We join Scott Griffin near the beginning of his flight, as he guides his plane out of Canadian airspace, and into the danger zone that is the Atlantic Ocean. If something goes wrong on a ship in the Mid-Atlantic, it's not good, but on an airplane, especially a small Cessna, mistakes, miscalculations, and mechanical failures are unquestionably fatal. Fortunately, Griffin only experiences diabolical weather conditions, radio failure, and a bad case of exhaustion after multiple consecutive long-haul flights, which add to the story without taking his life. His arrival at his destination brings us to the end of the second chapter. Tired and hungry, he swoops over the N'gong Hills, makes an instrument approach and landing to Nairobi's Wilson Airport, and taxis up to the Flying Doctors Service hangar.
Griffin already sees a change in local lifestyles in these first chapters. While resting and refueling in the Azores before continuing on to Europe and Africa, he is invited for a drink by the captain on duty at Santa Maria airport. Surprised by the act of generosity, he agrees, and learns a little bit about the islands' aviation history and lore. "We don't see many planes coming through here any more," says the captain, Helder Fernando da Silva Borges Pimental. He clearly remembers a time when the islands were the crucifix of transatlantic air travel. But things have changed with the introduction of jet-engines and non-stop flights, and the islands are losing their importance. The people and their distinct Portuguese/international culture, however, still remain.
This first act of kindness is the beginning of Griffin's experience with a way of life vastly different and more fulfilling to him than his previous life in Toronto.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Travel Writing Blog #1 - Overview
Reading about the near disasters of a transatlantic flight in a single-engine Cessna while you yourself are making the same flight, albeit in the relative comfort and safety of a Boeing, is probably not recommended. But that speaks to the merits of a good book, one that grabs you by the propellor shaft and pulls you into the clouds, where you forget, ignore, or don't care about what is happening around you. All that matters is the book.
That's "My Heart is Africa" in a nutshell. Scott Griffin's tale of his two year African sojourn halted my life on page one, and didn't let it start again until the covers closed for the final time. Maybe it had something to do with the jet-lag or the excessive amounts of excellent wine one consumes in Italy, but one of the best books I've read this year has been by a mere businessman!
Griffin and his wife, Krystyne, spent two years based in Nairobi, Kenya, while he worked to reorganize The Flying Doctors Service, an organization that provides emergency medical and evacuation services to East Africa in its entirety. They also flew various missions and out-trips around Africa, Griffin's personal goal for his journey being to circumnavigate the African Continent.
Brilliantly written, superbly paced, and inescapably intringuing, "My Heart is Africa" paints an accurate and refreshing picture of life in every corner of the Dark Continent, from Arab North Africa to white dominated South Africa, black Nairobi to politically unstable . A clear-headed view of the people living on the world's most impoverished continent is also presented: foreign aid workers and organizations, black Africans, white Africans, various military personas, the UN, and a host of other tasty characters all appear in this magnificent cross section of Africa.
That's "My Heart is Africa" in a nutshell. Scott Griffin's tale of his two year African sojourn halted my life on page one, and didn't let it start again until the covers closed for the final time. Maybe it had something to do with the jet-lag or the excessive amounts of excellent wine one consumes in Italy, but one of the best books I've read this year has been by a mere businessman!
Griffin and his wife, Krystyne, spent two years based in Nairobi, Kenya, while he worked to reorganize The Flying Doctors Service, an organization that provides emergency medical and evacuation services to East Africa in its entirety. They also flew various missions and out-trips around Africa, Griffin's personal goal for his journey being to circumnavigate the African Continent.
Brilliantly written, superbly paced, and inescapably intringuing, "My Heart is Africa" paints an accurate and refreshing picture of life in every corner of the Dark Continent, from Arab North Africa to white dominated South Africa, black Nairobi to politically unstable . A clear-headed view of the people living on the world's most impoverished continent is also presented: foreign aid workers and organizations, black Africans, white Africans, various military personas, the UN, and a host of other tasty characters all appear in this magnificent cross section of Africa.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
David Bergen - Faith
Faith is a part of everybody's life, whether we admit it or not. Everybody has faith in something, be it God, people, the government, humanity - pick a topic. But our faith can be tested at certain points in our lives. For example, moving to a foreign country would certainly qualify as trying.
David Bergen's short story, "And You Arrive on the Other Side With Nothing," bears a strikingly similar pretext to Barbara Kingsolver's bestselling novel "The Poisonwood Bible": A family moves to a foreign country, and, shocked by what they discover, find it difficult to deal with a reality that is very different from what they had imagined.
Rather than a move to Africa, as in Kingsolver's book, Bergen's story takes place after having moved his young family to a small Vietnamese village - some might say "oops". They need a translator, have no or little idea of any local customs, and are not use to the geography, climate, food, travel methods, etc. And yet, despite being harassed or cast out as foreigners on innumerable occasions, they manage to hang on, pushed through their tribulations by their faith in each other, and encouraged by the helping hands extended by a very sparse group of locals.
David's son Levi demonstrates this faith when David has a moment of self-doubt, of weakness, of frustration with the circumstances his put his family, particularly his kids, in. As David holds his head, rocking back and forth in a corner, Levi just curls up with his father and touches his leg, letting him know that he's there. That, for me, was one of the most powerful scenes in the story, displaying a sons belief in his father.
Perhaps the Bergen family found their faith in each other because, in their new country, they knew nothing else outside of their family. They were unused to a world where little boys have their penises touched in public markets, or hookers work on most street corners.
David Bergen's short story, "And You Arrive on the Other Side With Nothing," bears a strikingly similar pretext to Barbara Kingsolver's bestselling novel "The Poisonwood Bible": A family moves to a foreign country, and, shocked by what they discover, find it difficult to deal with a reality that is very different from what they had imagined.
Rather than a move to Africa, as in Kingsolver's book, Bergen's story takes place after having moved his young family to a small Vietnamese village - some might say "oops". They need a translator, have no or little idea of any local customs, and are not use to the geography, climate, food, travel methods, etc. And yet, despite being harassed or cast out as foreigners on innumerable occasions, they manage to hang on, pushed through their tribulations by their faith in each other, and encouraged by the helping hands extended by a very sparse group of locals.
David's son Levi demonstrates this faith when David has a moment of self-doubt, of weakness, of frustration with the circumstances his put his family, particularly his kids, in. As David holds his head, rocking back and forth in a corner, Levi just curls up with his father and touches his leg, letting him know that he's there. That, for me, was one of the most powerful scenes in the story, displaying a sons belief in his father.
Perhaps the Bergen family found their faith in each other because, in their new country, they knew nothing else outside of their family. They were unused to a world where little boys have their penises touched in public markets, or hookers work on most street corners.
Monday, January 26, 2009
President Obama - Egg-nog-ural Address
The election of the 44th President of The United States in November of last year caused many people to break out the holiday cheer a little early in anticipation of a new era of change. Obama's Inauguration on January 20th caused much the same reaction, as hopeful people poured into the streets to show their support. Both days had that near-holiday atmosphere about them. Both days will likely go down in history. But President Obama's Inaugural Address was fundamentally different from President-Elect Obama's acceptance speech.
As his now famous acceptance speech was written to celebrate the moment, to take a collective step back and look at what had been accomplished, it rightfully took on an almost joyful tone. It could be described as a pep talk to get the world through it's last two months of Bush, giving us something to really look forward to in the New Year. He also had an "element of surprise" for his acceptance speech, in that everyone was anticipating the election result, not the speeches afterwards, which benefited him when he pulled a first-class speech out of his pocket.
His Inaugural Address, however, had no element of surprise, and had less celebrate. He couldn't draw out the "look at me! I'm a black President!" factor much further, so he had to cut a path between looking back, looking down, and looking forward. And he managed it brilliantly. Following Winston Churchill's example, he promised no easy way out, but stated to Americans that through their time-tested hard work and determination, they could pull their country out of a spiral into the economic abyss. He also renewed Americas perpetual promise to extend a helping hand to those who need it.
Obama also promised "an end to the petty grievances and false promises, recriminations and worn out dogmas" that have plagued American politics in recent years; a new way forward in conjunction with the Muslim world; and, perhaps most importantly, to Obama at least, a return to the old, true values that used to drive America.
As for the new President's oratorical skill, he's the only human being capable of captivating the world with the instructions to an IKEA furniture set. He is incapable, so far, of speaking poorly, and always presents as thoroughly convincing, and comfortable in front of an audience. He has passion and energy, but not in overwhelming or inappropriate proportions. He says what needs to be said, and isn't afraid of saying. All in all, he's just plain brilliant.
In the words of Robin Williams, he's just a tanned Kennedy.
As his now famous acceptance speech was written to celebrate the moment, to take a collective step back and look at what had been accomplished, it rightfully took on an almost joyful tone. It could be described as a pep talk to get the world through it's last two months of Bush, giving us something to really look forward to in the New Year. He also had an "element of surprise" for his acceptance speech, in that everyone was anticipating the election result, not the speeches afterwards, which benefited him when he pulled a first-class speech out of his pocket.
His Inaugural Address, however, had no element of surprise, and had less celebrate. He couldn't draw out the "look at me! I'm a black President!" factor much further, so he had to cut a path between looking back, looking down, and looking forward. And he managed it brilliantly. Following Winston Churchill's example, he promised no easy way out, but stated to Americans that through their time-tested hard work and determination, they could pull their country out of a spiral into the economic abyss. He also renewed Americas perpetual promise to extend a helping hand to those who need it.
Obama also promised "an end to the petty grievances and false promises, recriminations and worn out dogmas" that have plagued American politics in recent years; a new way forward in conjunction with the Muslim world; and, perhaps most importantly, to Obama at least, a return to the old, true values that used to drive America.
As for the new President's oratorical skill, he's the only human being capable of captivating the world with the instructions to an IKEA furniture set. He is incapable, so far, of speaking poorly, and always presents as thoroughly convincing, and comfortable in front of an audience. He has passion and energy, but not in overwhelming or inappropriate proportions. He says what needs to be said, and isn't afraid of saying. All in all, he's just plain brilliant.
In the words of Robin Williams, he's just a tanned Kennedy.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Mary Rogan on Josef Penninger
It's not often that we study the work of a classmates parent in class. In fact, I don't recall ever doing that before. It certainly does not detract from the article, however.
Ms. Rogan's sources are well chosen, and she makes the most of each of them. She appears to be tenacious in her pursuance of sources close to her subject, even travelling to Austria to speak with Mr. Josef Penninger's family, and some of his early teachers. She does not, however, appear to do this in an intrusive or rude way. That is critical when doing pieces like this. As demonstrated in the previous article of hers that we read, "Acts of Faith", she goes to great length to ensure that she is on good terms with the Dueck family, including buying Tyrel a t-shirt, and taking his mother and sister out to get their hair done. One could easily see her maintaining a friendship with those in her article for years after her work had been published. Although her article on Josef Penninger does not explicitly state that she used the same "tactics" with her sources for this article, it is probably safe to assume that she did.
For example, during her visit to Austria, she visits Penninger's mother, who lives in a hospital after being disabled by a stroke. She gained no information about Penninger's work from this episode, or really about Penninger himself, as his mother could not speak. But she was allowed a chance to look into Josef's life, and into the life of his family - a chance which she must have earned through kindness and trustworthyness. No one let's just any reporter visit their near vegetated mother/wife.
She also has the ability to look past what her sources are saying, see into them as people, look at their character. She does this with Penninger's mentor, Tak Mak, and also with both of Penninger's old teachers in Austria.
When Mr. Mak questions Ms. Rogan's reasons for doing the article on Penninger, at first she suspects jealousy, but she then discovers that Mr. Mak has had bad experiences with reporters in the past, and doesn't want Penninger to go through the same thing. When leaving her interview with Seitel, Ms. Rogan had the impression that speaking to her may only bring bad things for Penninger's old physics teacher. Probably true, seeing as the vice-principal was translating for them. And finally, she is able to tell that "Herr Teacher" is talking out his arse when he tells her that "he always saw something special in Josef." Her hunch was proved true when Josef laughed and told her that this was the same teacher who told his parents he'd never amount to anything more than a farmer.
Rogan's diction is the key part of her article, however. She is able to take extremely complex scientific ideas and processes and make them understandable to her readers. She uses the fantastic metaphor of a bicycle going downhill to describe Penninger's life, the rate at which he travels being relative to the impact his discoveries are making on science, and on human life. And he only gets faster and faster.
Interestingly, her language is a little more "uncouth" that one would expect in this type of article, but it doesn't detract from the article in my opinion. She just appears to be forcefully asserting her claim that Penninger is the greatest scientist of our time, and will save the world - again. Besides, swearing is a part of the English language, and I don't think anyone should be afraid of it.
All in all, a thoroughly enjoyable, well written article, on a fascinating topic.
Ms. Rogan's sources are well chosen, and she makes the most of each of them. She appears to be tenacious in her pursuance of sources close to her subject, even travelling to Austria to speak with Mr. Josef Penninger's family, and some of his early teachers. She does not, however, appear to do this in an intrusive or rude way. That is critical when doing pieces like this. As demonstrated in the previous article of hers that we read, "Acts of Faith", she goes to great length to ensure that she is on good terms with the Dueck family, including buying Tyrel a t-shirt, and taking his mother and sister out to get their hair done. One could easily see her maintaining a friendship with those in her article for years after her work had been published. Although her article on Josef Penninger does not explicitly state that she used the same "tactics" with her sources for this article, it is probably safe to assume that she did.
For example, during her visit to Austria, she visits Penninger's mother, who lives in a hospital after being disabled by a stroke. She gained no information about Penninger's work from this episode, or really about Penninger himself, as his mother could not speak. But she was allowed a chance to look into Josef's life, and into the life of his family - a chance which she must have earned through kindness and trustworthyness. No one let's just any reporter visit their near vegetated mother/wife.
She also has the ability to look past what her sources are saying, see into them as people, look at their character. She does this with Penninger's mentor, Tak Mak, and also with both of Penninger's old teachers in Austria.
When Mr. Mak questions Ms. Rogan's reasons for doing the article on Penninger, at first she suspects jealousy, but she then discovers that Mr. Mak has had bad experiences with reporters in the past, and doesn't want Penninger to go through the same thing. When leaving her interview with Seitel, Ms. Rogan had the impression that speaking to her may only bring bad things for Penninger's old physics teacher. Probably true, seeing as the vice-principal was translating for them. And finally, she is able to tell that "Herr Teacher" is talking out his arse when he tells her that "he always saw something special in Josef." Her hunch was proved true when Josef laughed and told her that this was the same teacher who told his parents he'd never amount to anything more than a farmer.
Rogan's diction is the key part of her article, however. She is able to take extremely complex scientific ideas and processes and make them understandable to her readers. She uses the fantastic metaphor of a bicycle going downhill to describe Penninger's life, the rate at which he travels being relative to the impact his discoveries are making on science, and on human life. And he only gets faster and faster.
Interestingly, her language is a little more "uncouth" that one would expect in this type of article, but it doesn't detract from the article in my opinion. She just appears to be forcefully asserting her claim that Penninger is the greatest scientist of our time, and will save the world - again. Besides, swearing is a part of the English language, and I don't think anyone should be afraid of it.
All in all, a thoroughly enjoyable, well written article, on a fascinating topic.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Sedaris v.s. MacLean
David Sedaris' "SantaLand Diaries" and Stuart McLean's "Polly Anderson's Christmas Party" are perfect examples of two different styles of comedic writing. The fundamental differences between the two pieces lie in what is said, and how it is said.
Sedaris' humour comes from his descriptions. He makes his readers laugh by describing events and details in a very straight forward, matter of fact way. For example, "I tend to avoid leaflets, but it breaks my heart to see a grown man dressed as a taco." For whatever reason, just saying things as they are is funny. And Sedaris is good at that.
There are funny things that happen to him as well, such as being told "Congratulations, Mr. Sedaris. You are an elf." Of course, many of the things that happen to him in SantaLand are quite surreal, and therefore prime comedic material, but it's Sedaris' ability to describe details humourously that makes him a right cracker of a comedian.
McLean's humour, on the other hand, comes from the events in his stories. Usually, everything goes stupendously wrong from the very start for his protagonists. For example, Dave in "Polly Anderson's Christmas Party" starts the story off by receiving his drivers license renewed, but there's a hitch, of course: it says he needs to wear glasses, however he's never worn them in his life. That sets the stage for the Christmas party to spiral out of control. It finishes with Dave being pulled over while driving Bernie Schellenberger and his baby around in order to put the baby to sleep. Dave, however, obviously doesn't have his glasses, but he does have his drunk, bloodied, mono-shoed, and coatless son in the back, who proceeds to give the cop a hard time.
McLean's descriptions are far less direct, even bordering on poetic at times. For example, this funny section of poetic language uses a long metaphor, and appears towards the beginning of the story: "The star in his stomach was burning brightly now. Ahh, thought Dave, I know the name of the galaxy. It's the galaxy of bureaucratic misfortune - an abyss of swamps and labyrinths, a horror house of tunnels and mazes."
In short, McLean's humour comes from what is said, and Sedaris' humour comes from how it's said. Both, however, are absolutely hilarious, and thoroughly enjoyable to read.
Sedaris' humour comes from his descriptions. He makes his readers laugh by describing events and details in a very straight forward, matter of fact way. For example, "I tend to avoid leaflets, but it breaks my heart to see a grown man dressed as a taco." For whatever reason, just saying things as they are is funny. And Sedaris is good at that.
There are funny things that happen to him as well, such as being told "Congratulations, Mr. Sedaris. You are an elf." Of course, many of the things that happen to him in SantaLand are quite surreal, and therefore prime comedic material, but it's Sedaris' ability to describe details humourously that makes him a right cracker of a comedian.
McLean's humour, on the other hand, comes from the events in his stories. Usually, everything goes stupendously wrong from the very start for his protagonists. For example, Dave in "Polly Anderson's Christmas Party" starts the story off by receiving his drivers license renewed, but there's a hitch, of course: it says he needs to wear glasses, however he's never worn them in his life. That sets the stage for the Christmas party to spiral out of control. It finishes with Dave being pulled over while driving Bernie Schellenberger and his baby around in order to put the baby to sleep. Dave, however, obviously doesn't have his glasses, but he does have his drunk, bloodied, mono-shoed, and coatless son in the back, who proceeds to give the cop a hard time.
McLean's descriptions are far less direct, even bordering on poetic at times. For example, this funny section of poetic language uses a long metaphor, and appears towards the beginning of the story: "The star in his stomach was burning brightly now. Ahh, thought Dave, I know the name of the galaxy. It's the galaxy of bureaucratic misfortune - an abyss of swamps and labyrinths, a horror house of tunnels and mazes."
In short, McLean's humour comes from what is said, and Sedaris' humour comes from how it's said. Both, however, are absolutely hilarious, and thoroughly enjoyable to read.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Acts of Faith
The issue of Faith v.s. Science is a perennial cringe-topic in almost every forum, but it gets the nervous looks flying fastest when it is raised with relation to medical care. People just don't want to talk about it. Mary Rogan, however, fears not the sensitive issues.
Her article tells the story of the Dueck family of Martensville, Saskatchewan. 13 year-old Tyrell Dueck and his parents, Tim and Yvonne, were referred to the Cancer Centre at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon by their family docor, who felt that Tyrell may have cancer. Upon receiving the news, rather than do what any normal parents would do - rush their child into hospital for an immediate diagnoses - Tim and Yvonne spent weeks researching alternative treatments, without even knowing for sure whether or not Tyrell had cancer. It was not until the Cancer Centre at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon called and asked them to bring their son in that they did so.
Tyrell Duecks was then diagnosed with osteogenic sarcoma, a fatal and fast growing form of bone cancer.
After this diagnoses, things went downhill. His parents refused to let him have chemotherapy, partly because of chemotherapy's side-effects and the required amputation, and partly because of their religion. This resulted in a court case that gave the Provincial government guardianship over Tyrell, solely for the purpose of medical consent. Tyrell then spoke up, saying that he didn't want the treatment - more court cases, media coverage, and inaction with regards to Tyrell's medical condition ensued.
By the time it was all over, the doctors said that Tyrell's cancer had spread. His parents were now free to do what they wanted. They chose American Biologics, an alternative care facility in Tijuana, Mexico, that provides treatment that is illegal in the US and Canada.
Upon Tyrell's return to Canada the following year, his parents made it public that his condition had improved. He subsequently died on June 30th, 1999, at the age of 13.
In my opinion, if somebody refuses medical treatment for themselves, that's there choice. However, if they refuse medical treatment for minors in their custody, that is unaccetpable. This article, along with other cases, gives substantial evidence against the effectiveness of alternative treatments, and anyone who refuses a child the proven medical treatments available to them, for whatever reason, does not deserve to have custody of that child. End of story.
Her article tells the story of the Dueck family of Martensville, Saskatchewan. 13 year-old Tyrell Dueck and his parents, Tim and Yvonne, were referred to the Cancer Centre at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon by their family docor, who felt that Tyrell may have cancer. Upon receiving the news, rather than do what any normal parents would do - rush their child into hospital for an immediate diagnoses - Tim and Yvonne spent weeks researching alternative treatments, without even knowing for sure whether or not Tyrell had cancer. It was not until the Cancer Centre at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon called and asked them to bring their son in that they did so.
Tyrell Duecks was then diagnosed with osteogenic sarcoma, a fatal and fast growing form of bone cancer.
After this diagnoses, things went downhill. His parents refused to let him have chemotherapy, partly because of chemotherapy's side-effects and the required amputation, and partly because of their religion. This resulted in a court case that gave the Provincial government guardianship over Tyrell, solely for the purpose of medical consent. Tyrell then spoke up, saying that he didn't want the treatment - more court cases, media coverage, and inaction with regards to Tyrell's medical condition ensued.
By the time it was all over, the doctors said that Tyrell's cancer had spread. His parents were now free to do what they wanted. They chose American Biologics, an alternative care facility in Tijuana, Mexico, that provides treatment that is illegal in the US and Canada.
Upon Tyrell's return to Canada the following year, his parents made it public that his condition had improved. He subsequently died on June 30th, 1999, at the age of 13.
In my opinion, if somebody refuses medical treatment for themselves, that's there choice. However, if they refuse medical treatment for minors in their custody, that is unaccetpable. This article, along with other cases, gives substantial evidence against the effectiveness of alternative treatments, and anyone who refuses a child the proven medical treatments available to them, for whatever reason, does not deserve to have custody of that child. End of story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)