After completing an immensely satisfying read of William Kent Krueger’s fourth installment of his Cork O’Conner series it “behooved” me to move on to the next installment, MERCY FALLS. As is usually the case Krueger’s storyline drew me in and I immediately got comfortable for what I knew would be another excellent read.
Straightaway we learn that O’Conner has been reinstalled as Sheriff of Tamarack County replacing the disgraced former Sheriff, Arne Soderberg who quit in the middle of a scandal. This would be his second go round in the Sheriff’s office having spent seven years on the job when he too was forced to resign. The situation he was confronted with involved a phone call from the home of Lucy and Eli Tibodeau who lived on the Ojibwe reservation. The couple had a history of domestic violence against each other but when O’Conner and Deputy Marsha Dross arrived they were immediately met by gunfire from a sniper. Dross was shot and it soon became clear that O’Conner was the target.
O’Conner tried to figure out who may have had a motive and the only thing he could come with was a meth bust a few weeks before when one of the perps was killed in an explosion with his brother vowing revenge. While developing an investigation into who was trying to kill him, O’Conner was presented with a murder scene at Mercy Falls where the victim had been stabbed to death and castrated. The victim was Edward Jacoby who represented Starlight Enterprises and provided management for casinos across the Midwest and was trying to sign up the Ojibwe Casino as one of its clients.
Starlight’s goal split the reservation community in half as to who might want their services. Jacoby was also a client of O’Conner’s wife Jo who was a lawyer. Events greatly upset Ms. O’Conner. First her husband was almost killed by a sniper and now one of her clients was murdered. They had left Chicago where O’Conner was a police officer because it was so dangerous and moved to a beautiful and supposedly peaceful town of Aurora, MN near Iron Lake to raise their children.
As in all of his novels Krueger highlights the natural beauty of northern Minnesota in addition to his deep respect for Native-American history and culture. Krueger delves into the development of casinos on the reservation as means of overcoming the poverty that federal law had imposed on the reservation. However, once the casino lifestyle was introduced it brought with it other socio-economic issues for locals to deal with.
Krueger can always be relied upon for interesting twists and turns in his stories. A case in point is the Jacoby family with the victims overly aggressive obnoxious father and his son Ben. It seems that twenty years had passed since Ben and Jo O’Conner had seen each other. They had been classmates at the University of Chicago Law School as well as lovers. It made for a very uncomfortable situation for Jo as Ben seemed to want more than catch up on old times. O’Conner also found himself in an uncomfortable situation when Dina Willner, a former FBI agent and Cook County DA in Chicago took a liking to Cork. She was part of the Jacoby family entourage and became part of the murder investigation. She and Cork worked close together which made him nervous. The Jacoby family also included an interesting Argentinian branch. Gabriella, the widow of Eddie Jacoby and her brother Antonio Salguero have their own agenda which is difficult to discern.
(William Kent Krueger, author)
Krueger ‘s plot line is split into two parts. First, the attempted murder of O’Conner and the continuing threat that included his family. Second, the murder of Edward Jacoby who was pressuring the Iron Lake Ojibwe Council to contract with Starlight’s managerial services for the casino. The question that comes to mind, are these two scenarios related, and if so how? To answer the questions the reader must follow the twists and turns in Krueger’s plot from the Great Boundary North in Minnesota to Chicago, along with unusual characters like Bryan St. Onge and Lizzie Fineday who play important roles as the plot moves quickly. It is an interesting ride, and if you take it you should be drawn in and quietly entertained, but keep in mind that the ending is somewhat obscure, and it could be an introduction to the next novel in the series.
William Kent Krueger is not your typical formulaic practitioner of suspense/thriller oriented fiction. Despite this fact he has created the award winning Cork O’Conner series with story lines and characters that do not follow any systematic pattern. Krueger focuses on many of the same characters from earlier books, but that is all that is predictable as he has the unique ability to introduce new characters and create plot lines that seem random but are engrossing and absorb the reader. The fourth installment in the series, BLOOD HOLLOW is no exception.
Krueger begins by introducing the reader to the white expanse of the northern Minnesota winter as it is January, and a blizzard is approaching. Cork O’Conner is joined by his compatriot, Oliver Bledsoe, an attorney and true blood Iron Lakes Ojibwe who handles the legal affairs for the tribal council. Both men are in a race to locate Charlotte Kane, a seventeen year old young lady who left her New Year’s party intoxicated on a snowmobile as the storm seems imminent. The girl has been missing for two days and O’Conner is deeply disappointed as the search is called off by Sheriff Wally Schanno who is about to retire.
(Iron Lake, MN)
The sheriff’s office plays a significant role in Krueger’s plot. O’Conner had been the sheriff but was replaced by Schanno after a nasty tribal incident. Now reaching retirement Schanno is replaced by Arne Soderberg who knows nothing about law enforcement and whose background is the family trucking business. Needless to say, Soderberg and O’Conner do not get along as the new sheriff is a political animal who wants to use his new position as a political steppingstone to enhance his career.
Once Charlotte Kane’s body is located the novel kicks into gear as Soderberg believes he has his ticket for a political future – Kane’s former boyfriend Solemn Winter Moon. When O’Conner shows up at the murder seen Soderberg feels threatened as the former sheriff points out a number of discrepancies in the new sheriff’s investigation. From this point on Krueger lays out the plot very meticulously as he introduces background information about his characters and the role they will play in the story.
Kruger’s novels can stand alone as he nicely fills in the context of each character from previous books and how they fit into the author’s current effort. Krueger has the ability to create intimacy among his characters particularly the O’Conner family, the role of Henry Meloux an aging Midewiwin, a mide, and member of the Grand Medicine Society, and the relationship between Solemn Winter Moon and Cork O’Conner.
Solemn is a troubled young man with a dark side that has gotten into difficulties in the past. O’Conner always looked after him as he was the great nephew of Sam Winter Moon, O’Conner’s surrogate father and mentor. Once Kane disappears her father Dr. Fletcher Kane is convinced Solemn is the murderer. Cork’s wife Jo, an attorney, represents Solemn and for the two of them proving his innocence becomes an obsession.
(Iron Lake, MN)
After digging around much to Soderberg’s chagrin who is in the midst of railroading Solemn, O’Conner develops an interesting theory as to who the real murderer is, and his private investigation begins to split the town of Aurora in half. Since Solemn is Native-American and Cork is one-quarter Native-American the segment of the local population that abhors the reservation and the people who live their rally around the District Attorney to prosecute Solemn for first degree murder. For O’Conner, the evidence just does not add up.
Krueger adds an interesting wrinkle to the story focusing on Anti-Native prejudice which gives way to spiritual controversy when Winter Moon turns himself in after claiming to have seen Christ while seeking a vision from Kitchimanidoo, the Great Spirit. The encounter changes Solemn’s view of life and brings tourists, the sick, and numerous others to Aurora to be healed by one of Jesus’ newest disciples. Krueger also introduces a series of new characters that have not appeared in previous novels. Arne Soderberg and Dr. Fletcher Kane play key roles as each has their own agenda, and Fletcher and O’Conner having their own convoluted history. Solemn’s personal journey is crucial to the story as are Lyla Soderberg, the sheriff’s spouse, Deputy Randy Gooding, a former FBI agent from Milwaukee and friend of O’Conner, and Father Mal Thorne whose actions raise some interesting questions.
The quality of Krueger’s work measures up to the first three books of the series as O’Conner in his own bullish way skeptical of Winter Moon’s religious claims is determined to prove his innocence. O’Connor will uncover a twisted family drama, frightening religious fervor, and suspicious betrayals. As per usual, Krueger skillfully crafts ample plot twists to keep the reader guessing through the bloody climax to the thrilling conclusion of the novel that this reader did not see coming.
In February 1969, the bodies of four women were discovered buried in a North Truro Cemetery on Cape Cod. The bodies reflected gruesome attacks that involved dismemberment and other despicable acts. The victims were in their late teens or early twenties and according to police sources the murderer, Antone “Tony” Costa was suspected of killing a total of eight women. The details associated with the investigation and conviction of the serial killer are the subject of Casey Sherman’s latest book, HELLTOWN: THE UNTOLD STORY OF A SERIAL KILLER ON CAPE COD. Sherman, a bestselling author of fifteen books including such topics as the mobster Whitey Bulger, the Boston Strangler, and the assassination of John Lennon, grew up on Cape Cod, attending Barnstable High School and shares his extensive knowledge of the region in his narrative.
Sherman has created a book with aspects of fictional storytelling as he writes in the author’s note, that “a work of fiction can benefit from elements of fiction storytelling.” The book is a mishmash of fact and fiction, filled with invented dialogue interspersed with actual events. In part, HELLTOWN, the nickname given to the Cape Cod community of Provincetown in the 17th century because of its affinity with drinking, gambling, and other vices of the time – reads like a novel.
(Mary Ann Wysocki and Patricia Walsh)
Sherman has exceptional command of the material relying on interviews, primary research, his personal knowledge of the case and area, including Costa’s own unpublished autobiography “Resurrection,” as he reconstructs each murder scene, provided knowledge of the victims, highlights a careful reconstruction of the investigation zeroing in on the detectives involved, the trial itself, and Costa’s incarceration at the Walpole State Prison until he committed suicide on May 12, 1974. The book itself has a number of ancillary stories particularly the relationship between writers Kurt Vonnegut and Norman Mailer who both lived on the Cape for periods of time. Their rivalry is explored as is their relationship to Costa, especially the role of Vonnegut when the killer was imprisoned.
For the people of the area the case and hunt for the serial killer reminded them of the Boston Strangler case of Albert De Salvo that had been solved two years earlier. Sherman explores the reasons behind the killings focusing on Costa’s split personality; the good Tony, and his alter ego, Cory Devereaux. The author recreates conversations between the two elements of Costa’s personality and offers a psychological profile dealing with his complex relationship with his mother. Sherman adduces that Costa idealized his father and resented the fact that his mother remarried. As a young man he craved the attention of his mother and had to fight for her affection with two unwelcome rivals; his stepfather and his brother Vincent. According to Sherman’s analysis his mother had been taken away from him, therefore, somebody had to pay. The murders were a result of Costa’s convoluted thought process and the dichotomy that existed in his brain.
(Anthony “Tony” Costa)
A number of important characters emerge in the narrative; George Killen, the chief investigator for the Bristol County District Attorney, Detective Bernie Flynn whose belief in understanding the active personalities of the victim led to an acquaintance of Costa who would expose the location of the buried body parts; Massachusetts State trooper, Edgar “Tom” Gunnery who focused on Costa from the outset and dug up the bodies at the cemetery; Maurice Goldman, Costa’s lawyer; Edmund Dinis, the Bristol County District Attorney who saw the murder case as an opportunity to advance his political career resulting in his sensationalizing events and outright lies, i.e., referring to Costa as “the Cape Cod vampire,” to achieve the notoriety he craved; and lastly of course Tony Costa.
Costa was a native of Somerville, MA and grew up with a deep interest in taxidermy. While growing up neighbors reported that he killed pigeons, squirrels, and household animals. He purchased a copy of Maynard’s MANUAL OF TAXIDERMY, whose instructions on how to skin animals was transferred onto Costa’s mutilated victims.
(Norman Mailer, author)
A further aspect of the story are the roles of Vonnegut and Mailer who are fascinated by the brutality of Costa’s actions. Their rivalry seems like a literary footnote to the murder narrative and seems rather irrelevant to the overall story. Sherman details Vonnegut’s jealousy and envy toward Mailer whose literary success won a Pulitzer and a National Book award for ARMIES OF THE NIGHT while Vonnegut struggled to complete what would become his masterpiece SLAUGHTERHOUSE FIVE. While Mailer enjoyed his notoriety which led to, opposition to the Vietnam War, directing films, and a run for mayor of New York City; Vonnegut ran a failing Saab dealership and as an American GI in World War II he endured the psychological impact of living through the carpet bombing of Dresden, and was later captured and imprisoned by the Nazis. Vonnegut would cover the trial of Costa as a journalist and wrote about it for Life magazine in an article entitled “there’s a Maniac Loose Out There,” giving the false impression that his daughter Edie knew and was perhaps in danger from Costa. Mailer also followed the story and the trial and later used some of its details in an unsuccessful novel and film.
(Kurt Vonnegut, author)
HELLTOWN successfully integrates Costa’s story with the major events and movements of the 1960s. Sherman discusses the Vietnam War, the impact of the assassinations of Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, the Civil Rights Movement, the Chicago Democratic convention, the Apollo 11 moon landing, the death of Mary Jo Kopechne on Chappaquiddick Island, the Charles Manson killings along with other events and issues. The result is an interesting study of the mind of a seral killer and the impact of the violent murders on the community involved. The book is well written and at times mesmerizing, the result of which is a fascinating read.
Recent newspaper headlines and reports on cable news have pointed to the threat of a nuclear disaster in the war in Ukraine. It appears that the Russians have seized the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the largest in Europe. They have forced Ukrainians to operate the massive complex and have turned it into a military base to fire missiles at enemy positions. The Russians know full well that using the plant as a “shield” would preclude the Ukrainian army from firing its own missiles at the plant or even trying to retake it. Western powers have requested that the International Atomic Energy Commission investigate, and finally after obfuscating for days the Kremlin has agreed to let inspectors into the plant today. As the situation evolves it has placed Ukraine, Europe, and even Russia in a precarious position if a nuclear accident occurs.
In this environment Serhii Plokhy, the author of numerous historical works including THE GATES OF EUROPE: A HISTORY OF UKRAINE, LOST KINGDOM: THE QUEST FOR EMPIRE AND THE MAKING OF THE RUSSIAN NATION and THE LAST EMPIRE: THE FINAL DAYS OF THE SOVIET UNION has authored a timely narrative in his latest work, ATOMS AND ASHES: A GLOBAL HISTORY OF NUCLEAR DISASTERS.
Plokhy, the Director of the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard University examines the dramatic history of Three Mile Island, the Chernobyl disaster, and most recently the Fukushima catastrophe in addition to three others. In so doing Plokhy has provided careful and informative details of each event discussed zeroing in on the planning of nuclear tests and building of nuclear reactors, their implementation, the disasters that evolved, and concludes with a telling analysis of who was responsible. Today a debate exists over the utility of solar and wind technology. As this debate rages, Plokhy takes a fresh look at the history of nuclear accidents trying to understand why they have occurred, how impactful they were, and what we can learn from each event.
Plokhy states from the outset that he “examines not only the actions and omissions of those directly involved, but also the ideologies, politics, and cultures that contributed to the disasters.” After each disaster, a commission was created to examine what occurred and what steps could be taken to prevent future accidents. The problem is that these accidents keep happening and Plokhy tries to lay out the process and offers suggestions to maintain safety for all of humanity.
One of the strengths of Plokhy’s remarkable narrative is explaining the scientific information associated with nuclear testing, the quest to build hydrogen bombs, the development of nuclear power programs, and the catastrophes involved in a clear and concise manner that allows the laymen the ability to understand what normally very complex information is. The author begins his presentation with a discussion of American nuclear testing in the South Pacific at the Bikini Atoll in March 1954. Plokhy points out that nuclear testing in the 1950s was very dangerous no matter what governments said. Scientists had little control over the power of explosions, the direction of wind at various levels of the atmosphere, and which direction fallout might travel. The events of March 1954 involving “Operation Castle Bravo” were no exception particularly once American officials realized that their testing had gone awry there were no contingency plans for evacuations and the weather forecast relied upon was incorrect, despite these “warnings” they continued with further testing even though the first did not go as planned. Of course, the American Atomic Energy Commission investigated and tried to reassure everyone there was nothing to worry about, a common theme in all incidents. Further, secrecy and the need to keep as much information from the public and adversaries in the dark as to what occurred also dominates each incident. In Castle Brava, many islanders felt they were “guinea pigs” for human radiation experiments and the American response was to throw money at them to deal with medical, social, and economic issues that beset survivors. Problems that emerged included the possibility of future cancers, irradiated food sources, and retarding the growth of children.
(Three Mile Island near Harrisburg, PA)
Nuclear events in the Soviet Union seem to dominate Plokhy’s narrative. First, the Kyshtym accidents, and the meltdown at Chernobyl. In both cases even though the events are 42 years apart the same Soviet scientists had tremendous impact. Nikolai Dollezhal developed a model of a graphite-moderated and water cooled reactor first used in Hanford, WA in 1944. However, Dollezhal along with his colleagues changed the design of the reactor, impacting the future of the Soviet nuclear program and later nuclear industry which became a contributing factor to the Chernobyl disaster. Plokhy takes the reader inside the Maiak nuclear complex and the repeated accidents between 1950 and 1955. He carefully explains what went wrong and the mistakes those in charge made as an explosion at the complex created what one witness described as a “radioactive northern lights.” The key here and Chernobyl in March and April 1986 were nuclear reactor design issues and who would be “blamed” for what transpired in both instances.
“Blame” was the game that was part of the Soviet managerial culture which kicked in immediately in both cases. Scapegoats were needed as upper management knew how to play the game and escape responsibility. Interestingly Yefim Slavsky, the former chief engineer at the complex will reappear at Chernobyl over 40 years later. Secrecy dominated at Maiak as Lavrenti Beria, in charge of developing a hydrogen bomb to match that of the United States pressured the Soviet scientific community to deliver a nuclear device. In 1986, Mikhail Gorbachev took his time in dealing with the reactor meltdown looking for scapegoats which of course centered on operators and engineers at the site. The Cold War dominated 1986 as it had in 1954 and Gorbachev and his cohorts kept information from his domestic audience and the international community which were desperate for information as evidence of radiation began to permeate the atmosphere across Europe. Authorities saw no reason to publicize what occurred as “radiation was harmful but invisible,” and one could pretend nothing happened – of course until an explosion occurred as in Chernobyl; which blew off the protective cover over one of the reactors.
(Calder Hall and Winscale power stations)
Anglo-American relations play an interesting role in at least one nuclear accident. British Prime Minister Harold MacMillan desperately sought to maintain the United Kingdom as a major power. Since the passage in Congress of MacMahon Act in 1946 the United States was no longer allowed to share nuclear secrets with the British, therefore London had to go it alone in developing a hydrogen bomb to show the US that they were worthy of cooperating on nuclear issues. In 1957, fresh from the disaster of the Suez War and the collapse of the Eden government, MacMillan pressured British nuclear scientists to develop and test a hydrogen bomb. At first, the bomb appeared to have had a successful test at Winscale, the US Congress rescinded the MacMahon Act, and MacMillan seemed to have implemented a successful strategy. However, when it appeared that one of the reactors caught fire and was leaking radiation, MacMillan kept it quiet as possible so as not to endanger nuclear cooperation with Washington. As in Kyshtym, Chernobyl, Bikinii Atoll, radiation levels in food and milk made it difficult to keep the accident from the public. Plokhy correctly reminds us that Cold War pressure on the US and United Kingdom dominated the period as on October 4, 1957, the Russians successfully launched Sputnik causing fears of a nuclear armed missile with a warhead reigning down on them.
The US had its own disaster on March 27, 1979 ,with the accident at Three Mile Island in central Pennsylvania. The event which saw a meltdown of a nuclear reactor was difficult to accept by American leaders, because of all the safeguards built into the system. As in all cases contradictory information dominated. In this case Metropolitan-Eddison who owned the complex, Lt. Governor William Scranton III, the point man for Governor Richard Thornburg, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could not agree on what had occurred and how dangerous the situation was. I remember standing outside my house in Northern Virginia testing which way the wind was blowing once the accident went public. The final report heavily influenced by Navy Captain Ronald Eytchison who was the only member of the investigating committee with extensive nuclear knowledge blamed the accident on human error, not simple equipment failure. The problem was that a reactor at the Davis Besse Nuclear Power Plant suffered an event in September 1977 that manifested the same problem that triggered the melt down at Three Mile Island meltdown in March 1979. Eytchison states “the dynamite was that no manager or operator of the similar reactor at the Three Mile Island Plant had ever been informed about the Davis Besse accident.”
(The site of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, 2011)
The last and most recent major accident that Plokhy discusses occurred on March 11, 2011, when the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant was hit with a 9.1 Richter scale earthquake followed by a level three Tsunami which flowed over all retaining walls flooding the plant. As in all cases Plohky’s research is impeccable presenting the background of the Japanese nuclear industry, what went wrong, and what should have been learned from the accident. In 2002 safety violations at the plant were falsified and TEPCO who owned and operated the plant would not institute the overall seismic safety measures for the entire complex. The Japanese always build their nuclear facilities near water sources to save money in the cooling process. With Fukushima located in Okuma, Japan on the Pacific Ocean, it was a disaster that was waiting to happen.
The Fukushima disasters present two aspects which Plokhy points out that are interesting. First, is the major difference between Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan who invested himself in the crisis to a degree unprecedented for any leader under similar circumstances. Eisenhower, MacMillan, Gorbachev, and to a lesser extent Carter all passed responsibility to others focusing more on withholding information and the domestic and international ramifications over what to do next. Second, is the comparison between Chernobyl and Fukushima. “Despite different levels of meltdown of reactor cores, no Chernobyl-type explosion of a reactor occurred at Fukushima-the result of the superior design of BWR reactors over RMBK type and the self-sacrifice of Japanese crews who worked overtime for days and weeks to supply water to the reactors.” Further, fewer people died and were irradiated causing deaths years later at the Japanese site than Chernobyl. Mortality at Fukushima rests around 10,000, while at Chernobyl the number reaches close to 50,000. The refugee issue is also different. Fukushima produced around 150,000 displacements, the Russian site 500,000. An ancillary result from these catastrophes has been the decline in support of the nuclear industry spurred on by anti-nuclear protests in Japan, the United States, and Germany in particular. However, the geo-political world, i.e., Russian invasion of Ukraine has called a halt somewhat in nuclear plant shutdowns because of the need for fossil fuels. In Germany and Japan, we have seen a reversal and nuclear plants that went offline since 1986 and 2011 are now going back online.
(Fukushima nuclear disaster, 2011)
In the end I agree with Jennifer Szalai who writes in her May 18, 2022, New York Times book review that ATOMS AND ASHES shows how the nuclear industry requires vast amounts of trust in the establishment — in scientific experts, government officials and corporate figures, a number of whom didn’t exactly acquit themselves well in the dismal examples recounted here. Part of this has to do with the real limits of knowledge; for all the confident pronouncements and safety guarantees, the awesome power of nuclear energy doesn’t always behave in ways that are predicted. Not to mention that the effects of radiation exposure can vary wildly.” “The existing nuclear industry is an open-ended liability, Plokhy writes. With catastrophic climate change bearing down on us, nuclear power has been promoted by some as an obvious solution, but this sobering history urges us to look hard at that bargain for what it is.”
(The Chernobyl disaster a few week after it occurred)
The preparation and writing of biography are truly an art form which Philip Short the author of works on Pol Pot and Mao Zedong has mastered. In his latest effort, PUTIN; HIS LIFE AND TIMES he has written another important biography of his subject based on intensive research drawing on almost two hundred interviews conducted over eight years in Russia, the United States and Europe and on source material in over a dozen languages. The publication of PUTIN: HIS LIFE AND TIMES comes at a propitious moment in history with the events that are transpiring in Ukraine as the Russian autocrat has placed the world on edge with his illegal invasion that has played havoc with the world price of energy and supply of grain and other foodstuffs, in addition to the destruction and casualties inflicted on Ukraine. At the present moment this war of attrition does not appear to be anywhere near a conclusion as Putin is adamant that Ukraine is not a country and is part of what he hopes to be a reconstituted Russian Empire. Short has done a service for anyone trying to understand Putin’s actions as he delves deeply into his personal life, career, how he rose to power, why he pursues the policies that affect the Russian people in addition to those living outside of Russia and evaluating what the reign of this autocrat will be like in the future.
Short’s work builds on Steven Lee Myers THE NEW TSAR: THE RISE AND REIGN OF VLADIMIR PUTIN published in 2015 in addition to the works of Masha Gessen, Fiona Hill, Robert Service, Catherine Belton, among others. Short’s work is the most important biography of the Russian autocrat written to this point and presents a comprehensive picture of Russia during Putin’s life in addition to integrating the roles of prominent figures such as Boris Yeltsin, Anatoly Sobchak, Alexei Navalny, a host of Russian oligarchs, and Russian politicians and military personalities. As the narrative gains steam it is clear that Short believes that the United States is in large part responsible for what Russia has become and how Putin has evolved into an autocrat who controls all the levers of power in the Kremlin.
(Putin, circa, 1960)
The biography begins with a discussion of the political situation in Russia in 1999. Boris Yeltsin who has survived two heart attacks and surgery was under attack for corruption and a myriad of other fraudulent actions. With the presidential election set for March 2000, Short speculates whether the FSB launched a series of false flag terrorist attacks in Russia which were blamed on Chechen terrorists to deflect criticism away from Yeltsin. After careful analysis, Short concludes it was Chechens and not the FSB. The prologue that Short sets forth has implications later as Putin is a candidate for the presidency and attacks continue with Putin’s opponents questioning a possible role for the FSB. In addition, once Putin is in office, the tactics used by the FSB will be questioned in Chechen terrorist attacks at the Dubrovka Theater in Moscow that killed 125 Russians, and the Breslan School massacre that resulted in 335 dead hostages, 186 of which were children. These attacks and the FSB response received great media coverage which Putin disdained leading to a crackdown on the media and eventual state control of television and newspapers in Russia shortly thereafter.
What separates Short’s work from others is that he tackles many of the myths associated with Putin – as it is hard to discern myth from reality. He mentions alternatives, then what appears to be the truth. For example, the death of Putin’s brother during infancy in Leningrad during World War II, the role of possible FSB attacks in 1999 to create support for Boris Yeltsin, Putin’s enormous wealth, reasons behind Russian aggression against Ukraine etc.
Short’s presentation of Putin’s childhood is important as he does so without the psychobabble that a number of writer’s conjecture. Putin had attention issues in school and was a very aggressive child who would never back off from a fight. Putin was home schooled for his early education and had difficulty adapting to formal schooling once enrolled. It is important to remember that Putin was raised in Leningrad, a city that suffered over 750,000 deaths at the hands of the Nazis who starved the city resulting in extreme cannibalism as the city was blockaded for over two and a half years. You do not have to be a practitioner of psychology to understand the impact of growing up in an environment that was still in recovery in the late 1940s and early 1950s. This approach is part of Short’s attempt to place Putin’s life story in the context of Russian history. Putin’s early teen years witnessed the Bay of Pigs, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the deposing of Nikita Khrushchev, replaced by Leonid Brezhnev and the impact on his life should not be discounted.
(The Putins)
As a boy Putin always wanted to be different and when not behaving as a hooligan he seemed to be an introvert, keeping his distance and thoughts to himself. These traits come to the fore later when he assumes certain roles in Russian politics, governmental positions, head of the FSB, and then President of Russia. He would learn to be social when needed, but this was not his forte.
Putin was always enamored with the life of a spy as he was a risk taker by nature and would try to volunteer for the KGB as a teenager. His path was clear as KGB minders had their eye on him and he was offered a position in 1975 as a Junior Lieutenant. At the time Yuri Andropov was the head of the KGB and believed in “stamping out dissent,” who wanted to derail the west’s ability to weaken the Soviet Union – a mantra Putin would follow his entire career. Short’s description of how Putin was recruited, trained, and integrated into Russian counterintelligence was indicative of the author’s point of view and how he had unearthed essential details that contributed to his narrative. Short raises an important question – did the KGB create Putin or were his character traits already in place before he was recruited? His character fit the kind of work the KGB did. He liked to stay in the background and observe others, and not attract attention to himself. He was disciplined and pragmatic and was able to concentrate on whatever the priority was at the moment, and never let his emotions dictate his behavior or thought pattern.
(Anatoly Subchak and Putin)
The watershed moment for Putin as he has stated many times was his KGB posting in Dresden and watching helplessly as the Berlin Wall collapsed in 1989 with no guidance from Moscow. This would create a formative memory that proved to Putin the overriding importance of maintaining a strong state and the dangers that an angry population could pose to a previously entrenched regime.
The most important figure in Putin’s rise to power was Anatoly Sobchak, a former law Professor at Leningrad State University, a liberal reformer in parliament, who became mayor of the second largest city in Russia. In 1990, Putin was assigned by the KGB assigned to surveil Sobchak as an assistant vice-rector at the university. As Putin gained Sobach’s trust he was placed in charge of trade negotiations which were highlighted by barter deals that allowed him to enrich his KGB colleagues and set a pattern as to how Putin would operate in the future. Most importantly, Putin’s relationship with the KGB and organized crime in the city was a training ground and a source of compatriots when he himself assumed power later on. During this time period the 1991 coup against Mikhail Gorbachev that saw Boris Yeltsin emerge as a hero, according to Short, saw Putin’s as playing a “none role” in these events. But Putin had learned how to make himself indispensable which is a major reason for his success.
A key chapter that Short offers is entitled, “The Gray Cardinal” which delineates the corruption and crime that was endemic in St. Petersburg in the 1990s. The borderline between the criminal world and legitimate business was tenuous at best. To conduct business bribery was a standard practice and it was a situation that benefited Putin greatly based on his position, though in an ode to objectivity Short argues that many anecdotes of Putin accepting bribes are fabricated. In this, among many other cases Short gives Putin the benefit of the doubt. Putin learned a great deal from Sobchak, and it provided him with an education for him to apply later.
apho via Getty Images)
(Fighting in Chechnya)
The concept of “Near Abroad” was key for Putin’s foreign policy ideology developed while being in charge of foreign affairs under Sobchak. He began thinking about the former Soviet republics, particularly Ukraine, the key to “Near Abroad” which he felt precipitated the collapse of the Soviet Union when it declared its independence. He could not accept that Crimea, the home of the Black Sea fleet, was gone, 1.8 million Russians lived in Crimea, in addition to the massive debt that Ukraine owed Moscow gnawed at him. These beliefs would stay with Putin, and we can see the results today with the current war of attrition. While serving in St. Petersburg Putin’s ideas about NATO, relations with the west, Russia as a bridge between Europe and Asia, the need for a strong centralized government which would unify the country were all reinforced. By the time he assumed the presidency in 2000 his mantra was set.
Putin’s assumption of the presidency is spelled out by luck, skill, and the ability to ingratiate himself after Sobchak’s political career ended with Boris Yeltsin. Short dives deeply into this process and in the end Putin provided a need that Yeltsin craved, loyalty to Yeltsin as well as his family. Putin would rise in importance in Yeltsin’s eyes over a five year period culminating in his appointment as the head of the FSB and shortly thereafter as Prime Minister. Once he was head of the FSB in 1998 he would purge the organization and bring in his cronies from St. Petersburg. When Yeltsin decided not to run for president in 2000 he chose Putin as the candidate to replace him. Yeltsin decided not to run because the war in Chechnya was not going well, charges of corruption abounded, and he knew Putin would protect him. What Short does not discuss was how the Yeltsin family was caught up in the corruption and how Putin’s perceived loyalty would protect them.
(Russian invasion of Georgia, 2008)
Once in power Putin had to deal with Chechnya which he did in a way we have come accustomed to as we watch events in Ukraine. He would botch the Kursk submarine disaster as well as terrorist attacks within Russia. He would learn that public information needed to be regulated leading to state seizure of media and television. Putin would learn from his errors to a point but his overriding beliefs that anything that made Russia look weak was a boon for the west.
In presenting Putin, Short tries in most cases to see events from Putin’s viewpoint. He is correct that the arrival of the Bush administration in Washington presented an excellent opportunity to improve post-Cold War relations with the United States. It is clear that Short believes that Bush blew an important opportunity particularly after 9/11 with the policies he chose.
Short is very careful to juxtapose Putin’s points of view on a myriad of topics relating to the Bush’s foreign policy between 2000-2004. At first Putin offered a number of fig leaves to the Bush administration and in return Bush made his “look into his soul” remark that many thought went overboard. After 9/11 Putin threw his support behind the United States by sharing intelligence, military over flights, and bases in Central Asia. Putin saw the US as an ally in the war on terror but felt his overtures were not being reciprocated as Bush canceled the ABM treaty which Putin abhorred; the US invaded Iraq when Russian intelligence which had a decades long relationship with Saddam knew better than the CIA that WMD no longer existed in Iraq. Issues of NATO expansion, anger that the US and the west did not see the war on terror extending to Chechnya, and hawks in Washington carrying on as if the Cold War was total victory. Further the US insisted on military bases in Poland and the Czech Republic and in 2008 the west recognized the independence of Kosovo.
(Russian seizure of Crimea, 2014)
By Bush’s second administration relations deteriorated even further as Gazeprom cut energy deliveries to Ukraine, the 2006 assassination of Alexander Litvinenko in London, and the Bush Doctrine which states that America can treat all countries that support terrorists against the U.S. as enemies. It also asserted the right that the U.S. can take preemptive action against nations that it felt might pose terrorist threats. Russia’s response was clear in Putin’s message at the Munich Security Conference as he railed against American unilateralism and the pursuit of global domination. Russia’s position economically improved as oil prices had increased markedly allowing Moscow to pay off its foreign debt depriving the west of leverage resulting in Putin’s popularity rising to 70% – it is no wonder that from this point on Putin felt the US was his enemy and became increasingly aggressive leading to the 2008 invasion of Georgia.
Putin admitted Russia lost the Cold War and resented the Americans lording it over them. Events in Ukraine, particularly the Orange Revolution where Putin believed the west prevented Kremlin-backed candidate Viktor Yanukovych from stealing the Ukrainian presidency and made possible the election of his reformist rival, Viktor Yushchenko angered the Russian autocrat. Further, Putin was exorcised over American interference in Gazprom’s attempt to take over Yuganskneftegaz, the main production complex for the Yukos oil company which he believed showed how far American tentacles could reach. What was clear was that by 2008 the rift between Russia and the US was too deep to heal.
Short is clear that Putin’s mindset is fraught with errors and lies, but it is important for him to criticize Putin further and not blame the US and the west for many of the choices Putin made. Short does present the American viewpoint surrounding violations of human rights and support for anti-democratic regimes abroad as well as in Moscow, the clampdown on the Russian media, the failure to curb corruption, and atrocities in Chechnya, and the American defeat of the Taliban, a gain for Russian security. However, one gets the feeling that no matter what course of action Putin pursued it was the fault of the West for the deterioration of relations with Russia.
(George W. Bush and Putin)
At times Short goes overboard in trying to attain objectivity. He argues that “Russia was no longer trying to export its ideology and value system. Instead, America was.” Perhaps, but Short should examine Russian actions toward Georgia, Crimea, eastern Ukraine, and Ukraine as a whole before he makes such statements. According to Short, the expansion of NATO by the west is responsible for Putin’s aggressive foreign policy in large part because of broken promises in the first Bush administration. However, it is clear from Putin’s own words that the greatest tragedy of the twentieth century was the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and his goal is to restore the Russian imperial system – this is Putin’s ideology and that has led to the invasions chronicled above.
Even in discussing the source and amount of Putin’s wealth, Short takes his objectivity a bit too far as he cannot accept any evidence like the Panama Papers or Paradise Papers that document the scale of multibillion dollar corruption that exists in Russia. Despite the fact that Putin oversees a system whereby Russian oligarchs hold large sums of money with strong connections to Putin, in addition to billions in offshore accounts reserved for the Russian autocrat, Short refuses to believe any evidence that is contrary to his own mindset.
(President Obama and Putin)
Short commentary on Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is not as well developed as his narrative was completed as the war was beginning. I agree with Angela Stent’s comments in her Washington Post review that “Short correctly identifies two of Putin’s major mistakes when he invaded Ukraine. First was his failure to understand that Ukrainians and Russians are distinct Slavic nations, both with a powerful sense of national identity, and that people defending their homeland have an advantage over those seeking to conquer it. His second mistake was to overestimate the capabilities of the Russian military, which was unable to take Kyiv in the first days of the war. Perhaps because he concluded this book before the full scope of Russian atrocities was known, he implies that Russia is acting differently in Ukraine than it did in Chechnya or Syria, where it destroyed Grozny and Aleppo. So far Russia has leveled Mariupol, Severodonetsk and parts of other cities, turning them to rubble, and has indiscriminately targeted civilians.”*
Despite Short’s approach to historical objectivity which seems to lean against the West and the United States and accepting Putin’s rationale for certain actions he has authored an important book that should be read carefully and dissected by the reader. But we should remember what New York Times reporter Peter Baker states that Short absolves Putin of several crimes especially, his explanation for his unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.** I wonder whether he is watching the same war that plays out on the news each evening as I am.
*Angela Stent, “A Biography that Gives Vladimir Putin the Benefit of the Doubt,” Washington Post, July 22, 2022.
** Peter Baker, “Who is Vladimir Putin,” New York Times, August 1, 2022.
It’s been a few years since I have read a Dan Fesperman novel which is an obvious oversight since I greatly enjoyed his previous works LIE IN THE DARK, THE PRISONER OF GUANTANAMO, and THE WARLORD’S SON. All novels met expectations for creativity and Fesperman’s ability to create realistic scenarios that maintain historical relevance is one of his many strengths. Therefore, his work was an obvious choice for my current read, SAFE HOUSES which did not disappoint.
In true Fesperman fashion, SAFE HOUSES is a complex novel that develops a multi-faceted plot involving a number of characters that are difficult to sort out. The main character, Helen Abell pursues a life that is a dichotomy. In the late 1970s she was employed by the CIA in West Berlin in charge of maintaining and operating four safe houses for agents and the German sources they handled. After overhearing a classified conversation and witnessing a rape by an important CIA operative Abell finds herself in a compromised position. She decides to report the assault on the German source, but her station chief, Ladd Herrington, a rather misogynistic pompous individual wants no part of any investigation and would like nothing better than to get rid of her.
(Maryland’s eastern shore)
Fesperman deftly flips the script as he turns to 2014 and Maryland’s eastern shore in developing a second plot line as Helen Abell and her husband are murdered. The police and public believe the murderer is their son Willard Shoat, a psychologically disturbed young man. Willard’s sister, Anna, cannot believe he has the capacity to engage in such violence and in seeking answers hires Henry Mattick, a private investigator who in the past held positions in the White House, Congress, and the Justice Department. Mattick is an interesting character as he also working for an operative named “Mitch” who wants him to keep on top of the events surrounding the murder and making sure that Willard is found guilty. The problem that surrounds the murder is that while Abell was in the CIA from 1977 to 1979 where she made an enemy out of Kevin Gilley, a CIA agent who resented her in the past and always wanted to remove her as an obstacle to his career.
Fesperman carefully manipulates his dual plot as the reader wonders how events in 1979 are related to the 2014 murder. As the link is established, suspense dominates as Gilley, the high priest of the CIA’s darkest arts operated by his own rules with a propensity to go rogue and had a history of attacking women with no consequences because of the male dominated structure of the CIA. Fesperman is a master at throwing out a series of hints to guide the reader, but then will shift the focus of the novel to a new path which is totally surprising.
The novel is an ode to persistence and hunting down a rapist and possible murderer while you are being hunted yourself. The story revolves around “the sisterhood” made up of Abell, Clair Saylor, a clerk at Paris station, and Audra Vollmer who will support Abell and assist her in challenging the misogynistic way in which the CIA operated risking their careers and their lives to bring about justice for the many women who have been violated. The key for Anna and Mattick is to unravel the life and career of Helen Abell and determine what really occurred in West Berlin and why she and her husband are eliminated thirty-five years later.
(Writer Dan Fesperman pictured in his home).
A series of important characters dominate the story. Apart from Abell is her lover and mentor in West Berlin, Clark Baucom, an aging CIA type who tries to control Helen and one wonders whose side he is really on. Kevin Gilley, code named “Robert” lives by his own rules and is difficult to control. Anna, in her early thirties had left the family years before, but she wanted to save her brother and learn her mother’s true history. Henry Mattick, an operator in his own right, falls for Anna, but can he be trusted. Larry Hilliard, an archivist at the National Archives who guides Abell in trying to understand “the Pond,” a clandestine intelligence organization spun off from the CIA. The members of the “sisterhood” within the CIA, a group made up of Claire Saylor who supported Abell and helped her conduct her clandestine mission, Audra Vollmer who turns out to be deeply involved with “the Pond,” which was supposed to be disbanded in 1955 and was not, and of course Helen Abell. Other characters appear with important roles and all point to Fesperman’s inventiveness and imagination in fitting the novel together as assassinations of politicians, intelligence assets and others have been arranged or carried out by Gilley in 1979, 1998, 2000, and possibly 2014.
Fesperman’s “Safe Houses” have a number of implications. The houses are designed for agents to meet in private and carry out their missions, but the houses contain hidden listening devices and traps for female agents. Helen Abell is the key to the story, and it is fascinating how she evolves from an employee who lacks confidence in herself to one who refuses to be cowed by the CIA leadership infrastructure. “Safe Houses” is an amazing thriller both on the international and domestic scene, particularly the #MeToo slant. After reading SAFE HOUSES, Fesperman’s latest novel, WINTER WORK is now near the top of my pile of books on my night table!
What could be better than a Scottish noir with the authentic ring of its slang as a major component of the characters vernacular? In the present case of Liam McIlvanney’s first attempt at the genre in THE QUAKER, very little as the complex and creative mystery moves along on a straight path, presents a number of forks in the road and settles into a marvelous whodunit. The novel focuses on the search for a serial killer who has already claimed three women as his victims. After a yearlong investigation, the Marine Flying Squad of the Glasgow Police Department have reached a dead end and are searching for closure. The problem that arises is that a fourth victim turns up, but an individual who is charged with all four murders has nothing to do with the first three which authorities do not want to hear or accept. What could be the motivations of the powers that be? A commander who has reached a retirement age and wants to go out with a major success. A police department that wants to put the crimes behind them and move on or for some other nefarious reason.
The scenario that McIlvanney has laid out becomes quite frustrating for the main character, Detective Duncan I. McCormack who is brought in from another department to bring the case of the first murders to some type of conclusion. McCormack is instructed to investigate the Marine Flying Squad and determine what went wrong and why the police have failed in trying to solve the case. McCormack is not accepted by his colleagues that he is overseeing, and he receives little cooperation which does not stop him from conducting his due diligence and concluding that the Marine detectives have conducted a thorough investigation but relied too heavily on a particular witness and that other avenues of inquiry were overlooked. As he was tasked McCormack advised that the investigation be wound down, especially since there had not been another murder for over a year, and it was logical to assume that the perpetrator was no longer at large in the Glasgow area.
(Author, Liam McIlvanney)
The original murders centered on three woman, Jacquilin Keevins, Ann Ogilvie and Marion Mercer who had gone out dancing and wound up raped and murdered. McCormack was against investigating the investigators as he wanted to concentrate on putting away John McGlasham, the biggest crime boss in Glasgow. In conducting his reinvestigation McCormack comes across important characters who his colleagues reject. As the author lays out the noir he provides an intimate portrait of Glasgow in the late 1960s focusing on run down parts of the city and a program to renovate the city’s many decaying tenements. In addition, by relying repeatedly on Scottish slang for dialogue the conversations between characters present a high degree of authenticity.
There are a number of important characters that are developed. McCormack’s partner, Derek Goldie is a big mouth blowhard of a detective who seems cocksure about everything. DCI Angus Flett, McCormack’s boss is the Commander of the Flying Squad who tries to keep McCormack aboard, and DCI George Cochrane in charge of the first failed investigation, among others. McIlvanney has the unique ability to develop clues that appear far-fetched but in the end become important. Esoteric discoveries like the role of Mary Queen of Scots and her four women in waiting seem to be important, leading McCormack to brush up on his history through renowned historian Antonia Fraser’s biography. Evidence hidden in abandoned tenements abound, Scottish poetry, and a series of songs sung to McCormack by his grandmother when he was a child. Another interesting touch is how McIlvanney gives the murder victims their own voice as he has them recount their own murders from their perspective – very eerie!
As the noir focuses on the serial murders, McIlvanney introduces a second story line which at first centers around the planning and conducting of a robbery of the Glendinning Auction House. The robbers are led by Stephen Dalziei who brings in an outside safecracker from London, Alex Paton. The robbery is a success until Paton is arrested for the fourth murder as he was hiding in a tenement in which the body was found. There are certain elements of the police force that are desperate for a conclusion and charge him as the serial killer even though the evidence is rather incomplete – the question is why.
(Glasgow Police Headquarters, 1969)
Once McCormack completes his report he wants to return to fight organized crime but refuses to let go. Higher ups are angry because of his tenacity which becomes the deepest mystery of all. Why do they want to convict an innocent man and who is the Quaker?
McIlvanney has structured an at times frustrating scenario. First, and foremost he lays out the crimes, the investigation, the re-investigation, and the fake scenario of an alternative murderer to cover for the real Quaker. Second, was the Quaker arranging a set up for Alex Paton who was innocent of murder to be found guilty even after a fourth murder takes place. For McCormack what was really happening and what could he do to solve the crime against the wishes of others.
My only suggestion for the author is to develop the personal lives of his main characters more. There is a hint of the private lives of McCormack, Goldie, Cochrane, Flett, Levein, apart from the Quaker which could have enhanced the story line and drawn the reader closer to the characters. Despite this slight drawback, the author knows how to capture the reader’s attention and create a nail bitter that has a powerful ending. Further, the noir concept can at times be formulaic, but in the author’s hands he reminds us of what an enduring approach to murder mysteries it is. McIlvanney’s first effort produced a number of awards and I look forward to reading his latest just released, THE HERETIC.
(Victory Day – World War II celebration in Russia, May 2022)
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 produced tremendous corruption, poverty, lawlessness, food and other consumer goods shortages, among many other negative occurrences. These aspects that are normally discussed when dealing with decade of the 1990s, however, there is another major circumstance that needs to be stressed, the loss of identity. Former Soviet citizens and soldiers immediately lost their affiliation to the only country they had known and asked themselves, “who are they?” Since 1991 people were required to reformat their view of national ideology, the geopolitical balance, and for over 250 million people their psychological makeup. The result people was that were ripe for manipulation to fill the void of their loss of identity with the passing of the Soviet Union. Shaun Walker’s book THE LONG HANGOVER: PUTIN’S NEW RUSSIA AND THE GHOSTS OF THE PAST explores how Vladimir Putin attempted to fill that void and “forge a new sense of nation and purpose in Russia.”
As the Moscow correspondent to the Guardian holding a command of the Russian language, Walker has the sources and language skills to present a concise and searing argument that will allow the reader to acquire a true understanding of the underpinnings of Putin’s propaganda when applied to the February 24, 2022, invasion of Ukraine. Though written in 2018, the narrative presents a clear argument that is difficult to find fault with. The focal point of Walker’s book centers around Putin’s strategy of turning the Russian people toward World War II, the Great Patriotic War as a means of reuniting the Russian people and gaining support for his imperial ambitions. In order to accomplish this Putin, Walker argues, must eradicate certain historically factual events from the pre-war and war periods that do not reflect very highly on Joseph Stalin and the former Soviet Union. The need to create “willful amnesia” among Stalin and Putin’s victims was required. In Walker’s account the concept has been applied extensively and effectively.
(Putin attends Victory Day for the Great Patriotic War)
Walker clearly describes the tableau of the 1990s concluding with Boris Yeltsin’s resignation in December 1999 and the failure of the “decade of democracy.” As people lost their savings and pensions, dealt with the Chechen war and terrorism it created a yearning for stability and normalcy. Despite the fact that oil prices increased in 2004 resulting in a promising standard of living in the major cities, the vast majority of people living in towns and the countryside across Russia’s Eurasian land mass, poverty, drugs, addiction, and disease remained pervasive. Putin believed that the poverty and divisions were a symptom of a broader malaise. For Putin, the health of the state was most important and if Russia’s station in the world could be regained, people’s well-being would automatically improve. Putin was tapping into the long held Russian political creed that fetishized the strength of the state and sovereignty.
In all of Russian history there has been only one event that could catalyze Russian unity and create the foundation to bring the country together – the victory in World War II. Walker concludes that “pride in the defeat of Nazism transcended political allegiance, generation, or economic status, and had been used by later Soviet leaders to cement the regime’s legitimacy. Putin would once again draw on the war victory as the key to creating a consolidated, patriotic country.”
From the outset Putin had to deal with the “truths” about the pre-war and war periods unleashed by Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika. With archives opened people began questioning certain events; i.e., the Nazi-Soviet Pact and its side agreements to seize half of Poland and other areas; Stalin’s purges of the 1930s which included the officer class reducing the effectiveness of the Soviet military at the outset of the war which led to disaster throughout 1941; admission to the Katyn Forest Massacre of Polish officers; and the massive deportations that took place in the east. Nationalities like the Kalmyks, Chechens, Crimean Tatars, ethnic Germans and other smaller groups were deported to central Asia and Siberia. This involved thousands of soldiers when the war was not going well, but it was a priority for Stalin. If Putin’s narrative of the Great Patriotic War was to be accepted, many of Stalin’s actions and the plight of the deported nationalities had to remain unexplored and forgotten.
The rhetoric Walker describes reflects an amazing campaign of misinformation and warnings about what was to be believed and what was to be whitewashed. Even the meaning of “Victory Day” was altered as “under Putin gradually but inexorably the day became less about remembering the war dead and honoring the survivors, and more about projecting the military might of contemporary Russia. The message was one of unity, around the idea of a resurgent victorious nation,” especially after the successful invasion of Georgia in 2008.
In describing how this was achieved Walker travels throughout the Gulag and interviews survivors of the prison system and family members who know what happened to relatives. Interviews and travel with people like Olga Gureyva who spent years in the island prison of Kolyma, arrested at 17, spent over a decade in captivity working in freezing tin mines; Petr Nechiporenko, a Professor at Kiev State University who fought for the Bolsheviks in the Civil War but was arrested and accused of being a fascist terrorist who was turned in by colleagues and killed; Eveniya Ginzburg, the Russian writer and Gulag chronicler is arrested and sent to prison as a supposed Nazi terrorist for over a decade, just scrape the surface of the thousands upon thousands imprisoned and died in the Gulag. But people like Walker’s guide, Ivan Panikarov who built a museum in his own home describing the Gulag argued that Stalin’s crimes may have been necessary to industrialize and defeat the Nazis. Many of the people who Walker interviewed wanted to forget the past and move on as it just hindered the development of a strong Russia. Walker’s description of what they wanted to forget is in line with historians like Robert Conquest and Amy Knight, along with Russian writers Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Vasily Grossman.
(Stalin’s deportations from Estonia during WWII)
Walker mentions an interesting point that although Nikita Khrushchev’s De Stalinization speech of February 1956 created hopes of a more liberal Russia, he focused on the crimes of the Communist Party, and the vast network of camps was never discussed publicly. Walker also asks an important question; was everyone guilty in perpetuating the system? He concludes that there “were many varying shades of guilt and innocence. But almost everyone was at least partially a victim, almost everyone was at least partially a perpetrator.”
Putin’s strategy helped create a feeling of victimhood and martyrdom which would be offset by his perception of a successful Winter Olympics at Sochi, coming to terms with the Chechens after two wars and numerous terrorist attacks, and the successful invasion of Georgia in 2008 when Ukrainian president Mikheil Saakashvili decided to join the European Union and turned down a trade arrangement with Moscow, and the annexation of Crimea in 2014. Western media attacks assisted Putin in creating the narrative that the west wanted to blunt any attempt by Russia to return to greatness. Putin turned loose his domestic media to carry his message and the FSB and company made sure that protest and the wrong mind set would not get out of control.
The latter half of the narrative focuses on the evolving conflict in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region in 2014. He zeroes in on Kyiv’s Euromaidan protests, the annexation of Crimea, and the eruption of further conflict in the industrial Donbass region. The developing conflict between Ukrainian and Russian identity is presented within an excellent historical perspective and analysis.
(Joseph Stalin)
If one examines Putin’s justification for invading the Ukraine on February 24th of this year it is clear he is turning to the Great Patriotic War as he accused the Kyiv regime of being made up of Nazis that had to be rooted out, and Ukraine was not a country because it was part of Russia and wanted to be reunited with its countrymen.
Walker has written a well-researched, provocative, and insightful book whose arguments seem accurate. He uses the voices of authentic everyday Russians to tell his story. He is careful to avoid viewing the west as morally superior. Further, he provides a clear picture of Putin’s mindset and how he recaptured the faith of the Russian people in the state as well as in his leadership. In Putin’s mind he has created a mindset for a whole new generation of Russians who will continue to influence the collective Russian psyche long after Putin finally leaves the Kremlin. In the final analysis it is clear that though Walker authored his book in 2018, he foresaw the events of 2022 which are playing out in front of our eyes.
Let me begin by stating that I have been a Knicks fan going back to the 1960s. The great teams led by Willis Reed, Walt Clyde Frazier, Bill Bradley and company will always be the benchmark for success, a model that has been impossible to replicate. After a few down years, the drafting of Patrick Ewing created hope that was almost realized in the 1990s. Since that time there is only one way to describe this franchise; dysfunction, incompetence, and an inability to draft properly despite the presence of the supposed genius of Phil Jackson. Today it seems the team may have ended the thirty year point guard drought by signing Jalen Brunson to go along with its young core, but who can tell whether this is the first step back aside from the Julius Randle mirage and false hope of two years ago. When one thinks of the plight of the Knicks fan there is nostalgia for the past and prayers for the future. Since this is the case if one wants to feel better one can return to the last time the New York Knicks were relevant and Madison Square Garden was rocking. To meet that need I must thank Chris Herring, a senior writer for Sports Illustrated whose new book, BLOOD IN THE GARDEN: THE FLAGRANT HISTORY OF THE 1990S NEW YORK KNICKS fills that void.
(Pat Riley)
Herring’s deeply researched account highlights a number of combative personalities. Coach Pat Riley and his Armani suits instilled a fighting spirit in players like Charles Oakley, John Starks, Anthony Mason and others which after two years of “intimidating” basketball led the National Basketball Association to alter certain rules. The 1990s team had an amazing work ethic highlighted by its “wars” with its perennial enemy Michael Jordan and his Chicago Bulls, and later with the Riley led Miami Heat. Their playoff games were classics, though in the end the Bulls were more talented, and they presented a roadblock that the Knicks could never overcome, and the Heat would succumb to the Knicks more often than not. Herring dives deep into the player relationships, player attitudes and talents, and a number of fascinating personalities as he describes the highs and lows of the decade, but also the staunch support from New York basketball fans who grew to love the team.
Herring begins his narrative at the New York Knicks’ first practice under Pat Riley in 1991 with a fight between Xavier McDaniel and Anthony Mason during a rebounding drill. This would set the tone as to the type of team the Knicks were on the way to becoming. Under Riley they would emulate the physicality of the then recent two time world champion Detroit Pistons, a strategy that would dominate the team for a decade.
Herring reviews Riley’s physicality drills, one called “suicide ally” in detail and how players reacted and adapted. In Riley’s world there was no such thing as working too hard and Herring takes a deep dive into Riley’s methods and psychological approach to coaching. He was a master at manipulating his players, presenting speeches that captivated his team and provided a motivation that few coaches could replicate as he turned the team into a winner. In their first playoff series in 1991 they even out bullied the Detroit Pistons, replacing them as the leagues’ “bad boys.”
The epitome of the type of player Riley favored was Charles Oakley whose 1992 playoff hit on Indiana Pacers Reggie Miller shocked officials into not calling a foul, but later he would draw a $10,000 fine and would lead the league in flagrant fouls. The question for the media was whether the Knicks were dirty or overly aggressive as they pushed the envelope with their type of play. Herring provides numerous examples of hard fouls, fights, and other types of melees involving players and coaches.
The aberration to the Knicks type of play was Charles Smith obtained in a trade in 1992 from the Los Angeles Clippers. Smith’s personality and on the court makeup was the opposite from most of his teammates. Herring’s discussion of Smith is just one example of how he analyzed players for their temperament, approach to the game, relationships with coaches and teammates. He explores the likes of rambunctious and at times dangerous players like Anthony Mason and John Starks, players with short fuses who played with a sharp edge. Patrick Ewing, the key to the team, is ever present in Herring’s analysis as he describes Ewing’s triumphs and disappointments. Ewing was the rock that the Knicks leaned on throughout the decade and it is a shame that he never earned that championship ring no matter how much heart he left on the court. Herring also focuses on players outside the core including Latrell Sprewell whose controversial arrival to the team turned out well as did the drafting of Larry Johnson.
(Charles Oakley)
Herring introduces coaches aside from Pat Riley in an interesting fashion. Riley’s replacement Don Nelson was the anti-Riley. Riley was a bit paranoid and a control freak who rarely exhibited empathy. Nelson came across as a mad scientist who created an “inverted, semi-position less system” that has evolved into a dominant coaching strategy two decades later. The most important coach apart from Riley during the decade was Jeff Van Gundy, a workaholic in the Riley mode but exhibited greater sensitivity toward his players. Always looking behind his shoulder because of the arrival of the new owner James Dolan he drove the Knicks to the 1999 NBA finals and was an exceptional teacher of basketball.
(jeff Van Gundy)
After reliving the 1990s with Mr. Herring I am still trying to determine which loss was the most heartbreaking – 1994 to Houston, 1996 to Miami, Reggie Miller’s 9 points in 12 seconds, a brawl that knocked out their five best players from a playoff game, and 1993 to the Bulls which still hurts as I still have memories of Charles Smith’s inability to put back a rebound.
The sports media cauldron of New York is always front and center. The arrival of James Dolan and the decline of the Knicks over the last two decades does not receive the coverage it should and perhaps a longer epilogue would have enhanced this component of the story. However, overall, Herring has delivered an exceptional sports book dissecting a team that was adored in New York and as he states that the reason he accepted the challenge of authoring the book was to fill the void for Knick fans – I will point out he has accomplished his mission.
(Memorial to former residents of Rome’s Jewish Ghetto)
Lisa Scottoline has written over 30 novels most of which are legal thrillers. She decided to change her approach and investigate the Italian Holocaust because while in graduate school she had taken a course from Philip Roth on the literature of the Holocaust and was an avid reader of Primo Levi, the Italian Elie Wiesel. In her latest effort she branches out to historical fiction where she continues to deal with issues of family, justice, and honor but in a different format. Her new novel, EITERNAL is set in Italy beginning in 1937 and follows a group of teenagers who are living a simple life until European politics and war engulf them. Scottoline examines friendship and love and what they mean to her characters who must mature quickly as war overtakes their lives.
Scottoline begins by introducing one of her main characters Elisabetta D’afeo whose youth was encompassed by the regime of Benito Mussolini wondering how after twenty years she is finally going to tell her son who his father really was. Scottoline immediately turns to May 1937 in Rome and focuses on the friendship triangle embodied in three teenagers; Elisabetta, who aspires to be a writer, works in the Casa Servano restaurant, caring for her alcoholic father and wrestles with the fact her mother has abandoned her. Next we meet Marco Terrizzi, a young man who joins the local fascist party and disagrees with his father who fought in World War I and his brother, a priest over the course of Italian politics. Lastly, we meet Sandro Simone, a brilliant Jewish mathematician, whose father becomes obsessed with helping fellow Jews acquire exemptions when the government begins to pass racial laws that destroy the lives of Italian Jews.
(Allied bombing of San Lorenzo/Rome, October, 1943)
The three are close friends and a love triangle emerges as both Marco and Sandro fall in love with Elisabetta, a tomboyish girl they have known all their lives. The first half of the novel revolves around this love triangle but once war commences all three find their lives turned upside down. Religion, personal loyalty, relationships, and the pressure of racial laws and the war dominate the novel.
Scottoline develops the love triangle very carefully until it is undone by Mussolini’s racial laws. Each family is affected by its contents particularly those who had been loyal fascists and even fought in World War I. The story evolves in conjunction with the layering of racial laws by the Fascist government which are proclaimed over a few months. Scottoline is meticulous in her command of history and scenes are well thought out as she applies events, documents, and the beliefs of her characters which she integrates into her novel. Examples of historical accuracy abound. Aside from the development of racial laws, her recounting of the allied bombing of the San Lorenzo section of Rome in July 1943 and its impact that led to the overthrow of Mussolini is carefully presented while at the same time reflect how her characters react to the bombing which sets the stage for the last third of the novel.
Scottoline develops wonderful characters apart from Marco, Sandro, and Elisabetta. A prime example is Sandro’s father, Massimo. Once a successful tax lawyer he becomes the conduit for many Jews to obtain exemptions from the increasingly intrusive racial laws promulgated by the Italian government. Massimo is a member of the Fascist Party and fought in World War I and can not understand why his family is denied an exemption because of his background. Another is Nonna, a wonderful woman who owns the restaurant that Elisabetta works in. When the young girl is left alone by her family she moves in with Nonna who becomes her surrogate mother, and she in turn becomes Nonna’s surrogate daughter. There are numerous other characters which the author lists at the beginning of the book which makes it easier for the reader to keep up with as they are introduced and become major players in the novel.
The story develops slowly on a number of levels. First, Marco whose job with the Fascist Party separates him from his closest friend because of the racial laws which he finds appalling because of its effect on Sandro’s family. Second, Elisabetta, after severing her relationship with Marco and is turned away by Sandro, turns to authoring her novel as a means of healing. Finally, Sandro, devastated by the racial laws accepts his plight and teaches math to children at the synagogue as part of his solace.
The book is a well written and an accomplished historical novel that is steeped in period detail and full of relatable characters and is a welcome addition to the ever expanding list of new historical novels dealing with World War II, and in this case focusing on Italy. The concept of blind faith is severely tested throughout be it a loving relationship or loyalty to a growing anti-Semitic regime that has led Italy into a disastrous war denying people their livelihoods and for some their total existence.
(San Lorenzo 75 years after the war)
Scottoline focuses on the personal journeys of her characters. Two stand out, Marco and his father Beppe. The two become estranged over a series of issues but they will come back to each other. What made it difficult was Beppe’s World War I experience and his belief in fascism. His son Marco, also a committed fascist loved Mussolini and his country which his father warned him about before the war. Once Italy surrenders and the Nazis seize Rome father and son join each other in the resistance.
Scottoline does a superb job of ramping up suspense as she delivers a slow-build up as she traces the October 1943 Nazi roundup of Rome’s Jewish ghetto and its impact on her characters that culminates in scenes where Jews are being shipped from a transit camp to their deaths in Auschwitz. Scottoline offers many poignant scenes, many of which culminate in disaster. Scottoline’s success in achieving such a wonderful novel leads this reader to hope that her foray into historical fiction will continue.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/GettyImages-530958465-c80ffe4d75784c1c81e3c8f6dd95fda3.jpg)
Doc's Books 