4 out of 4 stars
Share This Review
The book Kennedy’s Revenge by Stephen L. Rodenbeck would make one think immediately that it is one of the ordinary stories based on the life of John F. Kennedy. Upon reading the description of the book, it would elicit a blank or a why question, followed by an instantaneous conclusion that it is more likely a parody of the controversy of his assassination. The description states that the book has both fiction and non-fiction parts organized and subdivided alternately. Indeed, the book is a story on his assassination but it is more than that. It has a fiction and a non-fiction part but again, more than two main stories.
The fiction part is the story of a man who found out the real identity of his father and guessed who were behind the death of his father. Clues from his father made him execute a plan to expose and correct the flaws and ills in the government policies and practices and as well as the people behind exploiting the situation. The outcome of his crusade happened as he had foreseen but he exacted a very dear revenge.
The non-fiction part is a digested historical review and discussion of the United States money creation methods from the American Revolution through all major US and world events. It also includes a discussion on US major controversies and events as well as clandestine organizations. The discussion includes rumors, alleged undertakings and conspiracy theories. The historical discussion is from a perspective completely different from conventional history. All of the discussions aim to expose the evils behind and directly point a finger at the responsible groups.
It was easy to rightly guess at the start the reason why the book has a non-fiction part and a fiction part. The fiction part tries to explain, emphasize, and make the concepts discussed in the non-fiction understandable and interesting. Initially, I do not know if it would have been better if the author should have separately presented first the fiction part and the non-fiction part afterwards rather than a fiction chapter followed by non-fiction and alternate afterwards. There were times I would like to skip the non-fiction chapters to complete the fiction story right away. Looking back, for an information-thirsty creature like me, I would have preferred the non-fiction part and I think it could stand alone on its own. In addition, I am satisfied that the author presented organized action plans for the technical thesis he elucidated in both chapters. These are in the appendices. The organization of the book could be described as “thinking out of the box” and I think it is really the most appropriate method to present the book and the author’s ideas given his two categories.
While evaluating the theories and analyses of the author, my immediate thought was the credentials and background of the author. A lot of facts, figures and analyses have been presented in different disciplines. I stopped and looked for the author’s profile both inside the book and in the internet. More often than not and especially for technical matters, the author’s background is as interesting as the book itself. I found the credentials of the author at the end of the book. However, I think it should be at the beginning and as comprehensive as it could be. This is for a reader to have quick access and immediately give a certain amount of credibility or tolerance to the ideas being presented by the author. At the start and middle of the book, I was reluctant to let pass for the moment or temporarily hold in abeyance judgment on ideas of the author until a complete picture has been formed. Looking back, it does seem that the author has the authority and credibility to make the different technical statements especially on economic terms.
The author mentioned that there are 1,100 footnotes that form the foundation of the non- fiction chapters and could be obtained. But the book has no immediately available section or pages listing the sources of information and linked to the information being discussed and supported. There are a lot of pages where sources are directly stated together with the information being discussed. Yet, not all information and ideas are explicitly supported. The complete list of sources should be simultaneously provided in the book especially for technical and historical matters. With the seemingly enormous amount of information and the author’s interpretations, it became difficult for me, and I believe it will be difficult for a reader looking impartially at all points of view, to decide immediately whether the opinions stated could be accepted as possibly true, true in certain cases, generally true, or a fact. Or even to disagree and dismiss the opinions as mere speculations.
There was a part where the defense or the reaction of one of those being pointed at as a villain was cited. In addition to the section or pages listing the sources, to be impartial, I would have preferred that the author presented clearly the statements, evidences for, and defense of those accused and those presenting conventional history rather than stating in general terms that history is a big lie of omission.
I believe that the author has done a great deal of trying to explain to a layman his concepts especially those pertaining to banking, currency and economics. However, a need to completely prove that a concept or course of action is the best and is workable follows after the need to explain for the reader to understand e.g.: Did the other countries that used the recommended policy or method continued to adopt it? What is the reason why other countries are not practicing it? Or how many countries are trying to or planning to change to the policy recommended by the author? Has the concept gone through the process of peer review? What are the what-if scenarios? In short, for the technical part of the book, for me to fully appreciate the book, a technical evaluation is in order. I understand completely the points of the author and I could not agree more with his conclusions. But just like a judge, I have to withhold verdict until I am fully aware of what the experts and those involved have to say.
But indeed, one of the most enjoyable characteristics of the book is that it made me learn a lot, it opened a new perspective for me to evaluate and it made me yearn for more instead of stopping me. Suddenly, I wanted to become a historian and or an economics expert.
For the fiction part of the book, the use of real –life events and political names as background and setting of the plot, I believe, had made it more interesting. But it bothered me a little, and amused me at the same time that the use of real-life names would be controversial and perhaps, legally questionable. I found myself researching on what are the reactions of the people whose names were used or mentioned in the story and what really transpired in reality.
It seems to me that one of the aims of the author is to present the other story on the assassination of John F. Kennedy and to give credence to it. I believe that the author is quite successful in peddling this other side of the story with his book.
I wish that real-life scientific/technical topics discussed in the fiction story that are thought provoking, debatable, if not fully accepted or established such as; global warming being not true, natural cure methods, organic methods and genetically modified organisms, income tax and sales tax and corresponding effects on the economy have been given more exhaustive and more impartial presentation in the story. It would have been all the more very interesting. But of course, it will make it a lengthy side topic. At the very least, the author has stirred up the reader on these topics.
I was amused that the fiction story bears comparison to a common joke that people have against all their politicians and those who are with wealth and power.
What happened to the main character caught me by surprise. The author made a good account of not giving a clue to the outcome of each of the following events in the story. In fact, the author was very good in hiding every succeeding situation up to the final end.
For a creature numb as a stone like me, emotion did run over when I realized and imagined the joy that one of the characters would have felt when she is about to meet her loved one (she is a she in the story).But really, what joy would it have been to meet our loved ones and relatives after a long time in real-life situations? And considering that it is a culmination of a love promise, what joy could it have been that one is about to be bestowed the fulfillment of a love promise and likewise, for one to fulfill his love vow to his love one? Again, considering that the situation in the story is a culmination of the success story of a love one, what joy could it have been when we see our very dear loved ones and relatives achieve the pinnacle of success in real-life situations?
I disliked that vulgar and profane language could sometimes be found. But then again, it is a strategy available to the author to fully express anger or any emotion and carry away the reader with that feeling. Nevertheless, for those who belong to the academe or for those who are involved in the development of formal and moral behavior among the youth, such language is definitely a no-no and taboo. As much as possible, I think it would be better to refrain from it. It may also lead to a wider reader and endorser coverage.
It did not do well with me that there is a comparison with Jesus. As a reader, I could tolerate, in fact ignore, bad religious comments and insinuations. But I am actually afraid that other people’s sensibilities might be crossed. Religion is very dangerous to touch, I believe. Better not to meddle with it.
The target readers of the book are government leaders, policy makers particularly economic formulators, bankers and historians but it cannot exclude ordinary thinking people. In fact, ordinary people and readers could be a driving force for the main intention of the book and the author. In as much as the recommendations in the book affect the whole country and everyone, everybody should be enticed to read it. There would be some who probably would not be able to understand the technical intricacies of the non-fiction part immediately after reading it. There would be some who probably would be in disbelief. Just the same, these eventualities should not be reasons to stop endorsing the book.
I would not consider it as an error but the electronic copy that I have received has no “Table of Contents”, making me unable to choose what part I should jump into as to excite me right away in reading the fiction part of the book or to facilitate understanding in reading the non-fiction. I found the word “north” instead of the word “worth” in many instances. I also found that the spelling of “principal” is “principle”. According to internet dictionaries, the two words have the same pronunciation but not one would say that principle could mean principal.
Despite the errors and my negative comments, I would like to focus on the main questions both for the fiction and non-fiction parts of the book. Is the book worth reading? Yes, I am convinced both for the fiction and non-fiction. Would one find it useful? Yes. The non-fiction part contains a lot of information and opened my eyes for a new perspective. The fiction part, on the other hand, discussed a lot of real situations. Is it right or wrong? It is for the most part, debatable. But that is beside the point. Everything is for analysis. A reader is left to judge, although the opinions of the author are clear and well stated. Would one enjoy or like the book? Yes, I enjoyed both the fiction and non-fiction parts. I would still fully endorse the book. Since I could not give a rating in-between two whole numbers but with all yes answers to my questions, the rating is 4 out of 4.
******
Kennedy's Revenge
View: on Bookshelves | on Amazon | on Smashwords
Like odlanra's review? Post a comment saying so!
