Let’s leave Trump and McCarthy and Gaetz aside for the day. I have a few thoughts to share about the last three books I have read.

First, “Fugitive Days” by Bill Ayers. You know Bill Ayers? You might know him as a long time Professor of Education and the University of Illinois, Chicago (retired since 2010), or as the author of several books on education. Or, you might remember that, earlier, he was a member of the Weathermen, involved in anti-Vietnam War activities, including bombings (luckily no one killed or injured) both at the Capitol and at the Pentagon. You may remember that, in 2008, his name was brought up as a close associate of Barack Obama, thus tarring Obama as associating with a known radical.

“Fugitive Days” is the story of his “radical” years and the story of the formation of the Weathermen and their dissolution, following (as you may also remember) the explosion in a row house in Greenwich Village which killed three members of the Weathermen, including Diane Oughton, a close friend of Ayers. The explosion was an accident that occurred as some of the Weathermen were learning to make pipe bombs. (All charges against Ayers were dropped because of prosecutorial misconduct.)

But that isn’t why I mention this book today. I mention “Fugitive Days” because of Ayers’ discussion of Vietnam itself during the war years. He talks about how the United States had a half million troops in the country, how Vietnam and neighboring Cambodia were carpet bombed, and how – when it was difficult to tell the friends from the enemies – all Vietnamese, including the most innocent, became the enemy. But through all of this, the Vietnamese people were impossible to defeat and impossible to discourage, always maintaining that they would come out the winners. And so they did.

What struck me about this was the comparison that can be drawn between the Vietnamese in the 1960s and 1970s, and the Ukrainians during the 2020s. From what it appears, nothing will destroy the Ukrainians, nothing will discourage them. They will persevere. The Russians may not yet have realized this.

Next, “A Farewell to Arms” by Ernest Hemingway. Yes, I had read this years and years ago, but it was certainly worthwhile reading again (this time the Penguin edition). Although Hemingway is always in fashion, it seems that even more attention is being paid to him (books and films about him and his legacy) today. For example, we recently watched on PBS the first two hours of Ken Burns’ six hours of film about Hemingway.

In talking about Hemingway, the focus is often on his style. No wasted words. Short, stubby sentences. Nothing extraneous. I am far being a literary critic (very far), but I would like to add something more. One of the problems I find with some novels is that there are multiple plots going on – one or two main plots, and a number of subplots that are hard to keep in mind. You don’t have this problem with “A Farewell to Arms”.

You recall the story line? An American is in Italy when World War I starts and he decides to do his part, join the Italian army as a medical driver. He develops a relationship with an English nurse working in a military hospital and finds, when he gets badly hurt, that he is sent to the hospital where she is working. Their relationship develops, he recovers and is sent back into combat, and tragedy happens. It’s a very simple story, although it takes place in very complex times. There are no distractions. Sure, there are other characters in the book, but we really know little about them – we only know them in their relationship to the two main characters. It makes the book so much easier to read and follow.

The third book, another Penguin, is one that you have probably never heard of – “Invitation to the Waltz” by Rosamond Lehmann. It was published three years after “A Farewell to Arms” (1932/1929). Was Lehmann influenced at all by Hemingway? I have no idea. But I can see the similarities (and, equally as important, the differences).

The similarities are, as you might already have guessed, a very straightforward and simple writing style, and one plot, without any complicating subplots. The differences? “A Farewell to Arms” is, I think, a very masculine book – war, machismo, coarse conversations, brothels, sex, and sarcasm. “Invitation to the Waltz” is a feminine book.

Why am I talking about a feminine book? Because it is so well written, and flows right along so smoothly, that it is worth everyone reading. There is no war, there is no machismo, the conversations are purposely refined, no brothels, no sarcasm, and sex is dealt with very differently.

The plot (broadly speaking)? Two sisters, the younger one (and the focus of the book) is 17, and thinks of herself as a “plain Jane”, especially in relationship to her somewhat older sister, whom she thinks of as a natural “belle of the ball”. They live in rural England, their family is comfortable but not wealthy by any means, and their wealthy neighbors are having a party – a fancy ball. And, for the first time, 17 year old Olivia is invited.

The story line is simple. Olivia is nervous she will be a failure. She is concerned that her dress is the wrong style, the wrong color. She isn’t going to know anyone there, and so forth.

The night of the ball arrives. She walks through the door and is “introduced”. She is given a dance card for the 19 dances. Her sister’s dance card seems to fill up immediately. Hers? Not so fast. But there are those who want her to be a part of the party – so they cajole people to ask her to dance. And you meet these people – they don’t interact with each other; they only interact with her, during their dance. But each is a character; no two are the same, and some of them are as uncomfortable as she is.

The night is not a failure; it is also not a success. It’s just a night. Olivia lives through it – she likes part of it, she shudders at other parts. But when it’s over – Olivia is content, ready to go on with her life.

Yes, “Invitation to the Waltz” is very different from “A Farewell to Arms”, and it is very similar. You’d be happy reading each, or both.

Tomorrow? Back to the real world.