For those of you who have not read books by Bill Bryson before, be prepared for a blast. These books are non-fiction, but are incredibly funny. There has been many a time when I have had to go back and read a section that I just read since it made me laugh (and I wanted to laugh again). Some of the other great books of Bill Bryson that you should read are a ‘A Lost continent’, ‘A walk in the woods’, ‘A short history of nearly everything’, ‘Down Under’, and so on (you get the picture – I have yet to read a Bill Bryson book that did not appeal).
This book is about the development of English language down the ages, so you will find a lot of detail about how words came to be added to the English used in the United States, such as derived from the American Indians who were living there when the settlers first went in, from various languages (or rather from the immigrants of various countries such Germany, French, Irish, British, and so on,) and from whom many words of the language came to be derived, though many times these were twisted and turned in a way that the original speaker would not have realized.

But is this just a scholarly exposition of the development of the English language used in the United States ? That would be downright boring. To everyone’s relief, such is not the case. The book delves into the history of the United States and presents a great many facts while reliving the story, at the same time, debunking many myths that we have. The book is a great read for anyone who wants to read about the history of the United states through its culture, not through politics or war. From the starting, the book is a wonder of facts and learning:
- Giving a lot more detail about the original settlers and whether there were people before them
- About the way that the original settlers almost got wiped out, but survived due to the help of the native Indians nearby
- About the nature of the apparently frigid puritans and the easy prevalence of sex before marriage as a way to measure compatibility and how many marriage were formalized after a baby had been conceived
- A great many myths around the American revolution including heroic words and actions ascribed to people who apparently did no such thing
- The womanizing nature of Benjamin Franklin
- The great debates and concerns around having the different time zones and even more so, the concept of daylight savings time
- A lot of description of the many inventions and the different nature of the investors (their human traits as compared to the noble myths around them)
and so on
Too many to tell, it is better read from the book which is a very enthralling reading.

In this time and age, the events described in this thriller by Frederick Forsyth seem as from another age. And in fact, that was another age. In 1979, when this novel was published, the Soviet Union was the worldwide great power representing communism, with the Eastern half of Europe in its clutches. In addition to the client states such as East Germany, Romania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, etc that were also communists, and some of whom had seen the might of the Soviet army when they had tried to move towards democracy, there were the states that were part of the Soviet Union besides Russia. In all, there were 15 former states that made up the Soviet Union, and it would only have been a visionary / fool who would have dared to claim that these countries will be separate countries within 12 years.
And this is one of the main stories of this thriller. The second largest constituent state of the Soviet Union was the Ukraine, and since it was the second largest, and had known independence before, it was ruthlessly sought to be made like Russia, and any elements of Ukrainian culture stubbed out; after all, if the people are as Russian as the Russians, then where will there be a need to start a separatist front. The Russians (the largest majority of the Soviet Union) used a combination of the Red Army and the feared KGB (formerly the NKVD) to sniff out and break any level of Ukrainian separatism, such that it never reached any dangerous point.

Frederich Forsyth also takes the opportunity to explain several aspects that form the basis of the thriller, namely:
1. The workings of the Soviet Politburo and the politics between the different members, especially about how the various members come to reach the peak of political life in the Soviet Union (politburo)
2. Some details about the concept of a super-tanker and the colossal damage that a super-tanker can do
3. The use of spies and their information in deciding what Governments that are in conflict with each other do, and how policies are made based on this information
4. And a very advanced topic for that age, involving the use of spy satellites to gather information about what is happening in the territory of another country
5. A lot of details about the spy-craft, about how to spy and control agents in hostile territory
6. And for me, something that was very interesting for me, namely details about what the SR-71 (the Blackbird) can do

The novel starts with the escape of a Ukrainian separatist (under attack from the KGB) from the Soviet Union. He meets a Ukrainian sympathizer who is fanatically in favor of Ukrainian independence and against the Soviet Union and the KGB. He takes this opportunity to go to the Soviet Union.
At the same time, the US and British discover that vast tracts of the Russian grain harvest is spoiled, and then you go to the Russian side and discover that a series of freak incidents cause the spoilage of vast chunks of the Soviet wheat harvest, causing a famine of immense proportions. And once the Americans and Western powers get to know about this, they would demand concessions on a large scale before providing the grain. The Soviet Union cannot afford to undergo a famine of this level since that may cause the one thing that any Soviet politburo dreads, the rise of the long suffering population at a level that the use of force cannot control. One option is to use the vast Red Army to attack Western Europe to get over this scarcity, and this becomes a issue about control of the Politburo.
At such a time, the new British SIS (MI6) head in Moscow meets and old flame; she is also in a position to be able to supply information about the workings of the Politburo, something that the Americans and British find very valuable. As things escalate, this information is of vital information in helping fine-tune the policies of the West.
As things move ahead, things threaten to spiral out of control. If the politburo source is used too much, she could get exposed; if it gets out that Ukrainian separatists have assassinated the head of the KGB, things could spiral out of control and risk giving the faction in the politburo the majority to go to war; and if the Ukrainian separatists use the vast super-tanker Freya that they now control and let the oil go into the ocean, it would be an environmental tragedy of the highest order.
At such times, what can happen. And this is the Devil’s alternative, anything you do has a consequence, and will lead to a loss of life. And for politicians and leaders, taking the easiest path is the way to go. Coldness is an essential attribute of state-craft.
The concluding lines of the book are what would shake you when you read them – ‘Ukraine will be free again’; and this is precisely what happened in 1991 when Boris Yeltsin took Russia away from the Soviet Union and the Soviet Union vanished into history.

Roman Holiday was a movie that brought a major star to American attention. Audrey Hepburn was an almost unknown to the American public at that time; she had appeared on American television in 1952 – a CBS Television Workshop production of Rainy Day in Paradise Junction. However, she was still an unknown, and then here comes this Oscar winning role introducing this great beauty in a role that gave her plenty of screen time. To a large extent, the role is written to allow an actress plenty of freedom, and Audrey Hepburn utilized this role to the maximum possible.
A lot of people know the concept of Cinderella, where a commoner can become like royalty for the night, but then has to get back to being a commoner after a few hours. There is also the reverse story, where royalty wants to get away from it all, and be able to enjoy life like a commoner. Popular imagination has it that being a royal means a life away from stress, but this movie presents a very rigid and structured life as royalty, enough to get people to revolt against this stiff life and want to break free.

The movie was produced and directed by a famous director, William Wyler. Wyler is known for directing a number of movies such as Dodsworth (1936), Jezebel (1938), Wuthering Heights (1939), The Letter (1940), Mrs. Miniver (1942), The Best Years of Our Lives (1946), The Heiress (1949), Friendly Persuasion (1956), Ben-Hur (1959) and Funny Girl (1968). Seeing this list, you can get an idea of the variety of movies directed by Wyler.
The combination of royalty, and a light-hearted romance that does not end in the usual marriage, but results in a bond that is not destined to progress beyond each other’s heart managed to get a total of 10 Academy Award nominations, out of which it won 3 of these awards.
Won:
1. Best Actress Oscar (Audrey Hepburn)
2. Best Original Story (Ian McLellan Hunter, later in 1982 given to the earlier black-listed Dalton Trumbo)
3. Best B/W Costume Design (Edith Head)
Nominated but did not win:
4. Best Picture
5. Best Supporting Actor (Eddie Albert)
6. Best Director
7. Best Screenplay (Ian McClellan Hunter and John Dighton)
8. Best B/W Cinematography
9. Best B/W Art Direction/Set Decoration
10. Best Film Editing

The movie is essentially about 2 characters, with Audrey Hepburn playing the royal princess of an European country, and Gregory Peck plays a reporter out for a good story, and willing to do what it takes to get the story of the real person behind the process. They meet coincidentally, and slowly fall for each other.
Princess Ann is on a European tour, generating goodwill for her country, meeting people of different countries in Europe, attending different functions, and overall getting very bored with all this. She is hemmed in by officials and her chaperone, not able to do what she wants, being guided on the right things to do. She is chafing at these restrictions, and wants to escape to see what things are really like outside the life that she is forced to live.
She manages to escape her embassy in Rome, and sets out to see the city. However, since she seemed hysterical in the embassy, she is getting drowsy and soon goes off to sleep on a park bench. She is found by reporter Joe Bradley (Gregory Peck), who like most reporters will do anything for a story. When he sees a girl sleeping on a bench, he takes her to this apartment, where she promptly sleeps on his bed, leaving him the couch. The next day he discovers from his office that he she is a princess who he was supposed to be covering, and he can visualize a great story where the real interests and feelings of a princess can be uncovered. Towards that end, he arranges to have a cameraman follow them discreetly.
He takes her for a trip around Rome, in a way that she would never have seen. She gets a different haircut, see the fountain, drive on a Vespa and have a lot of fun, including some serious discussions on life. They slowly start falling for each other, even though he still has a cameraman recording her movements. After they are tracked by the agents of her Government and manage to escape, she realizes that her time on the loose is up and she will have to back to her responsibilities.
Joe, his love overcoming his inclination to get the story, resists his editors commands to make a story, and the next day, in her press conference, presents her all the photos on the sly. And then she leaves his life forever, leaving him to wonder at what could have been, but would never happen.

I am not a great reader of biographies (or that too from Jacobean or Elizabethan literature) but I just finished a new book by Bill Bryson (and you say – but Bill Bryson is not about bioraphies). Yes, you are true – but this book is about a prominent figure from that era. The book surprisingly is not a travel book (oh thank god, I would not have to laugh-holding-my-stomach-till-I-cry a lot like I do while reading this travel books) but a biography of Shakespeare.

It is a very clean book – it actually does not gives its own theories about many mysterious facts of Shakespeare’s life; but just tries to be itself. It is author’s attempt to decode more of what Shakespeare was as a human being not as a writer. He traces William Shakespeare journey from Startford-upon-Avon to London (in Lord Chamberlain’s Men) and then back to Startford-upon-Avon, where he died in 1616.

Bill Bryson highlights the major feature of Shakespeare’s life (or whatever we know of him) – scant facts as we know. For example, it is rather strange to know that for nearly eight years of his life – nobody knows where Shakespeare was – before he actually surfaced as one of the most prominent play writer in London. Or, that there are hardly a dozen writings of Shakespeare in his own hand writing – and half of them are his signatures – each one different from another. And there is not a single painting of William Shakespeare in which we can say for sure how did he looked like – or even if the guy in the painting is indeed Shakespeare. Few records of Shakespeare’s life survive, and there has been considerable speculation about matters such as his sexuality (just because he wrote a rather risque poem dedicated to an Earl & some sonnets of intense friendship), religious beliefs (just because it was so confusion out there at that time in general) and whether the works attributed to him were written by someone else (this is height of… !!). Bryson documents the efforts of different scholars (some bizarre and others more bizarre) – where each one tried to prove a point about Shakespeare’s life. Consider this, an eccentric Delia Bacon, who developed a firm but ‘unconvincing’ (read “no proof”) conviction that, Francis Bacon, was the true author of Shakespeare’s plays.

Emulating the style of his famous travelogues, Bryson records episodes in his research, including a visit to a bunker like room in Washington, D.C., where the world’s largest collection of First Folios is housed. Bryson celebrates the great era of English literature & London play circuits with facts rather then defining them on speculations. Bryson also points out that we know so little about Shakespeare because till hundred years after his death there was no serious attempt to write about his life – was it because he was not so popular at that time?

Overall, a nice read if
1. You love to read about history.
2. You love to read Bill Bryson, which I do.
3. You can imagine Jacobean or Elizabethan era and its descriptions.