Lentorama 2010: Two Millenia of Pointy Hats

Day 22: Benedict IX (1032-44; 1045-46)

Remember that list of the 10 worse popes I mentioned? We may have our chart-topper here.

Benedict was the son of the count of Tusculum and nephew to two other popes. He became pope (thanks to his father) by the time he was 20 (though some sources suggest he was in his pre-teens).

Benedict had few, if any, qualifications for being pope. His lifestyle certainly didn't suggest his suitability for the office, as noted by Pope Victor III when he wrote of Benedict, "his rapes, murders and other unspeakable acts. His life as a pope so vile, so foul, so execrable, that I shudder to think of it."

This didn't go unnoticed, and Benedict was forced out of Rome twice during the first decade of his rule, leading to the appointment of Silvester III as pope. Benedict would depose him, but would later decide to marry and thus sold off the papacy to a relative, who became Gregory VI. Benedict, regretting this decision, returned to Rome and retook the throne - even though Gregory was still recognized as the pope. Silvester also took this opportunity to remind people of his claim to the papacy, which he had maintained since being deposed.

At this point Emperor Henry III intervened, calling a council that declared Benedict and Silvester deposed and sought the resignation of Gregory, which he gave. The new pope, Clement II, died in 1047, leading Benedict - who never accepted his deposition - to take one more stab at being pope. He was driven out by German forces, failed to appear before the new pope on charges of simony, and was excommunicated. He would fade away at that point, having had three separate runs as pope, all of them marked by chaos and dissolution.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 21: Gregory V (996-999)

The first German pope, Gregory was presented as a candidate for the papacy by Otto III, his cousin. One of Gregory's first act as pope? Crowning Otto III Holy Roman Emperor. Very convenient.

Too convenient for some, as for much of his short reign Gregory had to contend with an antipope elected by the Roman nobility. Having a cousin as emperor worked out for Gregory, as Otto invaded Rome and captured the antipope, cutting off various part of his face before sending him to a monastery to live out his days. Which wound up being longer - by more than a decade - than Gregory got, as he died unexpectedly (and perhaps suspiciously) in his late 20s.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 20: Sergius III (904-911)

If you were to compile a list of the ten worst popes, Sergius III would easily make the cut, if not compete for the top spot.

Sergius' election kicks of a period of the papacy often referred to a the "rule of the harlots" or the "pornocracy" (the church uses the less misogynistic Saeculum obscurum, "the dark age"). The popes in this period (which spans most of the 200 years after Sergius' election) were beholden to the counts of Tusculum and in many cases was a member of the family. The influence of the family women is where the harlot/porn references come in.

Most of the records from Sergius' term in office were destroyed by opponents of the faction he supported, so most of the information about Sergius comes from his enemies, which probably explains some of the more scandalous accusations (such as his fathering a future pope with a mistress and his ordering the killings of Pope Leo V and Antipope Christopher). He did invalidate most of what Formosus did, including the ordination of several bishops, requiring them to be reordained. Confusion may have reigned more than Sergius during his time in office.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 19: Formosus (891-896)

Hard to skip a guy who was exhumed and tried posthumously - possibly twice.

The postmortem judgment(s?) came from an incident where an earlier pope, John VIII, charged Formosus with a variety of crimes after Formosus fled the papal court in 872. Refusing to return to Rome to face the charges, Formosus was excommunicated, only to be reinstated by the next pope who, had he not done this, could have saved everyone a lot of trouble.

The reign of Pope Formosus brought as much political intrigue as his life before, mostly involving the crowns of France and the Holy Roman Empire. Formosus died in 89, and the following year a new pope decided to exhume Formosus and put him on trial for the charges levied by John VIII in what came to be known as the Cadaver Synod.

The body was dressed in papal robes and seated, and after deliberations it was (not surprisingly) found that Formosus was not a valid pope. Pretty much everything he did was repealed, and the corpse was stripped of its robes, had the three fingers Formosus used to bless people removed, and thrown in the Tiber. A monk would later retrieve the body, which was later reburied at St. Peter's. It's believed that a later pope, Sergius III, put Formosus on trial again, found him guilty again, and beheaded the corpse for good measure. There are several people who argue this didn't happen, but it's easy to believe of Sergius, as we'll see later.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millenia of Pointy Hats

Day 18: Sergius II (844-847)

After the death of Gregory IV, Sergius was elected pope, which would have been great if another man, John, hadn't been selected by public acclimation. Supporters of Sergius managed to hold the throne for him, but had him consecrated without the approval of the Holy Roman Emperor (so much for getting rid of the Byzantine approval). Troops were sent to Rome, but Sergius avoided a sacking through negotiation and giving the crown of Louis to the leader of the troops, who was also the emperor's son.

Of course, it may have been better if Sergius stayed in exile. During his brief tenure simony became the favored method of paying for building projects, and at one point the Saracens invaded the city and sacked a number of churches. It's at this point that he died, proving again that timing is everything.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 16: Leo III (795-816)

While some, if not most popes chafed under having to be approved by the Byzantine emperor before taking office, it doesn't seem like a problem when the flow of power started going the other way in a tradition/requirement started by Leo.

It was Leo who, on Christmas day in the year 800 crowned Charlemange the emperor of Rome, formalizing the future arrangement where the leader of the Holy Roman Empire would be crowned by the pope in return for pledging to defend the church. This would be in place for a good 600 years, until the ceremony moved to Germany.

Leo almost didn't get to do this, as he was driven out of Rome for a time by a group loyal to the previous pope that wanted a more patrician candidate to take office. Leo took back the papacy with the help of Charlemange, setting the stage for what was to come.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millenia of Pointy Hats

Day 15: Sisinnius (708)

Sorry for the fascination with short-reigning popes, but it's hard not to be interested in a guy whose term of office (three weeks) is shorter than the amount of time the job was open before he took it (three months).

Not surprisingly, there's not a great deal to talk about here. Sisinnus was apparently so gout ridden that he had trouble feeding himself, never mind moving around. This seems like something the College of Cardinals would take into consideration.

In those three weeks he apparently manages to things worth noting: he consecrated a bishop for Corsica and started to make plans to reinforce the walls of Rome (one source suggests this was done due to various threats from the exarch of Ravenna (who is apparently quite the pain in the ass), the Lombards and the Saracens. Those threats alone might be enough to do you in, never mind the gout.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millenia of Pointy Hats

Day 14: John V (685-686)

Remember how I mentioned last time that there was a time when popes had to be approved by the Byzantine emperor before they could be consecrated? Well, that ended with John V, thanks to the decision by Constantine IV to end the practice. John V was the first of a string of 10 popes to come from the east, so it could just be that Constantine felt that there was enough Byzantine influence in the process without requiring confirmation on top of things.

Not surprisingly, relations between Rome and Byzantium improved during John's short reign. His death sparked a brief conflict over succession, as the clergy and the military had different ideas on who should be elected. Stalemate ensued, leading the election of Conon, who was neither group's first choice.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 13: Severinus (640)

Severinus was elected during a time when the popes had to be confirmed by the Byzantine emperor. While this wasn't usually a big deal, the emperor at the time, Heraclius, refused to confirm Severinus until he signed off on a document about the nature of Jesus that didn't square with Rome's idea. Severinus refused to sign, at which point the Byzantine exarch (more or less a governor) in Ravenna sent people to Rome to sack the Lateran Palace and force Severinus to sign.

Severinus, learning of this, managed to keep the hordes out of the palace for three days, but they eventually got in and started packing up its contents. Even so, Severinus still refused to sign the document. Papal legates in Byzantium finally convinced Heraclius to confirm Severinus as pope, thanks to a combination of the emperor's declining health and persistent badgering.

Not that Severinus had much time to enjoy the office, as he died within a year of finally taking over the See of Rome.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 12: Gregory I (590-604)

The first monk to become pope, Gregory earned quite a few titles - Doctor of the Church, Latin Father, saint - thanks to his skills as a diplomat, theologian, writer and caretaker for poor Romans, who were helped by his almsgiving. He's best known to the average person today for music, as the Gregorian chants, the earliest organization and recording of sacred music, was attributed to him.

Not that he had anything to do with it. The entire enterprise seems to take hold in the 9th century, with the attribution to Gregory a fabrication. If nothing else, it likely helped the system gain acceptance, though it doesn't really explain how it made a popular comeback in 1994. And I'm sure his estate didn't get any of the royalties, which is more the pity.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 11: Silverius (536-537)

Silverius is the first son of a pope to become pope, as his dad, Pope Hormisdas, took orders after Silverius was born. This would not become the model for future father-son duos.

As for his actual reign, the most notable thing is that he was deposed by the Byzantine general Belisarius, charging that Silverius was passing information to the Goths. True or not, Silverius was busted down to monk and left Rome, going to Constantinople to get the backing of the Byzantine emperor, Justinian I. That didn't work out so well, as when he was sent back to Rome Belisarius managed to have him exiled to an island off the Italian coast, where he would later die.

For all that, Silverius managed to become a saint, though apparently by public acclimation rather than the more formal way. I didn't know you could do that. I should start my campaign now.

Book Log 2010 #3: The Survivor's Club by Ben Sherwood

If you ever wondered what it would take to survive a catastrophe or how some people survive an illness that is typically terminal, this book looks to provide some answers. Looking at a mix of specific cases and research, Sherwood looks to pinpoint the abilities and traits that allow some people to thrive and survive where others do not.

While I think it's an interesting topic, I did find the book a little unfocused. It's clear there are certain things that help people survive - positive outlook, paying attention to one's surroundings, etc. - and I'd have preferred it if the book was more organized around these.

However, I do think the looser organization will help drive people to the website to get more information. There's also a test to get one's survivor profile, though you need a serial number from the book jacket to take it (not sure what happens when you take the test using a library copy; sorry to anyone who's tried to take it using the copy I read!).

Anyway, it's OK. More of an airport book than anything else.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 10 - Hilarius (461-468)

I mentioned Leo I in the last post, and he'd seem like the obvious choice for this century. He served as pope for 21 years, solidified Roman primacy among churches with an edict from the emperor, ended heresies, was named a Doctor of the Church, and became the first pope to be called "the Great." A lot going on, and a pivotal time for the church. So how do you follow that up?

If you're Hilarius, who prior to becoming pope worked with Leo, you continue your predecesor's work without drawing too much attention to yourself. A game plan that works as well today as it did back then. Hilarius continued to work on issues in Gaul and heresies, and got several buildings completed. So not the most exciting run, but sensible given who was in his job before him.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 9 - Zosimus (417-418)

Zosimus is the only pope in this half-century to not have his name used by another pope. There's the first Innocent, Celestine, Boniface and Leo, all of which were repeated later, in some cases several times. But there remains only one Zosimus. Why is that?

Turns out that Sozimus was probably a bit to belligerent to serve effectively, as he inserted himself in situations in Gaul and Africa that didn't end well (or end at all - Leo had to solve one the problems, and he didn't start as pope until the 440s). Zosimus was either highly suggestible or not that bright, as he seemed to take the side of whomever he was talking to at the time. This was most notable in his acceptance of supporters of the Pelagianic heresy (who argued that original sin didn't taint human nature).

He also banned clerics from taverns, a move that you think would get him blackballed from sainthood. But Zosimus is officially St. Zosimus, sort of an early ecclesiastical George W. Bush who didn't let intellectual shortcomings get in the way of the top job.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 8: Liberius (352-366)

Liberius is the earliest serving pope who isn't a saint, at least to Western Catholics. I was curious how he didn't make the cut while everyone else before him - many with little to no surviving information about their lives or term as pope - did.

As with most of these early popes, there's not a lot of detail as to his term. One major item was his stand against the emperor regarding Athanasius, a noted theologian who argued against Arianism. The emperor wanted all the bishops to sign a condemnation of Athanasius, and Liberius was among a small group that refused. For their trouble, the emperor (Constantius II) exiled the non-signers to Thrace. This led to the appointment of an antipope, Felix II, who would be deposed by the Roman people when Liberius was finally allowed to return to Rome. All in all an interesting story, but not enough to get sainted.

What probably doesn't help Liberius is that he wasn't smart enough to get martyred, or at least have someone spread the idea that he was martyred. Another example of the benefits of good PR.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 7 - St. Sylvester I (314-355)

Not surprisingly, for a pope with such a long reign (the 8th longest to date), quite a bit happened to the church during Sylvester's tenure. The Roman emperor Constantine converted to Christianity, putting to rest (for the moment) the fear of persecution. Many of the great churches of Rome - including St. John's Lateran and the first St. Peter's - were built. And the first Council of Nicaea was held, marking the first attempt to bring some uniformity to Christian worship and practice.

And yet, we have little idea of how involved Sylvester was with any of this. Legends abound regarding Sylvester's relationship with Constantine, but most of the documentation on this is apparently fraudulent (from the Donation of Constantine on down). He must have had a hand in the building of churches, but we don't know how much. And he didn't even attend the council, sending his legates instead (though he would approve of the council's actions afterwards).

Some of this can be chalked up to the intervention of years, but you'd think someone who served at a time like this would have a better paper trail.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 6: St. Sixtus II (257-258)

There are two major facts I could figure out about this Sixtus - he reconciled with orthodox churches in Asia and Africa after a dispute over re-baptizing heretics threatened to end relations completely, and he was martyred by beheading during the persecutions of the Roman emperor Valerian. Care to guess which one caught my eye?

(It also appears that this Sixtus was often confused with a writer and philosopher of the same name, though that's not so interesting.)

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 5: St. Pontius (230-235)

Pontius is the first pope where we have exact dates for holding office, thanks to some unknown scribe who wrote about third century clerics. It was during this period that the schism started by Hippolytus (who you may remember from the last entry) was closed, thanks in large part to Hippolytus seeking - and getting - reconciliation with the Roman church.

Not that there was much time to celebrate, as not long after this the emperor decided to exile a number of churchmen - Pontius and Hippolytus included - to Sardinia. Pontius abdicated before going away, and eventually died due to the exertions from working in the mines. He is also joined to Hippolytus by feast date, which makes me think that things worked out pretty well for Hippolytus, going from potential anitpope to saint like that.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 4: Pope Zephyrinus (199-217)

You don't have to dig too far into the lives of the popes to find that they all weren't loved, or particularly suited for the job. Zephyrinus may be the first in the series of such popes, as contemporary writers seem pretty well united in the belief that he was too simple and too weak for the job. Many pointed to his deacon, Callixtus (who would succeed him as pope), as the real power.

With that in mind, it's no surprise that what little we know about his term as pope is negative. For starters, conditions for Christians under Roman rule grew steadily worse, until emperor Septimus Severus formally started persecuting them again (particularly converts). It also appears that Zephyrinus helped spur the first schism in the church, when he was unable to properly counter the teachings of a priest named Hippolytus regarding the unified nature of the Holy Trinity. Callixtus would inherit the problem, which grew to the point where Hippolytus is considered by some to be the first antipope.

What Zephyrinus does have in common with many of the early popes is that he is sainted, probably because of his martyrdom, of which we know nothing. Based on his performance, it's really the only way he'd get sainted.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 3: St. Telesphorus (126-137, give or take a year on both ends)

Again, we don't have many facts about Telesphorus outside of him being Greek and having served as pope during the reigns of the Roman emperors Hadrian and Antoninus Pius. Traditionally, he's credited with popularizing midnight mass at Christmas, celebrating Easter on Sunday, the seven week period of Lent, and the singing of the Gloria at the start of mass. That seems like a lot for one guy.

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

Day 2: Pope Anacletus or Cletus (77-88 or 80-92)

The third pope, the most we know about Anacletus is that we don't know if he is also Pope Cletus. The church and most historical sources consider them to be the same person, while some other sources continue to list two separate people. There were two feast days, which were merged into one in the early 1960s. It's all very confusing and required some level of papal intervention to get things as relatively clean as they are now.

As with most of the early popes, not much is known about him, as you might tell from the two different periods attributed to his pontificate. He is traditionally thought to be Roman and responsible for the division of Rome into parishes. He's also believed to have been martyred, though how isn't explained.

There is a religious order in the US called the Anacletians, who (ironically) don't believe that the pope is in charge of the Catholic church. This somehow relates back to the Old Catholic movement and the Syraic Orthodox Church, and leaves them in some sort of semi-legal status with Rome. I cannot even begin to pretend that I understand how it all works.

I was on my way home last night, and got to thinking about yesterday's post and possible topics on Lenten posting. It then occurred to me that we've had just over 2000 years of popes, and that divides nicely into a 40 day period, leading to...

Lentorama 2010: Two Millennia of Pointy Hats

The idea being I'll talk about someone who was pope for each 50 year segment of the office. This being day one, we start at the beginning of the first century AD, which pretty much gives us one option.

Day 1: St. Peter (circa 30-64 or 67)

For a guy who was an apostle and saint, there's a fair bit of confusion about Peter's role as the first pope. Or if he was even pope at all; doing a Google search on the topic will return a plethora of pages arguing both sides at various levels of hysteria.

We also don't know much about what Peter did while in Rome. The sources we do have were mostly written well after Peter's death, which could easily allow tradition to become fact.

And, of course, the actual title pope wasn't used in reference to the Bishop of Rome until much later, though that's the least of Peter's problems.

Obviously, this is a sensitive topic for the Catholic hierarchy, as without Peter being pope (or some sort of pope-like substance) the whole idea of the papacy being an unbroken line of leadership starting with Jesus goes away. This undermines the current leadership, and the next thing you know we're all Presbyterians or something.

Not surprisingly, it's not a topic that comes up in Sunday school, and I can't say I'd really ever considered it until now. I can say that I have a hard time caring either way.

Lent kicks of tomorrow, which usually sees me do two things around these parts:

1. Solicit ideas for what to give up, and

2. Run the Lentorama, a 40 day posting festival of things Catholic.

This year, I'm doing neither.

I've pretty much determined that I'm going to do what I did last year and give up unnecessary use of escalators and elevators. It's on the minor side, but if nothing else it'll give me a little extra workout. I suppose I'll pair that with not going to the vending machine in the basement of the building where I work, seems like a good pairing.

As for Lentorama, I have no good ideas and didn't even finish last year's edition (so much for Lenten discipline). So I think I'll take a pass this year, unless inspiration strikes in the next 24 hours. Sorry to both of you who were looking forward to that.

Book Log 2010 #2: The Devil's Company by David Liss

Boxer turned private eye Benjamin Weaver is back, involved this time in intrigue involving the British East India Company. His client, rather than hiring him for work, blackmails him into the job by putting several friend and family members at risk of debtor's prison. Weaver's work sees him involved in the various intrigues, financial and otherwise, that are the usual stock in trade of the series, though there's more of an international flavor here, not surprisingly. There's also a female character introduced who may prove to be Weaver's match - both professionally and personally.

As always an excellent historical novel, with the period detail we've come to expect. There's also a little plot movement back towards Weaver's personal life and interactions with London's Jewish community, which are also welcome. Very much worth the read.

Book Log 2010 #1: Hitler's War by Harry Turtledove

Turtledove's latest multi-volume reimagining of history involves World War II, which in this case starts much earlier, and without the appeasement that helped the Germans establish themselves in Austria and Czechoslovakia before actual fighting commenced.

As usual, the book covers multiple plot lines - I can think of at least seven - with the story unfolding across Europe and Asia. It avoids the narrative repetition that made Give Me Back My Legions! tedious, but is perhaps a little sprawling. The variety of plot lines waters down the personalities and stunts the growth of the more promising story arcs. I worry a bit that some of the people and events of the first book will be well forgotten by the time the second book comes out.

Even with the sprawl problem the book is still fairly entertaining, certainly enough for World War II buffs or alt history nerds.

The special election for Ted Kennedy's old Senate seat is Tuesday, and I think I speak for a good many Bay Staters when I say it's not a moment too soon. What started out as a quiet little vote has blossomed into a full-on race, with a level of national attention not often seen in Massachusetts. If the "quality" of third-party ads is the same elsewhere as what we've been subjected to the past couple of weeks, then I feel very lucky that we are most often an afterthought.

The fact that this is a race can mostly be laid at the feet of the Democratic candidate, Martha Coakley. She's run an incredibly underwhelming campaign; due to its short duration, she's mostly skipped public campaign events, preferring to meet local Democratic leaders, who she counted on to spread the word. She combined this with the typical front-runner tactic of not engaging her opponents - at least until the polls made it clear she needed to. She's been running ads, been in a debate or two, and has made public appearances with important supporters (including Vicki Kennedy, and Presidents Clinton and Obama).

This has all been in the hopes of stopping the apparent momentum of the Republican candidate, state senator Scott Brown. His campaign hasn't been particularly spectacular - he wants to change Washington and end business as usual, surprise - but he has been able to tap into a disdain with government (federal and state) with this fairly generic message. He's also been positioning himself as more of an independent thinker, which I don't buy. I think he's taking a page from the Mitt Romney playbook by moving more towards the center and ignoring places where he didn't (for example, he's countered questions about support of reproductive rights by forgetting about an amendment he wrote and sending his daughters out as proxies on the issue).

(UPDATE: The folks at fivethirtyeight.com have a post up calling Brown a liberal Republican. They're probably right. So maybe I just don't like the way he's handled that one issue during the campaign.)

There is a third candidate - Joseph Kennedy (no relation), a libertarian running as an independent. He benefited from Coakley's demand that all candidates on the ballot be in any debate, but is unlikely to draw many votes, and certainly not as many as Coakley would like.

In trying to sort out who to vote for, one of the things that most bothers me is that I know very little about what Scott Brown has done or stands for, outside of the most general notions. He's said very little about his time in the state senate, and the only thing I really know about possible Senate plans is that he wants to be the 41st vote against health care reform. I think his campaign is best summed up in his ad refuting negative ads about him - it debuted the same day as the negative ads, and makes no specific reference to them. As much as I don't like negative advertising, it makes me more curious when the response is something that seems like it was taped in Decemeber.

Conversely, I feel like I have a decent handle on Coakley's past and what she'd do in Washington. While that knowledge is certainly what's turning some people against her, it's something. And while I'm not 100 percent in tune with her positions, I'm certainly closer to her than Brown, so Blogalicious endorses Martha Coakley for the US Senate. If nothing else, it gives us two years to find someone we'd really like.

Book Log 2009 #60: Everything But the Squeal by John Barlow

Barlow, an Englishman who now lives in the Spanish region of Galicia, takes a year to live out his ultimate porcine fantasy: eating dishes made with every part of the pig, snout to trotters to tail and everything in between. This is often a solitary pursuit, as Barlow's wife (a native Gailician) is, improbably for Spain, a vegetarian (though she does nibble the occasional piece of iberico ham).

This quest takes Barlow all over this northwestern part of Spain, from festivals that focus on specific pork dishes to remove settlements where his meals happen almost by accident. At each stop we get an idea of what life is like among the Galicians, a subculture trying to cling to its traditional ways and proud of its (likely inflated) Celtic heritage.

There's plenty of pig talk, but it's easily as much a travelogue about Galicia as it is a food book. There are discussions of eminent Galicians (such as Fidel Castro, whose father moved the family to Cuba) and the ways in which Galicia is distinct from the other regions of Spain. It's all entertaining, but from the book jacket you'd expect the book to really be about the food. It's worth the read, just expect that not everything in the book is about pigs.

Book Log 2009 #59: Drunkard by Neil Steinberg

I was introduced to Steinberg's witty prose by his compendium of college pranks, If At All Possible, Involve a Cow and his work about the unsuccessful, Complete and Utter Failure (both highly recommended). His day job as a columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times saw him often write about home and family.

That domestic life took a sudden turn when he, fairly well soused, hit his wife. It turns out that Steinberg had enjoyed a comfortable, if excessive, relationship with alcohol for years, one which often put strain on his marriage but which hadn't previously turned to violence. After a night in jail and facing charges, Steinberg found himself forced into rehab to avoid more jail time.

The bulk of the book follows his road to sobriety, which encounters more than a couple of pot holes and a variety of stops to get soused. Steinberg is brutally honest about his feelings towards his rehab program and fellow patients, the applicability of Alcoholics Anonymous to someone who doesn't believe in a higher power, and how much he enjoys booze.

That last point seems to be his biggest problem. The way he explains it, drinking was something that helped make Steinberg bigger than himself. Once he joined the Sun-Times, drinking entered the realm of cherished journalistic tradition, putting him in the footsteps of Mike Royko. Kicking booze become more than just overcoming an addiction; it required a complete change of outlook.

People looking for the sort of overwrought confessional that seems common for this sort of book will be disappointed. Steinberg doesn't pull punches but neither does he overly dramatize things. His story is remarkable in its ordinariness, a descent that could easily apply to anyone. Well worth the read.

Book Log 2009 #58: Pygmy by Chuck Pahlaniuk

The title character of Pahlaniuk's 10th novel is a smallish high schooler from an unnamed foreign country who is ostensibly sent to the US as an exchange student. He is really here to participate in Operation Havoc, as are a number of other "exchange students" from his country. They are all sent to the same nameless American location, which is where Pahlaniuk starts to have fun, going after the more mockable aspects of American culture at full throttle.

Two things slow this down. The first is the highly broken English of the contact reports that make up the chapters of the book. It does allow for some humorous wordplay, but I found it very hard to deal with in the early going. The other are dispatches that provide insight into Pygmy's training, which involves being taken from one's parents at a very early age and heavy doses of brainwashing.

I'm not sure this book worked as well in practice as the idea did in theory. It's pretty relentless in its satire, but in a way that can get tiring, especially when the language is suffering from multiple compound fractures. There's also a cartoonish quality to the action that makes it hard to take seriously. I suppose that could be part of the point, but there's enough going on here to make it difficult to determine. I can't say that I'd recommend it, but I can't say I wouldn't, either.

Book Log 2009 #57: The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan

Starting with the familiar question of what to have for dinner, Pollan follows what he sees as the three main ways people feed themselves today: industrial farming, organic (or "organic") farming, and hunting/gathering. In each way, he examines how each foodway shapes the way we live, from the profusion of corn products in prepared foods to the ways in which companies promote "organic" food that hardly seems worthy of the label.

The dilemma is not only figuring out what to eat, but figuring out what is best to eat when balancing out all concerns. The industrial process results in cheap and plentiful food that doesn't quite nourish the body (or the soul), while more intensive processes may result in food that is better tasting and more nutritious (but at a price). He even questions being an omnivore at all, spending a little time considering vegetarianism (including a longish discourse on the ethics of eating other animals, which confirms that I am an incorrigible speciesist).

I like the approach of this book better than that of Fast Food Nation and its ilk, as it's less sensationalistic and more thoughtful about the impacts of every choice we make regarding food. It's also often a fun read, as Pollan gets to visit farms, hunt for game and mushrooms, and meet some very interesting people. Highly recommended.

Book Log 2009 #56: Stone's Fall by Iain Pears

If you've got the time to settle in to a 500-plus page mystery whose solution is unveiled by moving backwards into the 19th century, then this book is highly recommended. Industrialist John Stone is found dead, presumably from a fall out of a second story window. This doesn't quite add up for his widow, and combined with an unusual bequest in Stone's will, she hires a reporter to investigate. The reporter's story leads to the story of a British agent, which then leads back to Stone's own story.

Pears like to play with time and perspective, and this set up allows him to show his skill. He layers on the period detail, but never at the expense of the characters or the mystery (in fact, they help to develop Stone's widow, who comes to be the book's main character). Very much worth the read.

Book Log 2009 #55: The Reader by Bernhard Schlink

Known for its Oscar-nominated film adaptation starring Kate Winslet, this book tells the story of a teenaged boy in postwar Germany and his older lover, a tram operator with a past that comes back to haunt her - in more ways than one.

I suppose I liked the book, but it's pretty gloomy, so be forewarned.

Book Log 2009 #54: Cover Her Face by P. D. James

This is the first in the series of Adam Dalgliesh mysteries, and I have to say that while reading it I was reminded more than once of The Moonstone. Not so much for plot similarities - though both involve crimes committed in an English country house - but for those conventions that The Moonstone set for future mystery novels, many of which are present.

What is missing to some extent is the bumbling local cop, as Dalgliesh is on the scene pretty early. There's little hint in this book of the cop he'll become - there is a reference to the loss of his wife and child, but not of his poetry - and for most of the book he's more or less a minor character, only taking his rightful place when it's time to reveal the killer.

By then, though, I'd lost interest and never finished the book. Probably not the best sign that I bailed out right at the point where I should care the most. Also, as it was written in 1962 there are occasional moments that date things (references to the recent war and such), but that's really just a distraction rather than a reason to not read the book. The overall dullness of the case? That's a reason not to read the book, unless you want to read the whole series, in which case you're pretty much stuck.

Book Log 2009 #53: Swindled by Bee Wilson

A really interesting history of fraudulent food, from doctored wine in ancient Rome to fake eggs made in China. At each stop along the way, Wilson does a fantastic job of describing how food was tampered with and how people and governments reacted at the time (suffice it to say that governments, until very recently, did very little).

It's a great mirror on our own food production, and how the obvious cheats of the past have morphed into the variety of additives that get into our food today. Well worth a read if you're into this sort of thing.

Book Log 2009 #52: The Sword of the Lady by S. M. Stirling

A continuation of the series set in a post-change US where electricity and combustion don't really work anymore. It's typical of the series, perhaps a little better in that things move along more and there's a bit less of the fantasy-type stuff (or perhaps the same amount, just used at points in the book where it makes more sense). I am curious how - or even if - this is going to wrap in one book, as it took two books to get from Oregon to Nantucket. But I do look forward to finding out, which is something.

Book Log 2009 #51: Don't Go There by Peter Greenberg

The travel editor for NBC, this book is a compendium of the places worth avoiding when planning your next vacation. I tried reading it straight through, which I'd not recommend. It's better used if you have a destination in mind and want to see if it's overly polluted, crime-ridden or subject to catastrophic weather. For that I think the book would be fine.

Book Log 2009 #50: Give Me Back My Legions! by Harry Turtledove

Rather than dabbling in alt-history, this book is fictionalized account of the Battle of Teutoberg Forest, starting a few years before the battle and ending a short time afterwards. I think I'd have preferred an alt-history take, as this straight history was quite repetitive, as we'd be reminded every chapter or so that the main German character really doesn't like the Romans, and the main Roman character trusts the main German character even though all the other Romans tell him not to.

There's surprisingly little going on outside of this set-up, and the final battle provides relief mostly by signaling that the book is almost over. I get the sense that Turtledove has more ideas than time to write them, resulting in works primarily written to meet a deadline. I'd have preferred he didn't write this at all and spent more time improving The Man With the Iron Heart.

I did not write about the BU men's hockey team at all last season, for fear of jinxing what turned out to be an historic run. Over the course of the season, they set a new mark for wins and won every title that they played for, from the season-opening Icebreaker to the national championship. They entered this season with high expectations and the top spot in the Hockey East preseason coaches' poll.

And it's all gone downhill from there. In a way, a letdown was inevitable, as 40 percent of last year's scoring came from players who have since moved on. But the quality of the incoming class, coupled with a season of solid goaltending during the title run, combined to mask the problems that are now apparent. Inexperience, lack of fundamentals, a sophomore slump in net, the reasons behind the team's collapse are myriad. After tonight's loss to RPI, the team's record stands at 4-9-3. They are currently in 9th place in Hockey East, meaning if the season ended today the Icedogs season would end today.

(There is a bit of a comparison here to the BU football team, which made the NCAA tournament in 2003 and 2004, after which all of the best players graduated and the team cratered, winning 5 games over the next three seasons before being shut down. Not that the hockey team is in danger of being shuttered, just that there's a similarity.)

Anyway, this got me thinking. What's the mark for futility for a college hockey team in the season following a national title win? Looking at total wins, the worst five follow-up seasons to a national title are:

1993-4 Maine, 6-29-1
1954-5 RPI, 9-11-2
1972-3 BU, 11-17-1
1963-4 North Dakota, 12-11-2
1989-90 Harvard, 13-14-1

The Maine season is a bit of an outlier, as they had to forfeit 21 games that season for using an ineligible player. If we were to go by their original performance, you'd sub in the 1964-5 Michigan team that went 13-12-1 as the fifth-worst season.

In terms of winning percentage, we have:

1993-94 Maine, .180
1972-3 BU, .396
1976-7 Minnesota, .440
1954-5 RPI, .454
1989-90 Harvard, .482

Interestingly, every other championship team went at least .500 the year after they won the title (and Maine would have if they had a better grasp of NCAA compliance). So the rule is that teams generally play well the season after winning a national title, which makes a fair bit of sense.

Where does that put the current crop of Terriers? In terms of total wins, they'd have to put forth an impressively bad performance to not win seven games this season. You'd like to think they'll win at least 10. Twelve? Well...

For winning percentage, they are currently at .344, so if they keep doing what they're doing, they will succeed in putting together the worst (non-forfeit) post-title season in NCAA history. Surpassing a record they already hold. Faaaaaaaantastic.

Oh for three in my guesses, and I can't say I mind at all.

Playing England to open will be tough, no doubt. But once the chance to play South Africa went by the boards, any of the other seven teams would present a significant challenge. It's a better draw than getting Brazil or Germany, but not by much. But given England's tendency to land in the Group of Death (or at least the Group of Agonizing Pain), karma looked to be running against the US.

But then Algeria and Slovenia wound up in the group, and things improved considerably. Both have short World Cup resumes and were among the lower FIFA ranked teams in their respective pots. Like I said yesterday, neither team is exactly a pushover, but playing them makes going through to the round of 16 more likely than if we'd drawn, say, Cote D'Ivoire and Portugal.

Speaking of those teams, I'd mentioned both as teams in a potential Group of Death (well, I'd picked Greece but mentioned Portugal as a close runner-up), along with Brazil. And guess which three teams wound up in the same group? Ladies and gentlemen, your Group of Death. Just with North Korea as your fourth rather than us. Thank God.

Now we just have six months to figure out how to pull a repeat of 1950 on the English.

OK, World Cup draw starting in a couple of minutes. My prediction for the US group: The Netherlands, Paraguay and Serbia. Well, as much of a prediction as you can make for a random draw.

The draw for the 2010 World Cup is tomorrow. Each of the 8 groups in pool play will be populated by four teams drawn in semi-random fashion. The teams are divided into four pots: one for host South Africa and the 7 qualifiers who finished highest in FIFA's October rankings, one for all the teams from Asia, Oceania and CONCACAF (the US's confederation), one for teams from Africa and South America, and one for the remaining European qualifiers.

(There's some controversy over the pots, as the use of the FIFA rankings alone - which don't include November's playoff games and don't take into account past World Cup performance, which was used in the past - led France to fall from the first pot to the fourth. Some see a conspiracy to punish the French, and they may not be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time with this Cup that FIFA has changed rules on the fly, as they made late changes that wound up pitting France against Ireland in the first place.)

So with that set up, what's the best the US can hope for?

Pot 1: South Africa: As hosts they get to be seeded, but on rankings alone they'd never make it into this pot (they were 85th in the October rankings; the only qualifier ranked lower was North Korea at 91). They missed the 2002 World Cup, and some people wonder if they'd have qualified for 2010 if they had to play their way in. Even with the expected bump from playing in front of home crowds, they'd be the team to get here. Honorable mention goes to Argentina, who does have world player of the year Lionel Messi, but also has him (and the rest of the squad) being coached by Maradona, whose coaching skills can charitably be called uneven.

Pot 3: Algeria: They've not made the World Cup since 1986, making them the least experienced team in the pot. On the down side, they are currently at their highest ranking ever, so they may have enough skill to make up for the inexperience.

Pot 4: Slovakia or Slovenia: Slovakia is in their first World Cup as an independent country, while Slovenia was a qualified by surprising Russia in their playoff. Neither is exactly a pushover, but the rest of the teams promise a tougher road. An article over on ESPN.com suggested any team beginning with 's' would work here, but I'm not so sure. Both Switzerland and Serbia won their qualifying groups, and the Swiss are ranked 18th. Serbia did have a lousy 2006 World Cup, for what that's worth.

Now that we have the dream bracket, what would be the US's Group of Death?

Pot 1: Brazil: Avoiding Brazil for as long as possible is a good strategy for getting deep into the tournament. Having them in your pool automatically means you have three teams playing for one place. Of course, if you don't get Brazil you could just get Germany or Spain or Italy (or England or the Netherlands for that matter). Simply put, if you don't get South Africa from this pot the team you do get from here is likely to be a challenge. It's just a question of how big a challenge you want.

Pot 3: Cote D'Ivoire: They're much more than Didier Drogba, as their entire roster is made up of European club players. They're the deepest team in the pot, and they get to play on their home continent.

Pot 4: Greece: It's a hard pick here given the strength of teams like Denmark and Portugal (even with their difficult qualifying experience). But I went with Greece as their style of play will wear down and frustrate teams. I suppose France might be a problem, too, but their qualifying path was nearly as chaotic as Argentina's (moreso at the end), so they may be ripe for the plucking. Plus, I kind of want to draw them in the hopes of getting some Irish-American justice.

The bottom line for the US, and really for most of the teams in their pot, is that the way the pots were filled none of them are going to have an easy time getting through to the knockout stages. Given that many of the teams are lower-ranked there's an argument that that's the way it should be. On the other hand, consider this: the US is 14th in the FIFA rankings. There's a chance their group will include the teams ranked first, fifth, and 11th, while Slovakia, ranked 34th, could get a group with the teams ranked 37th, 84th and 86th. Granted, the US could also get two of those teams, but I still don't think one ranked pot and three geographically assigned pots was the best way to go. Unless you're a European team.

We're a week away from the primaries for the special election to fill the US Senate seat formerly held by Teddy Kennedy. Time to sort out who you should vote for!

On the Democratic side, we start with Mike Capuano, who is currently in his sixth term as the Congressman from the historic 8th district (former Reps include JFK, Tip O'Neill, and Joseph "Joe 4 Oil" Kennedy II). He's got the most legislative experience of all the candidates, and has worked the hardest to claim the Kennedy mantle by pushing his liberal credentials. His TV ads have focused mostly on war-related issues, even though it's more of an "it's the economy, stupid" kind of time.

He has a number of union endorsements, most notably the Massachusetts Teachers Association. His individual endorsements are kind of a mixed bag, with the most notable names being former governor Mike Dukakis and current Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

Even with his experience and endorsements, he's stuck in second place in most polls.

The person he's trailing is Martha Coakley, the current Massachusetts attorney general. She announced her candidacy scant days after Kennedy's funeral, and while there was some undercurrent of it being too soon, the quick announcement apaprently helped her get clear of the field that was still forming. That, plus strong name recognition and favorable ratings, allowed her to build a large early lead in polling, giving her time to raise money and plan. Opponents used this time to cut into her lead, but she's still holding on to a decent cushion and forwarding a message squarely focused on financial and health care issues. It also probably helps that she's the only woman in the race; she's not playing gender politics per se, but it's an obvious difference that connects her to approximately half of the voters in a way the other candidates can't match.

She's endorsed by a variety of unions and politicians, as well as groups like MassEquality and the Massachusetts Police Association (helps to be a former prosecutor). She also has a fair number of state politicians in her corner, including the state senate president and majority leaders from both the state senate and General Court (our quaint name for the House).

Social entrepraneur Alan Khazei is one of the two non-politicians in the race. He's the founder of City Year, a well-known AmeriCorps program, and was pretty well involved in the public service bill named for Kennedy. His vision for service finds room for both the private and public sector, and he's got experience working with folks in both arenas.

What he doesn't have is name recognition, and while he's been somewhat successful in raising money, he's not really made much headway. He does have one TV ad, whose theme is cleaning up Washington. It involves him holding a diaper (I assume it's full). He also doesn't have many endorsements, but the ones he does have are bigger names - Teddy's nephew Max Kennedy, New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, former Presidential candidate Wes Clark, and, most surprisingly, the Boston Globe. (Although perhaps not that surprisingly, as every piece I've read about him there has been effusive with praise for his thoughtful approach to political questions).

The other non-politician is Steve Pagliuca, a former manager at Bain Capital, where he worked for once and future presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Like Romney, Pagliuca is using his personal fortune to bankroll his candidacy, and he's used TV ads early and often. Their progression has at least been sensible, starting with "getting to know you" ads, moving on to spots casting his liberal political cred, and then to more specific issue ads (like Coakley, focusing on the economy and health care). He's also a minority owner of the Celtics, which he's mentioned but not harped on, to his credit.

I can't find any endorsements for him on his web site, though there is a link where individuals can sign up to endorse him.

While there's something to be said for the experience of Capuano and Coakley, I have to admit I love an underdog and think it's about time we started sending non-politicans to Washington, which is why Blogalicious endorses Alan Khazei in the Democratic primary.

For the Republicans, there are two choices. Scott Brown is one of five Republicans in the state senate, and is seen as a rising star in the state party (inasmuch as they can have one, given the low GOP numbers in elected positions). That being said, he's only the third-best known person in his family, as his wife, Gail Huff, is a local TV news reporter, and his daughter, Ayla, plays basketball for BC and was a semi-finalist on season 5 of American Idol. He's a fiscal conservative and social moderate, enough that I wouldn't call him a RINO though I'm sure there are plenty of people who would.

One of those people is his opponent, Jack E. Robinson, entrepraneur and occasional Republican candidate. He ran against Kennedy in 2000, losing pretty badly (a fair amount of the GOP vote went to the Libertarian candidate), and has since run for Secretary of the Commonwealth and the US House, losing both contests badly.

Robinson's political views are varied, as he combines fiscal conservatism with social views from across the spectrum (he's for gay marriage and thinks that public transportation should be federally funded and free to use; odd stances for someone who's called Brown a RINO in radio ads). The state party doesn't care for him, as they challenged the signatures he collected to get on the primary ballot (or at least threatened to, I can't find confirmation that they actually did).

As much as I'd enjoy the theater of Robinson winning, I'm opting for experience here as Blogalicious endorses Scott Brown for the GOP primary and eventual whipping at the hands of the Democratic winner.

Book Log 2009 #49: The Beckham Experiment by Grant Wahl

Touted as the signing that would single-handedly bring the MLS into the hearts and minds of Americans, David Beckham's deal with the Los Angeles Galaxy never lived up to its inflated promise, and Walh explores the reasons why this occurred, from Beckham's physical fitness to play to his uneasy relationship with teammates to the overly-slick handling by 19 Entertainment and Simon Fuller.

From the beginning, it's clear that Beckham's arrival in the US is about more than soccer, as his signing seems to be as contingent on his wife's ability to score TV deals as it is about the game. Further complicating things are the people that surround Beckham and the demands they put on the team, which eventually lead to a de facto takeover by 19 Entertainment and long time Beckham friend Terry Byrne. This leads to some disastrous decision making and the eventual firing of team GM Alexi Lalas, who had little to no actual control over the team.

Compounding things was Beckham's increasingly frosty relationship with teammates, specifically Landon Donovan, whose notoriously thin skin only made each perceived slight that much worse. They would patch things up after a fashion, but only in time to see Beckham sign a deal that would have him play with AC Milan during the Italian season, making him a part-time MLS player.

As interesting as the details are, the most intriguing question of the book is just how much the Beckham Experiment was controlled by Beckham himself. Did he know and direct the changes with the Galaxy, or did things happen with him staying in a state of blissful ignorance? Both options raise questions, and Wahl does a good job of exploring them and only drawing conclusions where the information allows.

A must read for soccer fans.

Book Log 2009 #48: A Spectacle of Corruption by David Liss

Benjamin Weaver, the boxer turned investigator who debuted in A Conspiracy of Paper, returns in this book to explain his involvement in the murder of a laborer, which is actually a small part of a larger struggle between the Whigs and Tories on the eve of the first Parliamentary election of King George's reign. Throw in an appearance by the Jacobites - who want to overthrow George and put James III in - and you have an engrossing tale of 18th century politics, business and social life.

Weaver's attempts to clear his name and find the actual killer only get him in deeper with parties on all three sides of the larger plot - and put him at danger of being killed himself by any one of the three. The difficulties that Weaver faces in untangling things is clearly felt, and it drew me in more deeply than the average historical mystery.

A worthy successor to a great first novel.

Book Log 2009 #47: The Arms Maker of Berlin by Dan Fesperman

A scholar on Nazi Germany with an interest in the short-lived White Rose resistance movement has to find files about the group for which a colleague died (possibly murdered) that shed light on the White Rose resistance movement and its potential ties to an elderly German industrialist. Along the way, the scholar teams up with a woman whose single-minded determination to find the same information leads to questions about her past and how well she can be trusted.

The book is split between the modern day search and World War II-era Germany, the latter following the industrialist during his younger - and apparently more radical - days. The two come together at the end of the book and its shocking conclusion, though I found some of the conclusions fairly easy to guess as things went along.

It's a different twist to World War II espionage stories, especially with the involvement of the White Rose, whose fight against Hitler isn't well known in the US. I also appreciated the way that the drudgery of academic research is portrayed, given how easily documents seem to turn up in similar works. Worth a look.

Book Log 2009 #46: K Blows Top by Peter Carlson

Highlighting one of the more bizarre moments of US-Soviet relations, K Blows Top recounts the 1959 visit to the US by Nikita Khrushchev. The trip, the result of a mistaken negotiating ploy , was as much farce as diplomacy, with nearly each day punctuated by an emotional outburst by the Soviet premier. It made for great theater (and newspaper copy) then, and it makes for entertaining reading now.

The only drawback to the book, and it's somewhat minimal, is the suggestion from the cover and jacket that the story of the trip intertwines with several of the biggest names of the day. There are appearances by the likes of Sinatra and Monroe, but the most notable brush with celebrity came from Shirley MacLaine, who met Khrushchev when he stopped in to see some of Can-Can being filmed. It's not a real problem, but I do think the blurbs over promise.

Certainly worthwhile for people interested in the 1950s or US-Soviet relations, with the expectation that it's on the lighter side.

Book Log 2009 #45: Jericho's Fall by Stephen Carter

I've loved Carter's previous novels, thrillers featuring upper class African-Americans at the highest levels of the academic and legal communities. This book is a radical departure from that universe, perhaps too radical.

Jericho Ainsley is former CIA director (and former Secretary of Defense and former National Security Advisor) who is slowly dying of cancer in his home in the Colorado Rockies. Beck DeForde, the woman he threw his career away to be with when she was a student of his at Princeton, is summoned to the house in his final days. She's not sure why, though it slowly becomes clear that he wants to confide in her, and that there are a variety of people out there who want to know what, from American and foreign intelligence agencies to corporate titans to Ainsley's own daughters.

Carter set out to write a page-turner, and he does manage to ratchet up the tension admirably, creating a sort of seige mentality by playing off the remote location with a constant barrage of surveiland and suspicion. But I don't think the story every quite gets to where it wants to go, and while we get a somewhat clear picture of what secret Ainsley is looking to spill, the ending leaves a lot unanswered, which is kind of unsatisfying in a book of this style.

It's still written well - Carter hasn't lost anything there - but I don't know if he's best suited for writing thrillers. An interview with him on Amazon.com suggests that he enjoyed writing it and would write more if reaction to this one was good. I'd probably have another book set in the same universe as The Emperor Of Ocean Park, but I'd take another thriller, as I imagine that Carter would do better the second time around.

Book Log 2009 #44: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J. K. Rowling

I never quite expected a Harry Potter book to have a body count rivaling 24, but I suppose I should have expected it with this final showdown between good and evil. I'm not necessarily complaining, mind you, but I'll admit to being taken back a bit.

That sorted itself out a bit over the long middle of the book, where it seems like Harry, Hermione and Ron spend several hundred pages camping. It's a lot of down time for a book that begins and ends with a fair amount of action, but it does help to fit in some of the exposition that gets us to find out just what the Deathly Hallows are and how they might relate to finally defeating Voldemort.

All in all it's a fitting end to the series, but I will admit to being a little disappointed in the epilogue, which gives us a very small peek into the adult lives of the main characters. There's not that much information about their lives, and it's wholly silent on the bulk of the supporting characters. I wanted to know more, and was left wanting.

Book Log 2009 #43: The Ignorance of Blood by Robert Wilson

All of the threads of the Javier Falcon books come together here in one engrossing package. Still trying to bring the bombers from a previous book to justice, the case intersects with a Russian mobster who died in a car accident, Islamic terrorist operating out of Morocco, and a CIA agent who can't be fully trusted. As he inches towards the truth, Falcon is put under significant professional and personal pressures, as the case takes a turn straight out of his childhood.

This is the last book in the series, and sadly so. There's rarely a dull moment over the four books, and it's rare to find a main character of such depth in a crime novel. The setting adds even more body, with Seville almost becoming a character in itself (perhaps less so in this book, but certainly in the series).

So as sad as I am that this series is over, I at least have the last two books in the Bruce Medway series to read while waiting for whatever comes next.

Book Log 2009 #42: The Man With the Iron Heart by Harry Turtledove

In 1942, SS officer Reinhard Heydrich was assassinated in occupied Czecheslovakia. This book theorizes what would have happened if Heydrich survived the attack and took leadership of the Werwolf insurgency plan that, in real life, did little to hamper the Allies at the end and after the war.

Not surprisingly, the insurgency in the book bears a strong resemblance to that seen during the US occupation of Iraq. I tend to think it's a little too strong. I don't doubt that proper planning and leadership would have allowed the Nazis to put forth a credible terror threat, but it does seem like Heydrich is operating more along al Qaeda's playbook than anything he'd have learned in the German military.

I also wasn't crazy about the domestic subplot, though I have a hard time putting a finger on why at this point.

It's worth a read, but I was a little disappointed.

Book Log 2009 #41: Holy Hullabaloos by Jay Wexler

Part travelogue, part hornbook on religion and the First Amendment, this may be the funniest book you could use to prepare for a Constitution Law final. In it, Jay visits places that were the settings for important church-state legal cases, and often gets a chance to speak with some of the litigants. Jay explains the law in a way that's easy to understand, though I think that conservatives and evangelicals will not appreciate his arguments or his humor (especially in how he skewers the affrontery known as the Creation Museum).

In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I knew Jay fairly well back in high school, thanks to debate. Jay parlayed that into becoming a legal scholar and prolific writer, while I author a blog with a readership in the high single digits. That actually kind of tracks our relative debate success, now that I think of it.

Book Log 2009 #40: The Jewel That Was Ours by Colin Dexter

In this outing, Morse must solve a pair of murders related to an American tour group and an artifact one of the group members was bringing to donate to an Oxford museum. I can't say I cared for the way the Americans tended to be portrayed (though perhaps there's a certain personality that gets attracted to bus tours), but the mystery is pretty solid. No complaints.

Book Log 2009 #39: Florence of Arabia by Christopher Buckley

You don't get a whole lot of satire related to Middle Eastern affairs or terrorism - the issues are either way too serious or seem to close to satire to begin with - but it should come as no surprise that one of the more successful examples would come from Christopher Buckley.

The basic plot: an American diplomat (the Florence of the title) is assigned to a (relatively) liberal Middle Eastern country, with the idea to open up a much more restrictive neighbor through empowering women. Aided by a CIA field operative and a typically dithering State Department bureaucrat, Florence gets more than she bargained for, and winds up running for her life before everything is over.

While not quite his best, this is better than Boomsday or Supreme Courtship. Worth a read, certainly.

Book Log 2009 #38: 7 Deadly Scenarios by Andrew Krepinevich

Pakistan - and its nuclear weapons - is swept into chaos by Islamic militants. A cvberattack leaves the US military unable to communicate or coordinate. China decides its time to bring Taiwan back into the fold. These are but three of the seven scenarios presented in this book, each of which helps to lead the reader into considering potential US vulnerabilities and what can be done now to prevent future catastrophe.

I'll admit I didn't read all seven scenarios. I found myself getting just that little more depressed after each one, and had to force my way through the five I did read. Still, at set-alone chapters each scenario is well worth reading. Many of the scenarios are timely (not surprisingly), and they do help pull some of our current events into sharper focus. Certainly worth a look, just not all at once.

Book Log 2009 #37: The Immaculate Deception by Iain Pears

This is the last of the series of art theft mysteries featuring British art dealer turned academic Jonathan Argyll and his wife, the acting chief of Rome's art theft polce squad, Flavia di Stefano, and to mark the end the book has a very different approach from the others. Government intrigue and long-hidden secrets are at the forefront, and while the tone isn't exactly dark, it's certainly cloudier than the other books in the series.

I will admit to being a little put off by this change, and I'm not sure if I'm thrilled at how it all turned out. There's one major personal revelation that comes a bit out of left field, and I can't say the sudden focus on political matters was all that welcome. It's not a bad book per se, but I was a little disappointed that the series ended on this note.

Book Log 2009 #36: The Moonstone by Wilkie Collins

Given my enjoyment of mystery and detective novels, it made some sense to finally get around to reading the book that is widely considered the first detective novel in English literature (or at least the first to use number of elements that became common in the genre).

The basic plot: a diamond (the Moonstone of the title) is bequeathed to a young woman on her 18th birthday, but goes missing the night after her birthday party. Suspects include various guests, a servant with a checkered past, and a troop of Indian jugglers who are suspected of being members of a religious group dedicated to returning the jewel to its sacred statue.

The book is written in epistolary form, as accounts from various people after the case is solved, which works well in that it provides welcome changes in tone and style. It's a little ponderous in comparison to modern detective fiction, and some of the now-common elements will come off as cliched, but I enjoyed the book quite a bit, more than I expected really.

Book Log 2009 #35: The Domino Men by Jonathan Barnes

This book is an indirect sequel to The Somnambulist, in that it takes place in the same universe and involves some of the same characters and organizations, but is not a continuation of the first book's story. It's also set about a century later, taking place in the present day.

And, really, I think both of those last two points work to the sequel's detriment. The new story - about an office drone who becomes the key person in stopping the House of Windsor from turning Britain over to a nefarious being called Leviathan - doesn't quite measure up to the mystery from the first book. And without period detail to enhance (or cover the weaker spots of) the story, I found myself less drawn in. There's also a subplot written by a "second" narrator regarding the Prince of Wales that didn't do much for me, other than tip where things were heading as I got towards the end of the book.

I suppose I was also a little disappointed that this book wasn't going to answer some of my lingering questions from the first one, especially about the first book's mysterious title character. Perhaps a third book will take care of that?

So three things I've been mulling as explanations for Chicago's poor showing in today's vote for the 2016 Olympics

1. Everyone else still hates us. Nothing like a sweeping generalization to kick things off, but it may be fair to say that there's still some fence-mending to be done, even with Obama's apparently popularity abroad. Which leads to...

2. Obama's slight to voters. At least one article I read suggested that some voters passed on Chicago because they felt snubbed by the short length of Obama's appearance. Honestly, if the idiots who vote for this thing won't vote for a city because the leader of the free world isn't going to spend a couple of days kowtowing to them, then we really don't need the Olympics.

3. Never underestimate the emotional appeal of the very old. As part of Madrid's presentation, former IOC president (and current lifetime honorary president) Juan Antonio Samaranch more or less said they should win because he's pretty close to dying and he'd like to see Spain named host before that happens. Throw that out to a room full of people who you've worked with for years, and it's not surprising that you get that close to winning. Which also seems like a pretty weak rationale for voting, which just further tells you what you're dealing with as far as the IOC is concerned.

Anyway, congrats to Rio. Hope you get your rat and monkey problem cleared up in time for the Games.

Just testing our new home. Actual posts later?

Book Log 2009 #34: Agincourt by Bernard Cornwell

This one-off about the famed battle of the Hundred Years' War follows the same structure as most of the Cornwell books I've read, what with its troubled young protagonist taking up arms as a way to escape enemies and seek revenge, meeting powerful figures and an almost equally troubled woman along the way.

But like those other Cornwell books, the story is told in an entertaining enough way to help keep the repetitive aspects from bothering me too much. I don't think it's a book that needs to be sought out, but if you like Cornwell or historical fiction and are looking for something to read, you'd do worse.

Book Log 2009 #33: Death and Restoration by Iain Pears

Another in the Jonathan Argyll-Flavia di Stefano series, this time centered around a rumored theft in a monastery whose only painting of value is of disputed origin and currently undergoing the ministrations of a controversial restorer.

A solid mystery as always, with an added dash of subplot related to the art theft squad and Flavia's boss that will set up some stuff in the next - and final - book in the series.

If you've checked in over at the Bruce's blog, then you know that this will be among the last posts here at the attemptedchemistry.com location. As with most moves, there's a sense of nostalgia with an underlying understanding that it's for the best.

In any case, I'll be moving this to a Blogspot location at some point. I should also start cross-posting things to Facebook, I suppose. I'm not as social network/Web 2.0/buzzword of choice savvy as I should be, so it's not like this will turn into a random assortment of links and tweets any time soon. Though that may be more entertaining.

Book Log 2009 #32: World War Z by Max Brooks

I'm not much of a zombie fan, unlike some people. I have nothing against zombie movies and the like, more that I'm not much of a horror genre person generally. But Greg suggested this book as it does venture into the alt-history genre, sort of, so I gave it a go.

And I have to say that I may have misjudged my affinity for the walking dead. I really enjoyed the story, and using an oral history framework made the thing seem a little less bizarre for me. I suppose there's some sort of parable in here as well about how to win a war against a foe that's non-state, but really, it's the sort of book you do read for the zombies.

Book Log 2009 #31: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince by J. K. Rowling

Honestly, I don't have much to say here. Liked it, and appreciated the shift to a darker tone, and was a little surprised about the real lack of typical Hogwarts stuff (Quidditch and the like) until I thought about the fan base. The kids who started with the first book are, I think, old enough to want to move beyond the walls and get more involved in the impending war against Voldemort.

I still don't think the romantic parts work particularly well, at least where Harry's concerned. Still seems too rushed, but that could be my comparing him to the slow build with Ron and Hermione.

Typically I've read the books just before the movies, but I don't think I'll be able to do so with the last one. I nearly took the last book out of the library the day after finishing this one, which certainly instills a desire to see how it all turns out. Which, I imagine, is just what you want from the next to last book in a series.

Book Log 2009 #30: Enclave by Kit Reed

A former Marine officer, spinning a story of imminent world collapse to the wealthy, opens a school in an isolated and abandoned monastery, and takes in 100 students whose parents are as anxious to be rid of them as they are hoping to save them from the anarchy to come.

Ironically, that anarchy comes to the school when two viruses - one computer, one biological - threaten the survival of both the school and its inhabitants. The officer falls back on SOP (standard operating procedure) to work through the crisis, but when the Lord of the Flies instinct kicks in with both the students and the staff, SOP is SOL.

I did like the book, though I never quite bought that the guy in charge was so blind to the need to adapt to the situation at hand (he clearly never watched Heartbreak Ridge). Still, it was an entertaining diversion.

It's also worth noting that when I read the book there was only one review on Amazon for it, from the notorious Harriet Klausner. The review, and the comments it inspired, were almost as entertaining as the book itself.

Book Log 2009 #29: Capturing Eichmann by Neil Bascomb


I knew a little about the Eichmann case before picking up this book, but quickly found myself drawn into its presentation of things. I was especially interested in how Israel, a young country still fighting for existence, mounted this operation in a country where it had few official connections.

The book reads well, and it quite recommended. I'll also recommend The Perfect Mile, the story of the race to break the four minute mile. I thought I'd read it after I started doing the Book Log, but apparently not.

One clear oversight in talking about turning 40 is that I didn't mention the surprise party the wife threw. Well, it was more of a 75 percent surprise party, as the night before the event the wife got on the phone with my sister, and the first couple of minutes of the conversation (from my end) went something like this:

"Yes."
"No."
"Yes."
"Yes."
"No."
etc.

It might surprise you that this is not how they normally converse. So I did have some idea that something was going to happen, but didn't realize the scope of things. At least until I got to Salem Beer Works and spent the afternoon with a variety of family, friends and co-workers. I'm assuming a good time was had by all, given the easy access to beer and a birthday cake shaped like beer.

So a belated thanks to the wife for making 40 that much less scary.

So, 40.

It's been a few days, and I can't say that I've had any life-changing revelations, or had the urge to go out and buy a sports car. I have talked to a few people who got to 40 before me, and the consensus is that the transition to 30 was more of a big deal, apparently as it's the age where people really start thinking that they're adults.

I can't say my 30th birthday was a big deal, either. The only thing I remember doing on my 30th was seeing Eyes Wide Shut. By that measure, 40 beats 30 hands down.

Additionally, I think that adding a kid to the mix has a way of refocusing things. Granted, I'll probably wind up being one of the oldest parents among the boy's class/team/playmates, but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

Not that the age thing matters greatly, as 40 is the new 30. Or the new 20. Or perhaps the new 25? 40 should not be the new 15. And it just may be the new 60. Actually, that last one may explain how CBS improved its ratings. Heck, I'll just be happy to make 41.

This week marks a bit of a milestone for us, as the boy started at day care on Monday. For all of the concern about how he'd react to being in unfamiliar territory with people he doesn't know - most of them other, somewhat larger, kids - he did fine. No crying, no fussing, slept and ate fine. We should have expected that, as he's never put up a fuss when interacting with any of our family and friends, and will pretty much take a bottle from whoever is holding it.

Us parents, though, didn't do as well. The wife actually did very well in the morning, keeping the drop off quick so the emotions wouldn't build up. It helped that many of her co-workers are moms themselves, and those that aren't are certainly sympathetic.

Come the afternoon, though, plans fell awry. After dropping off the boy, the wife takes a bus from the Wonderland stop to her office, and does the trip in reverse after work. Going in, the bus went by the stop a few minutes early, so the wife had to wait for the next one. Not that big a deal, she got to work less early that she would have otherwise.

The problem came when the bus didn't show in the afternoon. This is apparently very rare, and the wife's fellow riders gave the driver an earful when the next bus came along. But by this time, it was clear that the wife was going to be late. So she called me.

I, as luck would have it, was at North Station having just missed a train. I'd have made it except the other train sharing the platform started boarding, and I couldn't fight through the swarm of passengers to get to my train. In any event, it gave me a chance to take her panicked call and plan on taking the Blue Line out to Wonderland, with the first one of us to get there to pick up the boy and then drive to the station to get the other person.

Turns out I was the first one there, so I hoofed over and got the boy. He was sleeping in his car seat ready to go, thankfully only 15 minutes later than planned (the day care provider was very understanding, I suppose she's used to this sort of thing at the start). The only snag after that was the parking ticket we got - the parking in that neighborhood is apparently resident only (which, given its proximity to Wonderland, makes sense in retrospect).

It probably shouldn't be a surprise that the transition to day care is harder on us than it is on the boy, but there it is. I'm just happy we don't have to go through this every day.

I find it hard to belive that the Arena Football League is going out of business, but it looks like that's the case. The league finally seemed to turn the corner in the last couple of years, what with the NBC deal and relative stability in franchise locations.

While I can't say that I know anything about the underlying financial causes of the collapse (other than blaming "the economy"), I tend to think the league was a victim of its own success (so to speak). I know I found myself less interested as the league became more mainstream, and once the Elway Rule brought in free substitution, the league lost the ironman image that was such a key part of its identity. What you had, then, was NFL Lite, and who wants to watch that?

Perhaps the more amusing aspect of this is that af2, the AFL's minor league, never shut down and appears to be going one place its parent league isn't - 2010. While I assume this has somethign to do with the relatively lower cost of running the league, it should also be noted that there's no Elway Rule in af2. Coincidence?

Book Log 2009 #28: Flashforward by Robert Sawyer

Two scientists at CERN are trying to find the Higgs boson, and when they run an experiment designed to do that it instead plunges everyone in the planet into a two minute vision of their futures. While this leads to world-wide catastrophe in the immediate moment (from people having their vision while driving, flying a plane, etc.), in the longer term it leads to questions about why this happened, and if the visions of the future can be changed.

It's an interesting premise, and it plays out among the characters at CERN in various ways, though not always smoothly. There's also a subplot involving a very old man in Toronto that winds up impacting the end of the book in an unexpected way. One that I didn't quite care for, to be honest.

I'd not have sought the book out except that it's the basis for one of ABC's new show next season. Promos aired during Lost even before the new show was officially picked up, which is unusual. And as the concept tied in with the way Lost has played with time, I'm likely to watch the new show as well. I just hope it's done better than the book. The link for the book above is to another review, which I usually don't do but it better addressed some of the specific problems than I could this far past reading it.

Book Log 2009 #27: The Whiskey Rebels by David Liss

Liss crosses the pond for this novel, set during the early years of American independence. The story moves between a disgraced ex-spy surviving on the margins in Philadelphia as a sort of detective and a brilliant widow whose frontier experiences have brought her back to that city to seek both revenge and fortune.

It's another well-written historical/financial thriller for Liss, who's found a pretty original niche for himself. He's also staked out some territory by including Jewish characters in his book, providing insight into the lives of Jews at the various times and places he'd written about. In this case, though, the Jewish character is more of a supporting player, so we don't get much of a picture of what life was like for Jews in early America, which is an unfortunate change from the earlier books. Still, worth a read.

There are things we take for granted that are simple yet serve and important function. Witness the aglet, the plastic or metal cap at the ends of a shoelace. It has no intrinsic value, but if you ever lose one, it makes it next to impossible to relace the shoe. On the other end of things, we have things that are, in some fashion, so complex that it's easier not to think of them, like the electrical grid or gravity.

In between these points, we have the human back. Muscle, bone, nerves and connective tissue, all critically important to a variety of processes. Walking, standing, sitting, lifting, turning, there's not much by way of human movement that doesn't, at some stage, involve the back. But, like aglets or gravity, it's something we tend to take for granted.

Usually.

I stopped taking it for granted last weekend, when my lower back decided to remind me just who was in charge. I have no idea what caused the problem (the wife thinks it was an awkward movement while separating car seat and stroller, which sounds about right), but the results were not long in coming:

Friday afternoon: Felt a twinge, took two Aleve. In past moments of back and hip discomfort, this usually takes care of things.

Friday night: Twinge is still there, maybe even a little worse. Took another Aleve, put a couple pillows behind me for support when sitting, but no other changes.

Saturday morning: Getting out of bed requires a variety of hand holds on any furniture within arm's length. I can walk - barely - with a fair amount of pain and over short distances, using the wall for support. When upright, I can feel the muscles in my lower back seize up, which is a new experience for me.

We try a heat pad to loosen things up, but it doesn't work. So it's off to spend our Saturday morning at the hospital. But when we get there, we discover that they're running some sort of disaster drill. We're stopped as we turn into the road that leads to the hospital, and asked if we're there for the drill or actual care. We reply the latter, and are given a green tag for the dashboard. This allows us to get by the next two checkpoints, but we do have to weave through a variety of first responders, volunteers and emergency vehicles to actually get to the Emergency drop-off.

Which, of course, is manned by someone who is also checking to see if people are there for the drill or for treatment. The guy asks me to stop at the door, but before he can say anything else a woman comes by and he leaves with her. I think he intended that I'd wait for him to return. I did not. He actually followed me into the ER when he was done with the woman, so if nothing else if we do have a disaster up here, we certainly have the right people to handle traffic flow, if nothing else.

Saturday morning is thr right time to go to the Beverly Hospital ER, as our entire visit was no longer than 90 minutes. It wasn't especially crowded; there was one mother with two kids who spent more time on her cell phone than minding her kids, one of whom apparently needed some sort of medication, and a woman who I know but haven't seen in some time, who chatted with the wife while I was being seen.

(The wife gets this semi-regularly, running into people she doesn't really know but who know me and know that we're married. Though in this case I don't know why the woman just didn't say hi while I was out there.)

Anyway, I get called and spend the next 20 minutes sitting in a room wearing shorts and a johnnie (I think we can all be thankful that they let me keep my shorts on). In this time, the woman with the kids winds up down the hall, and in the 20 minutes I was waiting they managed to get the nurse manager to come in and cause a panic when one of the kids yanked the emergency call switch in the room. Things quieted down after that; I assume the hospital had someone babysit the room from that point.

Once the doctor showed up, he spent about five minutes checking breathing, heart beat and leg movement before deciding it was a muscle problem and not an issue with discs or the like. I got various scrips and was sent packing.

And by that afternoon, I felt pretty good, well enough to hang out downstairs as if nothing happened. Which worked well, for a while. But it wasn't too long before things locked up again, at which point I put myself to bed... for nearly three days. This is the longest period I've ever spent laid up like that, and I don't recommend it. As bad as it was for me, I was also mad that I'd put the wife in a position where she had to do all the work with the baby and take care of me. I tried to minimize the amount of time she needed with me, but it was still hard on her, and I'm grateful - but not surprised - that she managed the situation in fine form. I think she only wanted to kill me once. Maybe twice.

But as the saying goes, time - and drugs - heal all woujnds, and by Wednesday I was able to get around enough to go to the baby's two month check up and into work. I'm still a little tender with some movements (getting into the car, for example), but I'd say I'm 85 percent and rising.

So whatever you plan on doing today, take a second to think about your back, and where you'd be if you were stuck on it for the weekend (and not in a good way).

Book Log 2009 #26: The Lost Army of Cambyses byPaul Sussman

A British herpetologist and an Egyptian police detective independently investigate the killing of an archaeologist (the herpetologist's semi-estranged father), which is apparently linked to a relic he purchased as a souvenir and a major terrorist organization, who want the relic to help find the titular lost army so they can sell the antiquities at the find to finance their operations.

Generally, the book is pretty standard thriller material, another book suited for reading while traveling. The depiction of the police detective is worth noting, as he's one of the rare Muslim main characters I've run across in the last few years who is a regular guy, not all that different from a police detective in any other large city.

I don't know if that makes the book any more worth reading, but it's something.

Book Log 2009 #25: Tsar by Ted Bell

This is apparently the fifth book featuring master spy Alexander Hawke, a Brit who does all the expected spy things while saving the world. He's like James Bond, but prefers rum to martinis and rides a motorcycle rather than drive an Aston Martin. I assume he has a thing for the ladies, too, but in this book he's monogamous (making this the analogue to On Her Majesty's Secret Service, I suppose).

Anyway, it's a perfectly servicable spy thriller about a Russian inventor who wants to revive the monarchy and become the new tsar (I'm also assuming that Bell likes one word titles that are a little on the nose). It's the sort of book you'd read while commuting or on a plane or on vacation, engrossing enough to pass the time. I don't feel particularly compelled to go back and read the previous entries in the series.

Bell is a former ad exec, which may explain why the brand for pretty much every item mentioned is given in the text. That's a little off-putting.

Book Log 2009 #24: Traffic by Tom Vanderbilt

Subtitled "Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us)," this book takes a look at how a variety of factors impact our driving behavior, with the emphasis on behavior, at least in the first 100 pages or so of the book. I note that page amount as I didn't get past there, as I never really engaged with the book. Don't know why exactly, and I was a bit disappointed as it is a subject that I find interesting. Maybe you'll have better luck.