American Nations (Book Review Club)

American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America

by Colin Woodard
Viking, 2011

Why is the United States of America such a fractious and divided nation? Woodard claims it is because we are not one nation, one culture, but a federation of ten different regional cultures. (The eleventh nation is the relatively new First Nation in Canada. While he occasional references Canada, the book is primarily about the US. )

The problem goes back to the early European settlements in North America, which were begun by several different countries - Spain, France, Holland and Britain  - in widely separated areas and at different times in history. He bases his sociological ideas on the doctrine of "first viable settlement" which posits that the culture of a region takes on the characteristics of the first group to establish a self-perpetuating society, no matter how small the original group had been.

His regional American cultures are, in order of settlement:

• El Norte (on both sides of the present American-Mexican border)
• New France (Quebec & Southern Louisiana)
• Tidewater (Virginia, Maryland & part of Delaware)
• Yankeedom (New England plus areas later settled by Yankees)
• New Netherland (NYC & northern New Jersey
• The Deep South (North Carolina to east Texas)
• The Midlands (Pennsylvania and parts of the Midwest)
• Greater Appalachia (the "Borderlanders" from the Blue Ridge on westward into Texas)
• The Left Coast (Washington, Oregon & Northern California)
• The Far West

On his map* Canada is also shown having regional cultures from The Left Coast of BC to the Yankee-influenced Maritimes, though Woodard talks most about Quebec (New France) and First Nation.

There is a lot of information in this book, more than I can explain in a review, but it's quite readable and I found it interesting and persuasive. For one thing, his regional culture theory explains why parts of the country are what they are and why they cause so much amusement and/or consternation in the rest of us. Most important, he goes into what each culture values in terms of the balance of freedom and order, individual rights versus communal needs. And it explains why it is so hard for us to find a compromise position on much of anything. If there is one overriding theme, it is the historical struggle between Yankeedom and the Deep South, both aided by shifting alliances with the other regions, for control of the nation, which culminated in the Civil War but still goes on today.

Some of this was familiar territory, as Woodard builds on earlier works like David Fischer's Albion's Seed, which I read and enjoyed years ago. But I learned some new things as well, for instance, the reasons for the (to me) odd combination of Libertarianism and Corporatism found in the Far West. (Basically, the climate and geography of the region were too rugged for individuals to truly succeed on their own. Corporate and government intervention was required to make the land livable.)

As a history nut, I found the book both fascinating and insightful. The one time the nation really came together as one was during World War II, but even there, reasons for supporting the war varied. I think this passage is very telling:

Borderlanders fought for the traditional Scots-Irish reason: to avenge an attack by defeating their enemies on the field of battle. The Tidewater and Deep Southern elite... wished to uphold U.S. "national" honor and to defend their Anglo-Norman brethren acrosee the sea. Pacifist Midlanders backed the war as a struggle against military despotism, while Yankees, New Netherlanders, and Left Coasters emphasized the antiauthoritarian aspect of the struggle. Residents of El Norte and the Far West embraced a war that showered their long-neglected regions with federal largesse.

What a war, something for everyone!

I had wondered if our present culture wars were mostly a generational problem that would go away once the Baby Boomers died off. After all, we are a generation of Happy Warriors. But it appears the problem is of much longer standing. Woodard offers no solution to the problem, for there is no easy answer here, even acknowledging that the breakup of the country is not unthinkable. A greater understanding of our differences could help, especially if we can recognize that those who don't agree with us are not necessarily idiots or scoundrels, only people with differing values and beliefs. The trick is finding ways to compromise on policy without compromising principles.

In any case, Woodard urges an open and honest political debate, concluding with: "The United States needs its central government to function cleanly, openly, and efficiently because it's one of the few things binding us together." Unfortunately, that is not working optimally, as we've seen in the last few days. Our federal government is currently as dysfunctional as I've ever seen it, and I've been around for a while!

Happy New Year!

Linda

* Map Photo by Sean Wilkinson, Sean Wilkinson Design, can be better viewed on the Washington Monthly website where Woodard wrote an article or at the author's website.

Click icon for more

book review blogs

@Barrie Summy

Book Review Club: Proof of Heaven

Proof of Heaven 
by Eben Alexander, M.D.
Simon & Schuster, 2012

When I heard about this book, I pre-ordered it for my Kindle. Apparently I wasn't the only one. His website says the book debuted at #1 in e-book sales!

I've been interested in NDE (near-death experience) literature since reading Raymond Moody's Life After Life in the mid-1970s. So I didn't approach the book as a skeptic but a believer, and one who is familiar with the genre.

Dr. Alexander's experience is unique in several ways.

1. As a neurosurgeon, he was very much a scientist and a skeptic, so when he went into a protracted coma, he had no preconceived ideas about what to expect. No one was more surprised than he when he had a revelatory spiritual experience.

2. His coma was caused by an unusual condition in adults: gram-negative bacterial meningitis, which shut down the neocortex of his brain, the part that medical scientists say makes us human. That part of his brain was completely inactive during his coma. After he recovered, Dr. Alexander tried, and failed, to find a rational, scientific explanation for what happened to him. In addition, his survival of the meningitis without any brain damage is quite remarkable.

3. His NDE differed somewhat from those reported by other survivors. For one thing, while in coma, he had no idea who he was/had been on earth. Most patients who suffer NDEs have all or some part of their neocortex still functioning. As a result, he felt no compulsion to return to his previous life. Nevertheless, his family gathered around and prayed for him and he was ultimately drawn back to his life on earth.

During the coma, he initially spent a lot of time in a murky, undistinguished state he called the Realm of the Worm's Eye View. In time, a light appeared to him and he rose into a bright and beautiful spiritual realm where a lovely young woman acted as his guide. He traveled through areas of "heaven" he dubbed the Gateway and the Core. The message he brought back is simple:

You are loved and cherished.
You have nothing to fear.
There is nothing you can do wrong.

Before his coma, he would have said that all consciousness comes from the brain. Now he believes we are spiritual beings inhabiting mortal brains and bodies.

If you have any interest in this subject, I recommend the book. I found it quite fascinating and Dr. Alexander does a good job of explaining medical and scientific concepts in ways a non-scientist can understand. You can read more online at http://www.lifebeyonddeath.net/.

Linda

Click icon for more

book review blogs

@Barrie Summy

A Night To Remember (Book Review Club)

Like a lot of people, I got caught up in the Titanic 100-year anniversary enthusiasm, so I was glad when my library book club decided to read Walter Lord's book about that fateful night in April of 1911.

A Night To Remember
by Walter Lord
Henry Holt, 2005 edition
Trade Paperback (from library)

It has been one hundred years since the Titanic disaster, and people are still fascinated by the ship and her fate. Lord's classic account of the sinking is still noteworthy for the painstaking detail, much of it based on eyewitness accounts by survivors still alive in 1955. Step by step, he takes us through the events of that night, starting with the lookouts who didn't see the iceberg in time because the binoculars they were supposed to be using were locked in a chest and the key was in London. (The result of a last-minute change in the officers assigned to the ship.)

We hear from people from all three passenger classes - the very wealthy, the middle class, and the lowly immigrants - and crew members from the officers to humble stewards. Though at times the book reads like fiction, it is not. He did an impressive amount of research which is detailed in the Acknowledgements section at the end. From the retrospective of the 21st century, the book represents an impressive undertaking in a world of print-only resources.

I also rented the film, produced in 1958, but it wasn't the movie I remembered from my childhood. That one was Titanic, starring Clifton Webb, which came out two years before Lord's book. The film version of A Night To Remember is a British production starring Kenneth More as Second Officer Lightoller and a young David McCallum as Officer Lord. I was surprised at first to realize A Night To Remember was filmed in black and white, but I soon understood why. By not using color, they were able to mix archival footage of the actual ship with the movie reels. So we see the Titanic being christened and sailing off from Southampton as it really happened. There was no such thing as CGI in 1958!

 For the best sense of what it might have been like to actually be on the Titanic, nothing can beat James Cameron's 1997 epic. Like the fictional love story or despise it, the special effects are overwhelming and incredible. In my opinion, it deserved the Oscar simply for being a monumental and innovative piece of moviemaking. And the musical score is both beautiful and haunting.

After reading A Night To Remember, I think I understand why the story of the Titanic still draws us. It was one of the greatest disasters of all time, and it changed maritime history (and law) forever. But at its heart, it's a very human story-- of arrogance and hubris, negligence, bad luck and denial, bravery and cowardice, indifference and sacrifice. A testament to the bad and the good to be found in human nature. And for that reason, it is a story that will live forever in human memory.

At the end of a recent documentary on the Titanic, James Cameron talks about the ship as a microcosm of 1912 society, with its class distinctions. He also sees the image of the unwieldy ship sailing into the iceberg as a metaphor for a continent about to go over a cliff and into one of the most destructive and unnecessary wars of all time. (WWI) And then he talked about how things are not much different now. We are headed for an iceberg called "global climate change" and it's too late to correct the system in time to prevent the crash.

If you haven't read this book, I do recommend it.

Linda

Don't forget to check out the rest of the Book Review Club June reads!

Click icon for more

book review blogs

@Barrie Summy

Book Review Club: A First-Rate Madness

A First-Rate Madness: Uncovering the Links Between Leadership and Mental Illness
by Nassir Ghaemi
Penguin Press, 2011

I saw the author interviewed on The Daily Show and had to buy this book. It's political/historical psychology, but also collected biography because he has thumbnail sketches of a number of famous world leaders. The emphasis is on their mental state and degree of mental illness (or lack thereof), focusing specifically on bipolar disorder and/or depression. He includes FDR & JFK, whom he contends had something called hyperthymic personality, a mild version of mania.

Obviously, it's difficult to do psychological evaluations of people who are long dead. Ghaemi's approach looks for four aspects of mental illness: symptoms, family history, course of illness and treatment. Sherman, who was bipolar, mainly treated his condition with alcohol. Of course, that was one of the main drugs available to him at the time.

Ghaemi's contention is that a crisis calls for extraordinary leaders and that "normal" folks just don't cut it. They're not creative or realistic enough in their thinking. (Depending on the need of the moment.) FDR was hyperthymic and he was able to be creative in responding to the Great Depression. He tried different things; if they didn't work, he tried something else. But he didn't think conventionally.

Churchill, on the other hand, was a "depressive realist". He suffered from depression but not mania. New studies now find that people who have experienced depression are more realistic than "normal" people, who tend to be unrealistically optimistic. Churchill's "depressive realism" allowed him to see the danger in Hitler's Germany when all the normal people, like Neville Chamberlain, could not. Sadly, Churchill was right.

(I love the wonderful cover graphic. Here it is closer up.)

There's a separate section about JFK & Hitler and how the drugs both took affected them. JFK had good results from drugs for his Addison's disease, at least in some of the time, whereas Hitler's quack of a doctor had him mainlining speed. No wonder he was so crazy. Amphetamines make bipolar people cycle off the charts.

Oddly enough, the most disturbing part of the book was the chapter on homoclites, i.e. normal, mentally healthy people. Being mentally healthy doesn't mean being a nice person. Most of the Nazi leaders other than Hitler were quite normal. Ghaemi cites a study of mentally healthy people and goes on to explain that Nixon, despite his paranoia, was mentally healthy. (He had good, rational reasons to be paranoid. "They" really were out to get him!)

I can't say that Ghaemi is correct in all he says (what do I know?) but the argument is persuasive. I do know that I'll never look at a political leader again without trying to assess his or her mental health. Not sure if that is a good thing or not. I will look at them very differently!

This is the most fascinating book I've read all year. You can find a short excerpt from it at Nassir Ghaemi's website.

Linda

Click icon for more book review blogs
@Barrie Summy