The Crisis Years: Kennedy and Khrushchev 1960 – 1963

The Crisis Years: Kennedy and Khrushchev 1960 – 1963 by Michael Beschloss

I’ve read many books about this period in history including biographies of John Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev, and this one was by far the best.  It’s quite rare that you come across a book that is as lengthy as this one yet covering only a few years of history. It manages to captivate you and keep you interested throughout the entire volume. I was simply never bored.

When one reads a biography of a leader, such as a president or chairman, it’s crucial that the author cover all of the events of the subject matter’s life, especially during their tenure in office. This can actually be a drawback since, to be blunt, many things that are deemed consequential during a leader’s term really aren’t that interesting.  For me, nothing can be more boring than reading about a U.S. President’s domestic struggles and accomplishments. It’s really quite tedious reading about things such as stagflation, trade unions, and negotiations with various steel companies.  The GOOD stuff, for me anyway, is what happens in the international arena.  This is probably why I enjoyed this book so much. You could make a solid argument that this book was a bio of both of these men during their coinciding years in charge, but only dealing with international matters. The international matters that involved both of them, that is, which seems to be pretty much everything.

Specifically, this volume is about their relationship with each other during arguably the most stressful time during the twentieth century.  These were two very charismatic leaders that found their countries as allies on the winning side of the second world war, yet to say “ally” was a synonym of the word “friend” in this case was a big stretch.  These two countries had polar opposite ideologies and were always looking over their shoulder to make sure the other guy never got the upper hand.

This book highlights The Bay of Pigs, The Vienna Summit, Berlin, The Cuban Missile Crisis, and the various squabbling around nuclear test banning. The author paints a very vivid image of these two leaders, and I never (like some reviewers) came away with the feeling that he painted Kennedy nor Khrushchev as “failures”. These two men were incredibly committed to their respective ideology, so they naturally distrusted each other.  Although the early sixties were filled with such euphemisms as “duck and cover” and “fallout shelters” in the United States, author Michael Beschloss tells us that the USSR was equally as paranoid of the U.S.  Although both leaders felt their respective philosophies were superior, neither had it on their short-term radar to annihilate the other with nuclear war.  Of course, neither of them knew that for sure, so vicious cat and mouse games were played, not only from 1960 – 1963, but for the entire period of The Cold War.

This book has a massive supportive cast in addition to its two primary subjects.  Fortunately, Beschloss  knows just how to handle a complex cast without overwhelming his reader. Often when a key player is introduced (say, an Andrei Gomyko or a Dean Rusk), the author will take a brief 2- or 3-page diversion and give us a brief a history of the individual.  This helps us keep score of who is who and is invaluable if you’re not familiar with these key players that were the movers and the shakers approximately 60 years ago.

We also learn an awful lot about the personalities of Kennedy and Khrushchev, so we feel we know who these two really were in addition to what they did.  On this note, though, a strength of the author is that he never goes off too far on tangents when we learn more about their idiosyncrasies.  Example: It’s been well documented that Kennedy had a weakness for skirts and was shuffling women in the back door of the White House as early as Inauguration Day, and the author does provide brief anecdotes of such escapades, but he doesn’t fall too deep down the rabbit hole of gossip and innuendo.  When such incidents are discussed, it’s mainly done to better help understand the character of the man, and how it may or may not have influenced his decisions at the negotiation table. To understand the motivations of someone, you really do need to do a deep dive into their character.

The highlight of the book for me was the Cuban Missile Crisis. I would guess about 25% or more of this 800+ page book is devoted to this event.  Yes, we dive deep into the meticulous details, but the author knows how to do so without burdening the reader.  In fact, when the crisis “ends” in late 1962, the rest of the book seems a tad of a downer.  It’s a bit like watching a movie where the climax happens, not at the end, yet only 2/3 through the film.  This makes it slightly difficult to read the rest of this book with the same vigor and voracity. This isn’t a criticism of the book, it’s just how the events happen to play out during the time frame.

I was a bit surprised that there wasn’t more Vietnam here.  Yes, we read a bit about the failed regime of Ngo Dinh Diem, but ONLY a bit.  True, Kennedy was assassinated before the bulk of the war occurred, but since the main struggle of his shortened administration was to prevent the expansion of communism, I thought there would be more. Perhaps this is because the author felt that although the subject matter important, maybe it didn’t really tie in directly with the Kennedy/Khrushchev relationship?

My only really criticism was that this book was too sparse when it came to photos and illustrations. A book like this calls for a wealth of such accoutrements.  There were simply too many people, places, and events that could have benefited from a hefty inclusion.  In fact, the “illustration” section has maybe 5 or 6 random pictures that seemly mostly irrelevant to the subject matter.  You have to wonder, “why even bother?”. A minor gripe though.  One really doesn’t read a volume such as this for the pictures. Plus, when reading on an e-reader, Wikipedia is literally only a touch away.

My first book by this author. It looks like he has a catalog of many books of similar structure.  I’ll definitely check out more of his work.

Can’t Anybody Here Play This Game?

Can’t Anybody Here Play This Game? – by Jimmy Breslin

This book wasn’t really what I was expecting, yet I thoroughly enjoyed it. I was expecting a detailed retrospective of the 1962 New York Mets baseball season. For those who may not follow the game closely, the 1962 New York Mets are widely regarded as the worst team to ever play the game of baseball.  This book does highlight a lot of the misfortunes of this uncomfortable year, but it’s more of a thesis as to why and how this team came into existence, and more importantly why this team was so loved when they played so horribly.

Again, for those who aren’t diehards of the game, a bit of history is first warranted. The New York Mets were one of the first “expansion” teams in Major League baseball. This was a team whose star pitcher of that year (Roger Craig) had a won-loss record of 10-24.  If you really think about it, you have to be a pretty good pitcher to lose 24 ball games in one season. Since expansion teams are new, they have no farm system of good prospects, and they’re basically forced to start with rejects from other existing teams.  So expansion teams (in ANY sport) are never expected to do well for the first few seasons. In fact, the short-term goal of said team is to maybe come in second-to-last place instead of last place. So expectations are never high. Somehow, though, this team still managed to fall way short of such low expectations.

The city of New York (including neighboring Brooklyn) actually had a total of 3 teams through the first 50 years of organized baseball.  2 of those teams deserted the boroughs in the 1950s for California and left many of the baseball faithful in the Big Apple somewhat destitute.  The new expansion Mets would now be the “2^nd” New York team to compliment the steadfast Yankees over in the Bronx.  As soon as they started the season, they were awful and only got worse.  Ironically, the awfulness of this team became the charm of rooting for them.  So in addition to detailing aspects of this miserable first season, the author spends quite a bit of time pontificating as to why this phenomenon actually occurred.

The author alleges that people generally hate winners and love losers because, well, most of us lose an awful lot more than we win in the game of life. So watching a team like the 1962 Mets flounder, actually touches us in a fond, unique way.  To be fair, though, this isn’t one of those deep psychological books that explores this in any amount of detail.  It’s actually too short for that. The entire book is something like 160 pages.  So don’t be dismayed if you’re wanting a “sports” book and you end up getting a “psychology” book.

Still, some of the off the field anecdotes are quite hilarious.  Like the story of a midtown bartender who has a young son that he MAKES watch the New York Mets.  The reason? He wants his son to understand that life can be tough and unforgiving.  As his son gets older and learns about The Great Depression, he’ll be able to understand it a lot better after watching the Mets play baseball.

The on-the-field stories though are the best.  As mentioned, there aren’t that many as one might expect, but when the author does detail some highlights of some of the games, you can’t help but wail out loud in laughter at so many of the misfortunes.  The author definitely has a gift for recounting these events.  His style of storytelling is rather dry and wry, but this only adds fuel to the fire of reading about this travesty of a club.  You really feel as though you’re actually in the stands watching the house of cards collapse as author Jimmy Breslin recounts some of the highlights. “Highlights” is actually a poor choice of words, but never mind. 

An interesting factoid about this book is that it was written just after the disastrous freshmen season.  This isn’t a book written, say, 20 years after the fact where the author is reminiscing about such a memorable time.  For me, this actually adds to the charm.  It’s always fun to look back on a time period that was particularly peculiar and smile about it, but to have such a positive attitude when you’re right in the middle of such a fiasco really shows that you just might have the type of character that can prevail through the worst.

It’s a bit funny to hear the author moan about the present time (1963) being so commercialized and too “modern” for his tastes.  Things such as the (GASP!) television have brought the national pastime to a new low, he states.  This is quite laughable 60 years later. You have to wonder what the author would have felt about indoor baseball, free agency, ESPN, and multi-million-dollar per year utility infielders among other things.

So a book like this really is probably only for the fan of the game. Since it’s well under 200 pages, one won’t feel like it wasted too much of their time if they come away with their expectations not being met.  The fact that it was written so long ago added to its appeal for my tastes.  It’s fun to see how things have changed, yet to see the character of people stay mostly the same.  

You’ll laugh a lot as well.

The Catcher in the Rye

The Catcher in the Rye – by J.D. Salinger

The Catcher in the Rye was the very first “real” book I read without HAVING to read it (i.e. for school). I picked it up by accident when I was 15 and was immediately hooked from the beginning.  I recently picked it up for the second time to read (I’m now 53). To be honest, I don’t think I would have liked it as much if I read it for the first time at 53 years of age.  This book has a very strong appeal to young teenagers; as it always has.  The reason is that the main theme of this book is about a disillusioned 16-year old and it doesn’t pull any punches.  My guess is that most young people feel the way the main character in this book does at times, and something about reading about others that are struggling with teenage angst takes away a little bit of the sting.  We all go through lousy times in our lives, but it’s a slight comfort when you realize you’re not alone.

This book tells a story of Holden Caulfield. As soon as the book starts, Holden starts rambling.  We don’t really know who Holden is rambling to until the very end of the book, but it really doesn’t matter.  Holden is not happy and has had a pretty rough life.  At least a rough life for a fairly well-off adolescent.  Holden’s 224-page rant is very cynical and destitute.  What makes the book so appealing is that the author doesn’t really paint Holden as a “bad” kid. Holden doesn’t engage in any form of juvenile delinquency, yet he’s incredibly fed up with his life and the majority of people that he’s forced to come in contact with every day.

As the narrative starts, Holden has failed out of prep school.  Again. This is about his third different school, and he can’t seem to find the motivation to make any effort at all with his studies. He leaves the school a few days earlier than his official expulsion date and ends up wandering through the streets of New York City.  He lives in New York City, but he can’t actually go home yet. He doesn’t want his parents to know that he’s, once again, let them down. Not that he really cares, he just doesn’t want to deal with the drama.  So 16-year old Holden takes the train from school to the big city and just drifts from place to place. The places he goes really aren’t that relevant to the story.  What is relevant is his thoughts, feelings, and emotions as he aimlessly wafts from place to place.  Most everyone he sees and/or comes in contact with, he despises.  According to Holden, life is filled with “phonies”. We read about him striking up conversations with cabbies and trying to hit on women in bars, yet he mostly can’t stand these people.  He’s a troubled restless spirit who’s trying to make some sense out of his life.

This book was written in 1951, and this is an important thing to take note of when reading.  The city of New York (like everyplace else) was definitely a lot different than the city 30, 50 or 70 years later.  This is essential to put a lot of the narrative in focus.  Back then, a 16-year old kid could walk into bars, order drinks, smoke a lot of cigarettes, and stay in cheap hotels for $8 per night.  The time period of this novel, again, I think is reassuring.  Contrary to what your grandmother may have told you, these were not simpler times. When one reminisces about history, we tend to only remember the good.  Holden Caulfield’s story is a sordid reminder that teen age depression isn’t a recent invention and can’t be blamed on violent video games or heavy metal music.

There’s a lot of things about Holden that we DON’T know, and this is really one of the reasons why this book is such a classic.  The author gives us enough information to know WHAT Holden is feeling, but only a little bit as to WHY he’s feeling the way he is.  Why does he have so much confusion and anger? We know he lost a brother to leukemia several years before the story starts, but you get the feeling that there is more to it than that. We also get hints that even though Holden comes from a family that’s pretty well-off, you have to wonder if he grew up with enough TLC as a child.  He doesn’t seem to have fond stories of his parents as the narrative progresses. They seem to be just as “phony” as everybody else.

A key element that makes this story so rewarding, is that we see the good side of Holden as well.  He has a younger sister named Phoebe, who he adores.  He talks about her throughout the book and even attempts a clandestine visit or two under his parents’ noses.  He seems to treasure the innocents of younger children as he encounters them through his big-city trek.  Perhaps this is how he remembers his life before he lost his brother?  Again, we really don’t know for sure.  We then read another sweet encounter that Holden has in a coffee shop with two nuns that have just arrived in the big city.  In fact, the title of the book is in reference to one of Holden’s anecdotal memories that he shares with us, so we know all is not lost for this kid. There is definitely some feeling behind the fracture.

The entire book only takes place in about 2 ½ days, and we sadly see Holden going more and more off the deep end as the book progresses.  One almost wishes that this book had an epilogue of Holden ten-years in the future so we can find out whether or not everything turned out o.k.  Although he manages to stay away from serious trouble in this narrative, one can’t help but wonder if and when this kind of person just might ‘snap’ during their later years and really cause some serious problems to society.

I should also point out that this book was (maybe still is?) very controversial when it was released.  The language that Holden uses is quite R-rated, and popular books that came out in 1951 simply weren’t quite so littered with profanity; especially from the mouth of a 16-year old.  This is probably why many high schools either outright banned this work, or at least discouraged its students from reading it.  I’m proud to chime in and state that I think that’s a big mistake. As I mentioned earlier, this book probably does more good than harm for kids who realize they’re not alone with their somewhat morose thoughts as they journey through the rocky-road of adolescence. 

So as a mature adult, you might find this book a bit trite and want to step into the story and slap this kid around a bit.  For the teenage audiences, though, this book can serve as comfort to know that you’re not alone in a big scary world.  Plus, as sad as the book can be at times,  it’s still much more entertaining than some annoying country-western song about having your heart broken or something.