The Plot Against America - Characters

Book by Philip Roth, 2004

https://aulalibrary365.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/plot.jpg

[CHARACTERS]

    The Plot Against America, by Philip Roth, focuses on the lives of the oppressed Jewish community in the alternate version of 1940's American history. Chiefly, the story centers itself around the protagonist, Philip Roth. (it is assumed this is the younger version of the author) Here, however, we focus on his father, Herman.

    Herman Roth is a faithful Jewish American. He openly broadcasts his Jewish beliefs and shows his disdain for anything else. In the time segment of November 1940 - June 1941 titled "Loudmouth Jew", the story follows up on the impact of Hitlerite ideas and Lindbergh's inauguration as President. Previously, Herman's son Philip was affected by the anti-Semitism, "[...] I fell out of bed and woke up on the floor, this time screaming. Yosemite in California, Grand Canyon in Arizona, Mesa Verde in Colorado, Crater Lake in Oregon, Acadia in Maine, Mount Rainier in Washington, Yellowstone in Wyoming, Zion in Utah, Glacier in Montana, the Great Smoky Mountains in Tennessee -- and across the face of each, across the cliffs, the woods, the rivers, the peaks, the geyser, the gorges, the granite coastline, across the deep blue water and the high waterfalls, across everything in America that was the bluest and the greenest and the whitest and to be preserved forever in these pristine reservations, was printed a black swastika." (Roth 43) This was the anti-Semitism nightmare that Philip had, after Lindbergh was inaugurated. This is also the same attitude that spread to Herman Roth.

    Herman Roth, the Loudmouth Jew, is proud of his religious stance and when this religious threat came across America, he defended himself and his family. After the Roth family visited the Lincoln Memorial, they overheard an elderly woman compare Lincoln to Lindbergh, in which Herman clearly and publicly displayed his disgust. Afterwards, Herman was left with the feeling of satisfaction of making his point clear, and it was heard, "[...] refer to my father as 'a loudmouth Jew', followed a moment later by the elderly lady declaring, 'I'd give anything to slap his face.'" (Roth 65) Herman afterwards was left in a similarly rebellious mood of declaring his hatred for Lindbergh, who supports Hitler and anti-Semitism.

 

    A different character, Seldon, is the forced friend of Philip's. Seldon is the nieghbors' only son, living now only with his mother, as his father killed himself shortly after Lindbergh became President. Seldon is a very lonely kid, emphasized by his love for chess, and his fractured family. Philip despises Seldon, wishing he would stop following him around.
    Seldon is only a child, and his perceptions of the world are limited. He clings tightly to what little he knows, seeming clueless at times or annoying to Philip, a few years his senior. For example, Seldon's behavior was more clingy after the suicide of his father, "My aversion of him had grown stronger, and at the end of the day, I hid back at school when I knew he was out front waiting to walk me home [...] and there would be Seldon at my heels, acting as if he turned up by accident." (Roth 189) Here, Seldon has become more reliant on Philip, to the point of irritating him with his childish antics.
    Additionally, Seldon's clueless side shows later after he'd been relocated by the government. Moments after the Jewish radical Winchell had been assassinated by unreasonable Republicans, the Roth family made a call to the family of Seldon's. Only Seldon was home at the time, and his responses are a frustration to the Roths, as they seemed forgetful and reflected inadequacy, "'[Mrs. Roth] No. Just eat your snack---' '[I think I've had enough Fig Newtons now, but thanks anyway.' '[Mrs. Roth] Goodbye, Seldon' '[Seldon] I like Fig Newtons, though.'" (Roth 280) With this, Seldon has displayed himself as a youthful, innocent boy with a gram of knowledge and less so of awareness. This is only one of multiple examples of his childishness. Seldon is only a minor character, but plays a role in the fractured, life-changing childhood of Philip Roth.

The Plot Against America - Analysis

Book by Philip Roth, 2004

https://aulalibrary365.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/plot.jpg

    [ANALYSIS]

    The Plot Against America, by Philip Roth, is centered around a seven-year-old boy who is assumed to be the a younger version of the author, as they go by the same name. This young Philip Roth is an American Jew, in the 1940's. This, however, is an alternate form of history. After Roosevelt is finished with his second term, the Republicans elect the young, brave, and bright Charles A. Lindbergh to be president. This is the same Lindbergh who flew the Spirit of St. Louis.

    The book's chapters are set chronologically, each chapter longer than a normal chapter, as they are the measure of usually two to six months worth of material. The content is split between focusing on the Roth family and their struggles as a Jewish family, and the political aspect of the book, the fact that Lindbergh openly supported Hitler, which divides the whole of America. With this, the author glorifies all Jewish folk and the Democrats, and essentially tears down the 1940's versions of all Catholics and Republicans, both of which are supporting of Hitler in this time. As I'm basically halfway through the book, the Roth family has so far seen horrors in their time. Philip's cousin Alvin has gone to fight Hitler in Canada, and come back without one leg. Their father of the family next door killed himself out of despair, not only because the father was a Jew, he had lung cancer and was essentially disabled. His days were marked to him anyways, and as Lindbergh took over America, all hope was lost.

    This alternate history, the change of one person's role, drastically makes this book different from real history. A man named Walter Winchell, a Jewish Democrat who was originally a radio host (and later fired by hateful Republicans) took up candidacy for the next term of presidency. This inspired riots, called the Winchell riots, which led to politically-blinded, unreasonable Republicans making frequent attempts on his life. America was divided thoroughly, more so than in real history, due to a single man, Lindbergh, and his plans for passing the Hitlerites' ideas into America.

 

    The following link is to Lindbergh's real history, one not as President:

    http://www.charleslindbergh.com/history/ 

WWZ - Book Recommendation

Book by Max Brooks, 2006

http://blog.pshares.org/files/2013/06/WorldWarZ_200-s6-c30.jpg

    [BOOK RECOMMENDATION]

    This book, despite being a dystopian / zombie book, is a deep, intricately-written novel. The amount of detail put into it is astonishing, along with the research Brooks apparently did, describing cultural references and specifics that only an expert would know. The book covers 23 different characters, though some are repeated, like the Chicagoan soldier Todd Wainio, who appeared the most in the book: four times. This tally of 23 doesn't count the Interviewer, who has a unique personality, bringing in a little bit of dry wit to the seriousness of the book. The book contains more than its fair share of expletives and graphic descriptions, though these are associated with certain characters, giving each their own personality and view on life. 

    The layout of the book is completely an interview format, giving a very special tone of both professionalism and casualness to the plot. The book, regardless, gives an easy-flowing story-line by having the characters talk about different aspects, areas, and attitudes specific to their location and upbringing, and all the while keeping a clear, chronological order to it. The book is fairly easy to read, offering challenges sporadically throughout the text, though I found the story refreshingly simple to read regardless. 

    The story is essentially starts with the Interviewer reporting his complaints to his boss about the story of the Zombie War, how the report they gave was all facts and figures, without human emotion and personal opinion. He is advised to make a book from precisely what he has - the interviews. The story expands on the cause of the uprisings, the initial handling, the failures, the panic, the switch from white to blue-collar dominance, the survival of the common people, the second handling, and the finale. Ultimately, I'd rate this a 9/10, and a brilliant book.

WWZ - Theme and Summary

Book by Max Brooks, 2006

http://blog.pshares.org/files/2013/06/WorldWarZ_200-s6-c30.jpg

 
[THEME AND SUMMARY] 

    Yes, of all genres, the zombie book actually has a theme. And don't think it's something about the best way to survive a zombie apocalypse, because it's not. This book is amazing because of the thought, research, and incredible characterization that has been compiled into it. The theme, in my opinion, is something along the lines of: Trust and rationality are what keeps the unity, as humans become nothing without it. Explanation: The people of Earth, encountered with the zombie breakouts, would often become isolated cities left to their own devices. Some did well. Other fell apart, succumbing to the plagues of greed, insanity, and the loss of will. One example of the things that constantly threatened the people was: "ADS, that was my enemy: Asymptomatic Demise Syndrome, or, Apocalyptic Despair Syndrome, depending on who you were talking to... no one understood what was happening at first... some were in perfect health. They simply go to sleep one night and not wake up the next morning. The problem was physiological, a case of just giving up, not wanting to see tomorrow because you know it would only bring more suffering." (Brooks 159) ADS was a cause in some of the place hit harder by the loss of need for white-collar workers. People weren't prepared for a sudden shift in their comfortable way of life, and simply died, not committing suicide, not succumbing to injuries nor diseases, simply not wanting to live anymore. Like Princess Amidala from Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, when she died because she gave up. Some people handled things unlike the prewar times yet succeeded due to different circumstances, further proving my theme, is: "Yes, there was the fear of pain - the lash, the cane - but all of that paled back when compared to public humiliation. People were terrified of having their crimes exposed." (Brooks 149) This person, nicknamed "The Whacko", was a VP during the war, and was discussing the forms of punishment used. He said that people thought is was barbaric at first, but realized the logic behind it. People were more desperate, and needed more severe punishment to keep everyone in line and not committing crimes because they thought it would be their last days.

    The theme does reflect some real life issues. For one, modern problems like the government shutdown is a connection to the theme. Trust and rationality are important. Excuse me for defending my political view, but the Republicans acted irrationally, very irrationally, at a single law, shutting down the entire government because of it. They were mistrustful, thinking that the law was not worthy of being in place, not trusting the good it could bring. Sure, there are some things the Democrats got wrong too, as they are also guilty of mistrust and irrationality, and what does this whole predicament bring to us? A debt ceiling, the impossibility of reverence towards our great nation's history, and more and more childish, pathetic actions and feelings that have kept our country in a horrible gridlock, a stasis brought about only by the reluctance to trust one another and the actions of each other, additionally the hasty, short-sighted, and disgustingly childish reactions that both sides are known to do. This real life and frankly important issue is reflected with my theme for World War Z.

    The story utilizes the zombies to show the people of the Earth how the past ways of life are the better ways of life, which is similiar to the age Age of Romanticism, which idolized past lives. The zombies created such an unusual enemy that none of the modern attempts at persuasion through force (shock and awe) will affect them. Similarly, modern weapons and techniques are pretty much pointless, "It was a monument to American technical prowess...and in this war, that prowess counted for [expletive deleted]. That must have been frustrating. Frustrating? Do you know what it feels like to be told that the one goal [...] is considered 'strategically invalid'? Would you say this is a common feeling? Let me put it this way; the Russian army wasn't the only service to be decimated by their own government [...] Some DeStRes 'experts' had determined that our resource-to-kill ratio, our RKR, was the most lopsided of all the branches [...] Now we were told that the price of one JSOW kit [...] could pay for a platoon of infantry pukes who could smoke a thousand times as many Gs." (Brown 168-9) This person, Colonel Christina Eliopolis, used to be the pilot of an FA-22, and claimed it could "outfly and outfight God and all his angels." (Brown 168) However, this technology proved to be not worth much against a zombie who could physiologically not be scared, and wouldn't die without destruction of the brain. The army must convert to older methods of warfare to fight.

WWZ - Analysis

Book by Max Brooks, 2006

http://blog.pshares.org/files/2013/06/WorldWarZ_200-s6-c30.jpg

    Don't be put off by the zombie genre: the book is much different from other zombie books in the fact that it has a thread of feeling inside, effectively making an emotionally catching book unlike others in the genre.

   This book is remarkable in my opinion, because the entire book is set in interviews that take place in a postwar time, yet the book manages to follow 23 characters from different backgrounds, occupations, and moods, and yet tell a gripping, exciting story that actually has meaning. 

[ANALYSIS]

    ANALYSIS OF SETTING: The setting in World War Z is the entire world, considering the fact that it's called a "World War". The way the book is written gave the unique insight as to the different cultures handling the crisis at different times and in different manners. For example, Sensei Tomonaga Ijiro, a blind Japanese sensei, survived the zombie outbreak in an orderly, solitary manner. He believed heavily in Japanese spirits. "There was no need to be on my guard until they entered what you might call my 'circle of sensory security', the maximum range of my ears, nose, fingertips, and feet. On the best days, when the conditions were right and Haya-Ji was in a helpful mood, that circle extended as far as half a kilometer. On the worst of days, that range might drop to no more than thirty, possibly fifteen paces. These incidents were infrequent at best, occurring if I had done something to truly anger the kami..." (Brown 223-4) Sensei Tomonaga was a heavy believer in the Japanese spirits, considering he was a blind, which was an outcast where he's from, and yet he survived the outbreak. Sensei Tomonaga also used a Aino prayer stick called an ikupasuy, which was a specific item seen usually only in Japan with the Ainos, a native people low in the social ladder. As a younger, blind person, Tomonaga was able to effectively fend off the zombies using the ikupasuy, and lived a modest, solitary life until he apprenticed Kondo Tatsumi, a previous character who used to be an acne-ridden computer geek. "All I had with me was a water bottle, a change of clothes, and my ikupasuy [...] Did you always kill your enemy on the first strike? Always. [He gestures with an imaginary ikupasuy] Thrust forward, never swing. At first I would aim for the base of the neck. Later, as my skills grew with time and experience, I learned to strike here...

    Another character, Stanley McDonald, was part of the Third Battalion of Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry, and he encountered the zombies while in a search for drug dealers in Kyrgyzstan, one of the earliest outbreaks. It is interesting to note that one of the previous characters, a smuggler of people, said she often made runs, coming across a rich man in a cab, who looked beat-up and obviously bitten, the driver heading towards Kyrgyzstan, and this single person is thought to have started the outbreak in Kyrgyzstan. Stanley fought back with gunfire, and fell in with his country to fight against the zombies, unlike Sensei. They told him to be ready, but he said: "I thought I was ready for anything. [He looks out at the valley, his eyes unfocused] Who in his right mind could have been ready for this?" (Brooks 21)
    Imagery plays a part in the gruesome description of the mindlessness of the zombies: "Beyond them, in the first chamber, we saw our first evidence of a one-sided firefight, one-sided because only one wall of the cavern was pockmarked by small arms. Opposite that wall were the shooters. They'd been torn apart. Their limbs, their bones, shredded and gnawed...some still clutching their weapons, one of those severed hands with an old Makarov still in the grip." (Brown 19-20) The start of WWZ would bring the disturbing elements quickly.

An ikupasuy of the Aino culture.

WWZ - Characters

Book by Max Brooks, 2006

http://blog.pshares.org/files/2013/06/WorldWarZ_200-s6-c30.jpg

    [CHARACTERS] 

    Part of what made this book boggling for me was the fact that it has 23 characters, not counting the minor characters, but including the Interviewer. Besides the interviewer, who appears in every chapter (the book is completely based on interviews) the character to appear the most is Todd Wainio, an American soldier from Chicago, appearing a whopping four times out of the 330 pages of the book.

    

    That said, this book is rather terrible for focusing on a single character, but amazing for the variety - this detailed the whole world (or most of it: North Korea was more of a lone wolf) fighting their own versions of the "Zombie War" and eventually uniting. Considering that I can't focus on more than one person for the character analysis, I'll focus on the most repetitive [concrete] character: Todd Wainio. 

    TODD WAINIO: Todd was part of the infantry, and a survivor of one of the first battles of the Great Panic, the first wave of zombies that had everyone scared. Todd was explaining the supposed readiness of the army, just until they realized that the conventional high-tech weaponry won't cut it for the zombies: "Dude, we had everything: tanks, Bradleys, Humvees armed with everything from fifty cals to these Vasilek heavy mortars. At least those might have been useful. We had Avenger Humvee mounted Stinger surface-to-air missile sets, we had this AVLB portable bridge layer system, perfect for the three-inch deep creek that ran by the freeway [...] I saw a SAW gunner, a light machine gun that you're supposed to fire in short, controlled bursts about as long as it takes to say 'Die [expletive omitted] die.' The initial burst was too low. I caught one square in the chest. I watched him fly backward, hit the asphalt, then get right back up again as if nothing had happened. Dude...when they get back up..." (Brooks 94-100) Todd, at the Battle of Yonkers, said that the army was the last line of defense, but they were hopelessly outmatched and not fitted correctly. The zombies would get right back up. 

    The previous paragraph describes how Todd feels about the conflict, which is external. Todd, at first is desperate, realizing that the zombies will overrun them if they don't fight hard. They ran, giving up. The last few paragraphs said "Yonkers was supposed to be the day we restored confidence to the American people, instead we practically told them to kiss their [butt] goodbye." (Brooks 104)

    Todd changed by the end of the book by describing his more recent feelings (again, this is mostly an interview book) and how he felt different than how he did as a soldier at Yonkers. "That was us, standing on the Jersey riverbank, watching the dawn over New York. We'd just got the word, it was VA Day (Victory of America, celebrating the purge of the zombies) There was no cheering, no celebration. It just didn't seem real. Peace? What the hell did that mean? I'd been afraid for so long, fighting and killing, and waiting to die, that I guess I just accepted it as normal for the rest of my life. I thought it was a dream, sometimes it feels like one, remembering that day, that sunrise over the Hero City." (Brooks 342) These are the last words of the book. Todd lived a soldier, and changed by snapping out of the fear that had become so normal for the survivors of the Zombie War.

    One of the most important things I should mention, as it is detailed throughout several of the characters that fought the zombies, including Todd, was that World War Z was favoring of old-world war values over that of the modern times: nowadays, you can win wars by 'starving' the enemy of necessities, or by striking them with fear. Zombies cannot feel fear nor do they starve nor weaken with time. Todd even explained how he and his army adopted an older melee scythe-like weapon called a Lobo that was more effective against the zombies than traditional guns. Additionally, an older, wooden gun (because wood took less time to manufacture) was more effective than the previous guns.

Inferno - Book Recommendation

Book by Dan Brown, 2013

http://www.kurzweilai.net/images/Inferno.png

     [BOOK RECOMMENDATION]

     I would definitely recommend Inferno to anyone looking to read an exciting book. Personally, I found this book easy to read without much thought, yet simultaneously the book utilized high level diction and complex reading structures. Inferno is a fast-paced, very intellectual, addictive novel, actually the fourth in a series, though I know that the book can generally be understood without previous knowledge of the first three books.

    Taking place in the modern cities of Florence, Venice, and Istanbul, Inferno follows the recurring protagonist Robert Langdon as he wakes from amnesia, despite his eidictic memory. Told he took a bullet wound to the head, Langdon and Sienna Brooks, the doctor who aids Langdon's escape from the assassin, take refuge in her apartment. They find a projector in Langdon's jacket, which shows a modified Botticelli's Map of Hell, a religious piece based on Dante's poem The Divine Comedy. This sets the two on a rigorous journey to not only evade Langdon's own government (who are trying to capture him), but stop the plague of Bertrand Zobrist, also called Inferno.

    The book, which I rated a 10/10, is a beautifully written story, cleverly woven with the religious ties of Dante, Botticelli, and other famous historical figures and events, leaving you wanting more. The story itself, along with the other three Langdon books, is critical of Catholicism recurringly, though the author Dan Brown has denied any animosity towards the Catholic Church on interviews, such as the comedy/news show The Colbert Report.

Refer to my other, more comprehensive posts for more information.

Inferno - Characters

Book by Dan Brown, 2013

http://www.kurzweilai.net/images/Inferno.png

    [CHARACTERS]

    Sienna Brooks: Sienna Brooks deals with the conflict in the text in a deceptively normal way: throughout the book, she handles the situation as if she had a grip over what was happening. In the beginning, the reader has no idea whether or not they can trust Sienna, as she seems to have a past of prodigal fame, demonstrating incredible intellect, but in the beginning, she handles the situation like a normal person. "'Robert!' She shouted. 'I don't know who they are, but they found us!'...Sienna urged. 'Follow me!'" (Brown 67-9) Sienna shows very little suspicious behavior in the beginning, besides her immediate knowledge of where to go. Additionally, it states: "He would never want me, she thought. I'm damaged." (Brown 55) Shortly after this quote, Sienna reveals that she has a troubled past, to the point of baldness simply from stress. The reasons why are explained much later, and should raise a few eyebrows. Later on the book, Sienna cleverly misinterprets an elderly woman's accusation as a suggestion for CPR on the pained Ferris: "At that moment an elderly Italian woman pushed through the crowd, shouting angrily at Sienna. 'L'hai colpito al petto!"... "No!" Sienna snapped. "CPR will kill him!..." (Brown 330) First off, the term L'hai colpito al petto literally translates to "You hit him in the chest" in Italian. Sienna, who has demonstrated complete fluency in Italian, deliberately misinterprets this as a suggestion for CPR. Later, it's explained that Sienna hit Ferris in his spot of severe internal bleeding because she realized that Ferris was secretly working against Sienna's (though curiously not Langdon's) endeavors.

    Sienna has definitely changed since she was introduced in the beginning. In the beginning, and well into the middle, Sienna Brooks was seen as simply a Italian nurse, with a troubled past, who was caught along in the disaster churned up by Bertrand Zobrist and the adventure of Langdon to stop it. Towards the end, every missing link and every connection was explained. Sienna was a natural actress, becoming renowned for her performance as Puck in A Midsummer Night's Dream, which she used to briefly become a part of the Consortium, the organization who was betrayed later by Sienna and works against Langdon and the WHO, at least, until everyone is up to speed on what's going on. Evidence of Sienna's feigned innocence in the beginning: "Sienna reached up and gently smoothed out Langdon's Brioni suit jacket and adjusted his collar. 'You look very presentable, Robert.' She gave him a demure smile, adjusted her own sweater, and set out." (Brown 147) This is the time Sienna works hard, utilizing her actress skills to fake her alliance with Langdon and keep him away from any clue about the misunderstanding of their pursuers. Sienna is working to gain not only Langdon's trust, but to thoroughly convince him that she has nothing much to hide that could be related to the task at hand. Later, after Langdon was captured in the cisterns below the Hagia Sophia, Sienna thought to herself: "...she felt a familiar loneliness settling in. The feeling was nothing new...And so Sienna Brooks learned how to be a ghost. Invisible. She learned how to be a chameleon, a performer, playing just another face in the crowd." (Brown 349) Sienna was thinking this after Langdon was captured, and was left to her own thoughts, thinking of her own affinity to blend in because she's a brilliant actress. Sienna changed, from beginning to end, from being an active field actress to being a notorious person wanted for trying to keep the plague going (although this was again a misunderstanding, as she was trying to stop the plague and erase all traces of it, as she didn't trust the WHO. Additionally, she changed from beginning to end by wanting to be someone else to being accepted into science because of her emotion-riddled views and unique ideas, as she was a Transhumanist, same as Zobrist, the main antagonist. (She was accepted by Sinskey, the head of the WHO, at the end: "'...she obviously believes you are in a unique position to add to that dialogue.' 'My moral framework, I suspect, will not please the WHO.' 'Probably not,' Langdon replied, 'Which is all the more reason for you to be there. You are a member of a new breed of thinkers...'" (Brown 452)

    Sienna interacts with other characters in a clean, efficient manner, and as previously described, was acting for the majority of it, which needs no real explanation or quote, as both would be the exact same thing as earlier in the blog. At the end, Sienna is vulnerable and spills everything, figuring she has nothing left to lose. "'Robert,' She sobbed. 'I can't run away anymore. I have nowhere left to go.'" (Brown 427) This was the end of the chapter, though it goes on to the two sitting on a bench, and Sienna explains her actions, in actually burning the only instructions on how the viral vector was created, which she had hidden the entire book. This was a massive change in interaction, simply because Sienna had no other plan.

Inferno - Theme and Summary

Book by Dan Brown, 2013

http://www.kurzweilai.net/images/Inferno.png

[THEME AND SUMMARY]

    Inferno, by Dan Brown: as I interpreted it, there are very few themes to this book, considering its base more of a thriller novel rather than a moral, message-ridden text: Dan Brown was looking more along the lines of entertaining the reader, instead of trying to use the book as a didactic tool. Nonetheless, I believe I found a few themes, one of which I'll be sharing.

    The theme I want to focus on, given that the half of the external conflict of the book is based on Zobrist's plague, is: Extirpation carries only the repercussion of abundance for the remainder. What my theme is saying is that after an area or population is partly (or not completely) destroyed, the leftover people, plants, or other lifeforms can take part in the enjoyment of what is left behind. In the book, Zobrist claims: “Culling is God’s Natural Order. Ask yourself, What followed the Black Death? We all know the answer. The Renaissance … Death is followed by birth...To reach Paradise, man must pass through Inferno” (Brown 103) What Zobrist is saying is that the Black Death, which symbolizes destruction, was followed by the Renaissance, which symbolizes the abundance. On a side note, the concept is true, but the reality is that the Black Death took two centuries, in over three major recorded epidemics. Giotto, one of the first famous Renaissance painters, lived and died before the Black Death ever really occurred. However, the Renaissance did outlive the Black Death, so it reached its peak post-plague, giving credence to Zobrist, or more technically, Dan Brown.

    The issue presented in this text is overpopulation, which is the reason why Zobrist is creating the plague, which he refers to as the "chthonic monster". Dan Brown presumably wrote this because he wanted to entertain his audience with a witty, hypothetical situation that contained facts, though the apocalyptic suggestions are simply exaggerated: if you read my Analysis section of Inferno in this blog, there's a video link at the bottom that denounces the possibility of the concept of true overpopulation.

    Inferno suggests that people behave in many different ways, often having their views conflict with others or form a bond on the contrary. With this, Zobrist thought that the human population was amassing at frightening rates, and should be culled. Elizabeth Sinskey, the head director of the World Health Organization (WHO), opposes this by calling this immoral and short-sighted. (Excuse me for not providing a quote - I would've rather, but this message was spread out too far to explain in so few words)

    Inferno also suggests that people may weave constant and severe lies, but out of necessity or psychological urge, rather than for personal gain. (Again, I won't have a single quote - it would be spread out over several pages) Sienna Brooks has lied all of her life because she was a child prodigy, with an IQ of 208 (In comparison, Stephen Hawking's IQ is only 200) Sienna was better than everyone else, and obsessed over her own problems. She excelled in acting, especially in her adult years, where she joined the Consortium to raise wages for med school, and the Consortium looked at her knack for deception as an immediate advantage against other potential Consortium members.

The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who 

maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis.

-Dante Alighieri

    This quote from Dante was Zobrist's way of inspiring guilt in Sinskey, who was 'maintaining neutrality' in the midst of the overpopulation problem.

    The book is trying to explain to us the vagueness of the line between moral and immoral. Morality is a subject that has impeded science for years, similarly explored within Inferno. Zobrist believes his actions are justified, saving the world, though the WHO believe it the workings of a madman. Zobrist fully believes in his actions, calling them his parting gift to mankind. "...the spark that would finally ignite the fire that would rage across the land and clear the deadwood, once again bringing sunshine to the healthy roots." (Brown 47-8) 

Inferno - Analysis: Setting, Conflict, Minor Character

Book by Dan Brown, 2013

http://www.kurzweilai.net/images/Inferno.png

[ANALYSIS]

    Analysis of setting: In the book Inferno, the setting is a massive part of the plot. As the story revolves around Dante Alighieri's famous epic poem, Inferno, and follows Dante's story -- his trek through Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. Dante's birthplace, Florence, and his love Beatrice (whom he never becomes even remotely involved with), become central themes for the poem Inferno. First, his exile from Florence due to a murder on a bridge, (which resulted in a bloody feud between families) starts him on his "journey" through Inferno, or the underworld. Due to this, Florence is the main setting for Robert Langdon's mad escape from his own government. With Florence as the initial main setting, and the book containing historically accurate facts, the books appeal is accentuated by knowing that these things actually happened and were twisted into the making of a suspenseful, gripping, denouncing-of-Catholicism, (albeit not intentionally, according to the author, Dan Brown) thriller novel.

    Analysis of conflict: In the book, the conflict is both internal and external, exhibiting both frequently. Internally, the conflict is mainly within the minds of Robert Langdon, who struggles against amnesia against his normally eidictic memory, the provost, who struggles against his strict protocol and the massive threat he is technically endorsing, and the general mood of the book, where it seems deception is everywhere, and Sienna Brooks is obviously much more than who she says she is. For example, a man named Ferris joined Langdon and Sienna in their journey to stop the chthonic plague that Bertrand Zobrist engineered, and this Ferris seems to be hiding something, as he is acting suspiciously: "Knowing the ring well, [Ferris] immediately grabbed the phone... 'Sorry,' he said, standing up. 'Ailing mother'...[Ferris] locked the restroom door as he took the call. 'Hello?' The voice on the line was grave. 'It's the provost.'" (Brown 284) Ferris seems to be a deceptive figure, acting like a friend, who has connection with intent to impede Langdon, as evidenced by the appearance of the provost.
    Externally, the conflict is straightforward and right to the point: Bertand Zobrist, Transhumanist, (a society who believes humans should biogenetically reengineer themselves to survive) created a plague that would do something horrible (I don't want to give it away) which ultimately makes Zobrist go from 'scientific celebrity' to 'public enemy number one' overnight. Zobrist had thoughts of the world becoming overpopulated and becoming a "deadzone", a term for when an ecosystem becomes too full with a species and all the resources burn out, leaving the species completely extinct. Additionally, Zobrist seemed nearly out of his mind when it came to the boundaries of what he would do: "'Any environmental biologist or statistician will tell you that humankind's best chance of long-term survival occurs with a global population of around four billion.' 'Four billion?' Elizabeth fired back. 'We're at seven billion now, so it's a little late for that.' [Zobrist]'s green eyes flashed fire. 'Is it?'" (Brown 105) Zobrist, if given the chance, will attempt to curb the population of the world, from seven to four billion, which is rounded to 1/3, considering he stated that the Black Plague was the best thing to ever happen to the world, because after the 1/3 population decrease, an abundance of food and money was left over, and the Renaissance occurred.

     Analysis of a minor character: Vayentha. The "assassin" (this is later disproved, as she was faking the entire thing before she died) was a figure sent by the provost. Vayentha attempted to "shoot" Langdon in the head, and blamed the miss on the coo of a dove. She then is disconnected from the Consortium (the company of the provost) and takes the finding of Langdon in her own hands.
    Vayentha, as a member of the Consortium, never had the time for a personal life, nor a relationship, and is essentially wired for her duties full-heartedly. So she tracks Langdon and Sienna to the Corridor in Florence, away from prying eyes, and goes to prove to Langdon that her gun is fake, but Sienna mistakes this for Vayentha actually shooting Langdon, thus Sienna pushes Vayentha to her death.
    If Vayentha hadn't died, and she lived to prove her relative innocence, then the book would be much shorter because Vayentha essentially knew all the information that was covered in the first half of the book and the second half would be shortened because Langdon could figure it out much quicker with the knowledge.

    Which, if the book was shorter, that would suck. It's a good book.

    But, Vayentha died, and the book was longer, more comprehensive, and more intellectual. The plot of the book is much more complex now that everything must be revealed to us as fast as it is revealed to Langdon, suffering from amnesia. If Vayentha had a stronger impact in the book, it would weaken the overall message. Dan Brown did a superb job with this book.

This is a video that essentially tries to disprove the possibility of overpopulation:

The Killer Angels: A Novel of the Civil War - Analysis

Book by Michael Shaara, 1987

http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1355371689l/682804.jpg

[ANALYSIS]

   The book, The Killer Angels, by Michael Shaara, goes through the book and elaborates on the personal thoughts of the characters, one of the reasons the book is so impressive compared to other historical fiction books, possibly even regular novels. The Killer Angels follows these characters, who were living, breathing, real people once, in the flesh, and the book makes their long-past emotions and opinions into our world today once more.

   Analysis of Characters: The Killer Angels, with its ability to tag along with both sides of the Battle of Gettysburg, elaborates a little bit more onto the individual feelings of the generals and high-ranking officers of both sides, how even with a single, defined action, there were controversies and conflicts of interest. With the fateful Pickett's Charge, General Lee ordered the charge, but Longstreet disagreed, as this was suggesting they do what they had failed to do hours earlier with less troops. Though they went through with the idea, there was the conflicts of interest within the decision: "'Sir' He shook his head, groping for words. Lee waited. 'Sir, there are some things I must say.'... 'Sir, my two divisions, Hood and McLaws, lost almost half their strength yesterday. Do you expect me to attack again that same high ground which they could not take yesterday at full strength? With so many officers lost? Including Hood?' Lee was expressionless. The eyes were black and still." (Shaara 302) General Longstreet, Lee's second-in-command, disagrees with Lee on the tactics of the Confederacy, this included, along with how this warfare should be executed, in offensive or defensive warfare, for example. This similarly happened with the Union.

   I infer, that although it doesn't directly state it, Longstreet is worried about his ability to lead these men to their death. He begins to lose control of himself, subtly: "What was needed now was control, absolute control. Lee was right about that: a man who could not control himself had no right to command an army. They must not know my doubts, they must not. So I will send them all forward and say nothing, absolutely nothing, except what must be said. But he looked down at his hands. They were trembling." (Shaara 311) I infer that Longstreet likely had thoughts of his own ability to lead these men, as he withheld the fact that he had trouble controlling himself.



   During the famed Pickett's Charge, Lewis Armistead was focused upon, as he was among the ragged remains of the broken-up army. In the charge, he figured he had left his mark on this Earth and had already sent a package to the opposing general's wife (both of which he'd been old friends with). With the rest of his life in minutes, Armistead decides to climb upon the enemy wall. "...no Rebel yell now, no more screams of victory, the men falling here and there like trees before an invisible ax yo could see them go down one by one and in clumps...started screaming, follow me, follow me, and began the long fast walk toward the ridge. No need for hurry now, too tired to run, expecting to be hit an any moment...Armistead thought: we won't make it. He lifted the sword again, screaming, and moved on, closer, closer, but it was all coming apart. The whole world was dying." (Shaara 347) Armistead believed he was done, he was going to die, and he knew the only thing he could do was to keep going.

   I inferred that with Armistead's fairly traumatic situation of watching his friends and comrades die, he became disconnected from himself. "And then he was hit, finally, in his side, doubling him. No pain at all, merely a nuisance. He moved toward a cannon the boys had just taken. Some blue troops had stopped near the trees above and were kneeling and firing; he saw their rifles aimed at him. Too weary now... He saw again, a bloody tangle, men fighting hand-to-hand. An officer riding toward him; there was a violent blow... a sense of great peace." (Shaara 348-9) Armistead had experienced a feeling of knowing he will die here, on this day and hour, and became detached from himself. I infer this was common with the Civil War, especially since old friends will likely be fighting each other.




   Analysis of Conflict: Michael Shaara, the author, used both internal and external conflict in his book. With external conflict, which should be rather obvious considering the nature of the book, the Union, specifically the Army of the Potomac, and the Confederacy, the Army of Virginia, fought each other over the course of three days, four with the minor battle on July 4th, the symbolic finale of one of America's most important battles. "Here he had a few hundred. To the right Kemper's brigade had broken, but some men still fired..." (Shaara 348) The external conflict of the story is mostly based upon the battles and the shots fired.

   The internal conflict is the attention on the viewpoints of the officers and soldiers detailed in the book. The book emphasized that there's no one right way to do something, as oftentimes all choice will be limited to choosing the choice that will send the least men to their deaths while simultaeneously achieving the best possible tactical outcome. "Dear God, let it end soon. Now he must focus his mind on the war. Alternatives? Any real choice here? Move on, to higher ground in another place. Or stay and fight. Well if we stay, we must fight. No waiting. We will never be stronger." (Shaara 280) In this, Lee, the most beloved figure [arguably] in the Battle of Gettysburg, is attempting to decide his next course of action, which may determine the outcome of the battle and which will put the least amount of soldiers into harm's way.

   Both conflicts are emphasized nearly the same; internal and external conflicts are both heavy parts of the book, and are both frequently excerised with their role in the book. There is very little room to improve upon the capitalization of either type of confict.  

The Killer Angels: A Novel of the Civil War - Book Recommendation

Book by Michael Shaara, 1987

http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1355371689l/682804.jpg

[BOOK RECOMMENDATION]

   The Killer Angels, published in 1987, is a beautifully written, historical fiction novel of the three days of Gettysburg, four days if you count the minor skirmish the day after, which happened to be July 4th, during the Civil War. The book itself was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for Best Fiction, and I believe that it fully deserved such an award. The Four Days of Gettysburg were among the bloodiest days of the Civil War, and Michael Shaara recreated such an emotional and important time with more humanity and feeling than a textbook could ever muster.

   The book is written in a 3rd person omniscient manner: it assumes the viewpoints of some key figures from Gettysburg -- General Robert E. Lee, General James Longstreet, George Pickett, Richard Ewell, Lewis Armistead, Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, and many more are among those picked for their unique stance and view on their role during the Battle of Gettysburg. What impresses me is that Shaara manages to humanize them, and capitalize on the actual person rather than what they did -- throughout the book, for example, General Lee's days are marked, as he feels his body slowly weaken. Longstreet is constantly seeing the mental visage of his predecessor, the famous "Stonewall" Jackson. In full, this book fleshes out the individuality of the men, how each had his future and his past.

   Brief Intro: A spy for the Confederacy marks out the Union position, which is frighteningly close, which leads General Lee to move and cut off the Union from Washington. A separate Union force moves into Gettysburg, and the two armies meet and ready themselves for the next four days, perhaps the hardest days they've ever seen, or perhaps their last days.

   This book is undeniably unforgettable, with a page-turning urge with every word. I rate this, easily, a 10 out of 10.

The Killer Angels: A Novel of the Civil War - Characters

Book by Michael Shaara, 1987

http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1355371689l/682804.jpg

[CHARACTERS]

   ROBERT E. LEE: The overall idea with how the story is written with Lee is that he has less than a decade of life in him, as he has heart problems. He prefers the old ways of war, the traditional approach to a battle, though his second-in-command, General James Longstreet, has newer ideas about how to deal with the Union. Despite his age and degree of frailty, Lee commands with inspiration, and keeps morale high, even after the Confederacy lost many men with Pickett's reckless charge ordered by Lee.

   Lee doesn't change much at all in the book -- he is nearing the end of his life and has seen many years of war. He sticks with his idea of offensive war throughout the book, conducting attempts to control areas or hit-and-runs to the end, where the Confederates are forced to retreat. His personality never changes either; he remains a relatively humorless man who reveres God, from beginning to end. At the end of the book, during the end of the third day, the narrative states: "Lee knelt and prayed...This was the way, as God would have it. Face to face with the enemy, on the grounds of his choosing. End with honor." (Shaara 286) This was no different from how he acted in the first day of Gettysburg: he fought on the offensive completely, and often spoke prayer to the Lord. In the foreword, Lee was described: "He does not drink or smoke or gamble or chase women. He does not read novels or plays; he thinks they weaken the mind...He does not lose his temper nor his faith; he never complains." Lee remains this honest, clear-minded individual in the entirety of the book.

   Lee interacted with other characters in two different manners; one way in an honest and humorless manner, and the other way as a cold general. The distinction comes from Lee's responsibility and knowledge with how to deal with the situation: "He moved as if his body was filled with cold cement that was slowly hardening, and yet there was something hot and bright and fearful, as if something somewhere were about to break at any moment... 'There will be none of that.' Lee's voice was cold and sharp. He spoke as you speak to a child, a small child, from a great height." (Shaara 279-81) Lee recognized that the man he was speaking to (Stuart, who'd been absent and needed) and knew that this man was needed to win the battle. However, his absence had led to many more deaths than what was ever needed. Lee also, when not acting cold, took an honest, humorless way of speaking when interacting with other characters. "He paused. Hard to speak in this fashion. Longstreet was staring with cold silent eyes, Lee said sternly, "You have a very bad habit, General, of going too far forward.' Longstreet said, 'You cannot lead from behind.' 'Well, let me put it plainly. I cannot spare you.'" (Shaara 86). Lee spoke honestly, and did so without making jokes.

   Lee moves the plot along by keeping control of the army, and ordering constant attacks which kept them on the offensive. Lee's tendency to attack rather than defend and his confidence in his men ultimately spelled out the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg. On the first day of Gettysburg, Lee ordered a massive attack to take the town, "Lee felt a thrill of delight... Rodes had come in on the right on the Union flank; blue troops were turning to meet a new threat. And Early was close behind...Another courier. 'General Early has arrived, begs to report that he is attacking to the north of General Rodes.'... Rodes and Early were attacking; Heth and Pender were waiting here in front of him. Lee's instinct sensed opportunity. Let us all go in together, as God decreed a fight here. He swung to Heth, 'General, you may attack.'" (Shaara 109-11) Later in the book, Lee's overconfidence and tendency to attacks left the army in shambles. "'General, you must look to your Division.' Pickett said tearfully, voice of a bewildered angry boy. 'General Lee, I have no Division.' He pointed back down the hill, jabbing at the blowing smoke, the valley of wrecked men...'What about my men? Armistead is gone. Garnett is gone. Kemper is gone. All my colonels are gone. Good God, sir, what about my men?'" (Shaara 345) Lee's attack on the last day left his army unable to fight. In total, Lee moves the plot along with his tactics, first taking the town of Gettysburg, then losing it all in a reckless attack. In a way, Lee moves the entire book along by himself, as he dictates the entire movement of the Confederate army in the area, which is almost always on the offensive, and loses the Battle of Gettysburg.

Related Page: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/biography/grant-lee/

This is a old rock song from 1985 about the days of Gettysburg:

The Killer Angels: A Novel of the Civil War - Theme and Summary

Book by Michael Shaara, 1987



http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1355371689l/682804.jpg



  [THEME AND SUMMARY]

   SUMMARY: The first half The Killer Angels detailed the cluelessness of the armies, how both the Union and the Confederacy were essentially stumbling around in the dark, until a spy, previously an actor, gives a report on a large Union force within hours of James Longstreet's Regiment of the Confederacy, leading them to head to Gettysburg to cut them off from Washington. Simultaneously, John Buford's Regiment, a Union troop, was also heading to Gettysburg.

   Buford stays on Cemetery Hill, just outside of town. His dismounted cavalry defends the town from a small Confederate force, and is joined by an infantry to successfully hold the town. Robert E. Lee, the famed General of the Confederacy, has several of his Regiments force a surrender of the Union from Gettysburg, initially.

   The second half of the book details the larger battles of Gettysburg. Lee , after taking the town, slowly battles the Union down south several hundred yards, where the Union takes a Little Round Top, a hill, as its main headquarters. Lee engages the enemy, but is repeled, and tries again, with Pickett's Charge, which weakens the Confederate army down to 60%.

   THEME: The theme of the book is: There is never a single side to a situation. This applies to The Killer Angels in a few ways:

   Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, an ex-professor and in command of the 20th Regiment of Infantry of Maine, wrote an oration in his youth after a discussion with his father about a quote from Shakespeare, listed in the book: "What a piece of work is man...in action how like an angel!" (Shaara 126), his father then responding on how man must then be a "murderin' angel, a reference most likely to humanity's addiction to war. Chamberlain titled his oration Man: The Killer Angel, which is most likely the source of the name of the book. Chamberlain's oration detailed the duality of man, how we may sometimes be 'angels' and other times 'killers'.

   Additionally, being a novel of the Civil War and the fact that civil wars are wars fought against yourselves, it was witnessed in Buford's first hours in Gettysburg, he saw a general of the opposing army, from a distance. "He saw the lone officer. Buford waved. You never knew what old friend was out there. The Reb officer took off his hat, bowed formally. Buford grimaced: a gentleman." (Shaara 39) In another related part of the book, it described the troops refusing to shoot an officer because he was brave. Stonewall Jackson claimed "I do not want them brave, I want them dead!" Though this is commonly attributed to Jackson, it was found on page 128.

   The theme of the book, about every situation having multiple sides, is applied to the Civil War, specifically The Killer Angels, by having men realizing they may be killing old friends, or gentlemen, or men who have held so strong that they were admirable, even if they were an opposition.

Related Page: http://www.civilwar.org/battlefields/gettysburg.html?tab=facts

Don't Turn Around --- Michelle Gagnon

http://breathlessbookreviews.blogspot.com/2013/08/dont-turn-around-by-michelle-gagnon.html

 

I rated this book, Don't Turn Around by Michelle Gagnon, a good 7. The book started off with the main character, Noa, waking up in a bizarre warehouse where she has been experimented on. Without memory of the past several weeks, Noa had to survive where she could trust no one. As an runaway orphan, the police where after her. Her only hope to evade both the government and these strange people was to learn to trust her fellow computer hackers and use her cleverness to outwit the world. The theme of the book was to know that people are never alone in what they believe and do.