The Choice Wine by Steve Bollman is a how-to book with practical steps for anyone who wants to be happy, aimed particularly at married couples.  The same advice works for single people and engaged couples; it is basic.

Bollman father-in-law gave him simple advice for having a happy marriage:

Eat dinner with your family every night
Go to church with your family every week.

Bollman builds these two simple ideas into his 7 step guide and adds in statistics and scientific research to demonstrate that these steps do indeed correlate with happiness and happy marriages.  At one point he notes that the step may not cause happiness, but that the people who act this way already have habits and attitudes that bring happiness.  He uses Christian scripture to anchor the advice.

The 7 steps are:

1.  Honor your wedding vows.  This means fidelity and chastity, including mental chastity.  Bollman points out that adultery devastates marriages – which most of us know – and adds the insight that indulging in pornography also hurts the marriage.
2. Use money for others.  Be charitable with time and money.  Bollman talks here about spending time with people (eat dinner with your family) and with giving your worldly goods to your spouse and to others.
3. Give God some of your time.  This one may be hard for some to swallow but here too we have study upon study that shows the link between going to church/regular prayer and happiness and strong families. This step links to his father-in-law’s advice to go to church weekly.
4. Set your mind on things above.  This one is common sense but we all too often neglect it.  If you think about good things and not bad, it is easier to be good, to think better of others, to not hold grudges, to not be irritable.  Our retired bishop gave a homily last year where he asked us to not say one negative thing about another person all week.  It was hard but it worked!
5. Find God in yourself.  This is not the New Age “the god within” but the real deal.  This is applying church and prayer to yourself, to view yourself as important to God, to have high personal integrity and a moral code.
6. Find God in other people.  Just once I saw my husband as God sees him.  It was glorious.  If we could see each other the way God sees us it would set us free.
7. Make it easy to be good and hard to be bad.  Common sense.

Writing Style

My only complaint with the book was with Bollman using his in laws Riley and Rose Mary as imaginary discussion partners.  It quickly got tedious.

Overall Thoughts

Based on my personal experience and from observing my and Dave’s parents, the advice and the steps are sound.  Yes, there are people who do all seven steps and get divorced or are miserable and there are people who never go to church who have been happily married for years.

These steps are not magic.  They are meant as practical tips, steps that will greatly improve your chances to be happy and your ability to have a happy and mutually fulfilling marriage.

Likely there are some who will pooh-pooh the advice, especially that based on faith and love of God.  If that is you, then why not take a chance, try going to church and looking for God in yourself and others.  Just maybe you will find happiness.

I received a complimentary copy in exchange for a review through NetGalley.  4 Stars.  The advice is 5 stars.

 

Magazine Foreign Affairs recommended Knife Fights: A Memoir of Modern War in Theory and Practice by John Nagl, a former lieutenant colonel in the US Army who has experience researching, teaching and fighting counter insurgency in Iraq.  Nagl writes in an engaging style with humor and emotion, making this an easy-to-read book that covers a deadly serious and important topic.

Nagl covered his earlier theories on counter insurgency, developed via research for his doctorate from Oxford in a prior book, Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife: Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya and Vietnam.  In Knife Fights: A Memoir of Modern War in Theory and Practice he shows how his theories worked in the real world, in Iraq.

He spent a few chapters in his current book summarizing his experiences and what prompted his interest and led him to proselytize counter insurgency as a mandatory skill for the US military. These early chapters painted Nagl as intelligent, dedicated, very self-aware, excellent at building networks and friends, and thoughtful.  He realized that the downside of US military superiority is that few enemies will choose to fight us face to face.   Asymmetrical / guerrilla wars will be more common.

Nagl spent time at the Pentagon as a military assistant in the Department of Defense, and time teaching at West Point, and used both opportunities to plant seeds in leaders’ minds of the need to switch focus from wrecking havoc to protecting the population after the military invades a country.

Nagl shared excellent insights into the misery the US ran into immediately after the Iraq invasion:  The planning was superficial and did not address what to do with the country once we got there; the decision to disband the Iraq army meant no one was in charge of huge weapons depots and tens of thousands of experienced and angry men were no unemployed; the insufficient number of US troops to simultaneously protect people, secure weapons and deal with the chaos.

Nagl’s primary message is that counterinsurgency is messy, unpleasant, unrewarding and absolutely necessary.  He supports what should be obvious, that the US shouldn’t get into fights without careful thought and only when necessary, and if we do, we must have a plan to deal with the aftermath.  Further we need to develop and institutionalize the skills to handle post conflict problems and the ability to learn and adapt.

Overall Knife Fights: A Memoir of Modern War in Theory and Practice is excellent, well worth reading if you are interested in foreign affairs or understanding the effects politics and military affairs have on each other.  I found a few pages annoying but the book overall is illuminating and reflects the author’s experience augmented by his carefully thought out theory of war.

The book 13 Hours is not:

• A novel
• A political tirade
• An expose
• An examination whether our government deliberately misled about the terrorist involvement
• A prescription to avoid future incidents
• A blame cast (although it’s obvious that there is plenty to blame if one wanted)

13 Hours is an hour-by-hour account of the time immediately before, during and after the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attack on the US consular office and CIA annex as seen by, acted by, thought and felt by the surviving members of the “annex security team”.  The security team members were ex-military men contracted to provide extra security to the CIA case officers present in Benghazi, Libya.

I was impressed by the care the authors took to avoid compromising security or blaming others by name.  Naturally they were furious about certain measures, notably that the local CIA security chief “Bob” (not his real name) insisted on relying on local Libyan militia and, per their narrative, insisted on delaying the response to the first attack on the local consular office while he tried to reach the local militia leaders.  They used matter of fact, timeline narration to show their incredulous anger at the delay, during which two American consular staff and the US Ambassador to Libya were holed up in a burning residence.

They raised several points simply by stating the facts and narrating their response.  For example, the consular office had no fire suppression or breathing masks, the local CIA chief seemed more interested in protecting the CIA mission secrecy than in responding to the crisis, the local militia were mixed quality and uncertain loyalty, and someone was able to fire mortars accurately onto the roof of a house-sized building.  (The authors stated a mortar team needs exact coordinates to be that accurate – which leads one to wonder how the attackers got those coordinates.)

13 Hours does an excellent job making us see the security personnel as people instead of as faceless contractors, or stereotyped ex-military mercenary hard noses.  They included several maps of local Benghazi and of the two compounds that helped set context.  (Before reading I had the impression the “CIA annex” was in the same compound as the ambassador’s temporary residence when in fact it was about 2 miles away.)

Overall this is a sad book with an unhappy ending.  The attacks killed the US ambassador, a computer expert and two of the contractors. The security team helped the few dozen other American staff to leave Benghazi alive.

Compliments to the authors for bringing a horrific situation to life via matter of fact, calm narratives instead of indulging in blame or rage.  4 Stars

Change of Heart: Justice, Mercy, and Making Peace with My Sister’s Killer is a most unusual book.  As the subtitle notes, Jeanne Bishop has worked to first forgive and second to reconcile to the man who brutally murdered her sister, sister’s husband and their unborn child.

Change of Heart walks us through from the first few days after Ms. Bishop’s father found the bodies, through a nightmarish fiasco where the FBI tried to connect the murders with Ms. Bishop’s work in the Irish peace movement, to the trial and sentencing of the true murderer, David Biro.  That first part of the story is easy.  Bad guy commits murder, is found guilty and sentenced.

The second part of the book is harder.  Ms. Bishop became active in the anti death penalty movement, successfully lobbying for Illinois to end its capital punishment.  She describes how she initially held off from thinking of Biro as a person, putting him in a mental box even while she worked hard to forgive him.

After many years she realized that she needed to go beyond forgiving him in her private thoughts and heart, and instead pray for Biro that he could also receive God’s mercy and loving kindness.  Finally she visits him in prison to tell him that she forgave him and this act began an odd relationship.  Eventually Biro confessed to her in writing, an act that he recognized would forever make it impossible for him to pretend to innocence.

Biro was legally a minor, although the book implies he was just shy of 18 when he murdered, and Ms. Bishop extended her work to banish capital punishment to also banish the mandatory life-without-parole sentences for minors.  She did this knowing that such a sentencing revision could free the man who murdered her family.  She believes that we should never assume that a given person cannot be redeemed, cannot be rehabilitated and brought back into society.

Forgiving is hard enough.  Spending time face to face with someone you have every reason to hate must be incredibly difficult, and even harder would be to work for their eventual rehabilitation and possible release.

Once I spent several days with a person who found every possible way to annoy me.  It was so easy, so enticing, to play back the conversation and insults and dwell on his behavior.  It was only afterwards that I realized that such a personal encounter is actually an opportunity to receive God’s grace.  Difficult people and troubling experiences give us the chance to first recognize our own failings and sins and second to reach into the well of grace and help that person whether by action or prayer.  This isn’t namby pamby “saintliness” but true experience of grace.  Ms. Bishop went so far beyond that I have no words to describe her actions.

I recommend this but be aware it is well-written but due to subject matter is not enjoyable reading.  I received an advance copy in exchange for an honest review.

This is a book review blog focusing on science fiction and fantasy, but I’ve been fascinated with why and how people followed such an evil man.  Hitler’s Last Secretary: A Firsthand Account of Life with Hitler helps answer the question.

Hitler’s Last Secretary: A Firsthand Account of Life with Hitler by Traudl Junge is unusual in that she wrote it in 1947-8, while her memories were fresh – and positive.  Junge doesn’t try to explain or justify, she remembers and describes what she saw and felt.

She spent hours in attendance with Hitler and his inner circle from 1942 until the very end, typing letters and speeches and providing pleasant companionship.  The book includes Junge’s comments from around 2000 regarding her thoughts when she re-read the manuscript years afterwards, after she had time to recognize the evil of the men she only thought she knew.

In her forward Junge says of the late 1940s, “At this period we were all looking to the future and trying – with remarkable success, incidentally – to repress and play down our past experiences.”  She comments that she didn’t know what was happening because she did not ask and she did not ask because she did not want to know.  She questioned only too late.

We see a portrait of Hitler as a kindly leader, warm, charismatic, fatherly to those he liked.  (It reminded me of watching the first Godfather movie.)  He even arranged/encouraged Junge’s marriage, a step she was reluctant to take.  (The cover photo shows her with her new husband and the two witnesses.)

Hitler clearly felt he was destined to rule, equated “Germany” with himself, thought he was always right and dramatically superior to everyone else.  He was the worst possible combination of an ideologue with a charismatic leader who thought of himself as invincible.  (I fear ideologues like Pol Pot, Mao, Hitler because they can justify everything they do on the basis of their distorted view of what should work vs. what does work.  They will sacrifice anyone and anything to make their vision real.)

Despite Junge’s overwhelmingly positive feelings there are chilling points.

• The Jewish school friend whose family was once well-off but were later barred from working and eventually emigrated to America.
• The dietitian friend and former co-worker who wrote Junge in the later part of the war that once the SS found her foundling great grandmother was Jewish that she and her family could not find work and were destitute.  Junge took the letter to Hitler who pushed through “Aryanization” for the dietitian and her family.
• The wife of a colleague who asked Hitler whether he knew of the horrible conditions the Dutch Jews were in when transported to the camps.  Hitler left the room and the colleague and wife were not invited back.

All throughout Junge claims she kept her eyes out of politics, stayed away from the party, avoided thinking of anything other than the day-to-day work, her friends.  She worried about her family in Munich once the air raids started but even then believed Hitler when he said the setbacks were temporary.

She mentioned two times she saw cracks in the kindly facade.  First when Hitler stated he wouldn’t marry because he didn’t think it was fair to bring children into the world who were destined to fall short of his greatness.  Second when he decorated boys defending Berlin while planning suicide for himself.

Aside from the glimpses she could have seen into the ongoing persecutions, Junge provides other vignettes that are disturbing.

Hitler insisted on having his secretaries and other female staff spend time with him every evening.  But he did not like to hear them call it a “duty”.  He saw the fact he survived the assassination attempt in his military bunker as proving he was fated to lead the world.  She doesn’t mention the vicious hunt for the assassination plotters and all their friends and potential conspirators; it is difficult to believe she heard nothing about it.

But the most disturbing part of the book was Junge’s blind acceptance of whatever happened, whatever Hitler said.  She didn’t question, didn’t look for answers, didn’t even allow herself to think beyond the pleasantries of the day. Years after the fact we sometimes wonder how so many could so blindly accept what happened.  If this puzzles you, then read Hitler’s Last Secretary: A Firsthand Account of Life with Hitler.

 

Bill Bryson wrote Notes from a Small Island after his farewell tour of England in 1995, detailing his thoughts and reactions to the countryside and the people.  The book blurb says it is hilarious, I don’t agree.  Funny, yes in parts.  Insightful, yes.

Parts of the book were appalling, especially when Bryson describes his rude response to waiters and hotel clerks.  He admitted he treated people poorly a few times but other times seemed almost tone deaf.  One example was when he got soaked in a rainstorm walking back to his his hotel and had to wait a few minutes for the clerk to open up.  He recognized his rudeness but didn’t seem particularly ashamed or sorry.

I enjoyed reading about the countryside very much.  He spent most of his time in scenic, wilder places or small towns, not the typical London/Tower of England tour, and I loved reading about the beautiful countryside.

Bryson had interesting insights into the British character.  I was particularly struck by the “one mustn’t grumble” attitude he described several times.  It’s a refreshing change to see people who are content, even if they don’t have a lot of extras, and who appreciate what they do have.  I wonder whether this attitude is still prevalent or has shifted to the “I want” and the “more” attitude we see too often.

I liked reading about the walks; I would enjoy some of that although 10 miles is probably a bit much.  Bryson took public transportation or walked, and hired a car for only a few days out of a 7 week trip.

Some of his musings on politics and economics were worth reading.  He doesn’t see why certain things need to pay for themselves, and includes public transit, museums, national parks in that group.  I agree although I think public transit should make some sort of sense.  On the flip side he worked through a very long strike by the various printers/news workers unions early in his time in England and had nothing good to say about groups that insisted on ridiculous work rules and over staffing.

Late in the book he visits Durham and fell in love with the place.  I read about him online and saw that he did indeed go back to England after several years back in the US and settled in Durham.

I recommend this book although it didn’t inspire me to seek out more of Bryson’s writing.  He has a keen eye for place, the nuances of character that people display, interesting thoughts and ideas.   The downsides were the slow pace, glacial in spots, and the occasional display of mean temper.  Otherwise it was interesting but I wouldn’t call it a fun read.