Almanac question

I've just begun reading Day of the Jackal. The book begins by describing a failed assassination attempt against Charles de Gaulle. It says that the attempt failed because the prime planner consulted the wrong year's almanac: Supposedly the 1961 almanac for August 22 for Paris put sunset at 8:35 p.m., and he counted on his signal to the gunmen being visible, but that in 1962 sunset was at 8:10 p.m. on that day and place, and therefore his signal could not be seen, and the gunmen were taken by surprise when the motorcade arrived. (The year was 1962 but the fellow planning the attempt had consulted the previous year's almanac.)

My question: Is it actually possible that on two successive years at the same place on the same date, sunset would differ by 25 minutes? It seems to me it cannot.

Am I missing something? Or was the author ignorant of planetary physics? Or was the real point that the 1961 almanac contained an error?

 

As Stev0 says, neither of those was a leap year, and a time-zone change or daylight savings time alteration would make a full hour's difference.

So either the author has his science wrong, or he is saying that the 1961 almanac the conspirator was using contained an error. He does not name the almanac.

Differences due to the approximately quarter-day difference between 365 and a full year would make a difference of a few seconds or a minute in the time of sunset. It would essentially be 25% of the difference between time of sunset on two successive days at that time of year.

 

I read a review of The Da Vinci Code. It's on my list of books to avoid. Apparently it's not only a stupid book, but it's badly written as well. I don't mind plot holes in well-written books. Some of Shakespeare's plots are dreadful, not to mention dishonest history, but the language is so wonderful we can forgive the story lines. I recently read The Host by Stephenie Meyer, and there are some serious storyline defects, but Meyer is a wonderful story-teller, so I don't mind.

But the idea of sunset being 25 minutes off from one year to the next is just so peculiar! How can anyone be so ignorant?

It's raining outside! Just thought I'd mention it. I like the rain as long as I'm indoors and don't have to go anywhere.

 

People either love or hate the Twilight series. (Check out the reader reviews on Amazon.) Those who hate it generally focus on the neurotic teenage heroine who is totally emotionally dependent on the handsome vampire. It is politically incorrect to depict teenage girls in popular literature aimed at teens as needing a man for emotional health and stability. You are supposed to portray girls as capable, strong, and independent.

Those who love the series focus on the inspired story-telling ability of the author. The stories are inventive, original, exciting, and very well told. The love triangle (girl, vampire, and wolf-man) is compelling and (except for the supernatural components) believable.

The story is fantasy, and some folks do not like fantasy. The heroine is not an admirable person and is definitely not a desirable role model. But neither is Juliette a desirable role model, falling in love with a man three times her age and then killing herself over him! But the Twilight series is fun, exciting, and a very enjoyable read.

I said there are "holes" in Meyer's books, and her revisionist vampires are such a hole. Vampires do not exist, but in popular culture they cannot endure sunlight, and they drink human blood, infecting their victims with insanity, or else killing or transforming them into vampires. I dislike Meyer's revisionism regarding vampires, but her story-telling is so good that I overlook that, just as I overlook the fact that zombies do not exist when I watch a good zombie movie. ("I'm the only one that ever loved you. PLEASE let me eat your brains!" -- One of the zombies in Return of the Living Dead, speaking to his former girlfriend.)

Thanks for the Patricia Briggs suggestion. I've downloaded the sample of one of her books to my Kindle and will check it out.

 

Nor am I. But I enjoyed the series. You don't have to be a pre-teen girl to enjoy them. You only have to enjoy action fantasy and well-told stories. If you read the reviews on Amazon you will see that many of the positive reviews come from adults. The sub-set of feminists who hate men will hate the books, and some folks will disapprove of the political incorrectness of a story involving an emotionally weak and dependent girl.

FWIW, the author's other book, The Host, stars two very strong female characters, Melanie and Wanderer.

 

Meyer's plots are very original. The plot of The Host is even more original, revolving around two "persons" inhabiting the same body: the alien "body snatcher" who's been inserted into the body, and the person whose body it was, and who refuses to disappear, leading to a constant dialog between the two, and eventually a strong bond of friendship, and finally a selfless act of self-sacrifice. All within the context of the struggle of the few remaining humans to avoid capture by the aliens who have almost completely taken over the earth.

If you like fantasy adventure, this is top rate.