Blog

Review: "Gold: The Once and Future Money"

2010-06-11T23:07:25Z

Gold: The Once and Future Money by Nathan Lewis

An ambitious attempt to interpret all of economic history through the lens of gold, with the goal of establishing gold as the best available basis for money.

What have people used as money? What have rulers and governments tended to do to money? What comes into focus when you use gold as a reference source?

The main ideas here are that 1) gold is the people’s money (in the sense that people will always and have always found gold to be valuable and desirable); 2) gold keeps people, and especially rulers, honest; and 3) in a world of ever-shifting values, gold can be usefully used as a stable reference point.

Lewis tells the history of money generally, focuses in on the history of money in the U.S., then zeroes in on a survey of currency crises throughout the world. In its critiques of conventional economics, the gold-bug vision is surprisingly radical and trenchant -- very similar to, say, the Modern Monetary Theory (ie., hyper-Keynesian) view of things, though their proposed solutions differ by 180 degrees.

The book was twice as long as I needed it to be, but I was glad to have read it. Whether Lewis’ argument is right or wrong -- and how would I know? -- I found the book informative, challenging, and enlightening.

View more of my reviews at GoodReads >>

Park Musings

2010-06-11T22:17:41Z

Polly and I often take walks by the Hudson, down near Greenwich Village and further south, where New York City has been building a park for some years. Stretches of it are now complete, and it's possible to enjoy and marvel over what we've been given. It's a delicious location, and many of the plantings are beautiful. But some of the park's decorative features have caught my easily-annoyed eye.

Here's an example of one such:

What on earth is that thing? And what is it doing there?

Though it looks like a jungle gym on acid, or maybe a bus shelter constructed by a team of schizophrenics, it isn't meant to be interacted with physically. It doesn't supply seating or shelter, and you aren't allowed to climb on it.

It isn't the only kooky jungle gym / dinosaur spine on display, by the way. Here's another one:

I guess we're meant to take these things as ... what? Sculpture? Art? But do they make any sense as sculpture or art? Are there many people who would encounter one of these things and find them delightful or moving, let alone witty or meaningful? I can see how some might find them cheery ... But even in those terms, they strike me as akin to a smiley face. So maybe they're best understood as gigantic touches of "entertainment."

Next, and related, example: swoopiness. For no apparent reason the park's paths, plantings and lawns have been given this kind of shape:

Noticing this feature, I react with a hearty "What the hell? What's that swoop doing there?" Even a fan of decoration and ornament (and I am one) can find this kind of completely random design touch perplexing.

Here's another example:

Childish cheeriness, randomly applied, sez I.

Speaking of which, bear with me as I zero in on how the space defined by that swoop has been filled. It'll help bring my musings into focus.

Randomly spaced, brightly-colored tiles ... Hmm, reminds me of nothing so much as the elementary school I attended ...

Hence my conclusion: The civic resource our city has given us is half a park, half a nursery school.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm glad the park is there. I'm a regular visitor myself, and it's apparent that the park works. Lots of people use and enjoy it -- it's a success. Architecture and planning are practical arts, much like cooking, and successes need to be acknowledged.

But perhaps it can also be noted that the designers behind these features (and the people who commissioned the designers) are treating us -- the public -- like children. We-the-public, in other words, are understood to be undignified, immature, easily-distracted creatures ever in need of regular blasts of meaningless invention, cheeriness, and whimsy. It's the park as packaged food; our new park is to traditional parks what Cocoa Puffs is to real food.

America, eh? Why don't more of us get upset about being treated like infantile idiots?

Oakeshott Online

2010-06-10T08:37:40Z

I just turned up a scanned PDF of Michael Oakeshott's essay "On Being Conservative."

Don't be such an illiberal liberal that you turn your nose up because of the essay's title. Oakeshott was a sophisticated and brilliant guy as well as a great writer, and his case for conservatism is lots of fun to wrestle with. Why not challenge yourself? Who knows, you might even find yourself agreeing with a couple of his points. And wouldn't that be a kick in the pants?

Here's the Michael Oakeshott Association.

Book Club: "Voodoo, Ltd."

2010-05-31T16:53:03Z

Polly and I read Ross Thomas' droll, L.A.-set 1992 yarn -- part caper novel, part thriller, part shaggy dog story -- about a movie star, some hypnotists, multiple blackmail plots, and the team that's brought in to crack the case as our Book Club selection for May, 2010.

Polly: I wish Thomas had taken more care to deliver a couple of juicy big scenes, but basically it's a superfun, cynical and sophisticated read.

Ray: Not up with Thomas' very best, and I have to confess that I often have a hard time following Thomas' double-cross-heavy, baroque plotting -- does the book's plot really make sense? -- but it's still a dazzling and exuberant entertainment.

Bonus Links

There isn't a lot about Ross Thomas on the web, which is a shame. Let's hope he won't be forgotten just because he died before the web existed.
By far the best thing I could turn up online is this good Roger Simon reminiscence of Thomas, who was his friend
A short appreciation from Thrills Kills and Chills
Tony Hiss compares Thomas to Raymond Chandler, which strikes me as 'way off, but which is sweetly intended

Book Club: "Psycho"

2010-05-31T16:37:18Z

Polly and I read Robert Bloch's famous 1959 horror-thriller as our Book Club choice for April, 2010. Yes, this is the yarn that was the source for Alfred Hitchcock's movie, and it's quite amazing how much of the movie is already there in the book. The biggest difference between the two works is Norman Bates, who in the movie is played as a ticcy nervous nellie by the scrawny Anthony Perkins; in the book, Norman is a heavyset, slow-moving, anonymous schlump who wears thick eyeglasses.

Polly: Fabulous -- essential reading for any horror or thriller enthusiast.

Ray: Aside from its famously clunky plot-wrap-up chapter, ditto: What a performance.

Bonus Links

Wikipedia's entry on Bloch
A short biography
A number of interviews with Bloch

Linkage du Jour

2010-05-07T17:45:25Z

Yet another good reason to enjoy your coffee.
For people who want to have a public online identity but who don't want to go to the trouble of running a fullscale website or blog, Flavors.me looks like an excellent service. Use it to create a one-page homepage -- basically a portal to all your other web activities. Here's a helpful TechCrunch review Here's a nice example of what the service enables you to create.
Elvis Presley didn't take the most romantic way out.
Here's a weird fate.
I don't know about you, but I'm definitely feeling rattled.
More about Newsweek's troubles: here and here.
Gameblog of the Day: Dave from Hawaii and Roissy commenter dragnet get down to some Game basics.

Linkage du Jour

2010-05-06T17:13:07Z

Was Social Darwinism ever really much of a cultural movement -- or did historian Richard Hofstadter make it all up?
Is the immigration issue going to dominate the British elections?
How deep do the similarities between sociopaths and American politicians go?
African-Americans feel for other African-Americans more than white people feel for other white people.
Here's a view of ol' Abe you won't run into every day.
Please, taxpayers, can I have some more?
Get your pet ready for the coming collapse.

Crap Space 9

2010-05-05T06:08:26Z

Another look at the many ways our developers and designers have come up with to create dead and unused spaces. A quick reminder: traditional spaces don't often go unloved. Trad piazzas, parks, public squares and verandas have, in many cases, delighted, attracted and served users for centuries. It took we moderns to come up with such a variety of repellant spaces.

Today's example is almost brand new -- a Greenwich Village patio atop a restaurant's roof, in a notch-like shape defined by two low-ish buildings that, for whatever reason, don't abut. Forgive the borders and the drop shadows in the visuals, by the way. I've been dicking around with a cute little photo editing program, and couldn't resist. Still, the orange circle may be useful.

Does this empty wedge of space exist because zoning laws require it? Because the restaurant at ground level refused to sell air rights? Because the designer and developer behind the the metal-and-glass building on the left thought it would look cool? Beats me. In any case, you can see that the patio space is, by NYC standards, pretty large. You can also see that, despite the sunny spring day, and although someone has gone to the trouble of putting some chairs and a plant out, no one's using the patio. In fact, I've walked by this little gem dozens of times, at many different times and on many different kinds of days, and I've never seen anyone making use of this patio.

Why should this be the case? Perhaps it has to do with the fact that it's noisy. Only ten or so feet above the sidewalk, it can't give a person much protection. But maybe there's more to it than that. Let's take a closer look.

The closeup helps illustrate my guess about why this patio is such a dud. Actually, two guesses. One is that the patio is featureless and abstract. There's something about blankness that puts most people off. As chic as emptiness might look, everyday people find pure geometry barren and bleak -- anything but welcoming and uncozy. The second reason I come up with has to do with the wall behind the chair and the plant. Hard to tell from my snapz, but it's made of metal -- dazzling, chilly, highly-reflective, unyielding and hugely unfriendly stuff. Sitting out there when the sun isn't out -- well, what would be the point? But sitting out there on a sunny day? It must be like sitting in a solar oven. Nice work, designers!

What's your hunch about what it is that makes this patio such a convincing piece of crap space? Click on the "Crap Space" tag below to marvel at other entries in this series.

Review: "13 Bankers"

2010-05-01T06:21:33Z

13 Bankers: The Wall Street Takeover and the Next Financial Meltdown by Simon Johnson

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Excellent look at the current financial crisis by journalists Simon Johnson and James Kwak, not that (despite their heroic efforts) I’ll ever be able to recall exactly what a “CDO” is.

Two notable strengths of the book: 1) They set the crisis in context, spelling out the history of the relationship between the financial industry and the government, and 2) They tell the story as the tale of the financial industry doing everything it can for decades to take over as much of the American economy as possible. (Seemed plausible to me.) Their conclusions: The financial industry and the government now work in collusion, and the country is now ruled by an oligarchy.

This isn’t a trenchant, deep critique of the system, let alone anything that questions the roots of anything at all. It’s a pretty establishment performance -- but a smart and tough-minded one anyway. (Their main policy suggestion: Break up the too-big-to-fail banks.) As a fast, helpful, head-clearing snapshot of where we are now, it’s first-class.

View more of my reviews at GoodReads>>

Is PC Coming to an End?

2010-04-16T20:07:36Z

I keep wondering about Political Correctness ... It's been such a feature of the landscape for so long now ... It's based so much on thought suppression, thought control and thought policing ... Well, given the internet, how much longer can it last?

I see a lot of contempo phenomena like Game, Tea Parties, secessionism, even Paleo eating (all of which may, or god knows may not, have some validity in their own terms) as rumblings -- as indicators that many people are starting to notice, think, feel and react for themselves, and are beginning to try to pick their own way through the mess.