This admirable rebuke to ideologically inflexible partisanship lacks convincing, painstaking arguments.
A writer attempts to find pragmatic solutions to problems of American political policy by forging a compromise between libertarian and socialistic theories.
According to debut author Trigueiro, the United States is trapped in a tug of war between dogmatic ideologies, with each side laying claim to a superior patriotism. The way out of this partisan quagmire is to craft a compromise between libertarian and socialist perspectives “heavily rooted in common sense.” In fact, the author contends that libertarian-socialism, the hybrid theory Trigueiro recommends, is consistent with “the original vision of America’s founding fathers.” The author surveys an ambitious stretch of intellectual ground, covering diverse topics like Social Security and health reform, climate change, the electoral system, transportation, and irrigation, an impressively diverse list. Some of her discussions and proposed solutions are lucidly articulated and eminently sensible; for example, she suggests an expansion of the House of Representatives, which would accomplish, among other things, improved democratic representation and might stymie endless partisan gerrymandering. The author also tackles the burgeoning student loan crisis by outlining a “national service initiative” tied to the forgiveness of college tuition. Trigueiro truly does seem to hunt for ideologically unencumbered solutions to real problems, keenly avoiding ones that ignore either the demands of a communal society or the moral significance of individual liberty. In fact, the author is at her best limning the nation’s “complex relationship with socialism,” and the many ways in which its concrete applications, like Social Security, are already woven into the country’s civic fabric. But she covers far too much ground within a brief study, and as a result, her quickly developed contentions are more stridently declared than rigorously argued. Trigueiro’s tendency, in the search for common sense, is to reductively oversimplify the issues. For example, a value-added tax, whatever its merits, is surely not “almost guaranteed to succeed at righting America’s financial ship.” And she never provides a searching discussion of the fundamental elements of either libertarianism or socialism—a glaring inadequacy of the study. Still, the author deftly demonstrates that a spirit of open-minded compromise is insufficient; one needs a meticulous and thorough examination of the issues as well.
This admirable rebuke to ideologically inflexible partisanship lacks convincing, painstaking arguments.Pub Date: N/A
ISBN: 978-1-4834-9647-4
Page Count: 169
Publisher: Self
Review Posted Online: Nov. 26, 2019
Review Program: Kirkus Indie
Possibly inspired by the letters Cleary has received as a children's author, this begins with second-grader Leigh Botts' misspelled fan letter to Mr. Henshaw, whose fictitious book itself derives from the old take-off title Forty Ways W. Amuse a Dog. Soon Leigh is in sixth grade and bombarding his still-favorite author with a list of questions to be answered and returned by "next Friday," the day his author report is due. Leigh is disgruntled when Mr. Henshaw's answer comes late, and accompanied by a set of questions for Leigh to answer. He threatens not to, but as "Mom keeps nagging me about your dumb old questions" he finally gets the job done—and through his answers Mr. Henshaw and readers learn that Leigh considers himself "the mediumest boy in school," that his parents have split up, and that he dreams of his truck-driver dad driving him to school "hauling a forty-foot reefer, which would make his outfit add up to eighteen wheels altogether. . . . I guess I wouldn't seem so medium then." Soon Mr. Henshaw recommends keeping a diary (at least partly to get Leigh off his own back) and so the real letters to Mr. Henshaw taper off, with "pretend," unmailed letters (the diary) taking over. . . until Leigh can write "I don't have to pretend to write to Mr. Henshaw anymore. I have learned to say what I think on a piece of paper." Meanwhile Mr. Henshaw offers writing tips, and Leigh, struggling with a story for a school contest, concludes "I think you're right. Maybe I am not ready to write a story." Instead he writes a "true story" about a truck haul with his father in Leigh's real past, and this wins praise from "a real live author" Leigh meets through the school program. Mr. Henshaw has also advised that "a character in a story should solve a problem or change in some way," a standard juvenile-fiction dictum which Cleary herself applies modestly by having Leigh solve his disappearing lunch problem with a burglar-alarmed lunch box—and, more seriously, come to recognize and accept that his father can't be counted on. All of this, in Leigh's simple words, is capably and unobtrusively structured as well as valid and realistic. From the writing tips to the divorced-kid blues, however, it tends to substitute prevailing wisdom for the little jolts of recognition that made the Ramona books so rewarding.
Pub Date: Aug. 22, 1983
ISBN: 143511096X
Page Count: 133
Publisher: Morrow/HarperCollins
Review Posted Online: Oct. 16, 2011
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 1, 1983
A crash course in big-bucks tort litigation, as rich as any novel on the scene. In the mid-'70s, the small industrial town of Woburn, Mass., found itself afflicted with a plague of biblical dimensions: 12 local children, 8 of them close neighbors, had died (or were dying) of leukemia. The parents suspected the water supply, which was foul-smelling, rusty, and undrinkable, but they had no hard evidence of a link to the cancers. But in 1979, the accidental discovery of carcinogenic industrial wastes in the town's wells led the grieving parents to hire personal-injury lawyer Jan Schlichtmann, new to the profession but intoxicated with the sizable damages he'd won so far. This is magazine journalist Harr's first book, but his complex portrait of Schlichtmann is the work of a master. Egomaniacal, quixotic, workaholic, greedy, altruistic, and naive, Schlichtmann is Everylawyer, and as he allows the Woburn case to consume his practice, he almost loses his license and his life. Harr wisely downplays the dying-children angle, focusing instead on Schlichtmann's case against the two corporate Goliaths who dumped the waste: Beatrice Foods (represented by Jerome Facher of Boston's Hale & Dorr) and W.R. Grace (represented by William Cheeseman of Boston's Foley, Hoag & Eliot). Despite their white- shoe lineage, Facher and Cheeseman play dirty, withholding evidence and repeatedly seeking Schlichtmann's suspension for having filed a ``frivolous'' lawsuit. But the real villain of the story is Federal District Judge Walter J. Skinner, whose personal dislike of Schlichtmann (and camaraderie with Facher) leads him to grant the defense's motion to split the trial into two protracted phases. By the time Judge Skinner submits four incomprehensible questions to be bewildered jury, Woburn's young victims have been forgottenand the whole legal system has suffered a tragic loss. A paranoid legal thriller as readable as Grisham, but important and illuminating. (Film rights to Disney)
Pub Date: Sept. 1, 1995
ISBN: 0-394-56349-2
Page Count: 512
Publisher: Random House
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: July 15, 1995
BOOK REVIEW
© Copyright 2025 Kirkus Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Follow
Popular in this Genre
We can’t wait for you to join Kirkus!
It’s free and takes less than 10 seconds!
Already have an account? Log in.
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
Welcome Back!
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
