Rachel's Systema Writings >> Book Reviews >> Journeys of Socrates Journeys of Socrates by Dan Millman I just finished reading Journeys of Socrates, which I just loved. This book is truly a gift to the Systema community. You will delight in reading the descriptions of some very familiar training exercises, but of course, the story is the main thing. What an unforgettable story! But Systema, though never mentioned by name, is a theme that runs throughout the book. The characters are unforgettable, and the book is full of surprising plot twists, right up to the final revelations in the very last pages. It's also an historical portrait of late Czarist Russia, the Cossacks, the Jews, and military training as it was in those days. It's just a wonderful book and I can't recommend it enough. It's one of those books that stays with you and you keep thinking about it and turning over all the details in your mind. Anyone who is a devoted student of The System will be sure to enjoy this book. The best books always make us reflect on our own lives, like Eugene O'Neill's Long Day's Journey Into Night, in which nearly everyone can find some aspect of their own family's sadness or heartbreak. Journeys of Socrates is just like that, I think. Especially in the final chapter where there are some revelations, I thought that my own life, and my relationship with my late father, is a lot like Socrates' relationship with his family. (I am trying not to give too much away but if you intend to read the book, you may want to stop reading lest I inadvertently reveal any spoilers.) And as I read the book, I changed along with Socrates. All the people who were teachers to Socrates, were also my teachers, just as if they were real people. And maybe they are, or were, or will be. The other thing I liked so much about the book was the way it challenged any black-and-white perceptions, for example, of good vs. evil. The villain of the book is a wicked man and it's hard to see any good in him. And yet, there are passages in the book where he is described in such a way that you cannot help but see some redeeming qualities, no matter how small they may be, but there is just a drop of something in the villain that makes him not 100% evil, even if he's 99.9% bad. But as long as that little sliver of non-evil exists, we have to recognize the villain as human just as we are. It's hard to do so, but the fact is that we do have something in common with him. That's what I heard Mikhail tell a certain Systema student on one of the tapes, not one that is publicly distributed, but something that Edgar showed me and a few other students almost by accident (we were watching some action clips when the tape just rolled right into this personal conversation). We have to recognize that these bad people are also human, and however much we don't like to think of them as at all similar to ourselves, they were born with just the same potential as any other human being and according to some religious doctrines, there is no person so base that they cannot repent. But it's hard to accept this, and I still cannot help but think that some people are evil and deserve to die. The BTK killer showed no remorse when he was caught and tried, he felt sorry only for himself. He's one for the textbooks, happily married for years, devoted father, a Scoutmaster and church leader...how could this person exist in the same mortal soul as the BTK killer? It's hard to see the good in such a killer, and yet, he probably did do some good in his life, with the Scouts or maybe volunteering with his church, it's possible he even helped some people, but it's very hard to consider that in light of his atrocious crimes. In Journeys of Socrates, we see the Cossacks as a people who have such noble attributes, and such depsicable ones. How is it that people who killed women and children in the pogroms could draw the line at rape, looting, and desicration of corpes? Surely killing a child is a worse crime than looting gold and silver. But there is an expression "There's honor among thieves." I don't know how true it is, but the Cossacks have a code of conduct and as one of them says in the book, they are not common thieves. And despite all the killing of innocent humans, even the bad Cossacks (if they deserve that title, which is debatable) cannot abide the killing of a horse because it violates their unwritten code. According to some historical accounts, Cossacks also protected the Jews from mob riots, although those accounts are not as common as the accounts of the pogroms. It's no excuse to say they were just following orders, but some of the more brutal porgroms were apparently ordered by the Czar. But it's hard to say what really happened, because there is more than one version of the historical actions of the Cossacks against the Jews. But even today, some modern Cossacks are extremely prejudiced against Jews, Turks, Armenians, and other people whom they perceive to be not of Russian origin (of course, you could say the same about many Americans). Alex the Cossack, an early teacher of Socrates, actually reminded me of Vlad [Vasiliev] more so than Seraphim [a priest and teacher of Socrates]. He is so clearly good and honorable, in contrast to some of the other Cossacks in the book who are not good, even if they adhere to their own code of honor. Socrates himself is of mixed Jewish and Cossack descent, which I interpreted as a reflection of the opposition of the two groups, the storm of the violence against the Jews in Russia is the big picture, which is mirrored in the storm in the soul of Socrates as he struggles to decide whether vengeance or mercy will be his life's path.