KEV67

This is a book about economics and politics written in 1944 by Friedrich Hayek. I think he was an Austrian Jew. At the time he wrote the book he lived and worked in Britain, and I think later he moved to the USA. It is quite a hard read. In the book he argues that Socialism leads to autocracy, because economic decisions are taken out of individuals' hands and put into the purview of experts appointed by the government.

I am in the process of relocating from Reading to Bury St Edmunds in Suffolk. I attended a service at the Unitarian church in Bury St Edmunds last Sunday. It was not as good as the services usually are in Reading, but it was the same sort of thing, mainly readings with the odd hymn. Think 'Something Understood' on Radio 4. I have not returned to the other church I used to go to in Reading. I may do this Sunday, but I am concerned the vicar will take a dim view of my having become a single parent via surrogacy. There is another Church of England (Continuing) about 55 miles away from Bury St Edmunds in a place called Frimton-on-Sea. It is accessible by rail, but it is difficult to get there by 11 o'clock on Sunday.

I have read Ivanhoe now. Not as good as Waverley, or Rob Roy. Scott was treading on dangerous ground, and poured it on a bit thick with the antisemitism, but it was clear with whom his sympathies were. Did the members of your reading group object to the portrayal of the Africans at end or the Saracens near the beginning? The antisemitic feeling of many of the characters was pretty strong, but I suspect it was accurate for the time. The Prioress's Tale in The Canterbury Tales was very antisemitic. I did not think Sir Walter Scott was anywhere near as antisemitic as Charles Dickens was in Oliver Twist (although I thought Fagin was the best character, especially when he was in prison).

I thought the final chapters were a bit on the daft side. Altogether, not a bad book, but nowhere near as good as Waverley. Sir Walter Scott has a common theme. In Waverley, in particular, he celebrated the culture and national pride of the Highlanders, but appeared to think it was time for the English and Scots to forge forward together. In Ivanhoe the opposing peoples are the Saxons and Normans. Ivanhoe is a Saxon, Richard the Lionheart is a Norman. Ivanhoe's father, Cedric, wishes for the old days to come back, but finally accepts it is not possible. Antisemitism is the other big theme in this book. Isaac of York is portrayed as a stereotypical money lender, but his daughter, Rebecca is very generous.

Reading about King Richard II's singing reminded me of something I heard on the radio once. Richard Thompson of Fairport Convention sang a song Richard II supposedly wrote. He was very impressed with his song writing.

I don't think Ayn Rand would have approved of that. She would rather the mooches die off.

Huckleberry Finn. I loved Tom Sawyer, and I thought Huckleberry Finn would be more of the same. I got at least ten chapters in, but it was more serious and it did not have Tom Sawyer in it. I read it about forty years later and I thought it was a great book, probably the best American book I have read. The only bit I did not like were the last six chapters, in which Tom Sawyer reappears and is very annoying. Huckleberry nearly slipped to second place behind Moby Dick in the Great American novel charts.

You read that as a child!

He made the Booker shortlist once or twice. Goes to show you can he a superb writer and twenty years after your death, hardly anyone has heard of you. If an old footballer, not a superstar, just a solid pro, had died. Plenty of people would remember who he was.

Sir Walter Scott was very good at Latin. I am enjoying trying to parse the Latin phrases. It used to frustrate me when I came across Latin in books and I could not work it out, despite three years of incredibly boring Latin classes at school.

The Knights Templar are not coming across too well in this book. I thought Brian de Bois Guilbert was bad, but this Grandmaster Beaumanoir takes the biscuit. I used to work in a village called Templecombe in Somerset. There is a railway station in Bristol called Temple meads. I thought there was a Temple Cloud somewhere in between. They were all associated with the Knights Templar. I have not heard of a Templestowe, mentioned in the book. I thought King Henry IV of France, also called Henry the fair, was being jolly unfair when he persecuted the Knights Templar, but maybe he had the right idea. Regarding my previous query, who was prettier, Rowena or Rebecca. I reckon it must have been Rebecca, because Brian de Bois Guilbert has seen both and prefers Rebecca.

Anyone heard of Paul Bailey? I am just reading an article about him in The Critic. He was supposed to be ++good. John Self in The Critic says his masterpiece was Gabriel's Lament. I never heard of him before.

Wind in the Willows.

Ivanhoe is one of those 19th Century books that deals with Jews in England. Others I have read include: * Oliver Twist, Charles Dickens, * Our Mutual Friend, Charles Dickens, * Daniel Deronda, George Eliot, * The Way We Live Now, Anthony Trollope Ivanhoe is a good addition to the subgenre.

I wonder what it's like having killed that many men. I haven't even killed one yet.

Jack Reacher is a bit blood thirsty in this one. I have lost count of the people he has offed. I don't suppose it matters, because they were all bad men.

Sir Walter pours it on a bit thick in this book. Some of it is close to pantomime. Sir Reginald Front de Boeuf is a good laugh though. P.277 "In the name of St. Bennett, the prince of these bull-beggars," said Front-de-Boeuf, "have we a real monk this time, or another imposter? Search him, slaves; for an ye suffer a second imposter to be palmed upon you, I will have your eyes torn out, and hot coals put into the sockets."

Is Sir de Bracy as bad as the other two? Time will tell, no doubt. Also, who is prettier: Lady Rebecca or Rowena, the Jewess?

I don't like that Baron de Front-Boeuf. I hope he gets his. I don't like Sir Bois de Guilbert either. I think he gives the Knights Templar a bad name.

All this description of Jewish money-lending, and the meeting of a gang of robbers similar to Robin Hood and his merry men, reminded me of something I read years ago. I cannot remember the book, but the author said if Robin Hood ever lived it would be more likely to be in the reign of Edward I, after his expulsion of the Jews from England. There are no Robin Hood tales of Jewish money-lenders being robbed.

I am getting into it a bit more. It still seems somewhat far fetched. I wonder if it was true anyone passing by could just rock up to a nobleman's manor and be fed and sheltered at no cost for the night.

Only chapter 3, but, so far, not up to his usual high standard. I hope it improves. At the moment it reads like one of Ernie Wise's plays.

I have started reading. First I read a fictious letter by the author, purporting to be another author, outlining his reasoning for writing the book. Then I read the introduction. Often I avoid reading the introduction, because they give away spoilers, but this introduction was by Walter Scott himself. He said he did not want to write only Scottish novels, so he was branching out into an English one. He said it was trickier, because the wild men of Scotland were still in living memory, while England had been a civilised country a long time. I am only two chapter in, but, so far, I do not think it is as good as Waverley.

I think he also re-edited most his past novels. He made quite serious changes to at least one of them - Tess of the d'Urbervilles. As far as Jude goes,I think Hardy went too far. There were enough commonplace tragedies in the 19th Century without thinking up freak horror stories, which just do not happen in real life.

No, an I am not going to. I watched the film with Kate Winslet and Christopher Eccleston. It was quite a good film up to the horrible bit.