Warren Bull's Blog, page 3
March 10, 2017
The Blank Wall by Elisabeth Sanax Holding: A Review by Warren Bull
The Blank Wall by Elisabeth Sanax Holding: A Review by Warren Bull
Published in 1947, The Blank Wall inspired a movie Reckless Moment in 1949 and a second film The Deep End In 2001. Raymond Chandler described the author to his British agent as …”the top suspense writer of them all.” I don't disagree.
Of all the heroes and heroines I have encountered in mystery novels over the years, Holding’s Lucia Holley may be the most unusual. That is because she is so ordinary. Holley is a housewife. She married at age eighteen, going from daughter to wife with no stops between the two. She never held a paying job or spent time on her own as a single person. She defines herself in terms of her relationship with first her parents and then her husband.
Now at age thirty-eight with her husband away at war, her lovely seventeen-year-old daughter, Bee, is dismissive of Lucia’s life. But Bea is not nearly as capable and sophisticated she believes she is. Lucia’s son, David, and her father try to be supportive, but each has his limits. Lucia doesn’t want to worry her husband. She writes letters daily that she fills with trivia. She does not admit her fears for his safety or the trouble brewing at home.
The biggest challenges she faces daily are dealing with the limitations imposed by a war economy. When Bee’s new beau, a sinister character roughly twice Bee’s age, shows up at their home, events take an unexpected turn that calls for more decisive action, guts and determination than Lucia has ever shown. Her maid, Sibyl, could be an ally if Lucia can overcome the distance between herself, a white housewife, and an African-American maid who has no illusions about the way of the world.
The author presents a realistic picture of a woman who has to face demands she is totally unprepared for. I don’t recall any author writing about a heroine like this.
In my opinion the author does a great job and I am happy to recommend this book very highly.
Published in 1947, The Blank Wall inspired a movie Reckless Moment in 1949 and a second film The Deep End In 2001. Raymond Chandler described the author to his British agent as …”the top suspense writer of them all.” I don't disagree.
Of all the heroes and heroines I have encountered in mystery novels over the years, Holding’s Lucia Holley may be the most unusual. That is because she is so ordinary. Holley is a housewife. She married at age eighteen, going from daughter to wife with no stops between the two. She never held a paying job or spent time on her own as a single person. She defines herself in terms of her relationship with first her parents and then her husband.
Now at age thirty-eight with her husband away at war, her lovely seventeen-year-old daughter, Bee, is dismissive of Lucia’s life. But Bea is not nearly as capable and sophisticated she believes she is. Lucia’s son, David, and her father try to be supportive, but each has his limits. Lucia doesn’t want to worry her husband. She writes letters daily that she fills with trivia. She does not admit her fears for his safety or the trouble brewing at home.
The biggest challenges she faces daily are dealing with the limitations imposed by a war economy. When Bee’s new beau, a sinister character roughly twice Bee’s age, shows up at their home, events take an unexpected turn that calls for more decisive action, guts and determination than Lucia has ever shown. Her maid, Sibyl, could be an ally if Lucia can overcome the distance between herself, a white housewife, and an African-American maid who has no illusions about the way of the world.
The author presents a realistic picture of a woman who has to face demands she is totally unprepared for. I don’t recall any author writing about a heroine like this.
In my opinion the author does a great job and I am happy to recommend this book very highly.
February 24, 2017
Phantom Lady by Cornell Woolwich
Phantom Lady by Cornell Woolrich: A Review by Warren Bull
Phantom Lady was first published in 1942 by Cornell Woolrich using the pen name William Irish. Woodrich is often credited with being one of the authors who developed noir fiction. The book cover blurb states that more of his work has been adapted to film, TV and radio than any mystery writer since Edgar Allan Poe.
Phantom Lady read like an extended nightmare. It began with the protagonist wandering the streets showing signs of smoldering anger to everyone he encountered. On impulse he stopped in a bar where he met a woman and made her an offer. He suggested they go to dinner and attend a show together without exchanging any personal information and without asking any personal information. One evening of companionship is all he asked. After consideration, she agreed. They had a pleasant evening and parted.
When he returned home he found police detectives waiting for him. They told him his wife had been murdered, strangled by one of his ties. They questioned him about his whereabouts at the time of the murder. He told them about the evening, but the shock of discovering what had happened destroyed his memory of details about the woman’s appearance.
Luckily, several people saw them together. Unluckily, none of the people who saw them remembered that he was with a woman. He is tried, convicted and scheduled for execution. He has to find the woman to save his life. Imprisoned and knowing that police efforts to find her failed, he must find some way to locate her. But how?
Woolrich builds tension by the steady erosion of time before the execution date. Each time there is hope for proving his innocence, the hope is snuffed out, often by the death of the possible witness. The author writes with clarity and effectiveness. Some of his descriptions are almost lyrical even when what he describes is grim.
I recommend Phantom Lady highly.
Phantom Lady was first published in 1942 by Cornell Woolrich using the pen name William Irish. Woodrich is often credited with being one of the authors who developed noir fiction. The book cover blurb states that more of his work has been adapted to film, TV and radio than any mystery writer since Edgar Allan Poe.
Phantom Lady read like an extended nightmare. It began with the protagonist wandering the streets showing signs of smoldering anger to everyone he encountered. On impulse he stopped in a bar where he met a woman and made her an offer. He suggested they go to dinner and attend a show together without exchanging any personal information and without asking any personal information. One evening of companionship is all he asked. After consideration, she agreed. They had a pleasant evening and parted.
When he returned home he found police detectives waiting for him. They told him his wife had been murdered, strangled by one of his ties. They questioned him about his whereabouts at the time of the murder. He told them about the evening, but the shock of discovering what had happened destroyed his memory of details about the woman’s appearance.
Luckily, several people saw them together. Unluckily, none of the people who saw them remembered that he was with a woman. He is tried, convicted and scheduled for execution. He has to find the woman to save his life. Imprisoned and knowing that police efforts to find her failed, he must find some way to locate her. But how?
Woolrich builds tension by the steady erosion of time before the execution date. Each time there is hope for proving his innocence, the hope is snuffed out, often by the death of the possible witness. The author writes with clarity and effectiveness. Some of his descriptions are almost lyrical even when what he describes is grim.
I recommend Phantom Lady highly.
February 16, 2017
Artists in Crime by Ngaio Marsh
Artists in Crime by Ngaio Marsh: A Review by Warren Bull
It's not unusual for people to fall in love when they meet at work. However when the work is investigating a murder at the other person's home, complications are to be expected.
That is the set up Ngaio Marsh chose for her 1938 novel where Chief Detective-Inspector Roderick Alleyn met the love of his life, Agatha Troy. After meeting on the ship back to England and having a number of encounters in which attraction to the other person makes each one nervous, Alleyn and Troy left the ship thinking the other person had reason to dislike them.
Their second meeting follows when a model for Troy, a noted and successful painter, is murder in a particularly brutal manner. With the wrong impression from earlier meetings, both people are sensitive to anything that might implied continued dislike. But there are flashes on mutual respect and adoration.
The usual supporting is in evidence, Detective-Inspector Fox, the solid and dependable assistant who is comfortable with servants being of their class, Nigel Bathgate, journalist and friend and Alleyn’s mother, Lady Alleyn who hopes her bachelor son has finally found a potential wife.
Characters are well-drawn and three dimensional, the murder is sufficiently tangled but clear and the author is fair with the readers. I feel certain Marsh, as a Kiwi (New Zealand resident) enjoyed including an Aussie (Australian) who had all the traits that Kiwis claim the Aussies have when residents of this two countries banter back and forth.
This is another truly superb mystery that earns my highest recommendation. Read this one before Murder in a White Tie.
It's not unusual for people to fall in love when they meet at work. However when the work is investigating a murder at the other person's home, complications are to be expected.
That is the set up Ngaio Marsh chose for her 1938 novel where Chief Detective-Inspector Roderick Alleyn met the love of his life, Agatha Troy. After meeting on the ship back to England and having a number of encounters in which attraction to the other person makes each one nervous, Alleyn and Troy left the ship thinking the other person had reason to dislike them.
Their second meeting follows when a model for Troy, a noted and successful painter, is murder in a particularly brutal manner. With the wrong impression from earlier meetings, both people are sensitive to anything that might implied continued dislike. But there are flashes on mutual respect and adoration.
The usual supporting is in evidence, Detective-Inspector Fox, the solid and dependable assistant who is comfortable with servants being of their class, Nigel Bathgate, journalist and friend and Alleyn’s mother, Lady Alleyn who hopes her bachelor son has finally found a potential wife.
Characters are well-drawn and three dimensional, the murder is sufficiently tangled but clear and the author is fair with the readers. I feel certain Marsh, as a Kiwi (New Zealand resident) enjoyed including an Aussie (Australian) who had all the traits that Kiwis claim the Aussies have when residents of this two countries banter back and forth.
This is another truly superb mystery that earns my highest recommendation. Read this one before Murder in a White Tie.
Lincoln's First Legal Case
What was Abraham Lincoln’s First Legal Case?
Image from http://thecheappages.com
There are a number of occasions that could qualify as Abraham Lincoln’s first legal case. Long before he became a lawyer had learned enough to be able to write simple legal documents for events such as property sales and loans for friends and family members. However, I would not call that a case. The one occasion I think qualifies happened in New Salem. Lincoln built a scow and used it for delivering firewood and other things to earn a little money. One day two strangers hailed him and asked Lincoln to row them out to a steamboat. They said they did not arrive at the wharf in time to board the boat.
Someone on the bank signaled and the boat stopped. Lincoln rowed the men and their luggage to the boat. After the men and their possessions were aboard, each man threw a half-dollar into the boat. Lincoln was amazed to earn so much hard cash for so little work.
Later, without telling him why, John and Lin Dill persuaded Lincoln to accompany them to the home of a man who was a friend to all three of them. justice of the peace, Squire Bowling Green. When the men got to the house, the Dill brothers told the Squire they wanted to sue Lincoln. The Squire agreed to hold court immediately. The brothers swore under oath they had seen Lincoln ferry the men to a steamboat. They contended that, since they had the sole legal right to transport people across the river, Lincoln had violated their charter and should be fined for his disobedience to the law.
Lincoln was completely taken by surprise. For a few moments he could not answer their accusation since what they accused him of had taken place. Then Lincoln asked the Squire, if the brothers had the exclusive right to ferry people across the river, how did that apply to him? He had only rowed the men to the middle of the river, not across it.
The Dill brothers protested that Lincoln was nitpicking and quibbling, but the Squire appreciated Lincoln’s logical thinking. He dismissed the case. That experience helped the future President decide he should think seriously about becoming an attorney.
By Warren Bull, author of Abraham Lincoln For the Defense http://tinyurl.com/hyd94gr Abraham Lincoln in Court & Campaign http://tinyurl.com/hyjq7v2 and Heartland http://tinyurl.com/jre3m9p
Image from http://thecheappages.com
There are a number of occasions that could qualify as Abraham Lincoln’s first legal case. Long before he became a lawyer had learned enough to be able to write simple legal documents for events such as property sales and loans for friends and family members. However, I would not call that a case. The one occasion I think qualifies happened in New Salem. Lincoln built a scow and used it for delivering firewood and other things to earn a little money. One day two strangers hailed him and asked Lincoln to row them out to a steamboat. They said they did not arrive at the wharf in time to board the boat.
Someone on the bank signaled and the boat stopped. Lincoln rowed the men and their luggage to the boat. After the men and their possessions were aboard, each man threw a half-dollar into the boat. Lincoln was amazed to earn so much hard cash for so little work.
Later, without telling him why, John and Lin Dill persuaded Lincoln to accompany them to the home of a man who was a friend to all three of them. justice of the peace, Squire Bowling Green. When the men got to the house, the Dill brothers told the Squire they wanted to sue Lincoln. The Squire agreed to hold court immediately. The brothers swore under oath they had seen Lincoln ferry the men to a steamboat. They contended that, since they had the sole legal right to transport people across the river, Lincoln had violated their charter and should be fined for his disobedience to the law.
Lincoln was completely taken by surprise. For a few moments he could not answer their accusation since what they accused him of had taken place. Then Lincoln asked the Squire, if the brothers had the exclusive right to ferry people across the river, how did that apply to him? He had only rowed the men to the middle of the river, not across it.
The Dill brothers protested that Lincoln was nitpicking and quibbling, but the Squire appreciated Lincoln’s logical thinking. He dismissed the case. That experience helped the future President decide he should think seriously about becoming an attorney.
By Warren Bull, author of Abraham Lincoln For the Defense http://tinyurl.com/hyd94gr Abraham Lincoln in Court & Campaign http://tinyurl.com/hyjq7v2 and Heartland http://tinyurl.com/jre3m9p
February 10, 2017
Death in a White Tie by Ngaio Marsh
Death in a White Tie by Ngaio Marsh: A Review by Warren Bull
Image from Wickapedia
Death in a White Tie was published in 1938. It was recommended to me while I was on tour in Ngaio’s home in Christchurch, New Zealand. I very much enjoyed both the tour and the novel.
It starts when Roderick Alleyn’s mother, Lady Alleyn, announces that she will get involved in the ”coming out” of young women being presented to society this season in London. She has promised to chaperone one of the young women. One of the women presenting a debutante comes to the Chief Detective-Inspector to ask for help for “a friend” who is being blackmailed. The woman says she cannot reveal the reason “her friend” pays the money. The woman is a close family friend, which makes the matter more personal to Alleyn.
Chief Detective-Inspector Alleyn requests the help of a friend, Lord Robert Gospell affectionately known as Bunchy, who has aided investigations in the past. The man is genuinely liked and respected by other members of the social elite. He often helps those women who find it hard to fit in to the social swim join the activities. While Bunchy is on the phone with Alleyn conveying information aobut the blackmail someone enters the room so Bunchy ends the call. Shortly after that Bunchy is killed, which leaves Alleyn feeling guilty for involving him in the investigation. The policeman has to struggle to contain his rage.
The author describes the elite of society and the “coming out” of young women with assurance and knowledge of that social class. Her social commentary is woven seamlessly into the story. As with other novels Marsh’s command of writing is faultless. It is a pleasure to read her work.
This novel includes more about the Detective-Inspector’s life, family and emotions than her other works, which her fans will enjoy.
Dashiell Hammett called the novel, “The best detective story I have ever read.” I give my highest recommendation to the novel.
Image from Wickapedia
Death in a White Tie was published in 1938. It was recommended to me while I was on tour in Ngaio’s home in Christchurch, New Zealand. I very much enjoyed both the tour and the novel.
It starts when Roderick Alleyn’s mother, Lady Alleyn, announces that she will get involved in the ”coming out” of young women being presented to society this season in London. She has promised to chaperone one of the young women. One of the women presenting a debutante comes to the Chief Detective-Inspector to ask for help for “a friend” who is being blackmailed. The woman says she cannot reveal the reason “her friend” pays the money. The woman is a close family friend, which makes the matter more personal to Alleyn.
Chief Detective-Inspector Alleyn requests the help of a friend, Lord Robert Gospell affectionately known as Bunchy, who has aided investigations in the past. The man is genuinely liked and respected by other members of the social elite. He often helps those women who find it hard to fit in to the social swim join the activities. While Bunchy is on the phone with Alleyn conveying information aobut the blackmail someone enters the room so Bunchy ends the call. Shortly after that Bunchy is killed, which leaves Alleyn feeling guilty for involving him in the investigation. The policeman has to struggle to contain his rage.
The author describes the elite of society and the “coming out” of young women with assurance and knowledge of that social class. Her social commentary is woven seamlessly into the story. As with other novels Marsh’s command of writing is faultless. It is a pleasure to read her work.
This novel includes more about the Detective-Inspector’s life, family and emotions than her other works, which her fans will enjoy.
Dashiell Hammett called the novel, “The best detective story I have ever read.” I give my highest recommendation to the novel.
February 1, 2017
Was Lincoln a Dictator?
Was Lincoln a Dictator?
That’s a charge that his detractors make. It’s not completely without merit.
For example, during the eighty days between Lincoln’s first call for troops and before Congress convened Lincoln called forth the militia. He ordered his opponents to disperse quietly and return to their home. He increased the size of the army and the navy. He purchased weapons. He instituted a blockade off the coast of seceding states. And most noticeably, he suspended habeas corpus.
All that was done without Congressional approval or court review. Habeas Corp is when a person convicted of a crime and imprisoned is comes before a court so the court can review the conviction to see if it was lawful. When ordered to produce a person who was held in a military prison for the Supreme Court by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, Lincoln’s army commanders refused based on Lincoln’s instructions. A Marshal carrying court papers for the commanding officer was refused entrance to a military facility.
Many people arrested were tried in military tribunals, which have a very different set of standards than civilian courts. No one reviewed those convictions and imprisonments.
Lincoln’s stated reasoning was that he was acting in accordance with the Constitution provision for actions during a time of rebellion (or invasion) so he argued he was acting lawfully.
It’s certainly possible to disagree with his legal reasoning, but he had one. He was also he said acting in accordance with the Constitution when he revoked General David Hunter’s emancipation order in South Carolina. He described it as not meeting the legal criteria for emancipation in that it was not necessary for the war effort. Another time Lincoln cited the law was when he issued his own emancipation proclamation, which he said only applied in states currently in rebellion against the union. He described it as a war necessity and wrote it like a request for rations or blankets.
I want to note that the Confederate administration did exactly the same. The confederacy mandated conscription into the army one year before the union did.
Despite all of the above, one thing is certain — Dictators do not allow fair and free elections. Lincoln was elected. He was reelected due on large part to the strong support of Union soldiers.
By Warren Bull, author of Abraham Lincoln For the Defense http://tinyurl.com/hyd94gr Abraham Lincoln in Court & Campaign http://tinyurl.com/hyjq7v2 and Heartland http://tinyurl.com/jre3m9p
That’s a charge that his detractors make. It’s not completely without merit.
For example, during the eighty days between Lincoln’s first call for troops and before Congress convened Lincoln called forth the militia. He ordered his opponents to disperse quietly and return to their home. He increased the size of the army and the navy. He purchased weapons. He instituted a blockade off the coast of seceding states. And most noticeably, he suspended habeas corpus.
All that was done without Congressional approval or court review. Habeas Corp is when a person convicted of a crime and imprisoned is comes before a court so the court can review the conviction to see if it was lawful. When ordered to produce a person who was held in a military prison for the Supreme Court by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, Lincoln’s army commanders refused based on Lincoln’s instructions. A Marshal carrying court papers for the commanding officer was refused entrance to a military facility.
Many people arrested were tried in military tribunals, which have a very different set of standards than civilian courts. No one reviewed those convictions and imprisonments.
Lincoln’s stated reasoning was that he was acting in accordance with the Constitution provision for actions during a time of rebellion (or invasion) so he argued he was acting lawfully.
It’s certainly possible to disagree with his legal reasoning, but he had one. He was also he said acting in accordance with the Constitution when he revoked General David Hunter’s emancipation order in South Carolina. He described it as not meeting the legal criteria for emancipation in that it was not necessary for the war effort. Another time Lincoln cited the law was when he issued his own emancipation proclamation, which he said only applied in states currently in rebellion against the union. He described it as a war necessity and wrote it like a request for rations or blankets.
I want to note that the Confederate administration did exactly the same. The confederacy mandated conscription into the army one year before the union did.
Despite all of the above, one thing is certain — Dictators do not allow fair and free elections. Lincoln was elected. He was reelected due on large part to the strong support of Union soldiers.
By Warren Bull, author of Abraham Lincoln For the Defense http://tinyurl.com/hyd94gr Abraham Lincoln in Court & Campaign http://tinyurl.com/hyjq7v2 and Heartland http://tinyurl.com/jre3m9p
January 27, 2017
Lessons from Edgar Allan Poe
Edgar Allan Poe, inventor of the detective story, master of the short story and renown poet offered some thoughts on writing short fiction and poetry. I summarized some of them below:
1 Before putting pen to paper have the entire work including the ending worked out in your mind.
2 Write what can be read in one sitting. The time the typical reader is willing to spend reading has changed since Poe’s time but the concept is still valid.
3 Work toward unity of “effect.” Poe believed that the aim of a short story was to create a single mood, or ambience, which he called an effect. He favored melancholy and horror, but this applies to any mood.
4 Poe insisted that the effect should start at the very first line.
5 Related to the idea above include nothing that detracts or distracts from the design of the piece.
5. Regardless of the genre keep the story true to the way people really act in a given situation. It may be a fantasy, romance or science fiction but the characters’ actions should ring true to the human heart.
6. Stress imagination, invention, creation and originality. It is not necessary to invent a totally new situation. Familiar plot lines can be presented in fresh ways.
7 The resolution must be satisfying. In fact Poe suggested that the ending is often where to begin the piece.
By Warren Bull, author of Abraham Lincoln For the Defense http://tinyurl.com/z9grc2j and Abraham Lincoln in court & campaign http://tinyurl.com/zoxazej
1 Before putting pen to paper have the entire work including the ending worked out in your mind.
2 Write what can be read in one sitting. The time the typical reader is willing to spend reading has changed since Poe’s time but the concept is still valid.
3 Work toward unity of “effect.” Poe believed that the aim of a short story was to create a single mood, or ambience, which he called an effect. He favored melancholy and horror, but this applies to any mood.
4 Poe insisted that the effect should start at the very first line.
5 Related to the idea above include nothing that detracts or distracts from the design of the piece.
5. Regardless of the genre keep the story true to the way people really act in a given situation. It may be a fantasy, romance or science fiction but the characters’ actions should ring true to the human heart.
6. Stress imagination, invention, creation and originality. It is not necessary to invent a totally new situation. Familiar plot lines can be presented in fresh ways.
7 The resolution must be satisfying. In fact Poe suggested that the ending is often where to begin the piece.
By Warren Bull, author of Abraham Lincoln For the Defense http://tinyurl.com/z9grc2j and Abraham Lincoln in court & campaign http://tinyurl.com/zoxazej
January 20, 2017
Edgar Allan Poe
The Works of Edgar Allen Poe by Edgar Allen Poe published by Shepperd
Publications: A Review by Warren Bull
I approach this review with some trepidation. Poe invented the detective story in 1841. It is impossible for me, or anyone else today, to read him like his first audience did. This edition of his works includes a brief biography and a commentary on his life and achievements, which helps to orient the reader to some of Poe’s accomplishments. His entire literary career, that lasted only fifteen years, was spent struggling to make enough money to support himself and his wife. They lived at a subsistence level almost all the time.
His earliest biographer viciously lied about him, apparently in response to Poe’s criticism of that author’s work. That author is now remembered almost exclusively for his malicious biography of Poe.
During Poe’s lifetime he was probably better known as a literary critic than as an author. However, it is his poetry and prose for which he is most known. Poe was an American original. In the first detective story ever written, The Murders in the Rue Morgue, Poe starts the story with pages describing the type of analysis he labeled “ratiocination,” which his detective uses. Although this has limited usefulness to the modern reader, Poe doubtlessly had to explain the process to the original readers since his was the first description of it. The story as a detective story is till a solid piece of work.
I remember once asking a young man what he did in his job at a medical laboratory. He started by saying, “You’ve heard of E = MC squared, right?” After that he took me through several steps ending in the use of a tiny amount of radioactive material being injected into a person to trace a metabolic process — more or less. I think. I suspect my experience was like that of Poe’s early readers.
In addition, Poe wrote tales that evoke wonder and mystery. The Tell-Tale Heart and The Fall of the House of Usher are two examples. A genre of his I had not read before was The Hoax. Like it sounds, this is something written to deliberately mislead the reader. The Unparalleled Adventures Of One Hans Pfaal was a description of a balloon ride to the moon written before Jules Verne wrote about a similar trip. The work was pretty easily identified as a hoax in large part because of the jocular language Poe used.
Read for the first time, Poe’s works still evoke strong emotion. I admit to the chills down my spine, and the anxiety his words created in me. If I were advising someone today who had never read Poe, on what might best give some sense of the man’s genius I would suggest the short stories. The Pit And The Pendulum, The Tell-Tale Heart and The Cask of Amontillado would do. But I may just be showing my personal fears. You might suggest others.
Publications: A Review by Warren Bull
I approach this review with some trepidation. Poe invented the detective story in 1841. It is impossible for me, or anyone else today, to read him like his first audience did. This edition of his works includes a brief biography and a commentary on his life and achievements, which helps to orient the reader to some of Poe’s accomplishments. His entire literary career, that lasted only fifteen years, was spent struggling to make enough money to support himself and his wife. They lived at a subsistence level almost all the time.
His earliest biographer viciously lied about him, apparently in response to Poe’s criticism of that author’s work. That author is now remembered almost exclusively for his malicious biography of Poe.
During Poe’s lifetime he was probably better known as a literary critic than as an author. However, it is his poetry and prose for which he is most known. Poe was an American original. In the first detective story ever written, The Murders in the Rue Morgue, Poe starts the story with pages describing the type of analysis he labeled “ratiocination,” which his detective uses. Although this has limited usefulness to the modern reader, Poe doubtlessly had to explain the process to the original readers since his was the first description of it. The story as a detective story is till a solid piece of work.
I remember once asking a young man what he did in his job at a medical laboratory. He started by saying, “You’ve heard of E = MC squared, right?” After that he took me through several steps ending in the use of a tiny amount of radioactive material being injected into a person to trace a metabolic process — more or less. I think. I suspect my experience was like that of Poe’s early readers.
In addition, Poe wrote tales that evoke wonder and mystery. The Tell-Tale Heart and The Fall of the House of Usher are two examples. A genre of his I had not read before was The Hoax. Like it sounds, this is something written to deliberately mislead the reader. The Unparalleled Adventures Of One Hans Pfaal was a description of a balloon ride to the moon written before Jules Verne wrote about a similar trip. The work was pretty easily identified as a hoax in large part because of the jocular language Poe used.
Read for the first time, Poe’s works still evoke strong emotion. I admit to the chills down my spine, and the anxiety his words created in me. If I were advising someone today who had never read Poe, on what might best give some sense of the man’s genius I would suggest the short stories. The Pit And The Pendulum, The Tell-Tale Heart and The Cask of Amontillado would do. But I may just be showing my personal fears. You might suggest others.
January 18, 2017
Making History
When does History Happen? Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King, Jr.
Some people argue history happens when the right person shows up at the right time and place under conditions, which facilitate change. To some extent I agree with this idea. On the other hand, I contend that an individual can take steps to change history even when time, place and conditions are less than ideal.
Abraham Lincoln: Not Part of the Plan
In Bloomington, Illinois on May 29, 1856 the new Republican Party had an organizational meeting. A coalition was emerging from a political party known as the Whigs, which had both conservative and liberal members, men in the Know-Nothing movement, former Democrats and current abolitionists.
Members had a single idea in common, i.e., opposition to the spread of slavery to new territories and states of the United States. The main organizer, Paul Selby, could not attend. He had been severely beaten by a pro-slavery mob on the streets of his hometown and was left too injured to travel. The night before the organizing convention, Orville Browning met with leaders of the different factions and after considerable discussion and debate, they came up with a compromise agenda and a list of speakers for the convention. It did not include a circuit-riding attorney and former United States Representative whose opposition to the Mexican-America war eight years earlier left him very unpopular with voters. In other words, Abraham Lincoln was among the hopeful, ambitious men left off the agenda.
The convention agreed on a candidate for Governor. Lincoln was appointed chair of a committee to select candidates for lesser state offices, a necessary but secondary position within the party. The day wore on with others making speeches and positioning themselves for notice within the new Republican Party of Illinois. About 5:30 PM, the time scheduled to adjourn, friends of Lincoln in the crowd began to call his name and ask him to speak. It may well be that his reputation for delivering jokes and telling tall tales encouraged some in the audience to hope he would help end the day with a touch of levity and good feeling.
Sitting in the audience with time ticking away, ambitious consummate politician Abraham Lincoln realized he now had a chance, perhaps the only chance he would ever have, to elevate his status within the new state Republican Party. If he did nothing, Lincoln would very likely remain someone asked to nominate and support other men for state and national offices. Lincoln rose and said, “I believe I will say a few words from here.”
Delegates shouted, asking him to speak from the podium. Lincoln ambled to the front clutching a few notes he had scribbled over the last two days.
And then…
Lincoln delivered what has come to be known as “the lost speech.” He spoke for what was then a short time—ninety minutes. He talked with such eloquence that reporters (and even his law partner) assigned to transcribe the words got so caught up in the speech they stopped taking notes and just listened. With the rest of the audience, they listened and cheered. It’s impossible to know exactly what Lincoln said. Observers agree that early in the speech he calmly countered angry calls from an earlier speaker for invading Kansas with Sharps rifles with something like, “No, my friends, I’ll tell you want we’ll do. We’ll wait until November [the 1856 presidential election] and then we’ll shoot paper ballots at them.”
Observers also agree that after the calm opening Lincoln started to rouse the emotions of the crowd. Although we do not know the details of what he said, Lincoln had spent much of the prior two years speaking in opposition to an act of Congress, which allowed the extension of slavery into new territories and states. He constantly sharpened his arguments and learned from audiences what phrasing best elicited emotional responses. There is general agreement that close to the end of his speech he said something like, “We say to our Southern brethren, ‘We won’t go out of the union and you shan’t.'” At the end of the speech delegates surrounded him cheering, clapping pounding him on the back and pumping his hand.
It’s likely the speech was highly partisan. Lincoln made no effort to produce a version of the speech for publication as he did with many of his speeches. He may well have discouraged others from doing so. I suspect, having accomplished his goal, Lincoln did not lose the speech; he abandoned it. I believe Lincoln was aware, even then, of the importance of avoiding inflammatory language on the national stage.
Martin Luther King, Jr. : Barely On The Agenda
On August 28, 1963, the one hundredth anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom took place in Washington, D. C. Planned by the head of the march, A. Philip Randolf, and organized by Bayard Rustin, the event coordinated efforts by six civil rights organizations, labor and religious groups, singers and artists. Between 200,000 and 300,000 protestors attended. There were speeches by leaders of the various sponsoring groups, and a speech written by James Baldwin was read by actor Charlton Heston. Mahalia Jackson, Marian Anderson, Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Josh White, and Peter, Paul and Mary performed songs.
Late in the afternoon as the event was winding down, Martin Luther King, Jr. rose at the not-quite-prime time he had been allotted by the better-known organizers and gave a seventeen minute speech he had carefully written out before. His remarks were scheduled sixteenth out of eighteen events on the day’s schedule. He was to be followed by a pledge by the organizer, A. Philip Randolf, and the benediction. King softened some of the earlier rhetoric by arguing against protest degenerating into violence.
And then…
According to what may be a modern legend, Mahalia Jackson, called out, “Tell them about your dream, Martin.” Without notes, speaking on themes he had used many times before, King delivered an eloquent oration incorporating the American Dream and scriptural reference beginning, “I have a dream.”
King took the risk of speaking from his heart extemporaneously on an occasion when little was expected from him. He went from one of the civil rights leaders in the United States to the preeminent civil rights leader. He gave voice to generations of oppressed and provided a vocabulary for all human rights for all time.
Lincoln and King each seized a moment when little was expected from him to capture and ignite the hearts and souls of an audience, thereby creating an immediate stir and, more importantly, setting up future opportunities that each man would use on the way to becoming a major influence in determining the direction of American history.
By Warren Bull, author of Abraham Lincoln in court & campaign http://tinyurl.com/zoxazej
Some people argue history happens when the right person shows up at the right time and place under conditions, which facilitate change. To some extent I agree with this idea. On the other hand, I contend that an individual can take steps to change history even when time, place and conditions are less than ideal.
Abraham Lincoln: Not Part of the Plan
In Bloomington, Illinois on May 29, 1856 the new Republican Party had an organizational meeting. A coalition was emerging from a political party known as the Whigs, which had both conservative and liberal members, men in the Know-Nothing movement, former Democrats and current abolitionists.
Members had a single idea in common, i.e., opposition to the spread of slavery to new territories and states of the United States. The main organizer, Paul Selby, could not attend. He had been severely beaten by a pro-slavery mob on the streets of his hometown and was left too injured to travel. The night before the organizing convention, Orville Browning met with leaders of the different factions and after considerable discussion and debate, they came up with a compromise agenda and a list of speakers for the convention. It did not include a circuit-riding attorney and former United States Representative whose opposition to the Mexican-America war eight years earlier left him very unpopular with voters. In other words, Abraham Lincoln was among the hopeful, ambitious men left off the agenda.
The convention agreed on a candidate for Governor. Lincoln was appointed chair of a committee to select candidates for lesser state offices, a necessary but secondary position within the party. The day wore on with others making speeches and positioning themselves for notice within the new Republican Party of Illinois. About 5:30 PM, the time scheduled to adjourn, friends of Lincoln in the crowd began to call his name and ask him to speak. It may well be that his reputation for delivering jokes and telling tall tales encouraged some in the audience to hope he would help end the day with a touch of levity and good feeling.
Sitting in the audience with time ticking away, ambitious consummate politician Abraham Lincoln realized he now had a chance, perhaps the only chance he would ever have, to elevate his status within the new state Republican Party. If he did nothing, Lincoln would very likely remain someone asked to nominate and support other men for state and national offices. Lincoln rose and said, “I believe I will say a few words from here.”
Delegates shouted, asking him to speak from the podium. Lincoln ambled to the front clutching a few notes he had scribbled over the last two days.
And then…
Lincoln delivered what has come to be known as “the lost speech.” He spoke for what was then a short time—ninety minutes. He talked with such eloquence that reporters (and even his law partner) assigned to transcribe the words got so caught up in the speech they stopped taking notes and just listened. With the rest of the audience, they listened and cheered. It’s impossible to know exactly what Lincoln said. Observers agree that early in the speech he calmly countered angry calls from an earlier speaker for invading Kansas with Sharps rifles with something like, “No, my friends, I’ll tell you want we’ll do. We’ll wait until November [the 1856 presidential election] and then we’ll shoot paper ballots at them.”
Observers also agree that after the calm opening Lincoln started to rouse the emotions of the crowd. Although we do not know the details of what he said, Lincoln had spent much of the prior two years speaking in opposition to an act of Congress, which allowed the extension of slavery into new territories and states. He constantly sharpened his arguments and learned from audiences what phrasing best elicited emotional responses. There is general agreement that close to the end of his speech he said something like, “We say to our Southern brethren, ‘We won’t go out of the union and you shan’t.'” At the end of the speech delegates surrounded him cheering, clapping pounding him on the back and pumping his hand.
It’s likely the speech was highly partisan. Lincoln made no effort to produce a version of the speech for publication as he did with many of his speeches. He may well have discouraged others from doing so. I suspect, having accomplished his goal, Lincoln did not lose the speech; he abandoned it. I believe Lincoln was aware, even then, of the importance of avoiding inflammatory language on the national stage.
Martin Luther King, Jr. : Barely On The Agenda
On August 28, 1963, the one hundredth anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom took place in Washington, D. C. Planned by the head of the march, A. Philip Randolf, and organized by Bayard Rustin, the event coordinated efforts by six civil rights organizations, labor and religious groups, singers and artists. Between 200,000 and 300,000 protestors attended. There were speeches by leaders of the various sponsoring groups, and a speech written by James Baldwin was read by actor Charlton Heston. Mahalia Jackson, Marian Anderson, Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Josh White, and Peter, Paul and Mary performed songs.
Late in the afternoon as the event was winding down, Martin Luther King, Jr. rose at the not-quite-prime time he had been allotted by the better-known organizers and gave a seventeen minute speech he had carefully written out before. His remarks were scheduled sixteenth out of eighteen events on the day’s schedule. He was to be followed by a pledge by the organizer, A. Philip Randolf, and the benediction. King softened some of the earlier rhetoric by arguing against protest degenerating into violence.
And then…
According to what may be a modern legend, Mahalia Jackson, called out, “Tell them about your dream, Martin.” Without notes, speaking on themes he had used many times before, King delivered an eloquent oration incorporating the American Dream and scriptural reference beginning, “I have a dream.”
King took the risk of speaking from his heart extemporaneously on an occasion when little was expected from him. He went from one of the civil rights leaders in the United States to the preeminent civil rights leader. He gave voice to generations of oppressed and provided a vocabulary for all human rights for all time.
Lincoln and King each seized a moment when little was expected from him to capture and ignite the hearts and souls of an audience, thereby creating an immediate stir and, more importantly, setting up future opportunities that each man would use on the way to becoming a major influence in determining the direction of American history.
By Warren Bull, author of Abraham Lincoln in court & campaign http://tinyurl.com/zoxazej
January 17, 2017
States Rights to do What?
States Rights to do What?
I have fairly often heard the argument that the Civil War was fought not over slavery but over states rights. I agree with exactly half that proposition. When such as these arise questions arise it is always beneficial to go to the original sources. Fortunately we have just such a document. South Carolinians in the first state to rebel against the federal government wrote a document to announce their leaving the union. They also wrote a second document to explain why they seceded. The statement was called: Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.
The representatives for South Carolina wrote that individual states have the power to, “levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce” and so forth. That is clearly a statement of states rights. Also in the document the authors assert that the Constitution was a compact of the states with obligations for each state to follow. They express their understanding that fourteen of the states have broken the compact by refusing to return to the state of origin, “…any person held to service or labor [any person enslaved].” The document notes that the failure is a denial of property rights, i.e. enslaved persons owned by their masters.
The authors report increased opposition to slavery has greatly increased over the years and that people in the fourteen states encourage people who are enslaved to escape and have even granted …”citizenship to people incapable of becoming citizens.” Those enslaved people mentioned before.
Another charge made was the…”election to the office of President whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery,” namely Abraham Lincoln.
So, yes states’ right were involved. South Carolinians mentioned rights to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce and so forth. However, only one right was mentioned in the document. That one right was referred to several times. It was the right to hold people “to service or labor,” i.e. the right to hold people in slavery.
According to the people who succeeded from the union at the time they succeeded, the single most important state right they wanted to keep was the right to own slaves. So the civil war was about one state right in particular — the right to keep slaves.
By Warren Bull, author of Abraham Lincoln For the Defense http://tinyurl.com/z9grc2j and Abraham Lincoln in court & campaign http://tinyurl.com/zoxazej
I have fairly often heard the argument that the Civil War was fought not over slavery but over states rights. I agree with exactly half that proposition. When such as these arise questions arise it is always beneficial to go to the original sources. Fortunately we have just such a document. South Carolinians in the first state to rebel against the federal government wrote a document to announce their leaving the union. They also wrote a second document to explain why they seceded. The statement was called: Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.
The representatives for South Carolina wrote that individual states have the power to, “levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce” and so forth. That is clearly a statement of states rights. Also in the document the authors assert that the Constitution was a compact of the states with obligations for each state to follow. They express their understanding that fourteen of the states have broken the compact by refusing to return to the state of origin, “…any person held to service or labor [any person enslaved].” The document notes that the failure is a denial of property rights, i.e. enslaved persons owned by their masters.
The authors report increased opposition to slavery has greatly increased over the years and that people in the fourteen states encourage people who are enslaved to escape and have even granted …”citizenship to people incapable of becoming citizens.” Those enslaved people mentioned before.
Another charge made was the…”election to the office of President whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery,” namely Abraham Lincoln.
So, yes states’ right were involved. South Carolinians mentioned rights to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce and so forth. However, only one right was mentioned in the document. That one right was referred to several times. It was the right to hold people “to service or labor,” i.e. the right to hold people in slavery.
According to the people who succeeded from the union at the time they succeeded, the single most important state right they wanted to keep was the right to own slaves. So the civil war was about one state right in particular — the right to keep slaves.
By Warren Bull, author of Abraham Lincoln For the Defense http://tinyurl.com/z9grc2j and Abraham Lincoln in court & campaign http://tinyurl.com/zoxazej
