Glyph by Percival Everett – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Baby Ralph has ways to pass the time in his crib―but they don't include staring at a mobile. Aided by his mother, he reads voraciously: "All of Swift, all of Sterne, Invisible Man, Baldwin, Joyce, Balzac, Auden, Roethke," along with a generous helping of philosophy, semiotics, and trashy thrillers. He's also fond of writing poems and stories (in crayon). But Ralph has limits. He's mute by choice and can't drive, so in his own estimation he's not a genius. Unfortunately for him, everyone else disagrees. His psychiatrist kidnaps him for testing, and once his brilliance is quantified (IQ: 475), a Pentagon officer also abducts him. Diabolically funny and lacerating in its critique of poststructuralism, Glyph has the feverish plot of a thriller and the philosophical depth of a text by Roland Barthes. If anyone can map the wilds of literary theory, it's Ralph, one of Percival Everett's most enduring creations.’

Glyph is a novel written during the late 90s by the English professor, Percival Everett. The story features a baby named Ralph as the main character, who is a genius and reads books and writes poetry while on the crib. However, he does not utter a word and expresses himself only by writing. His mother is worried about him and takes him to a psychiatrist but when everyone starts taking note of Ralph’s abilities, which leads to his kidnapping.

For novels like this, the start has to be convincing, considering it is an absurd premise and the author had it written very well to draw the reader into this world of his. There were lots of humorous elements throughout the novel, starting from his antipathy towards his father, owing to his father’s own insecurities as a struggling writer, that he finds it difficult to accept that his baby is smarter than him. There were also several references, where Ralph discusses well known literature, from Balzac to Baldwin, and also various philosophers such as Nietzsche and Plato. I was not able to relate to all of the literary references but here was a case of the writer playing to his strength, of being an English professor.

While I enjoyed the premise and the humorous elements along the way, I felt the novel was a tad too long. One instance of kidnapping was fine, but a second kidnapping dragged the story too long. While I can buy into the world where there is an infant who is a prodigy, him being able to drive is testing the reader to the limits and that is where I felt the humour was getting lost.

Humour is not usually a genre that I read and those that I have, I did not particularly enjoy. However, this book proved to be an exception and I found it thoroughly amusing. Even though it was not the easiest of reads, and could be appreciated better if we could understand all the literary and philosophical references, I would still say that this book would satisfy the average audience and on that note, I award the book a rating of six on ten.

Rating – 6/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

Monsters: A fan’s dilemma by Claire Dederer – Book Review

 Publisher’s write-up: 

‘What do we do with the art of monstrous men? Can we love the work of Roman Polanski and Michael Jackson, Hemingway and Picasso? Should we love it? Does genius deserve special dispensation? Is history an excuse? What makes women artists monstrous? And what should we do with beauty, and with our unruly feelings about it?

Claire Dederer explores these questions and our relationships with the artists whose behaviour disrupts our ability to apprehend the work on its own terms. She interrogates her own responses and her own behaviour, and she pushes the fan, and the reader, to do the same. Morally wise, deeply considered and sharply written, Monsters gets to the heart of one of our most pressing conversations.’

We have ongoing conversation about whether artists could be separated from their works and if not, should we feel guilty of enjoying artistic excellence from ‘Monsters’? This includes topics like whether we could enjoy the works of Polanski – who has fled the criminal justice system in the US for raping a minor; or could still take pleasure from reading the books of JK Rowling, who uses her large platform to spread vitriol against the transgender people, one of the most vulnerable groups throughout history. These are some of the questions that the writer Claire Dederer tries to answer in this book.

She takes up the case of several well-known personalities such as Woody Allen, Pablo Picasso, JK Rowling, Doris Lessing, Roman Polanski, etc. and discusses her own dilemma around enjoying some of their works. An idea she discussed was interesting, describing this as conflicting biographies, where in the internet age, we know the biographies of all the famous personalities whom we follow but at the same time, if this conflicts with our own biographies (the ethics and values that we hold), then we start to question ourselves.

This would fall under the category of a book that I wanted to like, considering this is an interesting and contemporary topic, given the nonsensical culture wars initiated by the right-wing ecosystem lately. However, this book lacked structure and often missed the point. She starts talking about Rowling and then digresses immediately somewhere else without having relevance to what was being discussed earlier.

I would raise something I felt personally here, she was saying how to classify a famous woman as a ‘monster’ had much lower standards, which usually involved abandoning their children for the sake of their career and she cited the example of Doris Lessing. I understand that this is a topic close to her, but personally I do not see Doris Lessing discussed as much as she claimed and indeed, a separation where she willingly left the children in the custody of her partner, there is nothing morally wrong in her actions.

I understand that she was giving her opinions – as is the purpose of this book but that is when I stopped understanding whether she was inviting a discussion into the subject or writing a diary on how she felt about these people during the various phases of her life. Considering this was like reading a diary, I hoped that she would eventually reveal how she personally chose to deal with the subject (while you or I may have our own views and approach) but she leaves that open ended as well.

On that note, I would conclude saying that this was a disappointing book given the high level of expectations that I had. I rate the book a three on ten.

Rating – 3/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

Secession and State Creation by James Ker-Lindsay and Mikulas Fabry

 

Publisher’s write-up:

Cliquez ici afin de lire en français

‘What makes a state? This question has attracted more and more attention in recent years with Catalan’s illegal vote for independence from Spain and Palestine’s ongoing search for international recognition. And while Scotland chose to remain with the United Kingdom, discussion of independence have only continued as the ramifications of the Brexit vote begin to set in. Kosovo, South Sudan, and the situation in Ukraine – each in its way reveals the perils of creating a nation separate from neighbours who have dominated it.

As James Ker-Lindsay and Mikulas Fabry show in this new addition to the What Everyone Needs to Know series, the road to statehood never did run smooth. Declaring independence is only the first step; gaining both local and global acceptance is necessary before a state can become truly independent, The prospect of losing territory is usually not welcomed by the parent state, and any such threat to an existing culture and its economy is often met with resistance – armed or otherwise. Beyond this immediate conflict, the international community often refuses to accept new states without proof of defined territory, a settled population, and effective government, which frequently translates to a democratic one with demonstrated respect for human rights. Covering the legal, political, and practical issues of secession and state creation, Ker-Lindsay and Fabry provide a sure-footed guide to a complex topic.’

What makes a state? This question is even more pertinent today considering we are facing the most tumultuous geopolitical situation in decades, with Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, civil war in Sudan, regime change in Afghanistan, Myanmar, etc. As the author addressed early on in the book, some newly formed states like South Sudan have gained international recognition without much hassle whereas others such as Kosovo, notwithstanding their ability to operate as an independent state, including achieving recognition from major global powers, still is not recognised by over half the world and is not a UN member. These are the questions that this book answers, as to what creates a state and what are the valid causes for secession.

To start with, this book takes an academic perspective on the issue and is not a philosophical book on nationhood or sense of belonging. It addresses the widely recognised international conventions and also the UN charter and the various resolutions when it comes to statehood and ideas such as self-determination. Even the definitions of what constituted a state start from the late 18^th century (around the time of independence of the US) and does not explain how states were recognised in different regions in the past (for example, in Europe, the church for large parts of the Middle Ages).

It is presented in an easy-to-read manner – split into chapters and in a question-and-answer format. The book was published in 2023 and thus,  it is updated up until the unprovoked Russian invasion of Ukraine. For the uninitiated and at the same time interested in geopolitics and the various concepts of state recognition– this book provides an overview, explaining what constitutes a state, what have been the accepted methods used in resolving conflicts in the past, and also failed efforts and frozen conflicts. There were several interesting facts that were presented, especially the norms that we follow in the international community – which I have never thought of it that way, that the countries have agreed that one sovereign state would have one vote in the UNGA regardless of their size and population.

A disappointment that people could have is from incorrect expectations as I already stated, as the book is academic and often uses terms which are not in common parlance. However, to those who are even partially interested in the topic, might be familiar with a third of the book, and thus, could proceed with those sections fast (an example could be a detailed explanation of the Montevideo Convention on the criteria for recognising a state).

On the whole, I would say that the book was an excellent read, and is strongly recommended for those who are interested in geopolitics and how the international system operates. On that note, I award the book a rating of eight on ten.

Rating – 8/10

Have a nice day,
Andy