Tonite, May 20, at 7PM, Vietnam veteran and author Karl Marlantes will be at Malaprop’s to read and discuss his most recent endeavor, Matterhorn: A Novel of the Vietnam War.  Marlantes served as a lieutenant in the United States Marine Corps during the Vietnam War, receiving numerous medals and commendations including two Purple Hearts and the Navy Cross.  First receiving a National Merit Scholarship to attend Yale University, Marlantes would later attend Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar.  This novel is based on Marlantes’ first hand experience in the jungles of Vietnam.

Matterhorn can be purchased at Malaprop’s in either paperback or hardcover editions, priced at $15.95 and $24.95 respectively.

For more information on Malaprop’s Bookstore and Cafe, visit www.malaprops.com.  If you are visiting Asheville, the store is locate at 55 Haywood Street, downtown.

Original cover page for Lippincott's Monthly containing Dorian Grey

On this date in 1897, Oscar Wilde, famed Irish author of The Picture of Dorian Gray and numerous other works, was released from prison after 2 years of hard labor.  Wilde was charged and sentenced for homosexuality, considered a crime in Victorian England.  Because of his treatment in England for his sexual preference, Wilde fled to Paris, where he died three years later of meningitis.

Most readers are probably familiar with Wilde’s novel The Picture of Dorian Gray. The premise of this work surrounds the characters of Dorian Gray, the artist Basil Hallward and Lord Henry Wotton.  Hallward is commissioned to paint a portrait of Gray.  Through his contact with Gray, Hallward becomes infatuated with Gray’s character and striking good looks.  After meeting Lord Henry, Gray embarks into a new world of hedonism, leading to Gray selling his soul to the Devil to ensure that the portrait of himself aged but his physical body did not, ensuring his immortality.  The portrait stands as a reminder to Gray of his sins of debauchery and hedonism, a picture of his tortured soul for all eternity.

Wilde’s novel stands as a fantastic example of a Gothic horror story, encapsulating the fear of death and aging, intense narcissism, the deadly nature of obsession and a strong Faustian element.  This work stands as Wilde’s only published novel, appearing in the June 20, 1890 issue of Lippincott’s Monthly Magazine. Wilde would later amend his most famous work and publish it with the Ward, Lock and Company Publishing House in 1891.

Oscar Wilde

Dorian Gray has been adapted numerous times for the cinema, including 1945s cut starring George Sanders and Angela Lansbury.  The latest edition appeared in 2009, directed by Oliver Parker and starring Ben Barnes (of Chronicles of Narnia fame), Fiona Shaw and Ben Chaplin.  Dorian Gray also appears as a character in 2003′s film adaptation of Allan Moore and Kevin Oneill’s The League of Extraordinary Gentleman, played by actor Stuart Townsend.

Wilde’s imprisonment stands as an early example of the unfair and illogical manner in which homosexuality was treated in the Western world for the next century.  Homosexuality was considered by many Western powers to be a genetic mutation, a disease that made those who practiced it inherently degenerate.  Dictators like Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin included members of the homosexual community in their massive purges to cleanse society, epitomized through the Holocaust and the eugenics movement.  To this day, many countries, including the United States, ban gay marriage based on many factors, both religious and secular in reasoning.

Stuart Townsend as Grey in 2003s The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

Regardless of his supposed “crime”, Wilde stands as one of the most remembered and loved author produced during the Victorian period in England.

“We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.”–from Lady Windermere’s Fan (1892)

Copy of original print, January 13, 1898

information that he is told that he shouldn’t, hoping that his accusations may elicit accountability?  These actions have been all over the news for the past months, following the highly publicized WikiLeaks scandal.  The idea of governmental accountability is a pressing issue around the world today.  Questions range on the grand spectrum from where and how our taxes are spent to the truth behind the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence.  On this day in 1898, French naturalist author Emile Zola accused the French President Felix Faure and his administration of a gross indecency against not only an individual French citizen but the French nation as a whole.  Entitled “J’Accuse (I Accuse)”, Zola’s open letter to the government was published as a front page article in future Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau’s liberal newspaper, L’Aurore.

The article was Zola’s direct accusation of anti-Semitism and unlawful jailing against French Army General Staff officer Alfred Dreyfus.  Known today as the Dreyfus Affair, Dreyfus was arrested for what the French government defined as espionage; accused of trading information with the German government via a French maid who collected destroyed documents from Dreyfus’ personal wastebaskets.  After further research, Zola seemingly discovered that the information collected for the German government was not laid there by Dreyfus, but another staff officer, Esterhazy.  The problem was that if Esterhazy was considered guilty, then the entire War Department was guilty, due to the fact that they covered for Esterhazy by indicting Dreyfus.  Dreyfus became the patsy.

French Postcard circa early 1900s

Zola described the affair as “a most shameful and ineffaceable of blemishes” on the face of the French government.  Zola argued that the unlawful arrest was based on prior religious prejudices held by the Army General Staff.  Dreyfus was seemingly intended as a scapegoat for the treasonous actions performed by the rest of the Army General Staff.  Zola seemed to believe that Dreyfus’ status as a Jew were contributing factors that damned him as a liability from the beginning of his career.  Zola goes as far to accuse those who sentenced and indicted Dreyfus be subjected to some sort of medical examination to ensure that the three military handwriting experts who reviewed the “evidence” against Dreyfus were not suffering from some form of rare malady that impaired either “eyesight or judgment”.  Sarcasm aside, Zola ends the letter with a list of individuals, his accusations against and the punishment he believes should be awarded accordingly.

In this open letter to the French government, Zola has accomplished a task that many individuals in today’s political furor wish they could: to cause a large government to stand accountable for their actions.  Is this not what Julian Assange was doing?  Also, by having charges brought against them, didn’t Assange and Zola accomplish just that by disrupting governmental movement and legislation?  Obviously, they did something that someone saw as worth punishment.

For the record, Assange and Zola were treated similarly, at least considering arrest.  Zola was charged with libel for his accusations.  In the closing remarks of “J’Accuse”, Zola stated, “while proclaiming these charges, I am not unaware of subjecting myself to articles 30 and 31 of the press law of July 29, 1881, which punishes the offense of slander. And it is voluntarily that I expose myself.”  He was fully aware that he was in all probability going to raise a furor and end up on the unpleasant end of the law in his statements.  Consequently, he was protecting not only Dreyfus but the right of every French citizen by standing up to the status quo.  Zola was sentenced to jail, but escaped to England, where he remained until the collapse of the government after the death of Faure on February 16, 1899.  Zola returned to France soon after, but was not completely exonerated of his crime until 1906, four years after his death from carbon monoxide poisoning.  Zola may have escaped the fate of incarceration, which is something that Assange can not say; both men stand in similar positions in different times.

Something about “J’Accuse” reminded me exactly where we stand today on the WikiLeaks matter.  The inability of

Emile Zola

governments to account for their actions is by now means a new development in world history.  But it is interesting how we as a civilization handle it.  Here, Emile Zola states his opinion, commits himself to in-depth research, understands the gravity of his accusations and is sentenced to jail for well-documented truth.  As I allow “J’Accuse” to filter through reason, I can’t help but wonder what the ultimate outcome for Julian Assange will be for his “crimes” when comparing his eventual fate with that of Emile Zola.

Jack London

I have to admit that I often choose author’s birthdays based on my own biases and personal preferences.  As any literary enthusiast can relate, we all have our favorite authors.  But there are certain names that hearken eras of life, often childhood memories, which have had a lasting impact.  This is what happens when I hear the name Jack London.  Traveler, gold prospector, partaker of fine alcoholic beverages, father, London wore many hats in life.  When I mention The Call of the Wild or White Fang, how do you feel?  Cold frosty winds chap my face, the frozen Five Rapids dangerously close to the left side of my dog sled, huskies straining under the weight of prospecting equipment and hardtack, braving the piercing jaws of frozen death for flakes of metal prized above life?  Are we dogs or are we wolves?  If we are dogs, what would cause us to become wolves?  Jack London’s name alone creates this vast landscape of struggle, death and greed that pulsates through my frontal lobe.

On January 12, 1876, John Griffith “Jack” London was born out-of-wedlock in San Francisco.  Thus, was born one of America’s most prolific writers.  London was known mostly for his tales of the wild Northland of the Yukon, Canada and Alaska.  Most of his life, London either moved with his parents of roamed around looking for jobs in California.  As news of the Klondike Gold rush reached the lower forty-eight in 1897, 26-year-old Jack packed his bags and headed North, hoping to cash in on the flakes of the elusive yellow metal found in the icy streams of the Yukon.  It makes perfect sense why his best-selling novels and short stories are set in this extreme Northern locale.

An interest in nature seemed to be an innate characteristic of London.  By the time he was 15, London worked as an agent for the California Fish Patrol in 1892, one of the youngest members of the force.  The California Fish Patrol served as a sort of predecessor to the modern-day Fish and Game Warden.  Two years later, London would take part in a seven month voyage across the Pacific, stopping in exotic ports of call such as Hawaii, the Bonin Islands, Japan and the frozen expanses of the Bering Sea.  Here, London would pen his first short story, “Story of a Typhoon of the Coast of Japan”.

What many do not know about London were his political and philosophical beliefs, contributing factors to how he approached his daily living and his writing styles and themes.  London developed his own branch of socialism based on the woes and trepidations of the exploited worker.  Fueled by Nietzsche and Marx, London joined the Socialist Labor Party and enrolled at the University of California at Berkeley, believing that education was the route that bypassed exploitation.

London took two works to accompany him on his travels north, Darwin’s On the Origins of Species and Milton’s Paradise Lost.  When taking into account the socialist and Darwinist beliefs harbored within London’s mind accompanied with the extreme barren conditions of the Yukon, it seems easy to understand the influences London utilized in constructing his most popular and acclaimed works, The Call of the Wild and White Fang.  I read both of them as a kid and saw them through a child’s eyes.  Both stories seemed to be about dogs struggling with the choice of being feral or accepting human civilization.  But, as I sat today reading The Call of the Wild on my Nook (thank you, Erin), I realized that the tale was not just about Buck the “Southland” dog becoming keen to his atavistic roots; it is a story of the survival of the fittest, a story of struggle and survival set on the stark canvas of the Canadian tundra.  The final battle between Buck and Spitz is a culmination of the passing of a species to a well-adapted successor.

London’s philosophy completely alters my early understanding of what I thought were merely violent wolf stories.  London’s Klondike novels represented the root of his philosophy.  Knowing that London was an advocate of socialism and Darwinism, I would like to clarify that I don’t believe or have found no research that indicates that London was a Social Darwinist.  Social Darwinism is the philosophy of natural selection applied to the human race.  For example, Adolf Hitler could certainly be classified as a Social Darwinist because he believed that the Aryan race was superior to all other races.  The Aryan race would eventually, by process of elimination, overcome all other races.  In the case of the Nazi party platform, some races would be eliminated while others would be simply tolerated or dominated.  London adhered to his own form of socialism that read much like that of Marx and Engel’s Communist Manifesto, focusing on worker exploitation and classical Marxist class struggle.  Consequently, if The Call of the Wild is analyzed in a Darwinian fashion, Buck’s individual will, strength and brutality fostered his rise to power as lead sled dog.  When this struggle is placed in front of a snowy white blank canvas, the sanguine hues of failing life appear more stark and nauseating.

London expanded his philosophy to every aspect of his life, sometimes in manners that many would thing strange or even taboo.  For example, London was married twice, both times because he believed that they would be good breeders.  London believed that, genetically, both of his wives would produce superior children.  Admittedly, I thought this strange by my own standards, but isn’t that what all parents want?  The best and brightest amongst their peers?  While London’s ideas of breeding seem taboo to some, in essence they are closer to the truth than I think many would admit.

Jack London is best remembered for his novels of survival, triumph and death in the Klondike.  But to truly understand what seem to be stories about wolves, one must delve deeper into the London’s self-realized philosophy.  While London was both a socialist and a Darwinist, he was not a Social Darwinist.  I truly believe that London did not expand Darwinism to the human race, but abandoned any further connotations in the frozen corpses left in the snows of the Yukon.  If we imagine London’s life bundled in furs panning for gold in a partially frozen creek, let us imagine him here on his birthday, sipping a fine Scotch whisky on a sloop in the Pacific, relating tales of his travels to Japan.

My opinion is mixed, as I’m sure most people would be.  A portion of my mind completely disagrees with editing the original content of Huck Finn or Tom Sawyer because I believe that Twain used the slur purposefully to illustrate stupidity and ignorance.  I honestly believe that Twain was in no way being racist; he was only illustrating that characters or individuals who used the term of derision came across as ignorant.  Thus, I also disagree with omitting these classic works from  school curricula, at least at the high school level and beyond.  Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer only serve as examples of American history through a different but concentric medium; to understand Huck Finn or Tom Sawyer only aids in understanding the era they portray.  Unfortunately, like the Holocaust in Germany, the term must be studied to understand American slavery.  This is not one of those ugly situations or sensitive subjects that can be swept under a rug.  To understand the N-word allows us to avoid creating a similar situation in the future.  Mark Contois, head librarian of the Worchester Public Library, relays at Telegram.com that “Twain was using those words as a critique of the time, not as endorsement.”  In other words, the term is used to analyze and criticize the era, not to popularize the term and make it acceptable vernacular among the populace.

With regard to the term “injun”, if it is to struck from Tom Sawyer, then I would bet that around 80-90% of all Western novels written in America should be further scrutinized.  Again, we must understand “injun” in the same way, as a term still used to critique or characterize a period and its people.  We are obligated to understand derogatory slant towards Native Americans just as much as we are similar terms towards African-Americans.

The other half of my mind agrees that by omitting the demeaning slur and allowing more to enjoy the book consequently broadens a reader base.  Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer should be enjoyed by all people of all ages.  If editing is required to do so, so be it.  I support any measure that ensures that a developing mind is allowed, by whomever, to enjoy two classics of American literature.

Samuel Clemens aka Mark Twain

All of this in mind, I leave with a warning: literature, like history, should not be watered down to pacify or appease those who don’t want to accept it as it happened.  I feel that many Americans are so used to accepting a phony or amended version of a story that this development may serve as a harbinger for times to come.  If we as a people accept this sort of censorship, what else will we accept?  A friend of mine used the example of editing an album, omitting or changing expletives and content for correctness or radio play, as the same as what New South Publishing is doing to Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer.  I can see and appreciate the parallel, but I can’t say that I agree.  While I think that this sort of censorship has its purpose for young children, I believe that older children need to see and study the gritty underbelly of American history and literature to see that we as a nation have come a long way and, indeed, have further to go.  Furthermore, young adults and teens should be taught to understand Twain’s purpose.  To understand this purpose is to understand that Twain, as usual, was criticizing an American social injustice, in this case racism.

Also, does anyone think it strange that this controversy was sparked during the beginnings of the sesquicentennial of the American Civil War?  Is this to become more cannon fodder for a battle of morality to be waged at a later date on a different battlefield, another Missouri Compromise leading to a metaphorical Ft. Sumter?

Should New South Publishing edit Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer?  By all means.  It is their right as a company to practice and administer what they believe is a superior alternative to the original, which I can appreciate.  New South Books blog agrees that the new edition is a “bold move” and lauds the fact that this move sparks good debate.  Should the edited version be our only choice, an easier to digest version for a different base of demographic?  I reply with a resounding nay.  The original should be left intact and available to those who choose to embrace history and take the time to understand Twain’s purpose.  Perhaps common sense will triumph over political correctness in this matter.

The Barnes and Noble Nook

The Nook is Barnes and Nobles answer to the Amazon Kindle.  I was interested in the Nook because it was the first e-reader that I had worked with.  I also took the time to compare prices and features and found the Nook to be the most agreeable to my taste and budget. I figured I would save up and…wait, what I am thinking?  This is not a used book.  It’s not even a new book.  It is a metal, plastic and silicon inorganic robotic ghost for reading.  I don’t need to spend the money, anyways.

Fast forward to Christmas.  By lovely girlfriend handed me my Elvis stocking with one wrapped package in it.  As I unwrapped the package, I realized what it was.  Oddly enough, I had tried to convince myself that I didn’t want a Nook.  So, why did my heart skip a beat when I unwrapped the package?  Why did I have that feeling of elation if I truly didn’t want one?  Who am I kidding!  I was excited just at the prospect of this flat white machine.

It has been almost two weeks now since I received my Nook.  I have to say, it has taken some getting used to.  For a day or two , I would read a few pages on the Nook followed by a few pages from the pages of a printed book.  There is a technological learning curve to surmount, much like the shift from a QWERTY keyboard cellphone to a touchscreen.  It really did remind me of my transition from my Blackberry Curve to the touchscreen Storm.  Now that the transition has been made, I am flying through books on my fantastic machine.  I have also overcome a personal stumbling block, embracing technology to its fullest instead of remaining on step behind out of principle.

Newsweek Magazine recently printed a one-page comparison in their “Back Story” section.  It compares anything from cost to the  carbon footprint of printing a book compared to building an e-reader.  It also compares the price of an e-book to a printed book and even whether print or e-readers are easiest on the eyes.

My opinion is that e-readers and printed books each have their respective place in the world of reading.  I will never be able to abandon print.  As a historian, there are many articles and works that may never be digitized due to their nature as important, rare or one-of-a-kind documents.  Thus, I retain an obvious bias to printed word.  But, now that I have realized the convenience and pleasure that can be attained from an e-reader, I will no longer demonize them as the killers of the printed word.  Reading from an e-reader is easy and enjoyable.  The ease and speed of downloading a new book is quick and effortless, allowing the reader to save time and have new information at their fingertips almost instantaneously.  Newsweek analyzes the carbon footprint of printing a book.  If you take that one step further, consider the amount of gas that may be spent to drive a car or the amount of energy required to move a train of subway and the carbon footprint of an e-reader may decrease even further.

Take the time to make your own comparisons, but keep an open mind!

High Rolling with Guest Contributor Dakota “Smoky” Wydell!

Brew Review: Sam Adams Winter Lager

UPDATE:  I will be contributing an article in the same vein every other week on Culture of Spirits!  Stay tuned!

Color illustrated edition of the novel

Like many young adults around the world, “The Chronicles of Narnia” are a series of masterpieces that were read at a young age and taken at face value by their captive audience: fantastical adventure novels akin to Tolkien describing the unfolding drama of a fictional and whimsical land called Narnia , tales of  talking animals and ancient royalty amid the ubiquitous battle of good versus evil.  C.S Lewis has crafted great stories that are both relatively easy and very enjoyable to read.  However, I now understand that the purpose of C.S Lewis’ famed fantasy series were Christian allegories concerning and illustrating Christian morals and ideals.  A literary or theological critique of Lewis is a different topic altogether, but Lewis quite brilliantly accomplishes an introduction to Christian morals through his characters in a way that requires little analysis or theological knowledge to ascertain valuable information.

Perhaps like myself, you my readers watched the BBC versions of “The Chronicles of Narnia” at a young age as well.  I loved these films when I was growing up.  Indeed, they were undoubtedly filmed in a “made-for-TV” format, but they consisted of quality entertainment and acting.  These are films that I consider to be impressive renditions of Lewis’ classic series.

That being said, let’s discuss the new Disney/Fox winter blockbusters, in particular “The Voyage of the Dawn Treader”.  In the book series, this is probably my favorite volume.  Full of high seas adventure, sea monsters, island hopping quests and the swashbuckling banter of Reepicheep the Mouse King, it has everything that an adventurous boy needs for hours of entertainment.  Within the past few years, I have purchased the new glossy, color illustrated versions to replace my old ragged editions, bringing new life to my classic story.  I have to admit, my first premonition of a Hollywood blockbuster version of “The Voyage of the Dawn Treader” was a vision of me leaving a theater shaking my head, pale and nauseated from the horrid excuse for a film that I just witnessed.  While my reaction wasn’t that bad, I was still pretty disappointed.  So, here I sit, attempting to look at this conundrum objectively and take the movie for what it is: a movie, not a film, not a book, but a Hollywood rendition of a cherished classic.

A brief synopsis of the story: Youngsters Edmund, Lucy and their painfully annoying cousin Eustace find themselves in

Eustace, Edmund, Lucy and King Caspian

Narnia aboard the ship “Dawn Treader”  in support of King Caspian and his crew.  They then set out on adventure to find 7 swords that will vanquish an unspeakable evil that is threatening Narnia and its allied countries.  Caspian and crew encounter strange lands and creatures, including dwarves that hop on one large foot, magicians and sea monsters.

I had a feeling that Disney and now Fox would ruin these movies.  To clarify, the Fox company purchased the Walden Media/Disney franchise after the monetary disappointment of “Prince Caspian”, Disney’s second feature film installment of the Narnia franchise. By comparison, “The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe” grossed $745 million, while “Caspian” grossed almost half that at $415 million.  Back to the point, I’m attempting to look at this from an objective perspective.  These movies were made to entertain with a young audience in mind.  But, with the underlying Christian allegories fairly present in the movies, adults are able to watch a movie with their children that doesn’t utterly bore them.  That being said, “The Voyage of the Dawn Treader” was not a complete travesty, but it could have been better.  Two articles of note: the sea serpent and the voice of Reepicheep.

The movie and the book contain an epic, violent and climactic battle between the crew of the “Dawn Treader” and a humongous sea serpent.  In my opinion, the depiction of the sea serpent in the current Fox version is terrifying, almost too scary for small children.  In fact, when I was in the theater, a father brought in 5-7 children aged 7-12 that sat right in front of me.  They whispered and laughed on and off throughout the movie.  By the time this battle scene commenced, the children were sitting very close together, completely silent and wide-eyed.  One little girl actually ran back and sat with her father, who was sitting in my row a few seats down from me.  Something tells me that Disney may not have made a rated-PG sea serpent as disgustingly terrifying as Fox allowed.  In all fairness to Mr. Eisner and our friends at Disney, the sea serpent in “Dawn Treader” was no worse than the depiction of the Kraken in the “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise.  Regardless, I was fairly impressed with the depiction of the sea serpent, having slight feelings of revulsion myself at the sight of the serpent.

Reepicheep, voiced by Simon Pegg

Secondly, the voice of Reepicheep the Mouse King was different in “Dawn Treader” than it was in the previous Narnia installment, Disney’s “Prince Caspian”.  To my happiness and amusement, Simon Pegg aided his voice talents to that of the small and fearless rodent warrior.  I thoroughly enjoyed Pegg in “Hot Fuzz”, “Shaun of the Dead” and the newest “Star Trek” film.  To hear his voice as the new and improved Reepicheep was a welcome change from the bland and otherwise forgetable voice used in “Prince Caspian”.  In my opinion, Reepicheep is one of the most remarkable aspects of the film.  Also worth mentioning in the area of voice talent is the fact that the Narnia franchise has retained Liam Neeson as the voice of Aslan the Lion.

In general, the new version of “The Voyage of the Dawn Treader” stays fairly true to the plot of the novel.  While I was still disappointed in the film, I am now attempting to accept the movie as a blockbuster and not a film I would expect to see on IFC or at my local fine arts theater.  The basis of the story is there in all of its CGI grandeur, flickering across the big screen to rake in some Christmas bucks.  It is an entertaining movie, but if I were given the choice again, I would have stuck with the world I have created in my mind that I took from the book.  Perhaps I am a little biased.

I purchased a book that I am planning on using for my senior thesis entitled Fur, Fortune and Empire: The Epic History of the Fur Trade in North America. I have been perusing it for the time being, not really having the full initiative to read it.  That said, it is great.  Sweeping and engaging, it tells the story of the fur industry from the beginnings of the Southern deer skin trade and Canadian beaver trade to the demise in the 1850s.  All well and good.

Then, I found out that Dolin wrote another book called Leviathan: The History of Whaling in America. Awesome.  I really want to read this one, too.

Here is my problem inherent: I want to write those!  Mr. Dolin, you have stolen two of my favorite things in American history before I had time to realize my dreams!  So, thank you, Eric Jay Dolin for crushing my dreams as a historian.

Speaking of whaling…..

Twas the day before Christmas and strewn on the field

Were the bodies of Celts who’s fate had been sealed

The gold, it was stolen with the greatest of care

For Vikings are thrifty and they hate to share

Packed tightly on longboats, to sail the North Sea,

Suffering from scurvy and covered in fleas

Home they are drunk and in need of a bite,

“Merry Christmas from Valhalla and to all a good fight”