What I’ve Been Reading
The Winter Fortress, Neal Bascomb
This is the story of the Allied efforts to stop the Germans from accessing the heavy water produced in Norway, to prevent them from creating a nuclear weapon. It was fascinating simply as an aspect of WWII that I knew nothing about. It made me realize that every war probably has hundreds or thousands of stories like this, obscured by the famous battles that make it to our history books. From a literary standpoint, the book was not the most interesting. I felt like the author’s attempt to make it a “riveting thriller” felt a bit forced. One odd thing I noticed was his apparent disregard for Checkov’s gun. There were countless times he added a bit of unexpected detail which I anticipated would become somehow relevant. Eventually, I gathered that these minor details were included to make the characters more personal or relatable, but the delivery just felt off. As a chronicle of historical events, it was an interesting read, but I did not find the style particularly compelling.
A few things that stood out to me:
- The obscurity of this story made me realize how many other efforts like this go unnoticed in any war. We pour over the details of famous battles, but what about all those other obscure factors that played a role? It seems to me that the decisions made closer to the ground, the creative problem-solving of ordinary individuals doing their part, can turn the tide of a battle more than the directive of leaders in faraway places.
- The main players in The Winter Fortress were convinced that sabotage was the most effective way to stop the Germans. By tapping into the underground resistance in Norway, they were able to utilize the native knowledge of the land to gain an advantage over the invading forces. This guerilla approach, with an emphasis on sabotage, seems to be a much smarter way to wage war. It makes one ask, who really gains from the traditional mode of combat as seen in WWI and WWII? In light of the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and all the conflicts in the Middle East, you would think that leaders would be more receptive to a different way of waging war?
- I was also struck by the callousness of the British and American governments towards the Norwegian plight. When Germany invaded Norway, many risked their life fleeing to Britain simply to sign up for military training to return to Norway. These individuals were committed to protecting their homeland and doing their part. With their insider knowledge, they proposed missions that were vastly different from the schemes cooked up by the leading Allied nations. This book portrays America’s solution as simply being, “bomb it all to pieces.” No matter the catastrophic damage to civilians and national infrastructure. The Norwegians working with the British government were advocating for their nation’s long-term sustainability—what would stop the Germans in the short-term, but also allow the Norwegians to recover economically once the war was over? But the British and American leaders didn’t seem concerned about any collateral damage. This seems to be consistent with what I’ve read about how the British and American governments approached their “collaboration” (if it can be called that) with other nations during the war.
When Safety Proves Dangerous
I found this concept of the “risk thermostat,” from psychology professor Gerald Wilde quite interesting:
Our risk tolerance is like a thermostat—we take more risks if we feel too safe, and vice versa, in order to remain at our desired “temperature.”
For example, wearing a seatbelt might feel too safe, so we compensate by driving faster.
Overall, this piece affirms the difficulty of making decisions in a complex system. We see a problem or danger and immediately intervene to make it safer. And yet this intervention often has a host of unintended consequences, leading to as much danger, or more, than the original situation.
When we want to improve a situation, our first instinct tends to be to step in and change something, anything. Sometimes it is wiser to do less, or even nothing. Changing something does not always make people safer, sometimes it just changes the nature of the danger.
“My Immortal” as Alchemical Allegory
This is by far the most bizarre piece I’ve read in a long time. Having no previous knowledge of this infamous Harry Potter fan fiction, “My Immortal,” I had to do some background reading to wrap my mind around the subject of the post. Scott Alexander from Slate Star Codex argues that the mysterious and convoluted fan fiction story is actually an allegorical work outlining the process of alchemy, like Medieval allegories and Goethe’s Faust. His post is not just an interesting interpretation of “My Immortal,” but also a fascinating, although brief, history of alchemical literature.
Elon Musk is the Hero America Deserves
This Bloomburg article highlights Elon Musk’s accomplishments, and recent escapades on Twitter, in honor of the SpaceX launch to the ISS. There is no simple way to define Musk, and this article just adds another thoughtful perspective.
Bird by Bird
I had forgotten about Anne Lamott’s book on writing, Bird by Bird, which I read several years ago. But after reading this article on Farnam Street highlighting some of her key observations and suggestions, I feel inspired to find my copy and read it again.
Jerry Seinfeld on What It Means to Achieve Your Goals
Jerry Seinfeld talking to Howard Stern about getting to where you want to be in life. We think about forcing ourselves to put in the work, to discipline ourselves year after year, to achieve what we want. But it’s not about force.
What you were using, what Michael Jordan uses and what I use, is not will. It’s love. When you love something, it’s a bottomless pool of energy.
What I’ve Been Watching
Unbreakable
I wanted to go back and watch this M. Night Shyamalan movie after seeing Split a couple years ago and in preparation for watching the sequel, Glass, which came out last year. With each of these movies, I went in with high expectations and was left feeling underwhelmed. Unbreakable wasn’t a bad movie, it just wasn’t nearly as exciting as I expected. It did not meet the stereotypes of a superhero movie and instead focused more on the personal and psychological development of David Dunn. While I like the idea of the psychological emphasis, somehow it felt lacking. This is similar to how I felt after watching Split. The premise was fantastic, but I felt like M. Night Shyamalan didn’t really do it justice. Despite trying to be thought-provoking and challenging, neither movie changed my perspective nor moved me emotionally.
The Theory of Everything
This is another movie that’s been on my list to watch for quite some time. I finally got to it when our internet was down for a day and I had to resort to watching a movie that I actually had on DVD. Growing up, I had little cultural context or knowledge of Stephen Hawking and his work—probably owing to the fact that it is so far outside the accepted belief systems of conservative Christianity. And while I’ve attempted to remedy my ignorance over the years, I appreciated how this movie gave me insight into a more personal side of his life. It takes some liberties with the portrayal of Stephen’s relationship with Jane, but that is to be expected. Overall, The Theory of Everything gave me a broad framework of Hawking’s personal life and ignited my curiosity to learn more about what actually happened.
What I’ve Been Listening To
What I’ve Been Thinking About
What really matters is not our high points in life, the days where we just feel fantastic and unstoppable, but our low points. What does the low point look like? Does it spiral into weeks or months of self-sabotage? Does it lead you to make decisions that set you up for future failure? And how do you respond to your bad days? To me, it seems not so much about the fact that we have bad days, but how we react to those experiences of despondency or lethargy. Can we learn to react in a more compassionate and gentle way? And perhaps if we give ourselves permission to have a bad day, maybe we can move through those emotions in a productive way, instead of sinking further into a negative state?
