Friday, October 2, 2009

Book Review: intimate conversations- Devotions to Nurture a Woman's Soul

Intimate Conversations- Devotions to Nurture a Woman's Soul by Alicia Britt Chloe

There are three daily activites that a mother does each day.  They are so set in stone that we don’t schedule them.  There is no entry in the Blackberry, no red pen on the calendar. However, these are three things that each of us do.  Every. Day.   

We listen – to our kids, to our bosses, to our husbands, to our friends who vent over coffee, to the telemarketer who calls with an automobile survey.  It’s what we do.  And if we weren’t good listeners before kids, we certainly are now.  Endless “Mommy.  Mommy.  Mommy. MOMMY” and “Why?  Why?  WHY?  Must be answered.  AND NOW. 

We talk –We’re women.  It’s what we do.   

We share — We teach our children to share.  We share food, drink, time, maternity clothes, hand-me-downs, dinner with neighbors, and stories.  Oh the stories.  Okay, so maybe it’s called bragging and not sharing, but we do it…with fervor.  At the park, the bookstore, the doctor’s office, we’ll tell a story about our kids to anyone who is listening (Or even people who are not listening—aka your husband at the end of a long day).   

The one thing we don’t always do it stop and take a few minutes to spend with God. We put it off, we say “I’m too busy”, “I’ll do it later”, we have every rational reason in the world as to why we can’t possibly stop and take the time- for ourselves, for our family. Author Alicia Britt Chole’s book initmate conversations- DEVOTIONS to NURTURE a WOMAN’S SOUL shows ultra busy Mom’s and women how we must take the time to stop, and pray, and then wait and listen for the Lord to show us what His will is. The book is a collection of short devotionals that are easy to understand as they don’t take but a few minutes to read; the key however is to then use the Discussion and Reflective Journaling at the end of each devotion and apply it to your own life. This book can be read and used as a daily reminder of how much God loves us, and how much He wants to help us each and every day, in every situation, if only we take the time to STOP, PRAY and LISTEN.

Author Alicia Britt Chole brings the messages of the Bible into your home in this book, she writes with sound Biblical guidance and a gentle spirit that doesn’t force issues, but yet shows readers how just the simple act of allowing the Lord into your life and having Him direct your every day decisions can make such a big difference in how you live. This is a great book for new believers or those that have been believers for a long time. I highly recommend this to any Mom that just needs that gentle nudge to show yourself a little grace, take a load off and read one devotion a day- it can change you!

Available September 2009 at your favorite bookseller from Revell, a division of Baker Publishing Group.

'The Good King' a chapter dedicated to King Michael of Romania in a NEW BOOK by Sheilah Kast & Jim Rosapepe

Dracula is Dead: How Romanians Survived Communism, Ended it, and Emerged as the New Italy Since 1989, by Sheilah Kast and Jim Rosapepe, Bancroft Press, 400 pp, November 2009

Jim Rosapepe was the US Ambassador to Romania between 1998-2001. I had the great honour to met him and his wife ten years ago on the occasion of the US Independence Day celebrations in Iasi in north-eastern Romania. It was wonderful to meet the lively and energetic American community and officials so far away from the capital. The book written by the ambassadorial couple represents ‘a memorable tour of Romania – past, present, and future’ and its release, as the publishers announced, coincides with the 20th anniversary of the fall of Communism in Eastern Europe. I was very impressed by the publishers’ excellent marketing effort in promoting this remarkable work over the internet: on facebook, twitter and on the book website www.draculaisdead.com 

I highly recommend this book as an excellent holistic guide of Romania. For readers interested in royal history there is a chapter dedicated to King Michael of Romania  entitled “The Good King”. I endeavour to write a review for this book and post it on this blog in the next few weeks. 

Excerpt taken from Dracula Is Dead
Plotting a coup when you’re the king

“On the morning of the sixth of September, they called me to quickly take the oath,” Michael said. Waiting there were Antonescu and the Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church with a Bible, as well as the minister of justice and the justices of the Supreme Court.

“I was in a daze. After that, luckily, Antonescu did get my mother to return. He sent a telegram asking her to come to me [from her exile near Florence, Italy]. So she arrived at the beginning of October 1940.”

Whether by plan or happenstance, the schooling of the Crown Prince, which had grounded him so well in Romanian language, attitudes, history, and culture, had included nothing about the country’s politics. “I was completely kept away from any sort of political information,” Michael told us. “I had no education about the political part of the country—none! I used to hear about it on the sidelines—we knew what was going on, of course—but to actually make anything of it, no. I think it might have been my father’s idea . . . So, when all these things started happening, I mixed in it without knowing quite how and why and all the rest of it. Very difficult.”

And things were happening very fast. In November 1940, Antonescu proclaimed himself “Conducător,” the Romanian version of Hitler’s title “Fuhrer.” He did little to stop the orgy of violence against Jews and liberals by the Iron Guard elements in his government. To ensure a stable ally, Hitler pressed Antonescu to curb the Iron Guard. That provoked an armed uprising and the slaughter of 120 Jews in Bucharest in January 1941.

“It happened at the end of 1940, the very beginning of 1941,” King Michael recalled. “The Iron Guard got quite a few of the Jews in Romania, up in the north. Not just the Jews—they took our politicians, our statesmen, and they hung them on hooks, tore their hair out, shot them.” The king’s grim account trails off. Ion Antonescu, he said, “sort of let it happen, until there was a rebellion.” Antonescu used the army to quell the rebellion in forty-eight hours. That, King Michael recalls, kindled a shift in policies.

“After that, he started a little bit to change [with] the influence that my mother, myself, and the Church had on him to go easy on the Jewish question. It wasn’t one hundred percent, but it was something.”

Michael told us about meeting during the early 1940s with Romania’s chief rabbi, Alexandru Shafran.

“He used to come quite often to see me, and explain what was happening, and what he thought was going to happen. I called my mother into one of these meetings, and they talked together. She was appalled, and she said, ‘If you don’t do something, you will go down in history as Michael the Horrible.’” Michael said she took the same message to Antonescu: “She said, ‘This can’t go on anymore. You have to stop or change something.’ He had quite a bit of respect for her. So, somehow, something did get through.”

Queen Helen, who died in 1982, was later honored as a “righteous gentile” at Israel’s Holocaust memorial, Yad Vashem. Despite her efforts and those of her son, more than two hundred thousand Romanian Jews and gypsies were sent to Transnistria, where many died. Still, in southern and Eastern Romania, three hundred thousand avoided camps and massacres, more than anywhere else in occupied Europe.

The king told us that in his first months back on the throne, he didn’t realize the strength of Antonescu’s ties to Hitler. “The incredible thing was that he [Antonescu] declared war on Russia without me knowing anything about it,” Michael told us. “My mother heard the news on the BBC that morning, as the war started. About six o’clock in the morning, she came into my bedroom and said, ‘Listen!’ We were all taken aback. So I called up my prime minister, who was Mihai Antonescu [a distant cousin of the marshal], and I said, ‘What the hell is going on here?’ He said, ‘Yes, it’s true. I studied the situation in the newspapers.’”

That was June 22, 1941. We asked the king why he thought Marshal Antonescu had done it, and Michael displayed his usual detachment. He pointed to Russia’s occupation of Romania’s eastern provinces:

“As far as I can make out, because I never discussed all that with him, it had to do with patriotism. These were our provinces . . . After the Russians took our provinces of Basarabia and northern Bucovina, the Hungarians took northern Transylvania, which was something that went down very hard with the Romanian people . . . All our political parties and the population were fully in agreement that we should get these provinces back. We couldn’t do that alone. That’s why Antonescu went and allied himself with the Germans. But they all hoped to limit the conditions, [so that] we’d get to the frontier and not one step farther.”

Instead, Romania’s army took Odessa and joined in the German attacks on Sevastopol and Stalingrad.

Michael said he then “put the question” to Antonescu: “‘What are we doing there in Russia?’ Antonescu said, ‘I am sure that by going east, we’re going to get back Transylvania. Hitler promised.’” The King said there was no written agreement between Romania and Germany on that point, but that Antonescu told him that “he, as an officer, had given his word, and [that therefore he] had to go along without asking . . . His word to Hitler was more important than what was happening in the country.”

It proved to be a case of costly loyalty. At Stalingrad, during the last months of 1942, Romania lost eighteen divisions fighting the Russians, nearly two-thirds of the forces it had posted to the eastern front.

During his first two years on the throne, Michael told us, he did not have any contact with the Allies.

“But then, as things started going bad in Russia, we decided that this was not our war. This had nothing to do with us, and we had to find some way to get out.” He remembers commentators on BBC Radio and Voice of America badgering him, ‘Get out, get out. If you don’t, you won’t be able to show your face in the world.’ I said, ‘Fine to get out, but how do we do it?’ To that, I never got an answer.”

But the young monarch didn’t give up on back-channel communications with the Allies, though he was pretty sure Antonescu’s spies knew about them. The king told us he sent messengers to British and American contacts outside Romania—”representatives [authorized] to speak in my name and in the name of the opposition parties,” the PNL and the PNŢCD. Still no answer. So, the king told us, the head of the PNL, Constantin Brătianu, “sent another message that explained exactly the group we had and what we were trying to do, and that’s when we got a reply. It said, ‘We will not talk with you until you bring the Communists and the Socialists into your group.’ And then we understood,” the king told us. “It very much looked as if that message came from Moscow. And that’s what we had to do, finally.

“I wouldn’t say that America and Britain were thinking quite like that [to include Communists and Socialists in Romania], but Stalin was pushing. Why it was accepted so widely, I still don’t quite get. And then in 1943, we said, ‘There’s disaster in Russia. We have to do something urgently . . . and we could guarantee a certain part of [our] country free of the Germans, on the condition that they send in a massive airlift.’ We never even got an answer about that.”

In retrospect, the king told us, he could see that Stalin did not want Romania cutting a deal with the Western Allies. The contacts with the Allies that continued through 1943 and into 1944 were spotty. Meanwhile, King Michael was consolidating the elements of a conspiracy of his own. He had to move on it carefully, because Antonescu had chosen most of the royal aides, the servants at the royal palace, and even members of the cabinet. So, the king “huddled” with military and political people in settings that would thwart Antonescu’s eavesdropping— at parties, for example, or late in the evening. The king said several of the Army’s generals were loyal to him, and brought him intelligence, as did the head of the code office at the Foreign Office.

Antonescu was probably not as suspicious as he should have been. The king remembers the wartime dictator as very stubborn, even when his analysis was wrong.

“You know what the French say—’as the father, so the son.’ Antonescu had the mentality that I was going to follow in the footsteps of my father,” Michael told us. “He could not get it into his head that I was different.” The young king was not a playboy, and not focused on personal wealth, as his father had been. As Michael said with a sad smile, Antonescu didn’t get the psychology right.

“And he didn’t want me interfering. In 1943, at Christmas or New Year’s, I’d given one of my [public] messages, and said something to the effect that, ‘after the war,’ or ‘the war would end soon.’ The German minister objected. Antonescu was very angry about that, but it had already been done.”

Antonescu and his German allies had reason to be upset. From their perspective, the war was not going well. By late summer 1944, Russian troops had reoccupied northern Basarabia, and were headed toward Iaşi, in northeastern Romania. King Michael decided it was time to act, though he wasn’t sure what support he could expect from the Allies.

“We hoped and we imagined there would be a difference between the Russians and the Americans. But we couldn’t know it.” The king paused. “We were, I must say, extremely lucky, because the Germans pulled two Panzer divisions from Romania about the beginning of August. That let us breathe a little.”

Still, nearly fifty-five thousand German troops remained on Romanian soil, with almost none of Romania’s own troops present, except some raw recruits with a few months’ training, Michael recalled. What the twenty-two-year-old king had in mind—to seize power from Antonescu and switch sides in the war—was risky. It almost didn’t happen.

“The whole thing was planned for the twenty-sixth of August. One of the general staff officers, who was with us in this coup, began telling the units outside to start coming into Bucharest slowly and gently. But then, accidentally, my doctor in Sinaia was visited by a brother of someone on Antonescu’s staff, who stayed at the doctor’s house—I was at the summer palace in Sinaia at the time. My doctor told us the telephone rang, and he went to pick it up, and this other fellow picked it up at the same time. The doctor didn’t say anything, but he heard that Antonescu was going to the front for an inspection on the twenty-fourth.”

It was clear that if King Michael didn’t act right away, he’d lose his chance.

“So we nearly panicked. I got a call from one of our people in Bucharest. Then we dashed down to Bucharest—I left my mother in Sinaia. In the meantime, I had sent a telegram—I put it out myself, in military terms, to General [Henry] Maitland Wilson, who was commanding Allied forces in Italy. I said, ‘In view of the important events in Romania, we need massive bombardment’ at points I specified.”

Here was the king of Romania, telling the Allies precisely where to bomb his own country and people. Allied air attacks had started a few weeks before—Americans bombed the oil fields near Ploieşti during the day while the British made more tactical strikes at night. After he hustled back to the capital about August 20, the king recalled, “I went shooting ducks south of Bucharest as a sort of diversion.”

The new plan was for the king to call Antonescu in on the twenty-third, just before he was to head to the front, and demand a report from him. Also present would be the new prime minister, who was loyal to the king, and a military attaché who had served with Antonescu. In the next room waited three non-commissioned officers and a captain of the guard, and beyond them waited another aide de camp. The king and his co-conspirators had worked out a code—certain words the king would say if Antonescu did not agree to break Romania’s ties to
the Nazis.

“Antonescu came late, as usual,” Michael remembered. “We started talking . . . We discussed and discussed. Finally, I said, ‘Look, we have to get out of the war, and I’m asking you to do so.’ He said, ‘No! I’ve given my word to Hitler, and this is not my choice.’”

That was it. The king enunciated the pre-arranged code: “‘I’m very sorry, but you don’t leave me anything else to do.’ So at that moment,these three [officers] came into the room, got hold of him, and took him away. He was furious—and red in the face. He being the big leader, how could this happen to him? I didn’t like that attitude. I walked out—we didn’t get on well together, but this latest development was still not quite proper. It was unpleasant.” Sitting with us in the elegant parlor of Villa Serena, the king screwed up his patrician features at the memory of the long-ago unpleasantness. He continued the story:

“Before going upstairs, [Antonescu] turned around, spat on his captors, and said, ‘Tomorrow morning, you’ll all be hanging in the public square.’”

The king didn’t stick around to find out if that would actually happen. He remembers his staff telling him, “‘You’ve got to get out of here, because there’s going to be a reaction,’ which actually happened. I left about two o’clock in the morning and drove past Craiova [west of Bucharest]. I heard one airplane go by—when I looked up, it was a P38 Lightning [a U.S. reconnaissance plane] going toward Bucharest. I said to Mircea Ioaniţiu, my secretary and my friend, ‘I’ll bet he’s going to those places I gave him in my telegram.’ And that turned out to be right.” [Excerpt taken from Dracula Is Dead - Book - http://www.draculaisdead.com]

Diana Mandache’s Weblog Royal History

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Weasel and the Life of I

This has been such a strange two weeks. I’ve been back to work after losing my dog on September 18. Those first days were like a bad dream, the kind where you barely wake up several times before sinking back into the distorted narrative. I was like a Haitian zombie, going where I was pointed and doing whatever task was at hand without really becoming engaged in any process. Coming back to work helped because I have to think to do my job. Once I had to use my brain again, I had to really deal with my grief. What really helped is the love and support I received from friends and family, and the other dogs and doing their part to provide companionship.

Those of you who don’t know me must wonder how I could be so affected by losing a pet. It’s not like I lost a family member, right? Wrong. For me, this dog filled a hole that was left behind when I realized my child would be an only child. She’s a nearly perfect only child, at least for us, but it wouldn’t be fair to stand her under the waterfall of my frustrated need to baby something. And so, enter the dog. While I was being a strong and supportive mother, encouraging my daughter to go out and fully live her life, I was dressing up the rat dog in costumes, painting her toenails Hot Pink, and scheduling vacations around a four-pound dog’s separation anxiety.

Losing that dog was more than losing an animal companion. I lost the focus of much of my time and energy. This may turn out to be a good thing in a way, but moving through the event has been tough. My usual routine doesn’t fit anymore. Blogging has been hard because I haven’t been reading fiction. I don’t have a good, juicy novel to review for you. I’ve only been reading books on software programs and Ebay 101, useful but not very interesting when turned into a blog topic.

After awhile, my thoughts turned to a book I read a couple of years ago, Life of Pi by Yann Martel. Since it’s been some time since I read the book, and I don’t own it, I’ve pulled some information from Amazon to give you a background for this blog. Here are the two descriptions available from Amazon:

Amazon.com Review
Yann Martel’s imaginative and unforgettable Life of Pi is a magical reading experience, an endless blue expanse of storytelling about adventure, survival, and ultimately, faith. The precocious son of a zookeeper, 16-year-old Pi Patel is raised in Pondicherry, India, where he tries on various faiths for size, attracting “religions the way a dog attracts fleas.” Planning a move to Canada, his father packs up the family and their menagerie and they hitch a ride on an enormous freighter. After a harrowing shipwreck, Pi finds himself adrift in the Pacific Ocean, trapped on a 26-foot lifeboat with a wounded zebra, a spotted hyena, a seasick orangutan, and a 450-pound Bengal tiger named Richard Parker (”His head was the size and color of the lifebuoy, with teeth”). It sounds like a colorful setup, but these wild beasts don’t burst into song as if co-starring in an anthropomorphized Disney feature. After much gore and infighting, Pi and Richard Parker remain the boat’s sole passengers, drifting for 227 days through shark-infested waters while fighting hunger, the elements, and an overactive imagination. In rich, hallucinatory passages, Pi recounts the harrowing journey as the days blur together, elegantly cataloging the endless passage of time and his struggles to survive: “It is pointless to say that this or that night was the worst of my life. I have so many bad nights to choose from that I’ve made none the champion.”

From Publishers Weekly
A fabulous romp through an imagination by turns ecstatic, cunning, despairing and resilient, this novel is an impressive achievement “a story that will make you believe in God,” as one character says. The peripatetic Pi (ne the much-taunted Piscine) Patel spends a beguiling boyhood in Pondicherry, India, as the son of a zookeeper. Growing up beside the wild beasts, Pi gathers an encyclopedic knowledge of the animal world. His curious mind also makes the leap from his native Hinduism to Christianity and Islam, all three of which he practices with joyous abandon. In his 16th year, Pi sets sail with his family and some of their menagerie to start a new life in Canada. Halfway to Midway Island, the ship sinks into the Pacific, leaving Pi stranded on a life raft with a hyena, an orangutan, an injured zebra and a 450-pound Bengal tiger named Richard Parker. After the beast dispatches the others, Pi is left to survive for 227 days with his large feline companion on the 26-foot-long raft, using all his knowledge, wits and faith to keep himself alive. The scenes flow together effortlessly, and the sharp observations of the young narrator keep the tale brisk and engaging. Martel’s potentially unbelievable plot line soon demolishes the reader’s defenses, cleverly set up by events of young Pi’s life that almost naturally lead to his biggest ordeal. This richly patterned work, Martel’s second novel, won Canada’s 2001 Hugh MacLennan Prize for Fiction. In it, Martel displays the clever voice and tremendous storytelling skills of an emerging master.

I’ve been thinking about this book because it was the most surreal reading experience I’ve ever had; nothing before or since has left me feeling so off kilter. The book was a 14-day loan from the campus library and I had no prior knowledge of the writer or the plot. I started reading it at lunch and then spent the next 48 hours immersed in this story. It was a slow read, the Best Friend Read from my rating system because I didn’t want to miss anything and it’s a strange story.

The plot is described above but the reviews don’t convey the reality of the book. I began reading it with full knowledge that it was fiction but somewhere along the way, I forgot that it wasn’t real. I have a hyperactive disbelief mechanism that gets suspended easily, like a piñata at a birthday party. This story grabbed me and I started to believe that a boy could be stranded at sea, in a life boat with a mini-zoo that included a mammal-eating tiger. That’s not the worst of it; I even got caught up in the plot line about the free-floating reed island that housed a complete ecosystem of animals and trees and ate tourists if they didn’t climb a branch at night time. (I can’t explain how suspension of disbelief works, but if you’ve ever gone to the movies and sat through an action/adventure, you’ve probably experienced the same thing.)

At the end of the story where the boy’s tale of shipwreck is deciphered into a metaphor of fellow passengers, murderers, pirates and mental breakdown, I was caught completely off-guard. It took me days to deal with the plot resolution and the sense of incongruity stayed with me for a long time. This is an compelling book, one that is on my must-read list. As much as I love to read, and as many books as I’ve read in my life, this is the only story to really leave me surprised.

Sometimes, they say, life imitates art and these two weeks have had some of that not-real/too-real feeling. Never, never would I have thought that grief for a dog could be this overwhelming, but I’m not overwhelmed. I can pick up one of my other dogs and love it, I can sit down to a project and get excited about it, and I can look forward to a vacation. I’m not starting the vacation planning by worrying about the dog-sitter and that’s a real surprise.

I think that’s what reminded me of Life of Pi, this mix of real and unreal, grief but also knowing that things are going to get better.

Book Review: Kabul 24

Everything they did was to help the people of Afghanistan.  The work Shelter Now accomplished was greatly received by the Afghanistan people – so why did eight Shelter Now workers and their 16 Afghan helpers find themselves arrested and in prison?

In Kabul 24, Ben Pearson and Henry Arnold recount the arrest, interrogation, and trial of these Shelter Now workers in 2001.  These people did nothing but help the Afghan people they loved, and now the Taliban has arrested them for reasons that are never revealed to the prisoners or anyone else.

Yet, somehow, these people find a way to worship the Lord God in spite of their harrowing circumstances.  They sing songs praising Jesus, study scripture, and pray.  They remember that God put them in their predicament to bring glory to Him, and show His might and power.  Through their imprisonment, they remember that God cares and loves them and has not forgotten them.

This book reveals that Christians should look to God and depend on Him no matter what the circumstances.  Believers can look at these people and say, hey – they endured all of this and never lost their faith?  I can, too!  This is the message I received from this book.  This book allowed me to see that truly, through God ALL things are possible.  I highly recommend this book to readers everywhere.  You will see Biblical truths fleshed out in a concrete and profound way.  This is truly an unforgettable book.

  • Pub. Date: September 2009
  • Publisher: Thomas Nelson
  • Length:  320 pages
  • ISBN-13: 9781595550224
  • ISBN: 1595550224

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald

The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald, originally published in 1925, is an “American Classic” that can still be enjoyed today by much of America’s modern youth. For those with an appreciation of the beauty and elegance so often associated with lifestyle before the Great Depression. Fitzgerald does an exquisite job of bringing the characters to life in such a way that demonstrates how the “roaring twenties” shaped their lives. The novel follows Nick Carraway in the summer of 1922 as he both stumbles and soars through trials of romance, deception, and action. One of the things that make The Great Gatsby so unique is that while the novel is told from Nick’s perspective, he does not end up seaming to be the main character; after all he is not for whom Fitzgerald named the book. This of course proves interesting, as the reader hears Nick’s thoughts and feelings despite the fact that it is not he on whom the novel focuses. Readers who fear of being bored with books that take to long to even begin to develop a plot have nothing to be concerned of with this novel. Fitzgerald jumps right in, beginning to set the stage for a wonderful story before you even turn the page. The Great Gatsby provides a wonderful sense of entertaining reliability with such tag-lines as “Old Sport” with out becoming overly predictable. Because it has elements of human nature that are timeless, this novel has survived decades in American bookstores shelves. For that reason, and many more, the human nature of this amazing novel makes it a necessary addition to American homes.

By OdesssaRose M.

A Streetcar Named Desire by Tennessee Williams

A Street Car Named Desire, by Tennessee Williams, is an amazing novel that demonstrates how love cannot take place between two lovers under harsh conditions. Blanche is the main character in the story and experiences love but it just cannot happen. She visits her sister, Stella, in New Orleans and falls in love with one of her husband’s best friend. However, the relationship between Stella’s husband and Blanche is very stressful. Thus she is unable to love her husband’s best friend. Blanche has a very mysterious past and Stella’s husband is very curious and suspicious of her and once he finds out that she was sleeping around, he immediately informs his best friend. If only Blanche was truthful and did not hide her past from the one she loved, she could have still been with him. If you were to pick up this book in your local library, you would be nothing but satisfied. I personally enjoyed reading this novel, as I believed that the storyline and plot had to deal with everyday life scenarios. I would personally and strongly recommend this book to any reader who is interested in books that deal with realism and true love.

By Justin M.

Want the best Canadian writing? Read short fiction

Rachel Muenz Writes About the Canadian Giller Prize - Photo Courtesy of Stockexpert.com

By Rachel Muenz

A couple of weeks ago, British Giller judge Victoria Glendinning bashed Canadian writing in the Financial Times of London. She said our stuff is too homogenous and that it’s easy to get grants and be published if you’re Canadian, no matter how bad your writing is.

While harsh, Glendinning does have a point about Canadian novels.

Our writing is just fine but Canadian novels don’t tend to be very exciting or really stand out. There are probably only a couple Canadian authors I can name among my favourite novels.

However, Glendinning’s article probably would have been very different if she had read Canadian short stories instead.

One of Glendinning’s main problems with about 100 Canadian novels she read, was that too many of them were set in cottage country or focused on the immigrant experience.

But, very few of the Canadian short stories I’ve read over the past year had anything to do with cottages or immigration. Canadian short fiction is full of variety.

For instance, in Canadian literary magazines I’ve read many different stories, including two marijuana farmers coming across treasure hunters and a twenty-six-year-old woman who starts seeing her imaginary friend again.

At the same time, I don’t buy Glendinning’s opinion that it’s easier to get grants and be published if you’re Canadian. I think there are more “unbelievably dreadful” novels in general, not just Canadian ones.

Most novels, I find, drag on and on for no good reason. It almost seems that authors use as many words as possible just so the story will be long enough for a novel. By the end, you forget what the book is even about.

Short stories are more powerful because they use the fewest number of words possible.

Canadian short stories are especially excellent at getting right to the action and building character and feeling in just a handful of words. The writing is elegant and full of energy, each word strikes like shrapnel. You can’t find stories like these anywhere else.

There are great Canadian novels out there too, despite what Glendinning says, but if you want to read the best in recent Canadian writing, Canadian short stories are your best bet.

- with files from The Financial Times of London, the Globe and Mail and the Financial Post