The Atomic Submarine (1959)

———-

The Atomic Submarine (1959)

IMDB metadata is run time of 1 hour and 12 minutes, rated 5.1 by 1,600 generous spirits.

Genre: Sy Fy.

Verdict: Numbing.

Sums it all up in one busy graphic.

Set up: The fabled northwest passage is big business with cargo submarines passing beneath the Arctic ice cap on a polar route.  But then disaster strikes: I watched this movie!  Curiosity will kill not only cats. Will I ever learn to leave the unseen unseen? Probably not.  

One after another of the cargo subs is blown up.  No reason to be in a hurry and after about ten explosions the US Navy oozes into action.  Slowly, very slowly.  The budget cutters have been here.  Not only is Navy impoverished so is this production.  

We got this far with a ponderous voice-over of plastic models in fish tanks.  Commies in the aquarium! It is all Cold War with icicles. Brrr!

America’s finest are recruited from the Retired Actors Home, shorn of their canes and crutches, and sent into action as the A for Arthritic Team. Some of the cast and crew of geriatrics started in silent movies, while others pre-date film itself.  

Fortunately the screenplay does not require them to move often from the floor marks however when they do the creaking sounds are their joints not the cardboard submarine set. I ask you what kind of submarine movie is it when the captain does not once say ‘Scope up!’ and so never says ‘Scope down.’  

It is almost beyond the pale yet has, surprisingly enough, some merits.  First is an ongoing argument between a gung-ho sailor who wants to shoot first and a pacifist civilian scientist.  We have, of course, seen this debate before, and seen it better done, but the surprising thing is that it is here at all in this paper thin screen play. Moreover, in this offering the sailor is a hot head while the scientist is the voice of reason. Some marks for good intentions on this point. 

The only time the visuals rise above the high school play level is when the intrepid leads find and enter the alien ship, which is a submerged flying saucer, which we all figured out long before any of these droolers did.  It is all very German expressionism and cheap, no lights, no sets and the better for it. 

By the time the sub-Arctic Sea saucer was found, I realised it belonged to James Arness, aka the Giant Carrot, from The Thing (from another world) (1951), a far superior movie, having sunk through the ice, making Jim an ET with no way to get home.   

There is also an echo of the Odyssey, Ripley. Don’t see that often in B minus movies. 

Most of the acting is squinting with furrowed brow. Lead Arthur Franz never made it to the A-List and in this film the chip on his shoulder about that is starting to show.  He almost as disdainful of his lines as I am.

The alien is a hand puppet but upstages the actors, and it has better dialogue. No wonder it got a second gig with The Simpsons. Kang did not use the lowest bidder to build the flying and submersible saucer spacecraft that is self-repairing like a living being.  

America’s best go into action.

Even so our heroes blow it up! It does take them three or four efforts to do so, turning a torpedo into a Polaris missile with some duct tape, but they succeed and we can all heave a sigh of relief because the film grates and grinds to a halt. They make not the slightest effort at technology transfer – theft – from the alien ship while they stumbled around on it.

Overall, it’s so bad that … it’s bad.

I was tempted to watch it after reading a biography of Hyman Rickover, who built the Nautilus, the first atomic powered submarine which transited the North Pole in 1958. There are several other atomic sub movies, but this is enough for now.  

6 June 44 – The Light of Dawn

6 June 44 – The Light of Dawn (2014)

IMDb meta-data is runtime 1 hour and 45 minutes, and nothing more.

Genre: Documentary.

Verdict: Impressive.

On that day 7,000 ships, 11,000 airplanes, and 1,200,000 men converged on a 45-mile stretch of the French coast.  More than 7,000 vehicles soon joined the throng. What an organisational achievement.

In such an enormous and unprecedented undertaking what could go wrong did go wrong. The sea and weather interfered. The tide came earlier and heavier than anticipated and caused havoc all along the strand. Scores of those soldiers drowned in the resulting surf. Machinery broke down; nervous men made mistakes; unexpected obstacles emerged; the bluff at Omaha beach was more than ten feet higher than estimated. Ships collided. Aircraft engines failed. Earlier in the pre-dawn darkness half the 20,000 airborne troops missed the drop zones, many were killed, lost, captured, and ineffective. Maps were misread and Field Marshall Sir Bernard Montgomery took a month to reach his first day’s objective, Caen. A few days later storms in the English Channel disrupted supply.  

This documentary features a trove of archival film that I have not seen before. Among the footage is one odd and oddly moving sequence of a uniformed, bespectacled, battered, lone Wehrmacht soldier playing a Brahms requiem on an organ in a bombed-out Normandy church at 1 hour and 23 minutes. Solace of a kind, perhaps.

The narrative is cool, detached, and factual. None of that juvenile breathless ‘Now it can be told’ recitation of trivia from the History Channel and its ilk.  

Despite its outstanding high quality it evidently did not have a commercial release. That would explain the voids on the IMDb entry.  There are no ratings because raters did not see it.  I came across it on You Tube. 

De Gaulle (2020) 

De Gaulle (2020) 

IMDb meta-data is run time 1 hour and 48 minutes, rated 6.1 by 1,500 cinematizens.  

Genre: snapshot biopic.

Verdict: The man under the kepi.

The film, covers less than three months from April to June 1940 with an emphasis on De Gaulle’s family and home life upon which the war intrudes with the Blitzkrieg causing the two strands of the story to unravel.  Wife Yvonne stays at home in Lille with the children and the soldier goes to war. Events pull them further apart when De Gaulle’s duties take him here and there, to Bordeaux, to London, to Toulouse, to Nantes, to Paris, and back and forth. Communication is lost with Yvonne, and she in turn flees the Wehrmacht advance, children in tow, like thousands and thousands of others.

Two stories unwind, her flight and his fight.  She travels through a war zone (check the TV news tonight from Ukraine for graphics) and he battles across a table first with the French cabinet where he lost and then with Churchill where he drew. 

Why would Churchill invest in this nobody? De Gaulle has an answer: Because I am here. 

Much of it is nicely done, though the historic timeline is altered to tell the stories and many written exchanges become interviews. 

Listening to others at the conference tables speak in abstract generalisations about the distant war, De Gaulle imagines what Yvonne must be going through. For her part when she sees fields strewn with corpses in uniforms she wonders if De Gaulle might lying in a ditch somewhere. Ironically, the soldier is relatively safe in all the proceedings while she is constantly at risk from army, air, and naval attack as she eventually finds her way in a human tide to England.  

There are some explanations along the way about why De Gaulle, a soldier’s soldier, took the doubtful, dubious, and dangerous path he did, and part of it was his personal loathing for what his one-time mentor Philip Pétain had become – arrogant, vain, greedy, rapacious, selfish – but more important was a determination to keep faith with the fallen, some of whom had died at his command around Sedan, continuing their fight so that they did not die in vain. 

There is also an explanation of the first radio broadcast that makes sense even if it is not quite historically accurate. Like a lot of good ideas, it came from a subordinate.  

Why would Churchill let him on the BBC when there was still hope of negotiation with a French government?  De Gaulle has an answer for that, too: Because you know the power of words. Let them be spoken.  

The events are cataclysmic but the presentation is low key, emphasising the individuals and not the big booms and bangs, to the disappoint of many of the cinematizens raters. The actors look and dress the parts they play so unlike Hollywood or Pinewood. The fashions are of the times for both men and women. Soldiers have army haircuts and wear hats most of the time. The production values of Yvonne’s trek are excellent, if disturbing, from one disaster to another across the early summer countryside amid the blooming wild flowers, some splattered with the blood of children. The anguish of the Premier Paul Reynaud (with his frightened Jewish wife) as he struggles to fight on are in the background but very well realised. Georges Mandel, the only Jew in the cabinet, is a crucial player in supporting both Reynaud and De Gaulle, and that fact condemns them in the eyes of Pétain as tools of the Jews. 

This Churchill, played by Tim Hudson, is one of the better ones, because the actor does not try to incorporate every tic and mannerism, and so distract, but concentrates on the inherent drama of the moment.    

Honoré de Balzac, ‘The Unknown Masterpiece’

Honoré de Balzac, ‘The Unknown Masterpiece’ (1831)

Good Reads meta-data is 28 pages, rated 3.85 by 3,858 litizens. 

Genre: Short Story.

Verdict:  A gem.

This story is the 71st entry in Balzac’s sequence La Comédie Humaine.  

An ingénue befriends a celebrated artist only to realise that this painter profits from the advice, assistance, and creativity of another, much less well-known, but far greater artist.  The descriptions of painting and painters are superb, even better than those in Mario Vargas Llosa’s The Way to Paradise (2004) and those are memorable.  

It all leads to an ironic denouncement worthy of an O’Henry story.  It is all about knowing when to quit, about the perfect being the enemy of the good, about the means becoming the end.  Read it for yourself.  The story is usually bound with others so that the page numbers are deceptive.  

There are more than ninety items in the whole sequence, and Balzac left behind notes for another forty or so pieces. He did think big. I first heard about and read Balzac in high school whereas today the references are to Marvel Comics I am told. Go figure.  

Balzac

When we got our first Rocket E-Books in the 1990s I set out to read La Comédie Humaine in order. Nothing if not ambitious. I got as far as Letters of Two Brides before surrender.  Defeat was the result of (1) the terrible formatting of the contemporary public domain texts from Project Gutenberg which did not fit the screen, have line wrap, paragraph breaks, or any of the other formatting we take for granted today and by (2) the sheer boredom of that novel for no doubt the ever penurious Balzac spun it out to get paid by the word, but after some of the rip-snorters that preceded it the result was numbing.  

Marguerite Yourcenar, Memoirs of Hadrian

Marguerite Yourcenar, Memoirs of Hadrian (1951).

Good Reads meta-data is 288 pages, rated 4.24 by 23,264.

Genre: fiction, autobiography .

Verdict: Zen.

The ageing Emperor Hadrian writes a long, reflective, meditative letter to his designated successor, Marcus Aurelius.  In so doing he rewinds the spool of his life from beginning to his fast-approaching end.  Through Hadrian, Yourcenar conjures worlds, plumbs the mysteries of life and love, and offers some hard-earned advice to Marc and over his shoulder to readers.

It seems effortless to read, smooth as glass and offering a depth of vision with a calm detachment.  It is no surprise then to learn in an afterword that she worked on this manuscript for more than twenty years to achieve this diamond finish.  The poet W. B. Yeats said revision made him a better person, or something like that. Marguerite Yourcenar must have been a truly excellent person to have spun this prose.    

Hadrian’s travels make up much of the book.  One long episode concerns his efforts to negotiate a peace with some Zealots in Israel. No matter how much he was willing to concede it was never enough for his interlocutor, Akiba, who preferred isolation, and finally eradication to – in Hadrian’s eyes – the slightest compromise. Hadrian describes him as dried, rigid, ignorant, wilful, narrow, bigoted, but listened to his harangues for eight days in an Olympic instance of patience. Seeing that Hadrian had not begged forgiveness for having been born and had not admitted his inferiority to him, Akiba gave up trying to save his soul and left. Worse came to worst. (Self-indulgent note: I came across more than one Little Akiba in university life, intransigent individuals who could not see a matter from any point of view but their own. Any other perspective was at best wrong, and more likely to be evil.  A Manichaean world view often seems attached to the PhD.)

That approach to negotiation as an opportunity to harangue others into admitting your superiority still seems to characterise much of domestic and regional politics in the Middle East.  The race is to the high ground, not to the common ground.   

There are lower key episodes on Hadrian’s difficulty in sleeping, his political marriage, the competition for his favour, his hopes for Marc, and more.  

Some of the wise words:  

Marguerite Yourcenar

Battles are not won with hate. Anger can make a man brave, but it also makes him stupid, tripping over his own feet. 

Good like bad becomes a habit and the temporary tends to endure, and that what is eternal permeates to the inside; over time the mask becomes the face.

Watching the season come and is constant travelling of the earth.

A book may lie dormant for years, even eons, yet upon being opened its marvels, abysses, and more are revealed to the reader alone.  

Friendship is a kind of choreography.

An ineffable current passes through a poet in creating a poem.

Libraries are a reserve against spiritual winters which recur.  

One of the many things to like about this book is that Hadrian, speaking of the past, uses the past tense. Oh, if even historians these days would do that instead of flattening the topography of time into the eternal present tense.  

Henry James, The Aspern Papers

Henry James, The Aspern Papers (1888)

Good Reads meta-data is 106 pages rated 3.71 by 5,042 litizens.  

Genre: drama.

Verdict: Intriguing.

Ambitious scholar learns that some letters by a dead white poet might be in the possession of an elderly woman in Venice, despite her frequent and loud denials. Writing a biography of this poet, Ambitious decides to go to Venice to test the hypothesis.  His approach is oblique. He will pose as a journalist looking for accommodation and rent a room from Dowager.

In the household, apart from the nearly invisible servants are Dowager and her naive, plain, and shy dependent Niece. Ambitious insinuates himself into the household and finds Dowager avaricious and Niece tedious, but needs must, however, he makes no progress and frets. He dare not raise the question directly with Dowager least she give him, not the papers, but the boot.  

Dowager sees through his ruse but likes the rental income, while Niece is flummoxed to have a man in attendance.  His own finances are draining away but Niece admits that there are papers and a cameo likeness of the dead poet, Jeffrey Aspern. That convinces Ambitious to hang on.  

One night thinking the Dowager bed ridden with illness, Ambitious steals into her private study and rifles her desk to no avail. Dowager catches him at it and faints.  He scampers and lies to Niece.

Dowager dies and Niece inherits. Do the papers exist or was that just bait? Will Niece now give him any papers that do exist? He has spent a lot of time with her ever so subtly trying to find a path to the trove and she being completely inexperienced takes that as a kind of courtship. She hints that were they to marry then the papers would be his.  It is one of those marvellous James scenes where the message is never stated but hangs in the air above the page.

In a neat role reversal Ambitious is surprised by the hint and scrams, roaming around Venice in girlish confusion, but concludes that the game is worth the candle and goes back to Niece the next day, perhaps to accept her offer, he is not sure, but being so close to the trove, which has grown in his mind in importance, spurs him on.  He learns that Niece, ashamed and embarrassed at her bold hint, assumed it would never happen and burned the papers which were numerous. Ambitious is stunned.  His efforts have led to the destruction of the very things he wanted to preserve.  

The end.

It is a sort of mystery story. Are there any papers to get? Why is Dowager so determined not to part with the papers? Will he or won’t he get the papers?  Did the confrontation over the desk precipitate Dowager’s death? Will he or won’t he marry Niece to get the papers? What will become of Niece when Ambitious leaves?

I read it for the insights into the mind of a biographer, Ambitious, and there is some of that to be had, and there are rich descriptions of life in Venice.  

Henry James

Henry James was a great writer. The epiphany in Memorial Hall in the Bostonians has long stayed with me along with the drawing room scene in Wings of the Dove when a secret is revealed by posture. Added to that is the offered but not quite stated proposal in this story.  He was a maestro who could make the reader understand something without saying it.  

Alain Robbe-Grillet, The Erasers.

Alain Robbe-Grillet, The Erasers (1953).

Good Reads meta-data is 256 pages, rated 3.79 by 1474 litizens .

Genre: krimi; Species: PoMo.

 Verdict: Meh.

Spoiler: in which the detective accidentally kills the victim whose murder he has come to investigate. Or did he? Was it no accident, but perhaps a Deep State conspiracy all along?  We’ll never know….unless Hillary fesses up.

Detective Wallas comes to a dreary northern city to investigate the shooting of DuPont. We know Bonaventura planned the crime while his henchman Gatineau pulled the trigger. The story is pieced together from the points of view of these four and also Fabius, acting on the orders of the minister, who dispatched Wallas. There is the local copper, Laurent, who is only too glad to turn the inquiry over to him. A doctor, a constable, an innkeeper, and a talkative drunk. By the way, the victim DuPont has much to say, even when he was supposed to be dead. Then there are those erasers.

In his circular, repetitive perambulations around the scene of the crime and the city beyond, Wallas goes into this shop and that, one after another, where to conceal his purpose (gathering information) he buys an eraser for pencil marks. He has several les gommes in his pocket as a result. That quest embodies the story which is repeatedly rubbed out and then started again from a different perspective.  

Not much happens and the plot is paper thin but tantalising enough to allow for many speculations about a conspiracy so vast, dark, and deep that it cannot be named. If you have seen L’Année dernière à Marienbad (1961) that is Robbe-Grillet’s work, too. The film is style over substance as a critique of the vacuous lives of its characters, but it is gorgeous to watch and enveloping.  Not so these pages.

In 1953 the novel kickstarted Post-Modernism which, regrettably, continues to justify treating readers with derision and contempt.* In these pages everything is circular, not linear and heavy-handed clues to that are conspicuous in names and actions. There are those several narrators who offer different interpretations of the same facts, or different facts. Nor is it certain any of them is reliable. There is no closure at the end. Sounds like a classroom exercise in what not to do in a novel. I found no amusement in reading it but it is well enough written to sustain interest even as it goes around in circles.  

I did wonder if I should have read it as a palimpsest of his POW experience (see below) but I got no purchase on that. I tried to read one of his other novels years ago, and failed. This will be my last. He once said that a true writer has nothing to say and he proved it to me with this book.

Robbe-Grillet

Robbe-Grillet (1922 – 2008) was born to a comfortable bourgeois family in the provinces, educated and trained as an agricultural engineer and worked on the land for some years after World War II. He was a POW during the war and did slave labour in a German factory. Perhaps the agricultural life expiated those demons. He was not part of the Parisian set but burst onto the scene with this novel. He was soon inducted into the Beau Monde and became a gatekeeper for new writers as an acquisitions editor for a major publisher.  

*Has anyone yet coined the term ‘Post-Modernism Syndrome’ to refer to those readers who identify with and like the derision and contempt dished out to them by Po-Mo writers in pointless prose?  If not, I claim it now!  

Admiral Hyman Rickover: Engineer of Power 

Marc Wortman, Admiral Hyman Rickover: Engineer of Power (2022). 

Good Reads meta-data is 328 pages, rated 4.33 by a scant six raters.  

Genre: biography. 

Verdict: compelling.

Young Hymie (1900-1986) was carried to the promised land in his mother’s arms, Russian Jews escaping Cossack pogroms to Ellis Island. How this five foot nothing, 98-pound weakling Jewboy (as he was frequently called, and worse) became a dominating force in the US Navy is quite a story.  One thing is sure, he did not fall off a charm bracelet.  

His father eked out a living in Chicago as a tailor while his mother cleaned up behind rich people on the Gold Coast of the Lake. No genius, the boy had his parents’ work ethic, and knew he had to make his own way. By some assiduous trading of favours his father got his son nominated to the US Naval Academy at Annapolis because it was a route to a free higher education. There was never any nautical motivation. After the nomination to a secure place he had to take a battery of entrance examinations, some contrived to exclude undesirable elements from the Navy, and he fit that category: small, working class, Jewish. He started with three strikes. The prejudice of the examiners and the examinations were his first exposure to the US Navy. He had expected nothing less, schooled as he partly was on the streets of Chicago, and prepared to the maximum so that he could not be excluded. Once in the Academy he experienced the bullying, racism, brutality, snobbery, anti-semitism, and stupidity he forever associated with the Navy, but he also discovered the engineer within himself. Engineering was working class and few other cadets showed any interest in it.   

In his first sea duty on a WWI destroyer he spent all of his time taking it apart and putting it back together.  He did not rely only on the blueprints, the gospel for most engineers, but rather went over the ship on and off duty, wrench in hand seeing how, why, and what worked, and soon learned that reality differed from blueprint. Soon he was making changes to increase efficiency. That DIY approach, and skepticism about blueprints continued throughout his career, even when he was an admiral inspecting an aircraft carrier, his ADC carried a wrench not a brief case. 

Two qualities developed in his formative years. (1) The engineer who assumed nothing and tested everything, and (2) the officer who went full steam ahead at all times. He often made changes without seeking permission or telling anyone. He saw it; it needed doing; he did it. That got him attention and made him enemies. The efficiency reports by which careers are made or broken suited Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.  He was a good engineer and an incompetent officer. He was also a workaholic who had no other interests. None. That lack of social life made him anathema in the Navy where a premium was placed on getting along with others, such a large premium that it trumped technical or tactical competence.  (Ergo the miserable performance of the US Navy in the 1942 Guadalcanal campaign when the dancing officers failed to take the most elementary tactical precautions and paid for that in blood.)

His later sea duty included a battleship where he rewired the telephone system more or less single handed because no one would or could work with him and he was unable and unwilling to delegate, a submarine where he started thinking about alternative propulsion, a mine sweeper where he experimented with demagnetising mines, and so on.  During this service he hated the cramped living quarters and the traditional schedule of four hours on and four hours off. Later he changed both these in the nuclear navy he created.  

He was a loner, a martinet, foul mouthed, contemptuous of authority, and abusive of subordinates. Why he stayed in the Navy is one mystery, the other is how he stayed in Navy. As to the latter, there were guardian angels who wanted to keep good engineers in the service, and who were far enough up the hierarchy to influence that without having to suffer personal contact with him. As to the former, he was offered jobs in commerce more than once with a great deal more money but he never hesitated to say his favourite word, ‘No!’  He would never compromise on quality which he thought defined business.

He seldom wore the Navy uniform despite the standing order to do so, and that continued even when he was an admiral.  His attire was either a business suit or a boiler suit.  (See the cover illustration.) When he showed up for an inspection in a boiler suit, and he did do that, the captain of the ship to be inspected turned his thoughts to his retirement portfolio.  

He worked in Navy procurement during WWII and dealt with contractors, designers, builders, quartermasters, and kept the fleet of thousands of ships at sea supplied, refitted, and armed.  In doing that he rode roughshod over standard operating procedures, traditions, superior officers, the letter of the law, due process, and personal sensitivities.  The enemies list grew but other guardian angels saw in him a capital letter Trouble Shooter who would boldly go where wiser heads would not tread and who could then break log jams that stymied other officers.  He signed some 3000 contracts and insured by a rigorous, sometimes personal – remember that wrench – system of checking that all were honoured on time, on target, on budget.  The Truman Committee singled out Rickover’s department alone for praise in its otherwise scathing review of Pentagon procurement in 1944.  

One story in the procurement period brings home his way of doing business.  This midget sat at a desk in a business suit, while two executives from RCA did a sales pitch on a new radio for the Navy. It was smaller and better than those in service, also products of RCA.  They knew their stuff and spun a good line. One criterion for a radio was ease of repair in difficult circumstances.  Putting an example of this new radio on his desk they demonstrated how easy it was to operate, after which he got up, and pushed the radio onto the floor. ‘Gentleman a five-inch shell just hit the bridge and damaged the radio. Repair it!’ They squawked, we are not operators. He rejoined, neither is the sailor who just pulled the dead operator off the set, but he has to use the radio to report the attack. Repair it!’   

That was prelude.  The payoff was nuclear.  Signing all those contracts brought him into competition for resources with the Manhattan Project, and he became aware of speculations about atomic energy to generate electricity, and it came to him that it could be an alternative to coal, diesel, and oil. It was easier to say yes to him than to fight him, and he eventually established a Naval Reactor Project at Oak Ridge.  First it had a staff of one, him.  He schooled himself in nuclear energy with the same drive, determination, insensitivity, and – well – brutality that he did everything else.  He worked twenty-hours a day, travelled far and wide to attend seminars and lectures, and to interview specialists. Having arrived late for a lecture on one occasion he bullied the home address of the speaker from a secretary who was working late, and knocked on the lecturer’s door at midnight demanding that the lecture be repeated for him here and now!  

There was a bitter rivalry among the armed forces over who got the atom bomb, but when the Air Force hived off from the Army it was a foregone conclusion.  Such a weapon in 1948 seemed to sink the Navy even more comprehensively than Bill Mitchell’s bombers.  Who cares about ships at sea when there are long range aircraft carrying the Big One.  In the scramble to maintain its relevance (budget along with careers), the Navy tried all sorts of gimmicks and one of them was nuclear power for the one ship that still seemed relevant, because it could hide from airplanes, the submarine. The Navy began pushing this project, and about that time the Truman Administration, President Truman himself conscience stricken about using the atomic bomb, though he would never admit it even to himself, was eager to turn atomic power to peaceful and constructive uses and nuclear energy offered him a chance to do that, so he backed the development.  

No senior officer in the Navy thought a nuclear submarine was either possible or desirable, and so none of them wanted that job. Thus, Rickover stayed in place because no one else wanted it. The technicians involved also thought it would taken ten years to realise the concept but Rickover immediately cut that in half and promised a ship in five years. He delivered.  

In the best tradition of McKinsey management as soon as the nuclear submarine was a reality, superior officers dismissed Rickover from the program he had created, masterminded, and driven.  He had been passed over for promotion time and again, and when he was unanimously rejected a final time by the nine-man board of review, he was placed on the retired list.  Such was the animosity toward him that when the first nuclear submarine was initiated in a ceremony he had organised, he was not allowed to attend.  Only a direct and personal intervention by President Truman who wanted to met him put him at the platform. For this special occasion, he wore a business suit and not a uniform. Defying the order to wear the uniform on such an occasion of course added to his enemies.    

Further interventions followed and he was promoted to Admiral in a rare split decision. The officers who knew him best hated him the most and they voted against him. Others realised he had to be promoted to save the Navy.  

The USS Nautilus went to sea, setting off a bureaucratic battle in the Navy to crew it.  The Naval Personnel Selection Board, otherwise known as God, selected three captains and decreed that Rickover choose one from among them. Leaving the decision to him was regarded as a great concession.

All were three candidates were Academy graduates, all were socially acceptable to the admirals club, all were experienced submariners, none had shown any interest in the nuclear propulsion. Rickover ignored the list and choose a submarine captain who was not an Academy graduate but who had risen to bridge, who was not dance party material, who had been passed over for promotion more than once, and who had been an avid contributor to the reactor program and knew how to use a wrench.

More ructions followed. Rickover was summoned to Washington to get an earful. He refused to go ‘at this critical time.’  It was always a critical time when such a summons appeared. By now he had been on the cover of Time Magazine as Mr Atom Power, he had been profiled on the front page of the New York Times for creating the Nautilus, he had been singled out by first President Truman and then President Eisenhower, and so he was well insulated. That, of course, only further enraged his legion of nautical enemies.  Later when another forced retirement loomed an ex-Navy man, President John Kennedy, went to bat for him by holding the bill for naval appropriations until Rickover was promoted. Then Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Carter all supported him against the US Navy.

The Nautilus did the impossible by passing under the North Pole in 1958 which was as big a deal at the time as Moon landing in 1969 and a rejoinder to Sputnik the year before.  When this feat was celebrated, the Navy insured that Rickover was not invited to the ceremony.  However, President Eisenhower insisted on shaking his hand, and so he was permitted to attend but placed at the rear of the podium, and to prove how low the US Navy could go his wife was refused an invitation. 

On another occasion when the reactor he built, some of it by his own hands, to supply electricity near Pittsburgh was switched on, the Naval Chiefs proposed that another, ‘better looking’ officer do the honours.  Incredible, but it seems to be true. Rickover outmanoeuvred this sleight by inviting the president to do it, which he did.  

While he made nuclear power possible he opposed with his usual belligerence and tenacity turning it over to civilians. He testified to Congress, he gave press conferences, he wrote books, he spoke at meetings in which he said that the commercial imperative would lead to compromises in safety.  Contractors cut corners unless inspected with a wrench. Few materials are supplied to specifications unless there is constant inspection.  Blueprints are no more likely to match reality than the plates in medical textbooks resemble a patient. He had been dealing with designers, contractors, builders for forty years and knew whereof he spoke, citing a myriad of examples to prove his point. The enemies list lengthened because many of the examples he cited involved the contractors now lining up to take over nuclear power.  

The nuclear submarines, more than a hundred, and a few nuclear surface ships became known as Rickover’s Navy.  He insisted that he alone select officers to crew these ships and he did that in his characteristically wilful manner.  He sawed two inches off the front legs of the chair for candidates to sit on to make them uncomfortable from the start. He subjected about 15,000 officers to this test, and the many others that went with it, and so knew just about every officer in his navy, though he did not remember Jimmie Who. But Carter remembered him as a higher being, and made him a mainstay.  

He also insured his ships offered each sailor a space and bed of his own, and an eight-hour shift.  He also nagged Congress to fund a special bathysphere that cost more than a submarine to rescue crews from the deepest water.  Members of the first subcommittee considering this proposal endured his midnight phone calls.  

He stayed in the Navy, despite that ever longer list of enemies, for 63 years.  He was one of four people to receive a presidential gold medal, until the Crook-in-Chief started handing them out to himself, strippers, drug dealers, ETs, and KGB agents.  

A succession of presidents sponsored his renewal every two years until Reagan, whose Secretary of the Navy dedicated himself to forcing him out. He did not go quietly as President Reagan himself discovered! The implication is that the nuclear power industry wanted him gone and with him went a powerful voice for intense and constant regulation. Instead the Reagan Administration in this as in so much else, went for self-certifiction.

Marc Wortman

There is nothing in the book about either blacks or women in Rickover’s nuclear navy.  Nor is there much about how he met and married his wife of forty years.

Perhaps the last word is that a Rickover reactor has never had an accident, while there have been dozens in the Soviet and Russian navies.  

Hugh Trevor-Roper, Hermit of Peking: The Hidden Life of Sir Edmund Backhouse

Hugh Trevor-Roper, Hermit of Peking: The Hidden Life of Sir Edmund Backhouse (1976).

GoodReads meta-data is 391 pages rated 3.90 by 155 litizens.

Genre: Biography.

Verdict: A curiosity.

An anodyne entry about Backhouse in the Dictionary of National Biography of Great Britain in 1970 described him as a sinologist, antiquarian, and businessman, longtime resident in China. That belied a very colourful life of a forger, confidence man, thief, confabulator, swindler, and traitor.     

Scion of a wealthy Quaker banker, Backhouse (1873-1944) was a wastrel from the off, and his father refused to support him, though the title did eventually pass to the son, but not the dosh. By the way, the family pronounces the name as Back-us. To escape the collection agents come for the money he sailed for China in 1899, and fell in with the foreign ex-pats in Peking. 

He had shown at Oxford (before leaving under a cloud of debt never repaid) a remarkable facility for languages and that was the mainstay for the rest of his life.  As a student he learned French, Russian, German, Japanese, and started on Mandarin.  He continued the latter along with Tibetan and Cantonese in China. Being poly-lingual put him in demand as a translator in Peking for Western journalists, businessmen, politicians, and others.   

His modest manner masked as unscrupulous character.  Hired to translate a Chinese document, say a contract, into German, he always insured the result said what the employer wanted it to say.  If reality subsequently exposed the lie, he then claimed that the Chinese were at fault for changing their minds, and so on.  He was plausible, Quaker upbringing, son a banker baron, lately of Oxford University, well-connected (he always claimed), impeccable in manner and dress with a diffident even obsequious manner. 

His authority as an expert on all things Chinese was confirmed as he went native in abode, dress, diet, and manner.  He gradually withdrew from European society in Peking and lived like a hermit scholar (hence the title), emerging only when he needed some money. Like Jekyll and Hyde (or Bruce Wayne and Batman), he was one man but two people: a modest European and a hermit Chinese.  

As a scholar he claimed to be friends with numerous, important political, financial, and social leaders in China, and at times to prove this, produced letters from them recommending him, praising him, and so on. These he always produced only when pressed for his bona fides. And they were always in Mandarin with his own translations attached and which he himself certified as genuine.  At times a suspicious European would challenge these credentials, even once face to face with the Chinese who denied all knowledge of this man Backhouse, who then told the European that the Chinese was lying to save face, and he was so convincing that the European continued, to his later cost, to do business with him. 

He became the agent for a major Clyde ship builder on the strength of his assertion that China was re-arming after the defeat by Japan and after witnessing the Japanese defeat of Russia, and would buy battleships by the score. He made a show of only reluctantly taking a retainer (which he then anted up by claiming he was entertaining court officials to grease the deal), and the ship builder paid and paid, and no battleship orders ever came, but instead his many promises that they would – for years, and thousands of pounds. Even at the time Trevor-Roper was researching this biography, the ship building firm was unwilling to cooperate with him by opening its archives to him. It surely was embarrassing to this firm for its stupidity to be aired in a book that its shareholders might read.

Then there were his exploits with Oxford University from which he extracted an honorary degree through a handsome gift to the library of a trove of rare and important Chinese books, scrolls, objects, and relics.  This first gift was very valuable and genuine, leading to his name being incised in marble on a plaque in the Bodleian Library.  After a suitable elapse of time so that it did not seem that he had bought his honouris causa by this gift, he got the degree.  Later he contacted the grateful librarian at the Bodleian with the prospect of further additions to the collection, if only he had the money to purchase, pack, and ship the treasure.  First it was to cost £500, then £2,000, and by the time the scam snapped it had run to £20,000.  A few volumes did arrive at Oxford, but University scholars quickly ruled them to be forgeries. And that caused them to look more carefully at the first gift, with the predictable results. There was much dross interleaved with a little gold. Like the ship building above, Oxford did not want to expose its own foolishness, and kept the matter as quiet as possible.   

Backhouse going native.

Most incredible of all was a scheme he hatched to sell arms to the British embassy in Peking. When the Great War began, Britain was desperate for weapons and bought them around the world (until its own armaments industry began to manufacture in bulk).  In September 1914 when this subject came up in conversation with an official Backhouse claimed he knew a Chinese general who would sell an arsenal. But he would have to be bribed and the arms paid for.  In time Backhouse claimed to have located and secured the cooperation of a number of generals willing to sell vast quantities of arms – which he listed in detailed inventories running to pages and pages.  But since this was illegal, he could not name any names or indicate where the arms were.  Since it was illegal to steal government property and illegal to export arms, maximum secrecy must be assured so no one must negotiate and organise the purchase but Backhouse.  Officials in the Peking embassy were determined to pull off a major coup by securing such a stock of weapons and in due course as much £2,000,000 was invested in the exercise.  Well, no weapons ever appeared and most of the money disappeared.  When confronted with the failure, Backhouse blamed the unnamed Chinese for welshing on the deal, and to save face the British officials swallowed that tale.  They could hardly complain since the whole affair was illegal.  Still less could they broadcast it to warn others off Backhouse.

He went on to an American Printing firm which wanted to print Chinese bank notes and pulled another scam on it.  Again because of the questionable legality of some of the things done, no one could complain too much, too often, or too loudly.  

The pattern is made abundantly clear by the author, and it is repeated at intervals whenever Backhouse needed money.  Whenever things got out of hand Backhouse went to ground.  He just upped stakes and left Peking for Victoria (on Vancouver Island, for the geographically challenged) or other parts.  While visiting his family once, when subjected to some insistent questioning by his hostile brother-in-law, Backhouse went for a walk to clear his head and did not return to remain incommunicado for thirteen years.  Some walk.  He only resurfaced when he again needed a bolthole.  

When the Japanese invaded China in 1937, despite being a lifelong Sinophile he became a cheerleader for the Japanese, who, in his eyes, were going to end Chinese corruption and restore the old empire – he took the puppet regime Japan had installed in Manchukuo as an example of that – and eradicate pernicious Western influence.  Eventually, as an enemy national he was confined to a compound in Peking where he continued to declare his enthusiasm for the Japanese war effort even as Singapore, Malaya, Burma, and India were all attacked. One fellow internee said Backhouse volunteered to broadcast his support for Japanese on the radio, but the Japanese were not interested in this strange character in either his English or Chinese incarnations.  

The last chapters concern a lengthy autobiography that Backhouse compiled in his dotage that details a fantasy life of grand, if grotesque, proportions. In examining the claims and assertions of these stories, Trevor-Roper begins to psychoanalyse Backhouse, because, to be sure, the question all along is ‘Why?’ Why did he forge when he could have made a perfectly respectable living as a sinologist, and at one point he was all but offered the chair of Chinese studies at Oxford University.  It is pretty clear that Trevor-Roper cannot image why anyone would want anything more than that.

While a great deal of money came and went, very little of it ever stayed with Backhouse for he was once and always a wastrel.  As fast as money came in, it went out even faster.  

Some of the forgeries were undoubtedly done to get some cash, but that is no explanation for the vast effort and creativity he put into the major endeavours, like sixteen printed and bound volumes of fabricated secret diaries of a Chinese court official.  Each volume ran to a million characters. That must have been hard and exacting work sustained over a long period of time. The conclusion is that Backhouse enjoyed dreaming of himself being the court official and writing the diary. That once he discovered this self-induced fantasy life he returned to it again and again in a bizarre instance of vanity publishing. That is as good an explanation as any.  

That DNB entry has since been changed.  See for yourself.  

Hugh Trevor-Roper

I read it as an example of how to research, present, and write a biography.  It certainly makes use of an impressive array of materials, letters of contemporaries to others in which he is mentioned, company archives, embassy records, newspaper reports, and so.  Some of which Trevor-Roper solicited by mail and which the source dutifully copied and sent to him. Oxford letterhead in those days seems to have worked wonders. 

Olaf Stapledon, First and Last Men (1930)

Olaf Stapledon, First and Last Men (1930)

GoodReads meta-data is 246 pages rated 3.79 by 5,465 litizens.  

Genre: SyFy

Verdict: The history of the future 

These pages offer a tour de horizon of a five-billion-year history of seventeen human species from the First, homo sapiens (that’s us), to the Last who watch Sol die and they with it.  In between all manner of men evolve and disappear to be replaced by another lot.  Along the way there is a viral invasion from Mars and the colonisation of Venus.  It is a novel without drama, without characters, and without a narrative that has a start, middle, and finish. The story of Earth is told with a nearly divine detachment by The Last of The Last Men. It will remind some of those sociological studies where social forces, cleavages, structures, and other abstractions push us Sims back and forth.  

In evolution through the billions of years, the Last Men can project their thoughts backward in time, even to some among the First Men. (That, by the way, is the explanation for visitations, ghosts, angels, saints, martyrs, messianics, charismatics, nutcases, UFOs, aliens, ETs, and other inexplicable often unseen things, events, and occurrences.)  This projection without Blue Tooth is difficult, incomplete, and subject to distortion, like using the NBN in 2022. However among the Last Men some have perfected this projection so that this book can be dictated by the Last of the Last Men to a nameless receptive First Man of 1930. (Would such an ability to inhabit the mind of a subject make a Last Man the perfect biographer?) This future influence on the past reveals that the relationship we call time is lateral, not linear. 

Between the First and Last Men are billions of years and seventeen (17) species of Men.  Succeeding species develop as giant brains in jars.  Others grow to twenty feet in height.  Then there are the ones that sprout wings and take to the air. With each evolution there are cultural and moral changes, too.  Though some verities remain, like jealousy, envy, bad will, selfishness, and McKinsey management.

The beginning of the book forecasts (though it is told in retrospect) the future of we homo sapiens, and it is all too believable. Stupid wars, avoidable virus plagues, anticipated but neglected climate change, personal vendettas that escalate to planet-wide wars that kill off half the population, denial of undeniable facts, and so on.  It reads like BBC World Service reports this week. Move over Nostradamus, there is a contender. 

Of women, first, last, or in-between, there is none. There is plenty of troll-food in the many, necessary generalisations about peoples and places. Check out the sanctimonious comments on Good Reads. 

Olaf Stapledon

For his day job John O. Stapledon (1886-1950) lectured in politics at Liverpool University.  That work left him, we must conclude, plenty of time to write as this was just the first of his dozen novels, all SyFy.  (Did these count in his annual Research Impact Statement?) Others include: Last Men in London (1932), Odd John (1935), Star Maker (1937), and six more.  The books sold well but reviewers, unable to categorise them, did not like them. Thus is creative writing denigrated by the gatekeepers of creative writing.  

Although it is nearly lost in the giga-historical details that crowd onto the pages, the core idea is that of influence from the future on the past. That reminded this reader of Chris Marker’s haunting short film La Jetée (1962).  There are some similarities though the execution is completely different.  

There is a 70-minute film inspired by Stapledon’s novel which I can find only on Blu Ray and that does not interest me. I cannot find it on DVD. If someone can, please let me know. My cursory research into converting Blu Ray to another format left me confused. One guide offered a four-step procedure that involved about fifty steps, grouped into four categories. (Reminded me of the Man in Seat 61’s claim that the train from Amsterdam to Prague stopped only twice, whereas in fact it stopped nearly a dozen times.  It all depends on definition.) The surrounding images are from the film.

I happened to see a reference to this novel in something else I was reading and that sparked my curiosity. I could not remember having read it (though I knew the author’s name and felt certain I had read something by him) so I found it available on Kindle and hour later and started to read it. At first I could not put it down, but as clever permutations piled one on top of another, going – as far as I could tell – nowhere except to the next page, I soon adopted the Kindle flick, reading only topic sentences. Fortunately, Stapledon learned the craft when a topic sentence was a topic sentence and that eased my speedy navigation.  He is reported to have said that he turned to fiction for a wider audience than academic writing (and yes, he did a good deal of that, too) had.  Strong stuff, those wider readers if they marched through several volumes of this detail.