A novel may unfold on several levels.  The first is the entertainment level. One can read it for pleasure and be perfectly satisfied. The story may also suggest deeper elements, if the reader wishes to explore them.

My newest novel, Distant Thunder, (OakTara Publishers), is, on one level, a romance. A divorced mom facing her only child’s deployment to Afghanistan, deals with anxiety over that, as well as the boring muddle her life has become. On a train ride, she meets a U.S. diplomat grieving the death of his wife in a car accident in the Middle East after a marital quarrel. A close friend was killed in a car accident a couple of weeks later. A coincidence? Was betrayal to country involved?

The two edge toward cautious friendship, but always with past hurts simmering below the surface.

So there you have it: a romance with a bit of mystery, even intrigue, thrown into the plot.

If you wish, you can fish for deeper elements, also.

Following are excerpts from a review by Bruce Judisch, who understood the different strands.

In Distant Thunder, Ms. O’Barr has melded a personal journey of searching and restoration with a candid, point-blank look at American culture and faith.  Okay, that’s been done before.  A lot.  But what makes this book unique is the author’s perspective on America through the eyes of Americans who have spent a considerable portion of their adult lives outside of America.   . . .

(Excerpted from  http://brucejudisch.blogspot.com/  May 13, 2012.)

You can read it for pure entertainment or go deeper, as you wish.

The United States is one of the world’s oldest democratic republics, but democracy as practiced here is very much a work in progress. Its continuance is not guaranteed. Politics and power weave uneasily through our relatively new experiment in democracy.

A recent article suggests: “Politics is at once integral to the democratic process in the United States and the cause of politicians’ acting against the national interest in order to win or stay in public office.” (Leslie H. Gelb, Foreign Affairs, May/June, 2009.)

With few exceptions, the history of civilizations has been the history of groups seizing power and doing all they can to retain that power regardless of what it does to others. The failure or success of the American experiment in democracy is determined by whether we give in to that natural tendency to want ultimate power or whether we overcome that tendency and respect others as part of the democratic process.

Benjamin Franklin is said to have remarked at the signing of the Declaration of Independence: “Gentleman, we must all hang together or, assuredly, we shall hang separately.”

Humility requires us to admit that no one of us has perfect understanding. We need each other. We need contrasting, and even competing ideas. We should welcome the ideas of those with whom we disagree. If we seriously consider them, we either discover a better way that incorporates our view with theirs, or find stronger reasons for believing as we do and that may persuade others to our viewpoint. And no one of us will win all the time. If we find ourselves on the losing side, we should lose with grace.

Youcef Nadarkhani, a Christian pastor in Iran, has been jailed since October, 2009, for issues related to his faith. Recently a letter, reportedly from him and written in prison, was released by Present Truth Ministries. I don’t know if the pastor wrote it in English or it was translated, but I quote the entire letter as I found it. It is longer than my usual blog. I justify the length because I am touched by echos in the letter reminiscent of New Testament letters written by the apostle Paul while in prison,. The letter follows:

Greetings from your servant and younger brother in Christ, Youcef Nadarkhani.

To: All those who are concerned and worried about my current situation.

First, I would like to inform all of my beloved brothers and sisters that I am in perfect health in the flesh and spirit. And I try to have a little different approach from others to these days, and consider it as the day of exam and trial of my faith. And during these days which are hard in order to prove your loyalty and sincerity to God, I am trying to do the best in my power to stay right with what I have learned from God’s commandments.

I need to remind my beloveds, though my trial due has been so long, and as in the flesh I wish these days to end, yet I have surrendered myself to God’s will.

I am neither a political person nor do I know about political complicity, but I know that while there are many things in common between different cultures, there are also differences between these cultures around the world which can result in criticism, which most of the times response to this criticisms will be harsh and as a result will lengthen our problems.

From time to time I am informed about the news which is spreading in the media about my current situation, for instance being supported by various churches and famous politicians who have asked for my release, or campaigns and human rights activities which are going on against the charges which are applied to me. I do believe that these kind of activities can be very helpful in order to reach freedom, and respecting human rights in a right way can bring forth positive results.

I want to appreciate all those are trying to reach this goal. But at the other hand, I’d like to announce my disagreement with the insulting activities which cause stress and trouble, which unfortunately are done with the justification (excuse) of defending human rights and freedom, for the results are so clear and obvious for me.

I try to be humble and obedient to those who are in power, obedience to those in authority which God has granted to the officials of my country, and pray for them to rule the country according to the will of God and be successful in doing this. For I know in this way I have obeyed God’s word. I try to obey along with those whom I see in a common situation with me. They never had any complaint, but just let the power of God be manifested in their lives, and though sometimes we read that they have used this right to defend themselves, for they had this right, I am not an exception as well and have used all possibilities and so forth and am waiting for the final result.

So I ask all the beloved ones to pray for me as the holy word has said. At the end I hope my freedom will be prepared as soon as possible, as the authorities of my country will do with free will according to their law and commandments which are answerable to.

May God’s Grace and Mercy be upon you now and forever. Amen.

Youcef Nadarkhani

I search news reports for clues about a country’s first encounters with democracy. That country is Tunisia, where I once lived and worked. I scan the recent pictures. When I lived there, few women, and no younger ones, wore the head scarf.  Most of them dressed like counterparts on the streets of Paris. Now the head scarf appears more often. Plenty of women do not wear it, but it still surprises me that some do.

Compared to Egypt or Libya, Tunisia’s change from a dictatorship to free elections last year was remarkably smooth. Not completely so. Small groups of ultra-conservative Islamists occupied universities to call for a more religiously-oriented way of life, including the return of the veil for women. Thousands protested the actions of the ultra-conservatives and called for a continuation of Tunisia’s tolerant society.

The moderate Islamist party that won a majority of the vote in elections last year was embarrassed by the ultra-conservatives and pledged that it would not turn Tunisia into a conservative Islamic state.

Winston Churchill once said, “Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

I wish the Tunisians success as they enter the brave, exasperating world of democracy.

As countries modernized, some believed, religion would matter less, religion being a relic of a superstitious age. Religion would finally die. Instead, the modernization of nations has often brought opposite results.

The changes have even complicated relations between the United States and its allies. Cambridge Lecturer Andrew Preston notes two countries which surprised the United States by the strength of their religion. [link]

President John F. Kennedy was exasperated at the Buddhist resurgence in Vietnam which undermined a Vietnamese president we supported. As Preston points out, perhaps the president should have noticed that ninety percent of the country was Buddhist.

Another president, Jimmy Carter, underestimated the power of Islam in Iran, which led to the fall of the U.S. embassy there and the installation of an Islamic anti-American regime. Iran was a modernizing nation, a result of oil revenues, but religion’s hold did not vanish. In fact, modernization may have increased yearning for the certainty of religious belief in the face of rapid change.

The current election triumphs of religious parties in Middle Eastern countries, recently liberated from dictators, continue this trend. They join a long list of countries who were supposed to disavow religion as they modernized, but didn’t.

Some of the world’s fastest growing Christian and Islamic communities are in Africa. Exploration for Africa’s resources is pulling countries on that continent into the modern age, even as religion increases.

Perhaps religion is one area where the West lags behind.

The recent scandal involving U.S. Secret Service agents and military personnel in Cartagena, Columbia, who hired prostitutes, reveals a seamier side of U.S. expatriate life. As one who worked overseas with American citizens, I occasionally dealt with Americans of questionable virtue who formed unwise relationships with locals. Thankfully, the countries where I worked did not encourage what is called “the sex trade.”

My colleagues assigned to those countries had to deal more often with the problems caused by U.S. citizens traveling abroad solely for promiscuous purposes. Taxpayer-funded employees should understand that these activities are off-limits for them. Period.

Trafficking of human beings for immoral purposes is not confined solely to foreign countries. Albert Mohler has written in the Christian Post of issues involved both in the U.S. and in other countries by this trafficking. He rightly calls on the United States to insure that the representatives the U.S. sends abroad do not in any way abet the industry that feeds on the vulnerable.

At the same time, we should demand zero tolerance for such activities in this country. We should offer safe refuges for those who want to escape and prosecution for those who force victims, often quite young, into prostitution. We should bring all the pressure allowed on publications that advertise such activities.

Our connected world demands a higher awareness of the good, the bad, and the ugly that this connectedness makes possible.

After my father died, my mother rented out a room in our home to boarders. One of the local elementary school teachers rented our second bedroom until she met, fell in love with, and married our church’s minister of music.

Then Mom turned the upstairs into an apartment. During my adolescent years, she rented it to more teachers from the local schools.

It seemed natural to have an expanded “family” around as I was growing up.

Then my brother returned from college and two years in the army. He took over the upstairs until he married and moved out.

As I left for college and then marriage, Mom rented the apartment to young couples. In her declining years before she died, she rented the apartment to a single, working woman.

Looking back, I realize that our community arrangement benefitted us all. The working singles and couples had an affordable place to live. Mom was not by herself as her children moved out. I gained by having young teachers who were, to some extent, role models for me.

The conference went well. A spiritual and  intellectual feast resulted from a fortunate confluence: writers and poets on faith like Luci Shaw and Marilynne Robinson, best-selling books from around the globe, and sensitive readers.

Yet I found myself exhausted physically and spiritually at the end of the second day. Tired. A bit lonely as evening came on. Discouraged with my own writing, which seemed so much drivel. Too trite. Too driven by clichés. I found myself in a Dantean wood of sorts.

In this mood I wandered into the college vesper services.

I listened to “The Lamb” and “The Tyger” by William Blake, sung by the college choir. Readers presented more poetry and a reading from Job. More songs. I soared. Perhaps my words might one day soar as well.

As I listened to poetry ancient and modern, I knew why the church, despite human failing, endures still, lighting the way for uncountable billions.

No, I know my words will never quite reach what I desire for them, but I know it is not hopeless. Tomorrow I will try that new beginning on the novel that now teases me.

Hope. That’s the name of it, I think.

I just finished reading In The Garden of Beasts, by Erik Larson. It’s the story of an American family in Germany during the 1930′s as Hitler came to power.

Any reader of this story or student of this time in history asks why a civilized nation like Germany allowed such a depraved group of leaders to take over their country. How did the country that produced  Bach and Beethoven produce Hitler and the Holocaust?

One senses that citizens, weary of war and economic hardship (as a result of World War I), allowed this charismatic speaker to hypnotize them into believing that he could lead them out of their difficulties. And if he told them that a particular group (the Jews) was responsible for those difficulties, how easy to believe this simple lie. As the losers in World War I, the Germans chafed at their humiliation. When Hitler appealed to their pride by suggesting they were, in fact, a superior people, they wanted to believe him.

A reasonable people surrendered their reason to anger and pride. [link]

We’re much more realistic about racism and class prejudice these days, as the finely-crafted epic Titanic shows. Revived for the 100th anniversary of the big ship’s sinking, the 1997 movie appalls us with its portrayal of the disdain the upper class showed for  the working class. Yet we take in stride the liaison between the Victorian heroine with a working class man she has just met. Granted, the woman’s fiancé was a stuffy jerk, and she was being forced into a marriage she didn’t want, and the other man had saved her life. Still, the affair was straight out of our current age, totally alien to the atmosphere the movie successfully portrayed elsewhere.

Other current films have followed the same pattern, sometimes indulging our current taste for gore and violence.

A movie where romantic attraction stays out of the bedroom is so quaint as to be almost counter-cultural. A few movies have won high acclaim with little violence or permissiveness, often based on classic novels with strong characters. Apparently, if the characters are intriguing enough, such movies can be profitable. Violence and permissiveness don’t have to be as common as movie popcorn.

In past decades, it was typical for the U.S. Calvary to be heroes and Indians the villains. Today we’re more realistic about that era, just as the Titanic portrayed a more realistic class prejudice.

The bar is higher. Mediocre movies can succeed if they incorporate a certain amount of R-rated scenes, but a movie without them must be superior.