This is another book in the Wallander series, but it focuses on Wallander’s daughter, Linda, rather than on Wallander himself. This made it especially interesting, because I got to see familiar characters and scenes from a new perspective. Hoglund, for example, who comes across as an intelligent, good natured woman seems brusque and bitchy for no real reason in this book. Wallander is depicted as a rather violent, impatient sort of man, who doesn’t seem to really respect his daughter, or her choice to become a police officer.

The book involves several mysteries which are interlinked, but not in the way the reader might expect, and I like that. It was not immediately predictable in the way that many mysteries are, with strange twists and turns which set the book up in a very interesting way. It’s also interesting, to me, to read a book about a female lead character written by a man, just as it is intriguing to read books about men written by women. The tone and feel of this book is markedly different from the mysteries with focus on Kurt Wallander, illustrating Mankell’s diversity and ability to handle new topics.

One thing about the book which didn’t appeal to me was the sort of catty view of women. Linda seemed to be constantly on the verge of hysterics, in a way that Kurt never is, and the women in the book felt flatter and less interesting than the women in Mankell’s other books. Hoglund, for example, who feels like a vibrant, well-developed character in other Wallander books, and turns into a dull, flat, uninteresting monster. I can’t decide if this is because of the way that Linda views women, or if it says something about Mankell.

I think I may need to take a break from the Swedish detective mysteries. I’m getting a bit too mired in them. Maybe I’ll start reading African detective books, since my books on order still aren’t in at the library, and the one thing they do have is a sizable mystery section. I wouldn’t mind reading some good Chinese mysteries, too, if anyone happens to know of any.

Talking with a friend earlier, he mentioned that I seem to read a lot, and I explained that it’s because I dedicate several hours every day, and often more, to reading. I’m so hungry for material to read, though, that I will read pretty much anything, including absolute garbage. Reading is such an intense compulsion for me, though, that I can’t imagine giving up garbage if it meant I had nothing to read.

Demographics:

Before the Frost, by Henning Mankell. Translated from the Swedish by Ebba Segerberg. English translation published 2005, 383 pages. Fiction.

I have now watched “Patriots and Tyrants” twice, and I feel in a fit state to comment on it. And on the future of Jericho.

For a series finale, the episode was pretty good. It was obvious that there was a lot of pressure from CBS to come up with a neatly wrapped up ending in addition to the cliffhanger which had been originally written, and it was difficult to encapsulate an entire season in seven episodes to begin with, let alone end the show in 40 minutes. I would really like to see the cliffhanger, to see what direction the show could have gone in, but for what it was, this was a reasonably good ending. Hopefully the cliffhanger will be in the special features of the DVD…
A lot of people have criticized the second season, arguing that it didn’t hold together and dissing on the writers. I disagree with these criticisms, because I think the season was strong, but also intellectually demanding. I suspect that everyone knew this was it for Jericho, so they really put their backs into it, and it showed. The core message of this season is that people get the governments they want, and that if you have a problem with your government, you have a moral obligation to speak up about it. To do something about it. And I hope that my fellow Jericho fans got this message and will bring it with them to the outside world.

People who didn’t like the second season probably didn’t like the messages in it, with Jennings and Rall becoming a megalithic corporation which took over the American government, corrupting it from the inside out, much like corporations are doing to the real American government, right now. They probably also didn’t like the thought of using the military to control American citizens, and they were repelled by the idea that violent revolution against a corrupt government is sometimes the only appropriate action to take.

That’s understandable, because the last thing the United States government wants right now is a violent revolution. And Jericho drew a lot of parallels with our own government and our government’s actions, especially with Jake’s torture scene in “Sedition,” with a faint (though never explicit) suggestion that the viewers needed to think more like the citizens of Jericho, before it’s too late. Not only that, but the show distinguished between good and bad revolutions, underscoring the differences between Jericho and New Bern. The show also encourages revolution from within the military, as we see Major Beck go from being a yes man to a man who objects to a corrupt government and is willing to fight against it. Not only that, but Beck enlists his men in the fight.

Some people have criticized Beck as not feeling like a very realistic character, claiming that soldiers always have the right to refuse orders. Those same people are obviously not reading the reports out of Iraq from soldiers who have been threatened until they followed orders which they felt were illegal. Or the claims from conscientious objectors who have said the same thing. Yes, soldiers can refuse orders they believe are illegal, but in actuality, that doesn’t happen very often, and when it does, it takes immense courage.

I also think this episode hinted at some possible new directions for our characters. I think that in the cliffhanger, Eric might have made an allegiance with Constantino, and we could have seen a parting of the ways between the brothers, with Jake redeeming himself for his deeds overseas while his brother found himself on a dangerous path. Their personalities have always been at odds, and in some ways, Eric is a very weak person. I would have liked to see that play out a little more. I am also interested to see how Jake would do as a national hero, to see who would fight in the civil war, and see what would happen if/when the civil war came to Jericho.

One thing the episode most certainly did was wrap up Stanley and Mimi with a nice little bow, but that was one of the few true resolutions in the episode. I was also really glad to see Stanley haul himself out of his dark place, undertaking the cathartic act of burying Bonnie and preparing to move forward. Had the show continued, I think we also would have seen more of Gray Anderson, because he started to grow a pair towards the end there. I would also have liked to see what happened with Trish and other good people within the Jennings and Rall framework, and to know what happens with Dale, and Heather, and lots of other people I have grown rather attached to, like Emily, who alas spent most of this season running around with a gun in a dirty undershirt, rather than talking. These characters are complex and well developed, and there are a lot of places for them to go.

The episode was also open ended. We leave the characters on the brink of civil war, with the assurance that the good guys “might have a chance this time,” and that leaves a lot of room for future seasons of Jericho, if the show gets picked up by another network. And I hope it does, because I really want to see more from the amazing cast and crew. I think that Jericho would also benefit from having a clear-cut story arc, like Lost or the Wire, along with a definite ending point. All good things must come to an end, and I think that the true end of Jericho lies on the other side of the civil war.

Master bicycle plans in cities across the West are attracting controversy.

The new surfing hotspot is…Ireland?

Jonathan Watts tried to cover Tibet for the Guardian and was foiled by the Chinese government at every turn, so here’s a video about what happened, and why you should be concerned.

Is nuclear energy as green as people want it to be?

Reporters in Idaho are being told to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, or get off the House floor.

Veterans with PTSD may be offered the option of treatment rather than jail time after committing crimes. Of course, the Pentagon could also just treat veterans with PTSD, but that would be tantamount to admitting that veterans get PTSD. Confused yet?

The changing look of military tattoos reveals interesting things about the course of the war in Iraq and the people involved it. Some very excellent tattoo photography with this article, incidentally.

This is another entry from the Kurt Wallander series, and it might be one of my favourites. It was complex and dark, with two simultaneous and very important plots going on at once. As with the other Swedish detective novels I have been reading, it also illustrated the changes happening in Sweden when it was written, with a decided sense that these changes are collectively bad.

There are two things at issue in this book. The primary plot has to do with a series of gruesome murders which Wallander quickly connects to each other, allowing him to take his time unwinding their intricacies in the book. As with other books in the series, we meet the murderer before Wallander does, and we watch her commit an assortment of crimes as we watch him try to figure out who is committing the crimes. As it turns out, she is a sort of vigilante, exacting vengeance on men who are violent with women, and she is aggressive, bold, and very crafty. I like Wallander’s description of her as both insane and intelligent.

The subplot in the book also has to do with vigilantes, in the form of citizen militia brigades. These brigades are established to combat crime in Sweden, in response to a perceived inadequacy on the part of the police force, and at one point a squad severely beats an innocent man. This subplot reminded me of my own mixed feelings about the neighborhood watch concept, where everyone is assumed to be bad, and people need to be told to look out for each other. At least neighborhood watches don’t go around with guns, beating people up, I suppose.

One thing I really like about this series is that Wallander really develops, as a character. Unlike a lot of detective series, where the main character remains static, Wallander definitely grows and changes, and I like that. It’s a bit confusing when you are jumping all over the place in the series like I am, but that’s alright with me. Given the glacial pace at which my holds are moving, it might be awhile before I get to fill in the gaps in my Wallander knowledge, alas.

Speaking of which, does anyone have any book recommendations? I have a stack of books with hold requests, but they aren’t here, so I figure I should add more books to the hold queue in the interests of maybe getting something new and interesting to read before the end of the decade.

Demographics:

The Fifth Woman, by Henning Mankell. Translated from the Swedish by Steven Murray. English translation published 2000, 423 pages. Fiction.

One of the things they did during the “downtown revitalization” which involved ripping out half of Franklin Street was install crosswalks and sidewalks which are supposed to be more wheelchair friendly, along with textured material at street corners and driveways to alert the blind to changes in elevation (and the fact that they are about to walk out into the street). I happen to think that these modifications are awesome, because I am all for making spaces more friendly to the disabled.

However, it is sort of funny that while people in wheelchairs can now navigate Franklin Street, they still can’t enter a surprising number of the businesses on the street. In the rare cases of businesses which a wheelchair can get into, the stores themselves are usually not very wheelchair accessible (one notable exception to this is Racines, which has a very clear, open floorplan which makes it pretty easy to navigate in a wheelchair, although some of the corners of the store are a bit tight).A friend on mine in a wheelchair has often pointed this problem out.

“It’s one thing to be able to get into the store,” she says, “but usually I get inside and then can’t move, because the aisles are insanely narrow and cluttered with crap. So either I can’t fit down the aisle, or I can just squeeze in, but I am terrified of knocking stuff down, and most of the stuff is displayed out of reach, so I have to call a rude, surly employee over and beg them to get things for me. That’s why I shop online.”

When I was at the Botanical Gardens on Saturday, I found myself thinking about this issue, because I noted that wheelchair users really wouldn’t be able to see most of the gardens. And it really made me wonder how it is that almost 20 years after the passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act, many businesses are still not friendly to the disabled.

Look, this isn’t a politically correct thing. This is a cold, hard business concern. Back in my days as a retail whore, I made a conscious effort to recommend businesses which are handicapped accessible, not only to parties with obviously disabled members, but to everyone, because I think that these businesses demonstrate a genuine desire to reach out to customers. I also find that the staff at places like that tend to be more friendly, patient, understanding, and helpful, and those are all traits which I feel are worthy of promotion.

Especially since everyone here is all like “rah rah tourism!” It amuses me that business owners apparently think it is perfectly acceptable to write off the elderly and disabled as potential revenue sources. Especially since we have a growing population of elderly in this country, and we’ve got a fair number of disabled veterans returning from Iraq. Thanks for serving, hope you didn’t want to be able to buy underwear!

By excluding the handicapped from their businesses, people miss out on a lot of potential sales, and they frustrate a huge segment of potential customers. If you have stairs at your doorway instead of a ramp, right there you’re cutting customers off. And disabled people are just as capable as complaining about bad service to their friends as the “abled” are. When a friend of mine who was walking on crutches for a few weeks got rude service at a coffeehouse in San Francisco, I stopped going there. When a blind friend mentioned the generous, helpful service she got at another coffeehouse, I made a point of going there, just like I would when anyone gave me a good recommendation for an establishment.

I think that disabled activists are sometimes less vocal than activists for other groups who find themselves marginalized. You don’t see businesses with “no colored” signs on their doors anymore, and if you did, you would probably make a furious complaint to the business owner, town hall, and anyone else who would listen. Yet, you think nothing of walking up a flight of stairs which would be insurmountable to someone in a wheelchair or someone on crutches.

A lot of strides have been made for disabled rights in this country, and there is a growing idea that making accommodations isn’t just legally obligated, it’s also good business, and it’s just plain polite. Apparently that idea hasn’t reached Fort Bragg yet, which is a great pity.

The streets of Baghdad are a sign of how much the city has changed.

Alex Limkin writes a letter to his deceased commanding officer.

An etiquette squad is taking action in Tokyo to fight a tide of bad manners. Miss Manners would be proud.

Elephant videographers have provided an amazing glimpse into the lives of tigers.

A huge chunk of the Antarctic ice shelf just fell off.

Have you ever gotten an unexpected package? Well, Taiwan got a shipment of weapons when it was expecting batteries. Top that.

Human rights activists are using the Olympics as an opportunity to talk about human rights issues in China, as you may have noticed if you read the article about the disruption at the torch lighting ceremony which I linked to earlier. The Washington Post also did a feature story on the issue, with some additional commentary about human rights activism from within China.

I think that many Chinese rights activists view the Olympiad as a great, and perhaps the only, opportunity to speak out about problems in China, but they also might not get a chance. China is notorious for cracking down on dissidents, and already activists have been jailed and otherwise punished for appealing to the world. China claims that the symbol of the Beijing Olympics is peace, but apparently not peace for Chinese citizens who are uncomfortable with their government. Or for Tibetans. The Free Tibet movement has certainly seen the Olympics as a golden chance for Tibet, as evidenced by their forceful protest yesterday and attempts to get Tibet back into the public consciousness.

This is an issue which is not going to go away, and I think we are going to see widespread protests, especially in Europe, as the Olympic Torch makes its rounds. It’s unfortunate that the Olympics have become so bound up with politics, but I think there’s no way to escape the fact that the Olympics has become extremely political, and while it sucks for the athletes who genuinely just want to compete with the top of the field from around the world, I think we need to be taking a cold, hard look at the Olympics.

I’m not sure why the International Olympic Committee awarded the Olympics to China, given that human rights in China is hardly a new issue, and they must have been aware that it would generate some public comment at the very least, if not some acrimony. Maybe the IOC was hoping that this might spark a global discussion of human rights issues in China? The selection of an Olympic venue is a highly charged choice, and I doubt that the IOC would jump into it without careful consideration.

Regions being honored with a visit by the Olympic Flame are repressing protests, claiming that they will embarrass China. Well, that is sort of the point. I think that China should be humiliated in front of the world, because I think at this point it’s the only way to send a clear message. People inside and outside of China are angry about what is going on there, and they deserve a chance to speak.

I don’t know what to do about China, because there is no easy solution. I am not a huge fan of interventionist tactics, but I do think that the world needs to start pressuring China politically, to indicate that we are not comfortable with the status of human rights in China. However, it’s hard to squeeze China when we are, in a sense, enslaved to China. China holds a large amount of American debt, for example, and Americans are heavily dependent on China for cheap plastic crap we don’t need. In fact, I’ll bet that many of the supplies used to make protest signs come from China…

It’s official: as of Easter Sunday, over 4,000 American servicemembers have died in Iraq.

Benzene’s in the water in South Florida…and no one seems to care.

Let the Games begin! And the protests, of course.

Water, water, everywhere, and shrinking amounts to drink.

Lose the bottled water, and you might make a difference.

Talking about race wins you points in the polls, apparently.

I’ve already read this book this year,  but my books still aren’t in at the library, or rather they are, but the library was closed yesterdy so I couldn’t get them.

I actually read it specifically for “Forbidden Brides of the Faceless Slaves in the Secret House of Dread Desire,” which may be one of my favourite short stories ever. It’s a bit cute, and if it was any longer, it would be dangerously precious, but the shortness works in its favour. It’s simply funny and great.

I was also really intrigued by “In the End,” which is so short and abrupt that I thought my copy was missing a page or something. It’s so short that it’s more like a drabble than a short story, and I hope he develops it a bit more, because the basic idea was rather great.

It’s a very strange little book, whether one reads the decidedly creepy “Keepsakes and Treasures” or the rather pornographic “The Problem of Susan.”  And, unlike the Joyce Carol Oates short stories I read earlier, these are very diverse stories, sprinkled with a few poems. Gaiman has clearly grasped the idea that short stories offer a chance to go hog-wild and crazy, so he did. I like that in an author.

Demographics:

Fragile Things, by Neil Gaiman. Published 2006, 360 pages. Short stories.

A great article appeared in the Guardian yesterday, talking about the ethical trap of “food miles.” I highly recommend reading the article, as I assume that most of my readers are interested in food politics and the ethical issues which surround food, and I promise that it is very interesting, and not all that long.

For those of you who didn’t read the article, the short story is that the concept of food miles is a bit more complex than people want you to think it is. At first glance, it makes sense to eat exclusively locally, right? Eating from the land, supporting your local economy, reducing your impact on the planet…but, in fact, there are a lot of factors which go into whether or not a food product is ethical, and it’s not as simple as how many miles the food has traveled.

From an environmental standpoint, one of the things the article highlighted was that food grown with chemical fertilizers and pest management materials, on a farm with petroleum powered tractors (or in a greenhouse) may not be as ethical as food which is grown naturally and air-freighted with large shipments of goods. In terms of carbon footprint, food which comes from further away might, oddly enough, be more ethical.

However, not all locally produced food is made with chemicals, and if local food is produced with the assistance of animals, rather than machines, I would argue that it would,in fact, have a far smaller carbon footprint than freighted food. I was somewhat disappointed that this was not really addressed in the article, which seemed to assume that conventional mechanized agriculture is the only way to produce food. This interesting omission reminded me of a somewhat disingenuous New York Times article on the same topic which was published not long ago, trying to discredit the food mileage idea with simplistic arguments. (Note that I do not necessarily think alternative fuels are more ethical, given the fact that biodiesel is turning out to be a huge disaster.)

I think that the article really illustrated the fallacy of the carbon footprint, which seems to be turning into the new gold standard for ethical living. In fact, the carbon footprint only scratches the surface of ethical living. Tristan and I were talking about this recently. I was arguing that the carbon footprint is too simplistic, and that by accepting it, people are missing out on the opportunity to delve more deeply into environmental issues. He was arguing that the carbon footprint is better than nothing, and that complex discussions of environmental issues alienate people, so we should be promoting the carbon footprint concept. What do you think? I’m not a fan of doing things by half measures, but I can see his logic.

And, the article argues, growing food for the North is a valuable source of money for people in the Southern hemisphere. So, by passing on those Chilean asparagus bundles and buying some local Brussels sprouts grown organically and without the use of heavy farm equipment, you are depriving some poor Chilean of the means of sustenance. Oh, but wait, if people in the Southern hemisphere weren’t dedicating their farmland to producing food for us, they could eat their produce, rather than selling it.

I was very pleased to note a plug for veganism at the end of the article, because it’s true that in most regions of the world, veganism is the most ethical and logical choice. It kind of surprises me, really, that the locavore movement isn’t more into veganism; I think they want to have their environmental self righteousness and eat meat too.

I think that the article really highlighted the fact that food politics is extremely complex, and that there are no easy solutions. It also reminded me of my personal goal in life, which is to take care of a large stretch of land somewhere, growing things on it and becoming self sufficient. As tangled in the industrial food complex as I am, it’s frustrating to feel forced to rely on a system I don’t like for the food I eat.