Well, the Gerald Celente post continues to draw plenty of haters to this site. And that’s fine. Because everybody needs a hobby. But I’m pleased to report that I’ve taken on another dubious futurist in the fine pages of the San Francisco Chronicle. I had truly hoped for more from the book. I have a soft spot for futurists and I always start reading a book hoping for the best. But, alas, it proved to be grand bunk.
Today, if you’re in the San Francisco Bay Area, you can pick up the paper and read my review of George Friedman’s The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century. Unless, of course, you want to read it now. I can’t possibly predict the future of your own decision, but I’m all too happy to embrace the uncertainty of the present.
The Call by Yannick Murphy: The always interesting author of Here They Come and Signed, Mata Hari returns with a novel that whips up a worldview from a rather quirky set of limitations: namely, the call logs that a veterinarian maintains as his son is unexpectedly put into a coma and an unforgiving economy denies him work. What emerges is a surprisingly optimistic, often funny, and very moving account on how one family uses acceptance and forgiveness as a way to atone for hard knocks. (
Birds of Paradise by Diana Abu-Jaber: Forget Franzen and Eugenides. If you're looking for a social novel that counts, Diana Abu-Jaber is the author you're looking for. Building from the free-form exploration of consciousness and identity in Crescent and the gripping procedural structure of Origin, Abu-Jaber's latest novel is her finest, equally fluent with gutterpunk culture and smarmy real estate men. It has been suggested by The Washington Post's Ron Charles that you will likely gain some pounds while reading this novel. This is certainly true. Abu-Jaber's description of food is so precise that it often made me want to do more cooking. But I very much admired the way in which Abu-Jaber presents all her characters as unwitting victims of rough capitalism, which permits them some dignity even as they perform terrible acts.
The Last of the Live Nude Girls by Sheila McClear: This memoir isn't so much about the decline of the Times Square peepshow, as it is about one young woman's efforts to pull herself up by by her bootstraps when presented with few economic options. Filled with self-introspective candor and a quiet dignity, McClear's story is one that might befall any of us in these volatile times. While McClear does get back on her feet, her book leads one contemplating the terrible fates of other young women now moving to New York and falling into deadlier vocations. (
Hello Mr Ed.
Mr. T. Here
Would you like to play some Chess?
Be Careful, the Tachyon is Near.
Mr. T.
Mr. T:
I don’t get out to Costa Mesa much and it sounds as if you have your hands full. Nevertheless, you have me intrigued. Send details through private quarters and we’ll see what we can do. And I’m not afraid of a good solid small press.
Yours,
Ed
I’m not entirely sure how to get my message to Mr Champions, I thought this post would be adequate.
I assume you have my email address so if you have a response feel free to send it through as it is unlikely I will visit this site again as it was chance that lead me here to begin with.
I read your hack job critique of [i] The Next 100 Years [/i] and in part I found it represented an excessively sceptical and confused interpretation of the literature but for the most part I felt it illustrated one of the points Friedman raises early in the book.
The nature of American society as it stands is barbaric. And it is members of the free press/liberal media whom take it upon themselves to play watch dog and guise pessimism as moderation. It seems its gotten to the point where if you are a member of the U.S media you carry an overbearing political agenda or your beyond sceptical – The Michael Moore inspired post grads set out to change the world.
At this point I would like to make it clear I have read some of your articles and I am simply curious. I hope it doesn’t appear as an all out attack. Furthermore I to was critical of the book but I gave it room to breath I took it for what it was and developed an opinion, somewhat, influenced by Friedman’s speculative insight, methods and school of thought.
I’ve digressed, my other query regards your take on the future. As you are so quick to dismiss Friedman’s theories as hubris and a clutch at academic acclaim, would you be so bold to make a prediction. How does the next 50,20,5 (?) years play out for the U.S. Friedman in my opinion seemed enable to concede China’s likely ascension to ‘super power’ or ‘global economic power house.’ What is your stance on the matter?
I apologise for reviving a dead post – but out of all the critiques for Friedman’s work I have encountered yours carried the most venom and – on the surface – the least substance. Other reviewers had admittedly not finished the book but provided more insight into the work.
Best,
JP