4 comments about Winchell: Gossip, Power, and the Culture of Celebrity.

1. One has to admire Walter Winchell for he had it all: fame, power, money and beautiful women. Everything a man could want. And he had it for a long time (from the 1930s to the 1950s).

   He also had an enormous ego which fostered many feuds with others he feared.

   An outstanding book.




2. Although most of us remember Walter Winchell fo rhis rapid-fire narration for the old "Untouchables" television show, he was much more than that. Neal Gabler chronicles Winchell's career and life, but it's his analysis of Winchell's affect on his times and culture that makes this book transcend routine biography. Winchell's became a powerful voice for a time: businessmen wanted to be his friend, celebrities needed him, and politicians feared him. In fact, most people feared him. But somehow, Winchell created a definition of celebrity that has endured even today. Although he may be forgetton in our conscious memories, Winchell still looms large in our cultural memory. This is a stunning biography of a man who fought hard to get it all and fought equally hard to keep his fame and recognition as lost it in a blaze of self-destructiveness. One of the best books I've read in years.



3. This is a great story of a strange man. Someone who got power, defined the celebrity personal interest story, exploited the influence he developed, thought he was God, and ruined his own life. It is especially compelling reading when it becomes clear that our fascination with famous people and their love lives and personal faults is really whipped up by these media people. It is also great when talking about Lucille Ball and how the public embraced her. When you see Winchell making the fateful mistake when siding with McCarthy, it seems like karma. This is a fantastic book.



4. Winchell: Gossip, Power and the Culture of Celebrity is an historical biography of Walter Winchell, a lower class Russian-American Jewish boy who morphed himself from a teenaged vaudeville performer into a nationally famous gossip columnist and radio personality that helped shape Depression-era and World War II America.
   
   Walter Winchell was born in Harlem on April 7, 1897. As an adult, Winchell recalled an unhappy childhood of poverty, deprivation and neglect, surrounded by people who insulted and reviled him because he was poor. Author Neal Gabler says Winchell's childhood made him antagonistic, suspicious and resentful throughout his life. As an adolescent, he found the attention he craved and the skills he would use later in his career on the vaudeville stage. From vaudeville, Gabler says Winchell learned the values of mass culture and how to appear to be incautiously independent, unselfconscious and liberated. In reality, he was none of these. Gabler maintains "vaudeville made Walter Winchell an entertainer for life and in life."
   
   When he was 12, Winchell taught himself to dance and was hired as a "song plugger" at a decrepit movie theater across from his apartment building. Song pluggers sang new tunes before the movie began, often leading the audience in group singing designed to sell them sheet music. When he was 13, Winchell won an audition with six other boys to fill parts in a show called the "Song Revue" that toured the country for a year on the Orpheum vaudeville circuit. Winchell performed with vaudeville companies and in a two-person act with his first wife, Rita Greene, until he was 23 when he escaped the stage to the poorly paid world of trade journalism as an assistant editor of "The Vaudeville News." Gabler says there is no evidence Winchell ever thought about becoming a reporter. He had little formal education and certainly no training in journalism. Nonetheless, he was driven to find a way to earn a living more secure than that of a vaudevillian. Attracted by the power of publicity that was indispensable to a vaudeville show, he leveraged his stage training, distinctive voice and theatrical personality into a character that looked like a traditional journalist. Rather than report, analyze and interpret legitimate news, however, Winchell became a big-name media gossip with enormous impact in a crucial period of 20th century American life.
   
   Winchell worked incredibly hard for his fame. By 1933, he was internationally famous for his Jergens Lotion-sponsored ABC radio program, his movie roles and newsreel narrations, personal appearances and his daily "The Column" in the New York Mirror, syndicated nationally by Hearst's King Features. Alexander Woolcott wrote, "I have never been able to get far enough into the North woods not to find some trapper there who would quote Winchell's latest observation." Winchell's power did not derive from his accuracy; he was often very wrong. He never admitted mistakes as his fault, never issued retractions. Gabler says "The Column" was so sacrosanct and café society's faith in publicity so devout that Winchell spoke and wrote with an oracular authority. "If Winchell says so, it's gotta be true," said Lucille Ball about a Winchell report she was expecting a child (she was). Journalist-turned-film-producer David Brown was shocked to read in Winchell one day that his wife was divorcing him, then heard from her lawyer the next morning.
   
   Winchell built his huge radio and newspaper following with a quirky blend of serious news seasoned with trivial theatrical gossip, topped off with stinging personal comment. He wrapped it all in a pop entertainment package that imitated journalistic form. He would give the same urgency and drama to a story of 10,000 people killed in an Ethiopian earthquake as to one about a cross-eyed man whose eyes were uncrossed when he was hit by a truck. Winchell's loyalists patronized him for his vicious attacks on famous people and his implied promise to tell them what was going to happen before it actually occurred. His shtick irritated traditional journalism and disgusted intellectuals who stumbled into listening or reading him. Gabler says Winchell was successful in the 1930s because Americans in the Depression distrusted traditional authority. And he nails the main reason for Winchell's success: for most folks, Walter Winchell was fun.
   
   His radio audience lived primarily in eastern states and in urban areas with populations over 50,000. New York Herald Tribune radio critic John Crosby explained Winchell as an anxiety-monger who brilliantly captured the national mood in times of uncertainty. He added, "There's a definite feeling of guilt connected with listening to Walter Winchell." Gabler reports Winchell was at the top of national radio ratings just after Pearl Harbor and for several months in 1947-48 as Americans faced the threat of another war, this time with the Soviet Union. At times, his radio audience was larger than those of Bob Hope and Jack Benny.
   
   Walter Winchell enjoyed a deep insider relationship with Franklin Roosevelt's White House and considered FDR a father figure and his benefactor. Just like Winchell's back-scratching friendship with FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, the Roosevelt-Winchell association was a quid pro quo arrangement. Roosevelt guided Winchell politically for years, elevating him from the mud of gossip to occasionally credible political commentary. In return, Winchell flacked for FDR - and for Hoover - delivering the President's spin to Walter's massive radio and newspaper audiences. Roosevelt was also Winchell's apologist, lending him the power of the Oval Office when Walter needed protection. FDR's death marked the beginning of the end of Winchell's career.
   
   Gabler compares Winchell to FDR's successor, Harry Truman and in the process, helps readers understand the real Winchell. He says Truman was the "quintessence of nineteenth century rural Midwestern America, Walter of twentieth-century eastern urban America. Truman was self-effacing, Walter self-aggrandizing. Truman was dispassionate, Walter the very model of hot unreason. Truman was a moderator by instinct, Walter a crusader. Truman was a private man thrust into a public role, Walter was a man without any private life at all, a man always on stage."
   
   After bowing at Roosevelt's throne, Winchell found no majesty in Truman. He lacked the theatricality Roosevelt had in abundance that was so important to Winchell. What's more, Truman would never court Winchell as Roosevelt had and Walter resented it.
   
   One of Winchell's sharpest critics was Time magazine. The magazine infuriated Winchell with steel fisted jabs wrapped in velvet gloves, asking him to show "a greater sense of responsibility in deciding what is legitimate public news and what is mere trouble-making gossip." Winchell was always happy to return the disrespect. As he became a strident, scare-mongering critic of Russian communism, he lashed out at Time. "Whittaker Chambers, Russian spy, started as top editor at Time mag in 1939 and not long after that (sic) mag could find nothing good about anything this American reporter wrote or said."
   
   Because he'd been on the air, in print and in the national public eye so long, Winchell's audience had come to know what it could expect and developed a familiar, simple trust in him. Roosevelt's insider tips and interpretation of nuance had been extraordinarily important to Winchell in this regard. However after FDR's death, Winchell's naiveté and questionable judgment appeared with increasing frequency and America's trust in him declined. Two examples are telling. Shortly after Churchill's 1946 anti-Russian "Iron Curtain" speech at Westminster College in Missouri, Winchell wrote a piece praising Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, commending his "stern realism." Even though Winchell had always detested communism, it was hard for him to muster the same antagonism toward it as he had against Nazi fascism. Despite evolving into a staunch anti-Soviet, scaring America by calling for preparation for war against Russia, the Stalin piece weakened the Winchell mystique.
   
   He pushed his own popularity over a cliff with strong support for Senator Joseph McCarthy. In fact, he was McCarthy's loudest cheerleader during the Army-McCarthy hearings. Winchell was later subpoenaed by the Watkins bipartisan congressional committee investigating McCarthy's communist witch hunt, interrogating him about sources for his "reporting." Winchell never revealed them, but word on the street made him a stooge for McCarthy and his committee's counsel, Roy Conn. While McCarthy faded from public consciousness, Winchell continued to defend him. As he did, Gabler says people came to see Winchell as a "crazy reactionary who destroyed careers, exacted revenge, baited alleged Reds, flung lies and half-truths and generally engaged in the worst excesses of this shameful period. And it was all true ... he had become a right-wing fanatic himself."
   
   Toward the end of his career, Winchell confessed the fear that drove him constantly to self-promotion. "Who else will write about me?" he asked. Perhaps more revealing was Winchell's reaction to criticism that he'd talked too fast on one of his broadcasts. "If I slowed up," he said, "listeners would understand what I'm saying. Then they'd realize how unimportant it is and turn me off." Gabler says Winchell was always sensitive to the thin thread of celebrity, fearing it eventually would snap and banish him to the unknown. Rather than snap, though, Winchell's celebrity simply stretched into irrelevancy. Lonely and far removed from the center of public attention at the end of his frenetic professional and turbulent personal life, he died in California on February 20, 1972, a few months before his 75th birthday.
   
   Walter Winchell entertained millions of Americans for decades by appealing to base human instincts. He was a far cry from a critical thinking, reflective journalist. On the contrary, he was a simplistic, opportunistic gossip who knew how to grab the public's attention. As a journalist, he lurked in the intellectual shadows of contemporaries Walter Lippmann, H.L. Mencken, Dorothy Thompson, Boake Carter and David Lawrence, each of whom overpowered Winchell with their insight.
   
   Gabler's excellent book encourages a reflection on Winchell's legacy. He is the only American columnist / commentator ever to hold simultaneous top national broadcast ratings and print circulations in unrelated media properties and he did it for almost 20 years. His generation-long dominance of the American media-consuming audience of the day makes Walter Winchell arguably the most powerful individual voice in American journalistic history. In addition, he was one of the major characters who helped build U.S. radio. He was one of the first practitioners of tabloid journalism. Some would consider him the father of today's chatty, siren-chasing television content that masquerades as news.
   
   There is no question Walter Winchell left an extraordinarily large footprint on 20th century America from the Great Depression through the years immediately after World War II. Tens of millions of Americans formed opinions reading and listening to him gossip, speculate and ridicule famous people. This legacy is why Winchell by Neal Gabler is important: the book helps us understand how a great deal of American public opinion was formed in a crucial time of U.S. history. Much of that opinion came from the typewriter and voice of Walter Winchell.

5 comments about My Country Right or Left 1940-1943: The Collected Essays Journalism & Letters George Orwell (Collected Essays Journalism and Letters of George Orwell).

1. This is a great collection of essays and other writers by one of the foremost socialist critics of totalitarianism and domination. It is also a great book for admires of writers such as Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn and Edward said, as all share the same overarching purpose: to be a tireless critic of power and domination wherever it may be found. It is ironic to the extreme that so many conservative revisionists attempt to claim Orwell as their own, which is due to the tragically myopic misreading of his writings, especailly 1984 and Animal Farm. Both books are condemnations of totalitarianism, and in the case of Animal farm, the final page attests to Orwell's repugnance of capitalism. Let it not be forgotten that Orwell fought in the Spanish Civil War in the aid of the socialist-anarchists. This is truly a great collection, which should be required reading for those who may not be familar with Orwell's non-fiction work.



2. ...Country Right or Left is part of a four volume set of essays commissioned by Orwell's wife Sonia. Whatever the criticisms that have been made of her stewardship of Orwell's legacy, these four volumes contain much of the best of Orwell's essays, letters and diary excerpts. This volume covers the early war years and much of the writing is shaded by that war.

   This is Orwell at his finest, on one hand a confirmed socialist dedicated to fighting the right whether the Tory party or fascism; one the other hand an anti-Stalinist and critic of the left and always an anti-totalitarian.

   Contained within "My Country Right or Left" is some of Orwell's best writing. In "Pacifism and the War", a notorious piece at the time, he accuses pacifists of aiding the fascist cause. "The Art of Donald McGill" is an essay about, of all things, postcards that are popular among the middle and lower classes. The postcards themselves, Orwell argues, say much about England's political and social attitudes. It's actually a perceptive piece of pop art and social commentary. Among my favorites is the essay concerning Mark Twain (Mark Twain- Licensed Jester). Orwell, a great admirer of Twain's, is critical of him for not being forceful enough in his social criticism. He accusation is that Twain pulls his punches far too often. It's a great piece of criticism and is Orwell at his finest.

   What holds a large amount of this Volume together are the letters to the Partisan Review, a New York publication that contracted with Orwell to write commentary on England during this early war period. The issues vary from English politics, reflections on the clothing worn by the masses, attitudes towards democracy and so on. All well written, never dull and very often wrong in their predictions. There is much more here including excerpts from his diary, letters to other major figures of the day and reflections on the Spanish Civil War.

   This is some of the greatest essay writing in the English language. Even sixty years later the essay's read clearly and give insight to Orwell's thinking.




3. For years, I have been impressed by the quality of the essays in Dickens, Dali, and Others, Shooting an Elephant, and Such, Such Were the Joys. I was looking forward to reading more of Orwell's essays. I soon discovered, however, that Orwell's essays not published in book form shared all the faults of those that I had read, but few of the virtues.
   
   Many cite Orwell's honesty as his primary virtue, but these essays reveal a man who is, if not dishonest, then at least quite blind to his own experiences. He states, without any supporting evidence, that "only Socialist nations can fight effectively" (p. 67, from The Lion and the Unicorn), despite the fact that he served in an army organized along socialist lines (as narrated on p. 255), if not the army of a socialist nation, five years prior to the publication of this statement; the army was defeated decisively by Generalissimo Franco's decidedly non-socialist forces.
   
   Orwell also frequently resorts to name-calling. Those who disagree with him politically are almost invariably "reactionaries", "Fascists", or "pro-Fascist". Jack London is "not . . . a fully civilised man."; rather, he possesses a "streak of savagery". Any thought, expression, or even word of which Orwell disapproves is "vulgar", from the cartoon postcards of Donald McGill to Kipling's statement that "He travels the fastest who travels alone" to Yeats's use of the word (!) "loveliness" (Orwell also claims that "Yeats's tendency is Fascist." on p. 273).
   
   It is clear to me after reading this volume that the editors who selected pieces for the three volumes of essays published during Orwell's lifetime made the right choices; they show him at his best. The rest of the material here is hardly worth reading except as a window into the soul of a man who was incapable of viewing the world except through the distorting lens of a commitment to socialism.



4. This book is an anthology of Orwell's essays, literary criticism, letters to friends,and political criticism. Those who read this book can read some interesting letters that Orwell wrote to the editors of THE PARTISAN REVIEW on the fortunes of W.W. II involving the British. The book concludes with Orwell's diary of the war. While George Orwell (1903-1950)was a self admitted "leftist," he was not an ideologue. Orwell showed that he was a well read individual and knew very well that political labels conceal the desire for political power regardless of political titles and party affilations.
   
   Orwell was a master of literary criticism. Two examples are his review and comments on Hitler's MEIN KAMPF and Tolstoy's denounciation of Shakespear. Orwell commented that an English review of Mein Kampf favaored the German dictator. Orwell correctly predicted such praise would soon evaporate which it did. Orwell informed readers that praise for Hitler was not unusal. One must note that Churchill complimented Hitler in Churchill's book titled GREAT CONTEMPORARIES. Churchill also complimented Hitler in a speech to Parliament in November, 1938. Here Orwell shows not only his ability as a literary critic, but he informs younger readers that the political disapproval word,fascism, had a different connotation. Many Europeans including the British middle and upper classes had serious concerns of Big Communism with its record of mass murder and concentration camp brutality.
   
   Orwell showed himself again as a literary critic when Orwell critisized Tolstoy for the latter's condemnation of William Shakespear. Orwell correctly refuted Tolstoy on a couple of issues. First, Tolstoy read Shakespear in translation which may have tainted his understanding of Shakespear. Also Tolstoy tried to condemn Shakespear in lieu of Tolstoy's social philosophy. Orwell stated such criticism was useless because such criticism would have been incomprehensible to Shakespear and his English contemporaries in the 16th and early 17th centuries. Orwell also chided Tolstoy for his assumed superiority. Tolstoy could not understand why Shakespear literary work was so appealing and wrote that everyone should know that Shakespear was some sort of scoundral. Yet, Orwell wryly comments that Shakespear's literay work was available throughout the world while Orwell could not find Tolstoy's essay until he found it in a museum.
   
   The best part of this Orwell anthology are his political essays. Orwell noted that there was suppose to be a bitter political divide betwen Fascism and Big Communism. When the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact in 1939 unhinged this concept and angered Communists and their fellow travellers. When asked about this unexpected turn of diplomatic events, Molotov (I believe it was Molotov) who said that the difference between Socialism (Bib Communism) and Fascism was a matter of taste. Approximately two years later when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, this view sure changed. Orwell stated that Stalin and his supporters would have called themselves Fascists if they thought such a label would enhance their power. Hitler and his supporters would have done the same. Orwell clearly indicated that men who have concentrated power will use whatever political labels to keep or enhance their complete hold on power.
   
   Orwell used the political chaos both inside the Soviet Union and in Europe to sound a serious warning that literature could be lost because of the rapid changes in political loyalties. The sudden changes in internal enemis in the Soviet Union serves as a classic example. The heros of the Workers' Paradise were concentration camp victims the next day because they could not stay current with ruling party's changing enemy's list. The Non-Aggtression Pact mentioned above is another good example. Orwell reflected that in previous centuries, literary men (an women)had "a frame of reference." Their political and religious loyalties were stable from cradle to grave. However, given the rapidly changing of enemies, literary figures had no such stability and writing could be dangerous especially in the Soveit Union where writers were either sent to concentration camps or committed suicide. Had Orwell lived longer, he would have been pleased to see such Soviet writers as Boris Pasternak (DR. ZHIVAGO) and Alexander Solzhenitsyn who surived the Soviet purges and yet were awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature. In fact, Solzhenitsyn sent ten years in a Soviet concentration camp from which he emerged as a literary giant. Orwell did suggest that totalitarian thought control could not survive the spirit and soul of thoughtful men.
   
   Among Orwell's many talents was his ability to expose political hypocrisy. Many of the British leaders were demanding that Mussolini be charged for "war crimes." Orwell scoffed at this nonsense. Orwell cearly indicated to his readers that those British leaders who demanded such "war crimes" trials against Mussolini were exactly the same British leaders who ten years previously praised Mussoini for the acts they now wanted to charge as war crimes. Orwell had a solid memory, and when Mussolini moved against the Communists and aided Franco in the Spanish Civil War, many of the same British leaders who wanted to try Mussolini for "war crimes," praised him for his actions which they awkardly tried to define as war crimes ten years later. Among those who praised Mussolini in the 1920s-1930s included Churchill.
   
   In parts of the book Orwell showed himself as a military expert. When there were threats of a possible German invasion, Orwell had practical suggestions of arming the British citizen with the most practicle weapons. Orwell fought in the Spanish Civil War and volunteered for W.W. II, but illness kept out of that conflict. Orwell also took pride in his position in the Home Guard.
   
   This reviewer has one criticism. Orwell's letters to the PARTISAN REVIEW, political essays, literary criticism, etc. should have been arranged by topic rather than by time sequence. This would enable readers to easily read the book. However, this reviewer could not have done nearly as good a job. Orwell simply enhanced his position as a great novelist, literary critic, political thinker, and excellent prose writer. Readers would to well to read this book to have a better understanding of the war years (W.W II) than is presented in badly written textbooks and popular accounts. This reviewer highly recommends this book.



5. This is my first volume of essays, articles and letters by Blair/Orwell, which I read thanks to Jim Egolf's recent review here. The man contradicts himself quite a bit, but I do not regret the time spent. Who wants to get bored by people that one always agrees with?
   The main theme of the book, due to the time of the sample, is England in war with totalitarianism/fascism/nazism. Though Orwell was in his heart a leftist, he had enough insight from own experience to understand the nature of totalitarianism, he was a dedicated anti-Stalinist, and he staid away from party politics.
   And yet: his long essay 'The Lion and the Unicorn', one of the core texts of this book, gives a political vision, that puzzles me. He displays a surprising naivete about the strength of economic planning in socialism. Of course, we have the benefit of hindsight, we know that a central planning bureaucracy can be the right approach for a short term effort, like for a war, but will be hopelessly lost in inefficiencies in 'normal' times. Orwell was deeply convinced that state capitalism or socialism was the future, there would be no return after the war.
   I have decided to ignore his political recipes, but to enjoy his social analyses: England is a rich man's paradise, but the ruling class is too stupid to run the country.
   One of his main contributions to our understanding of the confict of the time: his juxtaposition of the ideology of hedonism (which nearly led the West into the abyss) against the ideology of social sacrifice, which helped the Nazis to succeed, luckily only temporarily.
   I wonder if he fully understood the real antagonism of Hitler to the West or if he got deceived by the temporary diversion of the pact with Stalin. (I notice when I browse the reviews and comments in this neighborhood that there is a certain willingness to say, the West should have gone with Hitler against the Soviets. Oh my, what a misunderstanding.) Probably he did. In a nice remark after the German attack on Russia he says, had this happened before the Hitler-Stalin pact, there was a chance of serious political disturbance in Britain, because the ruling class might have wanted to join the attack on Germany's side.
   My favorite text in the collection is the essay on H.G.Wells' inability to understand Hitler. Wells was the man who envisaged scientific progress against reactionary societies earlier in the century. He was unable to understand that Hitler's essentially irrational and superstitious ideology was capable of an efficient alliance with the other side of science.

5 comments about Love in Black and White: A Memoir of Race, Religion, and Romance.

1. This is a love story. The journey of two people arriving at the same place in time, finally. They share their respective experiences with sharp incisive candor. Readers are given a "no holds barred" look into their world.
   
   Quite frankly, they are right. It is the time for a book of this quality to be written. Two little children born and raised in America, each having individual, separate horrendous struggles, - yet surviving, maturing, achieving success. Through their eyes, we experience life in the political, journalist, entertainment,social, personal, civil rights, and sports arena of action. Through them We meet a young Muhammad Ali, Quincey Jones, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, Hilary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Sidney Poiter, Richard Nixon, Herbert Hoover, the FBI, Deepak Chopra, Bruce Gordon, Mahalia Jackson, John Johnson, Andrew Young, soldiers in Bosnia and many many more. Beautiful glossy photographs capture memorable moments. Thank you Bill and Janet. Your respective journeys were often jarring, but seldom boring. The book contains enlightening perspectives and is a wake-up call to the sometimes harsh yet mostly beautiful realities of life here on planet earth. And much like the lyrics of that sweet old poignant song, " We will show them as we walk together in the sun, that our two different worlds are one," -- you have indeed done just that.
   
   
   
   I have never met William Cohen and Janet Langhart Cohen, but I have observed Janet's steady progress and achievements, over the years, from the cover of Jet Magazine to the Ebony Fashion Fair, and her television show. I have always been inspired by her courage, intelligence and professionalism. I am an African-American woman. This book is excellent and informative. Its final chapter features Janet's masterfully crafted play, a dialogue between murdered Emmitt Till and the Holocaust's Anne Frank.
   
   
   My next read will be Janet's book, "From Rage to Reason."



2. I find it really amusing that these people with caucasion features who have a pretty easy time being accepted in the "white world", some how think they are the authority on race relations or interracial relationships. I have friends who married very dark skinned African Americans who lived in working class neighborhoods. Their love survived more pain, hardship, and strife then that half-breed Mrs. Cohen could ever imagine. I seriously doubt that Mr. Cohen would have it as bad a dark skinned male, with a white woman on his arm.
   
   Get a clue!



3. IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE IN THE AFRO AMERICAN COMMUNITY THAT FAIRER SKINNED PEOPLE HAVE IT MUCH EASIER THAN DARKER SKINNED MEMBERS. THIS IS BECAUSE THE FAIRER SKINNED MEMBERS ARE MORE READILY ACCEPTED AND ARE TREATED AS IF THEIR VALUE IS SOME HOW GREATER. IT IS ALSO A FACT THAT THE DARKER SKINNER MEMBERS TRY HARDER AND WORK HARDER. YOU CAN SEE THIS IN AFRO AMERICANS WHO ARE SUCCESSFUL IN MUSIC, SPORTS, MEDICINE, AND COMMUNICATIONS. THIS IS WHY SO MANY PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY BELIEVE THAT THESE HAVE MORE TALENT THAN THE FAIRER SKINNED ONES BECAUSE THE BATTLE IS HARDER.
   THIS IS WHY THIS BOOK IS NOT REALY VALID TO MOST OF THE POPULATION IN THE AFRO-AMERICAN COMMUNITY. SELECTIVE RACISM AND RACISM WITHIN A RACE. I DREAM ABOUT A TIME WHEN INTER-RACIAL COUPLES STOP TEACHING THEIR OFFSPRING THAT THEY ARE BETTER THAN THOSE WHO HAVE PARENTS THAT ARE BOTH AFRO-AMERICAN



4. I was disipointed that he did not reveal the intensity or depth of of attraction/love. Howeve,his account of his political career was interesting enough for me to want to read more of the stories by politicians during critical times in this country.



5. Autobiography that's more about the man than the couple, tracing from his childhood in Maine through the White House. Interspersed are sections about Janet Langhart, and her upbringing. The book is an uplifting memoir that educates readers about the decades of historical, political, military social, racial, and Black history milestones in the U.S., as well as those of Mr. Cohen and Ms. Langhart.
   
   A couple of times or so, there were disconnects from a topic launching into something else; and some occasional grammar things going on that seemed out of character.
   
   The books was informative and candid, including paths of excellence and failure for both Mr. Cohen and his future wife. Both came from trailblazing ancestors and in turn carried on that tradition. Mr. Cohen didn't spare himself with a revisionist eye to his fighting youth, bad grades, and even 'cursing like a one-eyed pirate' one day. We learn of his experiences of racism from both the Jewish community and others from a young age forward. Mr. Cohen's mother was Irish Catholic and his father Jewish. Mr. Cohen went on to forgive those who ostracized him and denied him his birthright and merit of a Bar Mitzvah.
   
   Ms. Langhart went on to lead the way from being among the first Fashion Fair models, relegated to segregated accommodations while touring the country to represent the beauty of Black women, as founder Robert Johnson, later of BET fame, and then of the Johnson Publishing dynasty, Jet and Ebony, had envisioned. The reader gets to see the underside as well as the triumphs. Apparently Mr. Johnson had to buy all of the clothing rather than the typical 'loan' of clothes from designers, as people did not want to wear what had been on black bodies. Readers get to see Janet develop from a small child holding fast to her mother's words of hope and tolerance, though she worked as a domestic for white people. Incidentally, I'd seen Janet over the years and one would've never guessed the struggles she'd faced or the disappointments. Her mother and she were basically abandoned by her father, a returning soldier, who'd been a war hero, but had advised his daughter that upon his return he would not be wearing his uniform in the South on the ride home, and he'd be sitting in the back of the bus, disheartened about fighting for freedom for others abroad while at home, he was treated as if he were the enemy. At some point in the book, Janet protests the disparaging treatment of returning black soldiers who had to sit at the back of an auditorium, while foreign prisoners of war were treated like white people and sat at the front.
   
   Incidentally, when other cultural movements such as interracial movements and gay movements look to Black culture in how to navigate in the mainstream culture, it's instructive to note how Black culture has always been of the opinion about representing a good profile to the mainstream. Countering stereotypes was the least activism one could do. In the Fashion Fair tradition, the NAACP, also continues to encourage Black people to keep representing Black culture well with its annual "Image" Awards. The idea of good representation to the public. In the book "Navigating Interracial Borders, Black-White Couples and Their Social Worlds" the author seemed off put with the idea that interracial couples would want to 'keep up a front'. Not airing dirty laundry, and keeping the positive out front to offset the stereotypes. In this regard, it's no different than what Black people have done since Day 1, and continue to do. I believe immigrants did the same as a survival mechanism, too. It works. Role modeling. If you see it, you can achieve it. You can believe, and work towards it. Like any habit, practice makes perfect.
   
   In Cohen's book, you will see the good. That's what counts. Like any married couple, a united front.
   
   We learn that the people who Janet's mother worked for were Jewish, and that Janet's mother adopted some of their practices, like cooking Kosher food, and instilling certain values in her children, in spite of their surroundings and those negative persons around them. Janet's mother didn't teach hate. Nowhere in the book did I read anything but good things about Black men, or negative remarks about shiftless Black men who didn't take care of their children or any nonsense even though Janet's father left the family. It would have been an easy stereotype to exploit given the circumstance. Instead, there were many Black History nods. In Janet's developing career, she met icon after icon in the Black community, including Mahalia Jackson and Martin Luther King, Jr., who reportedly was like a son to Mahalia, and who frequently visited and stayed in her home, as did some other Black icons. The practice of hosting Black people in residences was a collective practice to counter Jim Crow segregation that either excluded Black people from public accommodations altogether, or offered conditions that were very bad. Janet was mentored by a range of Black icons, including Muhammad Ali, who advised her when his heavyweight title was stripped because he wouldn't serve in the War, that he still had his self respect, and that was more valuable than anything someone could give and take away at whim. Years later, during her rise from model to weather girl to broadcast journalist, readers would see how the leaders around her were able to impart survival wisdom. Years later, when Bill Clinton picked Cohen to be Secretary of Defense--a Republican Cohen, no less, and a "Jew" to some, Janet would be treated with the utmost respect to the extent that she began to focus on the good that was in her life. She even began to pray and kiss the flag in Cohen's office when she took to heart lessons learned and experiences that showed her that there are different kinds of people, and there are good people who welcome good people to work for good together.
   
   In this regard, Janet's experience with the military prior to Cohen was that it mistreated Black people like her father, and gave empty promises at best. Her mother and her family had a new home in the housing projects set up by the military for returning Black soldiers. It was a glimpse of the later military 'family' vision that would again renew her faith in the good outweighing the bad. I got chills and choked up when Cohen described how he'd secretly made a special request to honor Janet to the White House leaders during his final days as SecDef.
   
   Now, there's a love story. Cohen and Langhart were formerly married. Ironically, both Janet's brother as well as one of Cohen's sons married someone of the opposite race. Readers will be surprised to hear about the intimate details of a medical situation that Janet faced, and which no doubt had enormous impact on her life.
   
   I don't think the book title really reflects the content of the book. The books is primarily an autobiography of Cohen's life, which didn't intersect with Janet's til only little more than a decade ago. However, some people believe, as mentioned in the book Janet does, in fate. In which case, there life partner was always on their way to them. It wasn't a matter of if but when the two would come together, and how they get there, is really what the book includes. I can see Cohen loving B-ball, his father loving B-ball, and thus Cohen playing on teams where he met more than just White males. I was tickled a bit about his doing the Black handshake with Black men, playing while in the Senate with some Black Congressmen. I could see that if his mother was feisty and had her own independence and opinions that she felt free to express, that Cohen would not be put off by an outspoken Black woman like Langhart.
   
   In the book Cohen mentions Janet's loving his blue eyes. I'd have to say I wish Janet hadn't worn blue contacts on the book cover. While she's got some mixed ancestry, it's not front and center, as in her parents are both black. Somewhere down the line, many Black people have Native American, or White people, etc. in their family tree. People who aim to be a 'couple' will sometimes start dressing alike, and even down the line, are supposedly starting to morph into each other, with similar features.
   
   Since the couple did not have kids, it was a bonus to them in a way because Janet could travel with him everywhere he went and he had no guilt about forsaking the family for his job, as with the case with his first marriage. That both of them could interrelate about their experiences across the board, and stand strong together, was more than a galvanizing force. Readers get to see their perspectives on a range of U.S. events, from the lynching of Emmit Till to Watergate to the assassination of MLK, Jr., Hoover, to USS Cole, Vietnam, WWII, Katrina, the Kanye West TV comment. The times did change, who'd have thought a Republican, an immigrant's son no less who rose from living in a room with 5 people to become an lawyer, Congressman, Senator, SecDef, would be right there networking across the board for better times. And walking into the White House at the invite of hipster Bill Clinton, with his Black wife by his side. In these times. The time for all good men to rise.
   
   If there's an interracial story of love and marriage, a united front, this is it. Representing. As always. That we are more than what meets the eye.

3 comments about In and Out of Vogue.

1. Grace Mirabella not only lets you in on her life and her rise throught the fashion world, but she also takes us you on a wonderful ride and adventure. She truly made VOGUE a wonderful magazine and when she was 'let go' she didn't pout instead she started her own successful magazine, MIRABELLA. Thank you Grace for writing your memoir and sharing your life with us all.



2. Mirabella's scathing account of her time at Vogue reads like a bleeding heart story of how she was wronged. What her one-sided account leaves out intentionally is what an amazing fashion editor Diana Vreeland was; at Harper's Bazaar, fashion editor at Vogue and finally, editor-in-chief at Vogue. Vreeland is the quintessential fashion editor which is why she's studied in fashion schools, has had exhibits of her work at the Met, countless books written on her. Mirabella tries to claim she made fashion more democratic, but Vreeland was the true originator; her use of ethnic models, the photographers she chose to work with( Avedon, Bailey), the content of the magazine took it from being a society-rag, to a more modern take of the world of fashion and style. Mirabella turns her acid tongue not just on Vreeland but on the wonderful photographer Helmut Lang, Avedon, fashion editor Polly Mellen and of course, Anna Wintour. Mirabella doesn't take credit for her own downfall; she was an editor at fashion magazine-they show fashion in all its outrageous, banal or causal air-what ever way the winds of fashion fall, the magazine has to reflect that. Her decade was the seventies. She reflected what was happening in fashion and the world at the time; she showcased American designers like Halston, Calvin Klein and Ralph Lauren, Geoffrey Beene. She favored the tall, blued-eyed blondes Patti Hansen, Roseanne Vela, Lauren Hutton, Karen Graham with their "tiny noses and big white teeth...exotic, `interesting'-looking girls weren't for me. The word of the day was pretty." She admits her book. But the eighties was the complete opposite of the seventies, but she chose to stay firmly planted in the past instead of showing the fashions of the eighties; she despised Christian Lacroix's clothes choosing to ignore one of the hottest designers at the time while other fashion outlets(Bazaar, Women's Wear Daily, Elle, etc) where showing his popular designs. Is it no wonder than that Alex Liberman had to overrule her? Her ego is so over the top, she felt she was "saving" women from fashions she didn't care for. The irony of the situation is she was fired for the exact same reason Vreeland was: being out of touch with fashion.
   Her book is an interesting read in a person so detached from reality and how they ruined their own career. What of Mirabella's own magazine, the magazine for real women? It folded like a stack of cards. It goes to show you what women really want.



3. Regardless of how you feel about fashion or Vogue, it is an interesting character study of a woman of that time, bucking the expectations of her family, her chosen industry, and of society in general as she married very late in life and never had children.
   
   I admire Mirabella for refusing to allow cigarette ads in Mirabella and for being so independant. No, she didn't try to please anyone but herself, but what an amazing feat that was considering that Oprah has built her dynasty on teaching women how to do just that.
   
   Not the greatest book in the world, but worth reading for the viewpoint. I would also recommend reading Katharine Graham's autobiography. That will roll your socks up and down.
   
   Disclaimer: I worked for Mirabella magazine's Chicago office for the last nine months before it was sold to the publisher's of Elle magazine and was then hired by said company to work for another recent acquistion, Premiere. I met her "Grace" once and only to shake her hand and stand aside. She was pleasant, though.

5 comments about Volunteer Slavery: My Authentic Negro Experience.

1. The only other author I ever read who so effectively combined self-pity and wry humor was Erica Jong. Jill Nelson turns a wicked phrase and makes her characters and her situations jump to life. I laughed aloud at her description of her teenage daughter telling her "Mom, get a life!" in response to her lecturing about black conciousness. All through the book I kept wondering where Ms. Nelson's gripes came from. Because her dad left her mom for a white woman, as recounted in the book? She grew up in plush surroundings, with summers on Martha's Vineyard. As the number of unread pages shrank, I kept wondering if Ku Kluxers in white sheets were going to suddenly show up in the book to explain her bitter feelings about white males. Ms. Nelson said that white men are priveleged, but believe me, we too can be put through the grinder. I'm also a former newspaper reporter, born the same year as Ms. Nelson. When she complained about her reporting duries at the Washington Post, saying "I was too old to chase fire engines," I had to laugh. That's exactly what I was doing at another paper at the time she said that. I don't buy what Jill Nelson says, but I did enjoy the way she tells it.



2. As an African-American journalist, I found Jill Nelson's book to be very real. Those who criticize the book because Nelson strikes them as naive are missing the point, on at least two levels.

   In the first place, though she naturally gets into certain generalities, the book is primarily about HER experience. It's not intended to be a handbook for reporters who are climbing the corporate ladder. Given her past, and her particular personality, this is the story of how she happened to react to a specific set of circumstances. How one judges her actions should be different from the way someone judges the book itself.

   And secondly, to the extent that the book does have a larger intent, it calls for the dismantling of an outrageously unfair system. Should we all just accept the status quo, and find clever ways to navigate our way past pettiness and stupidity, or strive for a sane alternative?

   The fact is that Nelson has done just fine since she left the Post. Viewed in that context, the book is a testament to her courage, and her insistence on personal dignity.




3. Volunteer Slavery is STILL the book! Family, friends and coworkers are probably sick and tired of hearing me raving about the revealing, blistering and gossipy tell-all memoir! It's been nearly 10 years since the book was published, but I still regularly reread certain passages when I need inspiration, a good laugh, or a clearer understanding of the journalistic imbroglio with which I frequently have to deal with--after more than 15 years in the business!! Celebrate the anniversary of the BEST book EVER written about what it's REALLY like being a black journalist on the plantation...the newsroom at a daily newspaper!!



4. It is ironic yet predictable that most of the people who don't "get" this book, tend to be individuals who are either not female, African American or both. Jill Nelson wrote an honest critique of the experience that many African American women go through when trying to attain the proverbial golden rings in corporate America. I am sorry some folks could not relate or understand Ms. Nelson's book because the points she brings up are true and still reflective of the socialogical culture most African Americans live in today--approximately twenty years later. The patriarchal blindness that many in this culture experience that prevents them from understanding or relating to another individual or cultures experiences is sad yet expected The best that Ms. Nelson and other writers like her can do is just tell the story and let those who get "it" get it.

   Were some of her experiences hard to hear? Most definitely. Were the experiences unique to her? Absolutely not. Ms. Nelson says on in chapter 2, that she has been doing the standard Negro balancing act which is "blurring the edges of [her] being so that they [white people] don't feel intimidated." There are few African Americans, I would venture to guess, who haven't experienced this feeling at one time or another, yet it is virtually impossible to communicate this experience in a way that is understandable to someone who hasn't had to always be "aware" of how they are perceived and how those perceptions can affect other African Americans as well. Ms. Nelson does an excellent job explaining these details and if some people are still clueless, well, it's through no fault of her skill as a writer.

   Keep on shedding a spotlight on these issues Ms. Nelson. There are a few out there who are truly looking for the light.




5. Jill Nelson is the modern day Harriet Tubman, leading the mentally enslaved from the chains of industrial oppression to the freedom of self-determined realization. If you read this missive and don't ask yourself if you've ever compromised your integrity to further someone else's capitalist agenda, you've missed the point of this brilliant body of work. Angst, inner turmoil, and introspection abound on the pages and tell the tale of a woman trapped in the web of office politics and backstabbing that eat at your joy, that erode your sense of self-worth. What is the price of voluntarily whitewashing your identity to please people with an agenda that does not validate or acknowledge the talents you bring to the table as a person of color? It's so much more than the reflections of a sista who got a position with the Washington Post who got a case of buyer's remorse and didn't like her job. This is the impetus to assess what it is that is important in life and to run towards freedom.

No comments about The Playboy Interviews: The Directors (Playboy Interviews).

5 comments about Kinfolks: Falling Off the Family Tree - The Search for My Melungeon Ancestors.

1. I had never heard the word 'Melungeon' before, so I had to go look it up on the web. It appears that no body else really knows what a Melungeon is either. Therefore, what a great thing to go searching for. You can find it if you wish. (662 people claimed to be Melungeon in the 2,000 census).
   
   Ms. Alther's search among her family roots lead her to about as confused a family as, as, as, well most families. The particularly amusing aspect of her family, especially among the older members is the refusal to admit even the slightest possibility that there might be a small percentage of African American blood running through their veins.
   
   Ms. Adler is able to take her investigation into the upper bounds of comedy. She reports a church sign, 'What did Noah do with the woodpeckers.' Upon her father finding out that he might have some Indian blood he tells a fund raiser who calls, 'Sorry, but I'm Cherokee, and I need to give my money to my own people.' I'm going to try to remember that line.



2. Well written, easy reading. But if you are looking for the history of the Melungeons, take this book very lightly. Borders on "Cultural Genocide". As with the works of Brent Kennedy and Elizabeth Hirschman, a very poor attempt at rewritting the history of the Melungeons.



3. This was a great book. It is styled like an autobiography and tells the tale of the authors childhood through adult years, focusing on family, culture, and the things she learned about her family through the years.



4. Lisa (LYE-ZA) Alther's latest, Kinfolks, falling off the family tree, is irresistible!
   
   Kinfolks is the most humorous and entertaining book I have read in years! (And I've probably read 15,000 in my lifetime of 81 years.) It also introduces you to a very interesting woman who is unafraid to reveal her weaknesses and foibles. She is also a marvelous role model of openness and self-effacement for the young as well as a reassurance for all senior citizens.
   
   Do not be fooled this is only about ancestors or genes. The genealogy and DNA searches provide the structure for very wise and unhurtful humor--a very rare quality.
   
   Most Americans no longer live where they grew up. What they gained by living among strangers, what they lost by uprooting, and what they may profit from by accepting ALL their roots, traits, and history are hilariously illustrated.
   
   The Melungeons, interesting as they may be, only provide a vehicle for Alther's search for more self-knowledge by a very gifted writer. The writing draws one on as Alther reminds us of cogent points through artful means: she contrasts northeast Appalachia church message boards' weekly quotes with Vermont bumper stickers to give us insights into two very different responses to extremes of the Appalachians. She teases her family who seem recognizably familiar, and she tantalizes us with the potential of what DNA may one day tell us about ourselves and others.



5. Lisa Alther hasn't lost her sense of humour or her keen insight into human nature. This is a great book and I learned a lot about history of the Southeast of which I knew nothing before reading this. I found it very interesting and I also loved learning more about Lisa's life as she is a favorite author of mine.

4 comments about I Celebrate Myself: The Somewhat Private Life of Allen Ginsberg.

1. I highly recommend Bill Morgan's "I Celebrate Myself", a biography of the late poet, Allen Ginsberg, a "Beat Generation" writer. Bill Morgan allows the reader to understand and appreciate, in such an interesting narrative, Ginsberg's unique style of poetry. I was truly captivated by this poet's life and work that the book seemed to be much shorter than it actually was. In addition to the title "I Celebrate Myself" from Walt Whitman's "Leaves of Grass," I especially enjoyed Bill Morgan's innovative approach of describing occurrences in Ginsberg's personal life that influenced his writing by placing in the margins of the book, the titles of the poems that Ginsberg was writing at the time. This creates for the reader an immediate interest and desire to read Ginsberg's poetry. "I Celebrate Myself" was a joy and adventure to read, and I learned so much about this sensitive, brilliant, and compassionate poet of the twentieth century. Fascinating Book!!



2. Its obvious that Bill Morgan had access to alot of primary materials in writing this biography of Allen Ginsberg, which is clearly a labor of love for the author. And rightly so. Ginsberg's humanity shines thru on these pages - generosity, kindness, creativity, eccentricity, but mostly a dedication to live fully and richly without excuse.
   
   I didnt know much of Ginsberg before I read the book; he seemed at best a minor talent in a discipline I knew little about, at worst a mentally ill crank. But Morgan's book drew me in deeper and deeper, and I soon saw the genius of Ginsberg, a genuis manifested in both his art and his life, which I assume Ginsberg would say were one and the same. In this age of greedy hucksters passing as 'artists', Ginsberg was the real deal. A fascinating human being in the best sense of the word.
   
   Thank you Mr Morgan for such a labor of love.



3. Bill Morgan's new book about the poet Allen Ginsberg, "I Celebrate Myself", rates at the top of my favorites list. I was immediately captivated when I read in the Introduction about an incident where Ginsberg saw a poor woman who was about to be attacked by an angry dog.Ginsberg went to her and asked,"Would you like a fig newton?" From then on I couldn't stop reading.
   The book is full of many interesting facts about Ginsberg's life and poetry.His writings represent the turbulence of the cultural revolution of the time and this book is a wonderful testament to this eccentric and unique writer's talent. I applaud and congratulate Bill Morgan for his superb book.



4. There are now many biographies of Allen Ginsberg. Shumacher's Dharma Lion stands out as a particular favorite, and the book-length poem by Ed Sanders is not to be overlooked. Most take a bird's-eye view of this poet and his life. Because of his long personal relationship with Ginsberg as his archivist and bibliographer, Morgan stood closer to his subject, both personally and through his access to the prolific journals Ginsberg diligently kept from the age of eleven to the end of his life, than any previous biographer has, or any future biographer is likely to.
   
   The result is a biography whose intimacy and authority are unparalleled. For or some at least, this will be a decidedly mixed blessing. Those with a strong aversion to sexual revelation and description will be distracted if not put off, for Ginsberg was possessed of a ruthless, at times self-defeating, candor in all matters sexual, as readers familiar with his poetry will know. But, as Morgan shows, he was equally candid in all other areas of his life and feeling.
   
   He was also deeply flawed, persistently naive and hopeful about the numerous lifelong friends he made in his days at Columbia and shortly thereafter: Kerouac, a drunk Republican mama's-boy and anti-semite, whose friendship Ginsberg treasured and whose work he championed to long after Kerouac's death; Huncke, who mooched and stole from him repeatedly; Burroughs, who, for a time lusted after him, but at others was inaccessible and gratuitously mean to Ginsberg's life partner, Peter Orlovsky; Cassady, an insatiable womanizer and artful dodger, or worse; Corso, who embarrassed and abused him often; and Orlovsky himself, heterosexual, chronically unstable and addicted to alcohol and amphetamines, and not infrequently interpersonally and physically destructive. To all of these, and to scores if not hundreds of others, Ginsberg's loyalty, generosity, and his efforts to support them financially and promote their work and enhance their lives never wavered. In his close personal relationships, Ginsberg could be, and often was, a fool, but he was not a fair-weather friend. Among the flaws that Morgan addresses and clarifies was Ginsberg's peculiar and persistent blind spot for women, their strengths, virtues, and talents. Even those close to him, not rarely in love with him, could in important ways escape his notice.
   
   In fairly documenting his flaws, however, Morgan's treatment does not throw Ginsberg's virtues into shadow. His intense interest in all things human, his passionate commitment to free speech and unfettered thought and social justice and, some will be surprised, his patriotism, all come through. But what comes through most powerfully is the loving pains he took to care for others, more often than not one-at-a-time. Undivided attention, a meal, a place to stay, the reading of a poet's work brought to him for comment, his personal responses to virtually all the letters sent to him, from friend and stranger alike; Ginsberg cared and gave.
   
   Until the last very few years of his life, and despite the popularity of his books, readings, and recordings, Ginsberg was chronically close to poverty, on many occasions simply broke, and sometimes temporarily stranded. Even when his income was nominally adequate, he bought his clothing in second-hand stores, rescued his friends again and again and again, and made up the difference. As he supported his friends, sometimes over many years, he supported numerous younger poets and writers, as well as working tirelessly to benefit the many causes, programs, and institutions he cared about; he gave and gave and gave.
   
   In the end, Morgan's biography, its chapters proceeding year by year, covers the life of a great poet who was not less a man of truly heroic love and candor, a flawed human being who can stand as a model and a beacon for that which is most tender and dear in each of us.

1 comments about China Ink: The Changing Face of Chinese Journalism (Asian Voices).

1. (with apologies to WS, Twelfth Night II:5)
   
   This is a wonderful book - a testament, really, to karma, commitment, compassion, and surrender to the personal tao. It is also an easy and engaging read - easy, that is, when one is prepared for the flood of evocations inevitable when such universal stories are recounted so intimately.
   
   The book comprises a well-orchestrated score of lively reminiscences by Chinese journalists in diverse positions and media (from Finance & Economics Magazine to call-in radio), each a unique and yet broadly applicable path to service. Since the personal dramas are set on the largest of national stages, the dynamism of recent Chinese decades naturally infuses and enriches the subject matter.
   
   This volume could be read profitably as a book on the startling evolutions in expression and other freedoms, turmoil in power politics, subtle and gross international relations and influences. For the non-historian (and non-journalist), there emerges a portfolio of powerful recountings of the one Hero's Journey: variously driven by intention, led by happenstance, entrained in strange eddies and whorls as the energies of empire expand into capitalism and post-Confucian self-determination, all following the ancient pattern of Separation from swaddling role - Initiation - Existential challenge - Transformation - Return with gifts to the tribe. In every case, the subject-speakers tell nakedly honest stories (eliciting them is only part of the genius of the author) of how speaking for the many happened to and through them, rather than something admitting of solipsistic or egotistic ownership. The power of this narrative is both greater and more subtle than that of narrator or subject.
   
   Is this a guide to good journalism? I wouldn't know; I aren't a journalist, and don't even take the papers. Is it a guide to great story-telling, in the sense of unadorned truth told warmly and compellingly? Unexceptionably.
   
   More than both, and the magic of its universality, it is an engaging guide to trusting both inner wisdom and evanescent opportunity in honor (not pursuit) of life and meaning that could not even be imagined in anticipation. It calls itself a book about Change, China and Journalism. Like the I Ching, it is also a book about Being, Life and Humanity.

5 comments about Land of a Thousand Eyes: The Subtle Pleasures of Everyday Life in Myanmar.

1. This is a very intimate look into the present culture of Myanmar. The author, a journalist, accesses the ways of the Burmese as well as any forigner is able. It is not a traveloge so much as a narrative on the ways of the people.Perhpas I would have enjoyed more information on the politcs or land but there is much to gain in understanding the culture. Also throws in some opportunites to re-examine aspects of democracy. An enjoyable read.



2. This is a badly written book by a man who appears to have no conscience. He has a good time but manages to ignore, apparently without any qualms, the suffering around him. Olszewski was a collaborator with the Burmese dictatorship and sees nothing wrong with that. I am very sorry that I spent money buying this book.



3. This book shouldn't be judged on whether it includes sufficient condemnations of the government of Myanmar. It's about the personal journey of an individual who experienced a year's stay in that country. I thought this book was fascinating. I could hardly put it down.



4. One of the better Travel books I have read in awhile. Book was very easy to read and gives one a good glimpse of life in modern day Myanmar, as seen from the eyes of one individual. I highly recommend this book for anyone considering traveling to Myanmar. I liked how it seemed every chapter gave me as a reader, a view of all the different aspects of Myanmar life. From past and present politics, family life, romance and courting, street life, hotels, bussiness, minority groups, etc.. A really good read!



5. This book was good. An interesting view of another culture and repressive political system. I enjoyed it. Not five stars, but four.