New Voice

Author Archive

Sphere of Influence

by kconnolly on Jun.24, 2010, under Current Affairs - Opinion, History

Whole acres of searing months have dissolved since my last post. Well, ok, just over a month has past with a distinct lack of writing on my part. I would obfuscate and manoeuvre and say things like – I was so busy, don’t you know how it is; or, My God, but where did the time go. Unfortunately, the truth is more accurate, I was finishing out a series of books that I had been plodding through and with no firm conclusions made on the subject matter I did not have any posts wandering around my mind. But, of course, now I do.
There is so much news that floods the airwaves it takes serious effort to maintain a link to the pulse; pages of paper news, volumes of television spiel. Within the crowds of information on show, I have once again been absorbed at the mess that is the North Korean despotic state. Literally, for no apparent reason, they blew up a South Korean submarine – something that could quite easily, and surely in almost any other place in the world, cause a war. Except, in the Korean peninsula the sphere of influence is carried by China – a nation at startling odds with the standard interpretation of foreign policy. Very little, if anything, China does on the Global stage – bar currency manipulation – makes any sense whatsoever. For example, they attended the Copenhagen climate change talks and turned up with powerless bureaucrats that did not even have a mandate to approve anything significant. Bizarrely, they appear to have done this deliberately, which is actually somewhat psychotic.
And so the mangled peninsula continues to exacerbate international tensions. Following the close of the Korean War, the US remained active in the south and the north grew closer ties to the international communist powers of China and the Soviet Union. As with most communists states the economy declined and the rulers continued to gain greater control over the people. All the while the southern half of the peninsula embraced republican democracy and free trade, to grow into the country of today. It is sad, but the paths taken by north and south seem to have begun with the commencement of the Korean War, and are directly attributable to the Chinese Communist Party’s decision to support the North’s attack on American installations in the South. China did not just complete the standard practice of issuing arms to an ally, but sent in their veteran soldiers to compliment and often lead the North Korean advance.  Where the Soviets played hands off and supplied arms, the Chinese won the first period of that war for the north, amidst awful general-ship from an aging MacArthur, and a wearied American army five years following the surrender of Japan.
China deeply influences the north still to this day. Not least by a profile of recognition for the state when they regularly meet with the country’s representatives and continues to form economic ties, ostensibly for the north’s benefit, but realistically China is a veritable machine for resources and wants and is taking up contracts on all of the peninsula’s major mineral stock piles. A common goal of Communist China, which has an insatiable demand for minerals, consuming more by a long distance than any other country in the world. And not just minerals; look at the extent of the Chinese stake oil in Iraq (more even than the US by next year) and across Africa, for instance Sudan – major investment and massive consumption. Slight aside on Chinese purchasing power, but this new economic weight is a central aspect of the Korea issue: with their international standing China may be infuriatingly quiet but they are consistent in their sphere of influence. They are taking over from Japan and the United States and whether it is morally correct or not, none of these countries can play politics in this part of the world any longer without Chinese involvement. A somewhat nervy prospect.

Whole acres of searing months have dissolved since my last post. Well, ok, just under two months has past with a distinct lack of writing on my part. I would obfuscate and manoeuvre and say things like – I was so busy, don’t you know how it is; or, My God, but where did the time go. Unfortunately, the truth is more accurate, I was finishing out a series of books that I had been plodding through and with no firm conclusions made on the subject matter I did not have any posts wandering around my mind. But, of course, now I do. Well, Newsweek, in all its genius, has helped. (continue reading…)

2 Comments :, , , , more...

The Old Breed

by kconnolly on Apr.20, 2010, under Television

So, I eventually go around sitting down and watching the first few episodes of The Pacific. The build up to this programme was nothing less than Hollywood in its execution. Thousands of mini advertisements whistling across television; epic statements of the programme’s scope, appeared on celluloid and digital screens in cinemas; its status as the sequel to Band of Brother’s was made evident. The Pacific is a veritable beast of the television medium. In the UK it was attached to Sky, for syndication on their movie network of channels. I don’t think any television series has previously garnered that level of anticipation. It says a lot about the power of television at present.
American television has been going through something of a golden age from, maybe, the start of the new century. Multiple candidates for the finest television programme ever made have appeared in those years, with some of the candidates significant assessments of society in general, the nature of life and death, history and politics. All themes frequently found in other artistic mediums. That reality seems to be at the centre of this revolution in television. Where productions houses previously focused their efforts on locating major genre staples like detective dramas and sitcoms etc, an element of the programming of the recent period contains higher aspirations. That is not to say that the vast majority of modern television is not exactly the same as before; with continued investment in many situational comedies and police procedure shows – not to mention the new fad of reality escapades. The thing is, today there seems to be an appetite for something more than the familiar genre entries. And, currently, this appetite is finding a home in quality production.
The US premium channel Home Box Office is, of course, the finest purveyor of this serious programming. Each television season they produce at least one addition to the quality cannon, be it their Original Series brand, their miniseries collection, or a new documentary or two. But other players have entered the market in recent years, challenging HBO’s runaway success at the Emmy awards (US TV’s Oscars), including Showtime and AMC. It is interesting to note that major film producers and directors have begun to view the medium as a significant rival to Hollywood. Martin Scorsese, Ridley Scott and Michael Mann have recently begun development of shows; for many years top acting talent has entered the billing, winning various plaudits.  Top writers are understood to be aiming for the major TV production companies, to coincide with the standard endeavour to shop a movie script. Indeed, many of the well known Hollywood studies have television production departments: Universal, Paramount, etc.
Such is the climate in which The Pacific appears. Tom Hank’s production company Playtone (track record includes Band of Brother’s, of course, the outstanding John Adams and a number of films); teams up with HBO and DreamWorks, Steven Spielberg’s enormous Hollywood studio. Literally a meeting of the top studios in the business. I’m four episodes in and it is savage military theatre – sweeping, visceral, ferocious. Two scenes already rival the infamous opening salvo of Saving Private Ryan. Script is a bit stodgy, though, and the characters pale when compared to that band of brother’s who marched across Europe. Let’s see if it picks up.

So, I eventually go around sitting down and watching the first few episodes of The Pacific. The build up to this programme was nothing less than Hollywood in its execution. Thousands of mini advertisements whistling across television; epic statements of the programme’s scope, appeared on celluloid and digital screens in cinemas; its status as the sequel to Band of Brother’s was made evident. The Pacific is a veritable beast of the television medium. In the UK it was attached to Sky, for syndication on their movie network of channels. I don’t think any television series has previously garnered that level of anticipation. It says a lot about the power of television at present. (continue reading…)

Leave a Comment :, , , , , , , more...

Get Some

by kconnolly on Mar.28, 2010, under Current Affairs - Opinion, History, Television

I endeavoured to follow through my readings of the Vietnam conflict, from my last post, with a shopping excursion to right my centre of gravity and ensure that I tackle the history from every angle – well, more than one. Being a historian first and foremost this is part of the obligation that is owed to the seriousness of the subject, apparently. I, of course, am not a historian, but I can read and do and pretend at the writing part.  My esteemed colleague, of the Secular Sundays posts, lent me his encyclopaedic knowledge of sixties and seventies American writings with a collection of Michael Herr-equalling shots of literature to vacuum up my soul into the US Armed Forces. Two things happened to impel a slight discursion on my Nam – centric world view.
Firstly, while perusing the four epic floors of Hodges and Figges (certainly they must have every book in the world) I found (as is normal practice for me) I couldn’t find two of the books on my list. Being a total independent I refused to ask for help from the staff, so I started to flick through the recently published section. My United States historiafied mind saw David Halberstam’s The Coldest Winter sitting in a paperback edition, then sitting on the shop counter and then travelling to my home in a paper bag. I forgot to continue looking for the books I came in for; I plowed through the sharp chapters of Halberstam and fell into the Korean War.
Secondly, I discovered the flawless work of stunning breadth that is Generation Kill, David Simon and Ed Burn’s (The Wire in television, The Corner in non-fiction gold-medal genius) play-like adaptation, of the book of the same name, following a first recon division in the Second Iraq conflict; as they weave through the desert mess of former-Mesopotamia and founder in the incompetence of the United States strategic armed forces.
Halberstam, very sadly, passed away not long after he finished work on this tome. I had for a long time meant to pick up just one of his many searing topical books, which tackle US history. The Coldest Winter is a lengthy walk through the miserable counter-Soviet, counter-Communist mess that was the three year Korean conflict. A prelude to Vietnam and the half a dozen later skirmishes with Soviet imperialist agenda, the Korean War was as much an aberration of modern war as it was a dynamic statement of US hegemony in East Asia. Akin to Nam, where the terrain was as much hostile as the opposition, Korea was simply staggeringly poor conditions. One of the major themes of the book (and which I intend to pursue in a later post on Korea) was the ineptitude of Douglas MacArthur. True the man was very old at this stage, but to say he was mildly sluggish when the North invaded in the South, would be an understatement. I found myself once again agog that MacArthur was so immune to any negativity: having recently read Max Hastings authoritative work on the final stages of the US pacific campaign of WWII, Nemesis, were Hastings depicted MacArthur as, definitively, a loose cannon, and, likely, insane. It was interesting (read: horrifying) to see this consistent interpretation of the Pacific Supreme Commander, and American warhero, continue into the opening pages of The Coldest Winter.
I could not fail to draw comparisons to Michael Herr’s withering portrayal of MACV which spent its time effectively trying to make it appear as though the Americans were winning when they were clearly not. MacArthur, following absurd decisions carried over from the pacific campaign, deliberately refused to use any intelligence that did not specifically agree with his own strategic opinion. This fantasy existed until it was fatal, and then frequently was ignored – though MacArthur was eventually found out in Korea. Most of this madness was rolling around my mind when I sat down and watched the first three episodes of Generation Kill. Not surprisingly the themes reappeared with the narrative following the grunts on the ground in Iraq, as they encounter the Ba’athists in a sea of despairing locals. Once again the strategic objective is poorly actioned, or hopelessly ignored. This, of course, does not lessen the impact of this finely crafted story. I mentioned above that it has a play-like feel to it – and this is no joke. Absolute rivers of dialogue materialise and hang around the scenes. In the similar way to, say, Tarantino pours forth the open conversations, walling in the tale; Generation is hilarious and serious in equal measure. I shall wander through the rest of the episodes, as I sit and wait out The Pacific which lands next month. I wonder how they will deal with MacArthur in that programme.

I endeavoured to follow through my readings of the Vietnam conflict, from my last post, with a shopping excursion to right my centre of gravity and ensure that I tackle the history from every angle – well, more than one. Being a historian first and foremost this is part of the obligation that is owed to the seriousness of the subject, apparently. I, of course, am not a historian, but I can read and do and pretend at the writing part.  My esteemed colleague, of the Secular Sundays posts, lent me his encyclopaedic knowledge of sixties and seventies American writings with a collection of Michael Herr-equalling shots of literature to vacuum up my soul into the US Armed Forces. Two things happened to impel a slight discursion on my Nam – centric world view. (continue reading…)

Leave a Comment :, , , , , more...

Illumination Rounds

by kconnolly on Jan.31, 2010, under History

Vietnam. A word that still to this day means many things to many different people. Travellers etch across its landscape throughout the year wandering its myriad paths and villages, soaking up its cultured cities. Its people are famous for their relaxed personalities and interesting take on life. But for several thousand Vietnam War veterans, this beautiful country remains a nightmare of ferocious memories, strange drug-addled flashbacks, and the emotions of fear and loss. Recently, I was picking through a history of America in the Twentieth Century and spent some time looking at this infamous war. One of the recommended readings, I was informed, was Michael Herr’s Dispatches. Herr wrote for Esquire Magazine during the late sixties and spent two years embedded with the US forces in Vietnam. A number of years following his return Herr wrote this book as a memoir of his time in the country and a scathing overview of the human catastrophe of the conflict. I was surprised, and deeply enlivened to the book before I even began reading, to find that Herr had co-wrote Full Metal Jacket – and indeed the crisp dialogue of that film is referenced significantly in the reality of his account of the war. He went further by writing much of the voiceover in Apocalypse Now – thus acquiring a central role in the two greatest Vietnam War movies.
Having finished the memoir, it is almost impossible to convey the savage intensity of Herr’s writing. Carefully examining the warfare from the point of view of the average “grunt” the book is a masterclass in exposing the utter depravity of the war. But much more than this the book finds a voice in the American soldier, a lonely dispirited, often courageous figure – mired halfway around the world in a green and brown sludge – drowning in death. Herr draws the colour from the country leaving only the forest and hills, the blood and rounds – the bright of napalm. Almost every single page (and I am not exaggerating here) reads like an image from the previously mentioned films – except Herr’s critical voice hangs dissonant echoing through the story, suffusing the theme. He examines the madness (absolutely staggering proportions), the fear and resignation, the burly anger and, scarily, the men who enjoy the unfolding drama. The killers. He weaves a narrative through some of the main conflicts of the latter section of the war – the Tet Offensive, the intensity of the military base at Khe Sahn. To my mind his journalist feels like Private Joker. Brash yet innocent, intelligent and conflicted. Herr mentions, quite loosely, that at times he crossed the line, his correspondent shedding viewer status and sitting behind an M-16 – gathering fire, shouting down the world.
Honestly, I have read very few books that truly – comprehensively – capture the very essence of a subject. Certainly, more so when that subject is the murderous hell of warfare. You sit with the marines for a period, wallowing in the endless rain of artillery (boarding the DMZ the forces effectively resided within bombing distance all of the time) the harsh shock of rifles and the buzz of choppers. Death exists permanently within inches, millimetres. And all of the time the NVA continued to pummel endlessly – never letting up, only dying, only to be replaced – inhuman in their courage. They fought viciously at night, armed to the teeth, almost no tracer rounds; just the startle of their AK47’s their AKMs, their shouts. It is serious reading when you look at the figures: Herr discusses this only in the broad sweep – 20% survival rate in some platoons, marine night-rotations often never returning, US napalm drops kill everything, period. It is serious reading any way you want to read it – but it is also reflective; it follows men into a war and explores their reactions, their humanity. Whether that humanity disappears into malevolence, or is shattered by madness and leaves an empty vessel where a grunt can exist on instinct, natural to the world around him, a marine, a Cav, whatever.

Vietnam. A word that still to this day means many things to many different people. Travellers etch across its landscape throughout the year wandering its myriad paths and villages, soaking up its cultured cities. Its people are famous for their relaxed personalities and interesting take on life. But for several thousand Vietnam War veterans, this beautiful country remains a nightmare of ferocious memories, strange drug-addled flashbacks, and the emotions of fear and loss. Recently, I was picking through a history of America in the Twentieth Century and spent some time looking at this infamous war. One of the recommended readings, I was informed, was Michael Herr’s Dispatches. Herr wrote for Esquire Magazine during the late sixties and spent two years embedded with the US forces in Vietnam. A number of years following his return Herr wrote this book as a memoir of his time in the country and a scathing overview of the human catastrophe of the conflict. I was surprised, and deeply enlivened to the book before I even began reading, to find that Herr had co-wrote Full Metal Jacket – and indeed the crisp dialogue of that film is referenced significantly in the reality of his account of the war. He went further by writing much of the voiceover in Apocalypse Now – thus acquiring a central role in the two greatest Vietnam War movies. (continue reading…)

Leave a Comment :, , , , , more...

The Fallen Man

by kconnolly on Jan.17, 2010, under Current Affairs - Opinion, History

Networking is a significant impediment on my life. I have been offline for what seems an age, in reality a shocking three and half weeks. Often the issue, when I am down and out from the interweb, is the catastrophic nastiness that is wireless networking devices. LAN is just so much more logical. Anyway, Happy New Year to one and all: may they be technologically flawless.
Before Christmas I was nattering on about the German soldier, which was jumping up all over my radar due to their involvement in Afghanistan. Similarly, there is a deal of talk these days about the return of the Russian to the forefront of international relations. Given this, I thought I might look at an aspect of Russian history that has always stood out to my mind.
The Fallen Man
The Russian consistently has it difficult. History is enamoured by the imaginative character; the sweeping independent figure that explodes out of the text, whether they be morally staunch or fractured. Often the narrative is militaristic: civilisations story is epic, but always deeply antagonistic. Pick up any history of a nation and the fountain of war will be buried in layers, appearing at constant intervals, shaping the scene, ending cycles, moulding the next age. There is a tremendous consistency. So too with the protagonists. The brilliant generals rise above the fold and capture a distinct position in the text. Frequently they are significantly divisive persons, usually ruthless, amoral, troubled; but yet personable, loyal (when they see fit), and often entertaining – in the humorous, intelligent way. They are also all extremely quick to action. If you were to require one particular skill, based on historical reference, to succeed as a general (baring luck, which is not a skill but you know what I mean) it would likely be the ability to react with alacrity. They were all shockingly fast: Alexander, Hannibal, Caesar, William of Normandy, Genghis Khan, Edward the Black Prince, Napoleon Bonaparte, Erwin Rommel, etc, etc.
You will note, having keen eyes, that no Russian is included in that list. I am probably being remiss avoiding the name of Georgy Zhukov who (to many historians) was the finest general of the Second World War. But so little is known of this individual that it is difficult to assess him in the same way as the aforementioned commanders. Indeed, my point is that Russian military figures throughout history are consistently shadowy and seem to conform to a different mould than their contemporaries. Peter the Great is romantic certainly but as a leader he was more brash and wilful than any of the above traits. He is remembered more for his westernising of Russian society and his landmark urbanisation. Militarily he was involved and had some successes in his Northern War – though not to any major degree. Across the history of Russia there are few figures that stand up as remarkable generals, with the Soviet Union an improvement but still weakly compared. It is interesting, this fact, given the military nature of the Soviets and size and capability of its former armed forces.
Though, however, Russia has lacked in dynamic generals they have displayed an extremely powerful common soldier. Unparalleled courage remains the essence of the Red soldier: very few combatants attacked as consistently as the Soviets during the war, though their lack of ingenuity damaged them frequently. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the armed forces fell into decline in Russia (as did much else) and it is – as mentioned – only lately that this decline has begun to halt. Russia was massively affected by the Global Financial Crisis of Sept. 2008; they have been significantly reliant on the sale of petroleum and gas for their GDP for a long and with the crisis came a massive decrease in the costs of energy. Coupled with the share loss every globalised country saw – bar China and India – Russia is in major difficulties. And yet, they have re-entered international relations with a jolt. It is not easy to see why they have done this, though most commentators with an understanding of the Russian mindset (with analysis I agree with) believe that it is because the average Russian citizen requires their nation to be sufficiently strong in the world, or deemed to be strong, and will accept nothing less. Regardless if that strength is fact or fiction. These same commentators believe that Putin and Medvedev are jostling for position to retain their mandates. Their may be the whiff of electoral fraud any time United Russia goes to the polls, but their will be no United Russia without a world-leading Russian nation.

A World of Computers

Networking is a significant impediment on my life. I have been offline for what seems an age, in reality a shocking three and half weeks. Often the issue, when I am down and out from the interweb, is the catastrophic nastiness that is wireless networking devices. LAN is just so much more logical. Anyway, Happy New Year to one and all: may they be technologically flawless.

Before Christmas I was nattering on about the German soldier, which was jumping up all over my radar due to their involvement in Afghanistan. Similarly, there is a deal of talk these days about the return of the Russian to the forefront of international relations. Given this, I thought I might look at an aspect of Russian history that has always stood out to my mind. (continue reading…)

1 Comment :, more...

“Nothing is Impossible for the German Soldier!”

by kconnolly on Dec.03, 2009, under History

The above is an interesting line quoted by Hitler in the second or third year of the Second World War. Memorable for its brevity, yet comprehensively encapsulating the reality of the German fighting machine. Hitler threw it out during the planning stages for Operation Barbarossa, when clamped up spartanly in the forested fortress of the Wolfsschanze, the eponymous Wolfs Lair. In a way it is a throwaway line, consistent to the megalomaniac Furher’s distorted faith in German dominance. But the fact of the matter is the German soldier was considered the finest of the war. This is in almost every respect: courage, order, imagination, alacrity and probably most of all counter attacking initiative. This final one is sufficiently exemplified by the Battle of the Bulge, following several months of consistent allied pressure, and having clearly lost the war, they almost completed a rout, bizarrely; it said a great deal about the Wehrmacht. Of course, they did not complete this rout, nor win the war. It’s somewhat unsettling to consider but baring the tremendous over extension of Barbarossa it might have been a different war following the D Day landings of June ’44.
But Hitler refused to ignore the Soviet landscape and his burning ambition to both claim ‘unlimited living space’ and defeat the image of an unconquerable Russia. His multiple tactical errors, outside of the original decision to even begin the war, were devastating to the campaign. A refusal to plan for winter quarters (odd given the somewhat bleak Russian climate), indeed a refusal to even assign winter clothing; all based on the absurd view that once they ‘knocked in the door, the whole thing would come crashing down’. All of which led to the inevitable stall, followed by the grinding down of the Wehrmacht. Far too much was left by Hitler to the Lancer’s of his armed forces: thus ignoring major field requirements like contiguous supply lines and comprehensive artillery support. The Panzer brigades (tank units) were there of course, but not as effective as they had been for the first two years of war. Again the landscape was murderous to mechanised units, but also a major issue was the T-34, the Soviet’s finest tank, considered the best general purpose vehicle of the Second World War. Still, having begun to lose by the winter of ’41, having launched the offensive that summer, they held on for a savage period of time given the circumstances.
The story of the failure of Barbarossa is wide-spread, and the German capitulation at Stalingrad and ultimately the Soviet Union, was significant to their war effort. They were effectively pushed back from that point onwards. But yet, and this is clear from reading across many books dealing with the period, the German soldier remained consistently difficult to break down. There are savage critics of the allied contingent, which shines positive militaristic light on the Wehrmacht, with the US forces in particular viewed as impotent. There were consistent issues around getting soldiers to push forward in battles (as apposed to hanging back and waiting for artillery to pound defensive positions into submission) and it was well known throughout the war that the Allies often refused to fight at night. This allowed the German’s shocking freedom of movement knowing they had from sundown to organise positions. Not dissimilar to today, the U.S. relied on technology and vastly outnumbered all comers with regard to the fertility of their assembly lines. Though often their vehicles were only moderate in capability. The Sherman tank was relatively weak, certainly when compared to the Tiger and T-34. The Hellcat and Mustang were solid fighter planes, though inferior to the Japanese Zero and German Messerschmitt. Of course, the U.S. B-29 Superfortress murdered everything, so that one goes without saying. The Allies were infuriated for much of the war by their infantry weaponry, in that they simply did not work: the British PIAT and U.S. Bazooka, which were hugely inferior to the German Panzerfaust – a constant menace to allied tanking.
Bit of an aside there; my main point remains that the German soldier was a solid fighting machine. Today their armed forces are minimal. American bases are situated across West Germany, with few major local military outposts. With the European Union’s movement to a standing army there is of course an expectation that the largest population centre of Union would contain the largest assignment of man power. Time, even the short drift of decades, make for significant change. However, the return of a German military is not new in that they appear to have a prominent place in NATO’s campaigns across Afghanistan. Newsweek record the figure a several thousand. Not surprisingly they are understood to be very effective.

The above is an interesting line quoted by Hitler in the second or third year of the Second World War. Memorable for its brevity, yet comprehensively encapsulating the reality of the German fighting machine. Hitler threw it out during the planning stages for Operation Barbarossa, when clamped up spartanly in the forested fortress of the Wolfsschanze, the eponymous Wolfs Lair. In a way it is a throwaway line, consistent to the megalomaniac Furher’s distorted faith in German dominance. But the fact of the matter is the German soldier was considered the finest of the war. This is in almost every respect: courage, order, imagination, alacrity and probably most of all counter attacking initiative. This final one is sufficiently exemplified by the Battle of the Bulge, following several months of consistent allied pressure, and having clearly lost the war, they almost completed a rout, bizarrely; it said a great deal about the Wehrmacht. Of course, they did not complete this rout, nor win the war. It’s somewhat unsettling to consider but baring the tremendous over extension of Barbarossa it might have been a different war following the D Day landings of June ’44. (continue reading…)

Leave a Comment :, , , , , , , more...

A Singular Notion

by kconnolly on Nov.26, 2009, under Science

One hundred and fifty years, exactly yesterday, since the publication of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species and I finish off the final words to peer, literally awestruck, at the breadth of Darwin’s thesis: there really are no words to sufficiently define the extent to which this work captures the utter power of nature. There are many things you can say about Darwin’s argument, not least that it was controversial, but I don’t think that the controversy really explores the vision within the story he unwinds. And I do mean this; above all else this book is to my mind a story: one that encapsulates the entire planet, her life forms, and their coexistence together. I read around the work to ensure I understood the period in which the book was written (being a ludicrously involved history buff, this was straight-forward) which I would highly recommend, as it gives a comprehensive context. Many sciences were still newly burgeoning fields during this period, including biology, however, the understanding in the physical sciences was high – so much so that many believed Darwin’s ultimate theory was a century or so later than it should have been. I’m not converted to this view, I think that this theory is novel in every way imaginable; indeed, its consistent opposition (slight, but there) over the past 150 years is representative of its ingenuity.
Nothing displays this view more than the difficulties society today has with the fact of evolution. In the year 2009 there have been three books released showcasing the argument for evolution (timed for the anniversary) which is so broad that it would actually take some serious effort to oppose the reality. One of these books (the only one I have read) is very thorough and easily digestible, Richard Dawkin’s The Greatest Show on Earth. Though Darwin’s work is rightly construed as the firing salvo, his theory is an explanation for evolution, explaining how it works via natural selection. Having read through Origin it feels as though Darwin’s main endeavour is deliver an opposing theory to the commonly understood origin of life from that period: namely, independent creation. This is of course part of its controversy – but it is clear when reading that Darwin is far more involved in dismissing the idea of independent creation than he is exposing faith. Independent creation is more or less the view that all individual entities (human or otherwise) were created in the current form we see in this age: i.e. they could not have evolved. Darwin’s fundamental argument against this is evolution, which he shows is controlled by natural selection, but also pretty much proves that all animals could not have been created in the form they currently hold, and must have originated from broadly a single life form (he argues five or six life forms, but today it is known to be one).
His proof that independent creation is not possible is absolute. Evolution, by its nature of occurrence over millennia, is impossible to prove to the same degree. Having shown that independent creation was not possible, Darwin proposes the argument for evolution as an alternative and to the best level that he could, explains how it occurs through natural selection. At its most basic natural selection is the selection (by nature) of dominant characteristics in any grouping of animals which best enable that group to survive. As each selection is made to the group the improvement it makes is carried down through their line and thus the animals evolve. This is of course over many many years. The genius, as with every theory, is how well this argument fits into place – in this case in the natural world. Darwin spends some time showing how his theory works; which is the story of life I mentioned earlier. All in all it’s a fabulous piece of work, and is rightly construed as one of the most important books of all time. I’ve always enjoyed the popular phrase of Darwin’s theory, which if you Google draws only one winner: the single greatest idea ever.

One hundred and fifty years, exactly yesterday, since the publication of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species and I finish off the final words to peer, literally awestruck, at the breadth of Darwin’s thesis: there really are no words to sufficiently define the extent to which this work captures the utter power of nature. There are many things you can say about Darwin’s argument, not least that it was controversial, but I don’t think that the controversy really explores the vision within the story he unwinds. And I do mean this; above all else this book is to my mind a story: one that encapsulates the entire planet, her life forms, and their coexistence together. I read around the work to ensure I understood the period in which the book was written (being a ludicrously involved history buff, this was straight-forward) which I would highly recommend, as it gives a comprehensive context. Many sciences were still newly burgeoning fields during this period, including biology, however, the understanding in the physical sciences was high – so much so that many believed Darwin’s ultimate theory was a century or so later than it should have been. I’m not converted to this view, I think that this theory is novel in every way imaginable; indeed, its consistent opposition (slight, but there) over the past 150 years is representative of its ingenuity. (continue reading…)

Leave a Comment :, , , , , more...

Facing Nature

by kconnolly on Oct.29, 2009, under Science

There are whole masses of positive news items circulating the science media. When you read around, the collection is not always particular to the fear-mongering I discussed in an earlier post. When I sat down a few months ago to begin these selections on the new science that may impact on climate change, I always imagined it as a positive approach to a vastly ominous situation. I think that this positivity is expressed in the media, with multitudes of blogs and news sites discussing the effects of climate change but through the prism of significant counter-action from the global community. I think in my posting I may have got side tracked in my last two pieces and begun the tremulous fixation of the ‘deer in head lights’, as the all powerful wonder of nature became all too clear in my readings. Partly, this was the blame of my picking through that mighty tome of a work, On the Origin of Species, which has enamoured my mind for the past while. Given the timing (2009, one hundred and fifty years since it was first published) it seemed an apt period to finally embrace the book and see if it was (in my opinion) as comprehensively argued as it is understood to be. Having completed the work, it seems there is no question but that it makes its point; rather well if I might say. (continue reading…)

1 Comment :, , , , , more...

The Science of Survival – Part 4

by kconnolly on Oct.07, 2009, under Science

There are reams of words. Whole spillages of words delivered into the ether of the internet acknowledging the fear of humanity at our capacity to wreak lasting damage on our society. Just read the pages of the climate project or the climate count down, on Greenpeace. Whole earthquakes of tiny words. Such is the embrace of the people and the fear. Bill Bryson, in his revelatory work of simple genius – A Short History of Nearly Everything – discusses at length the shocking power of the earth to unleash damage on the surface of the planet. In fact it incorporates a number of chapters. There is as seriousness to that power. I think that it is always present, and can never be fundamentally shifted. Utilised, though, is another thing entirely.
Imagine a sea of biological organisms that are bred solely to capture carbon from the atmosphere. That is, apparently, not too distant a possibility. These and a number, what can only be termed as vast, other engineering wonders are mixing around the political and scientific landscape seeking a home, and awaiting the correct level of funding to become a reality. These ‘projects’ are the burgeoning new world of geoengineering. Caveat: I say burgeoning, and new, but really they have been around for an extraordinary length of time; but have only lately been confirmed as a major step in tackling our climate problem. Their ultimate goal is the protection of our climate from the adverse effects of our buildup of carbon, but delivered in the swiftest possible timeframe. This swiftness is both bold and somewhat reckless, but the thought is, we may require swift and reckless at some point down the line.
Besides the aforementioned multiple organism engineering, there are a few main methods being tested: cloud seeding (first publically used – supposition alert – by the Soviet Union to deflect the weather systems pushing north from the Ukraine following Chernobyl) is a method by which clouds are deliberately formed. The purpose of this seems to be that consistent cloud cover would deflect significant amounts of sunlight, and thus reduce (significantly) the corresponding heating. It is thought that this could be managed both quickly, and to an absurd degree. To my mind Ireland is automatically eliminated from this requirement, as we achieve it naturally. It, of course, brings with it the issue of poor growing seasons for certain crops, and the withering problem of murdering organisms that demand voluminous sunlight. There also exists the possibility of planting artificial trees. This is currently taking place, but to a lesser degree than is envisaged in planet saving mode. This effectively would work in tandem with the current carbon cycle of carbon capture by trees. The issue, in the same way that a tree has this issue, is that the carbon is only stored until it is set free. This happens all too commonly across the world at present where overzealous corporations and developers burn into forested woodland to make room for road networks, and thereby free the captured carbon. It is both ruinous to the habitat (destroying multiples of life) and our planet.
There are many other types of geoengineering (not least the Russian idea of building a massive sun blocking device in the outer atmosphere to shade part of the planet) and I will continue on this topic as write through these blogs; but the aforementioned give a feel for what is being engendered. They are an interesting line in our assault on warming. As I said previously they bring with them the potential for possible mishaps, or indeed, many side effects that have disasters consequences. But they work in their swiftness; and can, in many cases, achieve powerful reductions in the rising temperatures However, this topic has filtered across the media in the last two years bringing awareness to the subject and with it it’s most troublesome aspect: the potential alacrity with which some geoengineering projects could have an impact as somewhat reduced the necessity for immediate action on carbon reduction.  Scientists worry that successes in cloud seeding and other methods could loosen the greening of the world’s political framework. And as any scientist would express (or indeed any science writer) geoengineering in almost every case is a temporary halt at best – while at worst, it could be too little too late.

There are reams of words. Whole spillages of words delivered into the ether of the internet acknowledging the fear of humanity at our capacity to wreak lasting damage on our society. Just read the pages of the climate project or the climate count down. Whole earthquakes of tiny words. Such is the embrace of the people and the fear. Bill Bryson, in his revelatory work of simple genius – A Short History of Nearly Everything – discusses at length the shocking power of the earth to unleash damage on the surface of the planet. In fact it incorporates a number of chapters. There is as seriousness to that power. I think that it is always present, and can never be fundamentally shifted. Utilised, though, is another thing entirely. (continue reading…)

Leave a Comment :, , , , , , , , more...

The Science of Survival: a comment

by kconnolly on Sep.28, 2009, under Current Affairs - Opinion, Science

Reading a science blog isn’t always the most comforting of past times. Many hours are subjected to the ignominy of bumbling theories and negative exposition. This is not to say, though, that such time is lost on the reader. Often the indulgent wording, and overly dramatic use of the exclamation point, embellish facts that are required reading; that are necessary points made to the ongoing debate. Regardless of whether that debate is climate change or the use of animals in drug testing, for instance. I have read recently a number of blogs that appear to have sprung up in an endeavour to reach the public on matters of pro or anti global warming merits. Their infusion in the debate is attributable to their opposition to the ‘other sides’ series of points, or blatant misrepresentation of certain facts. When reading some of these I was reminded continuously of a certain referendum that is currently in debate here in Ireland; and the ongoing difficulty for each side to approach the topic in a positive fashion. The thing is there is a consistent battle to reach the public and only finite room to make an impression. And in the absence of sufficient time, negative (and hence alarming) suggestions appear to receive greater attention. (continue reading…)

Leave a Comment :, , , , , , , more...

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!