MENTAL FETTLE
°
Books/movies/et al. Send your review to class gmail address. Name you or not: you choose.
New: BooksByUs.
All YLS68 books+links. Yes!
|
Troublemaker: A Memoir from the Front Lines of the Sixties
by Bill Zimmerman (2011)
|
This best book on the antiwar movement begins with a fiery crash on Lake Shore Drive . . . “it rolled over six or seven times,” plus end-over-ends.
Seven teenagers. Calling on his lifeguard skills, Bill parks, runs over, pulls two severely injured out; three others manage to crawl out; of the
two unconscious he pries one out, and also the other -- as the front end is engulfed in flames. After, he talks to paramedics, but then, anonymous,
leaves, preferring to be The Lone Ranger. “Who was that masked man?”
Actually, that’s where the chapters commence. The Introduction begins with the student demonstrations in Paris in 1960: “The sound , big and
deep, like the roar of a great beast, rolled up from the street below and spilled into our attic room in the little hotel.”
At the University of Chicago, where attendance is optional and only final exams count, going into junior year, he suggests to two friends they
go to Europe -- Paris, French-language school. Boring, but “A month later, we first heard the roar of the student demonstrations on Boulevard
St. Michel.”
Which they join, just as the gendarme phalanx charges, “inflicting great bodily harm.” Off into side streets with others, all
the way to the Seine, where he sees soldiers in formation, rifles ready, bayonets fixed -- a reserve force, however, in case the
gendarmes failed; which they did not, as their violence ultimately succeeded.
Crowded into their hotel’s small bar he meets English-speaking Daniel, who turns his world upside down. Daniel says the students wanted the
troops to be deployed. The protestors’ strategy was to be injured, for there to be deaths -- to create such outrage that parliament would throw
out de Gaulle and install someone “ready to accept the inevitability of Algerian independence.” Political victory by losing physical battles.
We had no way to predict it, but with astounding speed the fifteen years that followed my encounter in Paris upended the United
States, shook it loose from its cultural and political mooring, and fundamentally redefined it as a nation and society. I was part of that
upending.
Click below for more, including flying into Wounded Knee.
This book by Joan Andersson's husband was reviewed by The New Republic. Selections :
"In Israel after Paris, he found himself among kibbutzniks studying Chinese and reading Mao on Shabbat mornings. He witnessed raw racism in the
Mississippi Delta and, writing evocatively about the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, he helps to undermine the absurd retroactive
falsification that the civil rights movement consisted strictly of a bunch of people who “marched with Martin Luther King” (though he did that too,
and got pelted with stones and bottles for his pains while trying to integrate a white part of Chicago).
Older than most of his political peers, Zimmerman did not become a full-time activist before trying a conventional career track. An early
student of the psychology of sleep at the University of Chicago, he earned a Ph.D. there and started teaching at Brooklyn College. He was in the
front line of the protest at the Pentagon in October 1967, as a long-haired protester walked down the line of soldiers calmly inserting flowers
into their rifle barrels. (This scene, captured by a Washington Post photographer, was the origin of “flower power.”) By the end of that year he
was refraining from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, or standing for “The Star-Spangled Banner.” Realizing that his scientific research might
have military applications, he renounced it, whereupon he got fired. After a period spent on Caribbean beaches, he started organizing other
scientists against military research.
"It took several years before Zimmerman realized that America was not ripe for revolution. It took him until 1971, in fact, when thousands
arrested in Washington in the largest mass arrest in the country’s history “did not immobilize the government,” to realize that “our strategy and
our tactics had both failed. … The massive arrests and our mistreatment by the police did not provoke a huge public outcry. … The workers did not
rise up and support us as they had in Paris in 1968. … We had miscalculated. … A majority of Americans were finally opposed to the war. Yet the
militant tactics of the antiwar movement alienated those same people, most of whom were not activists but ordinary citizens.”
"But Zimmerman had not gotten the word that the age of adventure was over. “If I couldn’t be a revolutionary,” he writes, “I’d be a troublemaker.”
Soon he was smuggling medical aid to Vietnam, starting with a stolen sample of a new antibiotic that would help wounded North Vietnamese soldiers
recover. He debated the rights and the wrongs, and concluded that this was a life-saving expedition, since American soldiers would not (in the
short run, at any rate) be placed in harm’s way as a result. Later, he was under American bombardment in North Vietnam, and raising funds for
medical supplies that went there, around the time when B-52s razed the largest and most advanced civilian hospital in Hanoi.
"All of this precedes the act of troublemaking for which Zimmerman is perhaps best known. In 1973, Oglala Lakota protesters and their
supporters occupied the town of Wounded Knee, South Dakota, to oppose their corrupt tribal leader and demand that the US enforce treaties. Federal
marshals and FBI men blockaded the town for 71 days. Zimmerman led a three-plane expedition through a storm across government lines and dropped a
ton of food for the besieged Indians—crippling his own plane in the process. This part of his book is as thrilling as any true-life thriller—which
it is.
"Where does one go from there? To normal politics. Zimmerman lobbied Congress in the closing years of the Vietnam War, and worked with Tom
Hayden to create what they hoped would be a California statewide electoral machine. He concluded that after 1973 “we … won significant victories
not with protests and defiance but with focused work inside the established political system.” He went on to become perhaps California’s most
accomplished progressive public relations and media consultant." . . .
Review by Todd Gitlin, professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia 2/15/2012.
Carl Djerassi's autobiography. (1992)
The name may not be familiar, yet it's hard to think of anyone -- anyone at all -- who has had a greater impact on the personal lives of the Class of 59 than this man. Indeed, not just our class, but all classes, everywhere, starting about the time we were on the Hilltop and continuing right up to present day!
* Djerassi was the father of the pill.
This book tells the pill's story -- and Djerassi's, beginning with:
"Arriving at our Gasthof, we sit down for lunch. The choices in our small inn are limited to various Schnitzel. At the sight of my Naturschnitzel
mit Champignons, drowned in cream sauce, the Viennese in me salivates, even as the weight-conscious, lipophobic Californian draws back in horror.”
There's a lot in this paragraph, the third in the book. As the fondness for cream sauce indicates, he was born in Vienna -- in 1923, it should be added. His mother was Austrian, family name Friedmann, a doctor and a dentist. His father, a dermatologist who specialized in treating syphilis (before penicillin, one wealthy guy with the disease could provide a year's income) was from Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria.
So, this was a union, an unusual one. It was a union of two very different Jewish cultures. The culture based in Central Europe is Ashkenazi and speaks German-derived Yiddish. The US today has 5 to 6 million citizens who trace their ancestry to this culture, twice as many as in Israel. The other is Sephardic, the culture of the
Sephardim. These speak Spanish-derived Ladino and established themselves in Spain and Portugal -- until expelled near the end of the 15th century. Some, it seems, ended up in Bulgaria.
Not surprisingly, there was a divorce when Carl was a child. His parents hid the divorce from him till he was in his early teens. He lived with his mother in Vienna, but summered with his father in Sofia. In 1938, his father remarried his mother, so she and Carl could escape the takeover of Austria by the Nazis, the Anschluss -- and survive! Few of us know much about Bulgaria, but here is something to know: "although not immune to antisemitism, Bulgaria proved a safe haven, as the country managed to save its entire 48,000-strong Jewish population from deportation to Nazi concentration camps." Truly remarkable.
Traveling regularly between the two cultures, Carl found that he much preferred the Sephardim. These people were more laid back and enjoyed life more. The Ashkenazi, at least in the form presented by his mother, were tense and driven, with few pleasures.
Not lucky enough to become a Hilltopper, he benefited from the next best thing -- in the circumstances. His father had him attend the American College of Sofia for a year, where he became fluent in English. Other than that, he had a fairly regular upbringing. He joined the Boy Scouts, learned Morse code, used it to convey exam answers to friends (two thumbs up, dash, one, dot)
In December of 1939, he and his mother arrived in NYC, "nearly penniless." It saved his life. He was sixteen. His mother found a job in upstate NY, near the Canadian border, while he was placed with a wonderful volunteer family near the city. His father stayed in Bulgaria and managed to survive only because of that country's remarkable achievement. Carl did not see him for many years.
Although he hadn't graduated high school, he ended up at Newark Junior College, where he was inspired by his freshman chemistry teacher, Nathan Washton. Approaching graduation, he wanted to continue at NYU -- so he wrote Eleanor Roosevelt. He originally thought to address her as "Your Excellency." He hoped she could help him get a scholarship.
He ended up with a scholarship to Tarkio College in MO. One you've never heard of, but in fact it has one very famous chemistry graduate, Wallace Carothers, who invented nylon. (Alas, he committed suicide a few years after). Carl found that he was a great novelty in the area -- someone who has come from the very maw of what everyone suspected was heading to become a worldwide catastrophe. Rotary clubs asked him to speak on the “European situation” – he stole from John Gunther’s book, Inside Europe, including his definition of Balkan Revolutions ("abrupt changes in the form of misgovernment"). Carl had an accent, which he enhanced because he knew it added to his appeal. When he lectured in churches, they passed the collection plate and give him whatever was in it (except the Methodists).
On his way to visit his mother, he stopped at Kenyon. Loved it. Applied. "I was offered a room, board, and tuition scholarship." He entered as a junior, but took an especially heavy course load, and graduated in one year summa cum laude. He then turned 19.
He did eventually make it to upstate NY, near the Canadian border, to see his mother, and while sitting around in her clinic, waiting for her, he glanced through the promotional materials from pharmaceutical companies lying about. He had already decided against an M.D., having read Paul de Kruif's Microbe Hunters. What he found in those materials can be said to have sparked the pill -- not because of any science they contained, but because he realized how many pharma firms were based in NJ, not far from Newark, "my emotional American home." He wrote them all, and one, the American branch of Switzerland's CIBA, offered him a job. "It was in Summit, New Jersey, that I crossed my Rubicon into organic chemistry."
At CIBA he worked with another Viennese refugee, twenty years older, and they "discovered one of the first antihistamines," Pyribenzamine, which quickly became the drug of choice for allergy sufferers and was used by millions. He is still only 19.
After this he read a famous natural products (drugs derived from plants and other organic materials) book and became hooked on steroids, in particular. He also decided to get a PhD in organic chemistry, applying to and accepted by Wisconsin.
He worked under two young profs seeking "the total synthesis of steroids," though he also did research into transforming steroids into drugs of use. He got married (first of three), still only 19, on his way to Wisconsin (wedding night on Pullman sleeper), and while there had one of his knees fused to solve a longstanding problem. He got his PhD in two -- two! -- years.
Back to CIBA. His book contains a diagram of what he calls the "steroid skeleton," showing where carbon and hydrogen atoms are placed, and also what the diagram looks like when a third atom, oxygen, is added.
"Many of the most important biologically active molecules in nature, indeed, represent slight variations on the steroid skeleton: the male and female sex hormones, bile acids, cholesterol, vitamin D, the cardiac-active constituents of digitalis, the adrenal cortical hormones (related to cortisone and usually referred to generically as 'corticosteroids')."
He wanted to work on synthesizing cortisone, but that was monopolized by the people in Switzerland. Eventually, a colleague suggested he apply as associate director of research at Syntex, in Mexico City. There he found yet another refugee, George Rosenkranz, about a decade older and from Hungary, who was director of technical research. A large project was synthesizing cortisone, and Carl would head the research group. Cortisone was being looked upon, after the war, as a wonder drug, relief for arthritis and other inflammatory diseases. It could be produced -- after 36 steps, and great expense -- from the bile of slaughterhouse animals, but synthesis was the way forward. And the way forward was a great race among the pharma giants, all mammoths compared to that tiny mouse, Syntex.
But Syntex had young Mexican women technicians who'd joined the lab after grammar school. Carl soon learned to appreciate their advantages. They knew the "necessary chemical operations" and produced the needed result on time. They also innovated usefully on occasion. More advanced work was undertaken by undergrads, mostly women, from National University of Mexico. For the university, they had to produce a thesis, and this could be work at Syntex in remarkably well-equipped labs. Some of this led to publications in renowned academic journals by these young scholars.
Carl describes all this, the race to synthesize cortisone, using a mountain-climbing metaphor. The summit is synthesis. The final assault is all men, including an Oxford-trained Mexican organic chemist, Octavio Mancera, top prof Jesus Romo. and another Hungarian refugee, Juan Pataki. Rosenkranz and Djerassi are the expedition leaders.
His description of their three-pronged attack is too technical in its details and for this review, but he enlivens it with the fact that they had a mole in the labs of a major competitor at Harvard -- the mole was a grad student engaged to "a beautiful Mexican chemist."
An important aspect was utilizing something which had been discovered by the man who founded Syntex, Russell Marker, a chemistry professor at Penn State. Marker had discovered that substances in certain plants, inedible yams, could be easily transformed chemically into the female sex hormone progesterone. These yams grew in Mexico. Marker soon left his company, but his work lived on and ultimately provided a foundation for the ascent up the mountain.
One way to describe the ascent is that the leaders were discovering new paths in the structure of the steroid skeleton, publishing each advance in prestigious journals and, for the first time in its history, gaining some credit for science in Mexico. Ultimately, all of these paths resulted in a kind of convergence, and Syntex and its expeditionary leaders were able to stand at the summit, the first to arrive, beating out Harvard. One important proof of their success is described in the first paragraph of chapter 4 -- and in its title, "No Depression." They had sent a sample of their synthetic creation to a Nobel Laureate in Switzerland to mix with the stuff laboriously extracted from those slaughterhouse animals. The telegram which came back contained the two words in the chapter title, and what they meant was that the synthetic stuff was just as good as the extracted stuff.
They published their details and their results immediately. Carl goes into some of the fine points of academic priority in the most prestigious of the journals, but Life, Newsweek and Harper's, in the summer of 1951, had no trouble figuring out who was first. Life, in particular, featured a large photo of the Syntex team (Carl was 27, similar in age to the others, half with Mexican names) sitting at a conference table, the centerpiece of which is a large bag of yams. "CORTISONE FROM GIANT YAM."
The higher mountain in the distance, however, still needs climbing. At this point Carl addresses the claim that he is the father of the pill.
Not so simple, he says. In fact, it's a bit like a family:
>father – organic chemist, produce substance
>mother – biologist, demonstrate activity in animals
>midwife – clinician administers to patients
And progesterone leads the way. One of its qualities is that when a woman is pregnant, progesterone prevents ovulation from occurring. So, it has contraceptive capabilities. The problem was to synthesize it in a form which would overcome its limitations as an oral contraceptive. Again, the details of the synthesis are complex, but by 1953-4, the substance Syntex produced, together with a very similar substance developed by G.D. Searle & Co., was being tested for anti-ovulation properties, tested successfully. Syntex chose to partner with Parke-Davis as a marketing organization.
In 1957, both the Syntex-PD and Searle products were approved, and on the market -- but only for menstrual disorders. In 1958, PD got cold feet about marketing something as controversial, in their view, as a contraceptive. At this point, Syntex's Alex Zaffaroni, a 27-year-old native of Uruguay with a PhD from the University of Rochester, led the company to J&J because it already marketed contraceptive devices. There was a delay in redoing certain studies, because PD refused to give up data, with the result that Syntex was on the market two years after Searle. But by then PD had awakened and joined in with Syntex and J&J. This triumvirate soon led the market.
Carl says he is proud of his role in the sexual revolution of the time -- and that he never received any royalty on sales of the pill. His shares in Syntex, however, made him a rich man, and the bulk of his book deals with a number of other adventures in which he became involved, some of them, such as art collection, promotion of the arts, and becoming a Dapper Dan, due to his wealth. These are all interesting, often highly amusing, and the story is very well told. There is also a magnificent chapter on the state of birth control in the world fifty years after the birth of the pill.
The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History
by John M. Barry (2009)
Why Should Anyone Care About a Pandemic That Happened A Hundred Years Ago?
I picked up a copy of this book some years ago. My father’s younger brother Val died of the Spanish flu in 1918. That was mentioned from time to time in the family, but neither my father nor my grandparents ever talked about the Spanish flu itself, not even why it was called the Spanish flu. The book sat on my bookshelf for many years. It was thick and seemed likely to be depressing.
The obvious circumstances spurred me to dive into the book this spring. This review is written for people who, like me, read reviews mostly to decide whether they might like to read a book. There are much longer reviews – the NYRB essay runs almost 5,000 words – for anyone who wants a soup-to-nuts analysis of the book from every angle. So, prosaically, this review will talk only about why you might like The Great Influenza, and the reasons why you might not like it or be thoroughly sold on some of it. And consistently with the goal of motivating people to read this excellent book, this review will try to avoid spoilers, with one exception.
As for reasons to like the book, the author, a self-taught but respected historian, describes how the Spanish flu first surfaced in Haskell County, Kansas in March 1918. After a brief and not overly troubling run through several military camps in the United States and France, the outbreak largely disappeared. It came roaring back in the fall in a frighteningly more lethal form, appearing simultaneously in Brest, France – the major port for disembarkation of American troops being rushed to fight in World War I – and on the East Coast of the United States. Within a matter of weeks it killed most of the roughly 700,000 people who would die in the United States, and of the 20 million or more who died worldwide.
Perfect reading, obviously, for anyone staying home because of the coronavirus and the COVID-19 disease. The parallels – and, more frighteningly, the possible parallels – are many. In 1918, the public response was distorted, or worse, by politicians with personal agendas. President Wilson was fixated upon sending a maximum expeditionary force to France in the shortest possible time. So conscripts were crowded – jammed, really – into military cantonments that created the worst possible conditions for the Spanish flu to spread. Senior military officers rejected the pleas of public health officials because they gave primacy to Washington’s political goals. In Philadelphia, the frenzy to sell war bonds caused local politicians to insist upon going forward with a massive rally after the flu had arrived there, with disastrous consequences.
The book presents a detailed and graphic account of what happened when the health care system was overwhelmed by an “invisible enemy” in places such as Fort Devens outside Boston and in Philadelphia. The terror of soldiers and citizens suffering these conditions are matched against the assurances of their leaders – contrary to on the ground evidence – that the epidemic was well under control, or would be within days. The heroism of health care workers is described while they struggle to care for the living (and dispose of the dead) with wholly inadequate resources. Until, in some places, the health care system simply crumbled.
The Great Influenza puts paid to any fanciful notion that “No one could have foreseen anything like” the coronavirus pandemic. It also paints on the broader canvas of the history of medical science and medical practice from the late 19th Century to the first decades of the 20th. The limits of medical knowledge in the decades before the Spanish flu, the incredible inadequacies of all but a few medical schools, and the incompetence or worse of most medical doctors has been written about many times. But it provides important context for what the medical world was like at the time of the Spanish flu. It also provides a sharp contrast with conditions today, of course.
In addition to this history, The Great Influenza also portrays to dramatic effect the efforts of the leading scientists of the time to combat that pandemic. The conditions were horrible. Their resources were inexcusably limited. And it was not a success story. Vast effort was expended on the assumption, and it was largely an assumption, that the influenza was caused by bacteria. A decade before, Paul Lewis had shown that polio was caused by a virus, and developed a vaccine that was highly effective in monkeys – although it took decades to develop a human vaccine, a cautionary note for those today who insist a coronavirus vaccine is just around the corner. But even Lewis was drawn down the bacterial rabbit hole. No one figured out that influenza was caused by a virus, too, until well after the pandemic was over.
But the story of how these scientists struggled to solve the Spanish flu mystery is fascinating. For those who have never dealt with bacterial microbiology and virology, it provides a useful primer to begin to understand the issues confronting researchers today. For example, an effective vaccine against the coronavirus seems much more likely than the notoriously erratic influenza vaccines developed for every flu season. But the delicacy of vaccine development and production make an effective vaccine problematical, and doubtful in the very short term.
With all this going for it, what is not to like with The Great Influenza? For one thing, the book’s organization and efforts to follow the careers of a generation of leading scientists can be somewhat off-putting. Barry writes fluidly and well in an unpretentious manner. But chapters that alternate between what was happening with the pandemic and the medical research saga can make it hard to follow either line. Trying to keep track of the research projects and career development of so many scientists can also be wearing.
The author’s largely Manichean view of his characters may also be overdone. Even for someone generally suspicious of politicians and critical of the military mind, the portrayal of those classes may seem too unremittingly negative. The scientists, on the other hand, are largely portrayed as a noble, selfless band, intent only on joint pursuit of the scientific goal. The gritty portrayal in Watson’s The Double Helix of races to publish first and other one-upmanship seems more realistic, or at least provides a more balanced view.
Finally, although the author is unquestionably knowledgeable about his science, he may be led astray in explaining the end of the pandemic. After a painful rebound in 1920, it disappeared. And in moving from the East Coast to other areas of the country, the Spanish flu arguably became weaker and weaker. The author attributes this to a “reversion to the mean.” He theorizes that the virus that struck so hard in the fall of 1918 was an “extreme” mutation, which carried the likelihood that subsequent mutations were likely to carry it back toward a normal influenza virus. In fairness, Barry presents this as “not a law, only a probability.” But, like at least one recent and well-publicized effort to portray the coronavirus outbreak as a self-limiting phenomenon that could dependably be expected to result in only a limited number of deaths, efforts to assume such predictability in the dangerous and incompletely understood world of virology seem at best facile.
NOTE: So what is the spoiler? It is where the name “Spanish flu” came from. No, the outbreak did not first appear in Spain. Far from it, as explained earlier. What happened was that the American, French, English and even the German press were widely censored or self-censored themselves into not mentioning the flu outbreak and epidemic to avoid harming morale and the war effort. Spain, however, was neutral in the first world war, so its press freely discussed the flu, especially when King Alphonse XIII became seriously ill. So the outbreak became known as the “Spanish” flu.
Review by Bill Iverson.
J.L. Austin: Philosopher and D-Day Intelligence Officer by M.W. Rowe
Austin was an Oxford philosopher, leader of Ordinary Language Philosophy, with its idea of that the actual meaning of words is as they are
used by the ordinary man on the Clapham omnibus and not by philosophers distorting them for their own purposes.
Amazing book because Austin was a high-ranking Intelligence officer in the war. The secrecy surrounding this makes it extremely difficult for
a biographer to find out what he was doing. So, Rowe, the biographer, has chosen to describe in detail everything he can find out about the war,
from the British perspective, and from a lot of that plus whatever specific of Austin he can find, infer what Austin did. (His many letters to
his wife serve only to show that he couldn't reveal anything about the war).
In fact, Rowe proves himself to be a first-class military historian in all this. His analysis of specific events and their importance is keen,
as is his account of the overall picture, and the military figures making, on both sides, the big decisions. The accounts of D-Day and Ardenne
Forest (Battle of the Bulge) are terrific.
I was particularly taken of course, birder that I am, with the passenger pigeons. The very effective French resistance used them extensively
and Austin, a birder himself, got much from this. But in the build-up to D-Day info stopped coming in the usual amounts. Turns out Rommel had
formed a special unit to find the pigeons and blast them out of the skies.
The war, although only about 5 years of Austin's life, takes up over half the 640 pages. I've just finished the war and am now back with
teaching - like flying to a different planet.
Review by Hardy Wieting, Jr.
[ Back to Top ]