Somewhere tonight, a person will leave a hospital holding a sheet of paper they can read perfectly and should not trust.

The paper will look right. Clean typography, the hospital's logo in the corner, sentences running in grammatical order in the reader's own language. It will have been produced in under a second at a cost that rounds to nothing, and handed over by a clinician who cannot read a word of it, to a patient with no way of comparing it to anything. Everyone will believe the document is complete, because it looks complete, and looking complete is what this technology does flawlessly.

We know what these documents can contain, because researchers have checked. In 2021, a team led by Breena Taira at the University of California, Los Angeles took twenty commonly used emergency department discharge statements, ran them through Google Translate into seven widely spoken languages, and had native speakers evaluate the output. Their paper in the Journal of General Internal Medicine contains two findings that ought to have ended the argument about unsupervised machine translation in clinical settings. The first is statistical. The second is a pair of words: in the Armenian output, ibuprofen was rendered as “anti-tank missile”, and in Chinese, the anticoagulant Coumadin came out as “soybean”.

These are not subtle failures. A bilingual reader would spot them in a second. The problem is that no bilingual reader was ever going to look, because the entire economic point of the exercise was to avoid paying one.

That is the shape of the thing. Over roughly three years, the cost of producing a translation has fallen by close to three orders of magnitude. The cost of finding out whether it is correct has not moved, because verification still requires a person who reads both languages, sitting down with both documents, and thinking. Generation collapsed. Verification did not. Everything that follows, from the restructuring of a seventy billion dollar industry to the question of who is answerable when the instructions are wrong, falls out of that single asymmetry.

The Arithmetic That Broke in Only One Direction

Google's Cloud Translation service prices standard neural machine translation at twenty United States dollars per million characters, the first half a million each month free. DeepL's professional interface has been offered at around five and a half dollars per million. A thousand words of English is roughly six thousand characters, so translating it costs about twelve cents at the top rate and about three at the bottom. Professional human translation of the same thousand words sits, in 2026, at one hundred and fifty to three hundred dollars, with rate surveys clustering human work between ten and thirty cents per source word.

Generation is effectively free. But consider what verification requires and the picture inverts. To know whether a thousand-word translation is correct, a qualified bilingual reader must read the source, read the target, and compare them for meaning, register, omission, addition and negation. That is not faster than translating. It is often slower, because the reviewer must reconstruct the translator's reasoning as well as the author's. And it requires precisely the scarce human capability the machine was bought to replace.

Verification now costs more than production by a factor of roughly a thousand. If a factory could stamp a component for a tenth of a cent but testing each one cost a hundred dollars, nobody would call the testing optional. They would redesign the process, or admit on the record that they were shipping untested parts. Translation took the third option, never written down: shipping untested parts while behaving as though they had been tested, because they look exactly like the tested ones.

A second scarcity sits beneath the first. The binding constraint is not money but qualified bilingual attention. Only so many people can competently review a discharge instruction in Armenian, a tenancy notice in Tigrinya, or a pesticide warning in Hmong. Machine translation multiplied the volume of text requiring review by orders of magnitude while leaving the pool of reviewers where it was. The bottleneck is a population, not a budget line.

Failure With No Symptoms

The asymmetry persists because its consequences are invisible at the point of delivery. Machine translation does not fail the way software fails. It does not crash, return an error code, garble characters or leave a field blank. It fails by producing a well-formed sentence that means something other than what the source said.

The canonical example comes from a 2019 study in JAMA Internal Medicine by Elaine Khoong, Eric Steinbrook, Cortlyn Brown and Alicia Fernandez, who passed one hundred sets of emergency department discharge instructions comprising 647 sentences through Google Translate into Spanish and Chinese. Eight per cent of the Spanish sentences and nineteen per cent of the Chinese sentences were inaccurate. More to the point, two per cent of the Spanish and eight per cent of the Chinese carried potential to cause clinically significant harm.

One sentence read, in English, “hold the kidney medicine until you have a chance to speak with your kidney doctor”. The Chinese output instructed the patient to keep taking the kidney medicine, and the Spanish said much the same. “Hold”, in clinical English, means stop. The machine took it in its ordinary sense of retain and produced a fluent, grammatically flawless instruction to do the opposite of what the prescriber intended. Elsewhere, “aortic aneurysm” became, in Spanish, an “evacuation of the main blood vessel”.

The pattern is not confined to hospitals. A 2010 study in Pediatrics by Iman Sharif and Julia Tse examined 76 Spanish-language prescription labels generated by the computer programmes New York pharmacies were actually using and found errors in half of them, including the notorious collision in which the English word “once” reads in Spanish as eleven. In immigration proceedings, translators with the volunteer organisation Respond Crisis Translation told Rest of World in 2023 that machine translation of Pashto and Dari was corrupting asylum claims, in one case rendering the first person singular as a plural throughout a personal narrative, so that an individual persecution story read as a collective complaint. At least one Afghan claim was rejected after such errors.

No surface signal attaches to any of these. A negation reversal reads exactly like a negation preserved: same length, same cadence, same register, same institutional wrapper. That is what distinguishes machine translation from almost every other failure mode in consumer technology. The output carries no evidence of its own unreliability, and the evidence that would reveal it exists only in a document the recipient does not have.

Consider the chain. The clinician cannot read the target language and assumes the system did its job. The organisation that licensed the engine sees an aggregate quality score, if anything. The patient sees fluent prose on hospital letterhead and assumes that if it had not been checked, it would not have been handed over. Nobody holds both halves of the comparison, and the appearance of completeness does all the work verification used to do.

The older failure mode is instructive by contrast. In January 1980, an eighteen-year-old named Willie Ramirez arrived unconscious at a Florida emergency department. His Cuban family said he was “intoxicado”, meaning ill from something he had eaten. It was taken to mean intoxicated. Ramirez was treated as a drug overdose, his intracerebellar haemorrhage went undiagnosed for two days, and he was left quadriplegic; the settlement was estimated at around seventy-one million dollars over his lifetime. That failure had a location: a room, a decision, a defendant. When the same error comes from an engine invoked automatically inside an electronic patient record, it has no location at all.

A Thirty-Nine Point Gap Inside One Product

The Taira study's statistical finding should trouble anyone who believes machine translation is solved. Across seven languages, the overall meaning survived in 82.5 per cent of cases, 330 out of 400. That headline is meaningless, because the variation underneath it is enormous.

Spanish came out at 94 per cent accuracy. Tagalog at 90. Korean at 82.5. Chinese at 81.7. Vietnamese at 77.5. Farsi at 67.5. Armenian at 55. A thirty-nine point spread between best and worst inside a single product, through a single interface, with a single set of expectations attached. Farsi had a further problem no accuracy metric captures: directional text handling rendered some of it illegible.

Nothing in the interface communicates that spread. The menu presents Armenian and Spanish as equivalent options, and output arrives with the same speed, formatting and absence of caveat. An administrator enabling automated discharge translation is not choosing between a reliable service and an unreliable one. They are enabling both at once, with no signal for which patients get which.

This is language-tier inequality, and it maps onto each language's digital footprint. Languages with vast parallel corpora perform well; those spoken largely by populations who were never a lucrative localisation market perform badly. So the patients most likely to receive an unreliable translation are those least likely to have an alternative: recent arrivals, smaller diaspora communities, speakers of languages for which the local health system has no on-call interpreter at three in the morning.

The gap is not closing, because progress concentrates where the data is. A study in JMIR Formative Research in January 2026 by a team at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center tested Claude Sonnet 3.5 on Spanish translations of emergency discharge instructions and found the output essentially clinically acceptable, with evaluators scoring completeness and severity at 5.0 on a five-point scale and meaning at 4.9. Genuinely impressive, and a result about Spanish. It is also no longer isolated, which is the part of this argument that has changed. Meanwhile a framework paper in npj Digital Medicine in September 2025 by Ivan Lopez, David Velasquez, Jonathan Chen and Jorge Rodriguez recommends deploying first into languages with abundant digital resources, naming Spanish and Portuguese, and warns that underrepresented languages such as Quechua and Yorùbá need further testing first. The authors are right. But notice what that implies: the languages validated first needed validating least, and those where risk is highest get served last, or with no validation at all.

The strongest evidence against the case being made here arrived in Academic Emergency Medicine in 2026, and it deserves stating at full strength rather than filing under limitations. Giovanni Rodriguez, Patricia Hernández and colleagues ran a blinded non-inferiority study on fifty-three real emergency department discharge instructions of between one hundred and five hundred words, taken exactly as the clinicians wrote them, original spelling and grammar errors left in. Google Translate and ChatGPT-4o rendered them into Spanish, Brazilian Portuguese and Simplified Chinese, against professional translations of the same text. Professional medical interpreters, blinded to which was which, scored 477 unique translations for fluency, adequacy, meaning and severity against a non-inferiority margin of half a point.

Both machines came out non-inferior to the professionals on most domains. In Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese they matched professional translation on adequacy, meaning and severity, falling short only on fluency. In Simplified Chinese they matched it on all four. The frequency of clinically significant errors did not differ significantly by translation method.

That has to be conceded without qualification, because it is true and it matters. In those three languages, against genuinely messy clinician-written source text rather than tidied research prose, current machine translation is not measurably more dangerous than a professional human being. The 2019 and 2021 numbers quoted earlier are real, and they were real about the systems they tested, but those systems are two generations back. Nobody should now cite eight per cent Spanish inaccuracy as a description of what a modern engine does to a Spanish discharge sheet. It is not what happens.

What the study does not do is rescue the position it appears to demolish, and both reasons are visible in its own design. Start with the languages. Spanish, Brazilian Portuguese and Simplified Chinese are among the largest localisation markets on earth and among the best-resourced pairs in existence. The study says nothing whatever about Armenian at 55 per cent, or Farsi at 67.5, or any language whose speakers were never worth building a corpus for. It does not narrow the thirty-nine point spread. It measures the top of it, carefully, one study later.

The second reason goes to what non-inferiority establishes. That clinically significant errors did not differ by translation method is not a finding that machine translation is safe. It is a finding that professional human translation also carries a clinically significant error rate, and that the machine has drawn level with it. Nobody who commissions professional translation of consequential documents believes a single pass is sufficient, which is why the profession has review stages, standards describing them, and indemnity behind them. Both arms of that study were then read by trained evaluators. Every translation in it was checked. The subject here is the document nobody checks at all, and non-inferiority to an unverified human baseline is not a warrant for skipping verification. It moves the argument off provenance and onto verification, which is exactly where it belongs. The question was never whether a machine or a person produced the text. It is whether anyone competent read it afterwards.

There is direct evidence on both counts, from a study that measured what the non-inferiority design left out. In npj Digital Medicine in October 2025, Ryan Brewster and a large multidisciplinary team took paediatric discharge instructions into six languages, Arabic, Armenian, Bengali, simplified Chinese, Somali and Spanish, and compared three routes: ChatGPT-4o alone, professional linguist translation, and human-in-the-loop, meaning a machine draft post-edited by a professional linguist. Forty-two evaluators scored the output, twelve professional linguists, sixteen clinicians and fourteen bilingual family caregivers.

The tier gap turned up intact in a frontier model. For Spanish and Bengali, ChatGPT-4o came close to professional quality. For Armenian it scored 2.4 on overall quality against 3.6 for professional translation, a deficit of more than a full point on a five-point scale, and Somali and simplified Chinese also fell significantly below the professional standard. Whatever has been fixed since 2021, this has not been. Note that the two studies disagree about Chinese, non-inferior on every domain in one and materially below professional standard in the other, on different document types, against different comparison standards, judged by different evaluators, a year apart. That disagreement is not a scandal. It is a measurement of how thin the evidence is.

The other finding is the one this whole argument turns on. Human-in-the-loop did not merely rescue Armenian, it beat the professionals, scoring 3.9 against their 3.6. Across all six languages it was also the faster route, averaging 7.1 minutes per document against 16.8 for professional translation. Post-editing a machine draft was better than either route alone and roughly twice as fast as translating from scratch. That is what working looks like, and it is worth being precise about what it costs. It still requires the qualified bilingual reader. It makes that person faster. It does not make them unnecessary.

Every such study is itself an act of verification, and inherits the same cost structure. Beth Israel validated one language pair, one document type, one institution, which tells you nothing about Armenian, consent forms, or next quarter's model update. The evidence base is built at human speed against a deployment surface expanding at machine speed.

The Instruments That Cannot See the Errors That Matter

The obvious response is to automate the checking. If a machine can produce the translation, surely a machine can grade it. That is the promise of quality estimation, and what most enterprise deployments rely on when they route some segments to review and let others through.

Two pieces of 2026 research suggest the hope is misplaced exactly where it matters. In August, Serge Gladkoff, Angelika Vaasa, Sue Ellen Wright, Ingemar Strandvik and Lifeng Han released a peer-reviewed paper titled “Looking under the Wrong Lamppost”, accepted for the ninth International Conference on Natural Language and Speech Processing in September, arguing that automated quality estimation suffers structural rather than incidental limitations. Their conclusion is unusually blunt: segment-level scores should not be used as a standalone basis for routing, release or review bypass in production. They document overfitting, distribution collapse, failure to generalise across domains, and blindness to cohesion and coherence, which are not properties of individual segments at all. Their proposed direction is not better scoring but making human review cheaper rather than pretending it is unnecessary.

The clinical version arrived two months earlier. At the American Medical Informatics Association's Amplify conference in June 2026, William Mundo, Elizabeth Goldberg and Yanjun Gao presented work on AI-generated translation of emergency discharge instructions and found direct disagreement between automated evaluation and clinician judgement. Automated metrics suggested high quality. Clinicians found errors in precisely the meaning-sensitive areas carrying clinical consequence: mistranslated medication instructions, omitted return precautions, negation errors of the “take with food” variety, confusion between daily and twice daily, mild discomfort turned into severe pain. Automated metrics alone, they concluded, should not drive deployment.

Read together, the escape route closes. The class of error automated estimation misses is not a random sample. It is disproportionately the class that reverses instructions, drops warnings and changes doses, because those errors are small, local, fluent and invisible to systems trained to reward fluency. The scoring machinery is best at catching failures a human would catch instantly, and worst at the failures only a human can catch at all. You cannot build a verification layer out of the competence that produced the problem.

What the Market Did With the Savings

To see where value goes when a commodity becomes free, read the 2026 Nimdzi 100, the annual ranking of the world's largest language industry providers. It sizes the market at 72.6 billion dollars and reports growth figures that read like a diagram of stratification.

The hundred largest providers collectively grew by 1.1 per cent. The top ten grew by 3.6 per cent. Providers ranked fifty-first to hundredth contracted by 4.3 per cent, the first negative growth recorded for any segment since 2021. Ten providers entered the ranking who were not there the year before, largely through acquisition; Propio Language Services vaulted into third place by acquiring the interpreting company CyraCom. Industry optimism, on Nimdzi's own confidence rating, fell from 6.5 to 6.2.

That distribution is the signature of a market whose commodity has moved to machines. If you sell volume translation, your product competes with something priced at twelve cents per thousand words, and no cost base survives that. If you sell verification, liability, domain expertise, certification and the ability to put a name and an indemnity policy behind a document, you are selling the one thing machines did not make cheaper. The middle contracts because the middle sold the thing that became free.

From inside the profession, the same restructuring reads differently. A study submitted to arXiv in June 2026 by Yujun Wang, Ehud Reiter, Shimei Pan, Steffen Eger and Wei Zhao analysed 79,286 social media posts from Reddit, Facebook, Bluesky and Mastodon between 2019 and 2025 across four stakeholder groups. The arc in translator discussion tells the story in three data points. In 2021 they were talking about computer-assisted translation infrastructure, translation memories and termbases. By 2023 it was integrating AI into those workflows. By 2025 it was automation and quality assurance, which is to say they had stopped discussing how to translate and started discussing how to check machines. Translators held the most critical stance of any group. The communities are not even arguing about the same variables: where developers frame reliability as a hallucination rate, everyone else frames it as verification and oversight.

The professional consequence is a job description inverted without being renegotiated. Translators are increasingly employed not to produce text but to verify it, the more cognitively demanding half, and are paid at post-editing rates set on the assumption the machine already did most of the job. The standards infrastructure sees the distinction even where the market does not. ISO 17100 covers human translation services; ISO 18587 covers post-editing of machine output and requires post-editors to meet the same competence levels as translators under ISO 17100. Same competence, different pay grade, different assumption about how much of the output anyone read.

Nobody Ever Decided This

The most striking feature of this migration is that almost nowhere can you find the meeting where it was approved.

Organisations did not convene a risk committee, evaluate error rates by language, define a threshold above which human review became mandatory, and sign off. They enabled a feature. A content management system offered automatic localisation; a support platform added a translate button. A free allowance covered the first half a million characters a month, enough to translate a small organisation's entire public documentation set without generating an invoice that needed a signature.

Research commissioned by DeepL and reported in 2026 found enterprises investing heavily in language AI while still running critical global operations through manual, unintegrated workflows, which tells you the adoption pattern is not a strategy but a scattering of local decisions. Marketing copy, support documentation, product listings, internal policy, contract summaries and patient-facing instructions crossed the same threshold at different moments, authorised by different people, none asked to consider the whole. A system nobody decided to build is one nobody feels responsible for.

The Chain in Which Everyone Is a Bystander

Try to identify the responsible party in a concrete case and the exercise becomes a study in evaporation.

A patient is discharged with machine-translated instructions containing a reversed medication direction. Is the model provider liable? Its terms disclaim high-stakes use and it never knew the text was clinical. The record vendor? It integrated a service at a customer's request. The hospital? Arguably yes, the most promising thread, but it will point to the impossibility of reviewing every document in every language, and to the absence of any regulatory instruction telling it where the line sits. The clinician cannot read Armenian. The patient received a document from a hospital in their own language and read it correctly. The document was wrong.

Occasionally an institution refuses to accept this diffusion. In June 2018, a United States district court in Kansas suppressed evidence in United States versus Cruz-Zamora, in which an officer used Google Translate on a patrol car laptop to obtain consent to search a vehicle from a driver who spoke very little English. The officer typed “can I search the car?” The Spanish output, translated back, asked something closer to “can I find the car?” The court found the literal but nonsensical rendering meant the driver had not given unequivocal consent. That is a court locating responsibility with the party who chose to deploy the technology, rather than the person who received its output.

Cruz-Zamora is instructive precisely because it is unusual. It required an adversarial process, a defence lawyer, a back-translation and a judge willing to inspect the mechanism. Almost no machine-translated document gets that treatment. The vast majority arrive where there is no adversary and nobody whose job it is to check: a discharge sheet, a benefits letter, a tenancy notice, a warning label, a consent form. The error surfaces, if ever, only through the harm it causes, by which point the chain back to a mistranslated clause is nearly impossible to reconstruct.

The industry sells professional indemnity insurance precisely because translation carries assignable liability when a professional does it. A named translator working under ISO 17100 is insurable because the responsible party is identifiable. A model invocation inside a content pipeline is not, and the risk does not disappear when it becomes uninsurable. It transfers to the person holding the paper.

The Law Points Two Ways at Once

For a case study in regulatory incoherence, consider the current United States position on language access.

Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, whose final implementing rule took effect on 5 July 2024, requires covered health entities to provide qualified interpretation and translation, and specifically requires that machine-translated material be reviewed by a qualified human translator where accuracy is essential or the source is complex or technical. That addresses the verification gap directly: you may use the machine, but not unsupervised where it matters.

Eight months later, on 1 March 2025, Executive Order 14224 designated English the official language of the United States and revoked Executive Order 13166, the 2000 order requiring federal agencies to plan for meaningful access for people with limited English proficiency. It directed the Attorney General to rescind guidance issued under it, and the resulting Department of Justice memorandum of 14 July 2025 encouraged agencies to rescind their own guidance, to consider English-only services, and, explicitly, to use artificial intelligence to reduce translation costs. In July 2026, formal rescission notices for Title VI language access guidance appeared in the Federal Register.

The policy environment now simultaneously requires human review of machine translation in health settings and recommends machine translation as a cost-reduction strategy across federal programmes. Underlying civil rights law has not changed: Title VI still prohibits national origin discrimination, and recipients of federal funding still owe meaningful access. What has changed is the guidance telling them how, so the question of what meaningful access means when the translation is machine-generated is unanswered by anyone with authority to answer it.

Europe's failure has a different texture. The General Product Safety Regulation, applicable since 13 December 2024, requires products to be accompanied by instructions and safety information in a language easily understood by consumers in the member state where they are sold. That is an outcome requirement, usually preferable to a process requirement. But it is silent on how the translation is produced and on who must verify the text is in fact understood rather than merely present. A machine-translated warning that reverses a prohibition satisfies the formal requirement while defeating its purpose. The EU Artificial Intelligence Act adds transparency obligations from August 2026, including machine-readable marking of synthetic content, though whether a translation engine running over patient instructions falls inside its high-risk regime is a matter for lawyers rather than settled fact. A small joke is buried here: some widely consulted online reference versions of the AI Act's own articles carry a notice explaining that the translations are machine-generated and not the official European Parliament versions.

In the United Kingdom, NHS England published an improvement framework for community language translation and interpreting on 27 May 2025 that is unusually honest about the gap. It records annual NHS spend at around 75.5 million pounds against an estimated 250 to 300 million needed to meet actual demand, and warns that translation apps, while convenient, carry risks to accuracy and patient safety. It commits NHS England to national guidance specifying when AI is suitable, which tools are approved, how accuracy is verified across languages, and the governance frameworks including indemnity and responsibility. That last clause is an admission: who is responsible when an AI translation harms an NHS patient had not been settled. It is being written now, after the tools are already on the wards.

What Recipients Are Actually Being Handed

Strip away the institutional framing and answer the first question plainly. What does it mean to receive information machine-translated at a fraction of human cost and never checked by anyone who reads both languages?

It means being handed a document carrying the full social signalling of institutional assurance and none of the substance. Every cue on that page, the letterhead, the formatting, the fluency, evolved in a world where producing text in a language required a person who knew it. Those cues were reliable because they were expensive. Fluency was a costly signal of competence. Machine translation made fluency free, so the signal conveys nothing, and nobody has told the recipients.

That is usually asserted about lay recipients, and it would be easy to dismiss as condescension: of course a patient cannot tell, they are not a translator. But the non-inferiority study tested the claim without setting out to. Its blinded evaluators were professional medical interpreters, reading in their own working languages, paid to assess translation quality, and aware that some of what they were reading was machine output. They frequently took the machine translations for professional work. If the signal has stopped carrying information under those conditions, for those readers, there is no version of this in which it still carries information for a patient reading a discharge sheet in a corridor. Fluency is not weak evidence of human competence. It is no evidence at all.

It means epistemic risk has been transferred to the party least able to bear it. Previously the burden of ensuring correctness sat with the institution producing the text, because the institution employed the translator. It has been silently relocated to the reader, who is expected, without being told, to treat official documents in their own language as provisional. Those readers are disproportionately the people with fewest resources to seek a second opinion.

It means informed consent is being quietly hollowed out. Consent requires comprehension of accurate information. A patient who fully understands a fluent instruction that has reversed the source has comprehended something, but not the thing they were meant to consent to. Their signature attests to a document nobody on the institutional side has read.

And it means we have built, without deciding to, a two-tier information citizenship. Speak a high-resource language and the machine serves you at close to professional quality. Speak Armenian and the same interface, the same button, the same institutional promise delivers something accurate slightly more than half the time in controlled testing. Both are told they have been given information in their own language. Only one of them has.

An Accountability Regime That Would Actually Bite

The second question is harder. Who bears responsibility when the system producing the translation is more capable than any system available to tell whether it worked?

The honest starting point is that no technical fix resolves this. The verification gap is not an artefact of immature models but a structural property of a task whose correctness can only be assessed by someone holding both languages. Better models will narrow the error rate. They will not create the reviewers. So the regime must be built out of allocation of responsibility rather than engineering, starting by reversing the current default.

That default should be simple. The organisation publishing a translated document warrants it, regardless of how it was produced. Not the model provider, not the platform, not the clinician, and emphatically not the recipient. If a hospital hands a patient a discharge sheet in Armenian, it stands behind that sheet exactly as if a staff translator had written it. This single rule does most of the work, because it puts the cost of unverified translation onto the party that captured the savings rather than the recipient who absorbs the risk.

The rest follows. Risk tiering should be organised by consequence class rather than document type. A marketing headline and a dosing instruction are both text; only one can put someone in intensive care. Content that can change a medical action, alter a legal obligation, forfeit a right, or carry a safety warning belongs in a tier requiring independent bilingual review before release, attributable to a named professional. Everything else can run unverified, provided it is labelled as such.

Per-language performance disclosure should be mandatory and visible in the interface. A product performing at 94 per cent in one language and 55 per cent in another should not present those as equivalent menu options. Deployers in regulated settings should publish language-specific error rates for their own content domains, sampled by qualified reviewers, and suspend automated release for pairs below a defined floor. The Lopez framework recommends the healthcare version: extend Joint Commission oversight to machine-assisted translation, build a shared clinical translation corpus, and update Section 1557 guidance with language-specific benchmarks. Language-specific is the operative phrase, because aggregate accuracy conceals the inequality that matters.

Provenance labelling should appear in the target language, in the document, in terms a recipient can act on. Not a disclaimer in eight-point type, but a plain statement: this text was produced automatically and has not been checked by a person who reads both languages; if anything here concerns your medication, contact us. The harm mechanism is a false impression of human authorship, and labelling is the cheapest counterweight.

Procurement is the most immediately available lever. Contracts in regulated settings should specify ISO 18587 full post-editing as a floor for consequence-bearing content, name the accountable reviewer, require logging sufficient to reconstruct which engine produced which document on which date, and prohibit reliance on automated quality estimation as the sole basis for bypassing review. The Gladkoff paper gives that last clause its evidentiary basis. The Brewster results give the first clause its own: full post-editing was not a compromise between speed and safety but better than either route alone, and faster than commissioning a translation from scratch. The expensive part of translation is no longer the translating. It is the reading.

Finally there is a public-goods problem no single organisation will solve. Armenian performs at 55 per cent because of a shortage of high-quality parallel data, and that shortage persists because nobody has a commercial incentive to fix it. Building open, domain-specific corpora for lower-resource languages in the areas where errors are most dangerous, clinical instructions, legal notices, safety warnings, is unglamorous infrastructure that health systems, regulators and standards bodies should fund jointly. It is cheap relative to the litigation it would prevent, and the only intervention that closes the tier gap rather than documenting it.

None of this restores the old equilibrium, in which producing a translation and trusting one cost roughly the same. What a workable regime does instead is make the residual risk visible, priced and owned, so that an organisation choosing to publish unverified translations makes that choice explicitly, in writing, with its name attached.

The Sentence That Reads Perfectly and Says the Opposite

Return to the instruction that started this. Hold the kidney medicine until you have a chance to speak with your kidney doctor. In the source it is a stop order. In the output, in two of the world's most widely spoken languages, it became a continue order, in prose so natural that a native speaker would have no cause to question it.

That sentence is the whole problem in miniature, and it explains why the failure mode has been so hard to take seriously. Every intuition we hold about text quality formed under an assumption that no longer applies: that fluent, contextually appropriate prose in a language implies someone competent in that language was involved. It was a reliable inference for the entire history of writing. It became false around three years ago, and our institutional design has not caught up.

The organisations that migrated to machine output did nothing obviously reckless. Each decision looked like a straightforward efficiency gain, and the aggregate was never assembled by anyone. The people receiving the documents are not careless either; they read correctly and trust appropriately, given every signal available. The models are not malfunctioning. They perform the task they were built for well enough that the residual failures are undetectable by anyone in the chain.

That is what makes it a trap rather than a scandal. Nobody behaves unreasonably from their own vantage point, and the system as a whole produces outcomes nobody would defend if they could see them. The technology has become powerful enough to make the question of whether it worked unanswerable at the point of use, and we have responded by not asking. The gap will not close on its own, because the cheap thing keeps getting cheaper and the expensive thing is expensive for reasons that have nothing to do with technology. The only variable under our control is who is answerable for the difference.

At present the answer is the person holding the paper, who does not know there is a question.

Sources and References

1. Breena R. Taira, Vanessa Kreger, Aristides Orue and Lisa C. Diamond, “A Pragmatic Assessment of Google Translate for Emergency Department Instructions,” Journal of General Internal Medicine, 5 March 2021: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-021-06666-z
2. Elaine C. Khoong, Eric Steinbrook, Cortlyn Brown and Alicia Fernandez, “Assessing the Use of Google Translate for Spanish and Chinese Translations of Emergency Department Discharge Instructions,” JAMA Internal Medicine, 25 February 2019: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2725080
3. Giovanni Rodriguez, Patricia Hernández, Christopher Kirwan, Lisette Dunham and Sayon Dutta, “Comparative Evaluation of Machine Translation Accuracy of Emergency Department Discharge Instructions: A Non-Inferiority Study,” Academic Emergency Medicine, volume 33, issue 4, 2026: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/acem.70289
4. Ryan C. L. Brewster et al., “Evaluating human-in-the-loop strategies for artificial intelligence-enabled translation of patient discharge instructions: a multidisciplinary analysis,” npj Digital Medicine, 24 October 2025: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-025-02055-6
5. Nimdzi Insights, “The 2026 Nimdzi 100,” 2026: https://www.nimdzi.com/nimdzi-100-2026/
6. Yujun Wang, Ehud Reiter, Shimei Pan, Steffen Eger and Wei Zhao, “Beyond Accuracy: Community Perspectives on Machine Translation,” arXiv:2606.09655, 8 June 2026: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.09655
7. Serge Gladkoff, Angelika Vaasa, Sue Ellen Wright, Ingemar Strandvik and Lifeng Han, “Looking under the Wrong Lamppost: On the Limitations of Automated Translation Quality Estimation,” arXiv:2608.03577, 4 August 2026, forthcoming in the Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Natural Language and Speech Processing (ICNLSP 2026), Trento, Italy, September 2026: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.03577
8. University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, “Researchers Examine Safety Risks in AI-Generated Translation of Emergency Department Discharge Instructions,” 23 June 2026: https://news.cuanschutz.edu/dbmi/ai-generated-discharge-instructions
9. Carreras Tartak et al., “Evaluating Spanish Translations of Emergency Department Discharge Instructions by a Large Language Model: Tool Validation and Reliability Study,” JMIR Formative Research, 12 January 2026: https://formative.jmir.org/2026/1/e79676
10. Ivan Lopez, David E. Velasquez, Jonathan H. Chen and Jorge A. Rodriguez, “Operationalizing machine-assisted translation in healthcare,” npj Digital Medicine, 30 September 2025: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12485017/
11. Gail Price-Wise, “Language, Culture, And Medical Tragedy: The Case Of Willie Ramirez,” Health Affairs Forefront, 19 November 2008: https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/forefront.20081119.000463/
12. Iman Sharif and Julia Tse, “Accuracy of Computer-Generated, Spanish-Language Medicine Labels,” Pediatrics, May 2010: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20368321/
13. Rest of World, “AI translation jeopardizes Afghan asylum claims,” 19 September 2023: https://restofworld.org/2023/ai-translation-errors-afghan-refugees-asylum/
14. TechCrunch, “Judge says 'literal but nonsensical' Google translation isn't consent for police search,” 15 June 2018: https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/15/judge-says-literal-but-nonsensical-google-translation-isnt-consent-for-police-search/
15. The White House, “Designating English as the Official Language of the United States,” Executive Order 14224, 1 March 2025: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/designating-english-as-the-official-language-of-the-united-states/
16. Federal Register, “Notice of Rescission of Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons,” 14 July 2026: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/07/14/2026-14128/notice-of-rescission-of-guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-title-vi
17. American Translators Association, “Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and Language Access: Who, What, How”: https://www.atanet.org/client-assistance/blog-section-1557-of-the-affordable-care-act-and-language-access-who-what-how/
18. International Organization for Standardization, “ISO 18587:2017 Translation services, Post-editing of machine translation output, Requirements”: https://www.iso.org/standard/62970.html
19. TÜV SÜD, “ISO 17100 and ISO 18587 Certifications, Translation Quality and Machine Translation Standards”: https://www.tuvsud.com/en-us/services/auditing-and-system-certification/iso-17100
20. NHS England, “Improvement framework: community language translation and interpreting services,” 27 May 2025: https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/improvement-framework-community-language-translation-and-interpreting-services/
21. EU-OSHA, “Regulation (EU) 2023/988 on general product safety,” applicable from 13 December 2024: https://osha.europa.eu/en/legislation/directive/regulation-2023988eu-general-product-safety
22. EU Artificial Intelligence Act, “Article 50: Transparency Obligations for Providers and Deployers of Certain AI Systems”: https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/article/50/
23. Google Cloud, “Cloud Translation pricing”: https://cloud.google.com/translate/pricing
24. The AI Journal, “Manual translation processes still stifling enterprises despite surge in AI spending, finds DeepL research,” 10 March 2026: https://aijourn.com/manual-translation-processes-still-stifling-enterprises-despite-surge-in-ai-spending-finds-deepl-research/
25. National Immigration Law Center, “Trump Administration's Attempts to Dismantle Language Access Do Not Erase Civil Rights Law”: https://www.nilc.org/articles/trump-administrations-attempts-to-dismantle-language-access-do-not-erase-civil-rights-law/

---

Tim Green UK-based Systems Theorist & Independent Technology Writer

Tim explores the intersections of artificial intelligence, decentralised cognition, and posthuman ethics. His work, published at smarterarticles.co.uk, challenges dominant narratives of technological progress while proposing interdisciplinary frameworks for collective intelligence and digital stewardship.

His writing has been featured on Ground News and shared by independent researchers across both academic and technological communities.

ORCID: 0009-0002-0156-9795 Email: tim@smarterarticles.co.uk

Listen to the free weekly SmarterArticles Podcast

Alan Parsons Project – 1976

A Dream Within A Dream The Raven The Tell-Tale Heart The Cask Of Amontillado(The System Of) Doctor Tarr And Professor Fether The Fall Of The House Of Usher: Prelude The Fall Of The House Of Usher: Arrival The Fall Of The House Of Usher: Intermezzo The Fall Of The House Of Usher: Pavane The Fall Of The House Of Usher: Fall To One In Paradise

A Dream Within A Dream (Instrumental)

“For my own part, I have never had a thought which I could not set down in words with even more distinctness than that with which I conceived it. There is, however, a class of fancies of exquisite delicacy which are not thoughts, and to which as yet I have found it absolutely impossible to adapt to language. These fancies arise in the soul, alas how rarely. Only at epochs of most intense tranquillity, when the bodily and mental health are in perfection. And at those weird points of time, where the confines of the waking world blend with the world of dreams. And so I captured this fancy, where all that we see, or seem, is but a dream within a dream.”

---

The Raven

THE clock struck midnight And through my sleeping I heard a tapping at my door I looked but nothing lay in the darkness And so I turned inside once more

To my amazement There stood a raven Whose shadow hung above my door Then through the silence It spoke the one word That I shall hear for evermore

Nevermore Thus quoth the raven, nevermore

And still the raven remains in my room No matter how much I implore No words can soothe him No prayer remove him And I must hear for evermore

Quoth the raven, nevermore Nevermore Thus quoth the raven, nevermore

---

The Tale Tell Heart

“The Tell-Tale Heart”

YOU should have seen him Lying alone in helpless silence in the night You should have seen him You would have seen his eye reflecting in the light

So for the old man Ashes to ashes, earth to earth and dust to dust No one will see me No one with guilt to share, no secret soul to trust

Louder and louder Till I could tell the sound was not within my ears You should have seen me You would have seen my eyes grow white and cold with fear

Heard all the things in Heaven and Earth I've seen many things in Hell But his vulture's eye of a cold pale blue Is the eye of the Devil himself

Take me away now But let the silence drown the beating of his heart

---

“The Cask Of Amontillado”

BY the last breath of the four winds that blow I'll have revenge upon Fortunato Smile in his face I'll say “come let us go I've a cask of Amontillado”

Sheltered inside from the cold of the snow Follow me now to the vault down below Drinking the wine as we laugh at the time Which is passing incredibly slow

(What are these chains that are binding my arm?) Part of you dies each passing day (Say it's a game and I'll come to no harm) You'll feel your life slipping away

You who are rich and whose troubles are few May come around to see my point of view What price the Crown of a King on his throne When you're chained in the dark all alone

(Spare me my life only name your reward) Part of you dies each brick I lay (Bring back some light in the name of the Lord) You'll feel your mind slipping away

---

”(The System Of) Doctor Tarr And Professor Fether”

JUST what you need to make you feel better Just what you need to make you feel Just what you need to make you feel better Just what you need to make you feel

At the far end of your tether And your thoughts won't fit together So you sleep light or whatever And the night goes on forever Then your mind change like the weather You're in need of Doctor Tarr and Professor Fether

Even clouds seem bright and breezy 'Cause the livin' is free and easy See the rat race in a new way Like you're wakin' up to a new day It's a wise thing if you're clever Take a lead from Doctor Tarr and Professor Fether

Find the end of a rainbow Fly wherever the winds blow Laugh at life like a sideshow Just what you need to make you feel better

Satisfaction altogether Guaranteed by Doctor Tarr and Professor Fether

Find the end of a rainbow Fly wherever the winds blow Laugh at life like a sideshow Just what you need to make you feel better

Don't stop bringin' the girls round Don't start havin' a showdown Keep on handin' the jug round All that you need is wine and good company

---

“The Fall Of The House Of Usher – I Prelude”

[instrumental]

[(I) Prelude]

“Shadows of shadows passing. It is now 1831, and as always I am absorbed with a delicate thought. It is how poetry has indefinite sensations, to which end music is inessential. Since the comprehension of sweet sound is our most indefinite conception, music, when combined with a pleasurable idea, is poetry. Music without the idea is simply music. Without music or an intriguing idea, colour becomes pallor, man becomes carcase, home becomes catacomb, and the dead are but for a moment motionless.”

[(II) Arrival]

[(III) Intermezzo]

[(IV) Pavane]

[(V) Fall]

---

“To One In Paradise”

IF I could see the sky above And my mind could be set free As wild white horses reached the shore I'd stand alone and oversee

And if the bush before me burns Should I turn my eyes away And still the voices I can hear As clear to me as light of day

I believed in my dreams Nothing could change my mind Now I know what they mean How could I be so blind

Cold sands of time (Winds that blow as cold as ice Sounds that come in the night) Shall hide what is left on me (Come from Paradise)

I've been through times when no one cared (Words that were mine) I've seen clouds in empty skies When one kind word meant more to me (Shall last as a memory) Than all the love in Paradise

I believed in my dreams Nothing could change my mind Till I found what they mean Nothing can save me now

---

---

Ps 34:18 Jehovah is close to the brokenhearted; He saves those who are crushed in spirit.

Hebrews 6:10 For God is not unrighteous so as to forget your work and the love you showed for his name by ministering and continuing to minister to the holy ones.

Tales of Mystery: Dark beauty. Emotion within architecture. Disciplined intensity.

Horse gates

Jeremiah 31 is a sweeping promise of restoration. Jehovah assures Israel that his love has not ended: he will gather his scattered people, comfort their grief, rebuild their land, and turn mourning into joy. Even Ephraim’s remorse is met with compassion, showing Jehovah as a Father who still deeply loves his wayward son. The chapter reaches its high point with the promise of a new covenant—one in which God’s law would be written on hearts, sins would be forgiven, and his people would truly know him. The chapter closes with an emphatic assurance that Jehovah’s purpose for his people is as dependable as the sun, moon, stars, and the foundations of the earth.

---

“At that time,” declares Jehovah, “I will become God to all the families of Israel, and they will become my people.”

This is what Jehovah says:

“The people who survived the sword found favor in the wilderness

When Israel was walking to his resting-place.”

From far away Jehovah appeared to me and said:

“I have loved you with an everlasting love.

That is why I have drawn you to me with loyal love.

Yet again I will rebuild you and you will be rebuilt.

O virgin of Israel, you will again take up your tambourines

And go forth dancing joyfully.

You will again plant vineyards in the mountains of Sa·marʹi·a;

The planters will plant and enjoy their fruit.

For the day will come when the watchmen in the mountains of Eʹphra·im will call out:

‘Rise up, let us go up to Zion, to Jehovah our God.’”

For this is what Jehovah says:

“Cry out to Jacob with rejoicing.

Shout for joy because you are over the nations.

Proclaim it; offer praise and say,

‘O Jehovah, save your people, the remnant of Israel.’

I am bringing them back from the land of the north.

I will gather them together from the remotest parts of the earth.

Among them will be the blind and the lame,

The pregnant woman and the one giving birth, all together.

As a great congregation they will return here.

They will come weeping.

I will lead them as they beg for favor.

I will guide them to streams of water,

On a level path that will not make them stumble.

For I am a Father to Israel, and Eʹphra·im is my firstborn.”

Hear the word of Jehovah, you nations,

And proclaim it among the islands far away:

“The One who scattered Israel will gather him together.

He will watch over him as a shepherd does his flock.

For Jehovah will redeem Jacob

And rescue him out of the hand of the one stronger than he is.

They will come and shout joyfully on the height of Zion

And become radiant over the goodness of Jehovah,

Over the grain and the new wine and the oil,

And over the young of the flock and the herd.

They will become like a well-watered garden,

And they will never languish again.”

“At that time the virgin will dance joyfully,

Also the young men and the old men together.

I will change their mourning into exultation.

I will comfort them and give them joy instead of their grief.

I will satisfy the priests with plenty,

And my people will be satisfied with my goodness,” declares Jehovah.

“This is what Jehovah says:

‘A voice is heard in Raʹmah, lamentation and bitter weeping:

Rachel is weeping over her sons.

She has refused to be comforted over her sons,

Because they are no more.’”

This is what Jehovah says:

“‘Hold back your voice from weeping and your eyes from tears,

For there is a reward for your activity,’ declares Jehovah.

‘They will return from the land of the enemy.

And there is a hope for your future,’ declares Jehovah.

‘Your sons will return to their own territory.’”

“I have surely heard Eʹphra·im’s moaning,

‘You have corrected me, and I have been corrected,

Like a calf that has not been trained.

Bring me back, and I will readily turn back,

For you are Jehovah my God.

For after my turning back I felt remorse;

After I was made to understand I struck my thigh in grief.

I was ashamed and humiliated,

For I bore the reproach of my youth.’”

“Is Eʹphra·im not a precious son to me, a beloved child?

For as often as I speak against him, I do remember him still.

That is why my emotions are stirred for him.

And I will surely have pity on him,” declares Jehovah.

“Set up road markers for yourself,

And put up signposts.

Pay attention to the highway, the way that you have to go.

Return, O virgin of Israel, return to these cities of yours.

How long will you waver, O unfaithful daughter?

For Jehovah has created something new in the earth:

A woman will eagerly pursue a man.”

This is what Jehovah of armies, the God of Israel, says:

“They will again say these words in the land of Judah and in its cities when I gather back their captives: ‘May Jehovah bless you, O righteous dwelling place, O holy mountain.’

“And in it Judah and all its cities will dwell all together, farmers and those who lead the flocks. For I will satisfy the weary one and fill each one who is languishing.”

At this I awoke and opened my eyes, and my sleep had been pleasurable to me.

“Look! The days are coming,” declares Jehovah, “when I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man and with the seed of livestock.

“And just as I watched over them to uproot, to pull down, to tear down, to destroy, and to do harm, so I will watch over them to build up and to plant,” declares Jehovah.

“In those days they will no longer say, ‘The fathers ate sour grapes, but the teeth of the sons were set on edge.’ But then each one will die for his own error. Any man eating sour grapes will have his own teeth set on edge.”

“Look! The days are coming,” declares Jehovah, “when I will make with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah a new covenant.

“It will not be like the covenant that I made with their forefathers on the day I took hold of their hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, ‘my covenant that they broke, although I was their true master,’ declares Jehovah.”

“For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares Jehovah.

“I will put my law within them,

And in their heart I will write it.

And I will become their God,

And they will become my people.”

“And they will no longer teach each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know Jehovah!’ for they will all know me, from the least to the greatest of them,” declares Jehovah.

“For I will forgive their error, and I will no longer remember their sin.”

This is what Jehovah says,

Who gives the sun for light by day,

The laws of the moon and the stars for light by night,

Who stirs up the sea and makes its waves boisterous,

Whose name is Jehovah of armies:

“‘If these regulations should ever fail,’ declares Jehovah,

‘Only then would the offspring of Israel cease as a nation before me always.’”

This is what Jehovah says:

“‘If the heavens above could be measured and the foundations of the earth below could be explored, only then could I reject all the offspring of Israel for all they have done,’ declares Jehovah.”

“Look! The days are coming,” declares Jehovah, “when the city will be built to Jehovah from the Tower of Ha·nanʹel to the Corner Gate.

“And the measuring line will go out straight ahead to the hill of Gaʹreb, and it will turn toward Goʹah.

“And all the valley of the carcasses and of ashes and all the terraces as far as the Kidʹron Valley, clear to the corner of the Horse Gate toward the east, will be something holy to Jehovah.

“It will never again be uprooted or torn down.”

---

#jeremiah #biblereading

Boundless Energy: Blessing or Curse?

For as long as I can remember, people have talked about my mother’s energy. Neighbors, friends, relatives  commented on how energetic and active she was. She was always doing something and could never seem to sit still.

Even before she was married, she had countless hobbies: sewing, making dolls and clothes, knitting, fabric painting, and everything in between. She loved to cook and took it as a personal challenge to recreate dishes made by neighbors from the various cultures and ethnicities residing in our university housing community. Heck, she even somehow coaxed a reluctant neighbor to divulge her secret Family chocolate chip cookie recipe!I honestly don’t remember seeing her sit very often.I certainly don’t remember her lounging on the sofa, relaxing and watching Tv. She was always on the go.

Growing up Asian (if you know, you know ) there was a huge emphasis on productivity. You woke up at a respectable hour. Periodt. Sleeping in was frowned upon, even if you had been up half the night. Lazy people never got anywhere in life. The Nepali word was “Alchhi”. Because apparently, all successful futures were decided before 8 a.m.!

If I was sitting quietly, I was often asked why I was “just sitting there doing nothing.”Was I supposed to explain that I was thinking? reflecting ( or day dreaming about my latest crush) , conserving energy? Existing?!

I always felt as though I needed to be occupied with something or at perpetual risk of being judged. “Hare yo keti ya”… (translation: uff this girl!). Your value was tied to what you achieved: your grades, your accomplishments, and how many talents you could  hone. 

It also gave parents more material to brag about their children while subtly validating themselves as wonderful parents.Because what was the point of raising an accomplished child if nobody else knew about it? It was personal.

And listen, I understand it. There is absolutely truth in that how you are raised: the support, discipline, and encouragement you receive, shapes what you become. I am deeply grateful to my parents. They encouraged me, challenged me, and geared me to be successful and independent.

They beamed from the moment I first walked into Medical school (and maybe my first day of kindergarten once before) and continued beaming all the way through my becoming a fully fledged, experienced physician. And they had every right to be proud.I couldn’t have done it without them.

But somewhere along the way, I absorbed more than ambition.I absorbed the idea that stillness was scary and wrong. 

Because if I wasn’t doing something, wasn’t I wasting time? And if I was wasting time, wasn’t I wasting my potential?

After having children, I became more unstoppable. Literally. I stopped sitting down to watch shows. I would come home after commuting and hours of work and taking care of others to care for the kids, play with them, clean something, plan something, or find another task that suddenly felt urgent.

Over the past few years, I have incorporated more “self-care” into my life but even my self-care involved activity! 

The gym. Pilates. Walking. Dancing. Learning new hobbies.Coffee dates with my girlfriends, Playdate and girls nights. Planning outings. Going places.

Sadly, I decided rest was acceptable only if it came with athletic shoes and an elevated heart rate.Did it really count as self-care if I wasn’t sweating, multitasking, or checking something off a list? Creating more, writing more.Etc etc. 

Friends and family began asking me the same things about me that everyone had always said about my mother: Where do you get all that energy? How do you do so much? You’re always doing something.

And I was.

I planned, overplanned, booked, and overbooked my weekdays. Then, by the weekend, I desperately needed a break, so naturally, I immediately started planning the weekend. What better way to recover from an overbooked week than by overbooking your recovery??

I chose large, comfortable, expensive sofas for my home. I created cozy little nooks for resting, both inside and outside.

And then I stood in the kitchen eating.

Always standing. Eating, cleaning, organizing, doing.

Never actually sitting on those beautiful sofas I had carefully selected for the theoretical person who lived in my house and knew how to relax.

Who was she? When was she coming? And why did she need so many decorative pillows?

I would wash my hair at midnight after everyone was asleep-and finally sit down only when the lights were off and I was ready to fall asleep.

For years, I thought this was simply my personality. I had energy. I was productive. I was efficient. I got things done.I was proud of it.

But recently, I began to understand that some of it was also a response- a traumatic  one that was probably passed down from generation to generation.

We were taught, directly and indirectly, that having fun was frivolous. Taking care of ourselves was selfish. Resting meant we were lazy. And our worth is demonstrated repeatedly through how much we could accomplish.

But who decided that? And why did we all agree without even reading the terms and conditions?

Recently, I attended an event where we were asked to name the three things we valued most in life.

Someone said, “rest”. Someone said, “Fun.”

And I remember thinking: Rest? Fun? You’re allowed to choose that? 

Why shouldn’t fun be something we value? Why shouldn’t rest be important enough to claim openly instead of disguising it as recovery from productivity?

Why do we feel compelled to justify rest by checking off everything we accomplished first?

I cleaned the house, answered my emails, worked out, fed everyone, solved three minor crises, picked up the pet’s messes, reorganized a drawer…so now I may sit down for eleven minutes.

These beliefs are sneaky. But become so deeply ingrained that we start to  think this is how responsible, successful adults are supposed to live.

I want to teach my children something different. I want them to listen to their bodies. I want them to know that it is okay to have an evening with no after-school activity. It is okay to have a weekend without a bazillion plans. It is okay to sit on the sofa, watch something silly, laugh, nap, FaceTime a friend or simply do nothing.

Will an empty Saturday prevent them from becoming successful adults? Or could learning to rest actually help them become healthier, happier ones?

Rest is not a failure to use your time well.It is a gift we give ourselves. It may even be one of the greatest acts of self-love.

Boundless energy can absolutely be a blessing. It has helped me create, learn, grow, achieve, care for people, raise my children, build a career, friendships and community. And to live a very full vibrant life.

But energy becomes a burden when we believe we are never allowed to replenish it. Our worth does not need to be proven minute by minute; not to the world, not to our families, and certainly not to ourselves.

And really, what is the point of buying the plush sofa and designing the perfect coffee nook if we never actually use it?

Sometimes, sitting on the darn sofa is enough.

There is a kind of exhaustion that comes from constantly trying to make sure everyone around you is okay with you. You start measuring your decisions by other people’s reactions. If they are happy, you feel relieved. If they are disappointed, you start wondering what you did wrong. Over time, what Jesus teaches about people-pleasing becomes something we desperately need to understand.

I think many of us confuse love with responsibility. We believe that if we truly care about someone, then we should be able to keep them from being disappointed, angry, hurt, or frustrated with us. But learning to follow Jesus without living for approval means accepting something difficult: you can love someone deeply and still not be responsible for how they feel about every decision you make.

Jesus showed us this over and over again. He cared about people. He listened to them, healed them, fed them, taught them, forgave them, and gave Himself for them. But He did not allow their expectations to become His master.

In Mark 1, people were searching for Jesus after He had been healing and helping crowds. His disciples found Him and said, “Everyone is looking for you.” It would have been easy to hear that as an obligation. People wanted Him. People needed Him. People expected Him to come back.

But Jesus did not return simply because everyone wanted Him to.

He told His disciples that they needed to go to other towns so He could preach there too.

I find that deeply freeing.

Jesus did not ignore people. He did not stop caring. He simply knew that not every expectation placed on Him was an assignment from the Father.

That is something I have to remind myself of too.

Not every request is my responsibility. Not every disappointment means I failed. Not every unhappy reaction means I need to change my decision.

Sometimes people are disappointed because we were wrong. When that happens, we should admit it. We should apologize. We should make things right.

But sometimes people are disappointed simply because we said no.

Sometimes they are upset because we created a boundary.

Sometimes they are frustrated because we stopped doing something they had grown comfortable receiving from us.

Their feelings may be real, but that does not mean we have sinned.

Jesus disappointed people too.

Peter once tried to convince Jesus to avoid the suffering that was ahead of Him. Peter loved Jesus. He did not want Him to suffer. His concern was sincere.

But Peter’s preferred path was not the Father’s plan.

Jesus loved Peter, but He did not obey Peter’s emotions.

That matters.

Someone can love you and still want the wrong thing for you.

Someone can care about you and still pressure you toward a decision you should not make.

Someone can be disappointed with you even when you are trying to do what is right.

This is where people-pleasing becomes dangerous.

It can look like kindness on the surface. We tell ourselves we are just trying to keep the peace. We do not want conflict. We do not want anyone to think badly of us.

But eventually, keeping everyone happy can become more important than being honest.

We start saying yes when we mean no. We stay in situations we know are unhealthy. We avoid conversations that need to happen. We keep giving away our time and energy because guilt feels easier than disappointment.

That is not freedom.

Jesus never promised that following Him would make everyone happy with us.

In fact, His own life proves the opposite.

There were days when crowds followed Him and praised Him. There were other days when people rejected Him, argued with Him, misunderstood Him, and walked away.

Jesus did not change who He was every time the crowd changed its opinion.

He knew who He was.

He knew who His Father was.

And He knew what He had been sent to do.

I think that is where peace begins for us too.

We have to stop asking, “Is everybody happy with me?” and start asking, “Am I being faithful to Jesus?”

Those are not the same question.

You can make someone happy and still be disobedient.

You can disappoint someone and still be faithful.

That does not give us permission to become cold. Jesus was never cold. He was compassionate, patient, generous, and forgiving.

The goal is not to stop caring about people.

The goal is to stop carrying what belongs to them.

I am responsible for how I speak.

I am responsible for whether I forgive.

I am responsible for whether I act with kindness and integrity.

I am responsible for whether I tell the truth.

But I am not responsible for controlling another person’s emotions.

Neither are you.

Sometimes love sounds like, “I care about you, but I cannot do that.”

Sometimes love says, “I understand that you are disappointed, but I believe this is the right decision.”

Sometimes love means staying close.

Sometimes love means creating distance.

The important thing is that our decisions come from prayer, truth, humility, and obedience rather than fear of rejection.

So if someone is disappointed with you today, bring it to God.

Ask Him to show you whether you were wrong.

If you were, make it right.

But if you were honest, loving, prayerful, and faithful, do not automatically assume that another person’s unhappiness means you need to change course.

You cannot keep everyone happy.

Jesus did not.

What you can do is love people well, follow Christ faithfully, and trust God with the reactions you cannot control.

That burden was never yours to carry.

Your friend,

Douglas Vandergraph

Explore the complete Douglas Vandergraph Master Index: https://douglasvandergraph.com/douglas-vandergraph-master-index/

Watch Douglas Vandergraph’s faith-based videos on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@douglasvandergraph

I suppose it’s presumptuous to assume that my posts are of any interest to anyone, let alone worthy of a few minutes of attention to be read. But that assumes I’m writing this because I desire or crave attention. Honestly, I do not.

But I am compelled, for reasons I myself do not entirely understand, to share my thoughts and opinions here on things that probably should not be shared.

Does writing this go against my better judgment? That depends. What constitutes ‘better’ judgment? Is it the act, the process, the substance, or the consequence of such writings? Writings that would certainly be labeled as strange at least, insane at most. Or, worse perhaps, as I have a limited imagination.

As a writer, I’m a mere amateur. This means I have something to say but lack the language to make it truly compelling and memorable. But after five decades on this earth, the prose I offer here is likely the fullest and best version of my written capabilities.

But that doesn’t really answer the question of why I’m doing this. And after much soul-searching and back-and-forth in my mind, the best answer I can offer is this: Because to keep what burns inside me has begun to devour me from within.

Speaking my truth to the world is better than letting my inner world consume me whole.

I recognize the risks.

Our world has tidy boxes for what it considers untidy things, no matter how wrong the world’s boxes may be.

Human societies and civilizations have a long history of misunderstanding, preservation bias, and erasure when it comes to the weird, anomalous, or uncanny — the atopic. The system is efficient and expedient with its assigning of labels: episode, delusions, possession, psychosis, blasphemy, mania, hallucination. Pick your favorite. The thesaurus has plenty more. And modern medicine has an endless array of chemicals they’re happy to pump into you at cost, while religion has an endless array of dogmatic corrections they’re happy to also pump into you at cost.

To both I say, “I’d rather not.”

I suppose it's safer and easier to stay silent. After all, there’s no real benefit for me here other than some hope of processing, integration, and, if I’m lucky, a bit of solace. I thought I’d say peace of mind, but that seems impossible at this point. At least, not in this lifetime. Silence would certainly keep me out of the vile filing systems of this world. But.

Silence also corrodes.

If left unmanaged, some unspoken words and thoughts become toxic. They rush the mind, body, and soul like a firestorm, leaving nothing but ash and cinder in their wake.

And there’s a naive part of me that clings to the old-fashioned notion that the sort of thing that happens to one person and is never shared has no resistance against the onslaught of preservation bias and erasure the world never seems to get enough of.

No.

It folds inward. It becomes indistinguishable from reverie, invention, and madness. Writing it down, even into the void of the internet where no one listens, and no one cares, gives it the one thing silence can’t: continued existence outside the tiny vessel of the mind that now contains it.

This is all I have to offer the world.

In Summary: * This has been a quietly successful Monday. Two main chores: my weekly laundry, all done early; and a grocery shopping trip to Walmart, got what I intended and stayed within my budget.

The Rangers are scheduled to play the A's tonight with a start time of 7:05 PM CDT, I may try to catch at least the first few innings before heading to bed. We'll see how that goes.

Prayers, etc.: * I have a daily prayer regimen I try to follow throughout the day from early morning, as soon as I roll out of bed, until head hits pillow at night.

Health Metrics: * bw= 226.97 lbs. * bp= 152/87 (66)

Exercise: * morning stretches, balance exercises, kegel pelvic floor exercises, half squats, calf raises, wall push-ups, BP breathing exercises, pilates

Diet: * 05:30 – 1 banana * 06:20 – 1 slice of lemon meringue pie * 08:10 – cottage cheese * 09:30 – 1 hot dog & bun * 13:20 – sausage, scrambled eggs, biscuits and jam, pancakes * 16:15 – 1 fresh apple * 17:10 – 1 slice of lemon meringue pie

Activities, Chores, etc.: * 04:15 – listen to local news talk radio * 05:00 – bank accounts activity monitored . * 05:26 – read, write, pray, follow news reports from various sources, surf the socials, listen to music, nap * 06:55 – start my weekly laundry * 12:10 to 13:10 – grocery shopping * 13:20 – lunch * 14:30 – an afternoon spent mostly listening to relaxing music and working on my chess

Chess: * 16:00 – moved in all pending CC games, winning one, losing another, and started one new one

In Summary: * This has been a quietly successful Monday. Two main chores: my weekly laundry, all done early; and a grocery shopping trip to Walmart, got what I intended and stayed within my budget.

The Rangers are scheduled to play the A's tonight with a start time of 7:05 PM CDT, I may try to catch at least the first few innings before heading to bed. We'll see how that goes.

Prayers, etc.: * I have a daily prayer regimen I try to follow throughout the day from early morning, as soon as I roll out of bed, until head hits pillow at night.

Health Metrics: * bw= 226.97 lbs. * bp= 152/87 (66)

Exercise: * morning stretches, balance exercises, kegel pelvic floor exercises, half squats, calf raises, wall push-ups, BP breathing exercises, pilates

Diet: * 05:30 – 1 banana * 06:20 – 1 slice of lemon meringue pie * 08:10 – cottage cheese * 09:30 – 1 hot dog & bun * 13:20 – sausage, scrambled eggs, biscuits and jam, pancakes * 16:15 – 1 fresh apple * 17:10 – 1 slice of lemon meringue pie

Activities, Chores, etc.: * 04:15 – listen to local news talk radio * 05:00 – bank accounts activity monitored . * 05:26 – read, write, pray, follow news reports from various sources, surf the socials, listen to music, nap * 06:55 – start my weekly laundry * 12:10 to 13:10 – grocery shopping * 13:20 – lunch * 14:30 – an afternoon spent mostly listening to relaxing music and working on my chess

Chess: * 16:00 – moved in all pending CC games, winning one, losing another, and started one new one

To end the month of August with Blaugust, I wanted to write about some lessons learned.

I will reach my 15 blog posts goal as I publish this one, which is great! I did it! 🙌

One thing Blaugust helped me with was to lower my expectations, meaning, less perfectionism. I usually have an idea to write a blog post, and then I want to write a structured post, with intro, development and conclusion. And get all the references right, and edit it perfectly, and add the right images, and so on. Doing all of that takes time, and I realized I don’t have that much time anymore. Blaugust helped me see that I can break a few self-imposed rules about what a “proper” blog post needs to be.

And that means that I can share my thoughts while they are still fresh, without being over-polished. Not all posts need to have a conclusion, I can just throw away some thoughts and hit publish and that’s okay.

The post No big deal was from a draft I started two years ago and had never published because I thought it wasn’t good enough.

The post The only woman in the room was written during a lunch break, and I didn’t worry too much about structure.

The post Iron Maiden: Run for your Lives 2026 was written in a hotel lobby on some downtime before I left to catch a train. And I hit publish in the train station lobby minutes before entering said train. And that meant there were some typos in that post, which were corrected when I saw them.

All these really pushed me out of my comfort zone, and I’m glad they did!

But also, I don’t have that much energy anymore. Aging is real, and with it comes a shift in priorities where protecting my time and energy matters far more than obsessing over an ideal draft. Between work, personal life, house chores, reading, blogging, my well-being routines and whatever else, I have to be intentional about where my energy goes.

I planned on reading more of the other blogs participating, and I did read a few, here are some blog posts I enjoyed from which I discovered new bloggers for my RSS feed:

• Kobo vs Kindle – Divergent Rays
• Blaugust 2026 Group Project: Tell Us About Your Very First Blog – GamerLady P Blog
• The Internet Doesn't Exist – Matt's Blog
• I Don’t Want to Be the Product: Returning to the Tiny Internet – Pour The Coffee
• My Writing Workflow – Heart Soul Machine

Looking back on this month, I am so happy I decided to participate in Blaugust. It was exactly the push I needed to re-evaluate my relationship with writing and get back into a healthy rhythm. Writing 15 posts per month might be my upper monthly limit as of right now, and that’s okay!

Congrats to everyone else who took part this year! It doesn’t matter if you hit your goal, posted once or just spent the month reading along. I believe we’ve all learned something! It’s great to see that there are people interested in keeping the personal web alive and delightfully imperfect!

Post 15 of #Blaugust #NoisyMusings #blogging

Another Q-R Checkmate. Again playing White, but this time coming at the Black King from the right side of the board. This CC tournament game began on 03 August and ended a few minutes ago when my 25. Qxh7# delivered the mating move, my Queen being covered by my h4 Rook. The games in this tournament are being played with a comfortable 2 days allowed per move time control. Position of pieces at game's end is shown above, and our full move record below:

1. d4 d5 2. h3 Nc6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6 5. a3 Bd6 6. e3 O-O 7. Bb5 Qd7 8. O-O a6 9. Bxc6 Qxc6 10. Ne5 Qe8 11. Re1 Be7 12. e4 dxe4 13. b4 Bd6 14. Nc4 b6 15. Nxe4 Nxe4 16. Rxe4 Qc6 17. Qd3 Bb7 18. f3 b5 19. Na5 Qb6 20. Nxb7 Qxb7 21. Rh4 e5 22. dxe5 Bxe5 23. Rb1 Rad8 24. Qf5 Qd5 25. Qxh7#

And the adventure continues.

Like most Bostonians when he was mayor, I met Tom Menino a couple of times. (This isn’t an exaggeration. I saw a poll or something the last time he ran for re-election that said that over fifty percent of Bostonians had met Menino personally). He seemed affable, and his complete inability to do competent public speaking was strangely charming.

I don’t have any personal animus, is what I’m saying. People revere Menino largely because he seemed like a good guy. Which may be true. But he wasn’t good for Boston, and I think it’s really important to acknowledge this lest a present or future mayor repeat his mistakes.

Menino neglected Boston Public Schools and failed to address the affordability crisis which began when he was mayor and continues to this day. But I’d like to talk about Menino’s most visible and worst legacy: The Seaport.

Basically Menino looked at a chunk of Boston real estate that featured some working fishing piers, the place where people embark on cruises, an outdoor concert venue and a ton of parking lots and said, “let’s put a neighborhood there!”

Now, this isn’t, on its face, a terrible idea. Oh wait, yes it is, because climate change is going to put the whole area underwater eventually, and we’ll probably have to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on sea walls or other mitigation strategies to keep it from turning into Waterworld.

Okay, okay, but let’s put climate change on the back burner just like everyone else does and say creating a new neighborhood out of what is mostly parking lots is not in itself a terrible idea.

Except what arose was not a real neighborhood, but rather a neoliberal YIMBY* hellscape. If you’re not familiar…well, this video sums it up nicely. The Seaport is, as the video says, a collection of sterile offices, hotels, and luxury apartment buildings. Though people live there, it feels immediately off for reasons that can be hard to pinpoint. You get the sense you’re in a simulacrum of a neighborhood.

This is in part because it’s got no public services at all. That’s the neoliberal part! There are park-like spaces in the Seaport, but they’re not actual city parks maintained at public expense, and their private owners can repurpose them at any time. (Also since they are not public property, they can keep any protests or other undesirable gatherings out). There are no schools. There is no public library. There are no police or fire stations. There are also very limited views of the water in this waterfront neighborhood. Yes, there is a public sidewalk that runs along the water, but if you really want to sit and enjoy the view, you need to pay for a restaurant table or live on the upper floor of one of the apartment buildings.

The problem here isn’t really the existence of The Seaport so much as the fact that with high approval ratings and strong political clout, this is what Menino chose for his bold, legacy-defining initiative. What might he have done for the real neighborhoods of the city had he devoted his energy to improving the city rather than building a playground for rich suburbanites who will move out as soon as their kids reach school age?

I don’t know the exact mechanics, somehow Menino got the Commonwealth involved in this idiocy as well, building the “Silver Line,” which is a tunnel that buses run in, to serve the Seaport. The Silver Line stations in the Seaport are beautiful, and nearly empty, because rich people don’t use public transportation, and especially not buses. Recent MBTA usage data shows the Red, Blue, and Green lines all serving over 100k passengers per day, with the Blue Line serving about 50k and the Silver Line dead last at about 30k passengers. And that’s with passengers from the useful part of the Silver Line (Nubian Square to Downtown, where the bus runs above ground) pumping up the numbers.

This happened while the rest of the MBTA system, the parts that people actually use, nearly fell apart from decades of deferred maintenance that the system is only now starting to recover from. What if, instead of building tunnels and beautiful stations for buses that are rarely used, the MBTA had made everybody else’s buses free? Or just maintained the tracks and signals so we wouldn’t have had to endure closures and shutdowns?

What might Boston have been like if we’d had a mayor whose vision for the city wasn’t just “turn a chunk of the city over to developers”? Could we have kept the rest of the city affordable or made it more liveable? Might our children learn in buildings with functioning HVAC systems? (Most Boston Public Schools do not have ventilation systems, which leads to illness and absenteeism, but nobody wants to put their “education reform” money into giving BPS students and staff breathable air).

The problem isn’t just that we have a neighborhood for wealthy white people; it’s that the Seaport aesthetic and economics are coming for the rest of the city. And that’s why I say Menino ruined Boston. Boston is unaffordable and difficult to get around in. Kids who grow up here have to move to Randolph or Brockton or somewhere else that they can actually afford to live. We bring tens of thousands of young people here every academic year, and we’re losing them immediately after graduation because Boston is less and less livable. Even if you live in the Seaport.

We need bold action to save this city. But our only model for bold action is the creation of The Seaport. Is there anyone out there with a vision for the city that actually includes people who live here? If so, could you please stand up?

*YIMBY is a religious cult comprised mostly of white men who worship the invisible hand of the free market. They have been blessed by the god of late capitalism and, because they took econ 101, believe that the affordability crisis is a simple matter of supply and demand, and if we just capitalism harder, we can make housing affordable. This is a faith-based movement impervious to rational argument.

O meu pai não era uma pessoa de escrever. Foi uma pessoa que não pôde completar os estudos mas foi uma pessoa que sempre me ensinou a importância de estudar. Eu adoro escrever. É o meu escape para todo o turbilhão de ideias, emoções e conceitos que me surge ao longo da vida. Estive sem escrever mais de 20 anos. Estive sem escrever as minhas emoções, os meus pensamentos livres, troquei essa escrita por uma escrita cientifica, igualmente importante durante esses 20 anos. Acredito que as emoções são sentidas com uma intensidade apenas durante um período e com o tempo e com a rotina acabam por se perder, envoltas numa neblina, como se tivesse sido em outra vida. Acredito que colocar em palavras aquilo que sentimos, nos permite voltar a sentir, a viver de forma mais real um determinado momento. Acredito que escrever nos permite olhar para trás e cuidar, amar, e empatizar com a nossa própria história. O meu pai não era uma pessoa de escrever, ele era a pessoa do abraço apertado, do sorriso sincero, do amar fácil. Talvez ele escrevia na vida das pessoas assim. Neste momento, tenho ainda esperança de ser surpreendida por ele, mesmo não sendo ele uma pessoa de escrever quem sabe apareça uma carta perdida, um possível bilhete de ultimas palavras que o pudesse trazer pelo menos mais uma vez para perto de mim. Tenho 41 anos da sua voz comigo mas neste momento tenho medo de esquecer essa voz que tanto me acolhia. Acho que se tiver que listar um arrependimento é não ter gravado mais a sua voz... Eu fecho os olhos e sim consigo ouvir e sentir, preciso que essa memória auditiva me acompanhe sempre e que não seja como as emoções que vivemos, que ao fim de um tempo não conseguimos sentir igual porque não foram escritas. Sinto falta das tuas palavras pai.

Sketchbook 63 Flipthrough July 2025

https://vimeo.com/1101416922/7edd97d69d?share=copy&fl=sv&fe=ci

Feel and sense.

Taste the world. If weight comes, carry it. No feeling is final and happiness is not a destination.

December 2025

Riding back from the national palace in Portugal.

LB narrates her life, relating it to the book she is reading ‘Hamilton’, written based on his letters. I mention that what made Van Gogh famous was his letters exchanged with his brother, Theo. She rings in that she is a huge Van Gogh fan, having visited the museum in Amsterdam.

The timing reminded me of A Walk in the Clouds... just serendipity. Dusk was coming on and rain was beginning to blacken the village roof and cobbles while we sped down the mountain. Automatic for the People working its way through me. Mentioned Starry Night. Then the fields. Then the end.

Hitting the mark much?

Van Gogh has always frightened me—not because of the myth of madness, but because of the proximity. His hunger to see the world exactly as it was and then render it honestly. His inability to numb himself. His dependence on beauty as oxygen. I want to be this man. I fear being this man! Color and motion aren't just tools, but vitality. He was an observer, a recorder. A collector and a keeper.

Automatic is the kind of record that understands levels of awareness and how dangerous it can be to see so clearly.

Ignorance, as you know, is bliss.

Drive

Surrender... but not giving up or in. A voice speaking to youth, to momentum and inevitability. It isn’t despairing—it’s acknowledging that much of life happens whether we want it to or not. Age is a good example. Responsibility accumulates like porcelain clowns. Ever wonder how you got ALL THAT stuff in to your home? One grain of sand at a time, that's how. We wake up mid-journey look at life objectively and realize we didn’t choose the road, only what lane we're in and how fast we walk.

Try Not To Breathe

Closer to the fear. Not death as spectacle, but death as inheritance—watching parents age, preparing for losses before they arrive. It doesn’t beg for escape. It steadies itself and says: this is not a failure of love; this is love doing its work.

And that work is vital. The steady moving toward the goal. Van Gogh didn’t lack passion. He lacked relief.

The Sidewinder Sleeps Tonite

Misalignment—about speaking clearly and still not being understood. Van Gogh wrote letter after letter trying to translate himself to a world that didn’t have the vocabulary yet. I write too. I record. I shape sentences like bridges, hoping someone will cross them. And a thankful at least one has.

That impulse isn’t insanity. It’s loneliness looking for language.

Everybody Hurts

Pain, but not drama. Embracing the hurt without anasthesia. It simply says: stay. Don’t convert suffering into identity. Don’t mistake pain for destiny. That song exists because sensitive people nneed permission to endure without explanation.

The instrumental pause that follows feels essential—space for the nervous system to exhale. Silence as care. One wonders how different Van Gogh’s story might have been if embracing had been offered instead of judgment.

Sweetness Follows

The quiet moral center. Not happiness. Not redemption. Sweetness. Something modest and survivable that comes after loss if one remains present long enough to notice it. Van Gogh never lived to see the sweetness that followed his work. I am still alive inside mine. That difference matters.

Monty Got a Raw Deal

Beware the mythmaking. Against flattening human beings into cautionary tales or romantic archetypes. Van Gogh has been turned into a symbol at the expense of his humanity, and sensitive men are still quietly harmed by the suggestion that suffering is the price of authenticity. It isn’t.

Ignoreland

Anger exist without letting it rule. The world is unjust. Loud. Brash. Careless. Clashing symbols. Feeling despair in response doesn’t mean one is broken—it means one is awake.

Star Me Kitten

A whisper. Intimacy without performance. The desire not to be rescued or exalted, but simply seen while tired. This is where I felt myself soften. This is what I want most often: rest inside connection.

Man on the Moon

Pushing back against myth again. Meaning lives in contradiction. Humor and grief are not enemies. Neither are reason and wonder. Van Gogh was not a symbol. I am not a verdict!

Nightswimming

mourns innocence without declaring the future bankrupt. It remembers moments of alignment and insists they mattered simply because they existed. That insistence feels important when fear whispers that happiness is something other people reach and I somehow missed.

Find the River

No command. No solution. Just acceptance. Stop fighting the current. Stop demanding a final judgment on a life that is still in motion.

---

Van Gogh didn’t die because he never found happiness. He died because he lived in a time that didn’t know how to care for minds like his. He lacked support, treatment, and rest.

Romanticizing his end does violence to the living.

I am not standing alone in a field. I am in a car, in Portugal, with music, conversation, memory, and tears that come from recognition—not from collapse. Fear visited me. But fear is not prophecy.

If Automatic for the People teaches anything:

sensitivity is not madness. Awareness is not doom. Happiness is not a permanent destination one either reaches or fails to reach.

More like moments of alignment—music at dusk, a shared admiration, a hand on the rail.

And for now, that is enough.

---

Automatic for the People

REM – 1992

---

“Drive”

Smack, crack, bushwhacked Tie another one to your racks, baby Hey kids, rock and roll Nobody tells you where to go, baby

What if I ride, what if you walk? What if you rock around the clock? Tick-tock, tick-tock What if you did, what if you walk? What if you tried to get off, baby?

Hey, kids, where are you? Nobody tells you what to do, baby Hey kids, shake a leg Maybe you're crazy in the head, baby

Maybe you did, maybe you walked Maybe you rocked around the clock Tick-tock, tick-tock Maybe I ride, maybe you walk Maybe I drive to get off, baby

Hey kids, shake a leg Maybe you're crazy in the head, baby Ollie, ollie, ollie ollie ollie Ollie ollie in come free, baby

Hey, kids, where are you? Nobody tells you what to do, baby

Smack, crack, shack-a-lack Tie another one to your backs, baby Hey kids, rock and roll Nobody tells you where to go, baby

Maybe you did, maybe you walk Maybe you rock around the clock Tick-tock, tick-tock Maybe I ride, maybe you walk Maybe I drive to get off, baby

Hey kids, where are you? Nobody tells you what to do, baby Hey kids, rock and roll Nobody tells you where to go, baby, baby, baby

“Try Not To Breathe”

I will try not to breathe. I can hold my head still with my hands at my knees. These eyes are the eyes of the old, shiver and fold. I will try not to breathe. This decision is mine. I have lived a full life And these are the eyes that I want you to remember. Oh.

I need something to fly over my grave again. I need something to breathe. I will try not to burden you. I can hold these inside. I will hold my breath Until all these shivers subside, Just look in my eyes.

I will try not to worry you. I have seen things that you will never see. Leave it to memory me. I shudder to breathe. I want you to remember. Oh. (you will never see) I need something to fly (something to fly) Over my grave again. (you will never see)

I need something to breathe. (something to breathe) Baby, don't shiver now. Why do you shiver now? (I will see things you will never see) I need something to fly (something to fly) Over my grave again. (I will see things you will never see) I need something to breathe. Oh. Oh. Oh.

I will try not to worry you. I have seen things that you will never see. Leave it to memory me. Don't dare me to breathe. I want you to remember. Oh. (you will never see) I need something to fly (something to fly) Over my grave again. (you will never see)

I need something to breathe. (something to breathe) Baby, don't shiver now. Why do you shiver now? (I will see things you will never see) I need something to breathe. (something to breathe – I have seen things you will never see) I want you to remember.

“The Sidewinder Sleeps Tonite”

This here is the place where I will be staying There isn't a number, you can call the pay phone Let it ring a long, long, long, long time If I don't pick up, hang up, call back, let it ring some more, oh If I don't pick up, pick up The sidewinder sleeps, sleeps, sleeps in a coil

Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her, oh

There are scratches all around the coin slot Like a heartbeat, baby trying to wake up But this machine can only swallow money You can't lay a patch by computer design It's just a lot of stupid, stupid signs

Tell her Tell her she can kiss my ass Then laugh and say that you were only kidding That way she'll know that it's really, really, really, really me

Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her, oh

Baby, instant soup doesn't really grab me Today I need something more sub-sub-sub-substantial A can of beans or black-eyed peas, some Nescafe and ice A candy bar, a falling star, or a reading from Doctor Seuss

Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her, oh

The cat in the hat came back, wrecked a lot of havoc on the way Always had a smile and a reason to pretend But their world has flat backgrounds and little need to sleep but to dream The sidewinder sleeps on his back

Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her I can always sleep standing up. Call me when you try to wake her, oh

Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her I can always sleep standing up. Call me when you try to wake her, oh

Call me when you try to wake her up, call me when you try to wake her I can always sleep standing up, call me when you try to wake her I can always sleep standing up. Call me when you try to wake her, oh

We've got to moogie, moogie, move on this one

“Everybody Hurts”

When the day is long And the night, the night is yours alone When you're sure you've had enough Of this life, well hang on

Don't let yourself go 'Cause everybody cries And everybody hurts sometimes

Sometimes everything is wrong Now it's time to sing along When your day is night alone (Hold on, hold on) If you feel like letting go (Hold on) If you think you've had too much Of this life, well hang on

'Cause everybody hurts Take comfort in your friends Everybody hurts Don't throw your hand, oh no

Don't throw your hand If you feel like you're alone No, no, no, you are not alone

If you're on your own in this life The days and nights are long When you think you've had too much of this life to hang on

Well, everybody hurts sometimes Everybody cries And everybody hurts sometimes And everybody hurts sometimes

So hold on, hold on Hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on Everybody hurts

No, no, no, no you are not alone

“Sweetness Follows”

Readying to bury your father and your mother What did you think when you lost another? I used to wonder, why did you bother? Distanced from one, blind to the other

Listen here my sister and my brother What would you care if you lost the other? I always wonder, why did we bother? Distanced from one, blind to the other

Oh, but sweetness follows

It's these little things, they can pull you under Live your life filled with joy and wonder I always knew this altogether thunder Was lost in our little lives

Oh, but sweetness follows Oh, but sweetness follows

It's these little things, they can pull you under Live your life filled with joy and thunder Yeah, yeah we were altogether Lost in our little lives

Oh, but sweetness follows Oh, but sweetness follows

“Monty Got A Raw Deal”

Monty this seems strange to me. The movies had that movie thing, But nonsense has a welcome ring And heroes don't come easily. Now, nonsense isn't new to me. I know my head, I know my feet, But mischief knocked me in the knees. Said, Just let go. Just let go.

I saw the ocean meet the man. I saw you buried in the sand. A friend was there to hold your hand, Said, Walk on by. So, I went walking through the street. I saw you strung up in a tree. A woman knelt there said to me, Said, Hold your tongue, man. Hold your tongue.

You don't owe me anything. You don't want this sympathy. (waste your breath) Don't you waste your breath. (waste your breath) For the silver screen.

That nonsense doesn't mean a thing, They tried to bust you in a sting, But virtue isn't everything So, don't waste time. Now, here's a rhyme that you can steal. Put this on your reel to reel. Mischief threw a rotten deal. Monty's laying low. He is laying low. Just let go, just let go.

You don't owe me anything. You don't want this sympathy. (waste your breath) Don't you waste your breath. (waste your breath) Monty this seems strange to me.

“Ignoreland”

These bastards stole their power from The victims of the us v. them years Wrecking all things virtuous and true The undermining social democratic Downhill slide into abysmal Lost lamb off the precipice into The trickle down run-off pool

They hypnotized the summer 1979 Marched into the capital Brooding duplicitous, wicked and able, media-ready Heartless and labeled, super U.S. citizen, super achiever Mega ultra power dosing, relax defense, defense, defense, defense

(Yeah, yeah, yeah) Ignoreland (Yeah, yeah, yeah) Ignoreland (Yeah, yeah, yeah)

The information nation took Their clues from all the sound-bite gluttons 1980, '84, '88 '92 too, too How to be what you can be Jump jam junking your energies How to walk in dignity With throw-up on your shoes

They amplified the autumn 1979 Calculate the capital Up the republic my skinny ass, TV tells a million lies The paper's terrified to report, anything that isn't handed On a presidential spoon, I'm just profoundly frustrated By all this, so — you, man

(Yeah, yeah, yeah) Ignoreland (Yeah, yeah, yeah) Ignoreland

If they weren't there we would have created them Maybe, it is true But I'm resentful all the same Someone's got to take the blame

I know that this is vitriol No solution, spleen-venting But I feel better having screamed Don't you?

They desecrate the winter 1979 Capital collateral Brooding duplicitous, wicked and able, media-ready Heartless and labeled, super U.S. citizen, super achiever Mega ultra power dosing, relax, defense, defense, defense, defense Yeah, yeah, yeah

(Yeah, yeah, yeah) Ignoreland (Yeah, yeah, yeah) Ignoreland (Yeah, yeah, yeah) Ignoreland (Yeah, yeah, yeah)

“Star Me Kitten”

Keys cut, three for the price of one And nothing's free, but guaranteed for a lifetime's use I've changed the locks, and you can't have one You, you know the other two

The brakes have worn so thin that you could hear I hear them screeching through the door from our driveway Hey, love, look into your glovebox heart What is there for me inside, this love is tired I've changed the locks, have I misplaced you?

Have we lost our minds? Will this never end? It could depend on your take

You, me, we used to be on fire If keys are all that stand between Can I throw in the ring? No gasoline, just star me, kitten You are wild, and I'm in your possession Nothing's free, so star me, kitten

I'm in your possession So star me, kitten

“Man On The Moon”

Mott the Hoople and the game of Life yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Andy Kaufman in the wrestling match yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Monopoly, Twenty one, checkers, and chess yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Mister Fred Blassie in a breakfast mess yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Let's play Twister, let's play Risk yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah I'll see you in heaven if you make the list yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah

Now, Andy did you hear about this one? Tell me, are you locked in the punch? Andy are you goofing on Elvis? Hey, baby Are we losing touch?

If you believed they put a man on the moon Man on the moon If you believe there's nothing up his sleeve Then nothing is cool

Moses went walking with the staff of wood yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Newton got beaned by the apple good yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Egypt was troubled by the horrible asp yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Mister Charles Darwin had the gall to ask yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah

Now, Andy did you hear about this one? Tell me, are you locked in the punch? Andy are you goofing on Elvis? Hey, baby Are you having fun?

If you believed they put a man on the moon Man on the moon If you believe there's nothing up his sleeve Then nothing is cool

Here's a little agit for the never-believer yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Here's a little ghost for the offering yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Here's a truck stop instead of Saint Peter's yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Mister Andy Kaufman's gone wrestling yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah

Now, Andy did you hear about this one? Tell me, are you locked in the punch? Andy are you goofing on Elvis? Hey, baby Are we losing touch?

If you believed they put a man on the moon Man on the moon If you believe there's nothing up his sleeve Then nothing is cool

If you believed they put a man on the moon Man on the moon If you believe there's nothing up his sleeve Then nothing is cool

If you believed they put a man on the moon Man on the moon If you believe there's nothing up his sleeve Then nothing is cool

If you believed they put a man on the moon Man on the moon If you believe there's nothing up his sleeve Then nothing is cool

“Nightswimming”

Nightswimming deserves a quiet night

The photograph on the dashboard taken years ago, turned around backwards so the windshield shows. Every street light reveals a picture in reverse Still it's so much clearer

I forgot my shirt at the water's edge The moon is low tonight

Nightswimming deserves a quiet night I'm not sure all these people understand It's not like years ago The fear of getting caught The recklessness in water They cannot see me naked These things they go away Replaced by every day

Nightswimming, remembering that night September's coming soon I'm pining for the moon And what if there were two Side by side in orbit around the fairest sun? The bright tide forever drawn Could not describe nightswimming

You, I thought I knew you You, I cannot judge You, I thought you knew me This one laughing quietly Underneath my breath Nightswimming

The photograph reflects Every street light a reminder Nightswimming Deserves a quiet night Deserves a quiet night

“Find The River”

Hey now, little speedyhead The read on the speed-meter says You have to go to task in the city Where people drown and people serve Don't be shy, your just deserts Is only just light years to go

Me, my thoughts are flower strewn Ocean storm, bayberry moon I have got to leave to find my way Watch the road and memorize This life that passed before my eyes And nothing is going my way

The ocean is the river's goal A need to leave the water knows We're closer now than light years to go

I have got to find the river Bergamot and vetiver Run through my head and fall away Leave the road and memorize This life that passed before my eyes And nothing is going my way

There's no one left to take the lead But I tell you and you can see We're closer now than light years to go Pick up here and chase the ride The river empties to the tide Fall into the ocean

The river to the ocean goes A fortune for the undertow None of this is going my way There is nothing left to throw Of ginger, lemon, indigo Coriander stem and rose of hay Strength and courage overrides The privileged and weary eyes Of river poet search naiveté Pick up here and chase the ride The river empties to the tide All of this is coming your way

#nonfiction #books #memoir #history #war

During World War I, a British archeologist singlehandedly forged a multitude of Arabian tribes into a unified army, leading them to victory over a decaying Ottoman Empire, in so doing bringing Arabia into the modern world, i.e. that of Western-style national statehood. This hero would become the legend known as Lawrence of Arabia, the white man who donned desert garb and with his Arabian comrades conquered Damascus. At least, that’s the story of the movie, as I understand. The story told by T.E. Lawrence himself in his autobiographical Seven Pillars of Wisdom is rather more complex and ambiguous.

Seven Pillars of Wisdom is Lawrence’s own account of his role in the Arab Revolt, written some years after events from his notes and diaries (though most were lost) and going through several iterations before its final version. From the outset, Lawrence recognises that the Arab Revolt played only a minor part in the Allied victory in World War I, and that if it was critical to this victory, it was so in the sense that British authors tend to ascribe a sense of crucial importance to any single operation because it was part of the totality of the war effort (see also dambusters etc.). Nor does Lawrence suggest he tells his story because he was uniquely instrumental to the events of the Arab Revolt. By his own words, he tells his story because he was there. As such, he is as much, or perhaps even more, of an unreliable narrator as you might expect. Nevertheless, Seven Pillars of Wisdom is assuredly not a heroic tale or adventure novel about how good old British pluck saved the day. Instead, we accompany a profoundly emotionally conflicted man into a struggle where he is forever doomed to be an outsider to both his own and his adopted peoples. On top of which Lawrence is emblematic of so many of the pathologies of 1920s English repressedness that his memoir could double as a psychoanalytical field manual. Seven Pillars of Wisdom is now the sort of historical artefact that requires a 100 page introduction (which my copy duly has), and on the whole, the surface level war story of a few brave fighters facing overwhelming odds is the least interesting part of it.

Events, dear boy, events

Its nature as a memoir rather than a novel means that Seven Pillars of Wisdom lacks an overall plot, at least in the traditional narrative sense. There is a trajectory, starting in the deserts of the Hejaz in 1916 and terminating with the fall of Damascus in 1918. Damascus is Lawrence’s lodestar from the very beginning, but with the book written after events unfolded, it is hard not to suspect some of this is a backward projection. The narrating Lawrence at any point in the book is always a superposition of the contemporaneous Lawrence in situ and the future Lawrence telling his story with the benefit of hindsight. Combined with his literary writing style and tendency to embark on long introspective digressions, all this makes Seven Pillars of Wisdom oscillate unsteadily between being a memoir, a historical account, and a war story.

Real life is much messier than a story, with less structure, and hence Lawrence’s retelling often feels like a series of disconnected events following one after the other without much in the way of connecting tissue. Seven Pillars of Wisdom presents the reader with a constant procession of people, places and communities, many of whom are introduced with an assumed familiarity, only to never be seen again. Keeping track of the manifold characters and places isn’t made easier by Lawrence’s refusal to adhere to a single rule for transliteration from Arabic to English. With Lawrence rushing between villages, riverbeds, oases and most importantly, railway lines, always in the company of an rotating cast of comrades, there is simply too much going on, a significant part of which would be considered irrelevant digression from a narrative perspective. There is a sense in which Seven Pillars of Wisdom truly is ‘one battle after another’, with its endless sequence of skirmishes, reconnoitres, and a truly astonishing level of destruction levelled at railway lines.

War of manoeuvre

Lawrence’s account of the campaign in Arabia contrasts markedly with the common understanding of World War I as fought on the Western Front. Where the the latter is remembered as a war of stasis, the Arab Revolt is a mobile guerrilla war predicated precisely on refusing a pitched battle with the enemy. The Arabian forces use stealth and mobility, tying down the Ottomans in a futile defence of their extended supply lines. In the first chapters of Seven Pillars of Wisdom, Lawrence muses on contemporary military theory and its applicability, or lack thereof, to the situation in Arabia, foreshadowing the contrast between wars of position and wars of manoeuvre that we see developed a decade later by Antonio Gramsci. Compared to the masses of forces involved elsewhere in the war, the Arab forces are pitifully limited in number, ill-equipped and riven with internal tribal rivalries. Even within the Middle Eastern theatre of war, the Arab Revolt is a side-show to the main event, which is the British and French advance against the Ottoman Empire. Lawrence himself is fully aware of this, and Seven Pillars of Wisdom never pretends the fight to be anything else.

Given Lawrence’s knowledge that the Revolt will only play a minor part on a secondary front within the Great War, his determination to claim victory is not based on the strategic value of his efforts, but a professed desire to help the Hashemite dynasty, in particular Crown Prince Faisal I, secure a truly independent Arab State. This is to be achieved through a combination of direct conquest of the lands to be incorporated into the putative Arab Kingdom, consolidating the variegated tribes into a single national body politic, and lending sufficient assistance to the British to gain standing as a reliable ally. It is this latter consideration that causes Lawrence no end of anguish, given his fears that Britain will in the end do what serves the Empire, even if it means reneging on its promises to its Arab allies. Time and again Lawrence returns to the feeling he is a traitor, engaged in a deception against the Arabian tribes whose fealty he is working to enlist for Faisal, and it is no surprise that on entering Damascus, victory tastes bitter to him.

Complex white saviour

Lawrence’s constant unease about the trustworthiness of his British superiors towards the Arab forces is only one part of the profound emotional turmoil that afflicts him, which means Seven Pillars of Wisdom is not the straightforward Orientalist white saviour narrative that I had come to expect. At a surface level, the Orientalism is definitely there, with a white man leading a motley collection of noble savages towards their destiny, i.e. a modern, European-style nation state. Below the surface however, Lawrence is aware that his leadership is less to do with the innate superiority of the white race, and more with his role as a conduit for British rifles, money and supplies for the Arab cause, as well as his status as a neutral outsider with no stake in the many inter-tribal rivalries flaring across a still divided Arabian peninsula. Significant parts of the book are devoted to Lawrence describing debilitating illnesses, fatigue and lack of endurance compared to his fellow guerrillas, even as his experience with desert warfare increases. Conversely, once he has adopted the indigenous ways of living with the desert, Lawrence can only gaze in bemusement on his compatriots who refuse to exchange their patently unsuitable khaki uniforms for the much more appropriate indigenous dress. Although he does not articulate this explicitly, one gets the sense that Lawrence is well aware that British supremacy is not due to the innate superiority of the white master race, but the result of being the ones holding the Vickers machine guns.

Not that this means the racism and Orientalism isn’t there. In keeping with Western sensibilities of the era, Lawrence cannot help but essentialise his Arab comrades, as well as every other people, including the English. It makes for a pervasive but also uncommitted and inconstant racism, with Lawrence readily pronouncing on the innate characteristics of the Arab race on one page, only to completely deviate from all of this in his detailed psychological profiles of the most prominent members of the Revolt or his most intimate companions. There is something intriguing about seeing the racist logic operate so openly on the page, with Lawrence unable to grasp how the immense diversity of personas and communities he describes directly contradicts the generalising tenets of his racist ideology. Time and again Lawrence will make sweeping pronouncements about Arabs, Turks, Indians or the French, only for these to immediately break down in his recounting of the actual people he meets. Even the Turks, who come in for most of Lawrence’s spite, are humanised when encountered as individuals, in particular the conscripts, prisoners of war, and the many casualties. His role in the Revolt makes Lawrence acutely aware of the great variety across the Arabian tribes he encounters, and while he is unable to divest himself of a belief in some inherent ‘desert culture’, the racism on display in Seven Pillars of Wisdom is of a completely different nature than our prevailing ‘clash of civilisations’ discourse, which lets Western leaders launder their realpolitik via some putative grand theory of history. The idea of unified ‘Christian’ and ‘Islamic’ cultural blocs will have seemed patently absurd to Lawrence, engaged as he was in enlisting the aid of Arab muslims against their Turkish overlords as part of a protracted European ‘civil war’.

Nor is it only his deep ambivalence over his role in the Revolt that causes Lawrence anguish. From his writing emerges a profile of a conflicted man profoundly repulsed by all things physical, most of all his own body, and hence with a deep-seated envy of people who inhabit their bodies with ease. Time and again Lawrence seems to seek bodily transcendence in the harshness of the desert, but this remains always beyond his reach. Neither is he intellectually confident, for while he is an educated man, he is not a trained soldier and therefore feels inferior to the military command in which he is embedded. If it were not for his duty to king, country and the Revolt, Lawrence might plausibly have taken the road of Frank Herbert’s [Dune Messiah](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuneMessiah “Dune Messiah – Wikipedia”)_ and walked into the desert to disappear forever.

Imperial mandates

I cannot help but wonder to what degree the recurring episodes of self-loathing were retroactively amplified by the developments that followed the end of World War I. As Lawrence was writing his memoirs on return to England in the 1920s, the Arab state that he helped bring into being was destroyed in its infancy by French colonial forces, exercising their ‘mandate’ to Lebanon and Syria as agreed with Britain in the infamous Sykes-Picot agreement, of which Lawrence was probably already aware when fighting with his Arab irregulars. Only a few years later, Arabia is indeed unified, but not under the Hashemite dynasty of Faisal I, but under the rival house of Saud, again with connivance and support of the British. Within a decade of the conquest of Damascus, everything that Lawrence told his Arab comrades they were fighting for has been crushed, one way or another, by the European Powers, endorsed in this by the nascent League of Nations. It is the beginning of a long series of betrayals that endures to this day, which includes Mandate for Palestine, the Nakba, the Suez Crisis, the assassination of Iran’s Mossadegh and the invasions of Iraq, Libya, and Iran, as well as the unwavering support for Israel’s military adventurism and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people. Seen in the light of the abject failure of the League of Nations to defend Arabian right to statehood in the 1920s, is it any wonder that the newly established Arab nations of the 1940s were disinclined to abide by a United Nations decree that the better half of Palestine was to be awarded to its recently arrived minority Jewish population?

Over a hundred years after its first publication, Seven Pillars of Wisdom is mainly interesting as a historical artefact that shows both the continuities and discontinuities of Western involvement in the Middle East. The British Empire has been eclipsed by the United States and its Israeli vassal as the primary imperial force, but the subordination of people’s right to self-determination to Western national interests remains. Direct colonial subjugation has disappeared, replaced by indirect economic control. And the racism is still there, but now grounded in Islamophobia rather than Orientalist essentialism. From the perspective of a family in Syria, Iran, or Palestine today, it must seem that everything changes so that everything can stay the same. The question is how many more white saviours they must suffer before they can take charge of their own destinies.

Notes & Suggestions

• An unavoidable comparison on reading Seven Pillars of Wisdom is with Frank Herbert’s Dune, for which it was a direct inspiration. In between the fighting and travelling, Lawrence gives a great deal of attention to the desert itself: the different compositions of sand and stone, the shape and topography, the sensation of various environments. Echoes of the desert, the Bedouin, and the outsider become leader can all be found in Dune. This essay offers an interesting discussion of the similarities, differences, and varying degrees of Orientalism in both books.
• Lawrence’s account of the exercise of imperial power is by its nature personal and small in scale. For an impersonal and macro-level account of how colonial policies readily sacrificed the lives of millions on the altar of imperial ambition, Late Victorian Holocausts gives a gruesome account of the catastrophic famines inflicted on European colonies in the 19th century as a consequence of their forcible integration into the global market.
• The Palestine Solidarity Campaign is the main British organisation campaigning to secure Palestinian rights and defend them against the ongoing occupation and genocide.

• Leviathan Falls (The Expanse #9) by James S.A. Corey, 529p: I didn’t want it to end, but all good sagas must come to a close. We see what’s left of the Rocinante crew as fugitives, now joined by Teresa Duarte (daughter of the Laconian high consul, Winston Duarte). There is a lot going on as bizarre, physics-bending anomalies begin to manifest within the ring space, threatening the existence of humanity. It’s tense, and full of high stakes with interesting viewpoints from Colonel Tanaka and Elvi. I think it was a satisfying conclusion to the series even though it does not answer all the questions. Sometimes, knowing less is better.
• Platform Decay (The Murderbot Diaries #8) by Martha Wells, 256p: Another adventure with Murderbot. Very consistently good, delivering the usual cynical humor and inner monologues. To be honest, nothing in particular stood out to me, but it is still a solid comfort read.
• Cryoburn (Vorkosigan Saga (Publication Order) #14) by Lois McMaster Bujold, 345p: We get into cryogenics shenanigans and politics with Miles investigating a major “cryocorp” called WhiteChrys, on the distant planet of Kibou-daini. I enjoyed the three different POVs: Miles, his Armsman Roic, and a local boy called Jin Sato. We also get to see Raven, a cryo-revival specialist from the Durona Group who assisted in reviving Miles after his death on Jackson's Whole in a previous book. Another great book in the Vorkosigan saga, that brings me closer to finishing the series!

Post 14 of #Blaugust #readinglist #books #reading