6.11.09

Rogue Praetorians?


It has been quite a while since I last updated this blog, as Twitter seems to have sated most of my creative and informative writing urges. But fear not! I've recently come up with an array of stuff that I would like to share, and I'm going to be putting out some of it over the next few weeks. First a little writing, then perhaps some old photography (for real this time). Who knows where my semi-productiveness will take me?

In any case, a review: I recently came across an audiobook of Jeremy Scahill's seminal work, Blackwater: World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army, which I had heard so much about in some of the more excitedly liberal circles. If the topic (American mercenaries in Iraq acting as modern-day Praetorians that are exempt from oversight) was not enough of a hook, the cover art surely was.

Unfortunately while it was interesting listening to the book, honestly I was a little disappointed. Blackwater came across as being too much of a YouTube indictment, with the author wringing his hands over minor anecdotes rather than putting together a cohesive narrative. He seems to expect the reader to be rah-rahing him on, and without a healthy topping of righteous indignation the work rings rather hollow. But it simply is hard not to notice that his book, though extensive, is principally just conjecture and recantation of relatively well-known news stories. To top it off, Scahill's roughshod approach to military parlance and culture makes him appear rather confused and inexpert in a topic that clearly deserves a more considered hand.

While I went into the work looking forward to a stirring and fascinating take on one of the most controversial horrors of the Bush era, I came to a limpwristed finish thinking that if these were the worst examples to be found, then perhaps the usage of mercenaries in Iraq probably wasn't all that bad. Amusingly enough, this was much the conclusion of Jon Stewart on The Daily Show, though he later partially apologized for his confrontational attitude.

The most memorable example of this sort of thing was when Scahill details an action where enlisted US soldiers join Blackwater contractors in fending off thousands of advancing Iraqis armed with small arms, RPGs and mortars. In the midst of describing this hours-long firefight that ends only after American gunships show up to put down the mob, Scahill chastises Blackwater for potentially creating the conflict by firing warning shots, according to unnamed sources. After raising the issue, he then seems to dismiss it entirely in a sort of "We report, you decide" parody of Fox News. The author further expects the reader to join him in an eye-rolling reproach of a soldier who asks the Blackwater mercs (who are typically highly experienced and ex-special forces) for permission to fire in absence of a US officer or noncom.

In short, while I admire the ability of the author to pick a great topic and then to write an even better jacket cover, I was sadly discouraged by his lack of follow-through. The only thing that he convinced me of is that writing about Blackwater is a fantastic way to use the term Praetorian Guards, and otherwise I should remember to look for good journalism from experienced organizations like the Washington Post, not well-meaning Democracy Now! hacks.

As a parting shot in this unashamedly negative review, I was most amused by the opinion of Publishers Weekly on the book. Not only did it ravage Scahill for his "scare language", but it applauds audio narrator Tom Weiner's cool baritone delivery for balancing out the histrionics of the text. It would appear that this is one of the few works where the narration not only improves the content, but outshines it completely.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hi Tristan,

Well written review of the book. I appreciate hearing other opinions besides my own...especially when they are written with an understanding of what the author TRIED to do - but failed to do.
Love ya,
Aunt Jini

Unknown said...

Hey Aunt Jini, I'm glad you enjoyed reading my review. Honestly, I think that Scahill had good intentions and was even relatively well-researched, but his editor completely let him down. Most of my issues with the book seem to come down to style and focus, rather than the content as a whole, and that is something that his editor should have been able to help him with. It's certainly a topic worth learning about.