Author Mark Munger (Cloquet River Press)

We Sinners by Hanna Pylväinen (2012. Picador. 978-1-250-3218-8)

I saw that the author of this novel was selected by Finlandia National Foundation’s 2024 Lecturer of the Year. Because I’d not read any of her work and I have an interest in Laestadianism (a branch of Lutheran fundamentalism associated with the Apostolic Lutherans in my neck of the world), I decided to make this slender novel my book club pick for the month of February. 

Pylväinen knows of what she writes, having been raised in a conservative Christian family adhering to the doctrines first pronounced by Lars Levi Laestadius in the mid-19th century when Lars, an indigenous Sami Lutheran pastor from Laplap (Arctic Norway, Sweden, and Finland), underwent a personal epiphany. The “sins” prohibited by Laestandism include dancing, alcohol, and gambling: a direct result of Laestadius’s own father’s addiction to alcohol and the family’s resulting poverty. In We Sinners, the author chronicles a contemporary Finnish American family (also struggling with poverty in spite of their piousness) adhering to this strict form of Lutheranism and, despite the introduction of strict parenting, homosexuality, doubt, alcohol use, and other sinful conduct into this family of nine children. Pyläinen renders each of the children deftly, with love, and without severe judgment for the parents or their chosen faith, though it does become confusing at times, with so many children, who she is writing about when she switches from one to the next.

In the end, this is a well-written exploration of a little-known part of the Christian faith in a fictional rendering. My one criticism of the book is that, coming in at only 189 pages while covering nine children and their parents makes the story feel more like a series of vignettes than a novel. But that having been said, it’s well worth the read: my book club universally concurred.

4 stars out of 5. 

East of Eden by John Steinbeck (2002: Centennial Edition. Penguin. 0-14-200065-5)

Steinbeck reportedly considered East to be his masterpiece. I’m not sure about that given the beauty and story of Grapes of Wrath, Of Mice and Men, and some of his other works. But I will say this: in creating Cathy Ames, the female antagonist of this morality tale set in the Salinas Valley, Steinbeck drew one of the most convincing tales of female sociopathy ever put to paper. That alone is sufficient reason to consider this work as one of the author’s most ambitious.

The plot’s basic premise is not hard to extract despite the tale’s heft and volume. Good and evil exist in this world, not only within the same family, but within the same person. Ambiguously, we never know whether Charles Trask, the roustabout and quick-to-anger son of Cyrus Trask (a heavy handed Civil War veteran who is essentially an embezzler and crook), or his kinder, gentler, more polished brother, Adam, impregnated Adam’s wife (Cathy, who wiggled her way into both men’s beds), the result of which is a set of twin boys, Caleb and Aron. The Biblical links to the story of Cain and Abel are not hard to discern in either the Charles/Adam or the Caleb/Aron plots. It’s this simplistic connection that many critics of the book found to be its deepest flaw. I disagree.

The interjection of Cathy, who leaves the twins with Adam and vanishes into the world of prostitution, into the well-known Biblical tale makes the plot sing and keeps the reader guessing. Originally released in 1952, the themes of Cathy’s life post-abdication from the Trask home, (she becomes the madam of a house of ill-repute that prides itself on fetishes and sadism) must have caught the eye of more than one censor. Tawdry, raw, and emotionally upsetting as Cathy’s life and immorality may be, it is her tale to be told and one that leaves you, in the end, without a clear resolution of the conflicting themes carried throughout the book.

Is it better than Grapes? That’s in the eye of the beholder … But it’s a book every novelist wishes he or she wrote.

5 stars out of 5.

Love and Spirit: A new Set of Eyes by Thomas R. Martin (2015. Balboa. 978-1-5043-4197-4)

Confession time (pun intended). Tom is a guitarist in the River of Grace praise band at my church, Grace Lutheran ELCA. So consider my review with that connection in mind.

This is a compelling look at what it means to be Christian (not just Lutheran) in a world full of competing faiths. The author discusses Jesus and God and the Holy Spirit in a unified, easy to follow manner, all of which has, at its core, the belief that Love is at the center of the Christian faith (and the world’s other major religions as well) and that it’s this Love (agape love, not lust or romantic love or familial love) that’s indeed behind Jesus and our redemption. 

Using the language of the Gospels, the Old Testament, and the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, the author leads readers on a welcoming and loving journey of Faith; one in which he doesn’t shy away from such questions as, “Can a non-Christian like Ghandi, who did everything Christ-like but wasn’t a believer in the Holy Trinity, be saved by Love?”. The thoughts expressed and ideas and doctrines explored are not new: most of us have questioned, “Hey, but what about good people who haven’t heard the Word, or who have heard it, have acted in a manner Christ would approve of, are full of agape Love, but haven’t converted?” and have, like the author, struggled to find an answer to that query.

This book is a welcome addition to that discussion.

4 stars out of 5

Peace

Mark

A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings of Martin Luther King, Jr. Edited by James M. Washington (1986. Harper. ISBN 978-0-06-064691)

I made a promise to myself, after attending the 2023 MLK Breakfast at the Copper Top Church in Duluth, to find a book of Dr. King’s writings, speeches, and theories regarding race relations and discrimination and read it. I picked up this very exhaustive collection from our local Barnes and Noble and, over the past year, with an eye towards completing my read by MLK Day 2024, got to work. I missed finishing the book by my deadline by a week but I am ever so glad I undertook the task.

What did I learn by reading this tome? I learned that King’s brilliance, though at times repetitive in theme, shines through his words and establishes guidelines for how we should be working towards equity amongst the races and the poor in America and the world. Along the way, King details his theories of non-violent change based upon principles pronounced in Christianity and by Ghandi; why he, as a minister of the Gospels, decided to vocalize his personal opposition to the Vietnam War; and why the uptick of violence in the inner cities of America following the passage of Civil Rights legislation was, while regrettable and not in keeping with his pleas for social and electoral change through sit-ins, boycotts, and other non-violent protest, completely understandable yet avoidable.

I came away from reading this collection convinced that not only was Dr. King a leader of a movement; he was a brilliant thinker and strategist whose lessons and thoughts are as applicable to our tortured race relations today as they were during his oh-too-short-life.

Beautiful prose and succinct reasoning.

5 stars out of 5. A textbook for nonviolence. 

No Time to Spare: Thinking About What Matters by Ursula K. Le Guin (2018. Recorded Books.)

This was another of my YMCA workout “listens”. I’ve been a fan of Le Guin since taking a political science class at the University of Minnesota-Duluth concerning utopias. I picked up one of her early science fiction titles (The Left Hand of Darkness perhaps?) as part of that class and wrote a paper on it. Here, Le Guin, very shortly before her death in January of 2018, collected a number of essays on a variety of topics ranging from literary awards, writing, science fiction, the F-word, cats, marriage, and a smattering of other seemingly unrelated topics into a fanciful, humorous, yet poignant whole. While not as thought provoking or entertaining as the best of her fiction (I still consider her Earthsea series to be the gold standard of fantasy), there’s enough in here to keep any Le Guin lover (or anyone simply interested in her thought process) entertained while walking the track, the dog, or simply chilling in the car.

4 stars out of 5.

Peace

Mark

                                                Erik Koskinen Interview

MM:

 Let’s start with your roots, where you were born, where you grew up?

EK: My father was born in Helsinki and was adopted in Negaunee, Michigan as a young child. As an adult he traveled and lived around the United States but met my mother in Marquette, Michigan. I was born with my twin brother in Fort Collins, Colorado. By the time I started grade school, I was living in The Copper Country and my parents worked at Suomi College (Finlandia University). My mother’s family has been in the US for generations and are Irish/Scottish/British. My whole family on my father’s side resides in Finland still.

MM:

 A bio of you on the First Avenue (a famed Twin Cities music venue) website indicates you were “raised in Northern Michigan”.

EK: The Keweenaw Peninsula is a large part of my upbringing and of course I grew up with Sauna. Some of my relatives in Finland fought in the wars of the 1940’s on skis. I grew up skiing all the time. Food that was either brought from Finland or adopted by Finns in the UP was around me often. In general, Sauna, skiing, fish, stews, pasties, polka. Cussing in Finnish was a popular activity. Part of my high school was in NE New York, near Quebec, and I only met one Finn there. I took French classes, but I let everyone know I was a Finn!

MM:

 Growing up, was the Finnish language spoken around you by parents or extended family members?

EK: My family from Finland speaks English so well (maybe better than I) that my household never took it in as a necessity. My father has lots of terms and phrases he uses from the old Finn world. Many of these are now unknown to family in Finland. I heard a language program on the radio recently that mentioned that the two most used Finnish words in America are Sauna and Sisu. Sisu has strong sentiment in my world. I believe in it and I’m very proud of my heritage which has heavy influence on my daily life, including writing music.

MM:

I’m a huge folk, rock, blues, and Americana fan. One of my favorite singer/songwriters of the past several decades is James McMurtry, son of famed author (Lonesome Dove, Last Picture Show) Larry McMurtry. I hear some similarities to Jim and his austere, stripped-down songwriting and arranging (including simple yet elegant guitar work) in your songs.

EK: Interesting question. My parents are writers and teachers. They taught me about Larry McMurtry early on and I was in his hometown visiting his bookstores at the end of a tour in Texas about twelve years ago. Archer City, Texas. It’s where they filmed The Last Picture Show. Very close to where my mother was born. I wanted to visit both places.

The first time I heard of James I was on a road trip playing shows in Duluth, MN and I called my father from a payphone. It was the late nineties. He said that he just heard an interview with James on the radio and Dad said James reminded him of me. I’ve heard that more in the last 25 years than I can count. I’ve been compared to no one else more than him (in a positive way). So early on, he wasn’t an influence. But I’ve grown to love his music, writing, phrasing and the intent of his delivery. He’s brilliant. I would imagine I’ve been influenced inadvertently, but not directly. I always take it as a high compliment when someone mentions the similarities, but I feel like a novice comparatively.

MM:

In that same First Ave bio, you’re listed as currently living in Cleveland, MN. I have to confess, I’ve been to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, OH but never, at least knowingly, been to Cleveland, MN.

EK: I don’t live there but I have my recording studio there. It’s a small but grand farm town near Saint Peter, MN. Folks treat me with respect, and I do the same. I moved to the Saint Peter area from the city because of true love with my lady. Why else move? Before that I’d been in Saint Paul for a while. I play annually in Cleveland (early August) and it’s a ruckasy, fun time. Lots of people from all over Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa. The show has a bit of a Willie Nelson Picnic vibe. City folks, farmers, townies, hippies, musicians. Everyone gets along great and has a lot of fun.

MM:

Have you toured outside the United States?

EK: I’ve toured in Canada, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland and England. I felt very at home in all of those places. In fact, I loved it and I can’t wait to go back. That side of my blood felt soothed. I really want to play Finland: it’s in the master plan. If it doesn’t happen soon, I’ll be going to visit family regardless.

MM:

The same First Ave bio indicates you spent some time in “upper New York State”. What timeframe are we talking about? Did that include time near Woodstock, where famed Band drummer Levon Helm operated and recorded at the infamous Barn? I only ask because another Munger interviewee, famed Jefferson Airplane/Hot Tuna guitarist, Jorma Kaukonen has done some work there and in fact, will be headlining a show at The Barn next April. Have you ever met or played with Jorma?

EK: The music world is like a small town: you’re always one person away from knowing the President, so to speak. But I’ve never crossed paths with Jorma. I sure hope to. I’ve seen him play but let him be at the end of the show. He’s brilliant. He’s also way more influential than he gets credit for.

MM:

Just a couple more and I’ll let you get back to making music. It looks like you’ve worked with quite a few folks based in or from my hometown of Duluth, MN.

EK: I’m pretty old school as well. I still listen to “albums” and prefer that. I hope the tradition never dies and even if it fades a bit, I believe it never will die. It will have a resurgence, which I think has already started. 

I get hired many ways as a working musician. Sometimes I’m a guitarist or a producer or an engineer or co-writer. Many times, I’m all of the above at the same time. I feel very lucky that people keep contacting me to work with them. My own Duluth history goes back almost to my beginning. It’s the first town I “toured” to. My history with Sacred Heart also goes back to the beginning. A musical mentor, Bernie Larsen, sold his recording gear to the people that started Sacred Heart. The very gear I learned to work on in Michigan made its way to Minnesota! I also recorded one of the first records ever recorded there. I was told I was part of the influence to record the first “Duluth Does Dylan” compilation record. Even though I never lived there, they included me on the record! That was all done at Sacred Heart, along with many others compilation records that involved Trampled By Turtles, Haley, Low, and Charlie Parr. Teague Alexy (from Duluth) is a dear friend. Sarah Krueger too. Tim Nelson has a lot to do with that scene. I wish I could mention everyone.

MM:

Last one. Looks like your latest, album-length recording is Burning the Deal. I thoroughly enjoyed “Big Plane” which to me, again evokes not only McMurtry, but also the Finnish folk duo (no longer so, I’ve been told), Ninni and Mika (whose great album Powder Burn was recorded and engineered by Amy Helm at The Barn). Is Burning the Deal your latest? Where can folks, including newspaper writers not of Finnish heritage, find your music?

Kiitos!

EK:

Thanks much! That’s the newest. There’s a new one coming very soon. I’ve been so busy working on musical projects for others that my own work has taken a back seat, but only to refine it slowly. I’m fine with the time it’s taken (four years). I’ve not listened to Ninni and Mika but now I will: thanks for that as well.  I was honored to play with Amy Holm once but not at the barn. Hopefully, one day …

My website, www.erikkoskinen.com has an online store and all the streaming platforms have all the records. I love to sell them at live shows. Coming soon to a town near you!  Kiitos! Kiitos!

(This interview first appeared in the February 2024 issue of the Finnish American Reporter.)

Nostromo by Joseph Conrad (2011. Tantor Audible. ISBN 978-1853261749)

I’m a Conrad fan. Victory. Heart of Darkness, his short stories. I’ve read and loved them all. But I hadn’t heard of, much less listened to, Nostromo: A Tale of the Seaboard, until my book club picked it as the January selection. Again, given I’ve been spending rehab time at the Y track in Hermantown, I chose to listen, rather than read, this novel. After many hours on the track, with the weights, and on the exercise bike, here’s my take.

The headline says it as succinctly as I can. If this was a debut novel, given it takes the first one-third of the book before the story begins to pique one’s interest, I’m not sure a modern day first-time novelist could get this story published. I’ve been told that editors/agents in this hurly-burly world give a book-at most-five pages, to make a favorable impression. Here, if that test is applied to Nostromo, the novel would be doomed. But it isn’t. Why? Because Conrad wasn’t some neophyte handing an agent or an editor his first manuscript. By 1904, when this book hit the shelves, Conrad, whose remarkable personal story deserves an entire book itself, Heart of Darkness, Typhoon, and Conrad’s other noteworthy works of fiction had already made their marks, meaning Conrad had the attention of the world’s readers when Nostromo debuted.

This is a very complex novel in terms of multiple characters, including the title actor, Nostromo, the leader of the the longshoremen in the fictional port town of Sulaco, in the Occidental Province, in the nation of Costagauna (a stand-in for Columbia). But the plot itself is relatively simple and straight forward once Nostromo is introduced and the action begins. Again, patience is required for a reader to meet up with the dashing former Italian sailor, who, while admired by everyone in the port city for his pluck, bravery, and daring-a-do, is not one of the city’s elites.

A revolution is taking place. A rebel army is threatening. The region surrounding the port is home to a productive silver mine and Nostromo is charged with captaining a boatload of silver away from the rebels’ hands. I won’t spoil the plot here by divulging what becomes of the sailor, his companion, or the treasure. I’ll leave it to you to turn the pages and come to the book’s conclusion before making up your own mind up about whether, as some contemporaries of Conrad opined, this is best work.

All things considered, worth the listen or the read.

4 stars out of 5

Peace

Mark

I’m a dyed-in-the-wool Liberal and proud of that label. So, take my musings with a grain of salt.

Recently, I’ve been troubled by a segment of America continuing to support the former Occupant and his vision of the future for nation. As a retired judge, former prosecutor, historian, political scientist, and author, I believe the man has proven himself to be unqualified for public office. His rhetoric and actions during his presidency (and since his electoral defeat) have only solidified my perception. With that perspective in mind, I’d offer the following as a way to truly make American great again.

SUGGESTION ONE: READ THE NEWS

I’m not talking about scanning blogs or posts or headlines constantly appearing like freshly popped popcorn on the internet. I’m talking about subscribing to and reading your daily newspaper. It might be the printed version. Or it might be online. Or it might be, as my newspaper is, a hybrid. Whatever format fits your lifestyle is fine by me. But it’s critical, if we actually want to make America great again, that we support, read, and consider our daily newspapers. Without them (and they’re disappearing faster than moose in Minnesota) we’re left with local gossip and unverified rumors as our guides.

SUGGESTION TWO: WATCH AND/OR LISTEN TO LOCAL BROADCAST NEWS

Turn on your television (or, if in the car, the radio) and supplement the news your get from your local newspaper with actual, non-biased, reporting. This means avoiding MSNBC, CNN, Fox, NewsMax, or similar agenda-driven networks. On the radio, that’s a hard ask since much of Am radio is dominated by Right Wing Talk. I prefer PBS and Public Radio. Why? Not because there’s an elitist, Liberal bias to such outlets but because they drill deep into issues. And, nearly every night, I supplement public media reports with local television news as well as national news from the Big Three, ensuring that my bank of knowledge is wide and varied and based upon fact, not fiction.

SUGGESTION THREE: MEET CHALLENGES RAISED BY THOSE WHO DON’T AGREE WITH YOU

Recently, a friend asked me to watch The Fall of Minneapolis, a film concerning the conviction of Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd. Five minutes into the two-hour YouTube video, I was ready to pull the plug. It was obvious the producer/director had a bias, one that, having spent considerable time following the trials concerning the involved officers, I knew was not based upon fact. But my wife, a mental health practitioner and a very wise lady, convinced me to watch the whole film before casting judgment. So, I did. It was a painful exercise, one filled with half-truths, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and bias. But in the end, she was right. If you’re asked to read something or watch something by a well-meaning friend, even if you’re suspicious of what’s behind the information, do so.

SUGGESTION FOUR: DIG DEEPER

In today’s social-media-driven world, it’s easy to see a headline, accept it as gospel, and move on. Don’t. I’ll confess that, from time to time, I log onto Huff Post or similar Liberal pages (or watch a short clip from “Morning Joe”).  But I learned long ago that both sides of the political divide like to “gild the lily” as Grandmother Munger used to say. A number of times, I’ve read a headline on a Liberal media site, said to myself, That’s interesting, and opened the article only to find that the hook exaggerated the facts. My caution to you is, regardless of whether it’s a piece by Hannity or Scarborough (or anyone else) read, watch, or listen to the offering in its entirety. Don’t rely upon a headline, or worse yet, someone else’s interpretation of the information, for the basis of your opinion

SUGGESTION FIVE: READ BOOKS

No, not mine (unless you want to!) I’m talking about investing time, either listening to audio books, reading books on Kindle, or reading a book the old-fashioned way. And in this vein, here’s a thought. Before getting on the band wagon to ban a book in a school or library, why not actually read what’s been written before allowing censorship by a school board, a governor, or some other authority figure to ban someone’s words? One school district in Florida is, at present, considering dictionaries and encyclopedias as books worthy of such consideration. Really? That’s damn scary stuff to anyone, Liberal or Conservative. Maybe Webster’s including the term “transgender” somehow will magically turn Florida children into furries. I doubt it but I’d suggest that, before such things are accepted, citizens actually read and weigh in on books being scrutinized. And while I’m at it, did you know that half of our population (the female half) buys 80% of all the books sold in America? That’s unacceptable, men. We need to be reading, learning, and growing regardless of our age, gender, or political affiliation. So read, gosh darn it, and hopefully some of your reading includes history, biography, fiction, and poetry; not just the latest tomes from political pundits or celebrities.

SUGGESTION SIX: STOP WEARING POLITICAL SIGNS AS CLOTHING

In our home, there’s an old John Kerry for president ball cap hanging on a hook. No one wears it. Not out of shame or remorse but out of respect for others who might not view the world as our family does. I also have a “46” tee (in honor of Biden’s win) in my closet but only wear it around the house. Not out to dinner. Not to church (yes, some Liberals actually go to church!). Not to the local Y. Not to the mall. Same is true of my “Shut Up Man!” tee (my favorite Biden debate response). While I love Uncle Joe and want him to serve another four years, I don’t need to parade my support around town. My suggestion to my Conservative friends? If you own a MAGA hat, sweatshirt, or tee, maybe consider leaving it at home rather than trying to stir up an argument. Sure, I get there’s a right to free speech. I’m not saying anyone should be prevented from expressing their politics. I’m just saying wearing a political billboard in public  (not talking about at campaign events here) isn’t helping us to talk things through. You won’t sway me with your tee shirt and I won’t sway you with my ball cap.

SUGGSTION SEVEN: TAKE DOWN THE FLAGS

Folks in my neck of the woods continued flying flags supporting the ex-President for months following January 6^th. During the 2020 election, my wife and I spent time in an Arizona RV park surrounded by such flags. Did it make me feel uncomfortable to be in the minority? Sure. Did I object or start arguments with my fellow campers? Of course not. And after the election, after Biden won the popular vote and eclipsed the prior Occupant’s “electoral landslide” (his words, not mine), the next time we were in the park, the flags were gone. We can have a debate about the validity of the election results. We may disagree as to whether the events of January 6^th, including the actions of the former president, constitute fomenting an insurrection. But I’d prefer letting juries decide such things. Continuing to fly MAGA flags after that terrible January day isn’t fostering productive dialogue. So, instead of flying such a flag at your cabin, from your boat, or on your pickup, take it down. Invite me over for coffee and conversation. But be prepared: I won’t allow you to rest on fiction; I’ll ask for the sources behind your positions and your views.

SUGGESTION EIGHT: WALK A MILE IN SOMEONE ELSE’S SHOES

This is my biggest criticism of the former Occupant. He, in my humble view, is entirely devoid of empathy. He cannot, will not, place himself in the shoes of another. Christ encouraged us, throughout the Gospels, to do just that. You don’t have to be a Christian to accept that, before you cast the first stone, you should look at yourself. As an example, every one of us (with the exception of descendants of African slaves brought here against their wills; or Native Americans on whose land we now tread) are the progeny of immigrants. Yes, the southern border needs addressing. But before you decide how that should be accomplished, do the hard work of reading up and listening to and watching news reports covering the issue. Do the same for any issue you’re concerned about. Then, as Christ would, put yourself in the shoes of the people being affected by the issue.

SUGGESTION NINE: DO THE HARD WORK

In my vocation as a novelist/writer, I find myself relying upon the internet to research events, people, and places. As I do so, I’m constantly checking the source I’m consulting against other sources to ensure I’m not relying upon an article, movie, clip, or book based upon magical thinking or revisionist history. As an example, I’m currently working on a novel based upon my Slovenian heritage. In  nutshell, I’m trying to understand what happened in the Balkans from 1918 through present day. In doing research, I must constantly guard against bias, be it Slovenian, Serbian, Croatian, or Bosnian, as to what happened and why. To do so takes hard study and in-depth probing. It might seem like a lot to ask you to be similarly thorough with respect to your political views. But, if you’re casting a vote for a candidate based upon his or her views, upon his or her perceptions of reality, don’t you owe it to America (and to your kids and grandkids) to do the hard work and make sure what you’re being sold is the real deal and not a catch phrase based upon fiction or bias?

SUGGESTION TEN: BE INVOLVED AND VOTE

I may not like your position on an issue. I may not support your views of a candidate or a platform or where America is headed. That’s OK. Our Founders didn’t always agree with one another when they created, out of whole cloth, the Great American Experiment. But if you take the above to heart and choose to support or vote for a party or cause or candidate after you’ve done your best to ferret out truth from fiction, I can live with that.

Peace

Mark

Recently, an old friend, whom I admire both for his wisdom and pragmatism, asked me to watch the documentary, The Fall of Minneapolis. After watching the first five minutes, wherein the intentions of the folks behind the film are made abundantly clear (the main premise being that the conviction of Derek Chauvin for the intentional murder of George Floyd was a sham), I emailed my friend and said, “No, I’m not going to watch the rest. I already know where it’s headed.” But my wife, a very thoughtful, retired mental health professional, convinced me I needed to watch the entire documentary to come to a judgment regarding its merit. So I did.

Before I discuss the factual and legal fallacies inherent in the film, let me raise a couple preliminary points.

I’m in the midst of reading the complete works of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. I have, for the better part of a year, been steeped in King’s message of nonviolent change. I’m at the point in King’s journey where he’s dealing with advocates of Black Power: younger, more strident Black men and women tired of the slow, steady, drip-drip of attaining civil rights. King watched the Watts and Detroit and other riots of the mid-60s, his people fueled by rage and anxiety and poverty and hate to destroy the cities they lived in due to frustration at the pace of racial reform. As the riots unfolded, King believed his way, the nonviolent path to racial justice in America, was in jeopardy. I write this so you understand: I don’t minimize or condone what the rioters did in Minneapolis or any other American city following Mr. Floyd’s death. Violent crimes were committed and the folks who committed those crimes should be held accountable. In addition, much of the film deals with the angst and heartache and loss and sadness and fear experienced by the Minneapolis police officers who worked out of the 3rd Precinct and were forced to retreat from their beloved station house. They were heroes, doing heroic things to try to keep order and peace in a neighborhood on fire. The officers failed in their attempt to keep the peace, not due to a lack of courage or will but due to overwhelming odds against them. There’s no shame in that and I honor their sacrifice and their service. 

When I conduct historical research or in-person interviews for my books (or when I worked as a judge and attorney) I am and was cognizant of the training I received as a college student working on research assignments handed out by my history and political science professors, as well as the research protocols I learned as a law student, legal assistant, and full-time legal researcher while attending William Mitchell College of Law. In any such enterprise, the fundamental questions to be asked are:

1. What is the source of any background material?; and
2. What biases do the witnesses and/or the individuals (including me!) asking questions bring to an interview?

The film begins with footage of the arrest of George Floyd. Let’s remember that Mr. Floyd had not been accused of committing a violent crime. He was accused (by a shop owner) of attempting to pass a counterfeit $20 bill; a financial offense. For certain, passing/possessing a fake $20 bill can be charged as a felony. But the question I’ve never been able to answer is whether Floyd knew the bill was fake. That’s something any prosecutor charging Mr. Floyd would want to know and the answer, so far as I’m aware, died with Mr. Floyd. Given the nature of the allegation, the interaction between the suspect (Floyd) and the officers (Chauvin and others on scene) should, all things being equal, have been a routine matter. For a number of reasons, it wasn’t.

There’s no question Floyd was high on illegal narcotics, including fentanyl and meth. That combination didn’t assist his cognition or how he responded to officers. But in the initial interaction, it’s clear Floyd isn’t verbally abusive or cursing or disrespecting the officers. He’s mostly polite, if excited, and largely cooperative with commands to leave the van he’s seated in. The video shows at least one officer approaching the parked van with his handgun raised and pointed at Floyd. I understand officers believed something was going on inside the van (cops call such behaviors “furtive movements”) which made them wary. But a cadre of uniformed cops approaching a Black man, with at least one gun raised, shouting the “F word” at the top of their lungs would be enough to make even the most compliant and calm citizen nervous. 

Additionally, young Black men have been taught for generations that policemen, Black, white, purple or orange, are not necessarily their friends. This urban understanding is historical and long-standing. I have four sons. I’ve never had “The Talk” with my sons about potential interactions with police because, well, they’re white and that discussion is something Black parents have with their sons. That Mr. Floyd becomes more and more upset, as no officer on the scene takes the time to calmly defuse the situation and explain that Floyd is suspected of a financial crime, might not be understandable to me, an old white man. But it’s understandable to George Floyd and generations of Black men.

Let’s also remember that the Minneapolis Police Department has a history of misconduct based upon race. Remember: this is the same department, that, when dealing with an intoxicated Native American, saw its officers shove the man into the trunk of a squad car for the ride back to the precinct. That incident, and countless others, have cost the city money in civil settlements over the years. That history, well known throughout the state, is part of a larger legacy of racial profiling and mistreatment of citizens of Color by the Minneapolis police. It’s not me saying that: it’s the United States Department of Justice and State of Minnesota agencies saying such is the case in their official findings.

Back to the film. 

With respect to source material, the movie is less than two hours long. Testimony, instructions, and arguments in Chauvin’s jury trial took more than a month. For the first fifteen minutes or so of the movie, we’re provided snippets of body camera footage from cameras worn by three of the four responding officers. So I raise this question: Why is there zero, repeat zero, footage from Derek Chauvin’s body cam included in this film? After all, that footage was viewed by the jury and presumably, if they did their job, jurors considered that evidence in arriving at their verdict. To this researcher, reporter, trial lawyer, and judge, that’s a glaring, selective omission and, likely, by its absence, an admission that the footage doesn’t support the film’s political agenda.

Additionally, the journalist on camera conducting interviews needs some discussion as well. The photo at the top of this piece is of former WCCO reporter, Liz Collins: the face and voice behind the film. It’s important to understand that Ms. Collin is married to the former head of the Minneapolis Police Federation. After a lengthy career as a cop and union steward, the husband, Bob Kroll, found himself under scrutiny for a number of things, not the least of which was wearing an arm patch (off-duty) supporting white supremacy. He left his post in January of 2021 and, in 2023, settled a civil lawsuit filed by the ACLU regarding his actions following the murder of Mr. Floyd. The financial terms of that agreement are sealed but the settlement includes a provision that Kroll not seek employment with any law enforcement agency located in Hennepin, Ramsey, or Anoka Counties. This husband and wife connection, a clear conflict of journalistic interest for Ms. Collin, is undisclosed in the film. 

Further, while the fact a book about the Chauvin trial and the violent riots following Floyd’s murder (They’re Lying: The Media, the Left, and the Death of George Floyd) is referenced at the film’s conclusion, nowhere are viewers told that the person conducting the interviews and the person who penned the book is Ms. Collin. And it’s curious to me that Collin’s name, unlike the names of witnesses she interviewed, never appears beneath her during the film (as least so far as I can recall). Wouldn’t it be important, in assessing bias of the reporter asking questions, to know she’s married to a cop (and not just any cop but the head of the police union) and that she has already, as indicated by the title of her book, made up her mind regarding who is the real victim in her saga?

Now, let’s examine the folks who speak on camera and support the film’s conclusion that Chauvin did nothing wrong. Collin parades ex-Minneapolis officers, sergeants, lieutenants, and the mothers of two of the convicted officers to establish a number of points of view. Understand: all of this narrative would be irrelevant and inadmissible in a criminal trial. Just like a defendant’s prior arrests or an officer’s prior instances of excessive force and/or misconduct are, under general precepts of evidence, irrelevant and not fodder for jury consumption, so too are the opinions of the officers and the mothers shown on camera. I wasn’t at the trial and I didn’t follow it day to day. But I know it’s likely that both sides presented evidence regarding whether the “hold” used by Chauvin was proper police procedure under Minneapolis rules and guidelines. Such evidence would have been presented by experts (training officers) who reviewed the manuals, training videos, and other evidence of what Chauvin was actually taught. Both sides would’ve called their experts: the state, to show Chauvin’s conduct was beyond the pale; the defense, to show Chauvin did what he was taught to do. The officers who appear in the film (other than a self-serving audio by Chauvin from his prison cell: “I did nothing wrong”), so far as I know, don’t have the expertise to provide such evidence. If they did, they would’ve qualified as experts and been allowed to present their opinions to the jury.

More broadly, who and what is Alpha News, the outlet behind this documentary? According to reputable media watchdog groups (e.g., www.factcheck.org) Alpha News is:

• A conservative news outlet founded in 2015 by Tea Party Activists;
• A media organization with questionable veracity and reliability based upon poor sourcing of information, promotion of conspiracy theories, anti-Islamic propaganda, bias, and a lack of transparency as to its funding and ownership.

On the company’s website, Liz Collin is listed as a principal reporter/journalist working for and at Alpha. I don’t know about you but I don’t get my news from CNN, MSNBC, Fox, or any other cable/streaming outlet. I get my news from PBS, the three major networks, our local TV and radio news outlets, and mainstream newspapers.

Much is made of “missing” or “withheld” body cam videos. The innuendo is that someone: the AG, the police chief, Mayor Frey, President Biden, Governor Waltz, the Court, or perhaps Pope Francis, deliberately excluded relevant body cam footage from the jurors’ review of evidence. No. Close scrutiny of the film establishes that, while that allegation is made at the beginning of the documentary, what in fact was excluded from jury consideration was body cam video taken after George Floyd died. The videos referenced are shown towards the end of the film and include efforts by Officer Kueng to apply CPR in the ambulance (but Floyd was already dead) and footage depicting conversations held in the ambulance cab between Kueng and an EMT. None of that would be relevant at trial given the charges involved murder, which had already occurred. 

The film also includes an interview of a nurse anesthetist. In her discussion of the case, she states that: a. a mistake was made by the EMTs with respect to providing oxygen to Mr. Floyd; and b. she has an opinion regarding George Floyd’s cause of death. Again, the nurse being interviewed did not, so far as I know, testify as to either issue. Why? Even though, as a nurse, she may be qualified to give certain opinion testimony in a trial, her views regarding perceived EMT errors, while interesting, are not probative as to why Floyd died unless she has the necessary expertise to establish some causal connection between such errors and his death. Further, nurses don’t testify in courtrooms regarding causes of death. MEs, coroners, and pathologists carry that evidentiary burden. She may have a personal opinion as to cause of death based upon her background but she doesn’t have the necessary experience, education, or training to testify about the same in front of a jury. 

Collin also interviews a general surgeon on similar topics. In a telling exchange, the doctor admits his views are based upon hearsay (“I’m told …). He also downplays the fact that the autopsy, which found the actions of Derek Chauvin (kneeling on Floyd’s sternum/neck area for 7-9 minutes) likely caused Floyd’s fatal heart attack, had its conclusions peer reviewed. That review found the ME’s conclusions (testified to at trial) were supported by the science behind the medicine. Finally, the general surgeon, who might be able to testify regarding cause of death but who, to my knowledge did not do so at trial, indicates the involvement of the FBI in the investigation into Mr. Floyd’s murder is a “red flag”; intimating that there’s sculduggery afoot to wrongfully convict an innocent man (Chauvin). 

The film makes a great fuss about whether “MRT”, an arrest technique described in Minneapolis police training manuals and policies, is what Derek Chauvin applied when he knelt on Floyd’s neck/shoulder/chest area for 7-9 minutes. In the movie, officer after officer sympathetic to Chauvin makes the claim that MRT includes the maneuver/technique deployed by Chauvin. However, no interviewee is able to supply Collin with a video or a diagram from Minneapolis police training materials depicting the technique. Not even Chauvin’s mother, who holds up two manuals (owned by her son) for the camera, is able to open either manual and prove that MRT, as described in the manuals, includes the hold Chauvin used on George Floyd. There’s a still photograph in the video demonstrating the technique but we have no idea where it came from and, if it wasn’t from Minneapolis training materials, the trial judge would’ve barred it from jury consideration as irrelevant. That some other department, in some other city or state or county allows the technique and teaches it isn’t the issue. A similar, grainy, hard to see line drawing of the technique likely ran up against the same evidentiary bar. But it must be repeated again: the manuals introduced at trial, the testimony that the jury saw and heard regarding MRT, apparently did not establish that what Derek Chauvin was doing to George Floyd for 7-9 minutes was, at the time, an approved Minneapolis police procedure. 

Which leads to this question. If Derek Chauvin was trained by the Minneapolis police department in a technique he says was part and parcel of MRT, why didn’t he explain that to the jury? Sure. Jurors are admonished by the judge at the end of the case that the state must prove a defendant’s guilt; that it’s absolutely within a defendant’s right not to testify and that his or her silence cannot be weighed against the defendant. And yet, if things were as Mr. Chauvin believes, that all he was doing was his job, following protocol, using approved techniques to subdue Mr. Floyd, why not tell the jury? And, while you’re it, tell them, that while you were just doing your job, you now regret a man lost his life in the process. Those things didn’t happen because Chauvin decided not to clear the air.

There’s a hint in the video that Derek Chauvin couldn’t get a fair trial in Minneapolis given pre-trial publicity and the riots that engulfed the 3rd Precinct and other parts of North Minneapolis. Ask yourselves this question: given a state court case cannot be moved out of the state where the crime was allegedly committed, what far reach of Minnesota was not affected by the murder of George Floyd and its attendant publicity? What other jurisdiction within Minnesota could provide the necessary security, jury facilities, and a similar jury pool (including jurors of Color)? In the end, it’s within a trial judge’s discretion to grant or deny a motion to change venue (I both granted and denied such motions as a jurist) and if Judge Cahill got it wrong, the Minnesota Court of Appeals, the Minnesota Supreme Court, and the United States Supreme Court all have the ability to vacate a wrongful conviction, grant Mr. Chauvin a new trial, and order that the second trial be moved. The reviewing courts declined to do any of those things. 

A couple of other observations gleaned by a fact-finder of forty years’ experience. One of the allegations, not necessarily proven during the Floyd trial but one advanced in political, social, and cultural circles, is that the Minneapolis police department had, over considerable time, demonstrated racism during interactions with young Black men. Racism is a strong word. I don’t know what’s in a man or woman’s heart. But one of the officers in the film, when discussing Floyd’s situation, uses the phrase, “Well, if a person is colored …” That caught my attention as it’s the sort of language my ignorant paternal grandmother used when discussing Black folks. She often, in a very pejorative way, called Blacks, “coloreds” or “darkies”. Both terms carry connotations of prejudice. Then too, Officer Keung, his mother and other interviewees spend time pointing out that Keung is Black and that he’s listed as the arresting officer. But, as other police officers (including respected chiefs of police) have pointed out in the aftermath of the Floyd verdict, the fact Keung is Black doesn’t and didn’t insulate him from becoming part of the Blue Wall. As an officer responding to a situation where a superior (Chauvin) was acting in a fashion not in keeping with “protect and serve”, it doesn’t matter if Leung is Black, Asian, Native American or white. It matters he was complicit in a man’s death at the hands of a fellow officer. 

There’s a scene towards the end of the film where an officer is standing next to his or her (the footage is grainy) squad car and a citizen throws a hub cap. The cap strikes the officer in the head and drops him/her to the ground. No explanation or context is included. What’s depicted is a heinous and unprovoked attack. But stop the video. Rewind it (as I did). Study the emblem on the squad car. Study the writing on the driver’s door. Compare it to the earlier views of the marked squads that responded to the counterfeit bill call. To me, the emblems don’t match. The writing on the car doors doesn’t match. To me, the incident shown is yet another attempt to advance an agenda. That’s not reportage or an honest exploration of the facts. 

A last word. I’m deeply troubled that, if one clicks on Ms. Collin’s book title on Amazon and looks at the ratings and reviews, one finds universal praise for her work. No, this isn’t my ego rising up; my hackles being raised by a competing author’s success. I wish Ms. Collin well in her writerly pursuits. But it’s deeply disturbing to this old man-someone whose professional career was an attempt, perhaps misguided, to attain justice for the ordinary folks I represented as a lawyer and the citizens who appeared before me as a judge-that facts no longer seem to matter in our democracy.

Here’s what you need to do to prevent being hoodwinked by such faux news. Stop. Consider the source of the information. Then, dig deeper. Go behind the headlines. Uncover the reality concealed by fantasy.

The truth is out there waiting to be discovered. I am certain of that.

Peace

Judge Mark Munger (Retired)

See also:

https://thebradentontimes.com/stories/letter-fall-of-minneapolis-documentary,68870?

Here’s the unedited version of my interview in FAR with Finnish American author, Tim Jollymore.

MM:

Kiitos for doing this, Tim. Let’s start with your surname. Jollymore certainly doesn’t seem to be Finnish and yet, we run into each other at all these Finn Fests and events! Give the readers of FAR a brief explanation of your heritage and how Finnishness fits into your upbringing.

TJ:  Both my first and most recent novel (Listener in the Snow and The Nothing That Is Not There, respectively) investigate this conundrum of identity: How can a fellow named Jollymore be Finnish?

The short answer, and one very incomplete, is that once in America, my grandmother Ruth Martin of Kokkola, Finland, married the immigrant Andrew Lumppio. My mother, born in  Cloquet, 1915 then, was as Finnish as her mother and father were.

Had Elsie Elizabeth, my mother, met and married a Finn, I would have fully identified as the same, but then entered the handsome, half-Irish, French Huguenot and German John Jollymore, my father, who was as proud of his own heritage as he was unfamiliar with mom’s. The result was that the Jollymore in me was raised up and the Lumppio in me was suppressed, although  never extinguished.

Being Finnsh, then, was more an aspiration, more a search, more a mystery to me than it was a belonging, a surrounding of culture, or familiarity with  practices and foods that were Finnish at their root. It was not until adulthood that I tasted (and made) pulla, had enjoyed a wood-fired sauna, spent a summer at the cabin, or had spoken even a word of the language.

In a sense, the search for identity that Tatty Langille, my hero in the books cited above, is represented in my own life: a choosing  among things Finnish over the things of the wider European tradition.

MM:

You’re a writer and a playwright who’s written a number of novels. What writers have influenced your work? Who do you consider to be your mentors? Are any of the works distinctly Finnish in culture, history, plot, or character?

TJ:

I grew up an English major, so, of course, I’ve read the cannon that was current, say, in 1968, but I seldom now think of or mention anyone but Fitzgerald and George Orwell. Writers creating work since then have more meaning for me now: Sigred Nunez (The Last of Her Kind), Paul Auster (Leviathan and The New York Trilogy), Cormac McCarthy, and the Scandinavians: Knut Hamsun, Laxness, Petterson, Gaarder  and Knausgard.

I single out Diego Maroni’s New Finnish Grammar (a novel) which takes up Finnish identity in a most fascinating and surprising story of engaging and learning culture from an absolutely blank slate, something my own Finnish identity lives within.

MM:

You’re presently located in California. Could you give the readers of FAR a history of your education, employment, and background as to how you ended up on the West Coast?

TJ:

I grew up in my dad’s town, Proctor, and my mother’s town, Cloquet, then spent thirteen years in Duluth, half of that in college at UMD. I earned my MA degree at Duluth. I never intended to leave the area and have always and do now love the town. But Honeywell, Inc. had plans for me in Minneapolis and San Francisco. The company so well respected in Minnesota, was just another pretty face on the coast and our relationship did not last. Finally, I found and rededicated myself to teaching, Advanced Placement English. Teaching writing proved an easy step into professional writing. Since 2014 I’ve published seven books of fiction as well as publishing the fiction and poetry of others.

MM:

Finns Way is your publishing enterprise. Could you explain the origination of Finns Way, the ins and outs of self-publishing, and what are the benefits and/or downsides to being your own publisher. What advice would you give to would-be writers who are thinking about going the route of self-publication.

TJ:

I publish my own work and the work of two other authors, one’s a poet. Using my own imprint allows my work to be read. Had I insisted on finding an agent or other publisher, my words would likely have been less widely distributed.  A cursory glance on-line tells us that of five million titles  published annually nearly four million are self-publications. The main difference will be that the self-published works sell fewer copies each (mainly because of lack of promotional funding) but in aggregate own 30-40% of the market. Traditional publishers are certainly better at promoting new titles than a new self-published author can ever hope to be. Self-publication, though, opens more door to a variety of voices.

MM:

Have you visited Finland? If so, what were your impressions of the country, its people, its history and geography? If not, any plans to do so in the future?

TJ:

I have spent time in Helsinki, Truro, and Kokkola. “Progressive” and proud, but not in an overweening or obnoxious way, is how I’d characterize Finland and the Finnish. Left to their own devices the Finns are ingenious and highly creative folk.  Unfortunately, the history of the country and people is replete with interference (Swedish, Russian, and German) from outside. I most admire the Finnish dedication to excellence in education and support of the newborn citizens of their republic. I was able to participate in this last by sending a “baby box” to my son before the birth of my grandson. He’s an honorary Finn and 12%-er.

MM:

Your novel, Listener in the Snow, draws from Native American mysticism and religion. Do you have indigenous heritage? If not, what are the drawbacks to a non-Native utilizing Native American characters in a fictional work? If so, what from that heritage to you draw upon to formulate the plot and characters of the book?

TJ:

Any author works both within and outside of their zone of comfort. Far from gender or cultural appropriation, the active author must strive to characterize and authentically portray characters of another sex, age, culture, or set of interests. As long as same-gender authors and writers working within their cultural milieu are promoted, there is less danger in a majority imposing its understanding of gender and culture on others. Leave the judgment to quality and depth of the character and narrative.

MM:

What are you currently working on? Is there a snippet of your work-in-progress, maybe a short scene or exchange of dialogue, you’d be willing to share with our readers? When do you expect the work to be published? Where can the new book, and all your other books, be purchased by readers?

TJ: In the last few years, I took a turn at something very different: The Final Confession of Saint Augustine, an historical novel set in the north African 5^th century. It is a scholarly work with dynamite plot and character twists. My challenge, beside historical accuracy, was to portray the characters both from the historical contemporaneous standpoint, that is to show Augustine, for instance, as a Catholic church father, a flesh and blood man, and as an interior character with the usual blindsides, fears, and weaknesses. That work has been warmly received.

Last year, while touring with The Final Confession of Saint Augustine, a classmate of mine from Cloquet High asked, “Tim, why haven’t you written a sequel to Listener in the Snow? We all wonder what happened to those people.” After thinking about it a day or two, I committed myself to give it a try. Within nine months, The Nothing That Is Not There was ready for publication. Lovers of Listener will be pleased.

MM:

Last question. What’s on your reading and signing calendar for the coming days? Any appearances back home in Minnesota?

TJ:

I appeared at Finn Fest 2023 in July. Coming up are events at Hakensack, MN, The Art and Book Festival, August 12, at North Country Booksellers in White Bear Lake, MN on August 19, Chapter 2 Books in Hudson, Wisconsin, August 26, a CHS class party, August 19, Ely’s Harvest Moon Festival, September 8-10, and events at The Coffee Landing, International Falls, the Thunderbird Lodge, Rainy Lake, MN, and Nelson’s Resort, Crane Lake, MN. I leave for California in September. Finn Fest 2024 is a likelihood.

Tito: The Story from Inside by Milovan Djilas (1981. Phoenix. ISBN 1-84212-047-6)

In my continuing research regarding my manuscript, Slovenci (The Slovenians), I picked up my second book by one of Josip Broz’s (Tito’s) understudies. Here, Djilas, writing after his fall from grace (1954) chronicles Yugoslavia’s wartime hero in terms of personality, traits, and actions. Djilas carefully avoids sounding like he has a bone to pick with Tito, despite being removed from office, incarcerated (twice), and reduced to a mere private citizen because of his “anti-Communist”, revisionist views. In essence, the journalist and one-time Partisan ends up in Tito’s doghouse because he believes that more personal freedoms, both individual and economic, need to be incorporated into the Yugoslav political equation, especially after Stalin’s death changes the interplay between the countries. 

Tito, who was pragmatic enough not to completely nationalize the entirety of the agricultural output of the united nation, and who, for a time, tolerated Djilas and others gently questioning the direction of the country after its break with Stalin in 1948, finally had enough dissent. His retribution, disguised and carried out by other functionaries, left one of his closest advisors in prison, shamed, and forever marked as unpatriotic. But through it all, the author manages to maintain sufficient distance from his own story to paint a thorough and fascinating portrait of a man whose persona held disparate peoples together until his death. 

Djilas is wise enough to understand that, with Tito’s passing, the dream of Yugoslavia would likely come to an end. And it did.

4 stars out of 5.

Peace

Mark

Surface Displacements by Sheila Packa (2022. Wildwood River Press. ISBN 978-1-947787-36-0

I woke to an acre of mayflies

a lace of water lilies and weeds

before and after

nudges of waves

coming to and from the island

a cloud on the water, thick pollen afloat

and lines crossing.

Confession time. I know the poet. She knows me and has even been a pre-reader for Sukulaiset. So take my review here with a grain of salt. But I have to say, friend or not, I thoroughly enjoyed my time with Ms. Packa as encapsulated in her latest volume of poems. Why?

First, she carefully and dutifully explores NE MN, where both of us have lived the majority of our lives. It takes someone who is born (or has spent extensive time in) the gabbro and peat and muskeg and open pit mines and black water to do this place justice. And she has. Second, the title cleverly sets the stage for an examination of the displacements we, as northerners living in a land of cold and snow and mining (and, sometimes seemingly incomprehensibly, wilderness) and our ancestors, be they Finnish (Packa’s) or mine (Slovenian) commonly experience. One might argue that her musings about our “neck of the woods” containing three continental divides (the Arctic Ocean to the north, the Atlantic Ocean to the east, and the Gulf of Mexico to the south), given the erosive power of the rivers raging to those compass points, forms a third displacement, one based upon geographical orientation and watery flow.

I sat in my easy chair in my writing studio over a period of a couple of weeks inhaling these little gems of verse and wisdom. I was unhappy my time with this work ended so quickly. That said, this is my first review typed at my new stand-up desk in my studio space, a feature that my newly fused and titaniumized low back sorely (pun intended) needed. All things considered, fused spine and all, I’m happy to give the newest effort from Duluth’s former poet-laureate a big thumbs up.

4 and 1/2 stars out of 5.

Peace

Mark

Land Without Justice by Milovan Djilas (1958. Harcourt. ISBN 978-1-15-648117)

Just so you know. I’m in the process of trying to write a second historical novel regarding Slovenia from the 1930s to present day. My first effort, The Legacy, was well received but I feel, in retrospect, taht novel was a bit too sentimental in its treatment of the rise and fall of Tito, Yugoslavia’s dictator who controlled the fate of the Balkans until his death. In my second attempt at writing the Great Slovenian American novel, I’m trying to paint with a broader brush and understand why, within a decade of Tito’s demise, Yugoslavia ceased to be and the region once again found itself plunged into terror and war. In any event, I’m reading some of the literature of Milovan Djilas, one of Tito’s trusted lieutenants who, in 1954, ended up falling from grace to spend decades in prison and/or under house arrest. This is the first of two Djilas books I’m using as background for the middle portion of my novel, the timeframe being post-war through Tito’s death. 

This is an interesting read in that, rather than focus on Yugoslavia as a whole, it’s a patchwork of anecdotes concerning the author’s upbringing (and his family’s history) in the tiny state of Montenegro. Essentially, one gets, from reading this irregular narrative, that Montenegrins share with their Serbian brothers and sisters a history of repression and prejudice at the hands of the Ottomans, who ruled both nation-states into the late 1800s. This, in the author’s skilled prose, begets atrocities on both sides of the ledger: cruelty and nastiness permeates virtually every corner of Montenegrin and Serbian society during the timeframe of the tale. From that standpoint, it makes what happened in 1991, when the federal state so carefully managed and nurtured by Tito and his Communists, a union of six Balkan states, including Slovenia, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia, Croatia, and Macedonia, blew apart, understandable. Certainly not laudable. But understandable.

I found this book to be a valuable addition to my understanding of the circumstances confronting the Balkans before, during, and after the Great War. But given the slightly disjointed nature of the storytelling, it’s not quite the classic I’d hoped for.

3 and 1/2 Stars out of Five.

Peace