As I continue to move out of
“Fifty Shades” and continue with my out-of-genre reading journey, I’ve hit what
I call the “Political genre.” During the
American Presidential election season, with 24/7 news, Internet, old school broadcast
and word of mouth, I’m reminded of how glad I am that this happens every four
years. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a strong
supporter of our Republic, but if there is ever a season of over stimulation,
it’s a hotly contested Presidential election year.
While reading an article by
one of the smart people in the media, I ran upon one of the “hit-books” of our
President, “The Amateur” by Edward Klein.
I don’t usually read these books, but I thought, since this is a bestseller,
and part of being a writer is to know what people are reading, I downloaded it
and gave it a chance.
The questions I asked
myself: Can a political book be
balanced? Many of these books are
written by reporters, and give some vivid detail with actual dialogue of famous
political figures and family members. As
we know, they cannot reveal their sources.
Are these tapes? Or did this
dialogue come from a steel-trap memory of a witness to the conversation? Or is there a disclaimer somewhere that I
missed? (Likely). Biggest question: Can a
political book be reviewed with balance?
In “The Amateur” the writer
gives a political summary of the President’s first term from the standpoint
mostly from the executive branch of the US Government. The appearance of games
to us as we see it in the news is a serious game in reality. Decisions that affect billions of people
worldwide isn’t reality TV or WarCraft.
The book gives the reader an unflattering hefty detailed account of one
Presidential blunder after another, with aggressive legislation, executive
orders, and controversial meetings with longtime allies; “hit piece” stuff to
fans and truths to non-fans.
On the other hand, I found a
few points in “The Amateur” where “bashing” was subject to interpretation. If the President didn’t feel obligated to socially host certain high profile celebrities
or wealthy political families, to me that is up to him and his family. What obligation does a President have to help
others make money off of him? Why does
he have to please famous people because they are famous? In a sense, being “Amateur” is being
independent in his own way, though not the way of “the establishment.” I think the point was potential donor
alienation, which is another serious part of the “game.”
Overall, I didn’t hate this
book, and didn’t put it on the highest tier because so much of it is
regurgitation of what is already seen in the media. The President’s policies are hardly a secret. One
either agrees with them or not. Lots of
people read these books. I’ve written before how politics is a “hot button”
topic, and it’s because politics affects us all.
No comments:
Post a Comment