Tag: bookshelf

Google: booking it out of China?

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

The big technology news today is that Google is threatening to leave China, leading to a wave of speculation on what that may mean for both the gatekeeper of internet information and the Chinese economy.

On the surface, Google has said this is about human rights and cyber attacks – which are likely, at least, factors in their decision. But this isn’t the first time Google’s China operation has been in the news in the last few weeks.  Recall that Google’s efforts to make all books available online has run afoul of copyright holders in China (as it has here in the States) and even spawned a lawsuit.  Negotiations on what Google would pay the authors of the works it scanned and made available to search users were subsequently put on hold.

While Google’s exit strategy is a good way to draw attention to human rights, in the end it may be a way to beat the Library Cops.

(Disclosure: I have worked in a minor role on projects involving Google’s book settlement in the past, although I do not now.)

Catching up with John Galt

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

From CNN this week came news that the capitalism-themed works of Ayn Rand are in high demand.  As politicians on the right form their messages, this is worth paying attention to.

The only Rand book I’ve read is her most famous volume, Atlas Shrugged.  A 1200-page brick of a book, it was nevertheless a page-turner – and despite the set of beliefs and philosophies behind it, it was first and foremost an extremely well-written story.  Rand’s characters are interesting and her plot is compelling.

That’s exactly why big screen rumors have persisted for years – and there’s no time like now.

The genius of Rand’s social commentary is in its separation of the seemingly synonymous concepts of free market capitalism and “big business.”  She skewers lobbyists for large corporations who seek control of the cogs and wheels of government – in other words, she would have no sympathy for the automakers, banks, or other large companies parading, hat in hand, to Capitol Hill.  In Atlas Shrugged, as is the case today, big businesses are often the first to call for government involvement in the economy because they have the resources and influence to frame the policy.

And there couldn’t be a better way to deliver these messages than through compelling entertainment.  Inside-the-Beltway conservative talking heads just aren’t going to get it done.

And that may be the biggest impediment to a silver screen adaptation for Atlas Shrugged.  Despite a riveting and topical story, its core philosophy isn’t exactly in lockstep with the prevailing Hollywood liberalism.  Don’t get me wrong – there won’t be a conspiracy.  But if I’m a liberal studio executive, and all my friends are liberal studio executives, and most of my political conversations are with other liberals, it won’t take much to convince me that the only audience for Atlas Shrugged would be packs of black-clad anarchical-capitalist “Randroids.”

Perhaps a small, independent studio will take a chance on the product despite the paralyzing group think of industry leaders.  Given the story, that may be more appropriate.

Advise and Consent

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

I recently started reading Allen Drury’s Advise and Consent. (If you haven’t read it, you might have to resort to your local library or a used bookstore to find a copy – I believe it’s out of print.) The novel revolves around a controversial Cold War-era Presidential nomination under consideration by the Senate.

Washington, D.C. is a much different town today than it was 50 years when the book was written. Our government has changed, too – if Allen Drury was writing Advise and Consent in 2008, the basic plot may be the same but the characters and their interactions would take on a completely new look.

I’m about 300 pages into the book, and there have only been a handful of mentions of Senate staff. The central characters are officeholders – Senators, the Vice President, the President, the Secretary of State nominee, and others. In today’s bureaucratized Washington, D.C. the staff members would surely have a major role to play. In fact, they might arguably be more important than the Senators in pushing forward the machinations of government.

The other striking anachronism is the heavy cloud of the Cold War that hangs over Drury’s Capitol. In considering the nominee for Secretary of State, the Senators in the novel express differing views on handling the Soviet Union. The most vocal Senator adamantly insists on making concessions during negotiations with the Russians, claiming he would rather “crawl to Moscow than perish under a bomb.” Nearly twenty years after Ronald Reagan won the Cold War, such defeatism is almost unfathomable.

By the way, Drury also takes shots at the media and academia for sympathizing with the left. So apparently some things haven’t changed.