Just Finished Reading: Waiting for War – Britain 1939-1940 by Barry Turner (FP: 2019) [342pp] 

Despite the expectation of many, after war was declared on Germany on 3rd September 1939 nothing happened. The expected air attacks did not occur despite an overzealous sounding of an air-alarm siren moments after the announcement. The so-called ‘Phoney War’ had begun and would last 8 months. It was a strange time for everyone. 

Most people's experience of war had ended in 1918. For those not involved in the front lines, and especially for those not living in London or on the South coast, they had practically no idea of what was going to happen next. Naturally the government sent out ‘information’ leaflets which were, as usual, not that informative. The overriding message, it seemed, was not to panic and that most things would continue pretty much as usual. Even after war was declared the Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain still hoped that Hitler could see the error of his ways and come back into the family of nations. Hence the dropping of leaflets, rather than bombs, on Germany in the early months. Unsurprisingly these had very little effect. Actually, the RAF was quite keen to start dropping bombs on German targets but were constrained by Government restrictions against damaging private property (I kid you not) and angering Hitler resulting in him being pushed further from the negotiation table. 

Meanwhile, in England, wartime restrictions had come into place – including a countrywide blackout. Most of this was completely pointless and, paradoxically, caused a lot more injuries and even deaths than any enemy action did. Likewise, the evacuation of hospital patients away from the capital and the restriction of the availability of hospital beds (in anticipation of mass casualties due to bombing) caused people to miss their required procedures thereby probably hastening their deaths – and still, week after week, without any enemy action. Along with hospital patients and the elderly living in the predicted ‘danger zones’, thousands of mothers and young children were moved out into safer areas to prevent both mass casualties and mass panic during the expected bombing. It wasn’t long before people started moving back into places like London and other cities because of the many practicalities overlooked by government guidelines. 

One thing that did interest me was the issue of gasmasks. Although gas was never used it was thought that it might well be, so every adult (and child) in the country was issued with a mask and was required to carry it on them at all times. Failure to do so could get you a talking to by the police or even the issue of a fine. When it became obvious that gas wasn’t going to be an issue a growing number of people simply stopped carrying them. After a while the police & the government just had to turn a blind eye to this to save on the effort of enforcing a non-sensical rule. [Side note: for years in High school the bag I used to carry my books & stuff in was my dad's gasmask case which was quite brilliant. I loved it!] 

With the Second World War being an unprecedented event, it's hardly a shock that at least some of the government’s plans were either irrelevant or actually counterproductive. Partially it was various departments working at cross purposes or interpreting instructions in various conflicting ways. Partially, of course, it was the result of guesswork that had to be rolled back or rescinded once policy hit hard reality. Partially it seemed to be the reluctance of the Chamberlain government to accept reality – they were at war and sooner or later war-like things were going to start happening. This was an interesting insight into some of the chaos in the early months of the conflict and particularly how the ‘Phoney War’ impacted civil society. I think, for me, the thing that stood out the most was the cynicism and scepticism of the public and their willingness to break what they saw as pointless regulations. Maybe the people in that time were not as compliant as we assume they had been. Recommended for anyone with an interest in the early part of WW2 and its impact on the average person in the street.   

I think the only one of those I don't like is the Double Decker.... 

Just Finished Reading: Ghosts of Empire by George Mann (FP: 2017) [292pp] 

London, 1927. It was supposed to be a much-needed vacation, especially after the incidents in New York which very nearly ended all of their lives. But Gabriel was a man of action, a crime fighter and dedicated enemy of monsters, so visiting historic sites in London and sitting in fancy restaurants for too long was starting to bore him. Luckily their late guest provided much of interest, especially as he arrived covered in his own blood and was barely alive. Unable to tell Gabriel who attacked him or why it was clearly time to his alter-ego known simply as ‘The Ghost’ to investigate further. It wasn’t long before his friend's attackers showed their hand again in an all-out assault using esoteric magic the like of which the Ghost/Gabriel had never seen before. There was far more going on here than a simple attack, something dark, something sinister and, so it seemed, something very Russian. The Ghost couldn’t fight such a force on his own. Even his friends, as capable as they were, would not be enough. Luckily for the Ghost he was far from alone. Operating in the shadows, watching, waiting and gathering strength was an element of the British Secret Service dedicated to fighting the Empire’s supernatural enemies. After the end of the Great War and the recommencement of the ‘Great Game’ they knew that the Russian Empire would be itching to strike at the very heart of Albion itself – and Gabriel Cross, AKA The Ghost – had just walked right into the middle of it. 

This was the 4th and final book in the Ghost series. Whilst not my favourite – that was the 2nd book Ghosts of War – this was still a FUN romp in a crazy mixed-up steampunk, Lovecraftian, gothic Batmanesque world. It did start off rather slow but ramped up quickly once the action started. Some of the characters from previous novels got a bit more into the action this time – Gabriel's cop-friends wife actually got some ‘acting’/action time here and proved herself capable with the pistol – although some got trimmed back a bit – Ginny was definitely toned down as she had become quite powerful in the last book, being inhabited by a shard of an Egyptian god and all that.... The one I really missed was Astrid, the New York witch, who I really liked and wanted to see more of. I did like some of the British spies – both the boss and the girl had some depth of character to them – and the baddies were suitably BAD although maybe a little too weak. Much of the magic work was reasonable (reminding me of Dr Strange more than anything else) but much was very well done. The final ‘boss fight’ was slightly disappointing but not too much so. Overall, it was a pretty good outing and I enjoyed it. It was interesting that more attention was paid to the use of magic in the Great War than had been hinted at before but it's possible that the general public wasn’t aware of it as the information came during an exposition by the head Secret Service guy, but that would cast the conflict in a whole different light. Personally, I’m still totally intrigued by the whole idea of monsters from other dimensions living & feeding in no-man's land. That STILL sends shivers down my back! Looking forward to more novels/series from this author. More to come. Above average stuff and, therefore, recommended. At last, a FINISHED series – time to start two more!! 

Happy Birthday: Charles Patrick Ryan O'Neal (April 20, 1941 – December 8, 2023) was an American actor. Born in Los Angeles, he trained as an amateur boxer before beginning a career in acting in 1960.

In 1964, he landed the role of Rodney Harrington on the ABC night-time soap opera Peyton Place. It was an instant hit and boosted O'Neal's career. He later found success in films, most notably in the romantic drama Love Story (1970), for which he was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actor and the Golden Globe Award for Best Actor – Motion Picture Drama; Peter Bogdanovich's What's Up, Doc? (1972); Paper Moon (1973), which earned him a nomination for the Golden Globe Award for Best Actor – Motion Picture Musical or Comedy; Stanley Kubrick's Barry Lyndon (1975), in which he portrayed the titular character; Richard Attenborough's A Bridge Too Far (1977); and Walter Hill's The Driver (1978).

Just Finished re-Reading: The Hound of the Baskervilles by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (FP: 1902) [315pp] 

It was quite a story – a family curse, an isolated location and a spectral hound bent on a family's destruction. Holmes was suitably sceptical but equally intrigued, most especially when he heard how the latest tenant of Baskerville Hall had died – in sheer terror running for his very life. The reason Dr Mortimer was anxious for Holmes’ help was the imminent arrival of the last of the Baskerville line, recently residing in North America. He hoped that the story, and the family mystery, would intrigue the great detective enough to use his powers to unravel the riddle, see off the hound, and save the life of an innocent but cursed man. Holmes said that he would be delighted to, if only he had the time for he was pressed by other cases. He would volunteer Watson though and despatched him North to report back to Baker Street anything which might help the case move forward. Watson, alone and surviving on his wits (as well as what Holmes had taught him over the years), was going to be at his very best if he was going to protect Sir Henry Baskerville and help solve the mystery. If called upon could Holmes arrive in time to save the day if Watson couldn’t. He hoped that he wouldn’t have to put it to the test. 

As with the other Holmes books, I first read this over 40 years ago. I was somewhat surprised therefore by how well I remembered the plot although I’m guessing that’s as much based on the excellent 1939 movie adaptation starring the inimitable Basil Rathbone as Holmes and Nigel Bruce as Watson. I remembered this as my favourite Holmes outing, and I think I can say that it retains this top spot. Although I do enjoy the tightness of the short story format – which, to be honest, stops Conan Doyle going ‘off-piste’ with side stories in exotic lands – I did enjoy this substantial novel giving ACD time to develop the plot and have time for some decent character development. I liked, or at least didn’t dislike, most of the characters here. Dr Mortimer was an interesting one and I liked the way he described himself as ‘a dabbler in science, a picker-up of shells on the shores of the great unknown sea’ - very poetic! I did also laugh when Holmes *really* didn’t like being described (by the Dr again) as ‘the SECOND highest expert in Europe’. 

One of the things that really jumped out at me and was quire perplexing was the spelling of Eskimo – spelt in this case: ESQUIMAUX. Really? Was there no agreed upon spelling for Eskimo at that time? Did the author spell it phonetically because he didn’t know how to spell it? I’m intrigued! As with a hand-full of his short stories there was a definite Gothic feel to good chunks of the story, as you might imagine with a Hell Hound nipping at some of the characters feet, and Baskerville Hall certainly had that feel about it. LOTS of white paint needed, I think. A comment from Watson about Holmes made me smile – that Holmes had a ‘cat like love of personal cleanliness’. Finally, there was much mention, and much made of, the Barrows on Dartmoor as the *houses* of neolithic peoples – they were, of course, burial sites but I guess that this was unknown at the time of publication. 

Overall, I enjoyed this a great deal, and I was glad that my fondness for the book hasn’t diminished much over four decades. Definitely deserving its classic status and well worth a read even if you’re not already a Sherlock fan. After reading this you will be. I’m already looking forward to the last three books in the Holmes collection and then onto other Holmes ‘related’ tales. Much more to come. Oh, I almost forgot... I usually try to find the actual cover of the book I’m reviewing, but can’t in this particular case because my copy doesn’t *have* a cover. It’s a small format hardback I picked up in a 2nd-hand bookshop at some point in the late 70’s (I think!) for the princely sum of £1 and was published in 1948. Although not as nice as the copy I have of Pride & Prejudice – published during WW2 – I'm still rather fond of it. Pity about the lack of a dust jacket though!   

I LIKE it!!

Just Finished Reading: The Road to Wigan Pier by George Orwell (FP: 1937) [212pp] 

I grew up (ages 10-23) about 7 miles from Wigan so it's not that surprising that I’d heard about this classic for as long as I can remember. Recently, especially after reading another non-fiction by Orwell, I thought it was about time I finally got around to reading it. It wasn’t really what I was expecting and, to be honest, I was a little disappointed that Wigan itself didn’t appear more prominently in the narrative. But that was my only, very minor, quibble with this work. 

The word that comes to mind concerning his descriptions of working-class life in the North of England around that time is: grim. Not only was unemployment rife and of long duration – the area was only just beginning to recover from the Great Depression despite industrial uptick due to the ongoing (slow) rearmament program – but the general living conditions were often appalling. Born in a dilapidated Victorian terrace myself (built I think in 1888) I could easily visualise Orwell’s accounts of the houses he stayed in during his time there. I could also sympathise with the tales of overcrowding – although I have no solid memory of such – as my parents and my brother and I shared a TWO-bedroom house with my maternal grandparents. How we actually managed that is beyond me! 

Another early section that really jumped out at me was his description of a visit to a coal mine and a discussion of the conditions below ground as well as how poorly treated (and paid) the coalminers were. In the 1970’s - so a little over a generation later – my school offered a trip to one of the last working coal mines in the area. I THINK it was probably Golborne Colliery. So, when Orwell described the conditions at the coalface and the hardship of just getting there and back – UPAID – I was right there with him. The group of us (plus a teacher or two) only stayed there a few hours but by the time we got back I was both exhausted and filthy – and we hadn’t actually DONE anything. The guys who actually WORKED down there, 8, 10 or more hours a day, week in and week out – just the thought of it amazes me, as it did Orwell who had nothing but praise for them. 

Whilst the first half of the book covered conditions for the workers – both above and below ground – the second half moved onto more political and sociological discussions of Class which was much more important and honestly rigid almost 100 years ago. Orwell had some interesting ideas about the prospect of a ‘classless’ society as well as the problems of ‘social mixing’. In some ways little has changed, although so-called social mobility is far easier these days where money talks louder than old-school ties – at least in most places. I did find it interesting when Orwell mused on the possible future European war and the dangerous rise of fascism both on the Continent and in England itself. Interestingly he thought that fascism could indeed take hold here if it wasn’t intelligently challenged.  

Overall, this was a very interesting look at a particular Class in a particular part of England at a particular time – and viewed (of course) from a Middle-class perspective [Orwell was VERY conscious of his position in the class hierarchy and that in itself was another fascinating look at the lived experience of the control system that Class was/is]. Inevitably this was at times very dated – a LOT has changed in the last 90 years or so – and, as a look into a very different world, could be quite confusing at times – even the language used was different in some ways back then – but as a brief glimpse of a slice of cultural/political/industrial history it's definitely worth a read and is worthy of the name Classic. More Orwell to come. Recommended.  

Happy Birthday: Guy Fawkes (13 April 1570 – 31 January 1606), also known as Guido Fawkes while fighting for the Spanish, was a member of a group of provincial English Catholics involved in the failed Gunpowder Plot of 1605. He was born and educated in York; his father died when Fawkes was eight years old, after which his mother married a recusant Catholic.

Just Finished Reading: The Humans by Matt Haig (FP: 2013) [293pp] 

It was a punishment assignment, that was obvious from the start. His briefing was practically non-existent, he didn’t even know the language though, luckily, he was a quick learner. When they arrested him later – for not wearing cloths, how ridiculous! - he managed to cover his many mistakes with a simple phrased he’d picked up from Cosmopolitan: Nervous Breakdown. It was (almost) literally a get out of jail free card, well that and a bit of technologically enhanced hypnotism. It took a while longer to realise that they’d also lied to him. He’d just assumed that everything he ‘knew’ (or it turned out thought he’d known) was true, indeed obvious. It wasn’t. Sure, humans were indeed violent creatures who were wholly ignorant of how the Universe really worked but there was more to them than that. They had music, the poetry of Emily Dickenson and a wonderful food called ‘crunchy peanut butter’. They also, rather bizarrely, cared for their children and even knew who their parents were. Probably because of that oddness they also had something called ‘love’ but all of that was distracting from the mission.  

The real Dr Andrew Martin, who he had replaced soon after he was taken, had achieved a mathematical breakthrough. If allowed to be known it would propel humanity beyond its wildest dreams, into their Solar system and beyond into the greater Galaxy beyond. Such a thing could simply not be allowed to happen. The new ‘Andrew Martin’ would need to find out who knew about the breakthrough and eliminate them. Then, to make sure another breakthrough didn’t occur he needed to destroy all and any evidence. To be particular, he had been ordered to eliminate Andrew Martin’s wife and teenage son – just in case. That’s where the problems started and Newton the dog wasn’t exactly helping either... 

Sandwiched between a pair of serious books (the second of which is reviewed on Monday) I thought I’d drop in something silly, something different. This was definitely ‘it’. This is my 3rd book by this author and again I was not disappointed. He has the kind of off-beat quirky mind that I like – a lot. It would be easy to compare the author to Douglas Adams and this book to ‘Hitchhiker's Guide’ but that would be a disservice all around. Both are ‘light’ SciFi, both are commentaries on the absurdity of human existence, and both are ironically funny – and there the comparison falls apart. Essentially this is a novel about human relationships seen from a very ‘outside’ PoV. It's about just how HARD it is to communicate with others, even if you live with them, even if you gave birth to them, even if you love them – most of the time anyway. It’s about owning your mistakes; it's about admitting failure and doubt and it’s about knowing how inadequate the word "sorry" is. It is, in fact, all about being human. Funny, sad, profound at times and endlessly thought provoking I really liked it. Highly recommended – but you might need a few tissues ready for the sad bits.              

Just Finished Reading: National Populism – The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy by Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin (FP: 2018) [315pp] 

When the Soviet Union fell, and History ‘ended’ (or at least it seemed to according to some observers) it was assumed – by many this time – that Liberal Democracy had ‘won’ and that was it. For a while this rather simplistic view of things seemed to hold true. Democracy did indeed spread, and, for a while at least, it looked like Democracies would dominate the planet. But even the most optimist thought that Authoritarian regimes wouldn’t just vanish overnight. North Korea, China and other places would resist democratisation for years, decades, to come, right? What few saw is that the tide of democracy stopped and then turned back. Slowly at first, the numbers of clearly democratic counties actually REDUCED. What was going on? 

The problem, it would seem, was with Liberal Democracy itself. Much had been promised but little seemed to have been delivered except to the vanishingly few at the top of the tree. What little trickle down that actually existed (rather than simply being talked about and talked up) wasn’t anywhere near enough to satisfy those who felt ‘left behind’ by the pro-globalist forces. Something needed to change. As the so-called ‘peace-dividend’ failed to materialise, the housing bubble burst, the rich and shameless received their bailouts and a Pandemic spread across the globe people simply had had enough. It was time for something different, something new or actually something old – strong leaders who could ‘sought things out’ once and for all. With these reactions – against the ‘liberal elites’ - parties that had traditional stayed in the margins or even the shadows began winning seats in parliaments across the globe, from the UK, Europe, Asia and even the bastion of democracy, the USA itself. 

I did have some problems getting ‘into’ this book because, at least at first, I thought the authors were simply apologists for Authoritarianism. But I persevered and actually found the later part of the work much more interesting and even incisive. It’s clear that the present iteration of western Democracy has a problem – actually a number of problems. Sure, some of them have been exaggerated for effect by the Far Right, but there are the real foundations to their criticisms. The present political systems across the west do not accurately represent everyone they’re supposed to. That’s clear enough. The so-called ‘political classes’ have been for too long receding into the distance away from ‘ordinary people’ (a phrase I personally hate) and their concerns and instead of actually listening to their constituents (rather than merely going through the motions) are giving people what they should want, rather than what they actually want – or at very least taking actual desires into account.  

It shouldn’t have but the reaction against democracy has come as quite a shock both to politicians and political commentators in the media. If both groups had been paying more attention to falling voter turnout, increasing numbers of votes cast for ‘fringe’ candidates, street protests, rising acts of violence and a host of other indicators they might not have been. The ‘solution’ for many centrist parties, or even for those already on the centre-right, has been to try to steal the thunder of the more extreme political forces by moving to the right and adopting some of their policies in watered down versions. This is the ‘easier’ of their options and seems to be working at least in the short term. A much tougher option, at least from their perspective, is to make democracy work for everyone – as it should already be working. If Democracy is broken, or at least in need of some level of TLC, then it needs to be fixed rather than abandoned. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of world history knows exactly where growing Authoritarianism leads and its not to a happy place. If Democracy needs saving, which arguably it does, then we need to improve it, to ask the hard questions and be prepared to fix what needs fixing, to ACTUALLY listen to people's concerns, to involve more people more often in previously ‘elitist’ policy. You know, to be more democratic. That, I think, is the way forward to a happier place.  

This was an interesting, if sometimes depressing or disturbing, read and shows us that authoritarianism is, at least in the short term, here to stay. What I can but hope is that, if the right steps are taken, it will move back to the fringes and the shadows where it belongs. But, for the present it's not going anywhere. To understand why you could do worse than start here. A sobering read. Recommended.  

Happy Birthday to ME. 64 today............................!!!!

Only 15.......? Really......? 

I don’t know if you’ve had this experience recently, but I’ve been bombarded with a ‘meme’ on TicTok about the fact that the ‘average’ American house has only 15 books in it. Funnily the TicTokers I’ve seen have responded with incredulity and have said that they have at least 50 and in a few cases as many as 100 in their homes. Naturally this made me chuckle a bit as I’ve probably got at least 1500 and likely to be more in the region of 3-4K. I am still *thinking* of actually counting them but the amount of effort involved is putting me off. If they were all on shelves I’d give it a shot, but at least half of them are stacked on the floor (and a futon in my ‘spare’ room). Anyway, I was intrigued by the whole 15 books thing and did maybe 20-30 seconds of ‘research’ to discover how accurate it was – and found this:    

How Many Books Does The Average Person Own? 

By Rakib Sarwar 

September 6, 2023 

How many books is a lot to own? How many books does the average person buy? How many books does an average person read every year? How many books does the average person read? How many books are in the average American household? 

So, how many books does the average person own? The answer may surprise you. According to the Pew Research Center, the average American household owns around 29 books. However, this number is slowly declining as people move towards digital reading options. Interestingly, though, Americans still buy more physical books than any other country in the world with an average of 12 books purchased per year. And although we’re reading less print material than ever before, we’re still averaging about 5-6 books a year. 

How many books does the average person buy? 

The average person buys or collects about 12 books a year. You may think that this number is too low, but it really isn’t. When you consider how little time we have to read, the average person only has a small window in which they can purchase books. And unless you’re a professional reader, chances are, you may only buy one or two books every six months. This is especially true if you’re a busy individual. In fact, according to the Pew Research Center, it is estimated that millennials buy about 4 books per year while Gen Xers buy around 8. So, if you look at these numbers, it’s not surprising to learn that the average person only purchases 12 books per year. 

How many books does an average person read every year? 

Although the average number of books purchased is around 12, how many of those books do people actually read? According to a study by Pew Research Center, the average American reads just 4 books in a year. This is where things get interesting. If you look at this statistic over time, you can see that it has shifted. 

For example, in 2021 the average American read 24 books a year. Of course, this was during a time when ebooks were becoming wildly popular and contained an abundance of information. In the years leading up to 2021, though, the number of books read was much smaller. So clearly, something is happening in the world of publishing that is pushing the average person to read more. 

How many books does the average person read? 

The answer to this question depends largely on the individual. There are some people who have developed a love for reading, and as such, they want to read every day. If you’re someone who reads a lot, chances are that you probably average around 60 books a year. On the other hand, there are some people who only read a book or two every six months. This number is much smaller, but not everyone likes to read or needs to read. 

How many books are in the average American household? 

This number is changing from year to year, but it’s currently hovering around 30 books. This is an interesting number because most homes today are filled with more than one type of media. For example, many homes today have a TV in every room. This means that the average household may actually own around 100 books. 

However, the number of books in a home isn’t always reflective of its owner. If you have young children, you probably have a number of children’s books lying around. You may also have a few books that you plan on reading at some point in the future. Regardless of how many books you have, it’s likely that you’re buying an average number of books each year. 

Although the number of books in an average American household has decreased, there is still a demand for books and book ownership. Owning fewer books doesn’t mean that people are reading less, it could just mean that they are reading different types of books. With more ways to access information, such as the internet and e-readers, owning physical copies of books may not be as important as it once was.  

[Despite being a pretty poorly written ‘article’ it does show that I, and no doubt many people who regularly read/contribute to this Blog, am an outlier in this regard (plus not being American so the reported stats don’t really apply!). I’ve always been surprised by how LOW such ‘averages’ are and the fact that this must mean that a significant number of people must be reading VERY few books per year, if any at all. Unless people like me are SO out there that we’re practically a different class of human. Thoughts?] 

Happy Birthday: James Dewey Watson (born April 6, 1928) is an American molecular biologist, geneticist, and zoologist. In 1953, he co-authored with Francis Crick the academic paper proposing the double helix structure of the DNA molecule. Watson, Crick and Maurice Wilkins were awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material".