The Library

 THE LIBRARY

A library normally has thousands of books.  We should take this as a fact, as a basis of our discussion.  A second well-known fact, or projection if you must, is that I, or you, or anyone will not read all the books available in any given library.  These two notions should be uncontestable to anyone who has ever been in a library.

We currently have a set of people who complain and not only complain, but demand that certain books should either not appear in a library or if present, be disappeared so that they no longer are available to those who might want to read them.  

These people have the view that their opinion of a book should determine its availability to the public in general.  The current hullabaloo in Bondurant is a case in point.  As a person who reads books, the idea that some person or persons unknown to me can decide what I have available to read, is simply untenable.  Who are these people?

If you don't want your kid to read a book, tell your kid not to read the book.  What is so difficult about this?  If you do not have the ability to keep your kid from reading a book that your kid wants to read, you might want to reconsider your role as a parent.  Or, consider your own deficiencies in not understanding that not every one has your view of what is appropriate reading and what is not.  

I understand that this library thing has a religious element.  When it comes to a book about gay people or gay kids or a gay life, objections are raised that may have their basis in a person's religious beliefs.  But you know what!  I don't have the same belief and your belief should not have any effect on me or others who do not share your particular belief.  If I want to read a book about a particular subject, what is it to you!  By the way, what is your view of THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO or of the KORAN or of MEIN KAMPF?

I would project that if you are a person that doesn't want your kid to read a certain book, you are a person that is perfectly content that your kid not read any book.  Books are considered dangerous things and the view appears to be they can cause a great deal of trouble to someone set in his or her ways and therefore some will do whatever necessary to maintain a maximum amount of ignorance in themselves and in their children.

This piece is not an exercise in literary criticism, but what the book deniers do not understand is that a novel is not written for the purpose of convincing the reader to behave or identify in a certain way, a novel is written to tell you the way things are - - life as it is.  Denying access to a novel about gay people does not keep you from being gay, but it does deny you the knowledge that there actually are gay people and they lead gay lives.

The question is "Why should your kid be as ignorant as you?"  Are you the ruler in charge of ignorance; the maintainer of unknowing?  This fight for ignorance and set beliefs has been fought for centuries.   And as we can see, the fight continues and we must recognize it for what it is.  It is not a war against gay people or sex or unrecognized behavior, it is a war on books  - this is what it has always been. 

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

The Search for Intelligent Life

 THE SEARCH FOR INTELLIGENT LIFE

The search for intelligent life in the universe continues with new telescopes, computerized data, and now presumably AI.  A bacteria or a virus will do - any biological form will assure us that there is indeed life and intelligence out there somewhere.   The presumption being that where there is life, there is intelligence.

Our current situation here on earth is illustrative however:  life and intelligence are not necessarily concurrent.  One does not presuppose the other.  The number of life forms found on earth has yet to be determined with any certainty; it's a really big number.  I would suspect that if life, as we know it, can be located on another planet, it will not take the form of a solitary creature.  This should be considered a certainty if we take earth as an example.  Every biological unit on this planet will be eaten by other biological units, hence you need more than one for life to exist.  These biological units may have a form of  intelligence; some more than others.  But if life demands intelligence, all life forms presumably have some, at least enough to keep themselves alive.

It follows that if there is life as we understand it on other planets there must be more than one solitary version.  A little reason goes a long way in understanding the difference between what is intelligible and what is unintelligible.  But back to earth.  We, meaning us earthlings, homo sapiens in particular, pride ourselves on our intelligence.  We have concluded that we are an intelligent life form.

I would suggest that this conclusion does not necessarily comport with the facts.  Examples are endless and illustrative; we are all aware of human activities that defy reason and logic, and indeed, can not be attributed to intelligent life. Our legislative bodies are a prime example of human hubris in this regard.  These bodies of biological units (legislatures) presume themselves to be not only adequate to the tasks given them, but of the superior understanding necessary to regulate the behavior of all other biological units within their grasp - - meaning you and me.

If one were to actually look at what our legislative bodies do and how what they do affects you and me, one might quickly gain the idea that the search for intelligent life might be of more benefit if we were to look a little less celestially.  It would be significant if we found life, intelligent or not, on some other planet in the universe, but it seems to me that it would be more significant if we could find some here on earth.  On first glance there doesn't appear to be much intelligence locally and especially in our legislative bodies.  

One must not get the notion that I am casting unfounded and  disparaging remarks about our elected representatives which in turn reflect on the people who elect them.  But if one were to look at the situation without preconceived notions, one must necessarily come to the conclusion that our idea of intelligent life here on earth needs an adjustment.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Mason and Dixon

 MASON AND DIXON

Thomas Pynchon

Books for Bigots

Mason and Dixon, the first Pynchon book I've read, has been a significant find.  As I approach the end of the book with some sort of report for Bigots in mind, what comes to me is that I'm reading Tolstoy or Dostoevsky - a Russian novel.  What Pynchon has done here is give you a view into 1760s America, along with I might add Cape Town and St. Helena with a bit of England thrown in.   A late chapter of a conversation between Mason and Dr. Johnson and Boswell on their way to the Hebrides made me smile.

This book took an immense amount of work to write.  One must credit Pynthon with a massive effort and imagination.  As I have always maintained, I am not a literary critic but simply a guy who reads books.  What I have found is that if after reading a book, one thinks about it and writes something about it, it sets in your mind better.  This would apply to any Bigot as well where after reading some screed, make a few notes of some Bigotry notable for its eccentricity.

This book has nothing against Bigots.  In fact, there was no thought of them.  The portrayal of slavery was simply that, with the exception Dixon taking a whip from a slave driver who was whipping slaves driving them down the street; but even then it was simply a personal distaste of torture and maltreatment.

What I take Mason and Dixon to be is a history book; a so-much better history book than simply a description of things that have been - - one can get the feel of America as a colony at that time, the people that inhabited it; knowledge that nothing is quite what it seems; that there are other inhabitants out there in the forest that need accounted for.   And for all those who wish diversity to disappear, unfortunately a realization that you can run into just about anyone and anything from anywhere on the frontier.  There are always those looking for something different and they are of all kinds.

 

The other acknowledgement that one must make is the immense effort it took to make America as we know it.  It would seem to mirror the effort it took to write the book.  I am glad I read it and now will be required to read Pynchon's other books which will take considerable time and effort.  It should be worth it.  And, I highly recommend the book to any Bigot who might inadvertently come across a copy in his or her travels and carrying's on.  It really doesn't harm a person to know a little of how he or she got to be the way they are and the historical factors that go into one's personality.  It might actually cause one to have a thought process or two which often can be beneficial. 

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

No Mismatches Allowed

 NO MISMATCHES ALLOWED

As Iowans we should be proud of our legislative efforts.  We are a State that is leading the nation in  extinguishing any diversity and our latest effort needs commendation.  Senate File 579 signed by Governor Reynolds says that an Iowa city can't give its citizens more civil rights that Iowa gives them.  A necessary development, don't you think?  We simply don't want some people to have more rights than other people have; or, as the Governor would say, we do not want our civil rights "mismatched".

And we certainly don't want a person living in Des Moines to have more civil rights than a person living in Waukee - -  for instance.  It just wouldn't be right.  Or what about Newton?  It certainly wouldn't be appropriate for the citizens of Newton to have more civil rights than a person living in Colfax or Sully - - for example.

What Senate File 579 says explicitly is that a municipality cannot decide for themselves what is unfair or discriminatory.  Only the State of Iowa can do that.  So let's say that Newton, for instance, determines that a restaurant can not  deny service to a person wearing a cap.  Since the Iowa Civil Rights code says nothing about caps, Newton would not be able to protect your right to wear a cap while eating your lunch.  It may be discriminatory, but it is not forbidden.

Apparently, what has caused all this ruckus is the idea that some people would like to identify as something other than simply male or female.  We have taken particular offense to this idea.  What Iowa has decided to do is to declare that you are either a male or are female and that's the end of it.  How or why this came about is not clear, but it seems to be the case.

Self-identity is no longer allowed.   I am not to suggest, at least publicly, that even though I may have the body of a male, I have the hormones and mental traits of a girl.  No more of that-  - not allowed, verboten.  It could destroy civil society which is already teetering dangerously.

Now I realize I said the same thing about samesex marriage and things didn't fall apart, but this has got to be different surely.  This goes way beyond samesex marriage; when a gay person says they are gay they are not saying they are female when they are clearly male.  This transgender stuff is not acceptable and will result in total social catastrophe - - our whole belief system will collapse and anarchy will result.  We simply can't let some big bulky guy walk up to us and say, "Hey, I may look like a man, but I'm really a woman."

Not happening folks! Enough is enough and we should applaud our legislature in attending to things that are really important; those things which will make our lives better.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Tuff

 TUFF

Paul Beatty

Books for Bigots

A book definitely not for Bigots - for White ones specifically.  As you know, I recognize Bigots of all hues.  Winston Forshay, otherwise known as Tuff is not the ordinary human being either in New York City or anywhere else and such a character outside of a fictional account would not be easy to find.  

Clearly Mr. Beatty is an educated man who wants to give us a flavor of Black New York which he accomplishes in this novel although from mid-story on it would seem that Mr. Forshay is not the character that would best embody it.  Having written a book myself, I find it troubling to suggest that another book is somewhat deficient or otherwise unsatisfactory knowing just how much effort goes into writing one.

Tuff has all the deficiencies possible in a human being while at the same time has innate qualities that would allow him to rise above his neighborhood surroundings.  The other characters are likeable enough but caught in a city, a locale, that does not allow them to advance intellectually or otherwise beyond having street cred and  surviving in a rather hostile environment to which they contribute.  Tuff's wife, Yolanda, is trying for an education by working on a college degree:  she appears to be the exception.  It is also clear that these other characters that make up Tuff's immediate circle are rather intelligent and better informed than one would suppose but stuck never-the-less.  Winston's father, a former activist, is now a speaker, a writer, and seemingly a genuinely interesting fellow that the reader would like  to  have learned more about.

But as for Bigots attempting to read this book, one can envision nothing but failed attempts.  Accepting the fact that my own experience of Bigotry is limited to White, Semi-Rural, Iowa in close proximity to Des Moines which currently is hosting Bigotry-in-Full as a convocation of the current legislature.  Few of  those participating in our legislative process would even consider, as a possibility, reading a book by a Black author about Black people living in a mostly Black place, if they were to read a book at all which in itself is difficult to imagine.

The White population of our State still hasn't recovered from the Geroge Floyd uprising where "supporting the Blue" became the war cry of our local citizenry.  Now I can write stuff like this because I am White.  A Black person writing it, would not have much of an audience here in the land of corn and pigs and insurance companies.  I can call a White person a Bigot because I am a white person.

I'm sure that I will take heat for attempting to say anything at all about this book. This would be due to my complete ignorance of Black city life.  But isn't this what literature is about?  I don't know much about Russia either, but I read  BROTHERS KARAMOZ with the result that I now know more about Russian than I did before I read it.

Tuff's most used word, manifesting itself as the largest portion of his vocabulary, is "motherfucker".  I would have expected that word to be used wherever English is in current use and it is certainly commendable that it is in current use in the various boroughs of the City of New York.  But Tuff's vocabulary doesn't fit his aspirations.  There are hints that Tuff actually is pretty bright and would like to have an education and I would have felt a lot better about him if he had gained some during the course of the novel.  Maybe being on the City Council will be beneficial even though one is left with the idea that it won't work out well for our wanna' be hero.  He certainly doesn't think so.  The best view of Tuff: he has the qualities of a hero, but he may have too far to go to get there.

As indicated above TUFF is not a book for Bigots.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo