September Reading Log

Lots of great reading this month. Take a look!

4 Articles I Like This Month

"My Affair with the Intellectual Dark Web" by Meghan Daum, Medium. 29 minutes.

In our polarized time, it seems like nuance is a dirty word on both the right and the left, like straying from the established narratives will get you shouted down immediately. Feeling this way, the author of this piece starting finding solace—and eventually some realizations about what she really thought—in the videos of a group of professors, scientists, and writers coined the "intellectual dark web." Good topic, excellently written.

"Meet the Table Busser Who's Worked at the Same Wilmette Pancake House for 54 Years" by Christopher Borrelli, Chicago Tribune. 13 minutes.

Remember early last month when Geoffrey Owens (Elvin from The Cosby Show) was photographed working at Trader Joe's and a national conversation started about 'job shaming'? Consider this a companion piece to that story. Othea Loggan has worked as a busboy at Walker Bros. Pancake House for 54 years without a promotion or significant pay increase, not to mention benefits. Does he want more? Should he want more? Or is it a simple, honest job enough? Excellent article that offers these questions and more with no tidy answers.

"The Ideological Blindness at the Heart of Media Bias" by David French, National Review Online. 6 minutes.

Fox News (and its viewer-in-chief) would have you believe that the press is malevolently biased against conservatives. It's not; the vast majority of reporters are just trying to get and write the truth. But, says David French, that doesn't mean they're unbiased. In the average newsroom, he points out, diversity is extremely important, even required...except when it comes to political ideology. This right-of-center column addresses the topic of media bias without the fiery rhetoric that typically accompanies that topic. Definitely worth reading, whether you are a conservative, progressive, or centrist.

"A Lifelong Dream Washed Away" by Dave Sheinin, The Washington Post. 16 minutes.

Brian Mazone spent nearly a decade pursuing his dream to be a major league pitcher. When he was finally called up to start for the Philadelphia Phillies, his would-be debut was rained out, and he never got another chance. This is his story.

GOD IN DISPUTE: "CONVERSATIONS" AMONG GREAT CHRISTIAN THINKERS by Roger E. Olson

As a pastor, I consider myself a professional theologian (as I believe all pastors are.) However, since my theological studies happen in the field rather than in a classroom or seminar, I've always had some impatience with reading and learning about Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Barth, and the rest. It's not that I think their contributions to our understanding of God are unimportant, it's just that they seem to get bogged down in spiritual minutia that I find tiresome. "Give me the Cliff Notes!" I often wanted to cry out during my Texts and Traditions classes in seminary.

So, in his own way, Dr. Roger Olson, a professor of theology and ethics at Truett Seminary, did. God In Dispute is a series of mock conversations/debates between theologians throughout the history of the church, dating as far back as the church fathers up until the postmoderns of the 21st century. By imagining what Calvin might say to Zwingli or Barth to Brunner, Olson manages to distill some of history's greatest theological arguments down to something bite-sized and easily understandable for the layman (or the pastor wanting to brush up on his theological studies.)

These fictional conversations, which take place everywhere from ships bound for Rome to German castles to the gates of heaven itself, helpfully summarize the positions of some of Christianity's greatest thinkers and greatest heretics by watching these important minds square off in (mostly) civilized debate. You, the reader, are then left to make your own determinations. Preceding each conversation, Dr. Olson provides a page or two of context and then another page or two after the end of each conversation to let you know who history says "won" the debate.

More than anything, I'm grateful to this book for reminding me that theology doesn't have to be dull and tedious—that for all their squabbling over seemingly insignificant details, the church is better for the work of Tertullian, Aquinas, Wesley, and many others. Admittedly, reading the primary sources isn't as easy as reading Dr. Olson's Cliff Notes...but he just may have inspired me to give it another shot. 

GROUNDWORK OF THE METAPHYSICS OF MORALS by Immanuel Kant

Having finished Dr. Olson's book, I decided I was never going to be as inclined to reread one of those primary sources as I was at that moment. So with trepidation, I picked up a philosophy book that bored me to tears in seminary, hoping that a few years of maturation on my part would make it a more fruitful experience. Yeah, not so much.

Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals is an artifact of Enlightenment philosophy, Immanuel Kant's attempt to find a supreme moral principle (which he called "the categorical imperative") through reason alone, with no regard for experience, emotion, etc. And it. Is. Dense. At 78 pages, it took me nearly 3 hours to barrel through, underlining passages that seemed important while struggling with the dawning realization that, yep, this was still way over my head.

Philosophers prize this book as a brilliant exercise in moral philosophy, and I'll take their word for it. For non-philosophers like myself and you (presumably), here are the main takeaways: 1) the categorical imperative, as defined by Kant: "act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law." 2) As such, human beings are to be understood as ends unto themselves, never as means to an end.

These are good takeaways, albeit ones I already knew from reading this book the first time and then refreshing myself on its principles with Dr. Olson's book. If you want to see how those principles are logically proved by Kant, how they factor in concepts like autonomy and freedom, and what they say about free will, then give this book a try. Hopefully your brain won't hurt as much as mine did.

WHAT I TALK ABOUT WHEN I TALK ABOUT RUNNING by Haruki Murakami

Haruki Murakami, though renowned as one of the world's greatest living writers, was a name I knew only by reputation, so I couldn't imagine a better springboard into his writing than a book about his experiences running. As a lover of both writing and running, this memoir instantly appealed to me, and a recommendation from my friend and fellow pastor (and reader and runner) Jeff Gravens was enough to convince me.

The book is less a narrative than a collection of essays/journal entries, all about Murakami's love of running and experiences doing so. Every year for more than two decades, Murakami has run at least one marathon, as well as one ultramarathon and a series of triathlons along the way. The chapters in this book describe how he became a runner, how he trains, and what compels him to spend so much time and energy running.

But, as you might suspect from a novelist, it's about more than that. Using running as a lens, Murakami also talks about his life and the craft of writing. Running, he makes clear, is more than a hobby for him, it is a metaphor for his sense of self, even a source of meaning. Without ever stretching the metaphor beyond comprehension, Murakami convincingly shows how important the solitary exercise of running has been to him over the years.

For runners, I'd say this a must-read (and a pretty quick one). For non-runners, I'm not so sure. For all the insights into his life and his craft, you've got to read a lot about breathing, muscle soreness, etc. For a runner, this is familiar, comfortable territory; for others it may be a little like listening to someone talk about their fantasy football team—more fun for the speaker than the listener. As for me, I left the book with my first itch to run another marathon since birth of my son—stay tuned to see whether I decide to scratch it anytime soon.

THE WIND-UP BIRD CHRONICLE by Haruki Murakami

...what was this?

Seems like a strange question to ask after 600 pages, but that's where I found myself after finishing The Wind-Up Chronicle, my second Haruki Murakami book this month and first experience with his fiction. Beginning with a happily unemployed husband's search for his wife's missing cat, the book ends up going a million different directions—one moment the protagonist is chatting with his teenage neighbor May Kasahara, the next he is befriending a psychic named Malta Kano and her sister Creto, then he is descending into a well that leads to another world, then he is suddenly working for a woman named Nutmeg and her son Cinnamon, and finally he's returning to the well netherworld to rescue his wife from her evil brother. Yeah. It's a lot.

Here's the thing, though. I kept reading.  Something about Murakami's writing—the imagination, the dreamlike storytelling, the way he leaves you simultaneously mystified and spellbound—makes you want to know what happens next, even if you don't understand what it is or why it happened. Even when I was utterly lost, I was always entertained. It was a truly confounding read in every sense of the word.

I've never read a story like this one, and I mean that as both a praise and a criticism. Part of me wants to stash this book away and never touch it again, another part wants to wait a week and read it all over again. Credit to Murakami for this: either way, I guarantee you I'll be thinking about it.

SMART BASEBALL: THE STORY BEHIND THE OLD STATS THAT ARE RUINING THE GAME, THE NEW ONES THAT ARE RUNNING IT, AND THE RIGHT WAY TO THINK ABOUT BASEBALL by Keith Law

Anyone who follows baseball today can tell you that the way we talk about the game has changed a lot in the last 20 years. Once upon a time, we judged who was the best pitcher in the league by his win-loss record paired with his E.R.A.; now such conversations center around newfangled stats like FIP, ERA+, and BABIP. Same for hitters—discussing their prowess using batting average and RBIs makes you a dinosaur now; it's all about OPS+, ISO, and the almighty WAR. Like it or not, analytics have changed baseball forever, and getting with the times means knowing how to separate the statistical wheat from the chaff. Smart Baseball, the work of ESPN's Keith Law, purports to help the average fan do so.

The first section of the book deals with the old-fashioned stats that analytics (and sometimes just good ol' critical thinking) have revealed to be fatally flawed. With a mixture of anecdotes, math, and wit, Law pokes holes in some of baseball's most sacred numbers in a way that will leave even the staunchest traditionalist saying, "he's got a point there." Most of this is probably old news for the sabermetrically-minded fan, but it was nice to see it in cohesive chapters instead of isolated tweets.

The second section deals with more analytical stats, from the basics (on-base percentage) to the more complex and all-inclusive stats measuring player value (wRC+ and WAR). This was the meat of the book for me, since I was aware of all of these stats but far from fluent in them.

The third section addresses and projects where the game may be headed in light of what analytics has wrought, talking about everything from MLB's Statcast product to teams' efforts to prevent injuries. This, for me, was the weakest section of the book by its very nature, since it was more speculative than analytical. However, even in projecting, Law draws upon what we do know and never makes any Jetsons-like predictions that are likely to make him look silly decades down the road.

Overall, I liked this book a lot, which is particularly remarkable since I don't care for the author (I find him almost unbearably smug). In a format like this, rather than the quick hits of his TV appearances and tweets, Law's sarcasm manages to amuse instead of condescend, and he always lets the information drive the argument. For fans interested in sabermetrics, whether you are deeply skeptical or completely indoctrinated, I recommend this as an accessible, interesting primer.

ESSENTIAL SUB-MARINER VOL. 1 by Stan Lee, Roy Thomas, Gene Colan, Bill Everett, et al.

Some superheroes just work better as supporting characters. After reading this volume, I'm convinced that Namor the Sub-Mariner, King of Atlantis, is one of those.

Namor has the distinction, along with Captain America and the Human Torch (not the one from the Fantastic Four) of being a Golden Age character who was resurrected by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby when they started building the Marvel Universe. After being awakened from decades of amnesia by the Human Torch (this time I do mean the one from the Fantastic Four) in FF #4, Namor quickly became one of the most beloved guest stars in the Marvel Universe, as well as one of the original antiheroes. Depending on the needs of the story, he could be invading the surface world one day and teaming up with the Avengers the next—and given his brash, arrogant, yet noble personality, you bought it either way. As popular as he became in these guest appearances, it didn't take long before he began sharing the Tales to Astonish mag with the Hulk, where each character got a 12-page story. Eventually both graduated to their own titles, and this Essential volume collects all of his Tales to Astonish appearances as well as the first issue of his eponymous series.

My verdict, as my introduction gives away, is that it doesn't really work. Thanks to his role as ruler of the undersea kingdom of Atlantis, a solo series offered an opportunity for world building, but the short length of the stories in Tales to Astonish meant Stan Lee didn't have the space for it. Namor's unique personality (he is, frankly, kind of a jerk) sets him apart from the more classical do-gooders, but in these stories he is nevertheless mostly resigned to fighting off traditional baddies. With an entire royal court at the disposal of the writers, his supporting cast is basically limited to his love interest Dorma and wizened chief counselor Vashti. As for his villains, they are largely unmemorable (though the warlord Krang and Attuma would continue to plague his kingdom for decades.)

Overall, this series reads like the B-side of the record—okay but inessential. I didn't hate it, but I don't imagine I'll return to it any time soon. If you want a great Sub-Mariner story, you're better off finding it in the pages of The Fantastic Four, The Avengers, or the Incredible Hulk.

ESSENTIAL DAZZLER VOL. 1 by Danny Fingeroth, Frank Springer, Tom DeFalco, John Romita Jr., et. al

My question when I bought this particular Essential volume was simple: is there really such thing as "essential" Dazzler stories? The answer: no, but not for a lack of effort on Marvel's part.

Dazzler is a character that Marvel reeeeally wanted to work. Conceived as a multimedia character who would function as a sales vehicle for both comics and records (as Kiss had previously done), she was created by a committee of Marvel writers and editors, then introduced as a guest star smack dab in the middle of the Dark Phoenix Saga, arguably the greatest X-Men story of all time. Springboarding off that appearance, Dazzler was given her own monthly title, the first 21 issues of which are collected in this volume. Over the course of those 21 issues (plus that initial X-Men appearance), Dazzler encounters just about every popular Marvel character, from Spider-Man and the Hulk to heroes-on-the-rise She-Hulk and Spider-Woman to villains Doctor Doom and Galactus.

From her introduction, Dazzler, a.k.a. Alison Blaire, was conceived as a mutant who doesn't want to be a superhero, just a singer (initially disco, then rock). Her mutant power makes her a living transducer, meaning she can convert sound into light, a skill which helps her performances and can also be weaponized when trouble strikes. And, despite her best efforts, trouble strikes a lot—for someone who doesn't want to be a superhero, Ali Blaire has to fight a lot of supervillains.

The result is a comic that mostly just feels like it's trying too hard. A supporting cast was introduced early, but perhaps sensing that audiences didn't latch on to them, several of those characters were quietly shuffled off the board. A few potential nemeses showed up in the first few issues, but were largely abandoned in favor of already established villains. And guest stars—oh, the guest stars. Particularly in the 1970s, Marvel had a reliable strategy for new characters: make sure they met Spider-Man, the Thing, and Doctor Doom as early as possible, so that fans of those popular characters would buy the issue for their appearance and thereby be introduced to the new character. With Dazzler, Marvel ran the equivalent of a full-court press, ensuring that not just the big hitters, but all their popular characters ran into her as soon as possible.

But despite Marvel's best efforts, Dazzler just isn't that compelling a character. She has some fun adventures along the way (her encounter with Galactus is just so kooky I couldn't help but love it), but when you combine formulaic writing with mediocre art and a boring character, you've made a recipe for a run-of-the-mill comic, not the Next Big Thing. Dazzler would get 20+ more issues (which are collected in Essential Dazzler Vol. 2) before Marvel gave up and folded her into the X-Men books, where she continues to exist as a C-list character. Truthfully, that's probably where she belongs—she can be a fun character, but she's far from essential.