Bob's Books

Why this book: I had read Natural Born Heroes a health and fitness book, which interestingly enough, is built around the operation in Crete during WWII described in this book. I also just read Zorba the Greek which takes place in Crete in the early part of the 20th century.  Since Ill Met by Moonlight takes place in Crete, focuses largely on Crete, and I had had this book for several years, I figured that NOW is the time to read it!

Summary in 3 Sentences: This is the first person account of one of the two British officers who led one of the most daring and successful allied commando operations in WWII – the kidnapping of Major General Kreipe who was in charge of the Army Division occupying Crete for Nazi Germany. The book is primarily the diary of 1st Lt W. Stanley “Billy” Moss, written during his  time on Crete while he was preparing for, then conducting the operation, and the brief aftermath – providing a chronology and description not only of events, but also of his feelings and impressions. It is full of close calls, vivid descriptions of the Cretan partisans and villagers they worked with, and of their movement through the very rough terrain of Crete to get the kidnapped German General off the island to Cairo.

My Impressions:  This is a vivid first person account about a still-famous commando operation written as diary entries while it was happening by one of the key actors.  The author, Billy Moss shares his thoughts, feelings and impressions as a young British SOE officer co-leading this operation.  It is beautifully written – stunningly so for a 22 year old. Though it is a diary, it is written as though he intended to publish it  – almost as if a young Hemingway were leading the operation and writing about it as it occurred, but written without Hemingway’s bravado and self-aggrandizement.  Moss shares his anger, frustrations and anxieties while dealing with some of the cultural barriers he faced working with his Cretan partisans, as well as the love and admiration he eventually developed for them.  The success of the operation depended very much on their loyalty, stalwart support, toughness and ingenuity.

Published seven years after the war, he notes in his introduction that he left his diary entries unamended or edited – in order to retain the authentic sense of how he felt as he was engaged in the operation – but he does offer italicized after-the-fact perspectives and a few footnotes that add to understanding the context of the operation.  The book is short and moves quickly.  It is also a wonderful companion to Natural Born Heroes, and added a very useful dimension to the picture of Cretan  villagers that Kazantzakis painted in Zorba. 

The story was somewhat reminiscent of my own experience as a young SEAL officer training and conducting exercises in Europe in the 70s and 80s, preparing to potentially work with partisans in the next war, and even forty years after the end of WW2, our training and procedures were based largely on WW2 operations such as this.   I recognized in this story the language and cultural barriers, the necessity to come to agreement with partisans on tactics,  having to put one’s life in the hands of people one hardly knows and over whom one has no authority, having to agree on when, where, and how much risk to assume.   In this book we see constant, necessary and dangerous interactions with the local populace.

Moss and his Cretan partisans, with the German General in tow, were able to evade German patrols for several weeks, but they suffered a lot – many long, long nights of hiking through very rough terrain, often going without food, days and nights sleeping without cover, in rain and cold, lots of uncertainty about next steps and about what was next – requiring patience and faith in those who were supporting them.   And there were also moments of fun, periods of relaxation and camaraderie, and occasional moments when there was an almost spiritual contentment.  In one case he writes, “Last night was beautiful, the sky filled with stars and the Milky Way looking like a scarf of sequins.”  They were in a relatively safe hide-out, were able to sing quietly together, drink wine, and discuss life and literature, and “the war seemed a very long way off.”

They often worked closely with and depended on Cretan brigands, thieves and criminals who shared their hatred of the Germans, and who were expert at evading capture from authorities in rough terrain. They were constantly improvising and changing their plans, based on little and often unreliable information.   Whereas their group included several trusted partisans who stayed with them for nearly the entire operation,  different locals joined them and left them as they were passed from one group of guerrillas to the next, while moving across Crete, staying barely one step ahead of the Germans.

Their hostage, the German General Kreipe, was older, not nearly as fit as they were,  and was slightly injured, and having him as part of the group presented its own challenges. They  developed an ambiguous relationship with him, partly as a comrade sharing their hardships and suffering, but also as a senior officer and Prisoner of War who they were required by the Laws of Armed Conflict to take care of and treat with dignity.  He was in fact, their “precious cargo” but he did slow them down, which put them at risk.  He was sometimes Stoic in his suffering, other times complaining and difficult.   The group also included at various times Russians who had escaped the Nazi work camps on Crete, and had linked up with the partisans who delivered them to the British officers. The Russians became great friends of the Brits and the Cretans, with the exception of one – a Bolshevik zealot who saw the Brits as much an enemy as the Germans.

Ill Met by Moonlight is quite an adventure and a quick fun read, all the more remarkable because it is true.  There are several other first person accounts of this operation but it appears this book is considered authoritative, and was made into a movie in Britain, in the later 1950s.  I was continually amazed at the language of the young British officer  Moss – indicative of a very thorough education in the classics.   I had several times to go to Google to look up references which were unfamiliar to me – a couple which come to mind were references to the ‘hosts of Media” and to the “Krak des Chevaliers.”

After reading the book, I went on-line to find out more about W. Stanley “Billy” Moss and read that this was only one of a number of very intense and successful commando operations which he either led or participated in in WW2.  He later wrote another book entitled War of the Shadows which recounts his later operations in Crete, and afterward in Macedonia, and India.  His subsequent life after WW2 was also one full of travel to remote places and amazing adventures.  But his life was short –  his seems to have been a classic case of burning out rather than fading away, as he died at age 44 in Kingston, Jamaica.    I was unable to find an explanation for his early death, but the epilogue to Natural Born Heroes, seemed to indicate that heavy use of alcohol may have played a role.   As much as the story itself, I enjoyed the man who wrote it and I intend to read War of Shadows to get to know him better.

Why this book:  I lead a volunteer reading group for young men early in the pipeline to become SEALs or SWCCs (Special Warfare Combatant-craft Crewmen). We pick relatively short books related to the profession they are entering, and we meet and discuss them.   I had read this book 20 years ago, and recalled that it might be good for young warriors.

Summary in 3 sentences:  It is a science fiction novel in which Heinlein builds an elite military commando unit well into the future, trained and ready to conduct strategic raids in an inter galactic war between the earth and creatures which would seek to destroy or subjugate earthlings. This future world serves merely as a backdrop for Heinlein to describe how he would build an elite warrior culture and train fighters to build a close-knit unit based on very challenging basic training, shared values, shared sacrifice, shared purpose and a willingness to put the mission and the group ahead of one’s personal comfort.  There are allusions to how 20th century America had imploded due to comfort, coddling, and weakness, but had evolved to a more primal physical and mentally tough culture, led by wise, focused and supremely dedicated military professionals who are ready to sacrifice themselves for  the future of their civilization.

My Impressions:  The book is written in the first person from the perspective of a young man living centuries into the future. The young man’s narrative begins when he was in High School, describes how he joins the military against the wishes of his father, then goes thru grueling boot camp and training, to become a lower enlisted, then a combat hardened NCO.  He is eventually asked to and agrees to go through the process to become a junior officer and then rises to become a ground force commander in the elite Mobile Infantry force that is fighting for the survival of earth’s civilization He struggles at each phase, several times wants to quit but doesn’t, and loses a number of his friends and comrades to training and battle deaths.

Heinlein draws on his experience with the Marines in WW2 and creates a unit which has elements of Marine Recon, US Army Rangers, and Navy SEALs. It is amusing to see Heinlein build into his future military culture anachronistic aspects of the military from his frame of reference – the 1940s an 1950s.   But the fundamentals of the culture of his elite Mobile Infantry forces resonates with the cultures of elite military forces from the Spartans all the way to today’s elite forces.  And the leadership and leader development protocols that the NCO’s and Officers demonstrate in this book serve as a great model today.

Starship Troopers makes some civil-military statements as well.  In the future world that Heinlein creates, only those who have served are allowed to vote.  Everyone is permitted to apply to serve, but there are character tests and other requirements that must be met for an individual to fulfill military service sufficiently to become a fully enfranchised citizen with the right to vote.  Those who choose not to spend the minimum 2 years in the military have all other rights of citizens, just not the right to vote.

The Mobile Infantry that our character Juan Rico was selected for is the most demanding of the various options; there are other less dangerous and less demanding military branches, just like in today’s military, and serving in one of those still grants the person full rights upon leaving the military. Those  still serving in the military do not have the right to vote.

There were numerous allusions to the virtues of the society and culture of that future time, over the weak culture of the 20th century –  when comfort was given priority over character and principle, when the culture was unwilling to take hard measures, and leaders defaulted to non-violent options in response to threats.  This was clearly the danger Heinlein’s saw facing America when he wrote the book.

Heinlein builds some diversity into the military of the future that didn’t exist in his day – women are serving in key positions and are well respected. Also the names and backgrounds of many of the soldiers, to include our protagonist, show that Heinlein envisioned a fully integrated force, without prejudice or distinction based on ethnic background, though I don’t recall reading of any African Americans in his novel.

Some of the interesting anachronisms in this book that show how much military culture has changed since Heinlein wrote Starship Troopers in the 1950s.

• Heinlein had grown up with the genders socially separated, and in his book “ladies” were kept isolated from men, and Mobile Infantry troops guarded their quarters to protect them.  This was a great privilege because the MI troops could then see and even smell their perfume – privileges denied other military men.
• Sanctuary Planet was where the troops got liberty and could blow off steam. The fights in the bars were reminiscent of 40s and 50s brawls between Marines and Navy personnel in the Philippines.  Also the boys amused themselves in the rows of “fleshpots” that lined the highway between the base and the town.
• Corporal punishment was encouraged and endorsed. Also in the schools – in fact the  elimination of corporal punishment is alluded to as one of the indicators as to the beginning of the collapse of civilization in the 20th century.
• Deaths in training were accepted as common place, as they were in the military in the 40s and 50s.  Training deaths are relatively infrequent today, and are considered a failure of leadership or of process.
• They took horrendous losses on their combat missions – losses that we have not seen since WW2 and Korea.  In Heinlein’s book that was just part of the deal.  Elite units have never taken such losses in the recent wars, or even in Vietnam.
• The enemy they were fighting resembled in many ways the Chinese as we viewed them in the Korean conflict – with masses of fighters who had no identity and were of little value to their leadership except as numbers – sent into battle to die – they had millions more.  Also the enemy’s mindless fanaticism reminded me a bit of ISIS today.
• The cultural wall between officers and enlisted was very strict, and the privileges and distinctions that came with rank were much greater in Heinlein’s book than they are in today’s military.   This again reflects cultural changes that Heinlein would probably not approve, nor did he foresee.
• A number of other little things that were part of the culture of the 40s and 50s that seem quaint today, like:  Sending a telegram, servants for the officers, NCOs having a fist fight to resolve an issue, playing parcheesi, social centers for soldiers on liberty with dances where they could meet nice girls, getting in trouble for not seating a lady officer.
• I chuckled at some of the language of the 40s and 50s that also seems so quaint. For example, to die in battle is to “buy the farm,” “Shucks” “greasing for officer,”  “sack time,” “retarded” are just a few.

This was a fun book to read and I believe the character lessons his protagonist learns in the training and various challenges he overcomes are valid today.  The young officers and NCOs with whom I discussed this book found a lot that they recognized – the setting of inter-galactic warfare against insect-like enemies was not much of a distraction from the meat of what Heinlein was trying to impart.

Why this book:  Selected by my literature reading group at my suggestion.  I’d read it 3 times previously, two of those times in other reading groups.  I consider it one of  my favorite novels – because the issues it deals with are so meaningful to me.

Summary in 3 Sentences:  An academic of undisclosed age – I assume 30s – has decided to step away from the academic and theoretical life and learn something of real people and real life in his native Crete, by taking some of his family inheritance to rent and run a lignite mine.  On his way to Crete, he meets and is intrigued by an irascible old character – Zorba – in the Greek port of Piraeus,  and hires him on to be his foreman to run his mining operation for him.  The book is about the dynamic between the learned young academic and the older, uneducated, uninhibited, exuberant Zorba, about their interactions with the people of the Cretan village near their mine, and the lessons each of these two very different characters teach each other about how best to live in this world.

My Impressions:  I loved reading this for the fourth time.  I’m impressed that I was mature enough to love it as much as I did when I read it for the first time 40 years ago.   It is a great story,  built around the affection that develops between two very different characters representing on the one hand, the spiritual thinker, who loves ideas, theory, learning and understanding,  and on the other hand, the uneducated romantic and exuberant  connoisseur of life, who embraces the joys of being human, the pursuit of adventure and new experience.  To me the relationship between these two characters represents the conversation between the head and the heart, the mind and the spirit, what Nietzsche referred to as the Apollonian and the Dionysian impulses.   But this book is also very much about small village life in early 20th century Crete, the characters who inhabit this insular world, their simple joys and narrow prejudices.

I have described Zorba to friends like this:  Imagine that Kahlil Gibran (author of The Prophet) and Randall Patrick McMurphy (the protagonist in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest) meet, take a liking to each other, and decide to go into business together.  Gibran is intrigued by McMurphy and seeks to understand him and somehow tap into his energy and exuberance, while McMurphy seeks to cajole the poet Gibran to get beyond his poetic and spiritual nature and embrace life and his humanity.   The two develop a great mutual respect for each other.

Zorba is narrated in the first person by the sensitive young academic, referred to by Zorba  as “the boss.”  The boss is reserved and unsure of himself in dealing with the uneducated, salt-of-the-earth villagers and mine workers, and depends on Zorba to help him understand and relate to them. He admires, and even seeks to emulate the proud, experienced, self-assured Zorba.

The mining operation in Crete, and happenings in the nearby village and monastery are merely a backdrop for the on-going dialogue between Zorba and the boss.  These conversations, before and after work, and on weekends or other times when they are together, are the highlight and meat of the book.  The boss is constantly asking Zorba questions and Zorba is nearly always ready with an impassioned response.   And throughout the book, the boss shares with us, the readers, his perspectives on Zorba, and his struggles to reconcile his admiration of Zorba’s passion and exuberance, with the aesthetic, academic, spiritual life the boss had chosen for himself.

Most interesting were Zorba’s colorful perspectives on religion, philosophy, women (and women, and women, and more about women!)   He backs up his views with stories from  his rich experience living, working, fighting, and loving throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. We learn how Zorba came to be essentially an agnostic, to believe that God and the devil are the same, that war and nationalism are folly, that joy, love, emotion and passion are what make life worth living.   Zorba is honest, loyal and trustworthy,  but can also be undisciplined and impulsive, often choosing to live for the moment, and let the future take care of itself.

In contrast, “the boss” is well educated in the classics, apparently had been a university professor, and is writing a treatise on the Buddha during the day, while Zorba runs the mine and takes care of the business of the lignite operation.  The story has many direct and indirect references throughout the book to the contrast between Zorba’s devil-may-care passionate approach to life, and the more passive and aesthetic Buddhist values that the boss represents.

I did a bit of research and learned that Kazantzakis was born in Crete and spent many of his early years there.  As a young adult, Kazantzakis met and became good friends with George Zorbas, a somewhat older, uneducated fellow with a wide variety of experience, to include mining.  During WW1 the price of coal skyrocketed and Kazantzakis engaged Zorbas to run a lignite mine for him in the Peloponnese.  Kazantzakis had indeed been a student of Buddhism and did write a book on Buddhism.  He was also a devotee of Nietzsche and translated Thus Spake Zarathustra into Greek.  This novel was written in the 1940s and it appears is very much based on Kazantzakis own experience with George Zorbas, and Kazantzakis himself was indeed the young academic.

Some the other memorable highlights in the book are:

Zorba charms an aging cabaret singer, Dame Hortense, who runs a small cafe and hotel in the village.    Zorba names her his “Bouboulina”  and to him, she is not an old washed-up cabaret singer; she represents “women,” and what he loves about women,  and he treats her with the love he has for women in general.

There is a beautiful widow who lives just outside the village, who protects herself from the leering eyes of the men in the village by remaining aloof and distant.  Because they want but can’t have her, they come to hate her beauty and aloof unavailability, as do the village women.  Zorba insists that it is the boss’s “duty” to overcome his timidity and woo her.

Zorba and the boss discover sordid doings at a nearby monastery and Zorba uses that discovery to his and the boss’s advantage.

Zorba makes a memorable trip to a nearby larger town to buy supplies, which results in romantic and other adventures which help fill out Zorba’s character outside of the context of his relationship with the boss in the mining venture.

Zorba was an impassioned player of the santouri – a Greek instrument that resembles a hammered dulcimer – and he loved to dance.  When he was filled with passion, enthusiasm, excitement, he had to express it either with the music of the santouri, or by dancing. He would sometimes have to tell his stories simply through dance.

Zorba hatches a scheme to make a lot of money by moving timber from the mountain down to the sea to be able to ship it to other markets.

There is a village idiot, a parrot, a wonderful musician, a wild and crazy shepherd who can dance like no one else, monks and self-important clergy, and children and legends  – all the sorts of things that make up the eccentricities of life in remote rural villages anywhere in the world, but here with a Cretan flavor.

The movie staring Anthony Quinn does a credible job of capturing this book.  Hollywood does take some liberties with the story, but it captures the essence of Zorba, the boss, and their relationship with each other and the Cretan village well.  I recommend it.

I love this book, and recommend it to anyone who has wrestled with the tension between  passion and reason as guides to life.  It is a wonderful story, about two memorable characters, taking place in a fascinating corner of the earth, filled with wisdom and fascination.

Some quotes I like – from an older translation:   (I include chapter numbers to help you find the quote in the more recent translation. Page numbers are for my benefit alone to help me find these quotes in my copy.)

The boss about Zorba: That man has not been to school, I thought, and his brains have not been perverted. He has had all manner of experiences; his mind is open and his heart has grown bigger, without his losing one ounce of his primitive boldness. All the problems which we find so complicated or insoluble he cuts through  as if with a sword, like Alexander the Great cutting the Gordian knot.  It is difficult for him to misss his aim, because his two feet are held firmly planted on the ground by the weight of his whole body.  Chap 5 p 63

The boss: I was happy, I knew that. while experiencing happiness, we have difficulty in being conscious of it. Only when the happiness is past and we look back on it do we suddenly realize –  sometimes with astonishment – how happy we had been.  But on this Cretan coast I was experiencing happiness and knew I was happy.   Chap 6 p 65

Zorba to the boss:  “You’re young, you can still afford to be patient. I can’t.  But I do declare, the older I get, the wilder I become! Don’t let anyone tell me old age steadies a man! Nor that when he sees death coming he stretches out his neck and says: Cut off my head, please, so that I can go to heaven!  The longer I live, the more I rebel.  I’m not going to give in;  I want to conquer the world!”  Chap 6  p 76

The Buddhist comes out in the boss – as it does throughout the book:   We stayed silent by the brazier until far into the night. I felt once more how simple and frugal a thing is happiness: a glass of wine, a roast chestnut, a wrested little brazier, the sound of the sea. Nothing else.  And all that is required to feel that here and now is happiness is a simple, frugal heart.  Chap 7 p80

Zorba on women:  You can say what you like, woman is something different, boss….something different. She’s not human!  Why bear her any grudge? Woman is something incomprehensible, and all the laws of state and religion have got her all wrong. They shouldn’t act like that towards a woman. They’re too harsh, boss, too unjust.  If I ever had to make laws, I shouldn’t make the same laws for men and for women.  Chap 7 p88

The boss referring to Zorba: From time to time he eyed me slantwise. I felt that what he could not or dare not tell me in words he was saying with the santouri. That I was wasting my life, that the widow and I were two insects who live but a second beneath the sun, then die for all eternity. Never more! Never more!  Chap 8 p 102

Zorba telling a story from when he was a young man known as Roumi and an old Turk visits and speaks to him:) “Roumi, there ‘s a pasha’s daughter who’s like spring water. She’s waiting for you in her room. Come, little Roumi!”  But I knew that at night they murdered Christian infidels in the Turkish districts. “No, I’m not coming,” I said. “Don’t you fear God?” he asked me.  “Why should I?”   “Because, little Roumi, he who can sleep with a woman and does not, commits a great sin. My boy, if a woman calls you to share her bed and you don’t go, your soul will be destroyed! That woman will sigh before God on judgment day and that woman’s sigh, whoever you may be and whatever your fine deeds, will cast you into Hell!” Chap 8  p 102

Zorba to the boss: Don’t laugh boss! If a woman sleeps all alone, it’s the fault of us men. We’ll all have to render our accounts on the day of the last judgment.  God will forgive all sins, as we’ve said before – he’ll have his sponge ready. But that sin he will not forgive. Woe betide the man who could sleep with a woman and who did not do so! Woe betide the woman who could sleep with a man and who did not do so!  Chap 9 p 106

The boss about Zorba: I looked at Zorba in the light of the moon and admired the jauntiness and simplicity with which he adapted himself to the world around him the way his body and soul formed one harmonious whole and all things – women, bread, water, meat, sleep – blended happily with his flesh and became Zorba. I had never seen such a friendly accord between a man and the universe.  Chap 11 p 132

(The Boss’s challenge with Buddhism) The last man – who has freed himself from all belief, from all illusion and has nothing more to expect or to fear – sees the clay of which he is made reduced to spirit, and this spirit has no soil left for its roots, from which to draw its sap.  The last man has emptied himself; no more seed, no more excrement, no more blood. Everything having turned into words, every set of words into musical jugglery, the last man goes even further: he sits in his utter solitude and decomposes the music into mute, mathematical equations.  ….I started. “Buddha is that last man!?” I cried.. Buddha is the “pure” soul which has emptied itself; in him is the void, he is the Void… Chap 12 p 134

Zorba on old age: What scares me, boss, is old age.  Heaven preserve us from that! Death is nothing – just pff! and the candle is snuffed out. But old age is a disgrace… I consider it a deep disgrace to admit I’m getting on, and I do all I can to stop people seeing I’ve grown old: I hop about, dance, my back aches but I keep dancing.  I drink, get dizzy, everything spins round, but I don’t sit down, I just act as if everything’s hunky-dory.  I sweat, so I plunge into the sea, catch cold and want to cough – to relieve myself but I feel ashamed, boss, and force back the cough.  Chap 13 p 144

The boss on Zorba:  Like the first men to cast off their monkey skins, or like the great philosophers, he is dominated by the basic problems of mankind.  He lives them as if they were immediate and urgent necessities. Like the child, he sees everything for the first time.  He is forever astonished and wonders why and wherefore. Everything seems miraculous to him, and each morning when he opens his eyes, he sees trees, sea, stones and birds and is amazed.  Chap 13 p 151

The boss: Once more there sounded within me, together with the cranes’ cry, the terrible warning that there is only one life for all men, that there is no other, and that all that can be enjoyed must be enjoyed here. In eternity no other chanced will be given us. chap 15 p 169

The boss: As a child, then, I had almost fallen into the well. When grown up, I nearly fell into the word “eternity,” and into quite a number of other words too – “love,” “hope,” “country,” “God.””  As each word was conquered and left behind, I had the feeling that I had escaped a danger and made some progress. But no, I was only changing words and calling it deliverance. And there I had been, for the last two years, hanging over the edge of the word “Buddha.”  Chap 15 p175

(Zorba on how he rids himself of addictions.)  “And I did the same thing later with wine and tobacco. I still drink and smoke, but at any second, if I want to, whoop! I can cut it out.  I’m not ruled by passion. Its the same with my country. I thought too much about it, so stuffed myself up to the neck with it, spewed it up, and it’s never troubled me since.”  “What about women?” I asked.  “Their turn will come, damn them! It’ll come! When I’m about seventy!”  He thought for a moment, and it seemed too imminent.  “Eighty,” he said, correcting himself.  “That makes you laugh boss, I can see, but you needn’t.  … How do you expect to get the better of a devil, boss, if you don’t turn into a devil-and-a-half yourself?” Chap 17 p 196

Zorba to the boss: Have you noticed boss, everything good in this world is an invention of the devil? Pretty woman, spring, roast suckling, wine- the devil made them all! God made monks, fasting, camomile-tea and ugly women…pooh!  Chap 19 p. 213

Zorba on why he doesn’t write a book: Why not? For the simple reason that I live all those mysteries, as you call them, and I haven’t the time to write. Sometimes it’s war, sometimes women, sometimes wine, sometimes the santouri: Where would I find time to drive a miserable pen? That’s how the business falls into the hands of the pen-pushers! All those who actually live the mysteries of life haven’t the time to write, and all those who have the time don’t live them! Chap 19 p 217

Zorba to the boss: “Christ is reborn, my friend! Ah! if only I was as young as you!  I’d throw myself headlong into everything!  Headlong into work, wine, love – everything and I’d fear neither God nor devil!  That’s youth for you!”  Chap 21  p 234

The boss: I felt deep within me that the highest point a man can attain is not Knowledge, or Virtue, or Goodness, or Victory, but something even greater, more heroic and more despairing: Sacred Awe! Chapter 24 p 269

Zorba on Death: “You know, ” he said at last, “I think of death every second. I look at it and I’m not frightened. But never, never do I say I like it.  No, I don’t like it at all! I don’t agree!….No, I’m not the sort to hold out my neck to Charon like a sheep and say: ‘Cut my throat, Mr Charon, please: I want to go straight to Paradise!'” Chap 24 p 270

The boss: Who was the sage who tried to teach his disciples to do voluntarily what the law ordered should be done? To say”yes” to necessity and change the inevitable into something done of their own free will?  That is perhaps the only human way to deliverance.  It is a pitiable way, but there is no other….

But what of revolt? The proud, quixotic reaction of mankind to conquer Necessity and make external laws confirm to the internal laws of the soul, to deny all that is and create a new world according to the laws of one’s own heart, which are contrary to the inhuman laws of nature – to create a new world which is purer, better and more moral than the one that exists. Chap 24 p 270-271

Zorba to the boss: I’ve stopped thinking all the time of what happened yesterday. And stopped asking myself what’s going to happen tomorrow. What’s happening today, this minute, that’s what I care about.  I say: ‘What are you doing at this moment, Zorba?’  ‘I’m sleeping.’ ‘Well, sleep well.’ ‘What are you doing at this moment Zorba?’  ‘I’m working.’ ‘Well, work well.’  ‘What are you doing at this moment, Zorba?’ ‘I’m kissing a woman.’ ‘Well, kiss her well, Zorba! And forget all the rest while you’re doing it; there’s nothing else on earth, only you and her! Get on with it!’ Chap 24 p 273

Zorba to the boss:  A real woman – now listen to this and I hope it helps you – gets more out of the pleasure she gives than the pleasure she takes from a man.  Chap 24 pa 273

(The boss, after Zorba shared a story of using his determination and will power to overcome a hazard in a storm)  In these few words of Zorba’s, I had understood how men should behave and what tone they should adopt when addressing powerful but blind necessity… I walked rapidly along the beach, talking with the invisible enemy. I cried: “You won’t get into my soul! I shan’t open the door to you! You won’t put my fire out: you wont tip me over!”  Chap 25 p 292

Zorba to the boss:  You need a touch of folly to do that;  folly, d’you see? You have to risk everything! But you’ve got such a strong head, it’ll always get the better of you. A man’s head is like a grocer; it keeps accounts: I’ve paid so much and earned so much and that means a profit of this much or a loss of that much! The head’s a careful little shopkeeper; it never risks all it has, always keeps something in reserve. It never breaks the string.  But if a man doesn’t break the string, tell me, what flavor is left in life? The flavor of camomile, weak camomile tea.  Nothing like rum – that makes you see life inside out!”  Chap 26 p 300

Zorba to the boss:  What d’you lack? You’re young, you have money, health, you’re a good fellow, you lack nothing.  Nothing, buy thunder! Except just one thing -folly!   And when that’s missing, boss, well…Chap 26 p301

The boss: Reason, the eternal grocer, laughs at the soul, as we ourselves laugh at witches and old women who cast spells.   Chap 26 p303

I found more great quotes from this great book.  These from a different translation of the book than I have.  https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/1560878  

And here are some great quotes from the movie:

Quotes from the movie:

Why This Book: It was selected as our All American Leadership reading group and follows our earlier discussion of Team of Teams, written by Stanley McChyrstal, co-written by Chris Fussell.  

Summary in 3 Sentences: As Fussell explains in the introduction, One Mission is a sequel to Team of Teams,  borne of the feedback the McChrystal Group had gotten from many who had bought into the Team of Teams vision,  but wanted more practical guidance on how to actualize that vision.  In One Mission, Fussell takes the vision from Team of Teams and breaks it down into its parts and explains how they fit together. He provides guidance on various building blocks to a Team of Teams, and after each chapter provides a case study of how an organization in the private sector struggled with and overcame the challenges that were presented in implementing the guidance of that particular chapter.

My Impressions:  (note page numbers refer to the 2017 hard cover edition) This is a thoughtful book and is a worthy sequel to Team of Teams.  Fussell briefly reviews the vision from Team of Teams which grew out of the success General McChrystal had in transforming a traditional top-down organizational model that was in a react mode to the initiatives of its enemy in Iraq, into a unified and agile organization that was able to go on the offensive and keep its enemy off balance and on the defensive.   In One Mission, Fussell provides specific suggestions about how to break down stove-pipes and bureaucratic intertia to create a large organization working together and able to respond quickly to new challenges in general harmony to fulfill “one mission.”    In both Team of Teams and One Mission there are many vignettes to make his points from his and McChrystal’s experience with “the Task Force” in Iraq, but at the end of each chapter he offers case studies that provide insight into how these ideas have been applied in the civilian sector.  The book and the case studies make the point that creating a team of teams from a group of separate organizations each with their own histories, cultures and tribal agendas takes time, persistence and commitment to achieve.

He begins by explaining the difference between bureaucratic organizations and what he calls “networked” organizations,” and that each have their strengths and weaknesses. To respond to a rapidly changing environment, but also to be able to make and carry out long term plans and strategy, an organization needs to have qualities of both.  This he calls “the hybrid model.”

THE HYBRID MODEL:   He builds upon McChrystal’s explanation of how bureaucratic organizations evolved, and notes how they were perfect for their time and place.  They work extremely well in what he calls “complicated” environments, where cause and effect can clearly be seen.  But they are not agile enough to respond well to “complex” environments, in which “parts interact in new and unique ways, which defy preset definitions.”  p34 He notes that systems designed for complicated, but predictable environments, don’t do well in a complex environment.

The systems and processes of bureaucratic organizations provide many advantages of predictability, but have to break from their patterns to respond to crisis.  When the organization focuses it’s energy on the crisis and deals with it, afterward. it must return to it’s business-as-usual patterns, as it waits for the next crisis.  Many organizations struggle to maintain predictability, stability, and continuity in processes, while they are finding themselves almost constantly in crisis mode.

He contrasts bureaucratic and predictable decision making with networked decision making, which has few rules except those that govern trust and relationship building. But he notes that networks lack central planning and long term follow-through, and are driven purely by a common narrative that holds the network together.  They function best in response to immediate problems and crises, and without the continuity of bureaucracies and their centralized control, do not do well in long term planning.   Such non-bureaucratic networked structures have proven poor at organizing large enterprises for the long term.

In One Mission, Fussell refers to bureaucracies as solid-line organizations, referring  to the standard block-line chart of responsibility and authority.  He refers to networks as dotted-line relationships, that cut across the solid-line structures. They are social structures that are highly disorganized and difficult to focus or control.

In environments that require both long term planning AND a robust crisis response capability, he advocates a hybrid model which affords the advantages of each.  “The hybrid structure harnessed the speed and information-sharing capabilities offered by the informal relationships foundation in networks while retaining the efficiency, reliability, and predictability of a bureaucracy.” p45   But the hybrid model needs an aligning narrative.

ALIGNING NARRATIVE:  He pointed to how initially in the Task Force in Iraq, and in most large organizations, each unit – each “tribe” – had its own narrative, its own story about who they were and why they were there.  And these stories often were self-serving and not in alignment.  Though there was a top-down driven story, it was often only given lip-service within the sub-units of the larger organizations, each of which operated primarily based on their own cultures and stories. This whole section of the book is about why it is essential to break down the tribal narratives and create a single, aligning narrative that unites all the tribes, while still respecting the integrity of the tribes themselves.  And he makes abundantly clear, this can be difficult.

The aligning narrative was largely about HOW a team-of-teams operates in order to succeed.  “Credibility” within the larger organization was the coin of the realm, the common currency, and it was based on proven competence, integrity, and relationships.  It is in this section of the book that he gives us his simple formula:

Credibility = Proven Competence + Integrity + Relationships

Competence and integrity are standard organizational values; the role of “relationships” in building and sustaining credibility is stressed much more in networked organizations than in bureaucratic organizations.

The aligning narrative had to tie the various tribes within the organization together, and put the larger organization and it’s “one mission” ahead of the various and often conflicting tribal narratives.  The aligning narrative needs to focus on the team as one team, with one mission.

To build this aligning narrative the leadership needed to broadcast it daily, live this narrative, and reinforce it all the time.  Tribal competition was not tolerated.  There was only ONE mission, and the aligning narrative reinforced that. The new narrative  “…told to us every day, cast each of us as an actor in an entirely new story.  We started to feel what was possible, and the best among us were showing a willingness to forgo concepts of ‘tribe’ in order to become part of this new culture.” p.60

INTERCONNECTIONS: Fussell begins this chapter by talking about “culture carriers who connected the organization and shaped our dotted-line connectivity.”  p 76  He talked about key influences in the dotted-line organization, and referred to them as “boundary spanners”  who by virtue of their credibility, personal stature, and personalities were able to create and maintain new dotted line connections across silos.

Key influencers shape the attitudes and decisions of an organization and are frequently not high in the solid line hierarchy.  These are people who for whatever reason have achieved a level of credibility within various parts of the organization which outweighs their positional authority.  Knowing who they are and winning their support is key to creating a strong aligning narrative. “You can’t expect a solidi-line superior to force meaningful interpersonal relationships between individuals.” p82

“The only barrier to an influencer seeking to establish boundary-spanning relationships is a traditional org-chart structure that prevents them from meeting and connecting with other teams….A leader’s job, rather than appointing boundary spanners, is to create an environment where any individual in the organization can ‘connect the dots,’ and choose to become a boundary spanner themselves. ” p82

This creates an environment of “social contagion” and social learning of best practices and desired behaviors, modeled not just by the organizations leaders, but also by these boundary-spanning key influencers.

He points out the tension between cross-functional collaboration and the focused “deep work” that is possible in a smaller team.  Physically co-locating smaller teams is a good way to permit deep work and healthy collaboration – as long as there is a strong aligning narrative, being supported by key influencers.

Fussell explains how McChrystal used the daily O&I – Operations and Intel brief as a key tool in creating an aligning narrative and interconnections.  But what distinguished the O&I from a traditional broadly disbursed Video Teleconference was the discussion of actions.  It was a “…technologically enabled, contextualization-centered forum designed for teams to discuss the independent action they’d taken since the last forum. It represented an opportunity to exchange newly discovered and often imperfectly formed insights with the larger group.” p 90   Much of the detail was saved for “the meeting after the meeting, where as you’ve likely experienced, things actually get done.”  p 90

The O&I enabled “…firsthand, person-to-person information distribution or contextualization from any node in the organization to every other one, instantly.”   This information-sharing created new dotted-line connections that “no solid-line planner could have anticipated the need for, (and which) might lead to a tactical team’s exponentially”  greater success at their mission. p93

With a well-oiled dotted-line relationship “structure” and an accepted and constantly reinforced aligning narrative, an organization can get to a point of shared consciousness,  a concept which McChyrstal introduced in Team of Teams. Shared consciousness is “a state of emergent,  adaptive organizational intelligence brought about through transparency and information sharing….The goal was to reach this state at the end of every forum.” p108

OPERATING RHYTHM:   In this chapter Fussell makes the point that the hybrid model demands an agile operating rhythm – which can handle being disrupted and adjusted to meet the pace of change in the environment in which the organization is operating..  Many leaders and their organizations become addicted to the predictable patterns of activities and decision making that are easy to fall into. At that point, the organization is vulnerable.

He says leaders must ask two very basic, fundamental questions:

1.  How fast is our environment changing?

2. In its current state, how fast can our organization adapt to change?

He noted that in Iraq, his task force didn’t choose a 24 hour operating rhythm, but their enemy was operating on a 24 hour cycle – so their environment demanded it. They either adapted, or continued to lose – lives, momentum, and the war.

He points out that at different levels of the organization, decisions are made on different time lines and each level has to adapt to let the other operate as effectively as possible.  Which means pushing decisions down, and adjusting the operating rhythm to fit the needs of all levels.

“The solid line system alone can be optimized only to a certain point – a hybrid approach can offer exponentially better returns.” p140

DECISION SPACE:  This is one of the best chapters in the book.  He says, “Decision space…is the explicitly commuicated lane of decision authorities owned by critical leaders and teams within an organization.” p171.  In this chapter, Fussell talks about the process of empowerment and how to manage the risk of giving authority to those closest to the problem. He also identifies some of the challenges and opportunities associated with developing leaders who are comfortable with greater authority.

Up to this point he has outlined the need for an aligning narrative, creating a communication forum that develops interconnections and a shared consciousness, and then an appropriate operating rhythm.  But finally for an organization to respond quickly and effectively to a rapidly changing environment, those who do the work closest to the emerging challenges, must feel able, willing and empowered to make decisions that move the organization forward.

To do this they must know as specifically as possible what their “lane” is – what actions they have the autonomy to take,  what they are accountable for, and limitations or “constraints” on their authority.  He notes that it is often a new and uncomfortable experience for leaders to be empowered and expected to make decisions.  In most organizations, subordinates are required to ask permission and they become used to hiding behind the “bureaucratic excuse matrix” of superiors taking responsibility for decisions.

Newly empowered leaders risk hesitancy or deviance.  Fussell spends much of the chapter explaining these two concepts.

Hesitancy is the reluctance of newly empowered leaders to take action due to anxiety over either the potential to make an operational mistake or overstepping one’s bounds.  It is heavily informed by personal desires for safety and security.  Newly empowered are often unsure of their competence or authority.

Deviancy is what hesitant decision makers are afraid of demonstrating – stepping beyond the norms of the organization in ways that could be either positive (resulting in practical innovation or improvement) or negative (causing damage to the organization’s cause.)

The Deviancy piece is most interesting, since he says in great organizations, good and progressive leaders seek out “positive deviants” – empowered leaders who make decisions that depart from the norms of the organization “in honorable ways” while still respecting the strategic intent and aligning narrative of the organization.  Positive deviants are innovative and ready to experiment with new processes and procedures to accomplish the organization’s  goals, in ways that are better than the old tried and true.  While he warns against negative deviants, he argues that leaders need to actively encourage positive deviants and empower them to find new ways to challenge and resolve old problems.

With a strong aligning narrative, you want empowered leaders to ask: What is within the realm of the possible, given our decision making authority and the strategic direction of our organization?   You DON’T want empowered leaders to ask the standard bureaucratic question:  What am I being told to do and how am I expected to accomplish that objective?

He notes that the creation of decision space helps leaders identify and give further coaching to those who are naturally-hesitant, newly empowered leaders.   It also helps identify the positive deviants, who may need different coaching, but also may best serve the organization in positions of greater responsibility.  Fussell states, “The identification of positive deviants among our ranks was the most important result of the Task Force’s allocation of decision space.  These leaders would consistently test the  bounds of their decision space: they understood the game and were willing to follow the rules, but constantly sought better ways to play…..walking on the edges of their authority.” p.179

“Controlling decision space allows leaders to better mitigate excessive risk but also gives the best leaders in their ranks the ability to walk right up to the edge of their authority and then push for more.” p 184.

LIAISONS:  Fussell begins this chapter with the question:  “How might external stakeholders be exposed to an organization’s aligning narrative and be brought into collaborative problem solving?”  p198  The answer – sending really talented liaisons to these important organizations.  The liaison must have a clear vision of the aligning narrative and direct access to the boss.

Based on his experience with the Task Force Fussell stresses that the importance of having really strong liaison cells in key organizations both within and without the team of teams cannot be overstated.   Liaisons help foster and maintain healthy dotted line relationships, but they don’t replace them.  Sometimes relationships between individuals not only within but between organizations can get frayed, and liaison cells embedded in the bureaucracy of another organization can help anticipate and mitigate the damage that may result from misunderstandings or personality clashes. “All it takes to create such a permanent relationship divide is a  spoiled collaboration effort, or poorly considered comments by one leader in a meeting, internal competition over resources, or the office rumor mill…culturally disparate tribes can easily be drawn into generations-long conflicts with one another based on long-past slights.” p.200

How does a leader cultivate and maintain strong relationships in such a fragile environment?  With a strong liaison who has great credibility with both the giving and receiving organization.  He notes how extremely important it is to select the right people for liaisons, and these are usually the people you are least willing to give up.  “You know it’s the right person if it hurts you to see them leave.” 213  But their influence can be critical in building synergies with other organizations.  He  gives advice in vetting and selecting the right personality types, noting that boundary spanners and influencers generally make great liaisons.

In addition to serving as liaison between a key stakeholder organization and the team of teams, another key function of liaisons is to interact with the rest of the organization’s liaisons, “constellated across other organizations.”  Such a constantly communicating network increases the influence and strength of the networked organization, supports the aligning narrative and the interconnections that foster it.

“In the Task Force, our leadership constantly reminded us that we would need to make the first move, every time, to establish trust, as there were years of negative memories to overcome.  p201 (italics in original)  One of those important first steps was sending a really great member of his team to help build trust.

CONCLUSION:  He concludes the book with some vignettes that emphasize how important it is in a team of teams environment for people to feel free to share their views.  He talks about the value of psychological safety, “a sense of confidence that the group won’t embarrass, reject, or punish someone for speaking up” and  “the need for individuals to feel safe contributing in a  a constantly changing situation where there is an inherent risk of imperfection.”p.240  This requires leaders who are willing to accept transparency and debate. He also makes the point that “you need to build relationships before the firefight”  When the environment becomes stressed, and the stakes are high, contributors will not suddenly feel safe speaking in a transparent fashion without prior conditioning.

McChrystal fostered the openness to different views and opinions.  He described how after McChrystal had summarized how he saw an issue, he would finish with a question: “Does anyone think I’ve missed anything?”   This made the point that however McChrystal saw the situation, he realized that it was just one interpretation, and the situation was often fluid and rapidly changing.  He was always seeking to avoid group think.

Fussell concludes by arguing against the “great man” theory of leadership, and that while many have wanted to make McChyrstal a heroic great leader, responsible for all the good that happened under his leadership, Fussell noted that the heroic-leader myth ignores the truly hard work of the whole team of teams that made McChrystal’s success possible.  He pointed out that McChrystal’s leadership style was actually counter to the great leader model – in that McChrystal represented a humility-based leadership style.   “A truly humble leader will watch their (team’s) capabilities emerge, resist calls to take credit for them, and publicly acknowledge that the newfound capacity of the organization’s systems is far greater than anything one person or team could ever hope to produce.” p.248

THE CHIEF OF STAFF: Fussell adds an appendix to the book entitled “The Chief of Staff,” observing that while the importance of the Chief of Staff function is well known in the military, it is not well understood in private industry.

He provides a nice matrix of duties and responsibilities for an organization’s Chief of Staff, progressing from serving as a bridge between the CEO and the organization, to optimizing the organization’s decision making, to finally become a thought partner for the CEO.   He concludes with, “..today’s environment is simply moving too fast for any one individual to sift through the complexity alone.  Building a truly empowered team around the executive suite will prove to be an increasingly important value differentiator, in which having a  well-considered approach to developing a CoS is critical.”  p260

Why this book:  My good friends Jay, Emily and I have often spoken of synchronicity – the strange “coincidences” that seem to shape our lives, which somehow brought us three together.  We have often spoken of synchronicity as if it were an accepted force of nature – almost like gravity.  Jay found this book and strongly recommended to augment our discussion – Emily read it and agreed that it is worth the read.  That was good enough for me.

Summary in 3 Sentences: This book covers a lot of territory, beginning with the nature of reality, discusses coincidence and synchronicity, the nature of the soul, how our intention and desires impact our lives and the universe, addresses personal and universal archetypes, as well as the role of meditation and mantras.  He goes from describing an “Eastern” mystical view of the nature of reality, to how we can align our lives and minds to live in greater harmony with that reality. He concludes with a series of exercises to help us do that.

My Impressions (part 1)  I have been familiar with Deepak Chopra for many years, but this is the first of his many books that I’ve read.  My sense was that Chopra was writing this book to his already loyal audience, since he made statements about reality and the universe that seemed to assume that his readers already understand, and are ready to share his vision.   While I appreciate Chopra’s mystical view of man’s place in the universe, I’m not ready to declare that it is a self-evident given.  So I struggled a bit with his language which referred to things such as “pure soul” or the “universal consciousness”  about which I’m not so sure.

This is a perennial challenge for mystics – to describe a vision of reality in language that has evolved in a very different understanding of reality.   Like trying to explain to a blind man, what it’s like to see, or to a deaf person, what it’s like to hear.

Book Summary: Chopra’s book explores the implications of coincidence and synchronicity.   He expands the concept of synchronicity to something greater – what he calls “synchrodestiny”  – which is for Chopra the connection between the synchronicity that occurs naturally in our lives, to our life’s purpose.   Synchronistic coincidences he argues, are indicators of a connections between people, events and our destiny that exist on a plane of reality that we can tap into through meditation and spiritual practice.

He begins the book by describing three domains of reality: 1. The Physical domain that we experience in our day-to-day lives; 2. the Quantum domain, which he says is information and energy, which can’t be experienced through our five senses; and 3. the Nonlocal domain which he identifies with universal consciousness that operates beyond space and time.  Our connection to this “nonlocal domain” is what much of the book is about, and it is in this domain that the spiritual and synchronistic connections take place.

He talks about what he calls our “nonlocal mind” which is that part of us that connects to the nonlocal domain of reality. He distinguishes between the local “I” – the “I” which most of us identify with daily – and the nonlocal “I” which connects to the nonlocal domain.  He says that our nonlocal mind  “organizes all the details (in our lives) synchronistically.”   He says our local and nonlocal “I”s  are often not in alignment and don’t work well together, and that getting them in alignment is a key objective of the spiritual journey.    I think this “nonlocal” mind shares a lot with what we normally consider our subconscious mind, but Chopra gives it a lot more significance, as the pathway to our connection to what he refers to as “universal consciousness” and the “nonlocal domain” of reality.

The below two paragraphs summarize some of Chopra’s key points in the language he uses:

“This is the ultimate truth of synchrodestiny – that the sum total of the universe is conspiring  to create your personal destiny.  To do so it uses ‘acausal nonlocal connections” (124)….”What we experience as everyday reality is merely a shadow play. Behind the curtain there is a soul, living and dynamic and immortal, beyond the reach of space and time. By acting from that level, we can consciously influence our destiny. This happens through the synchronization of seemingly acausal relationships to mold a destiny – hence synchodestiy.  In synchrodestiny, we consciously participate in the creation of our lives by understanding the world that is beyond our senses, the world of the soul.”  p128-129

“You and I and the universe are the same…Even our thoughts, our wishes, our desires, our dreams are not technically our thoughts, wishes, desires, or dreams. They are manifestations of the total universe.  And when you realize that the intentions and desires that arise in you are the very intentions of the universe, you can relinquish your desire for control and let the miraculous life you were born to lead unfold, in all its unimaginable magnificence…Once you understand this premise, you will understand the sutra of the first principle of synchrodestiny: the core of my being is the ultimate reality, the root and ground of the universe, the source of all that exists.” p182

Those two paragraph gives you an idea of Chopra’s message and style.  It is indeed a lot to “understand.”

He has a chapter on archetypes – a concept developed by Carl Jung, and I am familiar with additional work done on archetypes by Joseph Campbell. He suggests that each of us has an archetype that we have subconsciously chosen as a model for our lives and decisions, and that we should should seek to identify that archetype and use it to our advantage.  “The activation of an archetype releases its patterning forces that allow us to become more of what we already are destined to be.” p150

Regarding “synchronicity,” he makes the point that coincidences are NOT coincidences – they are indicators of connections and forces that exist in the nonlocal domain, but which we may not see.  These coincidences are actually messages to us – if we will be open to receiving them – telling us something about our lives and our destiny.  “More coincidences provide more clues to guide our behavior…These clues point out the direction to take our lives.”  p143

On relationships, he says, “Relationship is one of the most effective ways to access unity consciousness because we’re always in relationships.”  p188 To describe spiritual experience, he says, “When you’re in love, for example, romantically and deeply in love, you have a sense of timelessness….You’re transforming, changing, but without trepidation; you feel a sense of wonder. This is a spiritual experience.” p189

He concludes the book with a set of seven principles which he suggests be the focus of daily meditations, a different one to be done daily for 7 days, and then repeated.    Each principle also has several exercises to be done during one’s meditation, and a number of sutra statements to be meditated on each day. The sutra statements reinforce the principle of that day’s meditation.

First Principle:  You are a Ripple in the Fabric of the Cosmos.  Example Sutra statements: Imagine that you are connected to everything that exists. Imagine that you are eternal. 

Second Principle: Through the Mirror of Relationships I Discover My Nonlocal Self. Example Sutra statements: Imagine that everybody is a reflection of yourself.  Imagine that you are the qualities you most admire in others. 

Third Principle: Master Your Inner Self: Example Sutra statements: Imagine that you are centered and totally at peace. Imagine that in your presence, all hostility is overcome by a profound peace.  Imagine that you are detached from the outcome. 

Fourth Principle: Intent Weaves the Tapestry of the Universe. Example Sutra statements: Imagine that your intention can bring joy and laughter to those who are in sorrow.  Imagine that you can bring hope to those who are feeling helpless.  Imagine that your thoughts affect the natural forces of the universe, that you can bring rain and sunshine, clouds and rainbows.  

Fifth Principle: Harness Your Emotional Turbulence. Example Sutra statements: Imagine that you are free from blaming, free from feeling blame and guilt.  Imagine that you can choose any emotional feeling you want to experience.  Imagine that you can set any goal you want to achieve and actually achieve it. 

Sixth Principle: Celebrate the Dance of the Cosmos. Example Sutra statements: Imagine that you are strong, decisive, courageous, articulate, and powerful. Imagine that you can be both masculine and feminine if you choose.  Imagine that you are beautiful, sexual, intuitive, nurturing, and affectionate.  

Seventh Principle: Accessing the Conspiracy of Improbabilities. Example Sutra statements: Imagine that you move in rhythm  with the impulses of a conscious universe   Imagine that every time you seek something, the universe provides clues in the form of coincidences. Imagine that there is meaning and purpose to everything that happens and everything you do.  

My Impression (part 2) I struggle with the broad assumption Chopra makes about the nature of reality,  but I do think there is something valuable in his message.  I wrote a short piece about my own questions about the nature of reality several years ago entitled “The Unseen Order of Things or Unscrewing the Inscrutable.”  I think there is a metaphorical baby in the bathwater of Spontaneous Fulfillment of Desire, and I want to hold on to the baby before I throw out the bathwater.  Though I don’t have Chopra’s seeming certainty about the nature of reality,  I do believe that:

1. Our minds and thoughts CAN affect reality and can help shape the future in ways that we don’t fully understand;

2.  Coincidences, or “synchronicity,” or what Chopra calls “acausal connections,”  may well be evidence that seemingly unrelated events are connected in ways that our linear cause-effect mindsets simply don’t understand.  And that it is probably worth our while to pay attention to them!

3. Our consciousness is connected to other people and events in ways we don’t understand, and being positive and open to that possibility, can spiritually serve us well.

4. I agree with Chopra’s advocacy of disciplined meditation and self- reflection, stilling the mind to let what is below the surface – whether we call it our unconscious or our “nonlocal” mind – to float to the surface of our awareness.

5. I also believe in the value and power of positive mantras or sutras, planting seeds of belief and possibilities in one’s consciousness, as Chopra advocates in his seven principles for seven days protocol.

6. I also accept that the materialist version of reality may also be “true” – that there is only the one domain of reality – the physical one.   I’m willing to accept the possibility that the views of Sam Harris (Waking Up)and Yuval Harrari (Sapiens) may be more true than false. I’m willing to accept the possible truth in their view that spiritual/mystical connections between us and other living things and the universe may only be wishful thinking and an illusion, borne of biochemical processes.

Could both Harris AND Chopra be right?  Two blind men on different parts of the elephant?  Or are their views mutually exclusive?

If you are interested in an Eastern, mystical view of the significance of synchronistic coincidences, this book will do it for you. You may be surprised out just HOW significant these coincidences may well be, and how these coincidences, just like everything else, are connected to – everything else.

Why this book:  In the All American Leadership (faculty) Reading Group, this book had been proposed numerous times and a number of us had already read it and found it well done.  It was finally selected by the group for the group to read and review.

Summary in 3 sentences:  Stanier argues that all leaders should be coaches and that coaching should be key part of a leader’s  everyday interactions with individuals on their teams in order to continually develop them as leaders .  He first talks about breaking bad habits and developing new and better habits – specifically applied to how leaders interact with their subordinates in the way of “coaching.”   He then goes on to suggest 7 questions that leaders should use to stimulate thinking in their subordinates which will develop them into thinkers, and problem solvers themselves, rather than depending on the leader to think and problem solve for the team.

Impressions: Short and very readable.  Easily read in about 2 hours on an airplane.  But after reading it, I needed to go back and review each chapter. There is a lot of content that can easily be passed over as self-evident, but which I’ve realized, deserves more attention.

I really like the apparent simplicity of his approach.  I say “apparent” because most of us are in a pattern of behavior that is difficult to break, and he suggests some simple, understandable NEW approaches to interacting with subordinates that shifts much of “Leadership” into a “coaching” activity as opposed to giving guidance, direction, and telling people what to do. His suggestions look simple, but are not easy in practice – because they often run against many leaders’ ingrained habits.  It is hard to break an old habit and create a new one.

His opening chapter briefly discusses habits – how we recognize them and a process for breaking them to create new habits.  He refers to Charles Duhigg’s book, The Power of Habit, and a few other works as well, though he doesn’t refer to Marshall Goldsmith’s Triggers, which would have been appropriate, since Stanier does talk about breaking the habit of being “triggered” into old patterns of behavior.  He argues that our habitual responses are normally triggered by some external factor, and notes that we need to recognize those triggers before we can create a new habitual response.  Two of the most counter-productive habits that most leaders associate with their responsibilities, but indeed run counter to the coaching habit, is telling people what to do and giving advice.

The book makes the useful distinction between “performance coaching” and “development coaching.”  Sometimes performance coaching is necessary – showing someone how to do something and solving everyday problems. Development coaching however shifts the focus from the problem to the person being coached –  he uses the analogy of shifting the focus from the fire, to the firefighter.   Development coaching  helps them to figure out what to do, what the right thing to do is, and develops them into more self-sufficient leaders.  This book is about development coaching.

The book is structured around Seven Questions – each question has its own chapter which discusses and elaborates on why this question is so important, and he offers different approaches to using it. He also offers at the end of each chapter a link to his website (Thecoachinghabit.com/videos) for a brief video (usually 10-15 mins long) of him discussing the topic of that chapter.

Below are the 7 questions and a very brief description of points he makes as to why each is a fundamental coaching question:

Question 1.  The Kickstarter Question:  What’s on your mind?  This question puts the onus on the person being coached to think about what their issue is and what they want to talk about.  It forces them to decide what they want to address – this question tells them that THEIR needs are driving the conversation.  Stanier offers alternatives: Where should we begin?  or Where’s the best place for us to begin? or Where’s the most useful place for us to start?

Question 2.  The AWE Question: And What Else? He calls this the best coaching question in the world.  “With seemingly no effort it creates more – more wisdom, more insights, more self-awareness, more possibilities – out of thin air.”  It puts the ball in the court of the person being coached.  It opens the door to what may REALLY be on their mind – the issues behind the issue.   In this chapter he warns against binary choices, and asking the “And what else could you do?” question should help the subordinate look for 3rd or 4th options when someone is struggling to choose.     He also introduces the “Advice Monster” in this chapter,  the bain of great coaching, because it “leaps out of the darkness and hijacks the conversation.”    He says he normally asks the AWE question  at least 3 times in any coaching conversation.   Amazing what comes up.   After the “And what else?” question has been answered, finish up with “Is there anything else?”.   Celebrate success when the response is “There’s nothing else.”

Question 3. The Focus Question: What’s the real challenge here for you?  This is the question you ask when your subordinates come to you and want YOU to do THEIR work for them.  It will also slow down the rush to action, and helps make sure that you or they are working on the right problem, instead of spending a lot of energy working on the problem that isn’t really THE problem. He says, “Focus on the REAL problem, not the FIRST problem.” The “for you” in this question pins it to the person you are talking to, and focuses on what they need to help them address the problem.  In this chapter he warns against “coaching the ghost” as discussions can divert to what other people are doing, or  what someone else could be doing better.  “What’s the real challenge here for you?” brings the discussion back to the person you are talking to.

Question 4: The Foundation Question:  What do you want?  He calls this the adult-to-adult question, since adults are able to ask and tell specifically what they are looking for. To ask this question, you have to be ready to answer “No” to what they want, but he suggests that you ensure that the No is to the request, but not to the person.    The corollary question is, “What do you REALLY want.”  It often stops people in their tracks.  He also has an interesting section on the difference between wants and needs, and offers  another corollary quesition, is, “Yes, but what do you really NEED.”  Understanding needs should give a better background to help define or satisfy the want.  He concludes that a coach gets more credibility when the coach also shares what s/he really wants or needs as well.  He offers up a couple of prefixes to help soften the tone and take the edge off of the direct question:  “Just out of curiosity, do you really think….” or “Just so I know…” or “To help me understand better….” or “To make sure I’m clear…”

Question 5:  The Lazy Question:  How can I help?  In this chapter he distinguishes between truly helping and being “helpful,” the later being a negative – always seeking to help others with their problems, and not helping them to grow.    He talks about the Karpman Triangle –  the three corners of which  are The Victim, The Persecutor, The Rescuer, representing roles we can inadvertently let ourselves be triggered into playing.  And when we let ourselves slip into The Rescuer mode, we are constantly leaping in to help others, when often the best thing would be to let them (or help them) figure things out for themselves.  The “How can I help?” question serves two purposes: First it forces a specific “ask” from the person being coached, and second, (and more importantly) it stops you from thinking YOU know the answer to what the other person needs, and puts the Advice Monster back in its cage.  The goal is to help people get better at finding their own answers….

Question 6: The Strategic Question: If you’re saying Yes to this, what are you saying No to? He wants to ban the phrases “good busy” and “work smarter, not harder” and quotes business strategy guru David Porter: “the essence of strategy is choosing what not to do.”   A “Yes” is nothing without a “No” that gives it boundaries and form.   Stanier calls getting things done  “good work.”  He calls work that has meaning and great impact “great work.”  The coach seeks to help people do less good work and more great work.   He says that asking, “What does being fully committed to this idea look like?” should bring an idea into sharper, bolder focus.   He also suggests strategies for saying “yes” more slowly, to allow time to stay curious, ask more questions, and examine the tradeoffs  in making a decision before committing.

Question 7: The Learning Question:  What was most useful for you?  This question creates the learning moment at the end of a conversation, forcing the participant to reflect on the discussion and what they got out of it. (Kind of like why I write these reviews.)  This question forces people to extract value from the conversation.  It bookends a conversation that begins with “And what’s on your mind?”  After hearing their response to the What was most useful for you? question, Stanier recommends you tell them what YOU found most valuable in the conversation – making you a partner with them in learning.  It is a strong and powerful way to end a conversation.

THREE EXCELLENT and SHORT CONCLUDING CHAPTERS:  He notes that these questions also work well in other-than-face-to-face media – email, text, phone.  He notes that when he gets an email that triggers the Advice Monster, rather than getting sucked in to a long response, he gives one of the 7 questions back to the asker.  “I’ve scanned your email. In a sentence or two, what do you want?” or “Before I jump into a longer reply, let me ask you: What’s the real challenge here for you?” He notes that “the real secret sauce here is building a habit of curiosity.  I love his concluding take off on the world’s most interesting man’s imperative to “Stay thirsty, my friend.”  Stanier tells us to “Stay curious, my friend.”

His final guidance is:  “A little less advice, a little more curiosity.  Find your own questions, find your own voice. And above all, build your own coaching habit.” The book concludes with a chapter listing additional resources and books he’d recommend for additional work in the areas he discusses in his book.

———

Here are the seven questions – with the order slightly adjusted:  What’s on your Mind?, And What Else?  What’s the Challenge in this for you? What are you saying No to? What do you Want?   How can I Help?   What was most Useful for you?

And in case this may be helpful to you, here is a silly pneumonic that helps me remember these 7 questions: My Aardvark Can Not Wear Heavy Underwear.  That said, if I were an executive with my own office, I’d probably have these questions framed and up on the wall, to remind me everyday to better solidify my “coaching habit.”

Why this book:  I lead a volunteer reading group for young men early in the pipeline to become SEALs or SWCCs (Special Warfare Combatant-craft Crewmen). We pick relatively short books related to the profession they are entering, and we meet and discuss them.   I had read several of Steven Pressfield’s books, and followed a couple of his blogs and assumed correctly that this short book would fit well in the “curriculum” I am creating for these young men.

Summary in 3 Sentences: Pressfield uses the extensive research he had done for his historical novels set in ancient Greece as a source for much of the wisdom in this book – especially the culture and values of ancient Sparta.  It is less an examination of the Warrior Ethos, and more of an unstructured discussion broken up into 30 short chapters (in a 90 page book!) in which he addresses a variety of aspects of what he considers to be perennial and universal warrior values.  He concludes by making the point in the final chapter that warrior virtues should be internalized into the warrior’s heart to serve the warrior not just in battle, but in a broad range of contexts where virtues such as courage, patience, loyalty, perseverance, and love also define the great and successful.

My impressions:  This book is a short meditation that Pressfield says naturally arose out of writing his most recent novel about future “warriors” unconstrained by a national purpose.  He had been grappling with the question, What is a warrior, beyond a tool of the state? This book is a loosely structured compilation of his thoughts.

It is not a complete, well-researched exploration of the subject.  Nor does it pretend to be. But he makes some interesting and occasionally controversial claims, and it is worth reading for anyone in or considering  joining the military profession, especially combat arms.

This book is his effort to define and describe universal warrior virtues, that apply to warrior cultures across time and space.   I am reminded of Joseph Campbell’s similar but much more exhaustive and more thoroughly researched effort, The Hero with a Thousand Faces, and Shannon French’s examination of various warrior cultures in history and around the world in her book Code of the Warrior.  These are actually much better books for students of warrior values and cultures, but are also much more demanding to read.

Pressfield begins with reference to the role of mothers, spouses and families supporting the men of Sparta who went to fight and die in Thermopylae – the subject of his highly acclaimed novel, Gates of Fire.  The warrior virtues in Sparta he claims, were upheld and reinforced by the strength of the women.

He devotes a couple of chapters to distinguishing between guilt and shame – that guilt is an internal sense of having sinned, whereas shame is based on how one is perceived by others.  He argues that though Western cultures value meeting obligations, following norms and avoiding guilt, warriors are driven to seek honor and avoid shame – especially in the eyes of fellow warriors.

He devotes a whole chapter to the differences between warrior cultures and the civilian world.  He notes the disparity between warrior values – the warrior ethos – which demands that the warrior seek adversity and put him/herself at risk for honor and higher purpose, and the values of most civilians to seek comfort and avoid danger or risk.  He asks the question:  “What is the place of the Warrior Ethos within the greater civilian society?…The greatness of American society is that our citizens are still debating it.”

I liked his point about the value of warriors dining together – amongst themselves as a bonding mechanism.  The Naval Special Warfare community is seeking to create dining facilities for their warriors and staff, for that very reason.

He includes numerous references to the Bhagavad-Gita and the metaphor of fighting enemies on the battlefield and enemies inside oneself.

The Warrior Ethos is a short, enjoyable and provocative read. It is not a deep look at warrior cultures, nor does he examine nuances or alternative views.  It catalogues  his own musings based on his research into (mostly) ancient Greek warrior cultures and to a lesser degree Asian – Bushido and the Bhagavad-Gita, and of course brings in his own experience as a US Marine in the 1960s.

I found a book of similar length entitled Steven Pressfield’s The Warrior Ethos: One Marine Officer’s Critique and Counterpoint, by Edward Carpenter.  This book roundly criticizes Pressfield’s book as superficial and not accounting for significant differences between the needs of warriors in today’s world and those of earlier times.    He pulls the string on the implications of many of Pressfield’s claims and argues that some are based on an overly romantic understanding of history, and many of his values are not completely valid in today’s world,  or are completely invalid. He argues against using Sparta as a model, that Alexander is no hero by today’s standards, that there are misogynistic overtones in his book, and that the tribal ethic Pressfield seems to advocate is inappropriate to today’s warriors.   He concludes with a rough outline for a warrior ethos for the 21st century.

While I agreed with most of the specific points of Col Carpenter’s criticisms, I disagreed with his overall point – that Pressfield’s ideal is not valid today.  The Colonel it seems to me, doth protest too much.  In his critique, Carpenter actively seeks possible negative implications of Pressfield’s points, rather than considering broader and possible positive interpretations.  For example he argues that Pressfield’s claim that warriors seek adversity is not true – they prefer comfort like everyone else, and indeed most military personnel deployed overseas are indeed living in what in previous eras would be considered the lap of luxury.  He also points out that Pressfield does not explore the meaning of the word or concept “warrior” noting that the vast majority of our military forces are not engaged in combat, nor in any real danger.

That said, I think he misses a point – the warrior “ideal” is of men and women who harden themselves by seeking demanding and adverse conditions and are not undone by difficulty.  And perhaps “warrior” doesn’t refer to a profession or a title, but rather to a mindset – that clerks and mess-stewards might have a greater warrior ethos (mindset) than a-less-than-committed infantry soldier.   I didn’t like the self-righteous tone of his critique – though again, he made points that in their specificity, were accurate.  In his rejection of Pressfield’s book, I believe he throws the baby out with the bathwater – but it is worthwhile to read his counterpoints.   I would recommend reading the two books together – and then reading Shannon French’s Code of the Warrior.

Attention getting quotes from The Warrior Ethos (page numbers from the paper back edition):

“the Warrior Ethos evolved as a counterpoint to fear”  10

“…an ideal of manly virtue – andreia in Greek – that praised valor and honor as highly as victory.”

Greek poet and Mercenary:  “Be brave my heart. Plant y our feet and square your shoulders to the enemy. Meet him a among the man-killing spears. Hold your ground. In victory, do not brag; in defeat, do not weep.” 10

The warrior ethos evolved to counter the instinct of self-preservation `12

Against the natural impulse to flee from danger, the warrior Ethos enlists three other equally innate and powerful human impulses:  Shame, Honor, And Love. 12

The Spartan king Agesilaus was once asked what was the supreme warrior virtue, from which all other virtues derived. He replied “Contempt for death.” 13

The dictionary defines ethos as: The moral character, nature, disposition and customs of a people or culture.  14

Warrior cultures enlist shame, not only as a counter to fear, but as goad to honor. 25

But Cyrus knew as the proverb declares that ‘Soft lands make soft people.’  His answer became famous throughout the world: ‘Better to live in a rugged land and rule, than to cultivate rich plains and be a slave.’ …The idea of a rugged land can be applied psychologically as well. 34

The Soldier’s prayer today on the eve of battle is not ‘Lord spare me.’ But ‘Lord let me not prove unworthy of my brothers.’  40

Courage is inseparable from love and leads to what may arguably be the noblest of all warrior virtues: Selflessness. 41

There is another key element of the Warrior Ethos: The willing and eager embracing of adversity. 50

The payoff for a life of adversity is freedom. 51

In Warrior cultures – from the Sioux and the Comanche to the Zulu and the mountain Pashtun – honor is a man’s most prized possession. Without it, life is not worth living.  53

Honor connects to many things, but one thing it’s not connect to is happiness.  In honor cultures, happiness as we think of it – “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” is not a recognized good.  Happiness in honor cultures is the possession of unsullied honor. Everything else is secondary.  52

The will to fight, the passion to be great, is an indispensable element of the Warrior Ethos. 58

The warrior sense of humor is terse, dry – and dark.  Its purpose is to deflect fear and to reinforce unity and cohesion.  61

The returning warrior may not know it but he has acquired an MBA in enduring adversity and a PhD in resourcefulness, tenacity and the capacity for hard work….The returning warrior possesses the Warrior Ethos, and this is a mighty ally in all spheres of endeavor. 76

But the Warrior Ethos commands that brute aggression be tempered by self-restraint and guided by moral principle.  77

The capacity for empathy and self-restraint will serve us powerfully, not only in our external wars but in the conflicts within our own hearts.  79

The Bhagavad-Gita takes the Warrior Ethos and elevates it to a loftier and nobler plane – the plane of the individual’s inner life, to his struggle to align himself with his own higher nature.  80

Here (in the Bhagavad-Gita) is the Warrior Ethos directed inward, employing the same virtues used to overcome external enemies – but enlisting these qualities now in the cause of the inner struggle for integrity, maturity and the honorable life.  81

FINAL PARAGRAPH-  Let us be, then, warriors of the heart, and enlist in our inner cause the virtues we have acquired through blood and sweat in the sphere of conflict – courage, patience selflessness, loyalty, fidelity, self-command, respect for elders, love of our comrades (and of the enemy), perseverance, cheerfulness in adversity and a sense of humor, however terse or dark.  90

Why this book:  Selected by my literature reading group, because it had been selected as the NPR 2017 One Book, One San Diego selection.  Over the years we have tried to read the One Book, One San Diego selections and have never been disappointed.

Summary in 3 sentences: It is a novel built around the  Armenian genocide of 1915-17 – often referred to as the genocide that nobody knows about – which the Turks undertook to rid their land of the largely Christian Armenian population during World War I.  The novel is structured around two main stories running in parallel, taking place nearly 100 years apart:  The narrator is a woman of American- Armenian descent  in present day America, tells her story of seeking to uncover the mysteries surrounding how her grandparents who met in Syria while assisting refugees from Armenia. The second story runs parallel to the first in alternating chapters and sections of chapter – and is indeed the compelling history of her grandparents: a young American woman doing philanthropic work in Syria in 1915, and the Armenian engineer she falls in love with.  It is a book about love, empathy, courage, and self-sacrifice amidst brutality and horror taking place in a setting in which ultimately half million people were murdered or starved to death.

My impressions:  It is very well written – Bohjalian’s 14th novel – and he is excellent at his craft.  He weaves the stories of multiple characters together to smoothly create a mosaic of experiences that makes a fascinating cross-generational picture of this horrible example of man’s inhumanity to man.  And most of the victims in this story are women and children.

The story goes back and forth from present day Boston, written in first person from the perspective of Laura Petrosian a young American woman who grew up hearing bits and pieces of stories  from and about her grandparents, knowing that there was much unsaid, much they were unwilling to talk about.  In her investigation she researches the time and place, finds old letters written by her grandparents, and bit by bit pieces together the evidence to learn  how her grandparents met and what they experienced.   The story goes back and forth between her life in present day America and the world of Aleppo, Syria in 1915 and the story of how the very different trajectories of her grandparents’ lives came together.  Aleppo was to mostly die of starvation, and maltreatment. Aleppo was a  main stopping off point where Armenian refugees mostly women and children were being herded by Turkish soldiers and then subsequently driven into the desert to die.  Here Laura’s American grandmother, and herArmenian grandfather met.

Ultimately Laura uncovers a secret that helps explain some of why her grandparents were so circumspect in talking about that period.

There are multiple parallel stories:

• The story of Laura Petrosian, married mother of two in modern day America, living the middle class life that most of us are familiar with, but captivated by the details she is uncovering about the lives of her grandparents, how they met and survived amidst the horrors of a genocide many of us know little or nothing about.
• The story of Elizabeth Endicott – Laura’s grandmother – as a young idealistic American woman from a wealthy Bostonian family who goes to Syria to try to provide assistance to Armenian refugees prior to the US entering WWI.  While there, she falls in love with Armun Petrosian
• Armun Petrosian an Armenian refugee, who as an engineer was able to escape the prison or execution by providing key engineering expertise for the Germans who were allied to the Turks in WW1.  He is struggling to come to terms with the losses of his family to the Turkish “cleansing”  – his brothers fighting the Turks, or in the case of his wife and daughter,  simply slaughtered by them. He falls in love with Elizabeth, but his and Elizabeth’s paths diverge, before they come together again.
• Two German military engineers who were in Syria to assist their allies the  Turks, but who are appalled by the treatment of the Armenian refugees. They were also friends and the employers of Armun Petrosian
• Nevart, a middle aged and formerly well-to-do Armenian refugee who Elizabeth is able to rescue from the almost certain death of the refugee camps and bring to live in the embassy. Nevart had taken a young girl Houtan under her wing and was committed to protecting her as best she could from the fate of most of the refugees.
• Hatoun -the young girl who Nevart was caring for who survived the death march into Syria after watching her mother killed.  Houtan was psychologically traumatized by the experience, would barely speak, her behavior was erratic, and did not trust anyone.
• Ryan Martin, the US consul in Aleppo who is appalled by what he is seeing, appalled that his country is not doing more to stop the genocide, and is determined to somehow get word back to the United States about what is happening. He feels helpless as he is stymied at every turn by the Turkish and Syrian authorities in his efforts to inform his country, or mitigate the suffering he is seeing.

All of these individuals have key roles in the story and their lives converge, then diverge, then converge again.  Their stories make up a mosaic which provides a picture of some of the tragedy and heroism in this little known but horrible time and place in history.  It is also the story of a comfortable middle-class woman exploring her roots and realizing some of the heroism that had made her relatively secure lifestyle possible.

When we discussed this book in our reading group, all of us were glad we had read the book – it was well written, a fascinating story and informed us of events about which we had little previous knowledge. Most said that the plethora of characters did not allow the author to give them the depth we felt they deserved. Many of us agreed we’d have preferred the book to have been longer to make the key characters fully three dimensional.   And one of our group noted that he would have wanted some background as to why the Turks were so adamant about ridding their country of Armenians? What were the sources of this genocide ?   What was the cultural backstory behind this ethnic cleansing?

An interesting and good read.  Another good One Book, One San Diego selection.

Why this book:  I was selecting books for a reading group of young men preparing to enter SEAL Basic Training. This is required reading for Marines. I had read it about 20 years ago and thought it had some good lessons learned for aspiring SEALs as well as good for them to know what the Marines are reading.

Summary in 3 Sentences:  The story takes place in the Napoleonic Wars between Wellington’s army and Napoleon’s  army in Portugal, where Rifleman Dodd – a five year veteran in England’s army who got separated from his regiment.  He links up with – and is aided by – several different groups of Portuguese partisans who are fighting the French as guerrillas, who Dodd is able to organize and runs some harassing operations against the French while he tries to find his way back to the British forces.   Through a series of hardships and close calls, Dodd is able to survive, maintain his focus on rejoining his regiment, while also never forgetting that he is in Portugal to defeat the French, and is able to make  a difference with his Portuguese guerrillas on French operations.

My Impressions: An interesting little book – about 200 pages – which offers insights into the lives of common soldiers 200 years ago, and into the battle between Wellington’s British Army and the French forces of Napoleon in Portugal.  The book was originally titled “Death to the French” and was written in the early 1930s when the British Army was still angry at the French for what they perceived as cowardice and lack of commitment to carry their load fighting the Germans in WW1.  It was published in the US as Rifleman Dodd – simply the name of the hero and protagonist of the novel.

Dodd is one man caught in a clash between two large armies in Portugal and is lost in the shuffle as the armies move and maneuver against each other. But his world and mission are dire and dramatic and he must use his wits to communicate and work with the Portuguese partisans who save his life and who are also fighting the French.  He is dependent on them, but they admire and take advantage of his military experience and tactical expertise in harassing the French forces.  He is an experienced fighter – with five years in the army and a veteran of numerous battles and campaigns. His instincts for survival and for tactical success on the ground are well honed.   Forrester makes him into something of a model soldier – uncomplicated, undemanding, physically tough and resilient, and focused on one thing -his duty as a soldier.

He was a soldier of his time, with very little education or knowledge of the world outside of what he had learned on the farm where he grew up in Sussex England, and as a rifleman in his regiment.  But he is very practical, humble, and resourceful, and when during a battle he became separated and then left behind as either a casualty or missing in action, he had to fend for himself, and he missed his mates and his regiment.  But alone or in his regiment, he was single minded in his focus on his duty, his regiment and his mission.

The essence of the story is Dodd’s character and soldierly virtues – and this is the reason this short book resonates so well with the USMC .   The story is not only about what happens to him under those austere and challenging circumstance, but more about how he handles hardship and challenge with a selfless, singleminded focus on his mission and returning to his regiment.   He was not tempted by comfort of mind or body, or by women, or even the opportunity for other comforting distractions with his Portuguese partisans.  After a series of misfortunes, he does not succumb to despair – he simply soldiers on, not expecting to live, but committed to live or die doing his duty as best he can.

Forrester also gives us some of the French perspective, but he does not paint a very positive picture of French discipline or of them as a fighting force.    We get to know throughout the book a particular French company of soldiers and their struggles and suffering under poor leadership, their poor morale, lack of food, shelter and a strong sense of purpose.  We also get to see how the Portuguese civilian peasants suffered at the hands of the French, but we are led to believe they were helpless victims of both sides –  their villages and fields burned, their women ravaged, their men killed,  their food supplies destroyed or confiscated.  And in the midst of all this, we follow Rifleman Dodd, alone and unafraid, organizing the peasants, attacking the supply trains of the French, doing his duty and doing whatever he can to return to his mates and his regiment.

There is a telling  quote in the story as he was about to embark on a one man sabotage mission against the French.   “Yet if he had been asked…if he were happy, he would not have known what to reply. He would have admitted readily enough that he was uncomfortable, that he was cold, and badly fed, and verminous; that his clothe were in rags, and his feed and knees and elbows raw and bleeding through much walking and crawling; that he was in ever-present peril of his life, and that he really did not expect to survive the adventure he was about to thrust himself into voluntarily, but all this had nothing to do with happiness: that was something he never stopped to thing about.  Perhaps the fact that he did not think about it proves he was happy. He was a soldier carrying out his duty as well as he knew how.”  (p 173-74)

When Dodd finally does return to his regiment, he does not regale his leaders or his mates with his adventures, nor of tales of his exploits against the French with the partisans.  When asked “How did you live? What did you get up to?”  Dodd responded, “Dunno, sir.  I managed somehow, sir.” And Forester goes on to say, “..in those days there were no medals or crosses for the ranks.  There was only honor and duty…”

This book is a great book for young men or women entering the military to serve in combat forces.  The ideal – almost a caricature – is hard to imagine with today’s young people.  At one point Forrester describes Dodd: “His mind did not constantly demand new little activities. He could lie and chew the cud of his observation as placidly as a cow.”  That hardly describes today’s young warriors who are well educated, well informed, and have been exposed to so much more of the world than Dodd.  But it is a good look at soldiering of a different era – and Dodd’s devotion to duty and honor and his unit are timeless virtues for those in the military.

Why this book: I had heard Tim Ferriss strongly endorsing Neil Gaiman’s Graveyard Book.  I was away from home unexpectedly without my current reading, so visited a book store and found this one.  It looked interesting and not too long.  So I thought I’d give Neil Gaiman a try.

Summary in 3 Sentences.  The protagonist of The Ocean at the End of the Lane  is a middle aged man who returns to the town of his youth, and lapses into memories from his childhood.  The book is written from his perspective as a lonely introverted 7 year old living on a farm in England, when without much warning, reality seems to bend and warp and things start happening that don’t fit the reality that you and I live in.  Reality and fantasy get shuffled and our protagonist comes face-to-face with supernatural versions of good and evil, must decide, react and respond, and grow.

My Impressions: I really didn’t know what I’d gotten myself into as I started this book but soon realized it would fit into the genre of “magical realism.”  The story takes place in about the 1970s or 80s in rural England, and begins with a middle aged man visiting the small town of his youth to attend a funeral – we don’t know whose – and takes a break from the various events to go sit at a spot where he’d had unresolved childhood memories.  Then the book becomes the first person account of a bizarre set of occurrences from the perspective of this man as a seven year old boy.

A stranger comes to stay with his family and is found dead in his car, an apparent suicide  from carbon monoxide – with a hose leading into the car with closed windows.  Near the scene of the suicide, with the police and other adults sorting things out, our young protagonist joins his neighbor, a girl of 13, who is confident and commanding, so he  follows her as she invites him to walk out into some nearby fields.  Then things get strange, and the reader  begins to realize that “we are not in Kansas anymore” as the sky turns a different color, and supernatural beings converse with the girl, and she converses with them,  quite comfortably and confidently.  She tells the boy to NOT let go of her hand, and when he inadvertently does, he feels a sharp pain in his foot, which has significance and opens the door to the rest of the story.

Soon our young protagonist returns home to seeming normality but the strange occurrences in that field continue to enter the boy’s world in the form of a woman who he senses is not what she claims to be, and his intuition is correct, as he see her disrupting his family’s life.  And the 13 year old girl is not what she seems to be either, nor are her mother and grandmother.  But they are clearly “good guys” in this battle between good and evil spirits.  But, it seems in this book, nothing is quite what it seems. The story culminates with an other-worldly confrontation between good and evil spirits on this and some other dimension of reality, where different rules seem to apply.

And then, we return to our middle aged man visiting his town, remembering this strange incident – but there are some things left over from that strange story when he meets again some of the players in that rather bizarre drama from his youth.

An interesting, and unusual book – a cross between a fairy tale and science fiction.  Not a genre I’m at home with.  I would read it again, but with someone else, with whom I could discuss metaphors and symbols, what the author may be trying to get at.   A group of creative people could read this book – it is short, about 180 pages – then get together, drink several glasses of wine, and have a rollicking good time figuring it out.