Is there no cure for love?
I recently read two books, both detective yarns of different flavors. And they both--one centrally and one less directly--deal with this question.
The one that deals with it centrally is actually called No Cure For Love. Very good book. Two notches up from a beach read, and still a fast page turner. A tv actress is being stalked by a maniac who claims to be her true love. A detective who works in a special unit of the Los Angeles police department is on the case to try to find the obsessive lover and protect the actress.
The maniac is the most extreme example of someone who is crazy in a kind of love for which there is no cure. But he is a maniac with a sick family background. Besides the maniac, there are three other "normal" characters in the novel who engage/d in relationships that reflect that, once smitten, decisions and behaviors become irrational and can be counterproductive. Yet a fourth example seems to provide a foundation for a sequel to the book. (I just perused the author's website and I don't see any sequels to this novel, first published in 1995 and then re-released in 2015). The normal characters and their relationships are not central to the plot, but they're examples of the premise: there may be no cure for love. Love begets irrational behavior.
A number of things are impressive about the book. The first is that the author, Peter Robinson, typically writes about an Inspector Banks who works and lives in the UK. I have read several in this series and thought No Cure for Love was part of the Banks' series. No Cure for Love however has nothing to do with Inspector Banks and very little to do with the UK. A main character is from the UK, but for the most part the dialogue/slang/language is typical of US detective stories. The ability to switch and write so differently reflects versatility and skill.
The second impressive feature is that while there are a couple of things in this book that make me wonder about how likely they are to happen, the book--for the most part--passes the plausibility test. I wonder about Sally's current mental health given her behavior in the past. And there is a love affair that seems not only gratuitous but, in my experience at least, unlikely to begin as it did. Still, everything else about the book rings as if it could be true.
Third impressive aspect: there are enough clues in the novel to keep you guessing about who the maniac might be. And you can get it right. I am not typically a fan of detective stories when at the last second someone pops up as the doer who could not have been sleuthed out by the reader.
In sum, if you like detective stories, read this book. And when you are done with its plot, maybe think about whether there is indeed a cure for love so that we can behave rationally when we are in the throes of it.
The second book, Slow Burn, by Ace Atkins is a Spenser novel. Spenser, a character developed by the late Boston author Robert Parker, is attempting in this novel to identify arsonists who have been burning buildings for a year. I liked the Parker Spenser novels, a little more than the Atkins's ones, though the latter have its strong points as well. Both write fast moving stories. Parker's typically had a moral message at the end that hung around for a spell. Atkins's characters have a little more depth. In this one, there is a reference to Spenser's hard drinking dad, who I had not read about before. Maybe I just missed it. I never thought Parker got Susan--Spenser's love interest--or Hawk--his friend and occasional partner--in anything other than monochrome. Atkins does a little better.
In Slow Burn, three people, with holes in their hearts, rationalize starting fires. The damage to their innards relate to family, abuse, and thwarted dreams more than romantic disappointments. Nothing of course condones their anti-social behavior. One of the three does more than just set fires.
There is a reference in the acknowledgments that the author researched an actual spate of fires in Boston in the 80s to do this book. However real were the other fires, I found I had to suspend too much belief to buy the plot line in this one. It is a fast read, but I don't think it sufficiently gets to the guts of why people do the things they do. Spenser novels written by Parker did not do this either, but often you were left with something to wonder about relating to the human condition when you were done. That happens to some extent with this one but not as much.
Not a bad read, but not a book I would hunt for.
No Cure for Love, however, is a different story. Very well written and compelling page turner. And beyond the search for the maniac--the title and the book itself made me think of why we act irrationally if not maniacally when "every fairy tale seems real." Probably there is no cure for the "dizzy dancing way we feel." I don't believe that is always a bad thing. Hate to be cured of that feeling.
Tuesday, June 13, 2017
Saturday, June 10, 2017
Well, I got that wrong.
Three huge errors tonight in my forecasting.
(1) Cleveland won despite the fact that typically a team that wins three straight in basketball series, wins the fourth to sweep.
(2) I thought the Under was the way to go. The O/U was 227.5. That was obliterated by 24 points.
(3) I thought that Kyrie Irving could not continue to play like superman. I will not think this again because once again Kyrie Irving was absolutely incredible. Incredible means not believable. He made shots that are not believable.
Now, Richard Jefferson was playing football out there guarding Durant and there was a whole hell of a lot of contact which probably will not be permitted in game 5. Nevertheless Cleveland whipped a flat Golden State. Curry came out half asleep and nobody but Shawn Livingston looked like they were ready.
On to Monday.
(1) Cleveland won despite the fact that typically a team that wins three straight in basketball series, wins the fourth to sweep.
(2) I thought the Under was the way to go. The O/U was 227.5. That was obliterated by 24 points.
(3) I thought that Kyrie Irving could not continue to play like superman. I will not think this again because once again Kyrie Irving was absolutely incredible. Incredible means not believable. He made shots that are not believable.
Now, Richard Jefferson was playing football out there guarding Durant and there was a whole hell of a lot of contact which probably will not be permitted in game 5. Nevertheless Cleveland whipped a flat Golden State. Curry came out half asleep and nobody but Shawn Livingston looked like they were ready.
On to Monday.
Friday, June 9, 2017
Wisdom for Tonight
The fourth game of the NBA championship begins in about 2 and a half hours. Cleveland is down 3-0. In the past, teams down 3-0 often succumb to the sweep. I cannot see Kyrie Irving playing as well as he played on Wednesday. And I have to think the wind has been taken out of the sails of the Cavaliers after blowing the lead in the last minutes of the fourth quarter on Wednesday.
On the other hand, the Warriors could easily be complacent and not as focussed as they have been. I will go with the Warriors tonight but only because my sense of basketball sports history is such that this typically is how it goes. If the Warriors prevail as I believe they will, I think they will cover the 6 points. The O/U is 227.5. Take the Under.
I would not bet a wad on tonight. I never bet a wad anyway, and I always urge readers to remember that I thought Carter and Clinton would win against Reagan and Trump respectively.
On the other hand, the Warriors could easily be complacent and not as focussed as they have been. I will go with the Warriors tonight but only because my sense of basketball sports history is such that this typically is how it goes. If the Warriors prevail as I believe they will, I think they will cover the 6 points. The O/U is 227.5. Take the Under.
I would not bet a wad on tonight. I never bet a wad anyway, and I always urge readers to remember that I thought Carter and Clinton would win against Reagan and Trump respectively.
Thursday, June 8, 2017
Great game
I arrived home in the middle of the first quarter tonight. Then I was riveted for two hours straight.
This was a terrific basketball game. The big three of the Cavaliers were outstanding particularly Irving who had a season's worth of highlights in one game. And LeBron James was sensational as he typically is. While Love did not shoot that well, he was a monster off the boards and again made me out to be a liar as I never was high on Love's talents.
At the end Kyrie Irving could not continue to make shots that were optical illusions and LeBron ran out of gas. It is understandable that he would. He played nearly the whole game and was stunning even by his standards. James is just a person though--not Clark Kent.
The Warriors on the other hand kept hanging around. Draymond Green did not have one of his better games and neither did some of the other Warriors. But Iguodala stepped up defensively as did Klay Thompson. And then Durant stuck the key three at the end.
Just great basketball.
Nobody can deny that LeBron James is the best ever or that Kyrie Irving made shots that truly were remarkable. But the Warriors are the Warriors.
If you listened to me and were in Las Vegas, you won against the spread as the Warriors gave up three and won by five, so you got to count your shekels at the end. However, I liked the Under which was at 226 when I made my prediction. I see it creeped up to 228 over the last two days. Still the final was 231. So I was a loser on the Under but a winner on the spread.
I am exhausted not from the toil of the day but from watching. This is why we love sports. I did not have a horse in this game. I like players from both teams. I was pulling for Golden State because I love their motion offense, but I also love LeBron and have come to admire Irving. Very exciting.
This was a terrific basketball game. The big three of the Cavaliers were outstanding particularly Irving who had a season's worth of highlights in one game. And LeBron James was sensational as he typically is. While Love did not shoot that well, he was a monster off the boards and again made me out to be a liar as I never was high on Love's talents.
At the end Kyrie Irving could not continue to make shots that were optical illusions and LeBron ran out of gas. It is understandable that he would. He played nearly the whole game and was stunning even by his standards. James is just a person though--not Clark Kent.
The Warriors on the other hand kept hanging around. Draymond Green did not have one of his better games and neither did some of the other Warriors. But Iguodala stepped up defensively as did Klay Thompson. And then Durant stuck the key three at the end.
Just great basketball.
Nobody can deny that LeBron James is the best ever or that Kyrie Irving made shots that truly were remarkable. But the Warriors are the Warriors.
If you listened to me and were in Las Vegas, you won against the spread as the Warriors gave up three and won by five, so you got to count your shekels at the end. However, I liked the Under which was at 226 when I made my prediction. I see it creeped up to 228 over the last two days. Still the final was 231. So I was a loser on the Under but a winner on the spread.
I am exhausted not from the toil of the day but from watching. This is why we love sports. I did not have a horse in this game. I like players from both teams. I was pulling for Golden State because I love their motion offense, but I also love LeBron and have come to admire Irving. Very exciting.
Tuesday, June 6, 2017
Comey and Dean
It was forty four years ago this month when John Dean testified before the Senate committee investigating the Watergate scandal. At the time the Nixon White House was preparing for Dean's testimony and was considering how they would react to any allegations.
It made me pause today to read that the Trump White House now, nearly half a century later is doing something similar in anticipation of James Comey's testimony on Thursday.
Whether it is correct or not we will never know for sure, but many experts feel that if Richard Nixon had admitted to his behavior regarding obstructing the investigation of the Watergate break-in, his presidency would have continued. The often cited claim is that the cover-up was worse than the break-in. Yet it appears that Trump has already hired an attorney to address any comments Comey may make that accuse Trump of wrong doing.
Watergate is the scandal most of us collecting social security remember most vividly. The scandal became such a common part of our culture that any subsequent scandal has been given the gate suffix. In sports we have Spygate and Deflategate. An exhaustive list of all such gate scandals can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scandals_with_%22-gate%22_suffix. I had not heard of many of these and the sheer number is a bit startling. (My favorite I think is Nipplegate a reference to the wardrobe malfunction during halftime of the superbowl a few years back).
The point is that anyone with any sense of history knows that what is happening now is similar to what happened then--not in terms of the offense--at least that has not been proven yet--but how the White House apparently intends to react to the accusation. It is a stonewalling defense that never works in the long run.
Of course in this case it would have been wise for Trump never to have attempted to stifle the investigation in the first place. But if he indeed had, why follow in the footsteps of the only president ever to be forced to resign.
I was in New Hampshire when Dean testified in June of 1973. I was staying with a buddy who had rented a remote cabin in the white mountains. We could not get television reception but we were able to listen to the testimony on a radio. And we did that all day long during the first day of his testimony--which was essentially, a very long statement. I can still remember us shaking our heads at what Dean was relaying. I will not shake my head if Comey says something akin to what Dean said half a century ago. But it will be head shaking stuff if the Trump White House decides to aggressively take the same road in defense that caused his predecessor to resign in disgrace.
It made me pause today to read that the Trump White House now, nearly half a century later is doing something similar in anticipation of James Comey's testimony on Thursday.
Whether it is correct or not we will never know for sure, but many experts feel that if Richard Nixon had admitted to his behavior regarding obstructing the investigation of the Watergate break-in, his presidency would have continued. The often cited claim is that the cover-up was worse than the break-in. Yet it appears that Trump has already hired an attorney to address any comments Comey may make that accuse Trump of wrong doing.
Watergate is the scandal most of us collecting social security remember most vividly. The scandal became such a common part of our culture that any subsequent scandal has been given the gate suffix. In sports we have Spygate and Deflategate. An exhaustive list of all such gate scandals can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scandals_with_%22-gate%22_suffix. I had not heard of many of these and the sheer number is a bit startling. (My favorite I think is Nipplegate a reference to the wardrobe malfunction during halftime of the superbowl a few years back).
The point is that anyone with any sense of history knows that what is happening now is similar to what happened then--not in terms of the offense--at least that has not been proven yet--but how the White House apparently intends to react to the accusation. It is a stonewalling defense that never works in the long run.
Of course in this case it would have been wise for Trump never to have attempted to stifle the investigation in the first place. But if he indeed had, why follow in the footsteps of the only president ever to be forced to resign.
I was in New Hampshire when Dean testified in June of 1973. I was staying with a buddy who had rented a remote cabin in the white mountains. We could not get television reception but we were able to listen to the testimony on a radio. And we did that all day long during the first day of his testimony--which was essentially, a very long statement. I can still remember us shaking our heads at what Dean was relaying. I will not shake my head if Comey says something akin to what Dean said half a century ago. But it will be head shaking stuff if the Trump White House decides to aggressively take the same road in defense that caused his predecessor to resign in disgrace.
Monday, June 5, 2017
Golden State
I am very much impressed with the way Golden State has played in the first two games of the championship. They play good defense, look for open players, run and run and run and run, and can shoot from long range. They have three players on the starting five who can shoot threes as good as any player in the league. Stephen Curry, Kevin Durant, and Klay Thompson are deadly. Who do you guard if you are Cleveland? You prevent Curry from getting the ball and Durant will hurt you, or Thompson.
Cleveland did not play poorly last night. LeBron James is still the best player on planet Earth and he demonstrated his prowess last night. Kevin Love continues to make a liar out of me. I thought he was overrated, but he has been an able shooter and a very good rebounder in the playoffs. Kyrie Irving makes shots that are worthy of standing ovations. Last year I thought he was only a bit better than average. I do not think so anymore. Irving is a super star.
However, despite James, and Love, and Irving, the Cavaliers got shellacked last night. And they got tired. This is not a knock on the conditioning of the Cavaliers. It is to the credit of the Warriors who are perpetually in motion. Every rebound starts a fast break. They often run after made baskets. And the offense is a motion offense. It is exhausting to watch and it must be impossible to defend.
Last year I, incorrectly, predicted that the Warriors would definitely beat Cleveland in the championship series. Yet, the Cavaliers came back from a 3-1 series deficit to defeat the Warriors. And they made Stephen Curry look only average. So, I should not count the Cavaliers out after two losses at the Warriors' gym. But gee, even if Curry and Thompson get cold, there is still Durant.
I think the only way Cleveland can prevail is if either Durant or Curry get injured during the series. Otherwise I don't see it happening. It is not just that the Warriors have excellent players. They have excellent players playing excellently. And last night despite shooting well, Curry had several turnovers, and the Warriors still won by close to twenty points. Quite a spectacle. I think people will talk about the 2017 Warriors for years to come as maybe the best team ever.
The Warriors are currently three point favorites for Wednesday's game at Cleveland. I think you give away the points and count your shekels afterwards. The over/under is 226. That seems low given last night's 235, but I kind of like the under on Wednesday.
Cleveland did not play poorly last night. LeBron James is still the best player on planet Earth and he demonstrated his prowess last night. Kevin Love continues to make a liar out of me. I thought he was overrated, but he has been an able shooter and a very good rebounder in the playoffs. Kyrie Irving makes shots that are worthy of standing ovations. Last year I thought he was only a bit better than average. I do not think so anymore. Irving is a super star.
However, despite James, and Love, and Irving, the Cavaliers got shellacked last night. And they got tired. This is not a knock on the conditioning of the Cavaliers. It is to the credit of the Warriors who are perpetually in motion. Every rebound starts a fast break. They often run after made baskets. And the offense is a motion offense. It is exhausting to watch and it must be impossible to defend.
Last year I, incorrectly, predicted that the Warriors would definitely beat Cleveland in the championship series. Yet, the Cavaliers came back from a 3-1 series deficit to defeat the Warriors. And they made Stephen Curry look only average. So, I should not count the Cavaliers out after two losses at the Warriors' gym. But gee, even if Curry and Thompson get cold, there is still Durant.
I think the only way Cleveland can prevail is if either Durant or Curry get injured during the series. Otherwise I don't see it happening. It is not just that the Warriors have excellent players. They have excellent players playing excellently. And last night despite shooting well, Curry had several turnovers, and the Warriors still won by close to twenty points. Quite a spectacle. I think people will talk about the 2017 Warriors for years to come as maybe the best team ever.
The Warriors are currently three point favorites for Wednesday's game at Cleveland. I think you give away the points and count your shekels afterwards. The over/under is 226. That seems low given last night's 235, but I kind of like the under on Wednesday.
A Man Called Ove
This is a beautiful book. Read it.
That is the short version of this review.
I had seen A Man Called Ove on best seller lists for a long time. Then, a few weeks ago I was sitting on a bench reading. A stranger sat down on the same bench and, after a spell, asked me about the book I had and if it was worth a read. I told her what I thought and asked for a recommendation. She said A Man Called Ove was special. Her comment plus the many weeks on the best seller list made me want to go get it. So, I put myself on a waiting list at the library and eventually it arrived.
It is wonderful. The story takes place in Sweden and is about, well, a man named Ove. He is a 59 year old curmudgeon who seems difficult to like. But he endears himself, despite his thorny personality, to others. The author does a good job of blending the past with the present and making Ove a real character-in both senses of the word. The evolution of his relationship with Rune-a neighbor, and Ove's beloved Sonja is very well developed. We learn about his cat, visits to a cemetery, issues with people breaking the rules in his community, a dear neighbor who befriends him, "white shirts" who are the bane of his existence, and assorted other relationships.
The story is laugh out loud funny. It's also sad and moving in many parts. The translator as well as the author, Fredrik Backman, deserve a good deal of credit. The descriptions of Ove's and others' reactions are so spot on that the reader can just about see facial expressions.
I was half way done when a buddy spotted me with the book and told me he had seen the movie. I had not known there was a movie, but am looking forward to renting it. If you've seen the movie and it is lame but not have not read the book, don't let the lame film stop you from reading this one.
You know Ove. You're likely not like him, but you will like him and he is inspiring in many ways. Very fast read. And a sweet ride.
That is the short version of this review.
I had seen A Man Called Ove on best seller lists for a long time. Then, a few weeks ago I was sitting on a bench reading. A stranger sat down on the same bench and, after a spell, asked me about the book I had and if it was worth a read. I told her what I thought and asked for a recommendation. She said A Man Called Ove was special. Her comment plus the many weeks on the best seller list made me want to go get it. So, I put myself on a waiting list at the library and eventually it arrived.
It is wonderful. The story takes place in Sweden and is about, well, a man named Ove. He is a 59 year old curmudgeon who seems difficult to like. But he endears himself, despite his thorny personality, to others. The author does a good job of blending the past with the present and making Ove a real character-in both senses of the word. The evolution of his relationship with Rune-a neighbor, and Ove's beloved Sonja is very well developed. We learn about his cat, visits to a cemetery, issues with people breaking the rules in his community, a dear neighbor who befriends him, "white shirts" who are the bane of his existence, and assorted other relationships.
The story is laugh out loud funny. It's also sad and moving in many parts. The translator as well as the author, Fredrik Backman, deserve a good deal of credit. The descriptions of Ove's and others' reactions are so spot on that the reader can just about see facial expressions.
I was half way done when a buddy spotted me with the book and told me he had seen the movie. I had not known there was a movie, but am looking forward to renting it. If you've seen the movie and it is lame but not have not read the book, don't let the lame film stop you from reading this one.
You know Ove. You're likely not like him, but you will like him and he is inspiring in many ways. Very fast read. And a sweet ride.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
