Book Log 2008 #3: Shakespeare by Bill Bryson

I'll admit to having been attracted to this slim biography more for its author than its subject, as I expected Bryson to take his usual whimsical view to English literature's greatest playwright. But he didn't, for the most part.

Instead, Bryson take a fairly straightforward approach, but not so much at who Shakespeare was but who he wasn't. Bryson is quick to note we know almost nothing about Shakespeare other than what appears in official documents and a few written mentions in works by other people. From there, he builds a biography based on what life was like at various places and times, and using that more to deflate theories that are mostly speculation.

So while it's not much of a biography (how could it be?), it does give a fairly objective picture. Just one that doesn't include its subject very much. I liked it, but it's an odd approach that will likely frustrate people looking for a story that's more robust, regardless of its accuracy.

Book Log 2008 #2: The Yiddish Policeman's Union by Michael Chabon

This book is set in present day Sitka, Alaska, where (as is mentioned often), it's a strange time to be a Jew. Sitka is the focal point of a district founded in the 1940s for Jewish immigration in the wake of the collapse of Israel, but it's all about to revert to the state of Alaska, leading to new chapter in the Diaspora for many.

One person who is moving out - permanently - is a junkie found dead in a flophouse that is also home to a drink-favoring homicide detective. The detective's interest in the case is tempered by his borderline alcoholism, the apparent involvement of a powerful Orthodox sect, and the reappearance of his ex-wife... who is now his boss.

Take away the unique background and this set-up wouldn't be out of place in mainstream mystery fiction. But with it - and with Chabon's stylish prose and ability to develop characters - there's much more depth to this book than the average work in the genre.

That being said, I did feel like the latter part of the book struggled a bit to maintain the various threads of the story, but it's still very successful. Very much worth a read.

Mike Huckabee has Chuck Norris, and now John McCain has Sly. So who would the other candidates have to back them up?

Mitt Romney: Arnold Schwarzenegger. Both are/were Republican governors of states that aren't thought of as conservative. Neither had elected experience before becoming governor. Arnie had well-sculpted pecs. Mitt has well-sculpted hair. Both have killed alien life forms that have the power of invisibility. They're perfect for each other.

Rudy Guiliani: Harrison Ford. Everybody loved you - for a time. You even had a moment where you looked completely Presidential. Now, you've had your mid-life crisis, done some odd things (ranting about ferrets and Six Days, Seven Nights, respectively), and remain on the edge of relevance with a level of popularity that's surprisingly soft.

Ron Paul: Nicolas Cage. Neither seems to belong in the category they're in, and neither really started out in a way that would make you thing they'd be where they are now (Paul is a doctor, while Cage's first role was in Fast Times at Ridgemont High). Both have popularity beyond what you'd expect. And both are loony tunes.

And for the Dems...

Barack Obama: Wesley Snipes. Always bet on black.

Hillary Clinton: Linda Hamilton. There aren't that many female action stars, and comparing Hillary to a man would probably lead to some sort of protest. So I'm going with Hamilton based on both women having matrimonial difficulties. Hamilton has been married three times, while Clinton... well, you know that story. Both also achieved their greatest success after moving to New York to pursue a career. Which is something, I suppose.

John Edwards: Steven Segal. He's always fighting on the side of the people, which befits the new, populist stance that Edwards is using. Both also continued on long after the point where they should have moved on and done something else with their lives.

Dennis Kucinich: I have nothing. It's hard to come up with an action star for someone whose campaign website touts "Strength Through Peace." Suggestions welcome!

(UPDATE: Kucinich has saved us the trouble of finding him an action star by dropping out of the race. The article I read on this reminded me that Mike Gravel is still in it, though, so I have to pick someone for him. I'm going with Ron Ely, best known for playing Tarzan back in the day. Like Gravel, you barely know who he is (if at all) and haven't seen him in quite some time.)

Looking for added guidance on who to vote for, I've taken a number of online quizzes to see what candidate I match up with the best. The results?

USA Today: Mike Huckabee
Political Base: Bill Richardson
Minnesota Public Radio: Clinton or Kucinich
SpeakOut.com: Chris Dodd
SelectSmart.com: Kucinich
Blue Pyramid: Peter Camejo (who isn't even running!)
ABC News: Huckabee (which isn't surprising, as they use the USA Today questions)
GoToQuiz.com: Richardson
dehp.net: Kucinich
Glassbooth.org: Edwards

Clear as mud, just as you'd expect. Also pretty funny that neither of the people I've decided I'm most likely to vote for came up at all.

Reading this post from the Bruce has finally gotten me to address the looming Massachusetts primary, which, like California's, will be held on Super Duper Tuesday. After reading his post, I was stunned to learn that there's a decent chance that he and I will wind up voting for the same person. I wouldn't have concieved of that four years ago. Or even four months ago, for that matter.

Now that I'm an unenrolled voter, I get to choose which party's primary to vote in, a first for me. So how might it go down?

Democrats - I have to admit, my decision here is based mostly on personalities and ephemera rather than positions, as from what I can tell the differences between the major candidates isn't that great. I'm discounting John Edwards as I find his populist posturing a little too sudden and opportunistic. And I don't think I'd go for Hillary as I've still got some Clinton fatigue from when her husband was in office.

This brings me to Obama, even though I have the same concerns about him that I did about Deval Patrick, namely that I'm not sure there's enough substance under the inspirational message. On the minus side, the Presidency is a tough job to learn while doing. On the plus side, he'd be able to choose his Cabinet and other staffers to help get things going. But then I think of our current leader and the example of how this sort of plan can go horribly awry. As you can tell, I'm not particularly convinced about this.

There is an outside chance I'd throw a vote to Joe Biden in honor of his "noun verb 9/11" analysis of Guiliani's campaign. It may be the most on point thing anyone has said during this campaign.

Republicans - voting here would be driven by voting against Romney. His tenure as governor was not impressive (granted, he didn't have a lot of support, given how thin Republicans are on the ground here), and I don't buy for a second his "evolution" into conservatism. I tend to think he was always conservative, but played at moderate positions in order to get elected. This hardly makes him unique, but it makes it hard for me to believe what he's saying at any given time. A good rule of thumb with politicians generally, but it strikes me as being particularly important with him.

A vote here would be guided by how candidates have done in the states to come and how things appear to be shaping up in the polls. Were I casting this vote today I'd probably go with McCain, even though I probably more closely aligned with Guiliani on issues. We do have a thing for McCain in New England. It's probably due to his curmudgeonly attitude and fondness for sweaters (which, based on this, may have an odd same-sex marriage/union corollary).

Should Guiliani show some life in Florida, I may throw him a vote. It seems unlikely, although if it would help Romney finish third here it'd up the odds.

The other option would be Ron Paul, even though he's a couple of steps on the wrong side of the good crazy/crazy crazy line. I've probably seen more signs for him here than any other candidate, and had be fared better in New Hampshire I'd be more inclined to pay tribute to the dedication of his supporters.

Huckabee gets nominal consideration based on performance to date. Everyone else is out.

Green - yes, there is Green Party primary here. Most of the names are of party functionaries that I've not heard before. Ralph Nader is on the ballot, as is Cynthia McKinney, best known for her time as a cop-slapping Georgia Congresswoman. I don't know what would drive me to vote here, though I am tempted to cast my first vote for Kat Swift, who will turn 35 this year, just so I can cast my first vote for a candidate younger than I am. But I suppose that day will come soon enough, so I'll likely pass for now.

You can see the lineup for the Massachusetts primary ballots here.

Book Log 2008 #1: Crazy '08 by Cait Murphy

An appropriately-titled book to start the year, it gives the lowdown on what was probably baseball's wildest year to date. The focus is more on the NL race, specifically on the Cubs and Giants, while the AL is given less attention. All of the highlights are hit, both in baseball and outside of the game, and that may be the book's biggest weakness. Some of the asides (both in self-contained chapters and in the middle of others) sometimes distracts from the baseball, to the point where you kind of forget that that's the main subject of the book.

Murphy also seems fond of old-timey baseball jargon, which I got used to after a bit.

I think I'd have liked something more focused on the baseball, but it's a good read to keep the hot stove burning.

If you work for an institution of higher education, and you're looking for a way to drive staff morale through the floor, cancel classes during a snowstorm but require staff to come in. Nothing says "you're expendable" better than that.

For anyone thinking about getting a passport who may be worried about long application times, you may want to act now. I filed a renewal just before Christmas, and got my new passport yesterday. Pretty good, considering how long the wait times were not that long ago and that the estimated time I was given was 6-8 weeks.

That being said, I may have benefitted from renewing rather than applying first time. Not sure if that makes a difference or not.

The new one is one of the ones with the RFID chip in it, making me a prime target for Big Brother or identity thieves. It's been redesigned quite a bit, comparing it to my old one. The cover is stiffer, and instead of my picture being on the inside cover it's been moved to the back of the first page. And while it's not as bad as my driver's license photo, there is a Whitey Bulger's bagman look to the picture.

The pages have replaced the state seals with scenes of Americana (rocky coasts, purple mountains majesty and so on) and various quotes from famous (and not so famous) Americans. So if nothing else, the propaganda value of the passport has improved.

Merry New Year! I'd like to say that I've been doing something interesting in the time since I've last posted, but I haven't. In fact, I've mostly been sitting on the couch watching TV, frittering away my winter break. I do not look forward to my return to work on Monday.

We have started to have the house worked on again, as the guy who did our living room is now doing our bedrooms. Not only will we have new walls (and insulation), but we'll actually have overhead lights and wall sockets that are up to code (the old ones were apparently too low). The main problem so far is that they were in doing work today, when the temps barely hit double digits. Not so much a problem with going in and out - there wasn't as much of that today as when the rooms were demoed - as with the door to the attic being open all day. Were I smart I would have gone to the library for the day. I may still do that tomorrow, although temps are supposed to be in the 30s, which is balmy by comparison.