Seanan McGuire’s MIDDLEGAME: A reviewlet

I am probably going to read at least seven new-to-me Seanan McGuire books in 2019(*); she is, I think, probably the most prolific author I am aware of, and gets mentioned fairly frequently around here. The last book of hers that I talked about a lot was Into the Drowning Deep, written as Mira Grant, a book that at the time I called her best book and which made it into #4 on my end-of-2018 Best Of list.

SO, yeah. ‘Bout that.

Drowning Deep is still my favorite of her books, I think, as personal preferences go, but it’s no longer her best book. Middlegame now takes that honor, as it’s a nearly-as-entertaining story with a frankly much more complicated theme and structure than any of her previous work; McGuire is, and this is not a criticism, a fairly straightforward author, which is one of the things that makes me so partial to her work, and Middlegame is anything but a completely straightforward book. It is, frankly, the second book I’ve read this year that I would describe as a level-up by the author, and in fact she talks about how it took her forever to decide she was good enough to write this book in the afterword.

So why am I calling this a “reviewlet” and not a review, since we’ve made it perfectly clear over the years that I don’t really feel compelled to adhere to any particular sort of template when reviewing books? Because I feel like going into this book as blind as possible is a good idea, which makes me not want to talk about the story all that much. Now, you will have to be patient for a bit at the beginning, as you sort of start off at the end of the story– well, one end, anyway– before rolling around to a prequel and then the beginning, but like I said, the book’s structure is kinda complicated. It’ll pay off, I promise, but there will probably be some confusion at first. It’s worth it.

What’s the book about, though? Alchemy. And twins. And math. And quantum entanglement. And language. And Frankenstein. And The Wizard of Oz, and a neat little fictional book-within-a-book that I kind of hope to find out that McGuire wrote in its entirety and released somewhere, and another actual book called The Midwich Cuckoos that I might actually have to check out. And graduate school. And horror. And murder. And … well, other stuff that I’m not going to spoil.

Y’all know if you can trust me by now on these things. Be it known that I’m highly recommending this, and my end-of-year list for 2019 is going to be bananas, and go check it out.

(*) Which would be more impressive were it not for the at least nine Sarah J. Maas books that I’m going to have read by the end of the year. But more on that in a couple of weeks.

Oh right also

My books did show up, so I’ll have all of my titles with me at Kokomo-Con.

… you are going to come see me at Kokomo-Con, right?

KOKOMO-CON X THIS WEEKEND!

This Saturday, October 12th, I will once again be manning a booth at the 10th annual Kokomo-Con, held from 10 to 5 PM at the Kokomo Event Center at 1500 North Reed Road in, you guessed it, Kokomo, IN. I’ll be in Booth 64, a nice corner spot near the back, with the usual assortment of stuff (I hope. My restock books get here Thursday.)

This is the third time I’ve done this show, and it’s always fun. It’s also currently my last planned show of 2019, although I may find a way to squeeze one or two more in there if something happens to pop up at the last minute.

Cosplay! Books! Comics! Toys! Central Indiana! Come see me!

#REVIEW: The Hidden History of the Supreme Court and the Betrayal of America, by Thom Hartmann

Back in June I was lucky enough to receive an early review copy of Thom Hartmann’s The Hidden History of Guns and the Second Amendment. I mentioned in the review that the book was part of a series– a series that I have since discovered is planned to run ten books— and that the second volume was to be out in October.

That was true! The Hidden History of the Supreme Court and the Betrayal of America was released on October 1 and should now be available anywhere you might happen to buy books. I was able to snag a copy of the second book in the series through the same folks that sent me the first one, and I sat down and read it tonight after getting home from work.

The book, and as I’m writing this I’m feeling like nonfiction needs a word similar to novella, is 156 pages long plus a dozen or so pages of footnotes and an index, and is divided into three sections. The first section is devoted to the founding fathers’ view of the Court and how the principle of judicial review became one of the Court’s powers. The second discusses the Court’s frequent rulings against the people in favor of the rich and powerful and corporate interests, and the third section– by far the shortest– is about how we might break the current right-wing stranglehold on the Court and, uh, save the world in the process.

I enjoyed Guns and the Second Amendment quite a bit. I was less a fan of this one, to be honest. To begin, it shares many of the weaknesses of the first book, weaknesses that are intrinsic to deliberately writing a book this short– I don’t have a wordcount handy, but I would suspect this book to be no longer than 30 to 40,000 words if it’s even that long, and it took me no longer than an hour or two to read. The sources, again like the first book, are almost entirely to websites, meaning that that entire part of the book will be useless in a few years, and this book feels a bit unfocused in a way that Guns and the Second Amendment didn’t. There’s simply a lot more to discuss when you’re talking about the Supreme Court– and as a result this book feels much more cursory and, to be honest, slapdash than the first volume did. This is, in large part, due to the deliberate decision by the author to write a short book, of course; I leave it up to you to decide if that aspect of it is going to be a problem for you or not.

A second problem is that I simply don’t have much sympathy for Hartmann’s core argument. I don’t believe that the first section ever actually directly states that Marbury v. Madison was decided wrongly, but it’s hard to escape that conclusion after reading it; describing the court as “despotic” in more than one place is pretty clear. And the thing is, I just … don’t care if it was the right decision, to be honest. The Constitution was fourteen years old when Marbury v. Madison was decided. We are, I think, well beyond the point where “The Court shouldn’t be able to overturn acts of Congress!” is a reasonable argument. If we’re talking about rewriting the entire Constitution, then okay, let’s discuss judicial review. But as an argument in what is supposed to be a history book? Meh. I just think it’s a silly discussion to be having.

The book is on stronger footing for the second part, although I’m not sure how hidden any of the history really is. The Court really has mostly privileged the wealthy and powerful over much of its tenure, although it’s not unlike basically all of human history in that regard, and there are certainly places where Court decisions have contributed materially to, well, justice. There is a brief review of judicial appointments to the Court since the Nixon years that was quite interesting– I wasn’t aware just how many of the Republican presidents (nearly all of them since Nixon, basically) initially took office under a cloud of some sort, which makes the hard-right turn that the conservative justices have taken over the last 40-50 years all that much more pernicious. And in more recent history, of course, we have Mitch McConnell stealing Obama’s last Supreme Court appointment, and the current occupant of the White House’s selection of perjuring rapist Brett Kavanaugh for the job.

The book wraps up with the rather grandiose claim that it is the composition of the current US Supreme Court that is causing the global climate crisis, or at least preventing us from fixing it, and goes into a few ways– court-packing and jurisdiction-stripping, basically– that we might choose to combat that. I, uh, kinda feel like Step One on this is to get Congress and the White House back, and if I were to line up a whole bunch of people in order of how responsible they were for the fucking mess human civilization is currently in I suppose the US Supreme Court would be on the list but they wouldn’t be as high as Hartmann seems to want them to be. It’s a bit of a stretch, is what I’m saying, and again the length of the book works against the author’s goals here, because you’re gonna need a few more pages to get me to blame the Supreme Court for climate change, particularly when you also make the point that the Supreme Court allowed the EPA to exist in the first place. We’d be worse off without them, in other words.

So … yeah. I wasn’t a huge fan of this book, although there were definitely some interesting parts to it; the series continues to be intriguing, however, and I’ll happily read the third volume– dedicated to the war on voting, which feels like a better fit to this series than the Court does– when it comes out even if my Mysterious Benefactors choose not to bestow a copy on me.

The Hidden History of the Supreme Court and the Betrayal of America is available now.