Sunday, August 5, 2018

The Lost City of Z: A Tale of Deadly Obsession in the Amazon

Book:The Lost City of Z: A Tale of Deadly Obsession in the Amazon
Basic Information : Synopsis : Characters : Thoughts : Evaluation : Book Group : New Words : Book References : Good Quotes : Table of Contents : References

Basic Information:
Author: David Grann
Edition: eBook from the Mountain View Public Library
Publisher: Vintage Books
ISBN: 0385513534 (ISBN13: 9780385513531)
Start Date: July 30, 2018
Read Date: August 5, 2018
352 pages
Genre: History, Biography, Archeology,Amazon
Language Warning: Low
Rated Overall: 4 out of 5
History: 4 out of 5-there is some question about Fawcett's role in the exploration of the Amazon. For a different perspective than David Grann's, see John Hemmings article in The Spectator
Religion: Spiritualism


Synopsis (Caution: Spoiler Alert-Jump to Thoughts):
In 1925, Percy Harrison Fawcett set out to find a lost city in the Amazon jungle. He never came back. David Grann sets out to gather background and maybe a little light on the city called “Z” by Fawcett and Fawcett’s disappearance. Z also was referenced by the Spanish conquistadors as El Dorado.

Grann traces both Fawcett’s quest for this city through many explorations, starting with the beginnings of his thirst for adventure in Ceylon. It ends with his disappearance in 1925. Many expeditions have sought the mystery of what happened to Fawcett.

Grann does not go into the jungle looking for Fawcett, but more to understand what he faced and to gather background. If possible to find people who have had contact with Fawcett. But throughout the book, he interweaves Fawcett’s story with his own.




Cast of Characters:
Percy Harrison Fawcett-Main person, explorer
Jack Fawcett-Percy Harrison Fawcett’s son. Explorer
Brian Fawcett-Percy Harrison Fawcett’s son who did not go on final expedition. Railroad executive in Peru
Raleigh Rimell-Jack Fawcett’s best friend. Member of the last expedition.
Nina Fawcett-Percy Harrison Fawcett ‘s wife
David Grann-Author of book, but also tries to understand clues left behind by Percy Harrison Fawcett
Dr. Alexander Hamilton Rice-Fawcett’s main rival in trying to find Z. A rich American which used modern methods of archeology and technology to try to accomplish the goals of his expeditions.
James Lynch-Brazilian Banker. Searched for Fawcett in 1996
Keltie-high official in the British Royal Geographical Society. Supporter of Fawcett



Thoughts:
Like any good treasure, a map is needed, one marked with an X, or on this case, a Z.

Purpose of book was to record how generations of scientists and adventures became fatally obsessed with solving the whereabouts of the lost City of Z.


We shall return
Z was Fawcett’s code letter for the Spanish’s El Dorado

Fawcett felt that the only way to accomplish finding Z was through the use of a small group, instead of large numbers which needed more logistics and supplies. On his last expedition, he only took three people: himself, his son, and his son’s best friend.


The vanishing
More people have disappeared looking for Fawcett than have disappeared looking for El Dorado

James Lynch became part of the people who would look for Fawcett.

There is an estimate that there are 60 tribes in the Amazon who have never been contacted by outside civilization.


The search begins
The term “counterfeit paradise” is used throughout the book. Basically what is being saying is the Amazon looks lush like it has a lot which could sustain a population. But under the canopy, the soil is nutrient deficient, so not much edible grows. Also game is not in abundance. So there is not much to keep explorers going. The term “counterfeit paradise” was coined by Betty Meggers of the Smithsonian.

Grann is single minded when working on a story, letting go of much of his life in the pursuit of it.


Blank spots on the map
Today, we take for granted that every place on earth has a spot on a map. But as late as World War II, much of the Amazon region was unknown. People like Fawcett and Rice were instrumental in getting down on a piece of paper where rivers and the like were.

Explorers are not, perhaps, the most promising people with whom to build a society. Indeed, some might say that explorers become explorers precisely because they have a streak of unsociability and a need to remove themselves at regular intervals as far as possible from their fellow men. From Galton’s Art of Travel. Some may also say that about outdoors people as well.


Into the Amazon
So sad that people enslave and treat so barbaric others. I think that if you do not believe someone is human or I should say fully human, then it is easy to descend into that kind of mentality. Isn’t that what happens with genocide? Be careful what we say about others. Also understand that fundamentally they have the image of God in them. What we do to a person we are doing to God. CS Lewis points out that even with animals, if we do not honor them as part of creation, then we will start that descent into mistreating humans.

The Amazon is against people more than anywhere else. Reading about the various fish, snakes, frogs, insects makes you wonder how anybody survives. Sort of like Jumanji in real life.

Fawcett’s approach to the Indians was non-violent. He had ordered his men not to fire their rifles at them. At times he approached the Indians and was at their mercy, bringing gifts. That seemed to work. But it required strong courage as it would have been very much in the nature of things for an Indian to blow a poison dart into him without notice.


The secret papers
Grann meets Fawcett’s granddaughter who is 51 years old. Fawcett disappeared in 1926\5. This was written in 2005/6. So that would mean the granddaughter would have been born about 25 years after Fawcett disappeared. Yet the granddaughter talks as if she knew Fawcett/

Also why does the granddaughter trust Grann enough to let him look at Fawcett’s papers which she kept under lock and key? Something seems to be missing from this telling. Also she told him that Fawcett purposely mislead people about the starting point of his search for Z. But she was willing to tell Grann. Why?


In the hands of the gods
To Fawcett, inactivity was a prison. Pity the person who cannot sit still as well as the person who cannot move. It draws to my mind what the Bible says: Be still and know that I am Lord. But there are also places where God sends people out to do His work. To know when to move and when to stay.

He would not let his wife go on expeditions. But Nina encouraged their daughter to become strong and aggressive so that she could be prepared to go on expedition.

A biologist who traveled with Fawcett noted that I thought that I would get many valuable natural history noted but my experience is that when undergoing severe physical labor the mind is not all active. … one has no time to miss anything save food or sleep or rest. In short one becomes little more than a rational animal. When backpacking, I experience a little bit of this-not to this extent. I think I should be able to write the great thoughts when we take a break or stop at night. But in the end, I just want to do nothing.

Is it better that one might die so that the rest be saved? This is the issue with Murray. He was so far gone, could he recover? He was slowing everybody else down so that it was possible none would get out alive. Fawcett takes the course of trying to find an outpost where he could lay Murray down there and let him recover.


The case for Z
The Guarayo’s knew how to live in the jungle. They had mastered how to obtain food and how to maintain the equilibrium with its environment. They understood that poison could kill you, but a small amount may dull the pain of a toothache.

Fawcett when meeting a new group of Indians would disarm rather than take up a defensive position. He would drop is belt to show he was unarmed or put his hands above his head. The response was to drop the hostility and act much more like negotiating partners.

He was able to show that the Indians could sustain a large population, and thus have had a critical mass enough to build an empire.

Mental maze of race-the problem where you observe on thing, but believe another thing about race. Such as the Indians are savages, but observe that they can be pretty sophisticated in how they approach a problem, such as food gathering. In Fawcett’s day it was believed that the lighter the pigment of skin, the more intelligence a race could be. But that did not seem to hold true.


ElDorado
El Dorado means the golden man

It seems like the Amazon re-pays people for their own barbarity. Soldiers turn to cannibalism but do not return from the jungle. The Spanish enslave 4000 Inca’s and force them into the Amazon, none of these return. But the Spanish almost none return either.


The whole world is mad
Fawcett became convinced there was remnants of an ancient civilization in the Amazon based upon interviews, documents, and pottery fragments. He was narrowing down locations of where El Dorado was based upon this information. He was also pretty secretive about where he thought it was and even referred to the location/city as Z.


A scientific obsession
An unexpected clue
Have no fear
The last eyewitness
Dead or alive
The colonel's bones
The other world
Z.


Have no fear

In several places, Grann uses the term priestly when one of the Fawcett’s are in training. I wonder what part of priestly functions Grann is referring to? Abstention from sexual relations? Saying mass? Self flagellation? Then the question is why does Grann use that term?

Success is the breeding grounds for failure. When you are highly successful, there tends to be a sense that you cannot fail. Is this the root of Fawcett’s demise? Grann wrote that Fawcett was confident-after all, he had always succeeded where others failed. This is punctuated with Fawcett’s final note to his wife, Upi need have no fear of any failure.


The last eyewitness
Grann talks about coming across a series of stone pillars. The illusion he soon discovers is that even though they look like remnants of a lost civilization, in reality they are weathered stone. It is easy to be deceive ourselves about what we are seeing.

When a resource is plentiful, it is easy to think it is inexhaustible. The rain forests which Fawcett saw along the Manso River looks more like the lands of Nebraska. In man’s drive to exploit, we also exploit our fellow man. Grann talks about the Amazon being one of the biggest concentration of slave labor. On the other hand, the jungle consumed Rio Novo, one of the last places Fawcett was seen and a very large ranch. Only the brick work remained as ruins on the ground.

Several spin off’s have been made of the disappearance of Fawcett. Bob Hope and Bing Cosby did Road to Zanzibar. Also one of the Indiana Jones spin off novels has Fawcett in it.

Grann meets an old woman who lives at an outpost, the last which Fawcett visits. She would have been about 12 years old and had seen the party. She asks a perceptive question: What is it that these white people did? Why is it so important for their tribe to find them?


Dead or alive and The colonel's bones
In these two chapters Grann explores thoughts about why and how Fawcett died. They ranged from starvation to being killed by Indians to being held hostage or as slaves to Ending his life as a chief among the Indians. Most of the theories and the explorers who put out the theories have been discredited.

Grann goes upstream to the Xingu Indian Reservation with the Kalapalo Indians. These Indians at one time were the deadliest, bloodthirsty Indians in the area. Now they are more wise to the ways of capitalism. A chief says that he will show Grann Fawcett’s bones. Instead, he said that the bones people took were his grandfathers. Then he told a story which had been passed down how three white men came through their village. When they left, they saw his fire/smoke for four days. Then no more. They were heading east.

Z
Grann visits an archaeologist named Michael Heckenberger at the Kuikuro village. This village showed a great deal of cultural sophistication with moats and symmetrical villages and farming. The question is, is this Z? Unknown, but it was the complex culture which Fawcett was looking for, but not the El Dorado of the Spanish desire. Fawcett came close to here, but Heckenberger understands why he did not find this city. Unless you are right on it and can see the whole area, it is hard it discern that there was a city here.


Evaluation:
 David Grann is not outdoors material, but he still gave an effort to understand the conditions which Percy Harrison Fawcett did his expeditions under. Consequently, he can describe some of the conditions which Fawcett faced upon his expeditions in the Amazon jungle.

The Lost City of Z provides the reader background on Fawcett. His strengths and weaknesses are exposed, along with his desires. It also provided me with the understanding that as much as I enjoy the outdoors, the Amazon is not the place for me.

This book is a worthwhile read. Quick and easy, but compelling, even though you already know the answer of what happened to Fawcett on his final expedition.

 
Notes from my book group:

From LitLovers
1. What inspired Col. Percy Harrison Fawcett's obsessive search for Z...what evidence led him to believe the city was more than legend?
2. How does Grann portray Fawcett? What kind of a man was he? Would you describe him as a victim of his own obsession...as a romantic...a fool bent on his own destruction...a rational man of science...?
3. What are some of the legends that have surrounded Fawcett himself? To what do you attribute his place in popular culture over the years—and what does it say, both about Fawcett and ourselves, that he has maintained a hold on our collective imagination?
4. How did Fawcett differ from his rival, Alexander Hamilton Rice—especially in the approach to exploration? Were the two men evenly matched in skill and technology...or not? In what way did Rice, perhaps, represent the future of modern exploration?
5. What draws David Grann into the search for Fawcett—what initially sparks the author's fascination? Consider Grann's own difficulty in the Amazon, especially for a man who delights in air conditioning and fast food. Finally, what new information does Grann contribute to solving the mystery surrounding Fawcett's disappearance?
6. Where does Grann stand with regard to the existence of Z? What conclusions does he reach? Where do you stand?
7. What are some of the more surprising, even shocking, accounts of jungle exploration you found in this work?
8. Does this book remind you of other stories of those obsessed with adventure or other cultures: The Man Who Loved China...or Bill Bryson's misguided but humorous adventure on the Appalachian Trail? Any resemblance to fictional works ... say, Conrad's Heart of Darkness...or Garcia Marquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude?
9. Brad Pitt has brought production rights to the book. So, will he play Grann...or Fawcett?


1. Books about explorers, adventurers, and extreme risk-takers like Jon Krakauer’s Eiger Dreams and Into the Wild, Caroline Alexander’s The Endurance, Joe Simpson’s Touching the Void, Nathaniel Philbrick’s In the Heart of the Sea, Sebastian Junger’s A Perfect Storm, and many others, have become extremely popular in recent years. What are the appeals of such books? What qualities does The Lost City of Z share with books of this kind? In what ways does it differ from them?
2. After time away from the jungle, Fawcett wrote: “Inexplicably—amazingly—I knew I loved that hell. Its fiendish grasp had captured me, and I wanted to see it again” [p. 116]. What drove Fawcett to plunge himself again and again into the dangers of the Amazon? What is the main force that drives him—obsession with finding the lost city, desire to prove himself against his competitors, a need to escape the confines of civilization, a spiritual quest?
3. In what ways is Fawcett a symbolic figure? What values does he embody? In what ways does he represent many of both the best and worst qualities of the British Empire?
4. Grann notes that some anthropologists and historians consider Fawcett’s view of the Indians enlightened for his era while others saw him as unable to transcend the prevailing racism of his own culture. How does he regard the Indians he encounters? How does he treat them?
5. How do Fawcett’s expeditions affect his wife Nina? How does she see her role in relation to him? In what ways does she succumb to his obsessions?
6. In what ways does The Lost City of Z challenge conventional views of the Amazon? What does it suggest about the current state of archeological research in the region?
7. What are some of the most fascinating and/or dreadful features of the Amazon jungle revealed in The Lost City of Z? How has the jungle been changed since Europeans first made contact with it?
8. What does The Lost City of Z reveal about the power of obsession? In what ways does Fawcett’s obsession draw others into its deadly gravitational pull?
9. By what means does Grann maintain such a high level of suspense throughout the book? What does the interweaving of his own story—the story of his search for the truth about what happened to Fawcett and the story of his writing of the book itself—add to the total effect of The Lost City of Z?
10. After witnessing the mass carnage of World War I, Fawcett exclaims: “Civilization! Ye gods! To see what one has seen the word is an absurdity. It has been an insane explosion of the lowest human emotions” [p. 189]. In what ways does The Lost City of Z call into question conventional notions of civilization? What does it suggest about the supposed differences between advanced and primitive cultures?
11. What are Percy Harrison’s Fawcett’s most admirable qualities? What aspects of his character prove most troubling? Was James Murray right in accusing Fawcett of all but murdering him? [p. 139].
12. Near the end of the book, Grann writes about how biographers are often driven mad by the inability to fully comprehend their subjects. Of his own quest he says: “The finished story of Fawcett seemed to reside eternally beyond the horizon: a hidden metropolis of words and paragraphs, my own Z” [p. 303]. How well does Grann succeed in discovering and revealing the truth of Percy Fawcett?
13. Does Grann’s meeting with the anthropologist Michael Heckenberger in Kurikulo village confirm Fawcett’s belief in a lost ancient civilization? Is Fawcett’s search vindicated at last?



New Words:

  • Camdiru (7): also known as cañero, toothpick fish, or vampire fish, is a species of parasitic freshwater catfish in the family Trichomycteridae native to the Amazon Basin where it is found in the countries of Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru.
  • Craniometer (14): a device for measuring the external dimensions of the skull.
  • Jezail (17): a simple, cost-efficient and often handmade muzzle-loading long arm commonly used in British India, Central Asia and parts of the Middle East in the past.
  • Autopsis (20): Greek “seeing with one’s own eyes,”
  • Denouement (21):the final part of a play, movie, or narrative in which the strands of the plot are drawn together and matters are explained or resolved.


Book References:
  • The Lost World by Arthur Conan Doyle
  • Othello by William Shakespeare
  • A Handful of Dust by Evelyn Waugh
  • Exploration Fawcett letters of Percy Fawcett, edited by Brian Fawcett
  • 1491 by Charles Mann
  • The Secret Doctrine by H.P. Blavatsky
  • The Victorians by A.N. Wilson
  • King Solomon Mines by Henry Rider Haggard
  • Swallowed by an Earthquake by Edward Fawcett
  • The Secret of the Desert by Edward Fawcett
  • 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne
  • Hints to Travelers by
  • The Amazon by Robin Furneaux
  • Solitude by Ella Wheeler Wilcox-as found in one of Fawcett’s diaries
  • The River of Doubt by Candice Millard
  • Hartman the Anarchist by Edward Fawcett
  • The Doom of the Great City by Edward Fawcett
  • Antarctica Days by James Murray and ___
  • On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin
  • Notes and Queries of Anthropology from the RGS
  • The Land of Mist by Arthur Conan Doyle
  • Man Hunting in the Jungle by Dyott
  • The Ecology of Power by Michael Heckenberger

Good Quotes:
  • First Line: I pulled the map from my back pocket.
  • Last Line: For a moment, I could see this vanished world as if it were right in front of me. Z.
  • A God forsaken hole … best seen with the eyes closed. Chp Have no fear

Table of Contents:
  • We shall return
  • The vanishing
  • The search begins
  • Buried treasure
  • Blank spots on the map
  • The disciple
  • Freeze-dried icecream and adrenaline socks
  • Into the Amazon
  • The secret papers
  • The green hell
  • Dead Horse Camp
  • In the hands of the gods
  • Ransom
  • The case for Z
  • El Dorado
  • The locked box
  • The whole world is mad
  • A scientific obsession
  • An unexpected clue
  • Have no fear
  • The last eyewitness
  • Dead or alive
  • The colonel's bones
  • The other world
  • Z.


References:


Sunday, May 27, 2018

The List

Book:The List
Basic Information : Synopsis : Thoughts : Evaluation : Good Quotes : Table of Contents : References

Basic Information:
Author: Amy Siskind
Edition: epub from the Fresno County Public Library
Publisher: Bloomsbury USA
ISBN: 1635572711 (ISBN13: 9781635572711)
Start Date: May 25, 2018
Read Date: Did not finish
528 pages
Genre: History, Politics, Trump
Language Warning: None
Rated Overall: 3 out of 5
History: 4 out of 5


Synopsis (Caution: Spoiler Alert-Jump to Thoughts):
The Forward is by Sarah Kendzior who admires what Amy Suskind has created-a bullet point list of what happens each week during the Trump Presidency during the first year. She says this is a rough draft, I think because she intends to continue this list until his Presidency ends. The points are short-a sentence or two, at most a short paragraph. In its current iteration, Suskind says this is a rough draft, she only takes on the first year of President Trump’s tenure.

Thoughts:
My wife checked out this book and I read enough to realize that I could read the whole book and be entertained and/or sickened by what I read. Or I could stop at some point and say that I am not going to gain any new insight by reading more. I chose the later, stopping around the beginning of February 2017.

There is no way which you will remember each point. And after awhile the events all begin to merge into a horrific blob of what is happening to the United States under President Trump. None of what Suskind portrays is pretty and Suskind slants her portrayal to the negative interpretation, not that President Trump needs any help in that.

The only parts of the book I thought was noteworthy was the Forward and Introduction.


Forwards
Sarah Kendzior puts forward the theory that the lies and misstatements the Trump Administration puts forward are purposeful. They know that are lying and know that we know they are lying, but they do not care. It is a show of power. The idea is that eventually truth will no longer be valued when we are too exhausted to look for it.

To me, this is a viable interpretation. Are there other interpretation? Maybe Trump is not smart enough to know truth from lies? Maybe he is like child who has not come of age? Or has dementia? Or some other mental sickness which skews truth? Kendzior interpretation is that President Trump is evil and manipulative. Probably not too far from reality.

Kendzior thinks that compared to President Nixon, President Trump is so much worse. She apparently is measuring it against some sort of corruption scale where she thinks President Trump is using the office for personal gain. This is not her book, but Siskind must buy into this thinking. While it would not surprise me, there is not the tax money to President Trump’s pockets documentation. Most of it would fall under influence, such as people staying at his hotels. This of course, is another whole issue.

Historically, demagogues thrive in times of economic desperation, … She goes on and talks about how President Trump has shown himself to prey on the vulnerable and even cheering others misfortune as an avenue to enrich himself.

Kendzior comes back to the concern about truth in this day. She says that Without documentation--without a reliable and shared sense of what happened--demanding accountability is tremendously difficult. The question in my mind, is The List the document to make it happen? Will there be agreement on what Siskind has compiled? Particularly since there is a sense of one-sidedness in it. Yes The List is a good rallying document for the opposition to President Trump, but is it complete? How badly is it slanted?

But the real interesting aspect of Kendzior’s piece is her defence of truth. She says that if truth did not matter to President Trump, why would he go so far to suppress it? But Kendzior implicitly is saying that there is a shared reality which we should know and share. The question I have is how do we know this truth which we all are to share? Is it a temporary set of items and facts which will get reinterpreted in 10 years? Or truth which lasts longer? I think most of The List qualifies as the former. Hence one of the reasons why I did not feel a strong need to finish the book.



Evaluation:
The List is not so much a book, but a blog dumped out into a book form. This is not to say it is boring or unsuited to read, just do no go into this book with the understanding of high or systematic telling of history. Also its thinking is not set up to be fair and impartial. Instead the idea is to record how far away President Trump is away from the author’s worldview. My confession, I read only about a tenth of the chronology before realizing that I knew what the book was going to say and that I probably would not be getting much more out of it.


The Forward and Introduction lays out the author’s agenda. The basis for the book is the President Trump is a liar and manipulator. Consequently he will bend and create his own history of his Presidency. The author’s objective is to document what happens during the Trump Presidency. In Siskind’s case, she is leaning towards documenting the history she is documenting leans toward the outrageous, potentially illegal, and fanatical. Siskind does reference her sources for each entry back in the notes chapter.


If you are a President Trump supporter, you will hate the book; a Trump hater, you will love it, Either way, your blood pressure will go up.


Good Quotes:
    • First Line: On the morning of Saturday, November 18, 2016, I found myself driving up to Val-Kill, the home of Eleanor Roosevelt.
    • Last Line: Puttin offered Comey political asylum in Russia, continuing to publicly insert himself into U.S.
    • Lies are not merely false statements but signals of power. Forward by Sarah Kendzior
      Table of Contents:
      • Foreward
      • Introduction
      • The List
      • Acknowledgements
      • Notes
      • Index
      • A Note on the Author

      References:

          Friday, May 4, 2018

          Shadow Divers

          Book: Shadow Divers: 
          The True Adventure of Two Americans Who Risked Everything to Solve One of the Last Mysteries of World War II
          Basic Information : Synopsis : Characters : Thoughts : Evaluation : Book Group : Good Quotes  : References

          Basic Information:
          Author: Robert Kurson
          Edition: Hardback from the Fresno County Public Library
          Publisher: Random House
          ISBN: 0965925072 (ISBN13: 9780965925075)
          Start Date: April 28, 2018
          Read Date: May 4, 2018
          335 pages
          Genre: History, World War II, Scuba Diving
          Language Warning: Medium
          Rated Overall: 3½ out of 5
          History: 4 out of 5


          Synopsis (Caution: Spoiler Alert-Jump to Thoughts):
          What is a wreck diver? It is a diver who finds, identifies helps to recover some of a ship-wreck.

          That is what this story is about, where Bill Nagle, a legend in the sport of wreck-diving, but now out of shape for serious diving, receives the coordinates of a possible wreck from a “friendly” captain. He takes along John Chatterton and eleven other divers. Most of them figure that this will probably be a garbage barge, but you never know. When Chatterton went down, it was not a barge, but cigar shaped-a German sub. But the question was, which one?

          A good section of the book deals with Kohler and Chatterton diving hoping to find some identification on the sub. The other part of the chase is talking with experts in the United States, Great Britain and Germany. They spent time in research archives and museums pondering possibilities.

          In the meantime, their monomania-drive to dive and to determine the fate and identification of the sub leads to the breakup of both of Chatterton and Kohler’s marriages. Kohler comments on his blog that he was an comfortable with Kurson’s digging into this part of the story, but after seeing the results felt that it was part of the story.

          Also, on two different dives three people died. The first because the diver experienced difficulties and sank without recovering. It was after this death that Kohler becomes part of the team. The second was a father/son team. The son tried to dislodge a barrier and became trapped. by the time he escaped, he was out of oxygen and ascended without decompression. The father gave chase and they both died because of nitrogen poisoning, the bends.

          As Chatterton and Kohler narrow the focus of which sub has been found, they realize that history may have been written wrong. Eventually the sub changes from being known as U-Who to U-869. This is confirmed when Chatterton goes into an unexplored compartment after performing a dangerous maneuver and finds a tag on a box of spare parts.

          After the confirmed identification has been made, neither Chatterton or Kohler go down to the sub again. Chatterton goes on to find other wrecks. Kohler is more interested in the family and friends of the men who were in in U-69. He was able to visit several of them.


          Cast of Characters:
          • Bill Nagle-Innovative deep wreck diver. Becomes ship captain of the Seeker which is used to find U-869/ He does not do any of the dives to find the sub. Dies due to issues related to his drinking.
          • John Chatterton-Deep wreck diver who is the first to see the sub U-869. He makes many trips back to the sub over a space of 6-7 years until he can positively determine the sub’s identity.
          • Richie Kohler- A member of a renegade group called the Atlantic Wreck Divers, he started out not friendly towards Chatterton and vica versa. But when they recognized their mutual love of figuring out a wreck, they became close partners. Kohler and Chatterton were a team to discover the identify of U-869.

          Thoughts:
          There are place in this book which Kurson starts something and then drops it. Such as when the German embassy approaches them about this is a German boat and they are not to disturb it. There is only that one small section, but I do not think that Kurson puts it to bed.


          Chapter One - The Book of Numbers
          Bill Nagle had gotten a potential deep wreck site.He and John Chatterton tried to find twelve divers who would pay $100 to go out and explore some mysterious readings another ship captain had gotten on a trip. Unless there was a “sure” thing, many of the divers were not interested. Nagle remarked that These guys don’t have the heart for wreck diving John. These guys just don’t get it. Is this a unique situation? I backpackpack, sometimes long distances. How can I explain what I feel, what drives me, to others who do not participate?


          Chapter Four - John Chatterton
          In Vietnam, Chatterton was a medic. His job: save lives and limbs. On his first mission, some of his colleagues went down under enemy fire. Chatterton braved the enemy fire to rescue them, running exposed and hauling them away. Reflecting on this experience, he thought how full like felt when a person got to be excellent. There is a sense of satisfaction by doing things well. I saw this when I worked. Some people would give their fullest and some would try to get by with as little as possible. My observation is that those who gave the most enjoyed themselves the most.

          Chatterton’s beliefs formed during this Vietnam experiences. Kurson synthesize them down to:
          • If something was easy, someone else already would have done it.
          • If you follow another’s footsteps, you missed the problems really worth solving
          • Excellence is born of preparation, dedication, focus and tenacity; compromise on any of these and you become average
          • Sometimes life presents a great moment of decision, an intersection at which a man must decide to stop or go; person lives with these decisions forever
            • My corollary to this is one must also be prepared when these moments come
          • Examine everything; not all is as it seems or as people tell you.
          • It is easiest to live with a decision if it is based on an earnest sense of right and wrong.
          • The guy who gets killed is often the guy who is nervous
          • The worst possible decision is to give up.
          In this chapter, Chatterton realizes that he was made for scuba diving/ He wondered how he had ever gone so long without knowing a man could get paid for diving. I think that when a person finds their true calling, their true vocation, they ask the question, And I get paid for this? At least that is what happened when I found out that I was pretty good as a computer programmer and that someone would actually pay me to work at what I enjoyed doing.


          Chapter Eight - Nothing At That Location
          Sometimes there can be wild speculation in the book. Such as is Hitler on the boat/ Was this the boat which he was trying to make his get away with? This is recognized as only speculation, nothing of substance. The question is how far a field does this speculation go? How far does it form the character of this book? Or is it just wonderings. I think it is more wondering than anything they were basing his thoughts on.


          Chapter None - A Heavy Toll
          After finding a human bone at the U-Who wreck, Chatterton and Kohler were faced with a moral dilemma. The question was, when they came across human remains, what do they do with them? The two of them worked through the issues surrounding this question. From the principle that the human remains should not be disturbed, they came up with five rules of engagement:
          • Respect the crewmen. The U-boat crew were sailors, doing a job and were trying to serve their own country.
          • Respect for the families. If they found something disturbing the bodies/bones, how do you talk with the families of the men?
          • Honor the brotherhood of the deep. While the divers were different than the submariners, there was enough similarities of the dangers that they understood the type of men who were in the sub.
          • Protect the wreck diver profession/avocation image. Their behavior would reflect on the sport.
          • Do the right thing. Don’t violat/dishonor the remains.

          Chapter Ten - History Mauled
          What is the measure of a person? Is it what a person thinks? What a person tries to be? Kohler and Chatterton thinks that most people do not get tested or even put themselves in a place where where they will have to understand their own character. Consequently, they do not really know themselves.


          Chapter Thirteen - The U-Boat is Our Moment.
          There is a couple of places where the name Gary Gentile comes up. Here it says that Gentile had thought that a different wreck was too busted up to identify. Chatterton was able to. Later on in the Appendix, Gary Gentile is given credit for explaining about the rivalries among boat captains. This is ionic because Gentile writes a book called Shadow Divers Exposed which calls into question Chatteron’s and Kohler’s explanation about how U-869 sank. Also what happened on deck after the Rouse’s died.

          To continue on with the thought in chapter 10, When things are easy a person doesn’t really learn about himself. It’s what a person does at the moment of his greatest struggle that shows him who he really is. Some people never get that moment. Does this mean that a person should go out of their way to test their limits? I think that you cannot go out and risk your life without sufficient purpose. And that is where I think that is where most of us live-without sufficient purpose in life. What what I die for? Why am I living?


          Epilogue
          ???Kurson says that circle-runners-torpedo’s which turn back on the sub where they are fired from-by their nature give little warning and bears no witness. Yet on the previous page Kurtson talks about how the radio person could tell it was coming and the captain has time to do a sharp dive. I think that the author left something unsaid or unqualified.

          Not many divers go out to the U-869. The feeling is that the kind of divers who are capable are not interest. They just do not have the mindset for it.



          Evaluation:
           As I was reading Shadow Divers, I thought this was an interesting book, a pretty good read, but not too much in it to think about. There are some interesting “heart” observations which come out of the book, like what are you doing which you really love and do with all your heart? Or What do you struggle for, really struggle which you want to achieve?


          As far as the book goes, it is a good adventure book, pretty well written. For the most part, it is a book you can race through, enjoy, and put away.



          Notes from my book group:
          When Bill Nagle says to John Chatterton in chapter one, These guys don’t have the heart for wreck diving John. These guys just don’t get it. Why would wreck diving become such a strong fascination? What do people see in it? Is this a unique avocation? What other lines of interest are there where there are true participants where the participants feel others do not understand the devotion to that interest?

          Chatterton and Kohler both think about what does it mean to be excellent? How does it play into their character? They think that When things are easy a person doesn’t really learn about himself. It’s what a person does at the moment of his greatest struggle that shows him who he really is. Some people never get that moment. When do these great moments which show your character comes along? How can one prepare for these great moments? How does that tie in with who you are?

          Chatterton and Kohler after examining records come up with conjectures about what took place.It turns out that their conjectures were correct. How can we be sure that what we know from history actually took place? As a side bar, Chatterton and Kohler felt that U-869 was sunk because of a circle-running torpedo. Another diver has, Gary Gentile, has written a book called Shadow Divers Exposed! which refutes their conjecture. In 2005, the Coast Guard’s determination was that Hedgehogs and depth charges from the American destroyer escorts USS Howard D. Crow and USS Koiner sank U-869. Which is right?

          If you were working the sub as Chatterton and Kohler were, what would you have done when you came across some human bones? What respect do the dead have?

          What occupation, advocation or purpose would you risk your life for?


          Questions from Penguin-Random House
          1. Is there something you would risk everything — your family, sanity, and life – to discover?
          2. Was it proper for Chatterton and Kohler to risk their lives, and the lives of others, by insisting that all divers allow the remains of the fallen U-boat sailors to remain undisturbed?
          3. Chatterton and Kohler lost their marriages to their quest to identify the U-Who. Was it worth it?
          4. Why weren’t Chatterton and Kohler bothered more by the German sailors’ mission — namely, to sink Allied ships and kill American sailors?
          5. Do you think the U-Who’s crewmen would have appreciated the efforts of Chatterton and Kohler to identify their submarine and explain their story?
          6. The German government told Chatterton that all requests by scuba divers to explore sunken German war graves had been denied. Chatterton politely explained his intentions, then dove the wreck of the U-Who anyway. Was this morally acceptable?
          7. Gisela Engelmann dearly loved her fiance, U-869 torpedoman Franz Nedel, despite Nedel’s fervent commitment to Hitler and Nazi ideals – and despite the fact that the Nazis had imprisoned both his father and Engelmann’s father. Could you love someone whose political beliefs were abhorrent to you?
          8. Despite claustrophobic conditions, many Germans preferred submarine service to army ground service, where they might find themselves dug into trenches and dodging enemy bullets. Which would you opt for?
          9. Given the grave danger of Chatterton’s final plan to dive the wreck of the U-Who, should Kohler have stuck to his first instinct and refused to accompany Chatterton?
          10. Chatterton did not attend the funeral of his dear friend, Bill Nagle. He never completely explains the decision. Why do you think he didn’t attend Nagle’s funeral?
          11. Divers continue to debate the ethics of removing artifacts from shipwrecks. When is it proper to take artifacts from wrecks? Are there circumstances under which artifacts should never be disturbed? Does your answer change if there are human remains onboard?
          12. Chatterton seemed emotionally ready for the Rouses to identify the U-Who. But he seemed incapable of accepting the possibility of a “greenhorn” diver doing the same. Why?
          13. Kohler gave up diving for two years in an effort to keep his family together. Can a person ever surrender his true passion and hope to live a happy and fulfilled life?
          14. Did the discovery of the U-Who hasten Bill Nagle’s demise?
          15. Given the intentions of the crewmen aboard U-869 — to attack and kill Allied ships — do you think the book treated them too kindly?


          Many of these questions are either from or adapted from LitLovers.
          • Why the title of Shadow Divers?
          • Does this story work as a historical account? Factually?
          • Did the ending seem fitting? Did Kohler visit any other family or friends beside the ones mentioned?
          • Which character did you identify with? Which one did you dislike?
          • What kind of world view did the author, divers present? Were you able to identify this story’s world view? How did it affect the story?
          • Why do you think the author wrote this book?
          • What would you ask the author if you had a chance?
          • What “take aways” did you have from this book?
          • How did this book affect your view of the world?
            • What questions did you ask yourself after reading this book?
          • Talk about specific passages that struck you as significant—or interesting, profound, amusing, illuminating, disturbing, sad...?
            • What was memorable?


          Good Quotes:
            • First Line: A few years ago, a friend told me a remarkable story.
            • Last Line: Thank you for coming here.”
            • When things are easy a person doesn’t really learn about himself. It’s what a person does at the moment of his greatest struggle that shows him who he really is. Some people never get that moment. Chp Chapter Thirteen - The U-Boat is Our Moment.


            References: