I had thought to review Bill Holm’s The Windows of Brimnes: An American in Iceland thinking that the book might be worth reviewing. It looked pretty on the cover, as if it might be more memoir, travelogue, and friendly ruminations. (That’s what I get for judging a book by its cover.) Upon actually reading it, I was sorely disappointed. A substantial reason, I admit, is that the author is unabashedly liberal. When I discuss politics or economics, I tend to mirror the tone that others discuss it in. If they are confrontational, I will be confrontational. If they are humble, I will be humble — if self-effacing… and so on. This book is an odd mix of patronizing and angry myopic blustering. That’s hard for a reader like me to take.
The book, sadly, can be summed up in the following sentence: America has perpetuated barbaric wars on the world, is destroying the environment, and its people cannot appreciate the better, simpler life. Some have compared him to Walt Whitman, but Whitman reflected on the world from a deep place of introspection that held the world in wonder. Holm is angry and bitter. The worst characteristic of America to him, it seems, is its people’s appreciation of religion. He tells us to pray in private, not in public and continually bashes religion, while at the same time raising the idol of the untouched environment.
Holm had potential — in some subjects, he seems like he could be a skilled writer, describing landscapes and music. He would no doubt be a much more popular and well-considered writer should he ever decide to eschew his odd, often misplaced recriminations with thoughtful consideration of broader themes. His fulminations completely overshadow the otherwise slightly charming anecdotes in the book. Oh, but I am sure the Chomskyites love it. It’s probably better called An Angry Liberal in Iceland. (Angry conservatives don’t make for very fun writers most of the time, either, folks.)
The author often pines for America to restore its fidelity to liberty and freedom, but it is quite clear that Holm has no understanding of what liberty really means, for he so loathes its exercise. One cannot on one hand advocate for liberty and on the other hand be so intolerant of its exercise. Not everyone believes that the government should control all facets of life. Not everyone believes that political speech should be regulated unless it is liberal political speech. And not everyone believes that terrorists should be able to maintain their liberty at the expense of American lives. The US does have many voces like Holm, however, and many of them are politicians, scientists, and influential public intellectuals. I think that the author of Poetry, Not Prose must have had these people in mind when he wrote “Freedom Dies By Suicide! (Obituary on A2)“:
Dear Readers,
Freedom died last night,
at the age of three hundred, three.
He left his children and his wife,
with nothing but their dreams.
He was found near a glass of gin,
and books piled to the lights,
(It was a lady friend who found him -
at a quarter past midnight.)
Though details are still to come,
The facts, as they are, imply:
Freedom did not die by the gun.
He died by suicide.
In summary: don’t look to this book for cogent or even interesting inquiries on human nature, nature, Iceland, or America. See some Shakespeare, read some Milton, go to Iceland, and vote Republican instead. I’m going to do a little bit of all that, and when I go to Iceland from October 11 – 16, I just might see if a certain author is around for a chat.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
September 5, 2008 at 3:04 pm
John C. Rezmerski
I just read your “review” of Bill Holm’s “The Windows of Brimnes”. It seems not so much a review of what Holm has to say as a review of the preconceptions and political prejudices you bring to reading it. In an intelligent review, one expects literary comparisons to be founded on the texts involved. You have apparently not read Whitman whole, and I suspect that you might be acquainted with him only through anthology selections. Holm’s negative statements about America reflect similar statements made by Whitman, whose line “What a filthy presidentiad!” keeps echoing in my mind as I consider your review. What an incompetent review! (Disclaimer: Holm is a personal friend of mine).
September 5, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Anonymous
Dear Mr. Rezmerski,
Part of the point of my review is to point out that I have some strong preconceptions and political prejudices. I certainly have them.
What is odd to me is how neither Mr. Holm nor you seem to acknowledge yours. Most people probably open that book to learn something, but they don’t. Most people want to explore Iceland, but they don’t get to! As I indicated, I think Mr. Holm has all the potential to be a good writer, but this is a really sad effort that probably lets down every single person who opens the book — except, of course, in the small, sad circles of people who hate America because they hate God (the rants against religion are so silly, especially when nature is held up as such an idol). \
You are right that I am not an expert on Whitman, but I have read a good deal of him, and as even you must admit, “What a filthy presidentiad!” is not exactly the same as relentlessly bashing people who have a kind of faith or people who believe in limited government. Instead, what I think Mr. Holm needs is an ability to reach out to his neighbor, and a modicum of tolerance to do so.
Thank you for taking the time to comment, however. I will be going to Iceland in mid-October for 7 days.
September 8, 2008 at 11:43 pm
John C. Rezmerski
Interesting to be attacked for not acknowledging prejudices I do not have. Not that I don’t have any–just that they don’t happen to be the ones you attribute to me. I am not sad (though, sadly, have sometimes been criticized by conservatives as stupidly optimistic), don’t hate America (am a dedicated participant in party politics and a volunteer for civic organizations), don’t hate God (as an unaggressive atheist, I’m fine with religionists if they don’t try to bludgeon me with it–some of my best friends are Catholics, Lutherans, Mormons, etc., and I am tolerant of Islam, Bahai, Wicca, etc., and indifferent to Scientology).
I am, however, dismayed by the regrettable anti-intellectualism endemic in our culture, noted by observers all the way back to DeTocqueville, which often manifests itself in a refusal to acknowledge and examine our nation’s imperfections–a central concern of Whitman’s thought. A core idea of his is that democracy implies striving to fulfill idealistic values, and denunciation of what is unworthy in our culture. Read “Democratic Vistas.”