Seven Days published a review of this Philip Hoff biography that made me want to read it (sadly, I can't link to the review because neither google nor the Seven Days website can find it. shame on you, Seven Days).
At any rate, Hoff was elected governor of Vermont in 1962; the first from the Democrat party in over 100 years. During his six year tenure (the VT gov is elected to two-year terms), the state underwent great social, political, and economic changes. Blah, blah, woof, woof. Normally I don't go in for biographies, but this one is charmingly Vermont-y.
For example, in talking about Hoff's first legislative session as a VT House Rep,
Hoff, who represented more than 35,000 voters, was seated next to Representative William Jay Smith, a Democrat from Pownal, who represented about 1,500 voters. Sitting close by was Ethel Eddy, a Republican of Stratton, who represented just 24. (pg27)
The text then goes on to mention that Smith "was a poet and professor of English at Williams" and gives a great quote comparing the Vermont House to the British House of Lords. What's never mentioned is that William Jay Smith was the 19th poet laureate of the United States. Oh, yeah, that Smith fella, the rep from Pownal. Oh, he taught some down at Williams. Good school, I hear. Lordy lordy.
Related to the quote above, the authors spend a godawful amount of energy talking about reapportionment as if it was Hoff's gift to VT, and having vapors over how "a House majority could be achieved by representatives from towns that [sic] made up of just 11.5 percent of the state's population". Well, yeah. Like how a majority of the United States Senate can be achieved by representatives from states that make up 17% of the country's population (summing half the population of Louisiana, plus the 25 less populous states, and dividing by the total). The Vermont legislature was simply flipped so that the Senate was proportional to population. Reapportionment was federally mandated, and while I see the argument for requiring unicameral legislatures to be apportioned by population, I really don't see how federally mandating that both bodies of a bicameral legislature to be apportioned by population isn't a violation of states' rights.
There's a section on civil rights issues during Hoff's governorship, and now I want to read Civil Rights in the Whitest State; we continue to face many of these issues today.
Percy is back, and he's got a whole new set of banisters!**
Well, sort of. It's the same world as the original Percy Jackson series, but this book focuses on three new heroes. Sarah insists that Rick is a better writer, but I suspect that maybe our level has been set, we know what to expect, and Riordan delivers on that promise. There will be strongly-drawn characters whom we like (the main heroes). There will be annoying minor characters (usually a satyr). There will a prophecy that foreshadows some long-range plotting in a great way for the YA crowd. There will be some good conversations between the demigods and their parents that are good character-building exercises, and reveal a bit more about the long-range plotting. There will be a thrilling final battle.
And... there will a bunch of haphazard episodic scenes to get us from the prophecy to the final battle, each of which has, at best, a tenuous relationship to the overall plot. Sigh. More problematic, for me, is the mis-characterization of Midas and Medea as among the worst evildoers in Tartarus. Midas might have made some mistakes, but was otherwise a good citizen. Medea is a complex and tragic figure who perhaps took vengeance against Jason too far, and not a simple villain.
It's still perfectly fun fantasy, I was entertained, and will be reading book 2.
** I'm paraphrasing Don King, talking about Mike Tyson's new lawyers? Anyone? Bueller? (yes, this is to further underscore that I'm not the demographic Riordan is writing for)
This is another Nebula finalist. I'm finding, as a general rule, that I don't enjoy the hard SF books that are finalists, but do not win. Why am I having trouble enjoying this particular book? Let us count the ways (I was reading the 2000 Tor hardcover):
- The prologue gives an eerie feel of the ghost ship Impris, so we're primed and ready for Chapter 1 (pg 15), which begins, "Renwald Legroeder's eyes darted frantically--" Wait, what?
"Legroeder"? "Renwald"? That's getting a little close to Renfield for comfort.
Worse, on page 306, the actual love interest (after a couple of false starts), insists on using his first name, cooing through their implants "I like Renwald, I like the way it rolls off my tongue..."
Is this a parody or serious SF?
- Still shaken from the name our hero is saddled with, we find that Legrover is making his daring escape from pirate activity, making a dangerous flight through flak and fire, when, on page pg 18, "he heard a voice softly, distantly, in his mind. You must keep your center . . . stay calm. Legroeder, you'll find the way through." Use the Force, Renwald? He's actually just thinking of an old friend, whom we never meet, and is never mentioned again in this novel. Again, is this parody or serious SF?
- The very next page, we find that Legrider was able to effect his daring escape "when a Flux capacitor in the main docking room blew." Srsly? Flux capacitor? Now, to be fair, the first three books in Carver's Star Rigger universe pre-date Marty McFly, but the damage is done. Only Marty and Doc Emmett Brown can say "flux capacitor" with a straight face, and even then it's in the service of comedy.
But this isn't comedy; it's deadly serious SF. I actually do like the way the starship riggers work in concert to pilot a ship, and the book is most effective when describing the riggers' experiences as they move through the Flux, but it's otherwise a very average SF book, and at 555 pages, I couldn't wait to reach Eternity's End.
"Kurt Wright wins narrow victory; Hinda Miller admits maybe IRV wasn't such a bad thing"**
"Miro Weinberger wins narrow victory; Republicans blame IRV"
"Wanda Hines wins miracle victory; God smiles on the People's Republic"***
** Hinda Miller lost the 2006 election for mayor; even though she trailed eventual winner Bob Kiss in votes after the first round and therefore was entirely likely to have lost a traditional runoff, she blamed her loss on IRV because Republican Kevin Curley mind-controlled his supporters into casting their second-choice votes for Progressive Kiss. I was ashamed to have had Miller on my ballot at all after that display of poor sportsmanship.
*** This is not an endorsement of Wanda Hines by myself (or God), but merely an observation that she is the candidate closest to the Progressive values that have defined the People's Republic of Burlington for the last 30 years. The global economic meltdown has helped kill the People's Republic, and whoever we elect is going to have to cut budget to the bone.
There seem to be more election signs and more people out waving election signs than in any other year leading up to town meeting day. I'll admit it *is* a big election year, as we are all-but-certain to have the first major-party mayor in many years. I'm a little sad to see the end of the People's Republic of Burlington.
