Posts

Showing posts with the label Koestler (Arthur)

Darkness and stars at noon

The group is reading Arthur Koestler’s Darkness at Noon (1940), “a book known to the world only in translation” for most of its existence (the German manuscript, which went missing in wartime, resurfaced in 2015). I’m reading the supposedly flawed translation by Daphne Hardy that everyone used for decades. Does the novel deserve its lofty Modern Library ranking? Probably not, but it’s engrossing enough; and it’s not difficult to read, which is lucky because my household has been ill. (I should read more “secret agent” lit. Nothing is so glamorous-gloomy as sad-sacks slinking around European capitals.)

Probably a red herring: Denis Johnson wrote a 1986 novel called Stars at Noon about espionage/​political dissent in Nicaragua. It was moviefied in 2022 by Claire Denis, with a Tindersticks soundtrack and with Margaret Qualley and Joe Alwyn in disagreeable but involving lead roles (I’ve seen the movie, not read the book). Apart from (a) similar titles and (b) the themes of spying and revolution, there’s little to connect this story with Koestler’s. (Well, the movie and Koestler’s book do both feature a mephistophelean interrogator. He’s a Communist in Darkness and a CIA operative in Stars.)

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Martin’s Super Market sent this postcard to gloat about the demise of our local Kroger.


About eight years ago, Martin’s began shrinking its Portage Ave./​Elwood St. store, which served an even poorer neighborhood than our Kroger. It converted a grocery store into a mere meat market; then, in 2020, it closed the store altogether.


Political things

I receive unsolicited emails from an agency called “Conservative Direct.” The latest one announces an online course on “totalitarian” novels, taught by the president of Hillsdale College.

Texts: 1984, Brave New World, Darkness at Noon, That Hideous Strength.

Conservatives and liberals may inhabit different echo chambers, but at least they read some of the same books.

(Extracting different lessons from them, of course.)

What else is “common ground?” Johnny Cash, I’ve been told.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

I thought this sociological piece on Elon Musk was insightful.

Too often, I see people denouncing Musk as a numbskull. He’s not that. I see other people praising his management style to high heaven. That’s wrong, too.

He succeeds at cutting costs when (a) he understands the industry (especially, its technology) and (b) he owns the stakes and assumes the risks for certain key decisions. But that doesn’t make him a good person for deciding how to cut costs across something so multiform, with so many “stakeholders,” as the U.S. government.

(He may or may not be evil, but that’s not what the piece is about.)

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

What does the government do? I look forward to reading these essays.