REVIEW: The Man in the High Castle

You sometimes reach a crossroads with a book don't you? A moment when you pause, scratch your chin, gaze out of the window and ponder 'where is this going?' and perhaps even 'is this any good?'.

I had such a moment with Philip K Dick's The Man in the High Castle. It was about 150 pages in but I decided to crack on, read a couple more chapters and see where it took me. Luckily my persistence was rewarded and I came away glad to have picked this unusual book up.

Take a look at any one-line review or short summary of this book and you'll see that it is described as a dystopian 'what it?' work, exploring what would happen in America if the Nazis and their allies had 'won' the Second World War.

While that's strictly true it really isn't the whole story. I'll admit I was wrong-footed by this book and it's probably what led me to question where it was going. Yes, this is set in an America divided into Japanese, German and neutral thirds but we see this world in a more abstract way, through the eyes of a clutch of intriguing characters. The book isn't about what the Nazis and Japanese would do if they were victorious, it's about how real people would react and what they would think. The ways in which day-to-day life is governed underpins it all, but it's in the background. Events in Germany - with a regime change - loom large, but are seen from afar. There's a chilling mention of what has happened in Africa since the war, with the detail left to the worst of your own imagination to fill in. Most tellingly everyone is seemingly pretty much resigned to life 'as it is', with the action taking place a good twenty years after the end of the war. There's a downbeat feel to the defeated Americans which contrasts wildly with the tubthumping 'God Bless America' of the hegemon of the real world.

The most fascinating aspect comes through the 'book within a book' that lies at the heart of The Man in the High Castle - with the fictional characters all intrigued by their own 'what if?' text, widely read across the States and written by an author who examines what would've happened if the Nazis hadn't won.

It's not always easy to identify with the characters written by Philip K Dick but remarkable things happen to some fairly unremarkable people as the book builds to a close - with a dash of espionage and intrigue coming to the boil in the final third. There's a plot to kill Hawthorn Abendsen - the man behind the aforementioned book - and the realisation that the Nazis are planning to oust their Japanese allies and take over the bits of the world they aren't already in control of.

This isn't really like anything else I've read but that's no bad thing. None of the plot threads are neatly sewn up but, strangely, that doesn't matter too much. This is an eerie book, an alternative reality that poses lots of questions and gets you thinking. If you park your preconceptions and accept the slightly odd nature of many of the characters then there's a reward to be had.

I haven't seen the TV adaptation - I've been reluctant to give money to Amazon after it blew hideous sums on those old Top Gear morons - but it would be fascinating to see what's done with the material here. My hunch is that some of the more obvious 'what if?' stuff might have to be shoe horned back in and it'd be interesting to see what impact that has.

Still, this has all whetted my appetite to return to reading a decent history book. So, next up, I'm going to make another diversion away from my 'next five books' and read something by one of my favourite historians, Richard J Evans. I'll let you know what I think...

REVIEW Brexit: What The Hell Happens Now?

Ok, so I've already deviated from my 'next five books' plan. However, it's with good reason. As soon as I'd snapped up Ian Dunt's 'Brexit: What The Hell Happens Now?' I was keen to get going, not least before Theresa May triggered Article 50. I've appreciated Dunt's superb analysis of post-referendum Britain for some time now on Twitter and in a series of columns. Luckily the book delivers the same blend of smart insight and wit.

There are two over-riding feelings I was left with by the end. Firstly, you have to take your hat off for what Ian Dunt has achieved here. To have been able to produce such an informative text within a relatively short time only increases my admiration for him. Not only that, but the book is future proofed, staying just as relevant now as it was when written - despite the election of a US president and all that has happened in the UK since (including the debate over the Scottish referendum). I feel like I'll refer back to this as a sort of instruction manual to whatever happens after this Wednesday.

For me, Dunt strikes the perfect balance in the book. There's the right level of detail on some fairly complex issues but, at 160-odd pages, it can all be digested quickly and easily. It's clearly the result of a lot of research and hard work - without ever feeling the need to talk down to the reader. The passages on veterinary medicine, farming and fishing are great examples of the complexity of the issues up for negotiation, a complexity which was all-too-often buried amid the bluster of both sides of the referendum campaign.

Yet, aside from admiration, I also came away from this feeling pretty terrified. The next few years are going to be one hell of a challenge aren't they? I'd love to say that I have confidence that David Davis, Liam Fox and Boris Johnson have mastered the topic of the EU as well as Dunt, but I just don't see it. As he ably demonstrates, there's a lot to do in a short space of time and a distinct lack of the manpower and expertise needed to deliver. Since reading this, I've been taken by how many times I've read and heard people glibly talk about 'falling back on WTO rules' or 'access to the single market' despite clearly having little or no appreciation for what this means in practice.

Indeed, you feel this book shouldn't just be on the shelves of Waterstones but in the pigeon holes of every MP. There's also a sadness to be had in the fact that so little of the workings of the EU - and the potential options for a post-EU future - were understood by the people who went out to vote on June 23rd last year. I still feel like we were given the option of a 'yes/no' answer to a question that was far more complex that a black and white choice such as that.

But this book isn't a polemic delivered by a sore loser (can we scrap the word 'Remoaner' from use? 'Brexit' is bad enough). Yes, it begins with a fairly sobering vision of a worst case scenario in the first chapter but Dunt stresses that the dangers that he outlines in the book arise from the way Brexit is delivered, not Brexit itself. As he puts it:

"Ultimately it is British values which will help get the country through this difficult new period: calm debate, instinctive scepticism, practical judgement and moderation. We appear to have lost sight of these values. The sooner we reaffirm our commitment to them, the better off we will be."

That said, I can't help feeling like Brexit will turn out to be a monumental mistake and the scale of the challenge Dunt sets out only served to convince me that we're about to head along the wrong path. I am worried about what happens next, frankly, and I've seen nothing since June that allays my fears. Dunt's values seem sadly missing from public debate.

For an understanding of what Brexit really means and what our future could look like, I couldn't recommend Dunt's highly enough. It delivers on its promise to be a readable guide to the 'biggest story of the decade' and is a superb piece of writing.

I'm heading back to my original plan next and will be picking up The Man In The High Castle by Philip K Dick. From a bleak real life vision of the future to a dystopian one, maybe it's a natural move?

REVIEW: Dent's Modern Tribes

After starting my reading quest with a bit of fun from Alan Partridge, I jumped head long into Countdown word guru Susie Dent's latest book and certainly wasn't disappointed. 

Dent's Modern Tribes: The Secret Languages of Britain is a celebration of the words and phrases shared by groups of people right across the country - from doctors to journalists to teachers and beyond. It's fascinating, funny and - for some who spends all day trying to pick the right words at work - inspirational.

In some respects it would have been easy for this to slip into being a pseudo-dictionary. As much as that would have been fairly interesting, it wouldn't have made for the greatest continuous read and Dent settles neatly on a well-paced structure instead. Each group is introduced with a short-but-sweet exploration of the type of words and language that they use, followed by lists of terms and their definitions.

That certainly all makes this a good bite-size read to dip in and out of and was perfect for our lunch time reading club. There's little chance that you'll get bogged down or bored here, jumping from bird watchers to darts players to undertakers to freemasons, via plenty of places along the way.

I'm continually fascinated by the words and phrases that we use and the stories behind why we use them and where they come from. It's in these stories that the words offer important nuggets of information about the people who use them and this book is riddled with such stories. It's through these words and stories that many old traditions live on - even in this more digital-led era.

As you go through Modern Tribes, it's interesting to note the threads that run throughout many of our 'secret languages'. Sexual innuendo and black humour, in particular, feature at almost every level of society - shaping the slang that we use on a daily basis. Plenty of these are bound to make you chortle (or maybe that says more about me?) and yearn to deploy some of the most fun in your own life. Dent, you feel, revels in revealing the cheekiest words possible.

There's also great fun to be had in spotting the terms that are familiar with you. The section on the language of journalists and publishers certainly made my eyes light up and contained many familiar words that were par for the course in my newsroom days (spike, splash, nibs, kickers, back-of-the-book etc). The sheer breadth of the groups covered means that I'm sure many people will find something to relate to here.

Modern Tribes is, therefore, a window through which we can have a good old nosey at the worlds of all sorts of different people. It's a word based form of people watching - as well as a celebration of our weird and wonderful language - and is great fun as a result.

Nomad by Alan Partridge and rediscovering the reading bug

I'm up and running. After a moan in my last blog about struggling to find the time to read, things have picked up on the book front. Luckily, it emerged that my colleagues (Flora and Ellie) were harbouring a similar wish and, as a result, a small work reading club has emerged. Twice-weekly lunchtime reading sessions have helped me pick up the pace and it has encourage me to get away from a screen for a bit (he says, typing at home). I can certainly recommend it to anyone if you're lucky enough to have a decent space and fellow bookworms working with you.

As planned, I kick-started 2017 with Nomad 'by' Alan Partridge, figuring that it'd be best to ease myself in gently with an easy read and a bit of fun.

Luckily it lived up to the billing. Steve Coogan, Neil Gibbons and Rob Gibbons seem to get better and better at writing for Partridge, finding new situations and observations that keep the character fresh, funny and relevant. It probably should be old hat by now, the fact it isn't is a testament to the quality of the writing, whether it's for television, cinema or, here, as a book.

This book plots Alan's not-so-epic journey from Norwich to Dungeness Nuclear Power Station on the Kent coast, a trip his father had once taken for a job interview. The conceit is, in itself, a parody of the walks, road trips, train journeys etc that celebrities regularly perform and gives the whole thing a neat device to thread it all together.

If anything the premise worked better than that of I Partridge, the character's last literary outing. While I enjoyed that one, the autobiographical format meant that large chunks of it had - out of necessity - to retread the steps of old TV episodes with a greatest hits-esque feel. This all felt fresher, with a narrative loose enough to allow us to veer off along the journey and enjoy a few laughs.

The highlight of the book came in one such random aside. A chapter named 'Edmonds' promised much and reading of the apparent feud between the Deal Or No Deal host and Partridge was indeed laugh out loud funny. The word 'wazzock' certainly needs to make a comeback I feel.

The character's views on celebrities in general - from Eamonn Holmes to Ben Fogle and Dan Snow (or 'Snogle' as their said to be known) - offer plenty of enjoyment. You always feel that the authors have had great fun in using Alan to poke fun at certain people.

Nomad veers from the observational - Partridge's take on the mis-named Head & Shoulders was enjoyable - right through to Operation Yewtree. Yes, really. Footnotes are deployed to good comic effect - as is the ongoing quest to 'fill out' the book.

In the end, this was exactly what I needed. A good, fun, quick read to start the ball rolling and an enjoyable way to escape for a while. Next stop Susie Dent...

My next five books

I don't really 'do' new year resolutions, which is a good thing really because I'd be pretty late to the party with this blog. It's not just because they're naff and swiftly forgotten - although that's one big reason - but also because I have one rolling/ongoing resolution that stands regardless of what date it happens to be: to read more books.

It's something I'm continually failing to do thanks to a combination of social media (not helped by following the fortunes of a dysfunctional football club) newspapers and magazines, which all eat into valuable reading time. I've often fancied finding a sneaky retreat for 20 minutes at a lunchtime at work but always chickened out.

Still, in the spirit of getting better, I've decided to map out the next five books that I'm going to read in the hope that it spurs me on. I don't usually do this but I'm hoping that having this carrot dangled before me will do the trick. I don't profess to want to fill my time with Booker Prize winners or academic texts (although there's a few history books on the shelf that are giving me a glare), I just want to read something that captures the imagination, whether funny, entertaining or thought-provoking.

Luckily, a combination of a late November birthday and Christmas have left me in a good position, with plenty of fun things that I'm itching to get started with. If your book appears on this list, thanks very much, you obviously know me well.

Nomad, Alan Partridge

I'm an unashamed fan of Alan Partridge and have got high hopes for 'his' latest book. Following on from the autobiography - I, Partridge: We Need To Talk About Alan - Steve Coogan and Rob and Neil Gibbons have penned a spoof travel book following a not-so-epic cross-Britain journey for everyone's favourite North Norfolk Digital DJ. I think the trio have become even better at writing for Alan in recent years and their work never fails to make me smile.

The bag pages plugs alone have had me chuckling and I think this might be the perfect read to lift a gloomy January/February day and a nice one to set the ball rolling.

Dent's Modern Tribes: The Secret Languages of Britain, Susie Dent

I'm fascinated by the way in which we use language and the origins of the words we use. That's probably not very rock n roll I know, but that's me. As a result, I'm often dazzled by the insight of Countdown wordsmith-in-chief Susie Dent (she's worth a follow on Twitter too). Modern Tribes involves Dent looking at the words and terminology only used by distinct groups of people across the UK, including journalists.

A Life In Questions, Jeremy Paxman

I miss Jeremy Paxman. I mean, I know he's still on University Challenge but it's not the same. His Newsnight interviews were superb to watch and put a healthy dollop of pressure and scrutiny on public figures. If his memoirs are half as good as his interviews then they'll be a cracking read.

The Man In The Castle, Philip K Dick

I've heard plenty of good things about both this book and the Amazon Prime TV series it inspired so it's time to see what the fuss is all about. Mind you, it remains to be seen if a dystopian alternative reality in which the 'bad guys' rule America is any different to sticking the news on at the moment.

What Sport Tells Us About Life, Ed Smith

Ed Smith has become one of my favourite voices on BBC's Test Match Special, always describing the unfolding action with a beautifully relaxing and reassuring eloquence. Yet, on top of broadcasting - and a decent cricketing career - he's also a fantastically talented writer (some people eh?). So, when I stumbled upon this little beauty it was too good to miss. It's a collection of 15 essays addressing topics from 'Why there will never be another Bradman' to 'Is the free market ruining sport?' and 'What do people see when they watch sport?'. Right up my street.


So, there we go. I'm pretty pleased with how that's all looking, now it's just time to actually get on with some reading. I'll aim to come back and let you know if they're as good as I hope...

The Crown: A right royal triumph for Netflix

There's a near endless stream of hype surrounding TV these days. So much so that I find it all a bit 'cry wolf'. How can you know which series' really are the 'real deal' and which ones are just pretending to be?

It's perhaps for this reason that I've long lagged behind the modern world and resisted Netflix. I don't watch enough telly to justify getting it. Yet when we recently succumbed and signed up for the streaming service, The Crown was one of the shows on our hitlist. Much had been made of Peter Morgan' expensive royal series and the reviews had been pretty positive. Luckily, it turned out that this was one of the shows that justifies the hype.

Duty calls. #TheCrown. Now streaming on Netflix. pic.twitter.com/MIdHOeJCym

— The Crown (@TheCrownNetflix) November 4, 2016

The first thing to note is the casting and the performances of the key lead roles. Claire Foy is fantastic as The Queen, embracing a role in which she carries the burden of the monarchy on her shoulders in an uncertain world.

We've probably all heard (or even attempted) enough impressions of Her Maj over the years and it'd be easy to have gone with an out-and-out impression of the long-serving monarch. Foy, however, resists this. She captures the right 'voice' and look without straying in caricature. The whole drama rests on the casting, writing and performance of this role - the fact I enjoyed it so much suggests that they got all three aspects just right.

Similar could be said for Matt Smith's Philip. I was surprised to see the former Doctor Who bag this role, but he was able to portray a subtle blend of mischief and frustration that brought the character to life.

In fact, the only role I was disappointed with was John Lithgow's Churchill. If there's one historical character we've seen impressions of more than the Queen then it's Winston and I felt this representation nudged too much toward the stereotype at times. It must've been a hard ask for a New York born actor to handle such a role. It's not awful, it's just noticeably not as good as the rest of the show.

One thing that helps all of the characters is the format of the first series. In 10 episodes, barring flashbacks, we cover the period from Elizabeth and Philip's marriage in 1947 through to the mid 1950s. While there is much ground to cover here, the length of time gives plenty of breathing space for the characters to be fleshed out. There are many dramas and films to have covered this ground before, but it's unlikely that any will have been able to do so with such depth or style.

Speaking of style, it's clear to see that the show's much-vaunted £100 million budget has been put to good use. The episodes are beautifully shot, without exception. The money hasn't gone on flashy effects, it's gone on getting all of the important things right. Looks alone should alert you to the fact that this is something special.

The substance more than matches the style, though. I was also impressed by the way in which writer Peter Morgan knitted the Queen's personal and family drama in with events in the world around her. Churchill political demise, Suez and the smog, intertwine with the abdication, Margaret's relationship and Philip's frustrations. We see how external and internal matters go on to shape the sort of monarch the Queen was to become with lessons on leadership, service and duty laced throughout all ten episodes. We also see a history of Britain through the eyes of the royal family. There's absolutely no need to be a royalist or a history buff to savour this.

None of the characters is a 2D representation of their real-world counterpart. There are things to  admire, respect and understand in most of the protagonists but we're also shown their flaws. I was perhaps only wholly sympathetic with the Queen (goodie two shoes-ness aside) and her father. Philip's petulance, Edward's money-grabbing, Churchill and Eden's politicking, the Queen Mother's scheming and, above all else, the resistance of those in the royal household to change all made for an array of actors who, for various reasons, made life complicated for the young monarch.

All in all, The Crown is a big triumph for Netflix. You feel there will be a bucket load of awards heading its way and you wouldn't begrudge that either. Roll on series two.

What to make of Donald Trump's victory?

Photo: Unsplash

I heard a discussion the other day about Donald Trump's election victory in which his less vocal supporters were referred to as 'silent Trumpers'. There are many things we can teach our friends from across the Pond about our language, but this will help them learn than one shouldn't judge a Trump by its volume, but the smell it leaves afterwards.

Yes, ok, 'fart gags' probably aren't the most adult way to react to recent events in America. It's the best I've got while we all try to make some sense of it all though. The journalist in me wants to understand it now but the historian in me feels it'll be some years before we can thoroughly and objectively determine what has happened.

At the outset, Donald Trump's victory over Hillary Clinton did feel like it could be one of those 'end of an era' moments. Perhaps it was apt on the day, 27 years earlier, that the Berlin Wall had come down, American voters elected someone who had loudly vowed to put one up. Historians love to split up the past into distinct 'eras', with 1789-1914 often seen as the 'long nineteenth century' for example. You might argue that 1914-1945 and 1945-1989, as the world wars and Cold War, marked two more eras (although historians love nothing more than debating definitions at length), but what if 1989-2016 is another? Only with the benefit of hindsight will we know if globalisation and liberalism were truly threatened by Trump and indeed Brexit.

Trump's campaign - and the words belched from his mouth - has been abhorrent. His comments really shouldn't have made him a suitable man to lead his nation and yet, come January, he'll be in the White House. Did people vote in spite of what he said or because they enjoyed hearing a language alien to political discourse? It was surely a bit of both.

In fact, that has been the problem with much of the coverage so far. Too many people have been too absolute in their analysis. Was it really a huge anti-establishment revolution when more people actually voted for Clinton? Why did so many women back Trump? Would Hillary have been looked upon more favourably if she were a man? If the 'rust belt' is supposedly prepared to support racism then why did it vote for Obama? These questions are more suited to someone more well-versed in American politics but they all point to a more complex and confusing picture with the split between rural and urban and old and young all revealing.

Journalist Gaby Hinsliff probably summed it up best with this tweet

New rule not to read anything starting 'Trump's victory proves...' No one theory fits. Begs as many questions as it answers.

— Gaby Hinsliff (@gabyhinsliff) November 10, 2016

Yet the impact has been felt beyond the world of American politics and has touched on two other areas: journalism and social media.

There's an interesting theory that suggests Trump was only able to stand in the first place because he built up momentum with what he said in TV studios. In an increasingly commercial news environment, Trump is a ratings winner. Controversial performers get bookings and are more likely to have a chance to have their say. I'm not sure how, if at all, that can be fixed. It does, though, show that a certain 'style' is likely to stand out and it's not a style that relies on careful reasoning or evidence.

Then there's the polls. For too long the smallest of movements in one direction or another have become a big story when it comes to politics. The debate then centres on the nip and tuck of the polling horse race, rather than the issues. Hopefully now, with so many of the pollsters being caught out by Trump's victory, Brexit and the last General Election, they will be taken with more than a pinch of salt rather than being  - as the New Statesman's Helen Lewis has said - a sugar fix for news outlets.

Social media is under the spotlight too and at last, it seems, the pressure is on Facebook. In recent years this has grown in importance for news outlets who need to publish to their audience on this platform. Yet, with power comes responsibility, and it's high time that Facebook did much more to combat the fact that fake nonsense is given equal weighting to proper journalism.

There's also been a focus on the danger of 'filter bubbles' - the way in which social media can cause us to only see a selection of views within our own narrow friendship and interest groups. I've written before how I think this isn't healthy when it comes to making us all tolerant of others. You might not agree with people who voted for Trump - I certainly don't - but we need to try to understand why they did (I found Amelia Tait's piece on bursting that filter bubble interesting).

Social media is also too much about the 'great take down' and someone 'shutting down' an argument as well as a near-constant state of outrage at what one person has said or done. Sometimes the outrage only serves to get more coverage for the person.

I can't help thinking that Hillary should've followed Michelle Obama's 'when they go low, we go high' mantra a little more. Rather than always attack Trump for what he said - which was what he thrived on - why not focus on his muddled policy platform? Maybe that was half the problem - there seemed very few positive policies to promote from the Clinton camp and so it became a bitter argument won by the man with the loudest voice.

Social media outrage isn't helping and neither is the growing trend of 'no platforming' people because of their beliefs. It's not easy to know what to do - we can't expect people not to be offended at genuinely offensive comments - but there needs to be stronger, clear-headed approach to defeating people through force of argument on all sides of the political spectrum. By refusing to debate with someone, you hand them a moral victory and the chance to appear unfairly treated.

Finally, much has already been made of the parallels with Brexit. It's a very tempting comparison to make, especially for those of us in the UK . One key area in which they were probably similar was in the strength of the core message for the winning side.

PR expert Mike Hind wrote a superb piece after the EU Referendum about the marketing reasons for the success of the Leave side. (It's here if you haven't seen it) I can't help thinking that Trump's 'Make America Great Again' was, like the Leave message, a simple and strong pitch that earned 'gut instinct' votes and cut through all of the personal mud slinging. I'm increasingly starting to think that these gut instincts decide more votes than long manifestos or detailed policy.

Also, just as Brexit turned a complex debate into a basic black and white choice, the US election turned its country's future into a personality contest between two people. Both votes have posed as many questions as they have answers and have left the electorate hopelessly divided.

So, what next? Either Trump will turn back on his boldest promises and upset the supporters he's whipped up into a frenzy or he'll stay true to his word and be awful. For once, I'm hoping this is a case of a politician who lied.

After that train of thought - almost as incoherent at Trump himself - it's time for a lie down. See you in 25 years for a proper historical look at Trump and Brexit? That's if he hasn't pressed the nuclear button before then I suppose...