Book Review: Parkland by Dave Cullen

Parkland by Dave Cullen tells the story of the group of students who galvanized the world by calling out their elders for years of inaction about mass shootings. On February 14, 2018 a shooter armed with automatic weapons walked into Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and killed 17 individuals. Occurring a few months after the the Las Vegas mass shooting that took 59 lives and the Sutherland Springs church shooting in Texas where 27 were killed - mass shootings were the new normal. The ritualistic aftermath of wall to wall media coverage, perfunctory wishes of thoughts and prayers, and then just waiting for the next one. Gun control was a non-starter in the GOP controlled congress. 

The narrative changed when a band of High School students, none of them old enough to vote, declared ENOUGH WAS ENOUGH. Survivors of the Parkland shooting decided to revolt: Senior Emma Gonzalez called BS on the NRA and their puppet politicians. It was the start of a new movement. Cullen provides a fly on the wall account of how these kids took on the status quo.

Cullen paints a vibrant portrait of these kids as he walks us along on their journey. The book describes the culture of the High School, with over 3000 students and countless cliques. On the day of the shooting most of them spent hours in lockdown wondering if they would live. From day one they proved adept at handling all media, wielding social media like a samurai knife. 

Media sensations less than 12 hours after the shooting, a flurry of criticism also came their way. Conspiracy theorists claimed one of the leaders Davd Hogg was a "crisis actor" for the deep state, followed by more far out nonsense from the fringe right. Harassment by online trolls were an everyday occurrence for them, with encouragement from Fox News and the NRA. 

The kids decided to not align themselves with any political party, nor endorse any candidates. Being mostly privileged white kids, it was not lost on them that fact alone accounted for the media attention. Youth movements by African-American kids in Chicago were mostly ignored. So they outreached to Chicago and other cities plagued by gun violence, places not on white America's radar. The March For Our Lives on March 24, 2018 brought students and adults from all walks of life together.

Cullen also writes about the PTSD survivors were going through and social pressures they faced. There was jealousy and hard feelings as they took on responsibilities most adults shy away from. Over the summer of 2018 the kids embarked on a bus tour of the country, intentionally driving through Red States to engage with those who disagreed with their message for more gun control (not a repeal of the 2nd Amendment). The goal is for smart gun control. They understood their mastery of social media could only go so far, there was no substitute for face to face contact.

Cullen also wrote the definitive book on the Columbine shooting and confessed his growing apathy on gun violence in America as no hope appeared on the horizon. He ends the book citing Bruce Springsteen reflecting on how the March For Our Lives renewed his faith in America in the grim trump era, it was "a necessary day . . . to remind Americans what they stood for." Parkland tells of a generation's awakening - highly recommended.

The Twilight Zone 2019 Episode #2 "Nightmare at 30,000 Feet"

In the third adaptation of the 1961 Richard Matheson short story "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet," Adam Scott takes on the role of the terrified airline passenger. William Shatner starred in the 1963 TV version and John Lithgow in the 1983 segment of Twilight Zone: The Movie. Written by Marco Ramirez with story credit to Jordan Peele, this 2019 version takes a different approach with mixed results.

Scott plays investigative journalist Justin Sanderson who is renown for his war reporting. He's about to board an international flight. On the plane are a group of diverse passengers that adds a layer of cultural tension that never quite pays off. Post 9/11 movies set on passenger jets have played on those anxieties ranging from the 2005 Jody Foster vehicle Flightplan to the 2014 Liam Neeson thriller Non-Stop. Remember Snakes on a Plane! Once Justin is seated he starts listening to a podcast about famous plane crashes - maybe not the best idea. 

The strength of the episode is the almost Sci-Fi setting of the airplane, creating a contrast with the claustrophobic feel of previous versions of the story. Despite the differences, this story moves in a predictable pattern, Scott's performance lacks the sense of urgency that's Shatner and Lithgow brought to the piece. On a brighter note the episode pays a nice tribute to the 1963 teleplay. The previous episode "The Comedian" is also referenced, suggesting these new stories exist in the same universe.

The Twilight Zone 2019 #1 "The Comedian"

The Twilight Zone has returned again with Jordan Peele as Executive Producer and narrator. With some intriguing trailers and star power behind the reboot, The Twilight Zone premiered today on CBS All Access. 

"The Comedian" stars Kumail Nanjiani in the title role, and also features strong supporting performances from Tracy Morgan and Jessica Williams as a rival comic. Coincidentally, one of Serling's most celebrated teleplays was also titled "The Comedian" and starred Mickey Rooney. In the 2019 version Kumail is a struggling comic. The episode begins with him doing a failed routine on gun control. The audience is more interested in their phones. Later that night Kumail meets a legendary comedian played by Morgan who encourages him to put himself out there more. Morgan takes a surprising turn as a sinister and enigmatic presence.

So Kumail begins to use people in his personal life for material. He performs routines about his dog going to the bathroom, his nephew's facility with social media, and past arguments with his girlfriend. Things get darker when he turns to social media for more material. These routines kill and suddenly his career takes off.

Of course this is The Twilight Zone and Kumail's new found fame comes at a high price. Much is written today of the state of comedy in the current political environment. Mainstream comedies tend to avoid politics in favor of bathroom humor and insult comedy. Even attempts at satire from stalwarts like Saturday Night Live and late night TV often come off as obsolete. "The Comedian" implicates zoned out audiences and on a superficial level comics that go for the lowest common denominator. Perhaps the script by Alex Rubens could've taken these themes a bit further. Still, the episode is well acted and moves along at a quick pace.

Jordan Peele's Twilight Zone will inevitably be compared to Black Mirror. I don't think his Twilight Zone will go as nihilistic as Black Mirror. After all, Serling's series had just as many optimistic endings as bleak ones, yet it's those shocking twists everyone remembers. Serling was always more cerebral, and I think Peele will take the series in that direction.

"I Have the Tough People"

The President stated the following in a recent interview:

 I can tell you I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump – I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad. 

The President has never shrunk from floating his desire to bring violence on those who disagree with his policies. His defenders tend to laugh this rhetoric off as "libs having another freak out." Maybe. But there's a track record. During the 2016 campaign he encouraged his rabid supporters to rough up protesters. On Twitter he's floated the idea of using police state tactics to stop crime. 

Lately he feels more emboldened. The emergency declaration to build the border wall (his shutdown failed), in effect entails a take over of the treasury for his own benefit. While there's been push back, today Senate Republicans defected in their strike down of the declaration, they may face the wrath of his minions in a primary fight. 

His statements today are no joke, one of the most despicable ever made by a sitting President (he holds a monopoly in that area.) Today's statement implied he may use the military, police, or violent gangs to check his political opponents. Troubling questions arise: 

Would martial law be declared if he loses the 2020 election? If the Mueller Report provides enough evidence for impeachment, would he use the military to stop Congress from moving forward? Will he keep pushing the limits of executive power until a point of no return is passed? (if it hasn't already)

There's a big difference between talking and action. It goes without saying that a sizable number of the President's supporters feel an authoritarian dictatorship may be their only hope of seeing their troubling agendas pass - overturning Roe v. Wade, a costly border wall, no human rights for refugees and undocumented people, a Christian theocracy, corrupt tax codes, gun mobs, overturning every aspect of a pro democracy agenda. A majority of Americans do not support the President, but he does have at least 30 percent who are with him all the way. 

The threat of political violence is nothing new in recent American history. It's ebbed and flowed from the heady days of the 1960s and 1970s and then settled into a cultural Cold War through the Reagan/Clinton/Bush years. The Tea Party Movement crossed a Rubicon, linking mainstream conservatism with fringe ideals (white nationalism). As a candidate Trump managed to win approval from the fringes and the mainstream, blurring the lines between the two. Rhetoric from the President and his supporters have facilitated this process further.

The President's statement can be read in different ways, none of them comforting. A sign of desperation as the Mueller investigation closes in? A way to quash disloyalty from the GOP Senators who defied him? A pledge that he's not leaving office without causing heavy disruption? A bluff to trigger his many critics? None of these are within the bounds of normal behavior from a so-called leader in a democratic society. What the statement will do is ramp up tensions even further, encourage extremists, setting the stage for more chaos on which he thrives. 

Book Review: Jim Henson: The Biography by Brian Jay Jones

Jim Henson: The Biography by Brian Jay Jones
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

A fixture of American pop culture during the 1970s and 1980s, Jim Henson worked in all mediums. Author Brian Jay Jones emphasizes the manic creativity of Henson, always working on multiple projects at once and pushing himself to the limits. As a High School student he begin performing puppet shows on local Washington D.C. television. Advertisers utilized his talents to sell their products, most notably Wilkins Coffee. At the same time he made experimental films and even started a psychedelic night club in New York. He was a pioneer in the early days of Sesame Street, creating vibrant entertainment for children like Bert and Ernie. By 1979, Henson had one of the highest rated TV shows (The Muppet Show), a hit movie (The Muppet Movie), and a top 10 record album. Always wanting to be seen as more than the "Muppet" guy, Henson branched out in the 1980s with mixed results. His two films, The Dark Crystal and Labyrinth, both failed at the Box Office, while various forays into television never panned out, the exception being Fraggle Rock on HBO. His untimely passing in 1990 at age 53 was a huge loss, leaving a hole in pop culture that's never been filled. Henson's playful humor and alter ego characters were original and inspiring. The book also reminds us Henson was much more than the Muppets, but affectionately recalls the great joy Kermit and the rest of his gang brought to the world and will make you want to seek out old Muppet Shows. The last third of the book gets bogged down in some dull details on his dealings with Disney (which sucks up everything these days), but overall I would highly recommend it!


View all my reviews

Book Review: Infamy: The Shocking Story of the Japanese American Internment in World War II by Richard Reeves

In the months following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, over 120,000 Japanese-Americans were uprooted from their homes and forced to lived in concentration camps throughout the American west. Richard Reeves provides a comprehensive history of how and why this happened. In his introduction Reeves wrote of how the escalating rhetoric towards immigrants escalated this past decade, echoing rhetoric used against Japanese-Americans during the war, impelled to write the book.

Few come out unscathed in this history, figures that are usually highly regarded do not come off well. Starting at the top with President Franklin Roosevelt signing Executive Order 9066 on February 19, 1942 to set up military zones to incarcerate American citizens with links to the Axis countries. Although Germans and Italians were subject to being interned, the overwhelming majority were Japanese-Americans. Others such as California Governor Earl Warren, Secretary of War Henry Stinson, columnist Walter Lippman all voiced support for internment. Even the ACLU failed to live up to their ideals, because they were closely allied with Roosevelt administration. 

Those who favored the internments used two main justifications. The first was to prevent a fifth column of Japanese-Americans who would sabotage on behalf of their native country. Throughout 1942 rumors of Japanese subs off the California coast in preparation for an invasion were everywhere. The other less persuasive reason was to protect Japanese citizens from angry white Americans. There was literally no evidence of disloyalty among the Japanese population of California, it was without any doubt fear and racism behind the policy.

Reeves focuses on the disruption and trauma these actons brought to the Japanese community. They were literally rounded up in their homes, bank accounts were frozen, civil rights were stripped away. Constitutional concerns were tossed aside in the initial paranoia. Conditions at the assembly areas were unorganized and lacking in basic resources, sickness and hunger were common. Life at the camps settled into something of a routine, but tensions often hit breaking points. Living life with soldiers in watchtowers ready to shoot were a constant reminder. Reeves used letters and newspapers to show just much vitriol was aimed at the Japanese, often from so called pillars of the community. 

At the same time resistance increased among the internees as well as a push back from public officials who knew it was a gross violation of the Constitution. As the need for manpower grew, the military began to accept Japanese-Americans into the armed services, while many of those of college age were allowed to return attend college in the East. But the camps kept operating until the end of the conflict with Japan. With almost four years of their lives taken away, many returned back to hostile communities, having to start all over again while still dealing with bigotry.

Reeves also shares stories of Japanese-Americans who served with distinction for a country that had labeled them an enemy. Many of these stories of bravery are quite moving. It wasn't until the 1970s when many began to speak openly about their experiences, usually at the behest of their children who were appalled at how the country had treated their families. Some of the those who oversaw the policies later recanted, Earl Warren broke down in tears when confronted with his complicity and admitted he was wrong.

An important lesson from Infamy is how deeply ingrained racism was and continues to linger in America. Phony rumors and shaky justifications were used to trample over the rights of American citizens. President Harry Truman even admitted there was much of the Nazi impulse in America after reading accounts of racism that persisted in California after the war. Another lesson is that many did push back and speak out against the policy. Yet many of those responsible never had to answer for their disregard of the Constitution. It is a part of American history that needs to be retold because we live in a time when the forces of intolerance once again feel emboldened. 

Book Review: The War on Science by Shawn Lawrence Otto

The War on Science: Who's Waging It, Why It Matters, What We Can Do About It by Shawn Lawrence Otto
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

A must read for anyone who wants to understand the current political climate. The hostility aimed at scientists gets worse each year as our society continues to slip. Otto provides a history of the tensions between science and civilization and its three main adversaries of the moment: religious zealots, corporate PR machines determined to discredit global warming, and some post-modern academics who dismiss science as "just another way" of looking at the world. As Otto points, science differs from other fields because it relies on overwhelming evidence to support itself, using experiments to confirm their conclusions. The amount of anti-intellectual nonsense out there is overwhelming, people willingly working against the future. At the same time, Otto calls out his fellow scientists to engage better with the public. My only criticism is that the book gets repetitive at times, but still though provoking.


View all my reviews