, and evidently I’ve enjoyed two of their prior works without realizing they were the source.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

WWW Wednesday, totally not sponsored by The Lincoln Museum

WHAT have you finished reading recently? And There Was Light, Jon Meacham. A biography of Abraham Lincoln.

WHAT are you reading now? I am listening to The Rivalry, a play composed by Norman Corwin. It turns the Lincoln-Douglas debates into a two-hour performance delivered by Paul Giamatti (Stephen A. Douglas) and David Straitharn (Abraham Lincoln). I began this on the heels of watching Lincoln, in which Straitharn plays Secretary of State Seward against Daniel Day-Lewis’ Lincoln. I was listening to a dramatization of The Hobbit but needed a break from the goblin/monster voices in general.

WHAT are you reading next? I need to read something that’s not history, but I am looking at both In Defense of Andrew Jackson by Brad Birzer and The Real Lincoln by Thomas DiLorenzo as followups to my Meacham biographies. I also ordered With Malice Towards None, a much-hailed Lincoln biography.

Image
….this is the first time one person has captured my WWW post. Darn you, rail-splitter!

And now, today’s prompt from Long and Short reviews, which is….”funny titles”. I’ve done this twice before , at five-year intervals, and will follow the same approach I did at my last interval. I’ll take the ‘current winning’ list and see if anything I’ve read in the last five years can unseat the current champions! As it turns out, there was only one change: Hurricane Lizards and Plastic Squid replaced Don’t Hurt People and Don’t Take Their Stuff.

How I Killed Pluto and Why it Had it Coming, Mike Brown
Death from the Skies!, Phil Plait
Cinderella Ate My Daughter, Peggy Orenstein
They Eat Puppies, Don’t They? Christopher Buckley
The Naked Lady Who Stood on Her Head Gary Small

Hey, Mom, Can I Ride My Bike Across America?, John Siegal Boettner
Gang Leader for a Day, Sudhir Venkatesh
How To Destroy the Imagination of Your Child, Anthony Esolen
Prepare to Meet Thy Doom: And Other Gaming Stories, David Kushner
Hurricane Lizards and Plastic Squid: The Biology of Climate Change, Thor Hanson

Posted in General | Tagged , , | 18 Comments

Science Survey ’26 Predictions & Tueasday Teese

Today’s TTT is books we’re anticipating being released this year, but I did that last Wednesday, so I’m going to offer a preview of what this year’s Science Survey might constitute. But first, a tease!

Hurrying means that you miss out on many things. Riding a train will take you far, but it’s a misconception to think that this will give you more insight. Flowers in the hedgerow and birds in the treetops are accessible only to the person who walks on their own two feet. – THE CAT WHO SAVED BOOKS

Image

Cosmology and Astrophysics
To Infinity and Beyond, Neil deGrasse Tyson

Local Astronomy
When the Earth Had Two Moons

Geology, Oceanography, and Natural History
Turning to Stone: Discovering the Subtle Wisdom of Rocks 

Chemistry and Physics
Ten Drugs: How Plants, Powders, and Pills Have Shaped the History of Medicine

Cognition, Neurology, and Psychology:
Reader, Come Home: The Reading Brain in a Digital World – A Neuroscience and Education Exploration of Empathy, Attention, and Our Future

Biology
Pump: A Natural History of the Heart

Flora and Fauna
Weeds: In Defense of Nature’s Most Unloved Plants

Archaeology and Anthropology
A Hunter-Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century: Evolution and the Challenges of Modern Life

Weather and Climate
The Secret World of Weather: How to Read Signs in Every Cloud, Breeze, Hill, Street, Plant, Animal, and Dewdrop

Ecology
Entangled Life: How Fungi Make Our Worlds, Change Our Minds & Shape Our Futures

Thinking Scientifically
Books do Furnish a Life, Richard Dawkins

Wildcard: (Science Biography, History of Science, Science and Health, or Science and Society)
Crossings: How Road Ecology Is Shaping the Future of Our Planet

Posted in General | Tagged , | 22 Comments

John Grisham’s The Widow

Image

Simon Latch is a seasoned attorney in a dead marriage who struggles to make ends meet, even as he sleeps on a cot in his office. When an elderly woman approaches him for some estate work and mentions that she has $16 million in stocks between Wal-Mart and Coca-Cola, his heart can’t help but skip a beat.  “Miss Netty” could keep him from complete insolvency. As Simon goes to work preparing a will that will keep her and her late husband’s money from being devoured by the locusts at the IRS, he also begins making himself into Miss Netty’s friend, treating her to dinners every week, and gently prodding her to take her end-of-life care more seriously. Then, she dies – and Simon finds himself being accused of murder.  While I do have a large gripe with this novel, The Widow was largely better than most of the potboilers Grisham has churned out in the last twenty years – not a great challenge, to be sure.   I enjoyed it until close to the end, when the supposed whodunit  gets an ending from out of left field: it’s not a mystery that allows the reader to participate in the conclusion of, let’s say.  I liked the relative intimacy of the novel, as we’re dealing with only a few characters, and Simon is a delicate mix of pathetic and morally…muddy. He’s not a bad guy by any means,  and I’d argue that his client is taking as much advantage of him as he hopes to take of her – she’s milking him for food and all manner of services, legal and otherwise,  while he waits for the penny-pinching woman to start paying him for his time. His being accused of murder and placed on the wrong side of the bar was a fun change, but I found the resolution rushed and unsatisfying. Still,  it kept me safe from the blue glow of a computer screen for a few hours!

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Buy one, get one free: Jackson and Lincoln

I thought it would be amusing to do a history short round after realizing I’d read two books in which Jon Meacham focuses on Kentucky-born presidents who became icons and who dealt with secession crises. First up, Andy Jackson!

Image

Andrew Jackson is a singularly American figure; no other nation could have produced him.  Just over two hundred and eleven years ago,  he won a flabbergastingly improbable victory over the British at New Orleans,  making a war that had already ended in a grudging truce into an roaring victory in American memory. Jackson – who had led men on his own through the wilds of the ‘old southwest’, bearing the pain of duels past as they trudged toward New Orleans  – became a folk hero and went on to transform national politics and become the President.  Although today he’s only associated with Indian removal, Meacham points out that his policies there were perfectly in line with other politicians of the period, like William Henry Harrison. Jackson is a tough old bird, resilient both physically and emotionally. Raised practically an orphan, he nevertheless forged a path for himself in the military and law. Raised in the southern honor culture, he had a tendency to get into duels and would carry the debris of several with him. He wasn’t just a violent hillbilly, though — he could conduct himself with grace that surprised his opponents in Washington. He had many, too, because he viewed the Washington elite as just that, an elite who were unresponsive to the needs of the people. In an age of increasing suffrage, the people had louder voices — and Jackson not only heard them, he marshalled their energy. Interestingly, although Jacksonianism was avowedly opposed to elitism and centralism in government — one of the reasons Jackson constantly attacked the National Bank, seeing it as a tool of eastern bankers to keep the country in hoc to them — Jackson in office was not a protolibertarian icon. He was heavy-handed, both with the bank and with South Carolina after the palmetto state threatened secession if the tariff of abominations — which sheltered northern industry at the expense of southern consumers — was not scotched. In this Jackson is not an exception: many who criticize the use of power find it strangely intoxicating when the One Ring is on their own finger. This was an engaging and fair take on one of early America’s more complex and fascinating figures.

Image

Next up, Abraham Lincoln.

Lincoln is usually rated alongside George Washington in terms of ‘great American presidents’; and perhaps that’s fitting in one way. Just as Washington was first to preside over the Union created by the Constitution – a new approach to Republic from the previous Articles of Confederation Republic — so did Lincoln effectively create a new Union in his attempt to save Washington’s from sectionalism and dismemberment. And Then There Was Light takes a fairly obvious tack towards Lincoln, hailing him not only as the man who kept the Union together, but in the process recognized that this was the moment to finally destroy the noxious institution of slavery, and labored to do so. It’s fairly hagiographic, at least as much as a modern writer can admit that anyone who died before us can have a shred of virtue. Meacham’s attitude is that while Lincoln was not the saint moderns might wish him to have been, he was all the saint it was possible to be in his time and circumstances. As such, the even-handedness from the Jackson biography is absent here: any opponent of Lincoln’s is a nogoodnik. Even the anti-war northern democrats, who protested the war in general and especially war measures like conscription and the like, are simply dismissed as allied with his enemies, and when listing the states that seceded Meacham does not bother to point out that the second wave, which would include many of the men who would frustrate the Union for years, did not happen until Lincoln called for troops to suppress the rebellion. (In the text they come off as being summoned to defend the Capital, surrounded as it was by hostile Maryland and Virginia.)

Fortunately for Meacham, his subject is inherently interesting: a poor Kentuckian turned Illinois rail-splitter was struck by ambition to be not only known, but unforgettable. Lincoln had a gift of gab — a quick wit and a sense of humor that made him both a good lawyer and an excellent political booster. According to Meacham, it was Stephen Douglas’ Kansas-Nebraska act that lured Lincoln fully into politics: he was so opposed to the potential for slavery’s expansion that he felt compelled to enter the arena. Although my libertarian politics do not allow me to give many laurels to Lincoln — he is one of the principle figures of the the Republic’s transition into the Dominion of DC — I cannot help but sympathize with him. I admire any man who shoots up from nothingness into national prominence through dogged hard work and ambition, and Lincoln served under the most dismal of circumstances. Not only did he inherit a country at war, but he was struggling with his own inner demons and would lose children in the process — and, when he’d finally neared the dawn of potential peace, a bitter actor shot him. Lincoln is a marvelously complex fellow, and I will not settle for just one book on him.

Do not be surprised to see Mr. Meacham again; I fully expect to read his biography of George H.W. Bush, which will be interesting since Bush Sr was my “childhood” president, and his face is the first that comes to mind when I think of The President — just as Queen II is always The Queen and John Paul II is always The Pope.

COMING UP: John Grisham’s The Widow and a radio adaptation of The Hobbit, if its obnoxious renderings of goblins and other monsters do not drive me to stop listening to it.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Great Gatsby: Dramatized

Image
He looked at her the way all women want to be looked at by a man….

As ifThe Great Gatsby needed more drama! LA Theater Works’ The Great Gatsby is a condensed audio adaptation (2 hours) of Fitzgerald’s original that focuses primarily on the relationships between Nick Carraway, Jay Gatsby, Jordan Baker, Tom Buchanan, and — of course — Daisy Buchanan. It features an ensemble cast, with at least one recognizable name in Rufus Sewell. If you do not know his name, you probably know his face: he’s good at characters who stand partially in shadow and menace, like Alexander Hamilton in John Adams and John Smith in The Man in the High Castle. Here, he features as Jay Gatsby himself. My experience with this was conflicted: while it’s been nearly five years since I read the actual book, I did see the movie only a few months ago and retained a lot of familiarity with the characters and stories. I was thus mostly listening for the voice acting and sound design, both of which were quite good. I especially liked the atmospheric sound effects, like jazz music playing in the background of party scenes, highball glasses clinking when one character is prepping drinks, and phone conversations sounding like phone conversations. The Great Gatsby, for those unfamiliar, is the story of a young man named Nick who moves in next door to an eccentric and fabulously wealthy chap named Jay Gatsby; Gatsby has a little advanced knowledge of Nick in that he knows Nick has a cousin named Daisy. Gatsby, as it turns out, is madly in love with Daisy and dated her some years ago, only to lose her between war and his own poverty. Now he’s loaded, and he wants a second chance. Only problem? Daisy’s married. Drama ensues! I enjoyed this audio production, though I cannot say why the story haunts me so: most of the characters are horrid, but that’s the charm of art. Sometimes it resonates in ways and layers we can’t readily identify.

“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments