VANCOUVER – When you’ve got some time to waste, there’s no better place to go to than a used book shop.

I’m not saying a used book shop is a waste of time, rather they do require some time to browse. If you’re looking for a book quickly, you might as well go to one of those chains where they have sales associates hovering at your every move, or to a website like AbeBooks.com, because used book shops demand to be browsed at a leisurely pace.

They’re also roughly organised. At least the good book shops aren’t. Good used book shops shouldn’t have their entire inventory in some database or online. The unorganised shelves are compensated by knowledgeable shopkeepers and proprietors who know exactly where to find that last copy of a certain book, or those books by so-and-so. Also, another prize for the customer at a used book shop of this ilk is yielded in that small victory of some rare find in some pile or at the back of a shelf.

My collection at home contains a great number of political books. I have nearly every book on the prime ministers from Diefenbaker to Harper, as well as most of the major books on Nixon, Reagan, Thatcher, and Obama. I lack books of the Canadiana vintage before Diefenbaker. And it’s those books I’m on a lookout for whenever I’m in a used book store, a charity shop, or a library discard sale.

Recently, I wandered into First Used Books, an estimable shop on that strip of Kingsway between Broadway and Main. I saw on the shelf a biography of Louis St. Laurent, Canadian by Dale Thomson. Having no books on St. Laurent I bought it. (It’s not however, to my surprise, the first book of Thomson’s I own. I later found that I own a copy of his Vive le Quebec Libre, which was published in 1988.)

I took the book home, and somewhere tucked inside was this note, handwritten on a sheet of white paper that appears to have been hand ripped:

Vancouver, Nov. 4, 1968

On the occasion of your birth day I am giving you the Dale Thomson Life of Louis St. Laurent, which I have read and which I commend to you as a model of the sort of life I think you are planning for yourself.

Uncle Arthur, once removed
D.A. McK.

P.S. Also the $100 cheque—a gift.

And no, the cheque wasn’t also in the book, which was published in 1967.

It’s a charming note, exuding a formality that was probably the norm of people from that era and likely from before. The city in which the note was written is datelined. Few people dateline their correspondence nowadays, unless one is on holiday, and usually the postcard’s photograph would give away where it was posted from. The whole ‘once removed’ reference would no longer be employed either. I doubt many young people today could explain the generational difference that ‘once removed’ represents. Kids today, in our largely Oprah world, give every family friend, creepy or otherwise, the designation of uncle or aunt.

I posted this photo on my Facebook, and my cousin noted the use of the word ‘commend.’ Few people, Norman Spector notwithstanding, use that word today. Uncle Arthur’s cursive writing—precise, halting, and graceful—evoke a time when penmanship mattered. His was not neat writing, but it was appropriate for the occasion.

Finding this note only elicited more questions. I’ve since wondered who old Uncle Arthur was. What did he do for a living? How old was he when he gave this gift to his nephew? I doubt that Uncle Arthur is still alive, so how did he meet his demise?

As the note is unaddressed, I wondered too about the recipient of the gift. It’s surprising at the level of formality employed by Uncle Arthur, that he could have lacked precision. He didn’t write his nephew’s name, and he left little clue as to his own identity, as he simply signed the note: ‘D.A. McK.’ The nephew would have known who he was, and I’m sure it never crossed his mind that someone other than his nephew would come across this note some 43 years later and wonder who he was.

It’s rather nice that the book stayed in Vancouver. I did feel bad that Arthur’s nephew didn’t keep the book. I wondered what happened to him and what amounted to his life. Did he heed the lessons of St. Laurent’s life?

Wherever Uncle Arthur is, I’m hope he’d appreciate that his gift if safely ensconced in my collection. And perhaps he’s pleased he’s being thought about.

***

As a bit of a postscript, I later e-mailed Peter, the proprietor of First Used Books, to ask if he had any clues as to the mystery surrounding the note. He simply can’t remember how the book came to him. If you’ve any information, do e-mail me.

-30-

For TheCommentary.ca

There are lots of levels and grounds on which the B.C. Liberal Party’s latest leadership contest could be questioned, including that Christy Clark could have won mainly because of strategy around the regional weighting system adopted shortly before the vote.

Results of the preferential votes announced by the party gave only the total points earned by each candidate and the percentages they were but the actual individual votes were not revealed and perhaps never will be, though intriguingly the Vancouver Sun has reported that the Liberals’ website on Saturday briefly posted but quickly removed what appeared to be the actual votes.

The system gave 100 points to each of the province’s 85 constituency organizations, so that a small membership in an NDP-held riding like say North Coast was equal to the points given to large ridings like say in the Surrey area where there reportedly were massive signups by at least three of the campaigns (Falcon, Clark and de Jong) in or around Sikh temples.

Thus 60 hypothetical votes for Clark out of 100 total votes in North Coast would give her campaign 60 points, and 30 votes for Kevin Falcon would give him 30 points, etc. And meanwhile in a big Surrey riding with about 3,000 votes they would need 1,800 votes to get the same 60 points.

That math comes into play when we notice that on the final tally there were 4,420 points for Clark and 4,080 points for Falcon, which translates to 52 % for Clark and 48 % for Falcon – which is a very close result and in some situations would be enough to call for a recount. Interestingly the briefly-posted votes were 28,411 for Clark to 26,119 for Falcon – the same percentage as the points.

But what – out of curiosity – were the actual vote totals round by round? It’s possible that there were up to 60,000 votes cast in the early rounds because members were required to vote for at least two choices but on the final vote that shrunk to “only” about 54,500 votes. So did Christy win partly because her strategists coached other supporters to not give any second or third-place preferences to Falcon?

It was apparent that Falcon’s votes came mainly in large urban Liberal ridings, but Clark rolled up the points in small rural and NDP ones. Until the party confirms otherwise it’s still possible to wonder whether Clark won on points but had fewer raw votes! Note that shortly before the vote she and her team were telling the media that they had about 42% of the first-ballot votes and maybe that was about what she won with too.

That’s even more troubling when one notes that some 95,000 people apparently were entitled to vote but only 62.4 % did so. The party spin merchants pointed out that that turnout still was above the 51% in the 2009 election and 58% in 2005 but that is misleading because the Liberal memberships were recruited in a hot and hard-fought battle in which urgency was of some importance – so why did more than one-third of those ostensibly keen new members simply not participate? Were there massive disqualifications of recent fraudulent sign-ups??

That’s an even bigger question when we look at the schmozzle involving PIN numbers, with hundreds and probably multi thousands simply not arriving on time in the mail which required the party and their private-sector contractor to mount a hasty backup phone-in service – so where and why were those PIN numbers not delivered? Was there hanky-panky somewhere, or was it merely incompetence? If those missing 30,000 votes had been cast would the outcome have been different?

But it goes beyond PINs because we also heard examples of people being signed up and issued PINs without their consent, as happened to journalist Simi Sara’s father and perhaps others, the media made much of a cat being signed up (apparently a dirty trick against the Falcon campaign done by George Abbott’s camp without his knowledge), a restaurant staff signing up en masse using the restaurant’s address, and even a hockey team was briefly signed up for Falcon without the players’ knowledge.

If those kinds of dirty tricks sound familiar they should because they’re quite similar to the tactics used by Gordon Campbell’s backers when they usurped the B.C. Liberal Party leadership away from Gordon Wilson in 1993, as Sun columnist Vaughn Palmer reported well a few weeks ago, such as lawyer and real estate offices set up as en-masse phone-in banks for transferred PIN votes, plus there were hundreds of bused-in voters who couldn’t speak English. And some of the same folks did similar stunts when Ujjal Dosanjh usurped the NDP leadership away from Premier Glen Clark in the late 1990s! (In that case numerous B.C. Liberals joined the NDP just so they could support an Indo-Canadian for Premier, and some dead people were registered and voted too.)

They also echo of the dirty tricks used to narrowly elect Liberal “stallion” Kash Heed in Vancouver-Fraserview in 2009 including unreported expenditures for falsely slanderous and malicious mailings of Chinese-language leaflets impugning the NDP and its candidate Gabriel Yiu, which are now the subject of renewed police investigations and could cause Heed, a former high-profile cop, to not only lose his seat but maybe also face criminal charges.

In the Liberals’ latest contest there also were duelling tailored polls from unusual sources, allegations of money sent in from the U.S.A. by environmental activists and just generally lots of evidence to raise questions about the integrity of the process, such as the widespread use of “membership brokers” and the somewhat-railroaded adoption of the weighted voting system.

Was the Liberal leadership contest in 2011 fixed in much the same way as the 1993 contest was fixed? We can’t say for sure but the evidence is – as the arson investigations say: “suspicious”.

Some of the evidence for that is circumstantial, such as a few Indo-Canadians trying to stay close behind Clark as she entered the Liberals’ victory room in downtown Vancouver on Saturday night, notably two wearing bright red turbans in the same hue of red as the federal Liberal Party – as if they thought they deserved to be seen as the king-makers. And then sure enough during her victory speech Clark gave a special nod to them by saying a few words in one of the East Indian languages and making a sort of praying gesture – indicating she was well aware that she owed her victory at least in part to South Asian mass signups.

Will Kash Heed re-emerge in Clark’s reformist cabinet? Not likely, but you can bet she’ll include some nod to South Asian voters, possibly related to her promise to undertake a trade mission to India within six months.

John Twigg (www.johntwigg.com) is an independent journalist, former press secretary to premier Dave Barrett and former interim leader of the BC Refederation Party.

By JOHN TWIGG

Special for TheCommentary.ca

It’s apparent from examining the entrails of Premier-designate Christy Clark’s narrow win of the B.C. Liberal Party leadership contest that she won because she became seen as the one most likely to be able to defeat the New Democratic Party opponents in the next provincial election, but there is no guarantee she will be able to do so.

Though the most recent opinion poll shortly before the vote on Saturday (Feb. 26) showed the Liberals with a 41 to 38 per cent lead over the NDP, the first such lead for the Liberals in about two years, Ms. Clark, a 45-year-old single mother, faces a daunting task in the weeks and months or perhaps years ahead before the next scheduled general election in 2013.

In fact the panorama of B.C. politics and policies is now a minefield of explosive controversies for Clark, and a maze of complexities, a morasse of conflicts, a jumble of conundrums and a lot of just plain cons – so much so that it will be some kind of a miracle if she manages to hang on to power, finish the Liberals’ third full term and then win an election against an array of opposing parties who are in the process of choosing stronger new leaders and mounting more populist platforms.

Clark is a lifelong political activist who entered politics as a young Opposition MLA and then a senior cabinet minister in Liberal Premier Gordon Campbell’s first government but she left in 2005 for a combination of reasons including family matters and unhappiness in the challenging Children and Families portfolio, made a failed bid for the mayorship of Vancouver but finally found success for four years as a talk show host on CKNW and then was wooed into the leadership contest after Campbell was forced to resign late last year. He is still nominally the Premier but will be resigning soon.

Clark’s win was all the more surprising because she had the support of no cabinet ministers and only one MLA, little-known Harry Bloy, but she did it with the support of a strong organization that featured campaign manager Mike McDonald, ex TV news anchor Pamela Martin, backroom eminence Patrick Kinsella, a long list of former Liberal MLAs and a team of local activists who combined to raise more than $500,000 for her.

The key factor that put her over the top probably was the finding in at least two opinion polls that she had a much better chance than her three male rivals of beating the NDP in the next provincial election, especially one poll showing she would pull more than a few women voters away from the NDP. But she also had a strong strategic campaign that helped her win the most support in almost every riding, albeit it narrowly, but especially so widely in ridings held by the NDP.

Many urgent issues

The many urgent issues Clark is facing probably were outlined in the briefing books delivered to her at 7 a.m. on Sunday morning and include such items (among probably hundreds of hot potatoes left by Campbell) as what to do about the hated Harmonized Sales Tax, the threatened Hydro and Ferries rate hikes, rising Medical Services premiums, the PavCorp stadium completion, several pressing Transit issues (Evergreen, Pattulo, Fraser Valley), the need to rescue the crumbling St. Paul’s Hospital, the stalled B.C. Treaty Process, the carbon tax and carbon trading questions, troubling child death reviews, understaffing in the courts and overcrowding in prisons, the revised Taseko Prosperity mine proposal, the wavering Therapeutic Initiative (regarding generic drugs), the contract renewal with the RCMP, the federal takeover of securities jurisdiction and more (e.g. what to do with the white-elephant German-made fat ferries now in only limited use due to fuel-guzzling). Not to mention tweaking the budget, recalling the Legislature, calling and winning a byelection in Campbell’s soon-to-be-vacated riding of Point Grey, meetings with about 50 MLAs, structuring a new cabinet, hiring a bunch of new staffers and – oh, yes: fulfilling her many and relatively-detailed campaign promises still viewable on her campaign website [grab copies before they're gone!!].

Could Christy copy Campbell and do a dramatic first-day symbolic “change” by fulfilling her promises to implement a set of new tax credits or rebates for lower-income families? Maybe she will, perhaps starting with the likely cabinet meeting on Wednesday. And/or maybe she will instantly restore all of the gaming grants cruelly cut by Campbell in the cause of reducing the apparent size of B.C.’s embarrassing overspending and budget deficits in and around the 2010 Olympics (along with many many other small cuts, such as slashing the SPCA’s budget for investigations, which was a contributing factor in the recent mass murder of about 100 sled dogs in the Whistler area, for example, not to mention the about equal number of avoidable deaths to humans from inadequate supports for street people, inadequate staffing in social services, over-crowding in hospitals and more than a few police-involved deaths of citizens).

In other words, like it or not, those misguided budget decisions have left Campbell with blood on his hands. The mainstream media may refrain from saying that but there is ample evidence that figuratively and politically that is the truth. (For example Campbell at first commiserated with the police who killed Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver’s airport, and he was among the voices denying there was a serial killer loose on Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside when he was chairman of the Vancouver Police Commission.)

And it wasn’t as if the Province couldn’t get the money needed to maintain basic and essential services – it has maintained one of the best credit ratings and lowest debt-servicing ratios on the continent even during NDP regimes, as well as owning a wealth of resources and other assets, but Campbell’s vanity and hypocrisy led him to decide it was better to lose a few people and animals and other public assets than to run up an embarrassing deficit at a bad moment in the pre-election process. So he grossly fudged the 2009 pre-election budget and right afterwards brought in the HST to try to hide his horror show – but it failed. And now it is Clark’s job to demonstrate that “change” – real change, has come, perhaps starting with the HST.

Challenge is holding the coalition together

But her even bigger challenge is over the mid-term: how to hold together her party’s anti-NDP coalition – which will be affected by whomever the New Democrats choose for leader on April 17 but probably even moreso by what the nascent B.C. First Party does following its founding annual meeting April 9 in Kamloops and then the renascent B.C. Conservative Party general meeting and leadership selection in May.

Shortly before the Liberals’ leadership vote Clark’s opponents released some opinion polls warning that Clark could endanger the anti-NDP coalition by being too much of a federal Liberal and thereby alienating the many federal Tory elements now in the “Campbell coalition” to the point that some might drift over to the Tories, and some of the Old Boys reminded voters that the only time the NDP has been able to win elections in B.C. was when the right-wing vote was fractured (as it was in 1972, 1991, 1996). It doesn’t take a lot, as little as 10 per cent, but it can make a big difference.

That was seen in fact in the 2009 election result too, when only about 3,500 votes delivered to the NDP in about 10 close ridings would have resulted in an NDP regime under Carole James, but as it was the NDP vote was fractured by an active effort by the B.C. Green Party, the NDP’s turnout was weakened by its gender-quotas policy and the Liberals’ coalition wasn’t threatened by a Conservative rump that was more of a rural regional redneck horse’s ass than a real populist movement.

But next time? Maybe the B.C. Conservatives will choose serious qualified leaders this time, perhaps also depending on what transpires in the federal election expected some time in May, but meanwhile Clark was demonstrably cheered-up on Saturday night when she told the media that Prime Minister Stephen Harper had just called her and wished her well, to which she assured the media that the B.C. government under her leadership would be working hard to maintain a close relationship with its “friendly government in Ottawa” – and rightly so, especially given that the Harper Tories have poured billions of dollars into B.C. in recent years in the form of stimulus projects and worthwhile new infrastructure to counter the global recession, and that Harper could kill off her coalition with a mere word to a handful of his B.C. operatives.

In any case the B.C. First Party probably will choose earnest Chris Delaney as leader – who was instrumental in collecting more than 700,000 signatures against the HST and so should not be under-estimated even though the main pollsters and much of the mainstream media continue to pretend he and they don’t exist. However the impact of BC First also could cut both ways because Delaney’s policy pronouncements are often decidedly populist and even progressive and sometimes he’s an even better critic of the Liberals’ record than the NDP have been, e.g. regarding ferry fiascoes.

A key factor in the next election thus will also and again be voter turnout, which has been trending downwards and now is around only 50 per cent. In fact the main reason the NDP lost the last election was not the success of Campbell’s lies about the province’s finances but the NDP’s own failure to craft a platform with broad-enough popular appeal to attract a better turnout and its even more glaring failure to pillory Campbell for his many blatant failures and scandals and so energize more people to turn out to vote against him.

Though many people, especially women, inside the NDP were and still are sold on the notion of “doing politics differently” – which is politically-correct code speak for not being critical of the opponents even when they deserve it – the history of politics in B.C. (as often elsewhere) demonstrates that many many people vote against some things moreso than for them, and if anyone wants clear proof of that just look at what happened to Gordon Campbell! The backlash was so strong that he was ousted in a manner not unlike Hosni Mubarak and other such despots, only thankfully here in B.C. we still do it with ballots, not bullets.

[I have to struggle to find kind things to say about Campbell now, given his atrocious despicable record of selling out the province, misleading the people and ruining lives, earning an approval rating that went below even Nixon's and Bush's, but I will give him this: at least he had the decency to realize the gig was up and it was best to leave as quickly and quietly as possible, which makes him a little better than say Libya's Gadhafi.]

In such a milieu why would Clark take on such a daunting challenge? Well partly it’s because partisan politics really is in her family’s blood, as in Big Red Liberal blood. And partly because it is a sweet job to have even if only for a short while, even better than being a talk-show host on powerful CKNW. But there’s also perhaps a dark side: it’s in her own interests and in the interests of some of her key supporters such as political strategist and lobbyist Patrick Kinsella and some of her own family and friends to keep a lid on a number of scandals, most notably the questionable giveaway/sale of BC Rail and the subsequent long-delayed trial and farcical guilty pleas of David Basi and Bob Virk – an inquiry into all of which has been loudly called for by numerous interests but which under Clark’s leadership is highly unlikely to happen.

As the NDP asked in the Legislature, was Kinsella really billing both sides at once? And if so, why? But under Christy Clark we’ll probably never know. However we do know from her public disclosure that his firm Progressive Strategies donated $20,000 to her campaign, and he attended some of her events and so probably coached her a bit too.

In other words, Patrick Kinsella, who has been a fixture in and behind the anti-NDP coalition since 1975, has found a new horse to ride.

Welcome to the real world, Christy, and for the sake of the Province, best wishes too. You may need them.

John Twigg (www.johntwigg.com) is an independent journalist, former press secretary to premier Dave Barrett and former interim leader of the BC Refederation Party.

VANCOUVER – The latest quandary is whether to keep or throw out (actually, recycle) the several thousand magazines I’ve socked away over the last decade and a half.

Two closets in the basement suite I’ve converted into my office/library contain the said periodicals. I’ve kept them on some optimistic notion that I’d refer to them one day for research or occasional recreational reading. I haven’t done either in some time, and I realise they’ve outlived their usefulness. Yet, I find myself hesitant to throw them out. I have an irrational fear that very soon after carting them off to the dump, I’ll desperately and urgently need to look up a hackneyed joke in a Fotheringham column in the back of an old issue of Maclean’s.

The home office though cozy and cluttered is not untidy. It isn’t a place you’d soon see on one of those cable television programs featuring the excess of the hoarder species. It’s cluttered, but it’s not unmanageable. There are no seven-foot high stacks of papers filling the floor. I make occasional efforts to keep it tidy, and it’s in one of those fits of organising the chaos that I’m faced with the conundrum of what to do with the magazines.

There was a flood in the basement a year ago, and as a result the entire home office, books, furniture, DVDs, and papers had to be stored away while the floor was being replaced. I thought then, that once moved back in, I would tackle the issue of the magazines. It had been some time since I last looked at them and a year or so before that, that I started organising them. A task I might add, that remains unfinished. So it’s been one year at least, and at last time to do something.

The internet and various clippings services online have made magazines irrelevant. I have Maclean’s organised by year in cardboard holders I had bought from the local office supply chain. They’re unread much like the hundreds of Entertainment Weekly’s and other entertainment magazines I’d either bought bust out retail when I cared what shows made the Nielsen top ten that week, or which forgotten actor was due to make a guest spot on ER or Touched By An Angel. In the TMZ-world we live in, the internet makes it easier and faster to find out what reason this week Charlie Sheen is in the hospital, or how much money CBS is making every day he’s in rehab.

But I find it hard parting with the Entertainment Weekly’s that are over a decade old. See they were all bought in high school, when I’d have to juggle my meagre allowance and scrimp and save five bucks a week in order to get the latest issue. Magazines are still notoriously high in price. Take for example the latest issue of Canadian Business that sits on my desk. Retail, a bi-monthly issue is six bucks on the newsstand. To throw away six bucks after a cursory read through seems excessive, and nostalgically speaking the high school kid for whom five bucks was back then a big deal, would be rather angry his magazines were now resigned to the dump.

I once asked Rona Maynard, a former magazine editor herself, whether she still subscribed to magazines. She said no, but that she would pick up magazines occasionally and usually for in-flight reading. And invariably, she’d never keep them. I find this self-control remarkable.

If journalism is the first draft of history, magazines historically would be in that class after newspapers and before books. The beginnings of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring were found in the New Yorker, a magazine which featured the genesis of many books, including Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood. It’s perhaps why my magazines lingered longer than newsprint. No one keeps newspapers piled up, unless you like seeing paper turn from grey to yellow.

One of my less than desirable personality traits is that which indulges in the excessive collection of stuff, need they be magazines, DVDs or books. DVDs are a bit more expensive to procure than magazines, and magazines don’t cost as much as a book. So, as I find myself in need of more book and DVD shelf space, I’m willing to do away with my magazines. There’s that little bit of me that is getting heart sore thinking of the waste over the years, not to mention the regret I’ll likely feel if I ever needed them. But I figure I’ll get over it, thanks to Google.

Therefore today, I’ve taken a decision, a bit of a minor step for the moment. And that’s to issue a bit of clemency to the shiny printed matter in my cupboards: two months. If between now and two months hence, I do not refer to the said magazines, grab one for some spare reading, research, or even touch them, they’ll get tossed. Two months, after a whole year after the flood is a good sort of statute of limitation. It’s the end of the line for my magazines. I swear.

-30-

VANCOUVER – Lists by their very nature are arbitrary and subjective just as they are inclusive and extensive. They are also opportunities for navel-gazing and hand-wringing; mindless chatter or serious discussion. Imperious deliberation might ensue, or a cavalier rattling off of personal favourites could occur. It’s usually once a list is finalised that the real work happens. The deconstruction and/or destruction of a list might occur—where one is placed as opposed to another, or why something was neglected altogether. As books are a significant source of discussion on this website it’s worth noting a couple of lists being culled and cultivated.

Alan Twigg, the editor of BC Bookworld has recently published his own list as it were, The Essentials: 150 Great BC Books and Authors (Ronsdale, 2010). I interviewed Alan on the book (http://thecommentary.ca/ontheline/555-alan-twigg/), and we discussed who made his list of 150 authors, and who didn’t. Invariably, it’s Twigg’s list, and a good one at that, but also a wonderful place to begin a survey of BC writers and books. It’s also worth noting that it is the fourth volume of Twigg’s Literary History of British Columbia, a remarkable achievement worth reading on its own.

Canada’s 100 Greatest Books is a list put together by Stephen Patrick Clare and Trevor Adams for the purpose of a book that is to be published in the fall of 2011. The website for more is at: http://www.wix.com/novamedia/Canadas-100-Greatest-Books. On their site you can see their criterion: that the book, either fiction or non-fiction must be written by a Canadian or involve Canada. Readers are invited to submit their selections via e-mail, and a one book-one vote system will be used to compose the final tally. It’s an ambitious project, and Sean Cranbury has already written about its flaws.

In British Columbia, Linda L. Richards and David Middleton are editing a book that’s also to be published in the fall of 2011, The Greatest 100 Books of British Columbia. In recent months they’ve made their presence known on Facebook and Twitter, calling for suggestions, nominations, and generally discussion on what books should be included. The editors are seeking lists from readers, and they say if enough people write in with the same book, it’ll surely make the list.

One hundred books on BC seems manageable, however when I thought of my own list for Richards following her appearance on the program this past May, I thought of the books others would list, and I suspect Richards and Middleton will have much work ahead of them to whittle all the submissions to a list of a hundred.

I owe Linda Richards a list of books and here goes. The list is Vancouver-centric, and for reason: I haven’t lived elsewhere.

Fascinated by Vancouver history, one of the authors I’d read early on was Chuck Davis. His The Greater Vancouver Book (Linkman Press, 1997) was always fun and fascinating read, and today it remains an invaluable resource. Davis has always been an inveterate historian, and the news of recent weeks of his terminal cancer and death has urgently showed us what an invaluable historian he has been to this city and this province.

Another book by Davis, Top Dog! A History of CKNW (Canada Wide, 1993) was commissioned on the occasion of the radio station’s fiftieth anniversary in 1994. Other than a chronicle of the radio station’s memorable stories and personalities, it’s also one of the only popular histories of the media in BC, specifically radio. As well, it’s a good look at the sort of culture of the Lower Mainland in the years between 1944 and 1994.

W.A.C. Bennett and the Rise of Modern British Columbia (Douglas & McIntyre, 1983) by David Mitchell is not only one of the best books on Bennett, but also a wonderful primer on BC politics from the post-war era of the 20th century, up to the 1980s. Surprisingly enough, there isn’t another serious book on the long-serving premier, and as such this is it. It’s still an outstanding achievement.

Jean Barman’s The West Beyond the West (University of Toronto Press, 1991) is a standard text in many of our colleges and universities. It’s out of date by about 15-20 years, but it’s still the best sweeping overview of the province and its people, as well it’s accessible enough for reading outside an academic setting.

Daniel Francis has written many notable books on the history of the country, the province and the city of Vancouver. Two books he’s written are on my list, though another of his books, the biography of Vancouver mayor L.D. Taylor could be added to my list as well. The two books on my mind are: The Encyclopedia of BC (Harbour Publishing, 2000), which he edited, and Red Light Neon: A History of Vancouver’s Sex Trade (Subway, 2006).

The Encyclopedia of BC is a standard resource in the province’s schools and libraries, though because of its price it’s unlikely in many homes in the province. As well, the internet has made the idea of encyclopedias somewhat superfluous. Yet, it’s a wonderful resource to have, and I find myself from time to time, getting lost in its pages meaning to look up something, yet engrossed by something else I’ve come across.

Red Light Neon is a fascinating history of the sex trade in Vancouver, and at once a social history of the social mores of a developing big city. It’s also a great street level history of a Vancouver that existed and exists, though we try not to acknowledge it. As well, it’s a bit of an entry point to the Downtown Eastside, what with the Pickton matter.

Bruce Hutchison was a legendary journalist in this country, and especially in BC. The lifetime achievement award given out by the Jack Webster Foundation to journalists is named in his honour. He wrote some 16 books, and I understand that the Vancouver Sun columnist and Hutchison’s protégé Vaughn Palmer is currently working with Douglas & McIntyre to reissue some of Hutchison’s books. The one book I consider quintessentially British Columbia, is his The Fraser (Rinehart, 1950).

The author and comedian Charles Demers points out in his remarkable Vancouver Special (Arsenal Pulp Press, 2010), that some of Hutchison’s writing was less than tolerant. That’s what’s great about Vancouver Special, is that it not only provides a wonderful view of Vancouver today and in recent years, but it also goes back and shatters (in the case of Hutchison’s work) some ideas we have of ourselves. Vancouver Special though is a great BC book because it shows how Vancouver is viewed within its own confines, but how it’s viewed by people outside of the city especially. It’s not sentimental or emotional, but it makes you remember Vancouver both positively and not so positively.

The 100-Mile Diet (Random House, 2007) by Alisa Smith and J.B. MacKinnon is on my list, because it’s seemingly spawned a new sort of culinary fad, though many a gourmand I talk to say it’s simply a reality of today’s world. It reflects something about British Columbia, that an idea can come from here and take the world by storm. And not just that, both Smith and MacKinnon are wonderful writers, whose skill is evident in this book that’s delightfully written and crafted.

Patrick Lane’s memoir There Is a Season (McClelland & Stewart, 2005) is raw and emotional, and just a wonderful book despite some of the harrowing episodes in Lane’s life.

Bowering’s BC (Viking, 1996) by George Bowering is a great book. It’s not your traditional history book, like say the Jean Barman book mentioned earlier. But it is very much a readable, exciting and entertaining look at this province and the colourful folks from the past.

Vancouver (Doubleday, 1970) by Eric Nicol, like Vancouver: Milltown to Metropolis (Mitchell Press, 1961) by Alan Morley were books written decades ago, and though now incomplete and dated, were books that attempted to write the history of Vancouver up to their time. In some parts though, they remain relevant, and though the two authors are completely different, they remain skilfully written works worth revisiting.

Bull of the Woods (Douglas & McIntyre, 1980) by Gordon Gibson is an autobiography by the prominent BC business leader, who was also a BC Liberal MLA in the 1950s. He made his fortune in logging and a lot of the stories in this book are delightful reads.

Fifty Years on Theatre Row (Hancock House, 1980) is a memoir written by Ivan Ackery, who was a noted theatre impresario and promoter in Vancouver, who also managed the Orpheum from the 1930s to the 1960s. It’s a fascinating look at the many celebrities who came through Vancouver in that time period, as well a view onto the entertainments Vancouverites enjoyed in those years.

Fred Herzog: Vancouver Photographs (Douglas & McIntyre, 2007) by Grant Arnold and Michael Turner is a visual record that’s aesthetically pleasing, but also a necessary documentation of how Vancouver was in the years that Herzog actively captured it with his camera.

Looking back at Strangers Entertained: A History of the Ethnic Groups of British Columbia (Evergreen Press, 1971) by John Norris is fascinating for two reasons. First, it’s a nearly comprehensive look at the people who came to BC up to the early 1970s. After that time though, when the book was published, it a stark reminder of how the province has changed, and I would suggest for the better.

Stephen Hume is a gifted and thoughtful writer. Simon Fraser: In Search of Modern British Columbia (Harbour Publishing, 2008), his book on Fraser’s journey to BC grew out of a series of columns he wrote for the Vancouver Sun, where he’s a columnist. Collected and expanded in this volume, it’s just a tremendous achievement, as it’s a great book on Fraser, but a needed look at how this province was and is today in some form or another.

Hume is also a contributor to a collection of essays published in 2004, A Stain Upon the Sea: West Coast Salmon Farming (Harbour Publishing, 2004). When Rafe Mair was on the radio daily talking about the ills of aquaculture, people viewed him as a bit of a bleating bore, or an alarmist. Thankfully today, salmon farming, especially the variety off this coast is viewed rather dimly. Like with Hutchison’s The Fraser, a lot of us now view our resources and our seascape with a little more care. This collection opened a lot of eyes. In fact, in an episode of the American television drama Boston Legal, set in BC revolving around aquaculture, the characters played by James Spader and William Shatner are seen reading this book.

The subtitle of Pacific Press (New Star Books, 2001) by Marc Edge is ‘The Unauthorized Story of Vancouver’s Newspaper Monopoly.’ It didn’t get very many reviews in the papers in this country, because it was an indictment of the convergence model that was to be in vogue in Canadian media in the first decade of this century. A lot of people viewed Edge as some sort of fear-monger, or disgruntled ex-employee of Pacific Press out to settle a score. In fact, the book grew out of Edge’s dissertation, and many that read it found it surprisingly readable. It’s got gossipy stories, but it’s also a great history of our media in British Columbia, and a view onto journalism in this country from this part of it.

-30-

VANCOUVER – As it’s year’s end and I’m on hiatus from the interview program, I figured it apt to reflect on the program and what’s been wrought.

This year, 171 interviews were produced for this website, of which all but three I conducted.

I’m not a professional journalist, nor have I been trained as one. I began the interview program as a bit of a lark five years ago to see what it would be like interviewing people and conducting conversations on the small and big issues of the day. I’d come to it with a great appreciation of interviewing and the art of the conversation.

I’m a steady listener of Don Imus and a lot of how my interviews are constructed—the mannerisms are copped from him. For example, my introductions will end with, ‘Please welcome to the Planta: On the Line program, John Smith; Good morning, Mr. Smith.’ As well, Imus’s interviews, when he was on CBS Radio and MSNBC would be about twenty minutes in length. I strive for about the same length, give or take a two or three minutes.

I remain an admirer of interviewers like Jack Paar and Dick Cavett. They’re two great personalities to learn from. Their interviews on DVD are fun to watch as well as instructive. One could also do no wrong emulating Charlie Rose. His format is that which I covet: a long form interview on a sparse set, that’s all about the conversation. As well, Rose is a fine interviewer because he’s knowledgeable and interested in a wide variety of subjects. He can have Richard Holbrooke on to talk about the Middle East, while the next guest might be Angelina Jolie about her new movie.

Early on, two influences were Rafe Mair and the late Tim Russert. When it came to political interviews they were terrific. They were tough and dogged. I’d also read Lawrence Grobel’s books in preparation, as well as books by Steve Allen.

In this country the three finest interviewers are Eleanor Wachtel, Steve Paikin, and Ken Rockburn. I like them because they’re very smart, yet they’re unpretentious. They also make asking questions seem easy. They’ve been on the program and I’ve learned a great deal from them. They are also talented in that they make subjects I wouldn’t necessarily find interesting, captivating. More often than not, I’ll find myself listening to Wachtel on CBC Radio’s Writers and Company talking about something I wouldn’t have found myself tuning into in the first place. And the same with Rockburn and Paikin, who make their guests captivating to watch. Rockburn has such vast interests himself, and reflected them on his CPAC program. It was also fun to see what pin he had on that show. Paikin is such an amiable fellow with a great countenance that he’s a relief to watch. He makes interviews look so damned effortless, he’s easy to envy. He is also right down-the-middle when it comes to his interviews, so good that he’s regularly called upon to moderate the federal leaders’ debates. He’s also one of the nicest people I’ve ever encountered.

In the five years since the beginning of what is now the Planta: On the Line program, I’ve interviewed authors and journalists, politicians and newsmakers, thinkers and philosophers, poets and other artists. It’s been fun, but it’s also a lot of work. There’s a great deal of reading, note-taking, and a bit of writing.

The guiding principle of the program is curiosity, and not necessarily the audiences, rather my own. I hope you see through the guests and what’s discussed what I’m interested in. I still haven’t done a program on Frank Sinatra or the sitcom The Office, or an appreciation of Jack Benny. I would love to have someone on to discuss Churchill, The Sopranos, even Margaret Thatcher. But generally, I’m curious about the debate surrounding global warming; I follow politics; and I enjoy hearing about the writing process, among other things.

If there’s anything that sustains the program, it’s the willingness of people to come on as guests. I’ve been very fortunate to have people agree to come on, as well on occasion people who offer themselves up as guests. I’d be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge the many publicists who are in regular contact, submitting recommendations for guests.
A good thing about this enterprise being non-commercial is that I don’t have a regular schedule, though I’ve gone on extended breaks during the summer. I have the great luxury of having guests on I want to have on, and not having to book someone who I’m not enthusiastic about because I have air to fill.

Looking back at the interviews I’ve done in 2009, I have favourites. But looking at the list, I’m pleased to say I haven’t regretted any of them. In fact, I’ve learned something from all of them.

My conversation with Christopher Buckley stands out. The Globe and Mail’s Ian Brown, who is such a great writer, made me laugh and weep when I talked to him about his memoir on his son, Walker. David Grann from The New Yorker on his remarkable book The Lost City of Z is one that I remember fondly. David Finkel from The Washington Post talking about his book The Good Soldiers is one that I think about often. I remember with a smile, Jane Christmas talking about her mum, who she wrote about in Incontinent on the Continent. And of course, the interview with Pulitzer Prize winner Michael Chabon about his wonderful memoir Manhood for Amateurs was a delight to do.

There are the good friends of the program who’ve been great about coming on: Rona Maynard, Paul Willcocks, Michael Klassen from CityCaucus.com, Sean Holman of Public Eye Online, Judi Tyabji, George Froehlich from the Savvy Insider, David Berner, David Schreck, Jim Taylor, Michael Kwan, Mike McCardell, Sean Cranbury, and of course the most frequent guest on the show, Rafe Mair. They’ve become audience favourites.

There are some fascinating and talented people I’d like to have on or on again when I return to the program. People like Stephen Hunt, Douglas Todd from the Vancouver Sun, Darren Barefoot, Craig Crawford, Mark Hasiuk, Charlie Smith from the Georgia Straight, Charles Demers, Craig Norris, Warren Kinsella, Dave Gerry, Chris Gailus, and Rachel Marsden, among many others.

And then there’s the audience. Modestly, I have to admit it’s great fun to see the hit counter to the website and see the numbers who are listening. I do the program for myself, but I’m glad someone out there is getting something from it.

Happy New Year, all.

-30-

VANCOUVER – In less than a week, I’ll find myself on a long haul flight. It’s not the destination that worries me, rather it’s the journey. I’m not enthusiastic about the several hours I’ll be flying, and so I’ve sought advice from regular travellers like Rafe Mair and Rona Maynard. They have both suggested reading mid-air.

I am not a productive reader. Perhaps because I have to read a great deal to prepare for my interviews, I don’t read for leisure. I’m also not a fast reader, which puts me off reading more than anything else. It heartened me a bit when the great Eleanor Wachtel told me in an interview recently that she too was a slow reader.

I also have the habit of re-reading books I enjoy. Now there`s nothing wrong with that, however it does paralyse me from reading books that I ought to or should. I do the same with movies. I`m loathe to start a picture I’ve never seen, yet can easily watch Superbad or About a Boy whenever it’s rerun on television.

The combination of sheer boredom and close quarters on this forthcoming flight affords me the chance to get a great deal of reading done. I`ve been ransacking my brain as to what to pack.

As a book buyer and sort of collector, I tend to favour hard cover editions of books over what`s called trade paperback versions in the book business. I find they stand up better on the shelf, and the spines don’t wear out visibly as the softer covers. As carry-on items on a plane however, in light of events of recent days, it doesn`t seem viable to be lugging around many hardbacks. Rona Maynard says she packs up to four books on the flight, as well as a couple of magazines bought at the airport. Stuff lying around the house won`t cut it, as it`ll bore, since it’s likely sat atop a coffee table for some weeks.

Another consideration as to what to pack has to do with the possibility that I might lose or leave the book behind. As such, it`s gotta be a book I`m prepared to not return with. And I would admittedly be heartsick if I lost a hard cover that I spent nearly forty bucks on.

A favourite is Tony Hendra`s Father Joe. It’s my favourite book, one I go to regularly. I try and read it at Lent, and perhaps around Christmas. I`m due to read it again, and this flight would be ideal. I don`t own a soft cover version, and I`ve already lost one hardcover to a loan, so I`m really hesitant about taking this along. I suppose I could read the posthumous George Carlin memoir, Last Words, which Hendra co-wrote. It`s a hard cover, with no trade paperback out yet, so I might not want to bring that. I`ve always loved Carlin (and Hendra too for that matter), so I don`t think I`d want my collection at home to be without this book.

Earlier this year, Stephen Hunt from the Calgary Herald said that the Rick Pearlstein book Nixonland would be a book I`d like. I bought the soft cover this past summer, and have yet to read it. On the list it goes.

I recently heard Wayson Choy on the radio talking about the Jade Peony. I read it in high school, and since it`s a Canada Reads finalist, perhaps it`s time to read it again. Perhaps because I was born and raised in Canada, even though my parents are Filipino, I have little connection to my roots. Choy, a Canadian born in Vancouver of Chinese ancestry has long struggled with his cultural identity in his writing, so perhaps it might be an interesting read. Or maybe his memoir All that Matters would be more apt.

Another book on my desk is the remarkable Vancouver Special by Charles Demers. I recounted the story on the program recently about how I sought the book out the weekend after it came out, and went of all places to the People`s Co-op Bookstore on Commercial Drive. A friend apprised of my political dispositions suggested that my shirts were perhaps a tad too starched for such an establishment. I`d love to bring Vancouver Special along, but I`m scared I`ll lose it on the trip, as it is simply too great a book not to have. It is such a wonderful love letter to Vancouver. Perhaps I should pack it along to combat homesickness?

I`ve considered packing some fiction along. I don`t read novels, despite having had some pretty big time writers on the program. I simply don`t have the imagination for reading a novel, and some idle hours over the Pacific Ocean would be good to catch up on some fiction. Rona Maynard suggested some light fiction conducive to interruptions. Maybe a collection of short stories? What about Alice Munro`s recent book? Would Mordecai Richler`s Barney`s Version be good for my situation? I`ve always wanted to read it. Then again, I`m tempted to go with what I know and what I`ve already read, and one I`m considering bringing is Nam Le`s The Boat.

My colleague Sean Cranbury did a great interview with Shinan Govani about his novel, Bold Face Names. I might bring that, along with the new Jeannette Walls book, Half Broke Horses. I really liked her last book, The Glass Castle.

It`s not the humidity, the language, the culture, the water, or the food that worries me about this trip. It`s what to bring along to read. Thinking about the situation, it`s not a bad bind to be in. Clearly proof yet again (if I ever needed it to begin with), that there`s no shortage of good reading out there.

-30-