Skip to main content

Appointment in Samarra by John O'Hara

A 1934 novel set in the early Depression years, centered around a man who today we might describe as a high-functioning narcissist: a man filled with rage and self-absorption, constantly running scenes in his head about all the things he can't stand about the people around him.

The novel contextualizes an interesting hinge point in United States socio-cultural history, when the Depression had set in but hadn't yet irrevocably changed society away from Roaring '20s-era libertinism. You also get a sense of the everyday social divides of "normal" America in those days, the era's reflexive classism, sectarianism and antisemitism. The author has a gift for acerbic commentary about social status, comments that ring true regardless of era.

It's interesting to see how certain social differences back then seem laughable now. Take the Catholic/Protestant divide, a central element of conflict among characters in this novel. This specific conflict may have been significant then, but it seems pointless and silly today, since in today's era civilization has far larger conflicts on a far greater scale. Sectarian conflicts have moved up in phylum to Christian vs. Muslim; the class conflicts have gone from trivial class distinctions to an all-out war between elites and everyone else; and if that isn't enough we also are fighting a culture-wars conflict and a brewing global geopolitical power struggle. You look back at people bickering over the Catholic/Protestant divide and you just want to climb into the novel and shake people and show them what's really coming.

The title refers to an old fable about how you can't run from your destiny--in fact, even your attempt to run from it fulfills it. The main character of this book destroys his reputation and his life in a matter of a few short days, thanks to rage, poor judgment, far too much alcohol, and an unwillingness to ask forgiveness. 

This isn't a great novel, by some measures it's not even a good novel. I'd recommend it only to those interested in context for a prior Fourth Turning/Crisis-type era in history in order to better navigate the current era. 

Pair with:
How To Deal With Narcissists by Anonymous Conservative 

Notes: 
* "Tonight's dinner, as almost every guest was able to tell at a glance, was the club's two-fifty dinner. This was a club dinner dance, and all members were invited. At a dinner such as the Ammermanns', the hostess could arrange with the steward for the dollar-fifty (roast chicken), the two-dollar (roast turkey), or the two-fifty (filet mignon), and this had been the filet mignon dinner. The Armormands had just that much money, and their position in Gibbsville was just that certain and insecure, that they had to give the best of everything."

* There's an interesting pacing technique in this novel: the author uses a technique of changing from one character viewpoint to another via shorter and shorter minisegments during the last third of the book. It has the effect of artificially speeding up the pacing and tension. Interesting device.

Vocab:
Swindle sheet: an expense account
Sawbuck: a ten-dollar bill
Paresis: a condition of muscular weakness caused by nerve damage or disease; partial paralysis; also can mean brain inflammation in the later stages of syphilis, causing progressive dementia and paralysis.
Flivver: a cheap car or aircraft, especially one in bad condition. [Heh, today we'd use the word hoop-dee.]

More Posts

The Great Taking by David Rogers Webb

"What is this book about? It is about the taking of collateral, all of it, the end game of this globally synchronous debt accumulation super cycle. This is being executed by long-planned, intelligent design, the audacity and scope of which is difficult for the mind to encompass. Included are all financial assets, all money on deposit at banks, all stocks and bonds, and hence, all underlying property of all public corporations, including all inventories, plant and equipment, land, mineral deposits, inventions and intellectual property. Privately owned personal and real property financed with any amount of debt will be similarly taken, as will the assets of privately owned businesses, which have been financed with debt. If even partially successful, this will be the greatest conquest and subjugation in world history." Sometimes a book hits you with a central idea that seems at first so preposterously unlikely that you can't help but laugh out loud (as I did) and think, &quo

The Two Income Trap by Elizabeth Warren

What is wrong with the following statement? "But the two-income family didn't just lose its safety net. By sending both adults into the labor force, these families actually increased the chances that they would need that safety net. In fact, they doubled the risk. With two adults in the workforce, the dual-income family has double the odds that someone could get laid off, downsized, or other wise left without a paycheck. Mom or Dad could suddenly lose a job." You've just read the fundamental thesis of The Two-Income Trap. If you agree with it--although I truly hope you're a better critical thinker than that--you'll have your views reinforced. Thus reading this book would be an unadulterated waste of your time. If on the other hand you are capable of critical thinking and you can successfully see through hilariously unrigorous "logic" of the above statement, then this book will still be a waste of your time (unless you like reading books for the s

Net Wars by Wendy M. Grossman

Workmanlike book about the early Usenet message boards that made up much of the internet's landscape in the early- to mid-1990s. While it offers helpful analogies for certain internet controversies today, I'd only recommend it to serious internet history geeks. It's not interesting enough of a read for the casual reader. However, books on technology ( and investing ) from past periods can offer surprisingly useful insights for current-day readers. The flame wars of the early days of Usenet rhyme with today's malevolently sarcastic social media arguments. Censorship battles of the 1990s give us a tiny hint of what they look like now. Spam, surveillance--we are grappling with the same problems today, just in far more extensive forms.  And then again, there are some issues that seemed like a really big deal to everyone back then that, once enough time passes, end up hardly mattering at all. I wonder what things we think matter today that don't, and what things we think