!"##"$%&'(%!"#$%&%")#*)(%+&,

!"# -#./)*%01"2*#(%3%456"789%6"789%6"78:::%3%4;

%<1"$=(=%>'(+&(18%3%4?%@(A*($,'()*&'+,"-.)$-%'(/)*01%3%4B

!"#$%&'()!$*&++,-,$.$/0$*&++,-,$12,3$1((14&+5!3$67$89:09$.$!,4"#$9;3$8098$.$2&+#$<<<52$.$5!!=,$0:

$%&'()

photo by Reza Djalal

!"#$%!"#$%&

Dear student interested in sociology, “mass psychology,” and its “experi-ments”:

I spoke to you unjustly in the Question Period Friday night, and I’m sorry. It was wrong of me to cut o! as I did the presentation you wanted to make of the social science experiments that inform your perspective on the issues being explored. A speaker who makes much of the rules of fair debate should play by his own rules. In the enthusiasm of my own opinions, I failed to do this, and that set a bad example, which was not only wrong but also embarrassing to me.

I take this means of trying to right my wrong, and of asking you to seek me out so that we can continue our conversation on a more equal footing. I think we both could learn from doing so.

Sincerely,

William BraithwaiteTutor

'(!#!)*+,-$(.$./!0-*1+.-<<

Two notes for our faithful Gadfly readers:

1) Because of Mr. Duran’s and Mr. Malka’s sterling political commentary in this week’s pages, “Bursting the Johnnie Bubble” is taking a week o!. But fear not —it will return next week.

2) We are hard at work preparing a special issue of the Gadfly to appear the weekend of Homecoming. This year’s program will include several events open to students, so make sure to take a glance at the Homecoming schedule, to be published in next week’s issue.

!"#$%&'(%)*+&#",-

T"# G$%&'( 02

T!" #$%&"'$ '"(#)*)"+ ,- S$. J,!'’# C,.."/"

60 C,.."/" A0"'%"A''*),.1#, M*+2.*'& 21401#34*./*&-.2@/5*1..4,5

(((.1##%%.4,5/#34/*&-.2(((.-*4"6,,7.4,5/#34*/*&-.2

Founded in 1980, the Gadfly is the stu-dent newsmagazine distributed to over 600 students, faculty, and sta! of the An-napolis campus.Opinions expressed within are the sole responsibility of the author(s). The Gad-fly reserves the right to accept, reject, and edit submissions in any way necessary to publish a professional, informative, and thought-provoking newsmagazine.The Gadfly meets in the Hodson House. Please use the front door. Articles should be submitted by Friday at 11:59 PM to sjca.gadfly@gmail.com.

Nathan Goldman • Editor-in-ChiefIan Tuttle • Editor-in-ChiefHayden Pendergrass • Layout EditorReza Djalal • PhotographerSasha Welm • CartoonistWill Brown • Sta!Andrew Kriehn • Sta!Sarah Meggison • Sta! Kevin Morris • Sta!Charles Zug • Sta!Jonathan Barone • Intern

S$*--

William BraithwaiteConnor CallahanAlvaro Duran

Robert MalkaBryce NorthingtonJoseph Vallely

C,'$+16%$,+#

Dear sneezy, drippy, hacking stu-dent:

While the campus’s population of firstborn appears to remain in-tact, you have no doubt realized that the first wave of Johnnie Plague has struck. With vengeance.

For the sake of the general wel-fare (and common defense) of the Polity, this concerned student po-litely requests that, as you grapple with this contagion, you kindly real-ize the benefits of Germ-X. Should that remain ine!ective, feel free to boil your hands. In tutorials, please place a chair, or a sheet of Plexiglass, between us; in seminar, take to the corners or the back wall. Or sit in the hallway. We’ll speak up.

I really do hope you feel better. But in the meantime, please do not take o!ense if I flee from your pres-ence in a Hazmat suit.

Sincerely,

Genial Germaphobe

2!3+4*+,-<<

What is your current job? I’m the Albany Bureau Chief of the New York Times.

Did you attend other schools after St. John’s?Other than two weeks at art school, no.

Did you know what you wanted to do while attending St. John’s?Yes, I wanted to be a painter, but I got the bug for journalism not long after I graduated.

Did St. John’s help prepare you for work in the field?Absolutely. St. John’s taught me how to think, which helps in just about any field. As a journalist, you obviously always want to be asking questions, searching for answers and trying to see things in di!erent ways, and those are all skills you spend a lot of time learning at St. John’s. Any specific disadvantages to a St. John’s background?Obviously, there are some specialized skills you don’t pick up at St. John’s. In my field, for instance, students who study at formal journalism programs can learn skills like computer assisted reporting—the growing field of mining and analyzing government databases for stories. But those are specific skills you can learn along the way.

How did you feel you compared, in graduate school or early jobs, to people from di!erent educational backgrounds, particularly those with field-related degrees? I don’t think it really made a big di!erence—most of journalism is learning on the job.

Can you describe a general track someone from St. John’s might take to get into a career in this field?There are a number of avenues to take, though the economic climate isn’t all that encouraging for starting out in journalism. If I was starting out today, I’d apply to small newspapers around the country, in out of the way places, and see if I could find some work. Sometimes you need to do an internship or work as a clerk at a larger paper to build up some credentials to get a full-time reporting job at a smaller paper. But it’s worth it. The advantage of working at a smaller paper is that you get to do a lot of di!erent things, cover a range of di!erent beats at once, and learn a lot of di!erent skills. Those are lessons you can build on the rest of your career. I started out as a clerk at the Washington Post—it took me four interviews over six months just to get a job in the mailroom. A couple years later, I got a job at a paper in the Bible Belt covering crime. Both experiences helped me tremendously. I got a taste for national

reporting at a top newspaper, and then also experienced shoe leather reporting on a much more intimate and intense scale.

Any general advice, especially for an upperclassman who is interested in this field but is not quite sure what to do?Try to do some freelancing and build up a clip file. Even if you can’t get a job in the industry after you graduate, getting freelance work is a lot easier than finding a job. Be prepared to be frustrated in your job search, but also be persistent. If you don’t get an answer from an editor you send an email to, call them, follow up, try to find a balance between being persistent and being a pest. But remember that reporters are supposed to be pesky, so don’t be afraid to be.

How did you market yourself with a St. John’s degree?I can’t say I really did—I tried to let my work speak for itself. More people than I expected knew about St. John’s, though, and for those who did it was always a conversation point.

How would you characterize your field as a whole? Is it accessible to newcomers or di"cult to enter? Stable or fluid? Etc.Journalism is going through a rough transformation period, so I wouldn’t call it stable. It’s not particularly accessible to newcomers, but people who are really interesting in journalism always find a way to make a go of it. But it’s competitive.

What was your senior essay topic?My senior essay was about the meaning of the Mona Lisa. If I remembered more about it I’d tell you. I didn’t really learn how to write well until I was paid for it, but it was fun spending a lot of time deconstructing Da Vinci’s approach to painting.

What is your favorite book on the Program?I think the Greeks had the greatest impact on me—Plato, the Iliad, Aristotle, etc.—perhaps because they were the first things I read as a Johnnie and freshman year was such an eye opener for me. I went to a traditional Southern private school where I was lectured at most of the time, so I was never really excited by learning in high school. Debating the Greeks that first year was shocking and exciting.

Do you find that you lead a philosophical life?Definitely not as much as I’d like to. I’m best known in journalism circles for being one of the lead reporters on the Times team that broke the Eliot Spitzer prostitution scandal, so my job is less about philosophy and more about the here and now. !

!"##$%&"'()*%+,-.

T"# G$%&'( 03

Danny Hakim, A’93, Albany Bureau Chief of the NYT.

!"#$%&'()*+",-As the Albany Bureau Chief of the New York Times, Danny Hakim has used the skill of consid-ered questioning for many years as a journalist. In this pro!le, he outlines a few paths that future Johnnie journalists can take to enter the !eld.

A week and a half ago, the Democratic/Republican Na-tional Conventions ended, after much unnecessary pomp

and a shrieking news cycle, for an audience that digests these scripted soap operas to reassure themselves that only their people have the right solutions for America. Sadly, neither have it, especially when it comes to the one issue that every poll states is the nation’s supreme prerogative: jobs. We lack jobs in this country, and everybody knows it. People live their lives around this daunting fact, and the conventions built themselves around it. So for all that political theater, what did the conventions have to o!er the American people?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Romney preached about his business acumen, and even policy wonk President Bill Clinton just kept score: “In the last fifty-four years… Republicans [have created]" twenty-four million [ jobs]. " Democrats: " forty-two [million].” And so on. Distinctly lacking was an honest explanation of the unprec-edented economic times we’re in. Distinctly wanting is an au-dience willing to listen.

So why are these economic times unprecedented? Let us be-gin with the transnational corporation (TNC). Never has the company, in any period in history, been so disconnected from the areas in which it operates. When a TNC finds cheaper wages anywhere in the world, it races there to set up shop, of-ten making workers put up with very extreme working condi-tions. And as wages, prices, and quality of living in that coun-try rise, and the people begin to ask for more, they scramble to yet another country, to indulge in the same process all over again. First it was Mexico, then China, and now Vietnam. This is a race to the bottom, a futile digging of holes in search of water, oil, and gold, from which we may never be able to get ourselves out.

Already we begin to see the very alarming e!ects of this pro-gression: The CEO of a mining company in Australia insisted that Australians should get used to working for under $2/day to keep up with the Africans. Indeed, if this keeps up, we’ll get our “jobs” eventually, and they’ll be McJobs.

But the TNC is a symptom. Corporations have the right to profit from their endeavors, and employees of the company have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. The more fundamental structural issue is globalization. True, it’s not

quite the flat world Friedman, a modern economist, predicted, but countries are nevertheless competing with each other on the world stage as they try to improve their and their citizens’ livelihoods. This is manifestly not the solution. Let compa-nies compete! Let the market regulate itself to give us the best products and services. But let us not put our livelihoods on the table—no country should have to risk its children in the fight to make itself relevant.

So where is this middle ground of which I speak? The late Sir James Goldsmith, a business tycoon, not only predicted

today’s conflict, but proposed that if coun-tries implemented tari!s, it would make economics regional, forcing companies to care about where they are and what they do to their consumers and workers. In oth-er words, we would sell products and ser-vices made and facilitated by Americans to

Americans. Yes, prices would go up, but so would wages, and who knows? We might even be able to have jobs. And with tar-i!s set at a proper rate, it wouldn’t exclude international trade.

The economy exists to serve us. It is not our God. And if we don’t do something soon to put our economy on a leash, we might as well embrace now what Steve Jobs said to President Obama just before his death: “Those jobs aren’t coming back.” And neither is the America we grew up in. Maybe we should tell those people running for president. !

T#$ G%&'()04

Robert Malka A’15

!"#$%&!"#$%&!"#$'''&

!"#$#%&$#%'()*

“Let companies compete! Let the market regulate itself to give us the best products and services.

!"#$%&'()&%$%'$*+,%-.$%&-$/'-0$'1$2,1-'+$3-%%-+$4-%.$'1$#-5%&'+.$'6-$'1$)'#.$%'$%-22$&,7$*,22'+$3-7%$'1$522.$*&5%"7$2'8-93(%.$*&5%$!$+-5224$1--2$%'#545+-$:(+,'(7$6'%,'67$'1$%&-$0,6#,6$0-.$*&'"7$'11$(/'6$%&,7$#54/-+&5/7.$7'0-*&-+-$%'$;6#5$1+,-6#24$8',:-$'(%$%&-+-*&'"22$7&5+-$5$%&,6)$'+$%*'*,%&$56'%&-+$+,)&%$'##$/-+7'6.$*&'0,)&%$-8-6.$<(7%$3-$4'(

!"#$%&'&()$#)(! Painter Bob

T!" G#$%&' 05

The only thing that needs to be known about the boring, camp movie trailer, Innocence of Muslims, is that the en-

tire production is rife with cowardice. The pseudonym of its creator, “Sam Bacile,” the attribution of the film to a shadowy cabal of Jews, the incessant overdubbing in the dialogue—the entire movie is a heap of spineless strata, all piled in an art-less mess. Let us not, then, compare it to the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons, which were satiric, openly published, properly attributed, and part of a societal discussion on the intolerances of Islam. Artistry aside, however, the film is prob-ably the least important issue regarding the storming of our embassies and consulates in the Middle East.

As many news sources have reported, most “protesters” have never seen the film and are, instead, fomented to action by religious zeal and a crude desire for self-expression and self-determination. Jihadist groups that had been forced to tread in the shadows under dictatorships are now free to vio-late diplomatic immunities at will—many doubtlessly encouraged by the impotence of local police and the half-hearted dis-couragements of political leaders. In ad-dition, this sad episode has shown the complete ineptitude of the Obama admin-istration, as well as the sinister useless-ness of religion.

Coming on the eleventh anniversary of al-Qaeda’s greatest victory in the West, why Obama chose to man a consulate in a newly liberated nation known to be populated with jihadists with little security is something ev-ery citizen should be demanding to know. Likewise, we should be demanding to know why the Egyptian embassy rolled over and allowed American soil (which is what an embassy is) to be overflown by an Islamist flag. Should we not have a company of Marines in every embassy and consulate in the Middle East liberally armed with rubber bullets to prevent such a gross hu-miliation? And just as liberally armed with live ammunition to prevent the lynchings of our ambassadors?

And what of the politicians that have permitted these at-tacks to take place? Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi—a weird and sinister man who has said the U.S. “has never pre-sented any evidences on the identity of those who committed [9/11]”—made his first remarks on the storming of our embas-sy not by denouncing the assaults, but instead calling for the prosecution of the filmmakers responsible and directing the Egyptian embassy in the U.S. to initiate “all possible legal ac-tion” against the producers. Morsi received his doctorate de-gree from the University of Southern California, so he is famil-iar with American safeguards on freedom of expression. This cheap demagoguery, therefore, is only to appeal to the most provincial and twisted louts in the electorate—many of whom were gleefully torching our flag.

But the most depressing aspect of this tragedy has been the spinelessness and opportunistic quality of our current and prospective leaders. First is the constant (almost compulsive)

need for the government to apologize for the legal acts of its citizens. Even before the Islamist flag was unfurled over our embassy grounds, the cowering inhabitants within were al-ready condemning “the continuing e(orts by misguided indi-viduals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims,” as well as the “e(orts to o(end believers of all religions.” This condem-nation, which came a bit late (the film has been up since early July), apparently did not have the e(ect its besieged authors anticipated. The grounds were stormed shortly after. After the mayhem, the embassy once again rea)rmed its criticism of American citizens before removing the posts completely.

President Obama correctly disavowed the Egyptian em-bassy messages, saying they had not been cleared by him and did not “reflect the views of the United States government.” The commander-in-chief, however, must have lost control of his subordinates afterwards. General Martin Dempsey, chair-man of the Joint Chiefs of Sta(, called the odious pastor, Terry

Jones, to convince him to step away from the film. What business does a ranking government o)cial have trying to com-pel the choices of one if its citizens? To try and save lives, you say? It didn’t mat-ter a whit, as I showed above, that the Egyptian embassy openly condemned the filmmakers. The grounds were still over-run and desecrated. And now there are

rumors that Obama himself called YouTube up to try and pres-sure them to take the video down. A cosmopolitan president like Obama should have realized that once something goes viral no one can “take it down.” More chillingly, what is the president doing trying to personally lean on a company that hasn’t done anything illegal? What in the world could he have been thinking that would have let him believe that was a good idea? Any fool who thinks that by silencing citizens at home they can save some abroad has been asleep for at least the last eleven years.

Mitt Romney shows no more promise in being a compe-tent war-fighter than Obama, either. While the smoke was still rising in Cairo and the blood was still fresh on the pave-ment in Benghazi, the “caring and compassionate” man we kept hearing about during the RNC decided this would be the perfect time to score some political points. Standing at the podium, he extended his condolences and then proceeded to smirk through a cheap and ultimately inaccurate attack on a supposed apology from Obama. He correctly noted that the president is ultimately responsible for the messages that his ambassadors give out, but Romney equated the mistaken con-demnation by the government of a legal action by a citizen to “apologizing for the right of free speech.” This was a twist-ed overreach—an opportunistic grab for poll numbers—and it showed, all too painfully, what a charmless Machiavellian looks like.

!"#$%&%'()&*+&",Alvaro Duran GI

“ In addition, this sad episode has shown the complete ineptitude of the Obama administration, as well as the sinister uselessness of religion.

Continued On Pg. 06

Social justice. Racial sensitivity. Gender equality. These issues matter. But there is another we often forget, that

should have a regular presence in our daily lives.The choice between recordings of Brahms symphonies

can appear daunting. Occupying a “salt of the earth” position within Romantic music, these symphonies have been, and are regu-larly, recorded by the best orchestras and the best conductors. For this reason I have se-lected two well-known complete recordings as the subjects of my comparative review.*

From the first bar of the first symphony and onward, the di!erences that characterize the styles of Dohnanyi and Karajan are loud and apparent. Dohnanyi treats every section of the orchestra as an individual part: because of this, the carefully punctuated timpani-strokes dominate the introduction of the first symphony. Karajan, in classic form, blends the timpani with the rest of the ensemble, and with the help of the first violins, makes the tutti sound like a sin-gle menacing instrument. Interestingly, even though Karajan calls for more blended orchestration, he generally pays much more attention to individual moments in the piece; that is, he undertakes a more dramatic reading of the score. So, whereas Dohnanyi maintains a solid tempo throughout the introduc-tion, Karajan willingly relaxes or exaggerates the tempo ac-cording to the drama of each moment, with mixed results. His handling of the introduction is superb; his handling of the be-ginning of the exposition is not. The first theme sounds scat-tered and chaotic as it bursts forth from the slow, brooding introduction. Dohnanyi lessens the change in in tempo, and therein renders a much more convincing exposition.

However, Dohnanyi orchestrates the development section much more e!ectively, by drawing-out and making more ap-parent the dialogue between the strings and the brass: in do-ing this, he both heightens the drama, and exposes several significant reoccurring rhythmic and melodic motives that are otherwise indistinguishable in Karajan’s interpretation. Un-fortunately, Dohnanyi does not maintain his poise throughout the recapitulation: there is one short, yet infinitely important series of horn calls that he entirely disregards. Here the score clearly calls for fortissimo:

But Dohnanyi blows it, o!ering a stifled mezzo forte at best. Karajan, in allowing the horns their proper loudness, clearly understands the significance this fanfare-like moment that so obviously foreshadows the mood of the fourth movement. Because of these as well as other examples, I view Karajan’s

more dramatic and blended interpretation of the first sym-phony as being most convincing. However, I think Dohnanyi deserves much listening to: Because he calls for more separa-tion between orchestral sections, he brings to the surface nu-

merous counter-melodies and motifs that could easily, in Karajan’s interpretation, go unheard.

In the second part of this series, I will review the second and fourth movements of the second symphony in D major, as well as the first movement of the third symphony in F major. !

*Reviewed: > Brahms: Symphonies, Overtures, and Violin Concerto, by

Christoph von Dohnanyi and the Cleveland Orchestra> Brahms: The Complete Symphonies, by Herbert von Kara-

jan and the Berlin Philharmonic

T"# G$%&'(06

Charles Zug A’15

!"#$%&'()#*#$+,-"'.$/0'("&12#.$A Review of Two Heavy-Hitters: Part I

It’s disheartening to see the level of stupidity, confusion, and ignorance regarding free speech—and I mean in the U.S. Hack writers and scholars of all stripes emerged to argue about the filmmakers “abusing” the rights of free speech. This, by the way, is weak, veiled language that insinuates that the producers exceeded some predeter-mined boundary that lies outside of the protections of the government. It’s a way to nudge forward the idea of pros-ecuting them without going right out and saying it. (Talk about abusing free speech.) Everywhere, “shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theater” was becoming the slogan of the of-fended. This stupid phrase, by the way, was coined by the overrated, over-quoted Oliver Wendell Holmes in a Su-preme Court case that upheld the censoring of someone protesting the drafting of men for a nationalist war. (Why, I wonder, do we not marvel over the supposed genius of Holmes when he writes that “it is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate o!spring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind”?) Either way, the usually competent Christiane Amanpour cited the “crowded theater” ruling. The absurd Stephen Prothero, professor of religion at Boston Univer-sity, did as well. Anthea Butler, another (surprise) profes-sor of religion from the University of Pennsylvania, wrote that it is “important to remember that other countries and cultures do not have to understand or respect our right.” If there is a crowded theater we’re all in, I would consider these comments to be a certain smoldering. !

Continued From Pg. 05

“The choice between recordings of Brahms symphonies can appear daunting.

The first Dear Sugar column I read was “How You Get Unstuck,” in

which Sugar consoles a woman devas-tated by a miscarriage. Those who ex-pect her to move on gracefully from the trauma, Sugar tells her, “live on Planet Earth. You live on Planet My Baby Died.” I was 18 and in my senior year of high school, and I must have read the column three times in fewer days. Overnight I joined the huge following devoted to this then-anonymous advice columnist redefining the form.

Tiny Beautiful Things: Advice on Love and Life from Dear Sugar collects more than 50 columns by Sugar, aka novelist/memoirist Cheryl Strayed. It includes a well-curated selection of the pieces originally published on The Rumpus and a handful of col-umns, some very brief, not previously pub-lished. Steve Almond, who originally had the Sugar gig, contributes a tender, exultant fore-word, and micro inter-views with Strayed in-troduce each of the five themed sections.

These columns are unusual because many are as much about the adviser as the advisee. They’re part advice, part personal essay. But it is not simply Strayed’s inclusion of her own stories that makes her singular in her field. Rather, it’s the delicate way she interweaves these stories into the pieces. She makes it clear not only that advice and anecdote are not discrete components of each column, but also that all advice bears in it one’s own sto-ries. When we ask someone, stranger or friend, “What are my options? What should I do?”, implicit in the question is another: “What has your life taught you about living that might help you to ad-vise me?” Our lives inform our choices and thus our counsel. By writing about herself, Strayed imbues her advice with a rare transparency and an authentic credibility.

Strayed’s openness also fosters a po-tent intimacy, if a strange one. It’s an intimacy in one sense shared between

two strangers (most of the letter writ-ers are, like Sugar, pseudonymous) but in fact shared with anyone with Inter-net access—and now anyone with this book. That Strayed has now gone pub-lic alters but does not diminish this.

So Strayed’s take on the form is in-ventive. But her patience and tender-ness distinguish her, too. She is direct and sometimes severe, but she never condemns. Her empathy is infectious, and it’s needed. Many if not all of us are gossips, hungering for others’ sto-ries and secrets. One of the advice col-umn’s appeals is the promise of nosing into someone else’s business, often to gawk and mock and judge. Rather than nourish that prurient want, Strayed’s columns transform it. Removed leering

becomes involved lis-tening. Judgment gives way to compassion.

Tiny Beautiful Things is a collection of these columns and it is more than that. As a work it has an integrity all its own. Though organized thematically rather than chronologically, the book has the feel of an epistolary novel, or, more appropriately, an epistolary memoir. It is a fractured look at Strayed’s life as filtered through others’ lives, so it’s a kind of collab-orative memoir, too. In terms of the advice itself, though Strayed never exactly repeats herself, the more you

read the columns, the more you can anticipate what she’ll advise. Ethical principles emerge as themes reoccur: Strayed emphasizes honesty (with one-self and others), gratitude, boundary setting, humility, and unreserved em-pathy. Nothing revolutionary, but much that is vital.

Tiny Beautiful Things ends up being something less systematic and rigorous than an ethical treatise but far more lyrical than a typical self-help book. It is practical but also meditative, a salve as well as a call to self-examination. It is an elegant ode to the troubles we face and our luck at not having to face them alone. !

A Review of Tiny Beautiful !ingsNathan Goldman A’14

!""#$%#%

Today

I dreamt I filed my nails down to the quickthey bled until the sun turned orangewarm colors burned my brainwhile the soft summer raincame tumbling downand we drownedand we were buriedin the sea of forgotten dreams

Cigarettes burned bright and our nailsstill bloodywere mirror imagesmere imagesof our souls

Tried and tired beyondall belief we strove to grow our gardentrimming it with more delicacythan we chewed on our nailsIt bloomed in the springand died in the fallas all things must

Quickly we harvested what was leftand quietly we let the garden go to seedallowed it to fallow for the year our heartswere buried in the mudrichdarkfull of power

And yet so inconsequentialit’s just dirtashesdust

All becomes one with the sea

! Connor Callahan, A’14 & Bryce Northington

Tiny Beautiful Things: Advice on Love and Life

from Dear Sugarby Cheryl Strayed

Vintage, 2012368 pages, $14.95

T!" G#$%&' 07

!"#$%&'()*+,!"#$%&"'()*+%$,(-$."/(0"''11234(5!(

(678"%(9+::.$(3(;!

-#%.#$%&'()*+)5'&.<$"(=>"?!.''+8(@ABC@ADE(;!

F'/%?"/.(G$%H<..-(IHJ(0,(@234(;!K(IHJ(L,(3(;!

9/J(M+*8NH()*+$7H,(-$."/(0"''E(;!

/01%&'()*2+)+8:.$/2(;"$O.$(9/$%8&(P7"$/./(G96(57#%/+$%7?D214(;!

3&4"0%&'()*22F'/%?"/.(G$%H<..L(IHJ(9,(12QA(;!0(IHJ(K,(12QA(;!

)*%8.H.(R."(0+7H.9S.:/+$(1H/Q2QA(;!

3".%&'()*259+::.$(-(I(K,(12QA(;!(9(I(0,(Q2AA(;!

!"#$%(!../%8&,(T+U.$('.I.'(+V(/*.(WW)E(;!

XV(Y+7(U+7'#('%O.(/+(H..(Y+7$(.I.8/(+8(/*.(U..O'Y(H:*.#7'.,(S'."H.(.?"%'(HZ:"J&"#[Y\&?"%'J:+?J

!"#$%&'()*+*',-

T!" G#$%&'08

!"#$%&'(#'$)*'+,-$./&'*#*!"#$%&$'(%)&$%*('##+%,-'(./-011012%

3'(4$(%5)(012%67'()$)8%9(0.'+:%5$;)$#<$(%=>

?8>@%3A95B%,7.0)"(07#C%

D&$%5)C%E"&1FG%H'I"(0)$G%-0JJ%;J'+%G$J$K/)0"1G%H("#%5K&7<$():%L(0))$1:%'1.%3M()C

photo courtesy of Janette Beckman