Paxton reviews the beginnings of fascism, its rise to power, and how it governed in order to try to suss out the common threads between successful and unsuccessful fascisms. Published in 2004, I hoped the book would explain how regimes with fascist tendencies like that of Donald Trump could be thwarted. Interestingly, Paxton hesitated to call Trump a fascist until Trump's unsuccessful attempt to retain power. Indeed, in the book Paxton makes an attempt to do away with democratic norms with the threat or actuality of a populist uprising one of the key part of fascism during stage 2, when it becomes influential, rather than mere groups of people obsessed with the unity and purity of the national people. Very solid and I recommend it.
User Profile
I have moved my Bookwyrming to @kingrat@sfba.club
This link opens in a pop-up window
User Activity
Phil in SF reviewed The Anatomy of Fascism by Robert O. Paxton
Phil in SF commented on The Anatomy of Fascism by Robert O. Paxton
Chapter 3 examines how fascisms changed from their original programs to gain power. In particular, Paxton notes that Mussolini was pro League of Nations, anti professional military, anti Catholic, pro nationalization of industry and anti capitalist in 1919. By 1922, he'd reversed course on those issues. This was how Italian fascism became successful (according to Paxton).
Phil in SF quoted The Anatomy of Fascism by Robert O. Paxton
His squads wore the cowboy garb and ten-gallon hats that the marquis had discovered in the American West, which thus predate black and brown shirts (by a modest stretch of the imagination) as the first fascist uniform.
Huh. So western gear has a much earlier connection to fascism than I was aware
Phil in SF commented on The Anatomy of Fascism by Robert O. Paxton
Phil in SF reviewed A Fatal Grace by Louise Penny
Uses some deceptive writing techniques
3 stars
Chief Inspector Gamache returns to Three Pines, where a person universally disliked, C.C. de Poitiers has been murdered in elaborate fashion in front of a crowd watching a curling match.
Unfortunately, the author used a technique i detest, so this will be the final book i read in the series. On at least three occasions we're following along in the mind of a character, but to keep the suspense going leaves out crucial thoughts.
"Her cell phone rang. She hesitated, knowing who it was, and not wanting to leave her last thought."
So, despite getting visibility into the character's thoughts, suddenly she doesn't think of the name of who is calling? Of course not, but the author doesn't want to let us into the scheme just yet. Rather than write from a different point of view or work around this limitation, she just leaves the thought out. And does this …
Chief Inspector Gamache returns to Three Pines, where a person universally disliked, C.C. de Poitiers has been murdered in elaborate fashion in front of a crowd watching a curling match.
Unfortunately, the author used a technique i detest, so this will be the final book i read in the series. On at least three occasions we're following along in the mind of a character, but to keep the suspense going leaves out crucial thoughts.
"Her cell phone rang. She hesitated, knowing who it was, and not wanting to leave her last thought."
So, despite getting visibility into the character's thoughts, suddenly she doesn't think of the name of who is calling? Of course not, but the author doesn't want to let us into the scheme just yet. Rather than write from a different point of view or work around this limitation, she just leaves the thought out. And does this multiple times.
Meh.
Frustrating but useful
4 stars
I found Mastering Genealogical Documentation to be very very frustrating, but ultimately it was very useful. The author says this book is a textbook, whereas Evidence Explained is a reference work. To some degree that's true.
Despite having read Genealogy Standards a few times, I've clearly missed some important points. That's mostly because Genealogy Standards does not include discussion of the standards. I read a lot of technical standards for a living. BCG's Genealogy Standards leave a lot to be desired for explanation.
That's a preface to the first really good point about Mastering Genealogical Documentation: it's an extensive discussion and breakdown of BCG standard 5, which lays out the 5 facets/elements/components of a citation: who, what, where, when, and wherein. What satisfies as good information for each element? Thomas W. Jones answers that. (Evidence Explained really does not.)
The second really good thing about Mastering Genealogical Documentation is that …
I found Mastering Genealogical Documentation to be very very frustrating, but ultimately it was very useful. The author says this book is a textbook, whereas Evidence Explained is a reference work. To some degree that's true.
Despite having read Genealogy Standards a few times, I've clearly missed some important points. That's mostly because Genealogy Standards does not include discussion of the standards. I read a lot of technical standards for a living. BCG's Genealogy Standards leave a lot to be desired for explanation.
That's a preface to the first really good point about Mastering Genealogical Documentation: it's an extensive discussion and breakdown of BCG standard 5, which lays out the 5 facets/elements/components of a citation: who, what, where, when, and wherein. What satisfies as good information for each element? Thomas W. Jones answers that. (Evidence Explained really does not.)
The second really good thing about Mastering Genealogical Documentation is that Jones has multiple chapters devoted to the really common situation of having images of another source. He breaks that down into a few situations: published images of published sources, published images of unpublished sources, unpublished images of unpublished sources, and unpublished images of unknown or lost sources. For each of those scenarios, the book lays out 4-5 options for how to construct citations. More importantly, the author explains why he recommend or does not recommend each method. Jones was editor of NGS Quarterly from 2003 to 2018, so he's certainly influential, but I'd prefer he didn't use passive voice as if his views are universal, using passive voice ("this option is not recommended").
The third really good thing about Mastering Genealogical Documentation is that Jones presents an actual process. Chapter 17 presents "Ten steps to cite any source". Boy howdy is that really useful! I do wish he didn't wait until the last chapter because that process would have been useful to work through the exercises in each chapter, particularly the exercises based on "using your own sources, apply this chapter".
Two related parts worth criticism though. One, Jones presents everything through a lens of format rather than function. Capitalize this way, not that way! Use periods here! I think people would learn & understand better with a focus on the what, and then applying that into how to format it into a citation. The second is that Jones focuses on publication of citations (Elizabeth Shown Mills does this as well in Evidence Explained). Jones is both a publication editor, as well as a frequently published writer. But there's a vast swath of "intermediate" genealogists who are trying to build family trees accurately and to high standards rather than publish articles. We don't work primarily with word processing software, and formal citations are a hindrance to smooth work flow. For instance, when I am documenting a source of published images of unpublished records, combining the documentation into one sentence like citation makes it harder for me to pick out each source as I review my notes. When I initially wrote this criticism on social media, one person responded to me with "just do what you want, use the parts you find useful." Which is absolutely true, but not useful. What I am saying is this work is tailored to budding genealogy writers or transitional professionals, not intermediate genealogists who want more solid trees. But it is extremely useful to those of us in that category; we just have to dig out the useful parts.
Phil in SF reviewed The Ipcress File by Len Deighton
Too hard to follow
2 stars
Harry Palmer is transferred from British military intelligence to another shadowy department. And pretty much everything that happened between then and the big explanation at the end was too confusing.
There's a kidnapping in Lebanon. A visit to an American Pacific island military base. Some running around London. And lots and lots of coffee, tea, and genteel drinks. None of it making any sense at the time.
Phil in SF reviewed The Housekeepers by Alex Hay
Housekeepers plot revenge
4 stars
Mrs. King works in the household of Mr. de Vries, an Irishman who made a fortune in South African mining (and changed his name). But shortly after his death Mrs. king is dismissed from the staff after being discovered in the men's quarters.
Soon she's plotting revenge along with other dismissed staff and de Vries' unacknowledged sister, Mrs. Bone.
They're going to steal everything in the house. Everything.
The Housekeepers is set in 1905 London. I love the setting and the plotting and the characters. At the end, i even feel a bit sorry for Miss de Vries, who is a thoroughly unlikable character. Her father didn't have her interests in mind.
Phil in SF reviewed Before She Sleeps by Bina Shah
Solid book
4 stars
Content warning minor spoilers
Some aspects of the word-building feel very thin. While I can easily suspend disbelief on a city-state having a virus the decimates its female population, and the government severely restricting the rights of women as a response, things like quiet acquiescence seem hard to sustain. Particularly, the idea of an underground group of women who are prostitutes who don't have sex seems like a hard thing to sustain. There's so few women that men use prostitution bots as a matter of course, and but there are many rich men who just want women to hold them so much they'll pay for the service doesn't seem tenable. The story itself makes it clear that it isn't tenable. But the sexless brothel is already decades past its founding before sex becomes an issue.
Anyway, after a while I was able to put aside my reservations about the setup and enjoy the story, which centers Sabine as she visits her most devoted Client as well as her relationships with other women of the Panah. However, when something goes wrong, the story starts to get into the minds and motivations of a lot of other characters.
Phil in SF reviewed The Lucky Strike by Kim Stanley Robinson
Politically thoughtful, but I couldn't engage with the story
3 stars
This book has three parts: the story "The Lucky Strike", an essay by Kim Stanley Robinson expounding on the themes of the story, and an interview of the author by Terry Bisson.
The Lucky Strike imagines that the crew of the Enola Gay are not the ones to fly Little Boy to Japan. Instead, the bombardier on The Lucky Strike is very torn about killing 100,000 people and imagines himself saying no, leaping out of the airplane, and worse. I think we should examine our motivations for bombing Hiroshima, but I don't know enough to have a moral opinion whether it was correct in the time. Nevertheless I'm deeply uncomfortable with the choice we did make. Maybe that's why all the second-guessing bombardier Frank January does in the story doesn't resonate; it repeats things I've thought about myself. I can't say "don't read this" because my inability to connect with …
This book has three parts: the story "The Lucky Strike", an essay by Kim Stanley Robinson expounding on the themes of the story, and an interview of the author by Terry Bisson.
The Lucky Strike imagines that the crew of the Enola Gay are not the ones to fly Little Boy to Japan. Instead, the bombardier on The Lucky Strike is very torn about killing 100,000 people and imagines himself saying no, leaping out of the airplane, and worse. I think we should examine our motivations for bombing Hiroshima, but I don't know enough to have a moral opinion whether it was correct in the time. Nevertheless I'm deeply uncomfortable with the choice we did make. Maybe that's why all the second-guessing bombardier Frank January does in the story doesn't resonate; it repeats things I've thought about myself. I can't say "don't read this" because my inability to connect with this probably says more about me than it does the story.
However, Robinson's essay on historical theories, whether they are good to apply to the Hiroshima bombing, and what to make of the alternate possibilities is also not something I connected with. I'm not interested in theories of history like the "great man" theory.
And lastly, I did find some interesting tidbits in Bisson's interview of Robinson, but most of the questions are pedestrian. In some cases, Robinson turns them into something interesting. In other cases, particularly on his writing methods, not so interesting. (Maybe writers will get something from those? 🤷)
Phil in SF quoted The Lucky Strike by Kim Stanley Robinson
I am only an activist today in the local politics of my town, Davis, California, where I am trying to fight a real estate development proposed by the University.
In which i discover that Kim Stanley Robinson is likely a NIMBY. I hope he's had a change of heart since this was published in 2009.
Phil in SF quoted The Lucky Strike by Kim Stanley Robinson
Anyone can do a dystopia these days just by making a collage of newspaper headlines, but utopia's are hard, and important, because we need to imagine what it might be like if we did things well enough to say to our kids, we did our best, this is about as good as it was when it was handed to us, take care of it and do better.
From an interview of Kim Stanley Robinson in the book.
Phil in SF reviewed One Shot by Lee Child
A little far fetched for a premise
3 stars
Content warning Minor spoilers in the review
Pure thriller bubblegum. First one i recall where Reacher doesn't sleep with a main character.
However well paced, the premise is the worst of the Reachers so far. The idea that a survivor of the Soviet gulags has set up a cement kickback scheme in rural Indiana, and that it's lucrative enough to kill 6 people over, along with an elaborate scheme to involve a soldier, making him repeat a crime he committed 20 years earlier so that he'd be blamed? Not to mention the timelines don't add up. But if you can suspend disbelief, it's a fun ride.
Phil in SF quoted The Lucky Strike by Kim Stanley Robinson
He watched Matthews and Benton tune the loran equipment.
Loran: A system of long-distance navigation in which position is determined from the intervals between signal pulses received from widely spaced radio transmitters