Litwits

February Meeting Recap

2012-02-10T09:04:00.000-08:00

Before getting into the February meeting recap, my apologies for not posting a recap of the January meeting, at which we were joined by Charmaine Craig, author of The Good Men: A Novel of Heresy. The primary reason I didn't post a recap is that I misplaced my notes and couldn't possibly reconstruct our two-hour Q&A from memory. In any case, because it was a Q&A rather than our usual format, it would have been very difficult to summarize that volume of information without paraphrasing and losing the bulk of what was said. I do want to thank Charmaine once again for joining us. It was a very informative discussion and we learned a lot about the processes and concepts behind composing a work of literary fiction. Many members have commented on how educational and enjoyable the discussion was, and I know those of us working on our own writing projects found her insight quite valuable.

So, on to February. Our book for this month was Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness. Thanks to Annemarie for hosting and Georgina for leading the discussion.

Joseph Conrad, though an English novelist, was born in the Kiev Governorate (now Ukraine) in 1857 to highly patriotic Polish parents. He was a member of a noble family and the son of a translator and writer of politically-themed plays. Conrad was encouraged from a young age to read in both Polish and French. When Conrad was four years old, his father was arrested by Imperial Russian authorities for helping to organize an uprising, and the family was exiled to Vologda, 300 miles north of Moscow. By the time Conrad was eleven years old, both of his parents had died. He was sent to live with an uncle who allowed him to travel to Marseille and become a seaman at the age of sixteen. Conrad lived an adventurous life on the sea and became captain of a Congo steamboat in 1889. His experiences in the Congo influenced Heart of Darkness and also led to his pessimistic view of human nature and beliefs about himself. He was an emotional man who was subject to fits of depression and self-doubt and who was morally unsparing and judgmental. He also valued duty and honor and wrote that he believed the temporal world rested on a few old and simple ideas, most notably the idea of fidelity. He believed fidelity was our barrier against corruption and evil, an idea that is incorporated into Heart of Darkness.

The group had mixed feelings about this book, but while many of us saw the merits of it, I think it’s safe to say that most of us were either ambivalent toward the book as a whole or disliked it. We did enjoy the humorous scenes that showed the absurdity of British colonialism, such as the starched officer who couldn’t work because someone was inconveniencing him by dying in the office. Some of us felt the prose, influenced by Conrad’s knowledge of French and Polish, was beautiful and hypnotic, but others felt it was droning and monotonous. Most of us admired his skillful use of imagery to draw us into the scene, but felt his lovely prose and imagery took us nowhere. Conrad seemed to be reluctant to say what he meant (it was suggested that perhaps he had so much trouble saying outright what he wanted to say because he started to see his own hypocrisy and contradictions). The majority of the book was a huge, melodramatic build-up to a climax that didn’t deliver. Many of us felt the narration and transitions between the past in which Marlowe’s story was set and the present in which he was telling it were very confusing. We were distracted by multiple layers of narration. We often weren’t sure who was speaking. There was some speculation that Conrad used this narrative technique to distance himself from the views being aired by Marlowe, though it was rather clear that Marlowe was essentially a mirror of Conrad in the book.

The topic of racism fueled a lot of debate at this meeting. It seemed to some of us that Kurz’s de-civilization would only be “terrifying” to readers with an aversion to Africa or Africans. We questioned whether Conrad was a racist or whether he was simply reflecting the dominant views of his time. We also discussed Chinua Achebe’s essay on racism in Heart of Darkness, which some of us felt was very insightful and more interesting to read than the book. We asked ourselves why everyone raves about this novel. Why is it considered one of the top ten books in English literature? The answer, we suspected, is that Conrad’s prose and technique were unique. Deconstructionism is the current trend in English literature, and experts tend pick out one element from a novel and ignore the whole, much like we might love the technique of a painting without liking the painting as a whole. Teachers seem to focus on style and ignore the racial issues when they discuss this book with their students.

We also wondered why books like Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn and To Kill a Mockingbird have been so widely censored and banned, while this book is hailed as one of the best examples of English literature (it has been banned on occasion, but not nearly to the extent that the other three have been). We suspect it’s because the first three are holding up a mirror to society and criticizing how we as a whole treat other cultures negatively. In the first three books, it’s clear that the author truly sympathizes with the downtrodden and disapproves of the actions of society, whereas in Heart of Darkness, what sympathy Conrad feels for Africans seems to be outweighed by contempt and fear. Some of us felt that Heart of Darkness subtly undermines the dignity of an entire race (in contrast to the first three, which uphold it) and presents a view with which many whites may agree on some level.

We talked about whether the popular interpretations of the themes of this book are accurate. The main theme is the darkness of human nature. It seems Conrad intended the book as a critique of Europe’s actions in Africa and the potential resulting moral degeneration of Europeans. But what was Conrad’s idea of what constitutes the “heart of darkness” in people? It seems to be that he viewed finding a connection with tribal people to be the ultimate “darkness” that leads to a disintegration of morality. Conrad also seemed to be trying to show the reader how people devolve (in his view) when they’re thrown into an uncivilized place without western social mores to check their behavior.

Fidelity was another theme we discussed. Conrad used Kurz’s African mistress and his “intended” as a contrast of physical desire and moral refinement. The fact that Kurz took an African mistress demonstrated Condrad’s view of fidelity as being the guardian of good and morality. Kurz’s betrayal of his “intended” was his ultimate offense and sealed his doom. The scene with “the intended” at the end of the story gave Marlowe closure on how he felt about Kurz and also underscored Conrad’s view that fidelity is the most critical trait that keeps evil and immorality at bay. “The intended” was faithful to Kurz to the end, and Marlowe decided to honor and preserve that fidelity by not telling her the truth.

Some of us thought Kurz’s African mistress was significant in another respect as well. She was one of several examples in the story of Conrad’s willingness to empathize with and even admire those he considered inferior, as long as they stayed in their proper place. It seems Conrad was only comfortable with people who stayed in the pigeonhole to which he had assigned them. The men dying in the jungle when Marlowe first arrived in Africa were another example of this, as was the helmsman on the steamer. In this last instance, it was notable that the moment Marlowe began to feel some affinity with this man and to recognize (to his horror) that they were, in fact, both human beings, Conrad killed the man off and had Marlowe toss his body into the river. It was no coincidence that Kurz, the only European who genuinely sympathized with Africans and saw their way of life as desirable, was the character who suffered, in Conrad’s view, complete moral degeneration.

Whether Kurz’s “transgressions” were actually morally worse than things that were widely accepted among white Europeans was another topic of discussion. For instance, was the fact that he and his tribe fought and killed other Africans actually morally worse than Europeans’ methods of warfare? Or were Kurz’s actions actually fairly mild in comparison? Is mounting the shrunken heads of your enemy, for example, really morally worse than blowing their limbs off with artillery? This led to a discussion of how history is taught in schools and how we tend to gloss over atrocities committed by our own culture while condemning atrocities committed by others. We talked about changes recently made to school curricula in various states which seem to further discourage discussion of our own country’s actions toward non-white cultures. Discussing negatives in our own history opens up a can of worms for teachers because we’re still doing some of the same things. How do teachers discuss these things with students without imparting their personal moral judgments or views on current events?

We voted on our next three books this month. The winners are Death Comes to Pemberly by P. D. James, Living Proof by Kira Peikoff and The Hunger Games trilogy by Suzanne Collins. We haven’t entirely settled the order yet, but we do know that The Hunger Games will be our summer read. We’re also planning to arrange a group trip to one of Kira Peikoff’s book signings in the area on either March 9^th or 10^th, so look for more information on that soon. If we’re lucky, maybe we can convince her to conference in to the discussion of her book.

Our selection for March is The Bell Jar, by Sylvia Plath. We’ll be meeting on Wednesday, March 14^th at 9:00 am. Kathryn will be hosting. If anyone would like to volunteer to lead the discussion, please let me know.

December Meeting Recap

2012-01-05T22:24:00.000-08:00

Our book for December was Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe. Thanks to Becky for leading the discussion and Teresa for hosting.

Chinua Achebe was born in Nigeria in 1930 to Protestant converts. His father cared very much about tradition and Achebe felt pulled between two worlds. He began attending Christian school at age six, then went to a school for “the future elite” when he was older. At school, he had to learn English, the language of the colonists. He resented having to speak English at school, but saw that it was useful and necessary.

When Achebe began reading literature, he found himself identifying with the white characters in the books and disliking the African characters because they were portrayed as ignorant. His own writing is largely concerned with the juxtaposition of tribal culture and modernity, and one of his primary goals in writing Things Fall Apart was to give a more objective portrayal of Africans than was typical in colonial literature. He has been critical of most colonial literature, most notably Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, which he critiqued in a 1975 essay titled “An Image in Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.” Achebe’s books aren’t one-sided or judgmental, but focus instead on cultures understanding one another. The reception of this particular book was positive in Europe but mixed in Nigeria, in part because Achebe had written it in English.

Many of us had a problem with the protagonist’s numerous weaknesses, but the author intended him to be a Greek-style “hero” with a tragic flaw. He was also trying to show that part of the reason for the downfall of tribal life was internal. Also, there’s no tradition of individual heroes in Nigerian culture.

We liked that Achebe’s portrayal of both Africans and Europeans seemed unbiased and we thought the discussion of religious differences in the novel was interesting. The tribesmen’s religious views were not all that different from the Christians’ views, but the British came in believing their system was superior. Most of them weren’t really interested in understanding the tribal way of life. We noted how difficult it can be to understand other cultures without judging. In fact, there are numerous T.V. shows based on this premise such as The Lost Boys and Extreme Cuisine.

Language barriers also complicated each group’s efforts to communicate with the other or to understand the other’s culture. Language difficulties sometimes turned authority figures into the butt of jokes. Also, an inordinate amount of power lay in the hands of the interpreters and they had a tendency to abuse that power. The British took advantage of this and presented British rule to the disenfranchised as an opportunity to gain power.

Religion was an important theme in the novel and a recurring topic of discussion for the group. Achebe’s contrast of the use of religion as a political tool with the more benevolent Christianity of the first missionary was interesting. We wondered why Africans were swayed toward Christianity. It seems it appealed originally to the outcasts and those who weren’t finding acceptance within their own culture. We also talked about the intertwining of politics and evangelical religions. Historically, the primary purpose of converting others is to gain power and more soldiers. We discussed numerous religious mandates that were actually politically motivated and The Jesus Film Project, which has been very successful in converting Africans to Christianity. Comparisons were also drawn between how Christians convert others to their religion and how America converts other countries to its political views.

We talked about the benefits and evils of colonization, about the divide-and-conquer strategy of the British, and about how that strategy was depicted in the story, such as when the British used the African translators against the villagers. We came to the conclusion that division occurs naturally in any case and cited examples such as the rich vs. the poor in communist China and the internal divisions amongst the OWS people.

Many of the characters in Things Fall Apart felt trapped in their culture. We found ourselves comparing the situations of characters in this book to those in books like Anthem and A Thousand Splendid Suns, and to people living under oppressive regimes throughout the world. Eventually people in this situation reach a breaking point, but there has to be an alternative before they can do anything about their situation. We discussed the differences between European and African culture and whether one was objectively superior to the other. We also talked about the conditions necessary for the development of “higher” culture. Proximity of population is a major one, as is ownership of land and resources. Members of a society have to be past the point of merely eking out an existence and there has to be a fairly intricate governmental structure.

January’s book is The Good Men: A Novel of Heresy by Charmaine Craig. The author will be joining us for the discussion on January 11^th at Lynda’s house.

November Meeting Recap

2011-11-17T20:45:00.000-08:00

November's book was The Lacuna by Barbara Kingsolver. Thanks to Annemarie for leading the discussion and Sylvia for hosting.

Barbara Kingsolver was born in 1955, and grew up in rural Kentucky. She earned degrees in biology from DePauw University and the University of Arizona before becoming a freelance writer and author. She has lived in Tucson, England, France, and the Canary Islands, and has worked in Europe, Africa, Asia, Mexico, and South America. She currently lives in southwestern Virginia .

Kingsolver has written numerous books, including The Bean Trees, The Poisonwood Bible, and a non-fiction book entitled Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life. Her books have been adopted into the core literature curriculum in high schools and colleges across the country. Her work often focuses on topics such as social equality, biodiversity, the balancing of individuality with community, and the interaction and conflict between humans and their environments. Although she has said that her novels are not autobiographical, there are often commonalities between her life and her work, and we noticed in this book that the protagonist's experiences with fame reflect Kingsolver's own views on the subject.

The Lacuna is the story of Harrison Shepherd, a man caught between revolutionary Mexico and McCarthy-era America. He searches for his own personal identity while Mexico and America are reshaping their cultural identities.

The novel covers several decades and is jam-packed with historical events and figures. A major topic of discussion for the group was how little we know about contemporary American history (there were several events in the novel most of us had never heard of or knew little about) and how much of our understanding is shaped by the media and other filters. We talked about the historical inaccuracies in The Lacuna and what Kingsolver's motivation was in misrepresenting certain historical facts. A large part of the story of Diego Rivera, Frida Kahlo, and Lev Trotsky is true, down to the descriptions of their houses and their preparations for parties. But numerous important historical facts are incorrect, and we had a lengthy discussion about the extent to which we expect historical fiction to be accurate and why Kingsolver's characters made those incorrect statements. Was Trotsky being intentionally dishonest when telling his version of the revolution and Stalin's rise to power? Did Kingsolver intend for us to realize that his statements weren't true? Many of us suspect that she included these inaccuracies as support for the book's theme that what we know or believe depends on how and from whom we got the information, as well as on our own personal filters. Others felt she didn't plant enough of a seed of doubt. When an author is using historical figures, there's an expectation that historical facts will be correct. Most of us also felt the book glorified Trotsky, and enjoyed it less because of that. On the other hand, we're seeing Trotsky from Shepherd's perspective, and he viewed Trotsky on a personal level separate from his work. To Shepherd, Trotsky was a caring father figure.

We were mostly indifferent toward Shepherd, though one member mentioned that he comes across differently in the audiobook. To most of us, though, he's a non-entity and not a character in his own life. We believe this was probably a result of his childhood experiences. We felt we couldn't respect him because he makes no decisions, instead just letting life happen to him. We talked about the moral implications of not having or expressing values and opinions. Is it okay to just want to get through life without having opinions or standing up against things you disagree with? It depends to some extent on the context and on what's at stake. At any rate, we certainly felt that Shepherd held no strong opinions and just wanted to avoid any type of interaction with the real world. But some members suggested that maybe this is really just a missing piece—we may just not know everything he thought or did because we only have his journal entries to judge him by, and that may not be the type of thing he would record when he's writing only for himself. Some wondered if Kingsolver intended for the missing journal to be the key to understanding Shepherd and why he became such a non-entity just trying to lay low and get by. Is that journal the lacuna that would have revealed Shepherd's inner workings?

One member commented that the novel is like a mosaic of experiences. The first half contains a great number of events, but has little plot to speak of. Kingsolver brings up small ugly truths intentionally throughout the book, but never delves into them. We felt in some ways, she was holding a mirror up to history to demonstrate that things don't change much over time. This led us to comparisons between the Bonus Army protests and Occupy Wall Street, as well as to a discussion of whether media coverage of OWS and the Tea Party is biased and, if so, in favor of whom. Not surprisingly, we couldn't agree on this question, and our perceptions were colored by which group each of us personally sympathized with.

Kingsolver uses journal entries and newspaper articles to reveal facts and plot points, while the theme of the novel is that you can't trust what you read. Some of us suspect she uses this format to encourage the reader to doubt what we're reading in the novel as a whole. She seems to be taking the position that unless we get our information first-hand, we don't know that it's true. And even our own observations are filtered through our personal experiences and values. How do we get to the source so we know what's true? How can we get past all of the perspectives, perceptions, and deceptions? How did changes in media, beginning with radio, change how we process information? At one point in the novel, Kingsolver writes that radio changed our national psychology. We became a nation of collective “thinkers.” There is now an endless stream of information, much of it aimed at selling products and opinions, and there is very little time to think about it all individually. This led us to a discussion of our own media consumption. To what extent do we or should we get involved with and learn about what's happening in the world? How do we make sure we're getting balanced information and a variety of perspectives?

One thing many of us appreciate about historical fiction is that it opens us up to history we weren't aware of. Even if it's not represented accurately in the novel, it's a jumping-off point for us to learn more about it. For example, most of us had never heard of the Bonus Army protest. Even if Kingsolver's version of events is flawed, we're interested in learning more about it. We also talked about how art reflects the history of a period and enhances our interest in and understanding of it. We wondered about Frieda's art, specifically. Was it meant to be a parallel with the rest of the story? Probably it was. She wanted people to see both the beautiful and the ugly—to know everything.

Our next meeting will be at 9:00 am on Wednesday, December 14^th. The book for December is Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe. Becky will be leading the discussion and Teresa will be hosting (Thanks, ladies!). I'll send out an evite with the address the week before the meeting.

October Meeting Recap

2011-10-27T12:17:00.000-07:00

Our book for October was The Maltese Falcon by Dashiell Hammett. Thanks to Sylvia for hosting and Geri for leading the discussion.

Dashiell Hammett was born in Maryland in 1894 and dropped out of school at age 13. After a series of low-paying jobs, he began working as a detective for the Pinkerton Agency in San Francisco. He later joined the army during World War I and contracted tuberculosis, which made continuing his detective work impossible after the war. He turned to writing, publishing his first story in 1922. Many of his stories, including The Maltese Falcon in serial form, were featured in the pulp fiction magazine Black Mask. Hammett's gritty realism was a departure from the intellectual mystery that characterized earlier detective novels. He wrote his final novel in 1934, after which he became an anti-fascist, pro-communist activist. After re-enlisting in the army and serving in the Aleutian Islands during World War II, Hammett returned to political activism and was elected President of the Civil Rights Congress (CRC). In 1949, he was jailed in a West Virginia federal penitentiary for contempt of court after refusing to cooperate with a government investigation into the CRC's bail fund. In the 1950s, he was investigated by the House Committee on Un-American Activites, but refused to cooperate and was blacklisted. He became a virtual hermit as his health and finances declined, and died in 1961 of lung cancer. He was buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

The Maltese Falcon, published as a novel in 1930, follows iconic detective Sam Spade and a collection of manipulative criminals as they try to get their hands on an invaluable treasure. Spade is the quintessential hard-boiled detective who lets both the police and the criminals think he's in with the bad guys while he's actually working to catch the crooks. Hammet never provides a clear sense of Spade's morality, which sparked some interesting discussion within our group, instead portraying Spade as a man who seems to coldly calculate risk, reward and duty, but whose inner workings are a mystery to the reader.

Much of our discussion centered around the concepts of integrity and morality and trying to define which, if either, Sam possesses. What is his idea of integrity? Is he just calculating and self-serving? It's hard to say, since we never get a glimpse of what's going on in his head. The Maltese Falcon is a mystery within a mystery in a sense because we don't know anything aside from the action and dialogue. We don't really know what anyone is thinking, except for Effie who seems to be the only honest character who says what she really means, and possibly Cairo who also seems fairly guileless. However, Hammett does use Gutman to reveal a lot about Sam's character. Much of our assessment of the type of man Sam is comes from Gutman's musings on the subject. We learn through Gutman that Sam is fundamentally honest in a way. He commits sins of omission, but doesn't lie. He has a great deal of foresight and keeps his enemies close. He seems to see good and bad as relative. (Though so does nearly everyone else in the novel. Even the police and newspapers lie and think it's okay, or they don't care as long as they get what they want.) Sam is a strong character who is true to himself, and in that respect he has integrity, though most of us agreed he lacks moral integrity. But in his line of work, he has to walk a fine line to be trusted by both the police and the criminals. Comparisons were made to Rooster Cogburn from True Grit, Anthony Soprano from The Sopranos and Michael Corleone from The Godfather—essentially decent men, or trying to be decent, stuck in circumstances that bring out a dark side. In the end, we decided Sam Spade is a fascinating man we'd love to meet for a drink or talk to at a dinner party, but we wouldn't necessarily want him in our lives.

We also talked about the three women in the novel, all of whom struck us as two-dimensional stereotypes. It was suggested that they represent the three fates and the choices faced by Sam: the promiscuous wife, the girl-next-door, and the bad girl. Some of us thought Effie was a lot like Nora Charles from Hammett's Thin Man series—a nice girl, but smart and strong, attracted to the tough guy, and wanting to get in on the action. Is Sam using Effie? Most of us think not. She was pretty tough and knew what she was doing. We also felt Sam has a true affection for Effie, and that she serves as his conscience throughout the story.

The constant dishonesty and obfuscation in the story made it difficult to get through for some. None of the characters is ever telling the whole story, and much of what they do tell is fabrication. Though it becomes obvious at the end that Spade knew the whole time what was really going on, the reader is in the dark until Sam's last scene with Brigid. As frustrating as it may be for some readers, though, the lies are a useful plot device that add to the mystery. Some members of the group also had trouble connecting to the story because they had a hard time believing this type of world exists in which no one is what they seem and everyone lies. Other members, however, gave similar examples from their own experience, such as life in mafia families in New Jersey, which led to a discussion of the extent to which we see people like this in our own lives. This, in turn, led to a discussion of sociopathy and how such people can be very successful in life (successful measured against their own values) because of, rather than despite, their manipulative personality and lack of concern for others or for morality.

Lastly, we talked about some of the themes in the novel, including justice (we appreciated that the really evil people were all ultimately brought to justice), redemption (or lack thereof—why no redemption for “the punk” at the end?), and the habitual nature of man (Sam's Flitcraft story is used to demonstrate the notion that a tiger can't change it's stripes. This gives us insight into Sam's assessment of Brigid and also what drives Sam and the other characters.)

We also voted on our next round of books. The voting was so close that we chose four rather than three: Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe for December, The Good Men: A Novel of Heresy by Charmaine Craig for January (the author will be joining us, so don't miss it), Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad for February, and The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath for March.

Our book for November is The Lacuna by Barbara Kingsolver. We'll be meeting at Sylvia's house on Wednesday, November 9th at 9:00. Annemarie will be leading the discussion.

September Meeting Recap

2011-09-14T17:31:00.000-07:00

It was a lively meet-and-greet this morning for our first meeting of the new school year. We had a great turn-out with a lot of new faces, which we're always happy to see. Welcome to all of the new people.

There was no book to read for this month, but after much chatting, eating, and getting to know each other, we did take care of a little book group business. We're switching books for the next two months due to a schedule conflict, so we'll be discussing The Maltese Falcon by Dashiell Hammett in October and The Lacuna by Barbara Kingsolver in November. Geri will be leading the discussion of The Maltese Falcon, and Annmarie will lead the discussion of The Lacuna.

We'll also be voting on our next round of books in October, so don't miss it! That meeting will be held on October 12 at Sylvia's house. Please let me know by October 5th if there are any books you want to nominate. I'll send out the nomination list several days before the meeting.

Lastly, we talked about some of the books we've read over the summer that we enjoyed. If you need some suggestions for your reading list, these are some of the books members enjoyed (descriptions are lifted from Wikipedia and Amazon):

A Room of One's Own by Virginia Woolf: an extended essay that explores women both as writers of and characters in fiction.
Lucifer's Hammer by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle: a post-apocalyptic science-fiction novel that details a cometary impact on Earth, an end to civilization, and the battle for the future.
The Leftovers by Tom Perrotta: explores what would happen if The Rapture actually took place and millions of people just disappeared from the earth.
The Help by Kathryn Stockett: a story about African American maids working in white households in Jackson, Mississippi during the early 1960s, told from the point of view of multiple narrators.
The Lightening Thief by Rick Riordan: a fantasy-adventure novel based on Greek mythology, it is the first novel in the Percy Jackson & the Olympians series, which charts the adventures of a modern-day twelve-year-old as he discovers he is a Greek demigod.
The Elegance of the Hedgehog by Muriel Barbery: a novel that follows events in the life of a concierge, Renée Michel, whose deliberately concealed intelligence is uncovered by an unstable but intellectually precocious girl named Paloma Josse, the daughter of an upper-class family living in the upscale Parisian apartment building where Renée works.
The Life of Pi by Yann Martel: a fantasy adventure novel in which the protagonist, Piscine Molitor "Pi" Patel, an Indian boy from Pondicherry, explores issues of spirituality and practicality from an early age. He survives 227 days after a shipwreck, while stranded on a boat in the Pacific Ocean with a Bengal tiger.
Breakfast with Buddha by Roland Merullo: a spiritual fiction novel in which Otto Ringling, an editor of food books who lives in New York and a skeptic, reluctantly goes on a road trip with a Siberian monk. This story, narrated in the first person by Otto, describes Otto's thoughts and beliefs, his conversations with the monk, and how he gains new perspectives on the world as well as his life, as a result of the monk's company.
The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman: the first novel in Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy, this fantasy novel is set in a universe parallel to our own and tells of Lyra Belacqua's journey north in search of her missing friend, Roger Parslow, and her imprisoned father, Lord Asriel, who has been conducting experiments with a mysterious substance known as Dust.
Henry and June by Anais Nin: based upon material excerpted from the unpublished diaries of Anais Nin, "Henry and June" discusses Nin's sex life and is full of her struggles and passionate relationship with husband Hugo, and then, as the novel/memoir progresses, other lovers.
The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz: shamanic teacher and healer Don Miguel Ruiz exposes self-limiting beliefs and presents a simple yet effective code of personal conduct learned from his Toltec ancestors.
Chasing Daylight by Eugene O'Kelly: a biography and a common-sense guidebook on how to die and live by the Ex-Chairman and former CEO of KPMG, who was diagnosed with a terminal brain tumor at 53. He quit his job to settle his accounts with friends and family and write his book to convey what he learned throughout the experiences of his life and death.
We the Living by Ayn Rand: a story of life in post-revolutionary Russia and, according to Rand, the closest she would ever come to writing an autobiography.
Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe series: a series of historical fiction stories centered on the character of Richard Sharpe. The series is composed of several novels and short stories, and charts Sharpe's progress in the British Army during the Napoleonic Wars.
The Last Night in Twisted River by John Irving: The novel spans five decades and is about a boy and his father who flee the logging community of Twisted River on the Androscoggin River in northern New Hampshire after a tragic accident. While on the run, the boy grows up to become a famous writer, writing eight semi-autobiographical novels.
The Name of this Book is Secret by Pseudonymous Bosch (the author's real name is Raphael Simon): a fantasy novel for young readers that chronicles the adventures of two children, Cass and Max-Ernest, as they investigate the mysterious death of local Pietro Bergamo.

June Meeting Recap

2011-06-01T18:55:00.000-07:00

This month, we held our annual year-end potluck and book exchange. Thanks to Lynda for hosting, and a big thanks to everyone for the gift! It was wonderful to see everyone there, sad to be saying goodbye to Tonya, who will be moving to San Jose, and exciting to see all of the new reads that were exchanged. So many of them were titles that most of us would want to add to our own reading list, even if we weren't the lucky one who ended up with that book at the end of the exchange. I suspect we'll be seeing a few of them on our nominations list in the fall. At our members' request, here is a list of all the books that were exchanged at the meeting, with descriptions shamelessly lifted from Amazon and Wikipedea:

Nefertiti by Michelle Moran: This fictionalized life of the notorious queen is told from the point of view of her younger sister, Mutnodjmet. In 1351 B.C., Prince Amunhotep secretly kills his older brother and becomes next in line to Egypt's throne: he's 17, and the 15-year-old Nefertiti soon becomes his chief wife. He already has a wife, but Kiya's blood is not as royal, nor is she as bewitching as Nefertiti. As Mutnodjmet, two years younger than her sister, looks on (and falls in love), Amunhotep and the equally ambitious Nefertiti worship a different main god, displace the priests who control Egypt's wealth and begin building a city that boasts the royal likenesses chiseled in stone. Things get tense when Kiya has sons and the popular Nefertiti has only daughters, and they come to a boil when the army is used to build temples to the pharaoh and his queen instead of protecting Egypt's borders. Though sometimes big events are telegraphed, Moran, who lives in California and is making her U.S. debut, gets the details just right, and there are still plenty of surprises in an epic that brings an ancient world to life. (July)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc.

The Oresteian Trilogy by Aeschylus: Aeschylus (525-c.456 bc) set his great trilogy in the immediate aftermath of the Fall of Troy, when King Agamemnon returns to Argos, a victor in war. Agamemnon depicts the hero's discovery that his family has been destroyed by his wife's infidelity and ends with his death at her callous hand. Clytemnestra's crime is repaid in The Choephori when her outraged son Orestes kills both her and her lover. The Eumenides then follows Orestes as he is hounded to Athens by the Furies' law of vengeance and depicts Athene replacing the bloody cycle of revenge with a system of civil justice. Written in the years after the Battle of Marathon, "The Oresteian Trilogy" affirmed the deliverance of democratic Athens not only from Persian conquest, but also from its own barbaric past.

The Annotated Milton, Complete English Poems by John Milton: This one-volume edition of The Annotated Milton encompasses the monumental sweep of John Milton’s poetry. Here are Milton’ s early works, including his first great poem, “On the Morning of Christ’s Nativity,” the light and lyrical “L’Allegro” and “Il Penseroso,” the masque Comus, and the lushly beautiful pastoral elegy “Lycidas.” Here, too, included in their entirety, are the three epic poems considered to be among the finest works in the English language: Paradise Lost, Paradise Regained, and Samson Agonistes. Fully annotated by Burton Raffel, this distinguished edition clarifies the complex allusions of Milton’s verse and references the personal, religious, historical, and mythical influences that inspired the great blind poet of England, who ranks among the undisputed giants of world literature.

Troilus and Cressida by William Shakespeare: Troilus and Cressida is set during the later years of the Trojan War, faithfully following the plotline of the Iliad from Achilles' refusal to participate in battle to Hector's death. The play ends on a very bleak note with the death of the noble Trojan Hector and destruction of the love between Troilus and Cressida. The tone fluctuates between bawdy comedy and tragic gloom. Several characteristic elements of the play (the most notable being its constant questioning of intrinsic values such as hierarchy, honor and love) have often been viewed as distinctly "modern."

Electra, The Phoenician Women, and The Bacchae by Euripides: Three late plays of Euripides collected here by Greene and Lattimore. This authoritative, critically acclaimed edition has been the preferred choice of over three million readers for personal libraries and individual study as well as for classroom use.

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot: Henrietta Lacks was a mother of five in Baltimore, a poor African American migrant from the tobacco farms of Virginia, who died from a cruelly aggressive cancer at the age of 30 in 1951. A sample of her cancerous tissue, taken without her knowledge or consent, as was the custom then, turned out to provide one of the holy grails of mid-century biology: human cells that could survive--even thrive--in the lab. Known as HeLa cells, their stunning potency gave scientists a building block for countless breakthroughs, beginning with the cure for polio. Meanwhile, Henrietta's family continued to live in poverty and frequently poor health, and their discovery decades later of her unknowing contribution--and her cells' strange survival--left them full of pride, anger, and suspicion. For a decade, Skloot doggedly but compassionately gathered the threads of these stories, slowly gaining the trust of the family while helping them learn the truth about Henrietta, and with their aid she tells a rich and haunting story that asks the questions, Who owns our bodies? And who carries our memories?--Tom Nissley

Mona Vanna by Maurice Maeterlinck: It is the late fifteenth century, and the battered city of Pisa faces imminent vanquishment by the superior army of Florence. As the city's commander prepares for the inevitable end, he receives from the enemy an astonishing offer of rescue. The attack will be called off, the siege will be lifted, the starving city will be resupplied—on one condition. The commander's wife, a woman revered as the epitome of honor and virtue, must surrender her body for a night to the hated leader of the Florentine army. Thus begins Monna Vanna—and thus is unleashed a torrent of conflicts and sub-conflicts, masterfully orchestrated by the playwright, concerning the meaning of honor and the pursuit of values. You will find a noble, distinctively elevated spirit in this 1902 drama. All the characters, even minor ones, are loyally committed to some moral principle and act only out of profound conviction. There are no shallow men or petty motives here—only heroic figures, sublime choices and epic decisions. Ayn Rand called Monna Vanna "One of the greatest plays in all world literature."

The Orientalist by Tom Reiss: Lev Nussimbaum fabricated a life that in its brief arc encompassed the whole of the Western and Near Eastern culture of his time. A Jew from the Caucasus, born in the first throes of the Russian Revolution, he styled himself a Muslim prince. As Kurban Said, he wrote a best-selling novel that made him the toast of Nazi Germany. Inventing and reinventing himself, he left a confused and perplexing trail. Reiss pursues two great narratives, one recounting Nussimbaum's life itself, the other following the author's quest to ferret from among myths and outright lies the truth of this man's life. Along the way, readers absorb much about oil-rich Azerbaijan, the Russian Revolution, the rise of fascism, and the centuries-old clashes of cultures and religions in the Caucasus and Middle East. Digressions abound because of Nussimbaum's intricate, multicultural encounters. In the hands of a less adept writer, such complex history might grow opaque and tedious, but Reiss' storytelling flair and the utterly compelling character of Lev Nussimbaum turn this biography into a page-turner of epic proportion. Mark Knoblauch Copyright American Library Association.

Gentlemen and Players by Joanne Harris: For generations, privileged young men have attended St. Oswald's Grammar School for Boys, groomed for success by the likes of Roy Straitley, the eccentric Classics teacher who has been a fixture there for more than thirty years. This year, however, the wind of unwelcome change is blowing, and Straitley is finally, reluctantly, contemplating retirement. As the new term gets under way, a number of incidents befall students and faculty alike, beginning as small annoyances but soon escalating in both number and consequence. St. Oswald's is unraveling, and only Straitley stands in the way of its ruin. But he faces a formidable opponent with a bitter grudge and a master strategy that has been meticulously planned to the final, deadly move.

Suite Francaise by Irene Nemirovsky: Celebrated in pre-WWII France for her bestselling fiction, the Jewish Russian-born Némirovsky was shipped to Auschwitz in the summer of 1942, months after this long-lost masterwork was composed. Némirovsky, a convert to Catholicism, began a planned five-novel cycle as Nazi forces overran northern France in 1940. This gripping "suite," collecting the first two unpolished but wondrously literary sections of a work cut short, have surfaced more than six decades after her death. The first, "Storm in June," chronicles the connecting lives of a disparate clutch of Parisians, among them a snobbish author, a venal banker, a noble priest shepherding churlish orphans, a foppish aesthete and a loving lower-class couple, all fleeing city comforts for the chaotic countryside, mere hours ahead of the advancing Germans. The second, "Dolce," set in 1941 in a farming village under German occupation, tells how peasant farmers, their pretty daughters and petit bourgeois collaborationists coexisted with their Nazi rulers. In a workbook entry penned just weeks before her arrest, Némirovsky noted that her goal was to describe "daily life, the emotional life and especially the comedy it provides." This heroic work does just that, by focusing—with compassion and clarity—on individual human dramas. Copyright © Reed Business Information.

I am Nujood, Age 10 and Divorced by Nujood Ali: Chosen by Glamour magazine as a Woman of the Year in 2008, Nujood of Yemen has become an international hero for her astonishingly brave resistance to child marriage. Sold off by her impoverished family at the age of 10, continually raped by her husband before she even reached puberty, Nujood found the courage to run away, and with the help of an activist lawyer, sympathetic judges, and the international press, she divorced her husband and returned home. Her clear, first-person narrative, translated from the French and written with Minoui, is spellbinding: the horror of her parents’ betrayal and her mother-in-law’s connivance, the “grown-ups” who send the child from classroom and toys to nightmare abuse. She never denies the poverty that drives her parents and oppresses her brothers, even as she reveals their cruelty. Unlike her passive mother, she is an activist, thrilled to return to school, determined to save others, including her little sister. True to the child’s viewpoint, the “grown-up” cruelty is devastating. Readers will find it incredible that such unbelievable abuse and such courageous resistance are happening now. --Hazel Rochman

Every Monday Matters: 52 Ways to Make a Difference by Matthew Emerzian: Monday used to be the least favorite day of the week. Monday was the day that ended the weekend; the day you had to go back to work; and the day you started a diet or decided to quit smoking…again. Not anymore! Authors Matthew Emerzian and Kelly Bozza do a total makeover on the bad image of Mondays and make that day mean something amazing, something incredible, something unbelievable. Every Monday Matters does this by taking 52 Mondays, providing 52 creative but doable activities, giving 52 down-to-earth ways to make a difference, one for each Monday of the year. It's a perfect way to have a positive impact, get others involved, and make a difference in your life and the lives of others.

A Fine Balance by Rohinton Mistry: From the Toronto-based Mistry (Such a Long Journey, 1991), a splendid tale of contemporary India that, in chronicling the sufferings of outcasts and innocents trying to survive in the ``State of Internal Emergency'' of the 1970s, grapples with the great question of how to live in the face of death and despair. Though Mistry is too fine a writer to indulge in polemics, this second novel is also a quietly passionate indictment of a corrupt and ineluctably cruel society. India under Indira Gandhi has become a country ruled by thugs who maim and kill for money and power. The four protagonists (all victims of the times) are: Dina, 40-ish, poor and widowed after only three years of marriage; Maneck, the son of an old school friend of Dina's; and two tailors, Ishvar and his nephew Om, members of the Untouchable caste. For a few months, this unlikely quartet share a tranquil happiness in a nameless city--a city of squalid streets teeming with beggars, where politicians, in the name of progress, abuse the poor and the powerless. Dina, whose dreams of attending college ended when her father died, is now trying to support herself with seamstress work; Maneck, a tenderhearted boy, has been sent to college because the family business is failing; and the two tailors find work with Dina. Though the four survive encounters with various thugs and are saved from disaster by a quirky character known as the Beggarmaster, the times are not propitious for happiness. On a visit back home, Om and Ishvar are forcibly sterilized; Maneck, devastated by the murder of an activist classmate, goes abroad. But Dina and the tailors, who have learned ``to maintain a fine balance between hope and despair,'' keep going. A sweeping story, in a thoroughly Indian setting, that combines Dickens's vivid sympathy for the poor with Solzhenitsyn's controlled outrage, celebrating both the resilience of the human spirit and the searing heartbreak of failed dreams. -- Copyright ©1996, Kirkus Associates, LP

May Meeting Recap

2011-05-11T23:38:00.000-07:00

Our book for this month was Ayn Rand's novella Anthem. Thanks to Sylvia for leading the discussion and to Lynda for hosting. We had a lot to say this month. I was quite surprised when I glanced at my watch to find we had been talking for three hours.

Ayn Rand (1905–1982) was born Alisa Rosenbaum in St. Petersberg, Russia, the oldest of three girls in an upper-middle-class, non-observant Jewish family. She wrote four novels and six non-fiction books and in the process created a comprehensive philosophy, which she called Objectivism. She changed her name to Ayn Rand after coming to America to protect her family in Russia from the repercussions of her anti-communist work.

Rand studied history and philosophy at Petrograd State University, where she was introduced to the writings of Aristotle and to American political history, both of which influenced her deeply. After graduating in 1924, she entered the State Institute for Cinema Arts to study screenwriting and escaped the trials of daily life in a totalitarian regime by attending Viennese operettas and Western films and plays as often as possible. Rand hated communism and was miserable in Russia. She rejected the communist idea that man should live for the state and not his personal happiness as an attack on men of “intelligence, ability and heroism.” She later referred to the country of her birth as “an accidental cesspool of civilization” and to its inhabitants as “mystical, stupid, backward and sentimental.”

Rand left Russia in 1926, ultimately moving to Hollywood where she was given a job by her idol, Cecil B. DeMille, first as an extra, then as a script reader. While at the studio, she met actor Frank O’Connor, whom she married in 1929. She became an American citizen in 1931.

Rand's first novel, We the Living, was published in 1936. Set in Soviet Russia, it focused on the struggle between the individual and the state. The publication of the book fulfilled a request made by a friend in Russia, who had told Rand, “When you get out, tell the rest of the world we are dying here.” Rand referred to We the Living as the closest thing to an autobiography she would ever write.

Her other major works of fiction include The Fountainhead and her magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged. In Atlas Shrugged, she dramatized her unique philosophy in an intellectual mystery story that integrated ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, politics, economics and sex. Atlas Shrugged is the most extensive expression of Objectivism of any of her works of fiction. She described Objectivism as "the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." After the publication of Atlas Shrugged, Rand wrote and lectured on her philosophy and was active in promoting laissez-faire capitalism and fighting communism.

All of Ayn Rand's books are still in print with more than 25 million sold to date. There has recently been a huge resurgence of interest in her work. Objectivism is taught in over 70 universities in America. In a 1991 Library of Congress survey of the most influential books in readers' lives, Atlas Shrugged came in second after the Bible. Her work has been embraced (though often piecemeal) by many contemporary political conservatives. David Nolan, one of the founders of the Libertarian Party, stated that "without Ayn Rand, the libertarian movement would not exist.” Two different editions of Atlas Shrugged currently occupy the first and second spots on Amazon's list of most popular classic literature and fiction, with numerous other editions of the book also on the list. Several editions of The Fountainhead are on the list as well.

The group felt that in Anthem, Rand masterfully painted a bleak picture of life in the collective and made the reader feel the oppression. We noted that Prometheus' escape from the collective mirrors Rand's escape from the USSR. It's a rare person who has both the courage and the luck to escape and start over. But everyone is born with at least the spark of individualism. We thought it was significant that Prometheus wasn't an over-the-top hero. He was kind of an average person who stumbled across the importance of individualism. We also wondered how Prometheus and Gaea would now start from scratch. Is their dream attainable or will subsequent generations destroy it? We talked about Gaea's almost submissive attitude toward Prometheus and how this is a reflection of Rand's concept of hero-worship.

Our discussion of Anthem was often more a discussion of Ayn Rand's philosophy and Ayn Rand herself than of the book. The book raises philosophical issues that tend to bring the conversation back around to Objectivism. Among the many topics we discussed:

Rand's moral absolutism, her concept of rational self-interest (often misinterpreted as “every man for himself”) and what she was getting at by pitting “we” against “I” in the book.
Rand's view of the purpose of government, which is to protect citizens from force and fraud. What constitutes protection from force and fraud? Is regulation necessary? Is protection of the environment a proper function of government? Would enforcement of private property rights resolve these issues without preventative regulation?
Is it ever true in a communal society that everyone is equal? There's always someone at the top benefiting from the oppression of the rest.
How did Rand view corporatists and the working class? She often depicted workers as noble and productive and her villains are often businessmen who engage in cronyism and who use government connections as a weapon.
There's a common misperception that Ayn Rand was a harsh person who didn't have time for anyone who disagreed with her. In fact, she was all about individualism and appreciated anyone who took ideas seriously. She had numerous friends who opposed her views, some of them communists and Trotskyites. What was important to her was that they played fair, not that they agreed with her views.
Does governmental altruism ever really stem from pure motives? Or is is used by people at the top to manipulate others and to gain influence, power and wealth? (Rand's view was that the language of altruism is used to pass legislation that is nominally in the public interest but which in reality serves special interests and government agencies at the expense of others.) Does government-enforced altruism have the effect that's intended? Does the system ultimately help or demotivate welfare recipients? Is private charity more successful at helping people without forcing them into dependence on the state? Is there a causal relationship between the increase in government intervention in America and the increasing wealth and education gaps?
What are the causes of the dramatic decline of urban areas such as St. Louis and Detroit and of the problems in public education? Does government intervention alleviate or worsen these problems?
Discussion of libertarians' and fiscal conservatives' rediscovery of Ayn Rand, and her view of libertarians and conservatives of her time. She disliked the left because they were essentially collectivists. She disliked the right because they were theocrats and failed to defend capitalism on moral grounds. She disliked the libertarians because she felt their ideas were a perversion of the idea of liberty. But she strongly believed that if America were to fall to collectivism it would be the conservatives who were most to blame, because they failed to provide a secular moral defense for laissez-faire capitalism.
The Law of Jante from “A Fugitive Crosses his Tracks” by Aksel Sandemose—essentially, a condemnation of individualism that can be summed up with “Don't think you're special or better than us.” Conversely, today we have the expression that “everyone is special” which, ironically (or maybe not) has the same end result, because, as we learned from The Incredibles, “when everyone is special, no one is.” Today we have the “everybody gets a trophy” generation, who lack intrinsic motivation and expect to be rewarded just for showing up.

A number of related books, films and TV shows were recommended by group members:

Other dystopian literature with related themes: We by Yevgeny Zamyatin (1921), Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (1932), 1984 by George Orwell (1949), Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury (1953), Lord of the Flies by William Golding (1954), A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess (1962), The Giver by Lois Lawry (1993)

Lisa VanDamme's article, “Teaching Values in the Classroom” (Published in The Objective Standard. I'll try to get a copy of this for the group.)

1942 Italian film version of Ayn Rand's 1936 novel We the Living (Rand's first novel and first statement against communism.)

1949 film version of Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead (Rand's first major literary success, The Fountainhead is both a romantic drama and a philosophical work depicting the struggle of individualism against collectivism.)

Film version of Ayn Rand's 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged, now in theaters (Rand's fourth and last novel, which she considered to be her magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged is the most extensive expression of her philosophy of Objectivism of any of her works of fiction.)

TV show Secret Millionaire, in which (quoting Wikipedia here) “a millionaire leaves his/her luxurious life behind, takes on a secret identity and lives undercover in a deprived area of the country for ... 6 days. Living on a limited budget with no modern conveniences they must forge their own way in the community – working and volunteering alongside the locals and finding individuals or projects whom they think deserve a cut of their fortune.”

Our June meeting has been moved to the first of the month due to changes to the VDA school calendar. We'll be meeting at Lynda's house for our annual year-end potluck and book exchange, which means there's no book to read this month. Please bring a dish to pass and one wrapped book for the exchange. Your book can be new or used, it doesn't matter. The only requirement is that it can't be a book you're trying to get rid of because you hated it. The idea is to share something you think others will enjoy reading. Even if you haven't made it to a meeting all year, please join us for the potluck. It's a great opportunity to meet everyone without the commitment of getting the month's book read.

April Meeting Recap

2011-05-11T23:05:00.000-07:00

Our book for April was Fannie Hurst's Imitation of Life. Thanks to Kathryn for hosting.

I wish I could say we had a wonderful discussion of the book, but the fact is it was so hard to get through that none of us finished it, so we spent the meeting watching the 1934 film version instead. The book had originally been nominated because the film was so good, but unfortunately none of us felt the book was remotely comparable to the film. As we later learned, Fannie Hurst, though a best-selling author, was not liked by critics, was held in contempt by many of her contemporaries, and is much better known for the film versions of her novels than for the novels themselves. Although the film was a humorous, sensitive and moving portrayal of race relations in the 1930s, those of us who got through a significant portion of the book found it to be a slow-moving feminist rant in which the theme of race relations wasn't even introduced until half-way through the novel.

The film, on the other hand, was wonderful. It's a noteworthy film because it tackled issues that were very controversial at the time and it is considered the first film ever that featured an African-American actor in a role of substance. It made Time magazine's list of The 25 Most Important Films on Race in 2007. Louise Beavers' portrayal of Delilah is both endearing and heart-wrenching and the themes of relations between blacks and whites, passing, and maternal affection were well-handled, at times with humor, at others with great respect and empathy. You'll notice however, that neither Louise Beavers nor Fredi Washington, who played her daughter Peola, were included on the poster.

Our book for May with be Anthem by Ayn Rand. Sylvia will be leading the discussion.

March Meeting Recap

2011-03-17T09:25:00.000-07:00

Our book for February was the Civil War classic The Red Badge of Courage by Stephen Crane. Thanks to Geri for hosting.

Stephen Crane was an extremely brilliant and happy child, but not studious. After three total years of college with no degree, he moved to New York City to work as a freelance writer and journalist. His first novel, Maggie: A Girl of the Streets, published in 1893, was so shocking to publishers due to its naturalistic portrayal of a prostitute who commits suicide that Crane had to self-publish it. It didn't do well. It was Crane’s second novel, The Red Badge of Courage, that was to become an international success and secure his reputation. Crane wrote Red Badge in March of 1893. He is believed to have written the entire original manuscript in only ten days. He was 22 years old at the time.

After Red Badge, Crane continued to write prolifically, publishing four volumes of short stories and two of poetry, covering the war with Turkey and Greece for periodicals in England and America, and reporting on the Spanish-American War. He settled in England with a Florida hotel owner (widely acknowledged to be actually the madam of a brothel) named Cora Taylor. The couple became close to many key literary figures of the day including William Dean Howells, Hamlin Garland, Joseph Conrad, Robert Barr, H. G. Wells, Henry James and Harold Frederic.

Never in great health and taxed by his travels and adventures, Crane contracted tuberculosis. He never recovered his health and died in 1900 at the age of 28.

The Red Badge of Courage is set during the Civil War, specifically the battle of Chancellorsville, one of the bloodiest battles of the war, though Crane never names the battle in the book. The battle of Chancellorsville took place in Virginia and was the battle in which Stonewall Jackson was killed by friendly fire. It's a particularly fitting battle for a novel about the futility of war, as it was a stunning Confederate victory, but irrelevant in the grand scheme of things since the Confederate army was weakened by high casualties and went on to lose the war. Red Badge was a remarkable novel in its day for a number of reasons.

The twenty-two-year-old author had never witnessed war in his life before writing this book, yet this novel contains some of the most detailed and realistic battle scenes ever written. Crane's story developed to some degree out of his reading of war stories by Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy and the popular memoirs of Civil War veterans, yet he also deviated from these influences in his depiction of war's horror (books about the Civil War had been mostly glorifications of war). Crane's was the first popular book to depict the war as horrific, pointless, and morally ambiguous. He was a pioneer in this sense.
Crane's portrait of war is an intensely psychological one—again, unprecedented in American literature (it is, in fact, essentially a psychological study of Henry) blending elements of naturalism, realism, impressionism, and symbolism—a very stylistically rich work. Crane broke away from his American realist contemporaries, including his mentor William Dean Howells, in his naturalistic treatment of man as an amoral creature in a deterministic world.
Crane's novel was also one of the first popular American novels to employ the common slang of everyday folk and soldiers in a serious work (previous examples were humorous, such as Mark Twain's fiction) and to experiment with psychological realism. His venture into the realm of the human psyche radically changed the common perception of the novel in America.
The novel has a very limited viewpoint but is actually huge in scope, as it deals with some of the major agonies facing mankind (confrontation of death, lack of self-identity, cowardice, failure, guilt). Henry faces these conflicts in extreme psychological isolation. But he also experiences the opposite of all of these. He recognizes the brotherhood of man, he faces death, he finds his identity, he discovers courage, and he gains perspective.

Red Badge was very difficult for some members to get through, in part because there isn't much plot to speak of. The story focuses on what's going on inside Henry's head. Also, although many of us found Crane's prose remarkably well-written and beautiful, we also thought the fact that it was so heavily-laden with metaphor and symbolism was distracting and made it difficult to focus on the content. As one member noted, Crane's writing seems to get in its own way.

We talked about Crane's use of metaphor to illustrate his philosophy of naturalism. Naturalism is a theory of fiction which approaches life with a detached, “objective,” almost scientific outlook. Man is portrayed as insignificant and helpless, a creature of instinct that is shaped by environment and does not exercise its intelligence or free will. Nature is seen as indifferent to man. Individuals are unimportant in the grand scheme of things. In Red Badge, the soldiers are shaped by the war. They don't act of their own free will, but are just cogs in the machine. Crane underscores this idea with copious use of machine- and animal-based metaphors to describe the army. Opening the book at almost any page, especially in the battle scenes, will produce examples. For instance, from one two-page passage: “The noise of firing dogged their footsteps...it always returned again with increased insolence...Lines were faced toward the pursuing bark of the enemy's infantry...This noise, following like the yellings of eager, metallic hounds, increased to a loud and joyous burst...”We're always being chased around like rats.”...”It makes a man feel like a damn' kitten in a bag.”” Crane also makes abundant use of personification and the pathetic fallacy (investing objects with human feelings or emotions) to describe the natural world.

We talked about the major themes of the novel, including courage, self-identity and the purpose of war. We discussed Henry's motives for volunteering and how his views of military life evolve, which led to a discussion of our own views of war in general and specific wars. We also talked about Henry's subjective view of courage and what he comes to believe courage is by the end of the battle ( “a temporary but sublime absence of selfishness” in which men become united in a comradeship which leads to heroic actions). We discussed why he behaves so differently in the two engagements, whether we agree with his view that what happens to him is mostly a matter of chance, whether we were sympathetic to his initial cowardice, and how we felt about how he behaves toward Wilson when he rejoins his regiment. And we talked about the real battle of Chancellorsville and how much of what occurs in the book and the attitudes of the men reflect historians' opinions of the actual battle, specifically that there was bad leadership and communication on the Union side and good luck on the Confederate side. Lastly, we discussed the root causes of the war, whether we felt it was a moral war, and the realism of the Union and Confederate soldiers chatting and befriending each other while on watch and then killing each other on the battle field.

We also voted on our next round of books. We'll be reading Imitation of Life by Fannie Hurst for April (and possibly watching the 1934 film), Anthem by Ayn Rand for May, The Lacuna by Barbara Kingsolver for September and The Maltese Falcon by Dashiell Hammett for October. June will be our pot luck and gift exchange.

The book for April is Imitation of Life by Fannie Hurst. Kathryn will be hosting (I'll send an evite with the address). PLEASE NOTE, THE APRIL MEETING WILL BE HELD ON THE FIRST WEDNESDAY (APRIL 6TH) RATHER THAN THE SECOND WEDNESDAY DUE TO SPRING BREAK.

February Meeting Recap

2011-02-28T23:40:00.000-08:00

For the month of February, we read True Grit by Charles Portis. Thanks to Annemarie for hosting and Lynda for leading the discussion.

We started with some background on the author and the first film version of the book. Portis wrote several novels, all of which are based in his home state of Arkansas and display that state's unique blend of southern and southwestern culture. His novels depict clashes between the old and new South, and between traditional Southern traits such as independence and gentility and the untamed, willful quality of the Southwest. Portis' fiction reflects many aspects of the culture of his childhood, including small-town life, oddball characters, rural conservatism, and love for hunting, country music, and tall tales. True Grit was first published in 1968 as a serial in The Saturday Evening Post and was subsequently published as a novel. It is considered by some to be one of the funniest and most under-appreciated novels of the last century, an American classic that was, unfortunately, overshadowed by and cast aside because of the rather disappointing John Wayne film version released in 1969.

This is one book that everyone in attendance seems to have loved, and those of us who saw the new Cohen Brothers film adaptation loved the movie as well. We felt this was a rich and important book, and one we would encourage our daughters to read. We had a long and lively discussion about various themes Portis developed throughout the novel.

One theme we talked about was the independence of frontier women and Mattie's breed of independence in particular. We wondered why Mattie never married. Was it because she was independent and idealistic? Because it was hard to find someone to compare to her father, Rooster or LeBoeuf? Because she had lost her arm? Does the fact that she wound up a spinster work for her character? Was she sad or lonely at the end? Or is this just how life turned out and she accepted it? We also wondered if Mattie's type of independence would have been viewed as odd at that time. Is it still frowned upon to some extent today? We discussed whether it was relevant to the story that Mattie is a girl. Would the book have been significantly different if the main character had been a boy? This last point raised comparisons between True Grit and Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Both are stories about rites of passage and coming of age. Both are set during a time of westward expansion. And in both books, the protagonists represent the opposite of established and establishment thinking.

Another theme we discussed was moral justice. Although Mattie, perhaps naively, saw moral issues in terms of black and white, there were sometimes actually very fuzzy lines between right and wrong, particularly for Rooster. He wasn't always clear on where the boundaries were. He wasn't always quite on the right side, and his conscience plagued him. We talked about why Mattie and Rooster grew to trust each other. Although Mattie was more simplistic in her views about morality, the two shared a similar sense of justice and vengeance. Mattie's ideas about justice particularly interested the group. We talked about how her religious views affected her sense of moral justice. We also noted that Mattie seemed impervious to all of the killing of criminals going on around her, but was crushed by the death of her innocent and noble horse. This fact reveals a great deal about her character. We also wondered whether moral justice was at work in the case of Mattie's snake bite. Did Portis see that as payback for the shooting of Chaney? And lastly, we discussed the idea of justice as a precursor to freedom.

The third major theme we talked about was the role of money in the story. Money symbolizes Mattie's sense of justice. She was very pedantic about her moral ideals, just as she was about her financial dealings. She expected to get her money's worth in all cases. She also viewed getting her father's two California gold pieces back as an essential part of avenging his death. It's significant that when she came upon Chaney at the river and tried to apprehend him for his crimes, he recognized her as “the bookkeeper.” Rooster, on the other hand, tended to have much more flexible moral standards and seemed to just be hoping that his good deeds would balance out the bad in the end. Similarly, when it came to money he had no expectation of coming out ahead, he just wanted his expenses paid. And LeBoeuf, who seemed to chase bad guys largely for the glory when we first met him, was out for the big money.

Lastly, we discussed the role of liquor, which is the source of much evil in the novel. Drinking drove several characters to do foolish or evil things. Mattie noted that Chaney was drunk when he murdered her father. For Rooster, drinking seems to be a way of coping with the mistakes in his past.

Our book for March is the Civil War classic, The Red Badge of Courage, by Stephen Crane. Geri will be hosting (Thanks, Geri!) and I'll send out the address shortly. We'll also be voting on our next three (or possibly just two) books. I'll send out the nomination list before Wednesday's meeting.

January Meeting Recap

2011-02-01T13:52:00.000-08:00

This month's book was How to Be an American Housewife by Margaret Dilloway. We were pleased to have the author join us by phone to answer questions and give us her perspective on the book. Thanks to Lynda for hosting.

Much of the book deals with cultural customs and the cultural isolation of immigrants. Shoko struggled in the novel with racism, the loss of her extended family, and the loss of her culture as she tried to adapt to the American way of doing things. We talked about how difficult it is to parent under normal circumstances, let alone with these additional challenges. We also talked about how Shoko's experiences are similar to our own or to that of our immigrant relatives, either when living in other countries such as Germany and Japan, or when coming to the U.S. One member referenced a comparison made by another author between rice-growing and wheat-growing cultures, which said that a culture's dependence on either rice or wheat shapes their cultural beliefs. Because rice requires careful cultivation and takes a long time to grow, rice-growing cultures tend to believe that success in life, like success in farming, depends upon dedication and hard work—if you tend it, it will grow. People in wheat-growing cultures, on the other hand, are more likely to believe that success depends upon luck and talent.

The book goes beyond culture-specific themes, however. The themes of mother-daughter relationships, coping with the past while embracing the future, and letting go of old ways are universal. Several characters in the book are stuck in their mindsets, whether that's due to pride, culture, habit, fear, or personality. Taro's situation was particularly complex and interesting due to the juxtaposition of spirituality and petty grudges and of religious and cultural mores. Shoko, Taro and Sue all managed to get unstuck by the end. Sue's trip to Japan changed things for all three of them. It gave her the push she needed to begin to grow, and it gave Taro the opportunity to let go of a grudge that was very draining for him and to accept his sister.

The fact that the story was told from the two perspectives of Shoko and Sue was enlightening for us, for the most part. It highlighted both the differences and the similarities between mother and daughter. We gained a better understanding of each character by seeing them from their own perspective as well as from someone else's.

When asked what her own relationship with her mother was like, Margaret Dilloway referenced the recent Washington Post article, “Why Chinese Mothers are Superior.” Her mother was very strict and controlling and had preconceptions (all negative) of how her daughter would behave as a teenager. Subsequently, Margaret's relationship with her mother was strained and she felt she didn't have the opportunity to really know and understand her before she died. This led to a discussion of differences in parenting techniques between Asian and western cultures.

Margaret is working on a new book, The Rose of Galilee, which is due out in the spring of 2012. This book was inspired by her sister-in-law and deals with the theme of chronic illness and its affect on the family.

Our book for February will by True Grit by Charles Portis. Lynda with be leading that discussion (Thanks, Lynda!) and I'll send out an email shortly to let you all know where we'll be meeting.

December Meeting Recap

2011-01-06T08:59:00.000-08:00

December's book was The Importance of Being Earnest by Oscar Wilde. Thanks to Kathryn for hosting and Becky for leading the discussion.

The play received mixed reviews from the group but provided some interesting topics of discussion. Some enjoyed the humor, while others found it formulaic and felt other writers have done similar things much better. One major difficulty with the play is that there is very little stage direction given and Wilde's sarcasm doesn't come across in the writing, so it's a play that's much more amusing when performed than when read.

Oscar Wilde was a leading figure of the aesthetic movement, which was opposed to seriousness in art, a point of view which was quite obvious in the play. It was an interesting contrast to Tartuffe, which had a strong moral point and made serious criticisms of the Church. There was some depth to Earnest, however, in that the authority figures are meant to represent certain institutions (education, religion, literature, etc.) that molded the young people and made them what they were.

Most of the discussion centered around the era in which Wilde lived, the aesthetic movement, and how things are similar today. Comparisons were drawn between the hippie movement of the 1960s and the aesthetic movement of Wilde's time. We discussed Prop. 8 and contemporary views toward homosexuality. We also talked about the Victorian era, the facade maintained by the upper classes in England, and their need for a place to go to drop the facade. This is true for prominent figures today as well, and to some extent it's true in our own lives. Many of us have had the experience of feeling that we have to pretend to be something we're not because of the company we're in, for example being conservative in a public education system, being atheist in a religious society, or being pro-gay rights or pro-abortion in a religious-conservative neighborhood. The play also made us think about the difference between friends and acquaintances, and the idea that friends know and accept the real you even if your values aren't the same.

Our book for January is How to Be an American Housewife. The author, Margaret Dilloway, will be joining us by phone, so don't miss it! We'll be meeting on Wednesday, January 12th at 9:00 am. I'll send out an evite with the location.

November Meeting Recap

2010-11-23T21:47:00.000-08:00

Our November read was the play Tartuffe by Molière. Tartuffe is the story of a religious hypocrite who, after failing to seduce the wife of a naive friend, almost succeeds in his plot to jail him and his family and thereby cheat them out of their home. The play is a social comedy, which satirizes false piety, hypocrites, and certain aspects of the 17^th century Catholic Church. Thanks to Holly for hosting and Tonya for leading the discussion.

Molière, whose real name was Jean Baptiste Poquelin, was born on Jan. 15, 1622. He received his early education at the College de Clermont, a Jesuit school, becoming a promising scholar of Latin and Greek. Although he proceeded to study law and was awarded his law degree in 1642, he turned away from both the legal profession and his father's business. Instead, in 1643 he incorporated an acting troupe, the Illustre Theatre. He polished his skills as actor, director, administrator, and playwright, and in 1658 the troupe returned to Paris and played before Louis XIV. The king's brother became Molière's patron. Later, Molière and his colleagues were appointed official providers of entertainment to the king himself. Molière is considered the master of French comedy and wrote some of the most enduring satirical comedies of all time, some in rhyming verse, some in prose. He was also the leading French comic actor, stage director, and dramatic theoretician of the 17th century.

Molière wrote Tartuffe in 1664. Following its first performance the same year, King Louis XIV immediately banned the play, probably due to the influence of the illegal underground organization, the Compagnie du Saint-Sacrement and of his confessor, Paul Philippe Hardouin de Beaumont de Péréfixe, Archbishop of Paris. The Archbishop issued an edict threatening excommunication for anyone who watched, performed in, or read the play. Molière attempted to assuage church officials by re-writing his play to seem more secular and less critical of religion, but to no avail. The revised version of the play was called L'imposteur and had a main character named Panulphe instead of Tartuffe.

Much of our discussion centered around the many possibilities of why the play was banned while Louis XIV continued to give Molière his patronage. In the official account of the performance, the reason given for suppression of the play is that the king's “extreme delicacy to religious matters can not suffer this resemblance of vice to virtue, which could be mistaken for each other; although one does not doubt the good intentions of the author, even so he forbids it in public, and deprives himself of this pleasure, in order not to allow it to be abused by others less capable of making a just discernment of it.” We suspect there may have been more to it, though. Could the original version have contained more direct criticism of the Church in France? Cléante's speech about hypocrisy in the existing version of the play is quite critical and seems to question the need for a religious hierarchy. He asks, can we not determine on our own the difference between right and wrong? That is very much a Protestant idea and would have been considered heresy by the french Church at the time.

Did Tartuffe represent someone specific, such as the king's confessor? Certainly, the play is full of depictions of religious hypocrisy which would have been offensive to anyone who recognized himself in the main character. When Tartuffe teaches Elmire to sin in private, telling her it's only wrong if you get caught, perhaps it was a dig at the archbishop or members of the Compagnie du Saint-Sacrement. There are many more such examples throughout the play.

We also wondered why the king would have continued to support Molière and allow private performances of Tartuffe for the aristocracy. Perhaps the king continued to allow private performances as revenge for the Church's prevention of his marriage to the girl he loved. Or perhaps he simply didn't feel the play should have been suppressed at all.

We also discussed Orgon's willful irrationality at some length. His blindness toward Tartuffe is one example of this, as is his insistence that his daughter marry a man she can't stand (we all enjoyed Dorine's speech about this subject and cheating wives). At one point, Orgon tells Cléante outright that although he realizes Cléante's advice is sound and wise, he has no intention of following it. It appears as though Orgon, as he ages, is losing the things that made him respectable in his youth and is trying to redeem himself through piety. Maybe he is 'quitting a world that is fast quitting him' by turning to religion. Or maybe as he ages, he's becoming preoccupied with ensuring a place for himself in heaven and feels he can accomplish this by pandering to Tartuffe. Possibly this is an additional criticism of the Church.

We also talked about the use of reverse psychology throughout the play. Both Dorine and Tartuffe are very skillful at manipulating Orgon in this way. It seemed to us that Dorine is both the brains of the outfit and Tartuffe's foil. We also noted that it's very common for a servant to be the wise voice of reason in well-done comedies.

Although we enjoyed the play as a whole, many of us found the ending disappointing and felt the twist involving the strong box came out of nowhere. Apparently, the strong box was brought up earlier and was fleshed out better in earlier versions of the play. We suspect the weak, formulaic ending was probably standard in plays written for the king.

Our next meeting will be at 9:00 on Wednesday, December 8^th. I'll send out an evite as soon as we have the location worked out. We'll be discussing Oscar Wilde's play The Importance of Being Earnest. We don't yet have a volunteer to lead the discussion, so if anyone is willing, please let me know.

We'll also be voting on our three books for February, March and April at the December meeting. Our plan is to read American authors or books about the American experience, to coincide with what the kids at VDA are studying this year. We have a list of about a dozen nominees, but if you have any you'd like to add, please email your nominations to me by December 1^st.

October Meeting Recap

2010-10-15T18:35:00.000-07:00

This month I think we demonstrated that you don't have to love the book or, in fact, even read it to enjoy and participate in the many wonderful discussions it provokes. Our book this month was Bonfire of the Vanities by Tom Wolfe. The novel is the story of Sherman McCoy, a wealthy New York bond trader and self-styled Master of the Universe, whose life takes a horrible turn after an accident in the Bronx. Thanks to Annemarie for leading the discussion and thanks to Lynda for hosting.

Wolfe began his career as a reporter and worked for The Washington Post after finishing school. He later left The Post for the New York Herald Tribune. While reporting for these two papers, he experimented with using fiction-writing techniques in feature stories, mixing those techniques with the traditional ideal of dispassionate, even-handed reporting. This mixing of techniques came to be known as The New Journalism. Wolfe wrote numerous non-fiction books, including The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test and The Right Stuff, before publishing Bonfire of the Vanities, his first novel, in 1987. The novel originally ran as a serial in 27 installments in Rolling Stone starting in 1984. Wolfe heavily revised it before it was published in book form. The novel was a bestseller and a phenomenal success and was eventually made into a feature film starring Tom Hanks and Melanie Griffith. Wolfe's intention when writing the novel was to capture the essence of New York in the 1980s and to present a commentary on American society.

The book received mixed reviews from our group. We liked that it was essentially a tale of morality and redemption and we enjoyed Wolfe's humorous use of dialects and accents. The book also raised many important social, economic and political issues that are just as relevant today as they were at the time the book was written. On the other hand, Wolfe was brutal to his main character, which was uncomfortable to read, none of the characters were really likable, several lead characters were obsessed with sex to a ridiculous degree, and some of us felt the novel read too much like a serial. Whether we liked it, disliked it, or couldn't get through all 650+ pages, it was certainly thought-provoking and led to much insightful conversation. Among the many discussions sparked by the book:

Men's views of women and women's place in society in the 1980s.

Male characters' preoccupation with sex and aversion to their wives.
Women are generally either a means to an end (sexual opportunity, status symbol, someone to exploit to gain power) or an encumbrance to be treated with indifference or contempt.
No traditional mothering is portrayed in the book.
Do we really know any of the women in the book? Probably not. We only see them through the eyes of Sherman and Kramer. Sherman's perceptions change throughout the book, and we learn that in many cases the perceptions of both men are very skewed.
Sherman's love for his daughter doesn't even seem genuine for the first half of the book. It's based primarily on how pretty she is, how nice they look together, and what other people must think of her.
How does Sherman's transformation change how he thinks of Judy and Campbell?

Was Sherman's fate sealed by the social, political and racial climate in the Bronx, or would things have gone differently if he had reported the accident?

Opportunism of many secondary characters heavily influenced Sherman's case.
How would things have been different if Sherman hadn't been wealthy and white?
How would things have been different if Henry Lamb hadn't been poor and black?

Cyclical nature of morality and of fashion are tied to economic cycles.

1980s vs. the past decade before and after the crash

Feminism and the social and economic environment in New York.

How did the feminist movement affect women and families in the 1980s (rise of daycare and working mothers, effects on society, impact on our kids, etc.)
Over 50% of black kids in New York at the time were in single-parent families, typically with no father. What factors contributed to that statistic?
How does feminism continue to affect us today? Are we or our kids better off, or do we now find that instead of being free to choose, women are now expected to do everything—be full-time parents and wage-earners?

How accurate is the portrayal of people on Wall St.?

Not very, based on our collective experience.
The novel echos the popular view that wealthy people get more than they deserve.
So many people in the book, both rich and poor, haven't earned what they have, yet have a sense of entitlement. It seems very easy for people to lose their way morally, particularly if they don't have good self-esteem and a sound moral foundation to begin with.

Was Sherman fundamentally a good person?

How does his moral character change over the course of the novel—over the course of his marriage, his career, and his legal ordeal?
How does sudden wealth affect people morally—examples in today's society (celebrities).

Social prejudice.

“The hive”—How do characters navigate through social situations? How are their social decisions affected by their own social status and the social status of others?
Social prejudices exist even within what we would consider the same social stratum.
How do Sherman's prejudices change as a result of his legal ordeal?

Notoriety vs. popularity.

Why is Sherman less popular with his own friends but more popular with Judy's friends after his arrest?
Why does he like Judy's friends more after his arrest?
What role does self-esteem play?
Many people are attracted to the drama and want to be part of the story. The situation becomes political and truth doesn't matter any more.

“The New Journalism”

The evolution of journalism and the rise of sensationalism in the mainstream media.
Relationship between entertainment value, readership and advertising revenue.
How is online news impacting the objectivity of the mainstream media? Are traditional news outlets becoming increasingly fluffy and subjective in an effort to retain their audience?

As an epilogue, Kathryn has pointed out that Eliot Spitzer, sleazy former governor of New York, whom we discussed during the meeting, is back in the news again. From a recent press release: "CNN announced today that former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who resigned from office following revelations that he had visited a prostitute, will be the host of a new prime time show on the network."

...and elsewhere: "Spitzer, meanwhile, has been steadily rehabilitating his image since his fall from grace in March 2008, appearing regularly on cable news shows, teaching and penning a column for the online magazine Slate. He complained to Time Magazine of his boredom earlier this year, saying, 'When you have nothing to do all day, you eventually start yelling from the rafters.'"

Our next meeting will be held on November 10th, and we'll be discussing Tartuffe by Molière. Tonya will lead the discussion (Thanks, Tonya!). Because we've learned from experience that the translation we choose can have a significant impact on our enjoyment of a book, we're recommending the Richard Wilbur translation published by Harcourt. As a bonus, this translation also contains the play The Misanthrope. There's also a free e-book available through Kindle by a different translator. Becky tells me that translation is a bit wonky, but the play is very enjoyable nonetheless. We will be holding the November meeting at a member's home, and I'll let you all know whose home once I get that ironed out.

We're also working on setting up a viewing of the film version of Bonfire of the Vanities at Bonnie's home within the next week or two, so stay tuned for details on that.

September Meeting Recap

2010-09-27T23:35:00.000-07:00

At our first meeting of the new school year, we discussed the two Shakespeare plays we saw and read over the summer, Twelfth Night and The Taming of the Shrew. After a brief overview of the two plays, we talked about some of the themes: disguise and mistaken identity, marriage as a business arrangement versus marriage for love, social roles, gender roles and roles of wives. We talked about Shakespeare's use of language and gender confusion to bring comedy even to his tragedies and how his bending of genders may have been influenced by the fact that all roles were played by men in Shakespeare's time. We also talked about how the women in his plays “play the game” (meaning they play the part of the submissive, dutiful wife) while influencing and controlling men in clever, subtle and sneaky ways.

We discussed the differences between different productions and how a director's interpretation changes the meaning of the play. Whether Kate was really “tamed” at the end of The Taming of the Shrew, for instance, varies from one production to another, as does the degree to which Petrucchio's conscience seems to bother him. And we discussed the differences between Shakespeare's commissioned and non-commissioned plays. There are notable differences between his plays for the masses and his plays written for the court. In a way, his plays for the masses are similar to today's soap operas or tabloids. Commoners were entertained by these not-very-flattering glimpses into aristocratic life.

Our book for October will be Bonfire of the Vanities by Tom Wolfe. We'll be meeting at 9:00 am on Wednesday, October 13^th. However, due to the size of the group, we will not be meeting at Barnes and Noble. The October meeting will be held at a member's home (Thanks, Lynda!) and I will email the address to everyone before the meeting.

Potluck Poems--Shadows

2010-09-08T22:26:00.000-07:00

Shadows
by Samuel Daniel (1562-1619)

Are they shadows that we see?
And can shadows pleasure give?
Pleasures only shadows be
Cast by bodies we conceive,
And are made the things we deem,
In those figures which they seem.

But these pleasures vanish fast,
Which by shadows are exprest:
Pleasures are not, if they last,
In their passing, is their best.
Glory is most bright and gay
In a flash, and so away.

Feed apace then greedy eyes
On the wonder you behold.
Take it sudden as it flies
Though you take it not to hold:
When your eyes have done their part,
Thought must length it in the heart.

Comments from the contributor:
This poem was originally composed within a larger work of which I am unfamiliar. The poet alludes to Plato's Allegory of the Cave to one's memories of joyous moments. This is interesting. He's warning the reader not to let these wonderful moments pass away into ambiguity and to make a concerted effort to keep the memories of such moments in the forefront of our minds. A worthwhile message.

Potluck Poems--A Red, Red Rose

2010-09-01T20:50:00.000-07:00

A Red, Red Rose
by Robert Burns

Oh my luve is like a red, red rose,
That's newly sprung in June:
Oh my luve is like the melodie,
That's sweetly play'd in tune.

As fair art thou, my bonie lass,
So deep in luve am I;
And I will luve thee still, my dear,
Till a' the seas gang dry.

Till a' the seas gang dry, my dear,
And the rocks melt wi' the sun;
And I will luve thee still, my dear,
While the sands o' life shall run.

And fare thee weel, my only luve!
And fare thee weel a while!
And I will come again, my luve,
Tho' it were ten thousand mile

Pot Luck Poems--The Highwayman

2010-08-16T14:33:00.000-07:00

And here we have our second put luck poem:

The Highwayman

by Alfred Noyes

PART ONE

The wind was a torrent of darkness among the gusty trees,
The moon was a ghostly galleon tossed upon cloudy seas,
The road was a ribbon of moonlight over the purple moor,
And the highwayman came riding—
Riding—riding—
The highwayman came riding, up to the old inn-door.

He'd a French cocked-hat on his forehead, a bunch of lace at his chin,
A coat of the claret velvet, and breeches of brown doe-skin;
They fitted with never a wrinkle: his boots were up to the thigh!
And he rode with a jewelled twinkle,
His pistol butts a-twinkle,
His rapier hilt a-twinkle, under the jewelled sky.

III

Over the cobbles he clattered and clashed in the dark inn-yard,
And he tapped with his whip on the shutters, but all was locked and barred;
He whistled a tune to the window, and who should be waiting there
But the landlord's black-eyed daughter,
Bess, the landlord's daughter,
Plaiting a dark red love-knot into her long black hair.

And dark in the dark old inn-yard a stable-wicket creaked
Where Tim the ostler listened; his face was white and peaked;
His eyes were hollows of madness, his hair like mouldy hay,
But he loved the landlord's daughter,
The landlord's red-lipped daughter,
Dumb as a dog he listened, and he heard the robber say—

"One kiss, my bonny sweetheart, I'm after a prize to-night,
But I shall be back with the yellow gold before the morning light;
Yet, if they press me sharply, and harry me through the day,
Then look for me by moonlight,
Watch for me by moonlight,
I'll come to thee by moonlight, though hell should bar the way."

He rose upright in the stirrups; he scarce could reach her hand,
But she loosened her hair i' the casement! His face burnt like a brand
As the black cascade of perfume came tumbling over his breast;
And he kissed its waves in the moonlight,
(Oh, sweet, black waves in the moonlight!)
Then he tugged at his rein in the moonliglt, and galloped away to the West.

PART TWO

He did not come in the dawning; he did not come at noon;
And out o' the tawny sunset, before the rise o' the moon,
When the road was a gypsy's ribbon, looping the purple moor,
A red-coat troop came marching—
Marching—marching—
King George's men came matching, up to the old inn-door.

They said no word to the landlord, they drank his ale instead,
But they gagged his daughter and bound her to the foot of her narrow bed;
Two of them knelt at her casement, with muskets at their side!
There was death at every window;
And hell at one dark window;
For Bess could see, through her casement, the road that he would ride.

III

They had tied her up to attention, with many a sniggering jest;
They had bound a musket beside her, with the barrel beneath her breast!
"Now, keep good watch!" and they kissed her.
She heard the dead man say—
Look for me by moonlight;
Watch for me by moonlight;
I'll come to thee by moonlight, though hell should bar the way!

She twisted her hands behind her; but all the knots held good!
She writhed her hands till her fingers were wet with sweat or blood!
They stretched and strained in the darkness, and the hours crawled by like years,
Till, now, on the stroke of midnight,
Cold, on the stroke of midnight,
The tip of one finger touched it! The trigger at least was hers!

The tip of one finger touched it; she strove no more for the rest!
Up, she stood up to attention, with the barrel beneath her breast,
She would not risk their hearing; she would not strive again;
For the road lay bare in the moonlight;
Blank and bare in the moonlight;
And the blood of her veins in the moonlight throbbed to her love's refrain .

Tlot-tlot; tlot-tlot! Had they heard it? The horse-hoofs ringing clear;
Tlot-tlot, tlot-tlot, in the distance? Were they deaf that they did not hear?
Down the ribbon of moonlight, over the brow of the hill,
The highwayman came riding,
Riding, riding!
The red-coats looked to their priming! She stood up, straight and still!

VII

Tlot-tlot, in the frosty silence! Tlot-tlot, in the echoing night!
Nearer he came and nearer! Her face was like a light!
Her eyes grew wide for a moment; she drew one last deep breath,
Then her finger moved in the moonlight,
Her musket shattered the moonlight,
Shattered her breast in the moonlight and warned him—with her death.

VIII

He turned; he spurred to the West; he did not know who stood
Bowed, with her head o'er the musket, drenched with her own red blood!
Not till the dawn he heard it, his face grew grey to hear
How Bess, the landlord's daughter,
The landlord's black-eyed daughter,
Had watched for her love in the moonlight, and died in the darkness there.

Back, he spurred like a madman, shrieking a curse to the sky,
With the white road smoking behind him and his rapier brandished high!
Blood-red were his spurs i' the golden noon; wine-red was his velvet coat,
When they shot him down on the highway,
Down like a dog on the highway,
And he lay in his blood on the highway, with the bunch of lace at his throat.

* * * * * *

And still of a winter's night, they say, when the wind is in the trees,
When the moon is a ghostly galleon tossed upon cloudy seas,
When the road is a ribbon of moonlight over the purple moor,
A highwayman comes riding—
Riding—riding—
A highwayman comes riding, up to the old inn-door.

Over the cobbles he clatters and clangs in the dark inn-yard;
He taps with his whip on the shutters, but all is locked and barred;
He whistles a tune to the window, and who should be waiting there
But the landlord's black-eyed daughter,
Bess, the landlord's daughter,
Plaiting a dark red love-knot into her long black hair.

Pot Luck Poems--Maud Muller

2010-08-10T14:02:00.000-07:00

Gosh, it's been a while, hasn't it? I hope you've all been enjoying your summer as much as I have. Our last official meeting of the school year was our June pot luck and book exchange, and if you weren't there, you missed a good time. We tried something new this year--instead of reading a book to discuss, we each brought our favorite poem to share. Over the next few weeks, I'll be posting the poems for you all to enjoy. When you see your poem posted, feel free to comment on why you chose it. Enjoy!

Maud Muller
by John Greenleaf Whittier

Maud Muller, on a summer's day,
Raked the meadows sweet with hay.

Beneath her torn hat glowed the wealth
Of simple beauty and rustic health.

Singing, she wrought, and her merry glee
The mock-bird echoed from his tree.

But, when she glanced to the far-off town,
White from its hill-slope looking down,

The sweet song died, and a vague unrest
And a nameless longing filled her breast–

A wish, that she hardly dared to own,
For something better than she had known.

The Judge rode slowly down the lane,
Smoothing his horse’s chestnut mane.

He drew his bridle in the shade
Of the apple-trees, to greet the maid,

And ask a draught from the spring that flowed
Through the meadow across the road.

She stooped where the cool spring bubbled up,
And filled for him her small tin cup,

And blushed as she gave it, looking down
On her feet so bare, and her tattered gown.

“Thanks!” said the Judge, “a sweeter draught
From a fairer hand was never quaffed.”

He spoke of the grass and flowers and trees,
Of the singing birds and the humming bees;

Then talked of the haying, and wondered whether
The cloud in the west would bring foul weather.

And Maud forgot her briar-torn gown,
And her graceful ankles bare and brown;

And listened, while a pleasant surprise
Looked from her long-lashed hazel eyes.

At last, like one who for delay
Seeks a vain excuse, he rode away,

Maud Muller looked and sighed: “Ah, me!
That I the Judge’s bride might be!

“He would dress me up in silks so fine,
And praise and toast me at his wine.

“My father should wear a broadcloth coat;
My brother should sail a painted boat.

“I’d dress my mother so grand and gay,
And the baby should have a new toy each day.

“And I’d feed the hungry and clothe the poor,
And all should bless me who left our door.”

The Judge looked back as he climbed the hill,
And saw Maud Muller standing still.

“A form more fair, a face more sweet,
Ne’er hath it been my lot to meet.

“And her modest answer and graceful air
Show her wise and good as she is fair.

“Would she were mine, and I to-day,
Like her, a harvester of hay:

“No doubtful balance of rights and wrongs,
Nor weary lawyers with endless tongues,

“But low of cattle, and song of birds,
And health, and quiet, and loving words.”

But he thought of his sisters, proud and cold,
And his mother, vain of her rank and gold.

So, closing his heart, the Judge rode on,
And Maud was left in the field alone.

But the lawyers smiled that afternoon,
When he hummed in court an old love-tune;

And the young girl mused beside the well,
Till the rain on the unraked clover fell.

He wedded a wife of richest dower,
Who lived for fashion, as he for power.

Yet oft, in his marble hearth’s bright glow,
He watched a picture come and go:

And sweet Maud Muller’s hazel eyes
Looked out in their innocent surprise.

Oft when the wine in his glass was red,
He longed for the wayside well instead;

And closed his eyes on his garnished rooms,
To dream of meadows and clover-blooms.

And the proud man sighed, with a secret pain,
“Ah, that I were free again!

“Free as when I rode that day,
Where the barefoot maiden raked her hay.”

She wedded a man unlearned and poor,
And many children played round her door.

But care and sorrow, and child-birth pain,
Left their traces on heart and brain.

And oft, when the summer sun shone hot
On the new-mown hay in the meadow lot,

And she heard the little spring brook fall
Over the roadside, through the wall,

In the shade of the apple-tree again
She saw a rider draw his rein,

And, gazing down with timid grace,
She felt his pleased eyes read her face.

Sometimes her narrow kitchen walls
Stretched away into stately halls;

The weary wheel to a spinnet turned,
The tallow candle an astral burned;

And for him who sat by the chimney lug,
Dozing and grumbling o’er pipe and mug,

A manly form at her side she saw,
And joy was duty and love was law.

Then she took up her burden of life again,
Saying only, “It might have been.”

Alas for maiden, alas for Judge,
For rich repiner and household drudge!

God pity them both! and pity us all,
Who vainly the dreams of youth recall;

For of all sad words of tongue or pen,
The saddest are these: “It might have been!”

Ah, well! for us all some sweet hope lies
Deeply buried from human eyes;

And, in the hereafter, angels may
Roll the stone from its grave away!

May Meeting Recap

2010-05-31T07:29:00.000-07:00

Our book for May was the Sir Walter Scott classic, Ivanhoe. Thanks to Geri for leading the discussion.

Walter Scott was born in Edinburgh, Scotland in 1771. He spent much of his childhood at his grandfather's country home in southern Scotland and eventually built himself a castle there. He was a lawyer by trade who was also a partner in a publishing house and wrote "on the side" in part to get himself out of financial difficulties. He became a best-selling author, as well as a baronet, and invented the genre of historical fiction. Scott was proud of his Scottish heritage and is credited with rehabilitating the image of the Highlander and revitalizing an interest in tartans. On the other hand, he was a Borderman with strong ties to England. He sought not to separate Scotland and England, but to enhance Scotland's status within the British empire. Many of his books, including Ivanhoe, take place in England.

We've read quite a few historical fiction novels in the past, so naturally we drew some comparisons between Scott and other authors such as Dumas, Hugo and Hawthorne. There are significant differences in plot and character development, and we also noted the tendency of the French authors to go off on 30-40 page tangents about some historical fact, which Scott didn't do. Overall, this novel was adventurous and quick-paced, but few of the characters developed or grew through the course of the story. Brian de Bois-Guilbert seems to be the one character who changed significantly, and the internal conflict caused by those changes was his downfall.

Scott brings the motif of disguise into the novel repeatedly. Ivanhoe and King Richard are in disguise throughout much of the book, and even characters who aren't in disguise are frequently not what they seem or what they're expected to be. The religious characters of the palmer, the prior, the friar, and the Templars are rarely, if ever, the morally upright characters one might expect, and in the case of the palmer, he isn't really even a palmer at all. Wamba, Cedric, Gurth and Rebecca also disguise themselves at some point in the story, all with the intention of anonymously helping their friends.

We also discussed Scott's treatment of Jews in the novel, and the fact that the portrayal of Jews and Christians' view of them was more a reflection of Scott's own time than King Richard's. Scott's intention was to portray Isaac and Rebecca as sympathetic characters who are victims of prejudice, and overall he succeeded. Rebecca is probably the most sympathetic and complex character in the novel, and Isaac, though somewhat a two-dimensional stereotype, also comes across as a kind man and loving father.

Considering Sir Walter Scott's own history and sympathies, it seems he may have been drawing on his own struggle to bridge two worlds for inspiration while writing Ivanhoe. Though Ivanhoe is wounded and absent for much of the novel, he is clearly the hero because he is the character who is most influential in bringing together the Normans and Saxons, just as Scott worked to bring England and Scotland closer together.

Once again, discussion of the book brought to mind a number of related movies, in this case about the time period in which the book was set or about some of the characters in the book. Some of the movies that were mentioned: Ridley Scott's Robin Hood (now in theaters), Knight's Tale (2001), First Knight (1995), Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975), and The Name of the Rose (1986). Another book that was recommended was James Patterson's The Jester, a historical fiction novel set in the late 11th century.

There is no book for June. We will instead have our annual pot luck and book exchange. I'll email details about that, as well as our Shakespeare plays for summer.

April Meeting Recap

2010-04-30T23:00:00.001-07:00

Our book for April was The Help: A Novel by Kathryn Stockett. Thanks to our very own Kathryn for leading the meeting.

We began with a discussion of Kathryn Stockett's childhood, why she chose to write this novel and write it in the way she did, and the research she did to ensure the authenticity of the voices and experiences in the novel. The author gave an interview with Katie Couric in which she explained much of this background.

We also talked about the voices of the different women in the book, and about how the book was received by reviewers of various races. The author was concerned about how it would be perceived that she, a white woman, was writing in the voice of two African-American maids. And, in fact, there are reviewers who have objected that it's presumptuous for Stockett to write as if she knows what it's like to be in the position those maids were in. However, we didn't feel that objection was any more valid than objecting to a male author writing female characters, or any other author writing about a group he or she doesn't belong to. We felt all of the maids were depicted with respect and compassion.

We talked a lot about the civil rights movement, particularly Martin Luther King Jr., the murder of Medgar Evers, and the role of the Catholic church in the protests in Selma, Alabama. We discussed the many guises of prejudice in the book, and our own experiences with prejudice in our lives.

A couple of movies were highly suggested by group members for those who are interested in another perspective on the subject of racial prejudice in America, including The Blind Side (2009), The Great Debaters (2007), and Imitation of Life (1934). The 1934 version of Imitation of Life has been noted as the first film of major significance that offered a black role of meaning, substance and humanity.

We also had some relatively new members at April's meeting, so we took some time at the beginning of the meeting to tell a bit about ourselves and learn more about each other. One of the many items of note we all learned is that we have a very talented landscape artist in the group. If you're interested in having a look at her work, you can visit her web site: www.annemariehall.com.

Our book for May is Ivanhoe by Sir Walter Scott. Geri will be leading that discussion (Thanks, Geri!). We'll be meeting at 9:00 am on May 12th at the Aliso Viejo Barnes & Noble. Also, I'll be sending out the information shortly for the Shakespeare plays we'll be attending this summer.

March Meeting Recap

2010-03-23T10:57:00.000-07:00

This month's book was The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society by Mary Ann Shaffer and Annie Barrows. Thanks to Becky for leading the discussion. We began with some background information on the authors and the history of the Nazi occupation of the Channel Islands before we talked about the book itself.

Mary Ann Shaffer was a West Virginia librarian and bibliophile whose dream was to "write a book that someone would like enough to publish." She became interested in Guernsey while visiting London in 1980. On a whim, she decided to fly to Guernsey but became stranded there when a thick fog descended. While waiting for the fog to lift, she read a book from the Guernsey airport bookstore called Jersey under the Jack-Boot, the story of the Nazi occupation of the island. Years later, when goaded by her book club to write a novel, she thought of the Channel Islands. When her health began to decline, she asked her niece, Annie Barrows (author of the Ivy and Bean series for children, and The Magic Half), to help her finish the book.

The Nazi occupation of the Channel Islands lasted from 30 June 1940 until the liberation on 9 May 1945. In June 1940, Great Britain decided the islands served no strategic purpose. After conscripting all able-bodied men and evacuating the children and much of the rest of the population, the British left the islands to the Germans. The Nazis, not realizing there was no military force there to defend the islands, bombed the harbors of Jersey and Guernsey, killing 44 islanders. Guernsey surrendered to the Germans on 30 June, and the nearly five-year occupation began. The islanders were not liberated until after the German surrender to Allied forces on the continent.

Overall, we thought the novel was an enjoyable read, though a "Costco book" as one member put it. The book is set in 1946 post-occupation Guernsey, but the letters written back and forth are often about the occupation itself, how both the islanders and Germans suffered and coped, and what happened to them throughout the occupation. Most of us felt we learned a bit of history of which we were previously unaware.

Generally, we enjoyed the fact that the novel was written in the form of letters between characters. It was interesting and gave the book a very personal feel. At times, though, it seemed ideas were left undeveloped, as if the author were skipping around episodically. We saw parallels as the book progressed between Juliet's personal growth and Shaffer's growth as a writer. Some of the slight disjointedness can probably be attributed to the fact that Barrows took over some of the writing and made changes to existing portions of the book. It seems fairly obvious where she took over, because she seemed to have trouble hearing the voices of the characters as Shaffer did.

The plentiful references to the books the islanders were reading gave us an added perspective on the islanders' personalities and also planted seeds in some of our heads for future reading. There are authors mentioned in the book whom many of us haven't read, and we're now curious to look into them.

Another thing we enjoyed about The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society is that the author told the story of the Nazi occupation from a sympathetic, female point of view. Unlike many authors who write stories about war, and about this war in particular, she gave a complex view of the Germans and the islanders and reminded us that there's potential for good and bad everywhere. It's easy to depict enemy soldiers as evil and the occupied country as uniformly good, but Shaffer showed us a more human and compassionate view.

We also voted on our next two books and our summer Shakespeare plays. We'll be reading Ivanhoe by Sir Walter Scott for May and Bonfire of the Vanities by Tom Wolfe for October. Over the summer, we'll be attending three Shakespeare plays, King Lear, Twelfth Night and The Taming of the Shrew, and we'll discuss them in September.

Next month's book is The Help by Kathryn Stockett. Our very own Kathryn will be leading that discussion, same time, same place.

February Meeting Recap

2010-02-24T13:19:00.000-08:00

Our book for February was The Black Tulip, the shortest of Alexandre Dumas' best-known novels. Thanks to Sylvia for leading the discussion. Dumas was one of the most popular writers of the French Romantic period, and was also among the most prolific, having written around 650 books, as well as plays, travel books, memoirs, histories, accounts of great crimes and numerous miscellaneous writings including his vast Grand Dictionnaire de Cuisine. We talked a great deal about Dumas' life and about his father, who had a significant impact on Dumas and his writing.

Dumas' father, born out of wedlock to the Marquis de La Pailleterie and a black Haitian slave, was a common soldier under the ancien régime who assumed his mother's name, Dumas, in 1786. A man of commanding presence, great courage and colossal physical strength, he was known as the Black Devil. He rose through the ranks to became a general in Napoleon's army at the age of 33. He later quarreled with Napoleon and was dismissed, was captured by Ferdinand of Sicily while en route home, and was left to rot in prison for two years. He returned home a broken man and died when Alexandre Dumas was only four. Alexandre's memories and his mother's stories of his larger-than-life father's swashbuckling heroism made his late father the most significant and influential person in his life. We can see the influence of Dumas' father in many of the author's characters.

As a young man, Alexandre went to Paris and obtained a post in the household of the Duke d'Orléans, the future King Louis-Philippe, but soon decided to try his fortune in the theatre. After writing numerous successful plays, he turned to historical novels, creating exciting stories set against a colourful historical background, usually the 16th or 17th century. Dumas was a celebrity in his own time and an extremely successful writer, but he lived very extravagantly and was forced to write more and more rapidly in order to pay his creditors, often employing collaborators who did research and worked out plot treatments. He ultimately left France to escape his creditors, among other reasons, but returned after his bankruptcy was settled. He was a devoted republican, stood as a liberal candidate in several elections, ran guns for Garibaldi in Sicily, traveled extensively, flaunted his mistresses, and was the most flambouyant and famous Frenchman of his day.

The Black Tulip was a comparatively short work for Dumas, and a much more simple story than his longer novels. The story begins with an historical event, the 1672 lynching of the Dutch Grand Pensionary, John De Witt, and his brother Cornelius by an angry mob, very likely incited by agents of William of Orange. At chapter five, Dumas switches gears and launches the main plot line, involving fictional characters. The connection of those characters to the killing of the de Witt brothers is gradually revealed.

The city of Haarlem has offered a prize of 100,000 guilders to the person who can grow a black tulip, sparking competition between the country's best gardeners to win the money, honour and fame. Cornelius de Witt's godson, Cornelius van Baerle, has almost succeeded, but is betrayed by his neighbor and suddenly thrown into Loevestein prison where he meets and falls in love with the prison guard's beautiful daughter Rosa, who will ultimately rescue him.

The group liked the book overall, but it was a bit difficult for some of us, having read The Count of Monte Cristo or The Three Musketeers, to get as excited about this novel. It isn't the same type of story of adventure and revenge, and there seemed to be a big disconnect between the first four chapters and the rest of the book. However, it did deal with themes that are common threads throughout Dumas' work: justice, envy, wrongful imprisonment, and the moral development of rulers. We saw the same extensive use of historical references for which Dumas is so well known, and we appreciated that Dumas' novels educate us about history and mythology without spoon-feeding it to us as many contemporary authors do. We also noted that Dumas makes use of imagery of light and darkness in this novel to depict shades of good and evil, and to show the process of something good developing from the bad.

We saw some hints of Dumas' theatrical past in this novel. There are numerous asides delivered by the narrator directly to the reader, which really threw us as we were reading. This may also have been the result of serialization. Since the novel was originally published in three installments, we think Dumas may have used these asides to wrap things up at the end of one installment and remind the reader of what happened previously at the beginning of the next installment.

A final point of discussion was the problem that different translations pose. Some of us had translations based on the original French version, and some on the pirated Belgian version. Some had translations that read more like Dumas than others. And some had translations with no historical introduction or footnotes, which made the many historical references very difficult to understand. So in the future, we may do some research beforehand and decide on the best translation so we can all read the same one and get the most out of the book.

Next month's book is The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society by Mary Anne Shaffer. Becky will be leading that discussion. And I was mistaken in my last post--we'll actually be voting at the March meeting for our May book and the summer Shakespeare plays, so please send me your book nominations.

January Meeting Recap

2010-01-15T10:10:00.000-08:00

This month's book, The Shuttle by Frances Hodgson Burnett, seems to have been a hit. Thanks to Tonya for leading the discussion. We started with biographical information on the author, which came up again and again as we discussed the book, as this novel was very much reflective of the author's own life.

Frances Hodgson Burnett was born in Manchester, England and moved to America during the Civil War at the age of 15, after the death of her father. She was a hugely successful and prolific writer with a career spanning 56 years, and wrote several well-known novels including Little Lord Fauntleroy, The Secret Garden and The Little Princess. Her characters delighted in breaking down social, class and national distinctions. Her novels are typically dominated by reversals of fortune and shifts in status and often feature both a very strong and a very weak character.

The author herself was in an unhappy marriage and had an ailing son while she was writing this novel. The character of Ughtred calls to mind her own child and the character of Nigel Anstruthers is based on her own manipulative, abusive husband. The tone of the novel became more dark and quick-moving as her own marriage deteriorated and ended, and she commented that killing off Nigel in the novel made her finally feel free of her own husband, whom she divorced. Burnett herself appears to have been most like the character of Rosie in real life, while aspiring to be like Betty.

Our discussion of the book focused largely on character development and how the novel is a reflection of the era in which it was written and of the author's own experience. Although some aspects of the novel were very modern (the final confrontation between Betty and Nigel, for instance) others were archaic and had to be interpreted from the perspective of that time period in order to be appreciated. The awe in which everyone held Betty simply because she was a woman of both beauty and intelligence may be the most obvious example of this. Overall, the group agreed that Burnett was very skilled at character development, presenting very strong and well-fleshed-out characters. We were particularly struck by how masterfully she depicted Nigel's evilness and his steady deterioration. We also appreciated the skill with which she illustrated the social constraints of that time and place, the effects they had on the various characters, and how Betty and G. Seldon helped Mount Dunstan escape them and think beyond the conventions of his time. We also discussed the differences between Rosie and Betty's temperaments and the numerous factors (cultural, environmental, familial, inherent) that contributed to their personalities and to their strengths and weaknesses. Why the daughter of one of the wealthiest and most powerful men in the world would do so little to help herself and protect her child was the focus of much discussion.

Next month's book is The Black Tulip by Alexandre Dumas. From Amazon.com: "Set in Holland in 1672, this timeless political allegory draws on the violence and crimes of history, making a case against tyranny and creating a symbol of justice and tolerance: the fateful tulipa negra." Sylvia will be leading that discussion (Thanks, Sylvia!). They have a few copies of the book at Barnes and Noble in Aliso Viejo and it is also available as a free e-book at Project Gutenberg, if anyone still needs it.

We will be voting at next month's meeting for the next bunch of reads, so please send me your nominations. What we would like to do for the June potluck/book exchange, rather than reading and discussing a book, is have everyone bring their favorite poem to share with the group. The plan for September is to attend a Shakespeare play (or two or three) together over the summer, read the plays, and discuss them at the September meeting. So we'll be voting next month on which plays to see/read as well as on which book to read for the May meeting.

December Meeting Recap

2009-12-09T19:25:00.000-08:00

This month's book was People of the Book by Geraldine Brooks. Thanks to Geri for leading the discussion. We began, as we usually do, with a biography of the author. This was followed by an account of how the idea for the novel developed, a history of the Sarajevo Haggadah, and our thoughts on the novel.

Geraldine Brooks is an Australian-born author and journalist who spent much of her journalism career covering crises in the Middle East, Africa and the Balkans. She has published several fiction and non-fiction books, including March, for which she was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 2006. Brooks converted to Judaism after marrying fellow journalist Tony Horwitz, and she became an American citizen in 2002.

The novel People of the Book won both the Australian Book of the Year Award and the Australian Literary Fiction Award in 2008. It is a fictionalized account of the history of a real book, the Sarajevo Haggadah, which grew out of Brooks' reporting for The New Yorker on human interest stories emerging in the aftermath of the 1991-1995 breakup of Yugoslavia. The essential historical information surrounding the Sarajevo Haggadah in the book is factual. It was created in the middle of the 14th century, and is believed to have been taken out of Spain by Spanish Jews during the expulsion of 1492. Notes in the Haggadah's margins indicate that it surfaced in Italy in 1520 and that it was saved from being burned by the Inquisition in 1609. It was sold in 1894 by a man named Josef Cohan to the National Museum in Sarajevo, which sent it to Vienna for assessment. The Haggadah again escaped destruction, this time at the hands of the Nazis, in 1941 when the Museum's chief librarian hid the manuscript and later smuggled it out of Sarajevo and handed it over to a Muslim cleric for safe-keeping. During the Bosnian War in the early 1990s, the Haggadah was saved once again from the National Museum, which was on the front line, by the museum's director, who transferred it to the vault of the National Bank. When the war was over, the President and Prime Minister of Bosnia presented the Haggadah at a community Seder in 1995. The Haggadah is now on permanent display in the National Museum and is viewed by the people of Sarajevo as a symbol of their history of cultural and religious diversity and unity.

This novel was unique for us in that most of us seemed to have mixed opinions about it, and we think that's a result of the fact that it was written in a mixture of first and third person narrative and that the contemporary sections of the book seemed stylistically disconnected from the historical vignettes. Brooks struggled for some time with how to handle the contemporary sections, ultimately settling on the idea of making the main character, Hanna, Australian because that was a voice Brooks understood. Unfortunately, Hanna is a rather shallow character, which seems inappropriate both for her profession and for the gravity of the subject matter of the novel. Other characters in the contemporary sections, such as Frau Zweig, also have some discordant qualities that distract from the narrative a bit. We wondered if the novel would have been improved by removing the contemporary sections altogether and including Hanna's portion of the story as one more historical chapter. One final criticism of the novel was that Brooks relies too heavily on narration to move the story along, rather than on action and dialog.

On the positive side, we felt the parallel of the story of the Haggadah and Hanna's personal journey was nicely done, illustrating that even when you're dealing with your own history, you still don't really know the whole story. We also felt Brooks did a fine job of drawing us into the mystery of the Haggadah from the start and making us want to know it's history. Who had handled it and where did it come from? We liked the way she started with actual facts and wove multiple stories around them, and we appreciated that the stories she presented didn't always support Hanna's assumptions.

We felt this novel presented some very important historical and cultural information of which most people in our culture are unaware. We discussed the connections between the rise of extreme nationalism and the persecution of Jews, as well as the more recent surges in those types of political movements in Europe and how they are often fueled by economic conditions. We discussed the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492 and why we only learn about the golden age of exploration in conjunction with Ferdinand and Isabella. Should our kids be learning about these negative aspects of Ferdinand and Isabella's reign--of all of European history, for that matter--and can it be taught to them in age-appropriate ways? Once again for our book group, a novel brought up the axiom that those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it.

Our book for January will be The Shuttle by Frances Hodgson Burnett. Tonya will be leading that discussion (Thanks, Tonya!) We'll be meeting at 9:00 am on January 13th at the Aliso Viejo B&N.

November Meeting Recap

2009-11-26T16:28:00.000-08:00

Our book for this month was David Benioff's City of Thieves, a dark but humorous adventure story set during the Nazi siege of Leningrad. The book received mixed reviews from the group, with some loving it, some just liking it, and some really disliking it. But of course, that makes for a lively discussion.

We began with some background on the author, his research for the book, and the history of the siege of Leningrad. This is Benioff's second novel. His first, The 25th Hour, was adapted into a feature film, which launched Benioff's career as a screen writer. His screenplays include "Troy", "Stay", "The Kiterunner" and "X-Men Origins: Wolverine". He has also written a collection of short stories called When the Nines Roll Over, which appeared in Best New American Voices and The Best Nonrequired American Reading.

City of Thieves is historical fiction which has been described as an adventure story, a bitter-sweet coming of age, and a very dark comedy. Though the details of the siege are factual, Benioff's grandfather was actually born and lived his entire life in the northeastern U.S., Benioff's grandmother was a wonderful cook, and the David in the novel is not the author. Benioff did a great deal of research before writing City of Thieves, reading dozens of books on the siege, most notably The Nine Hundred Days by Harrison Salisbury and Kaputt by Curzio Malaparte. The details of the siege revealed in the novel are a factual glimpse into the horrors and privations suffered by the residents of Leningrad.

We talked a bit about some of the major themes of the novel, one of which was patriotism. We discussed Lev's and Kolya's ideas of patriotism and how Lev reconciles his sense of patriotism with what the NKVD did to his father. We came to the conclusion that patriotism has little to do with one's feelings about the government or even the country as a whole, but with one's home and loved ones. Lev is fighting for his city, his neighborhood, and the people he cares for. We also discussed the idea of the evil without vs. the evil within. Lev and Kolya have no great love for the Communists and are often contemptuous of their government and their countrymen, as evidenced by their discussions of Nazi vs. Communist propaganda, the hypocrisy of their leaders, the posters of famous people, and the surrender of the Muscovites. But they understand that what's in store for them if they don't defeat the Nazis is far worse. On a related note, we talked about Vika's assertion that when the NKVD torture and kill people, they're only doing their jobs. We discussed whether that's a valid argument, whether it may be more valid in a totalitarian state than elsewhere, and the irony that the Nazi soldiers employed the same argument to justify their actions.

Another theme that came up was human dignity vs. survival. There are numerous examples in the book of degrading and inhuman things people did to stay alive, and the things that happened to them when they refused to comply, all of which were factual. The graphic descriptions of these things and the sheer number of them were among the reasons some members really disliked the book. Others argued that it's important to know and read about these things because they did happen, similar atrocities are happening in other totalitarian states today, and those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it. This led to a discussion of the experiences of family members who fled countries including Nazi Germany, Communist East Germany and Communist China. Because these experiences are so traumatic for the people who have lived through them that they often can't ever discuss them, someone has to tell their story.

Our last major topic of discussion was the development of the characters, which those who disliked the book thought was lacking. Others argued that it was appropriate for this type of novel and for the short-term relationship between the characters. We felt it was fitting that we didn't know Kolya or Vika any more than Lev did, and because we didn't know them well we could imagine anyone being in their positions.

The book for December is People of the Book by Geraldine Brooks. Geri will be leading that discussion (Thanks, Geri!). We'll be meeting on Wednesday, December 9th at 9:00 am at the Aliso Viejo Barnes and Noble, same as always.

We'll also be voting on our February, March and April reads at the December meeting, so get your nominations in now. You can email me directly or send them to oclitwits@yahoo.com.

October Meeting Recap

2009-10-14T16:50:00.000-07:00

If you didn't make it to Wednesday's meeting, I'm sorry to tell you, you missed a great discussion of a wonderful book. A big "thank you" to Kathryn for leading the discussion this month.

Our book for this month was Khaled Hosseini's A Thousand Splendid Suns. This is the second book the group has read by this author, the first being his debut novel, The Kite Runner.

We began with a high-level overview of the tumultuous history of Afghanistan and a brief biography of the author. We also watched an interview with the author (Thanks to Geri for bringing that to the meeting) which you'll find embedded below, in which he talks about his visit to Afghanistan and how it led to this novel. And we discussed some of this week's headlines from the O.C. Register regarding election fraud, attacks by Pakistan, and calls for more U.S. troops, that demonstrate that the current situation in Afghanistan is a continuation of the turmoil that has plagued the country for ages.

The novel was a heart-wrenching story of two women in Afghanistan, Mariam and Laila, and how their love for each other gave them hope in a seemingly hopeless situation. We discussed the opinions about women held by various male characters in the book and how culture affects women's views of themselves. We talked about how the restrictions the Taliban imposed on women influenced women's sense of self-worth both positively and negatively and how Mariam's sense of dignity and self-esteem changed throughout the novel as a result of her relationships with her parents, her husband and Laila.

Oppression is a focal point of the novel, and we talked about the many forms of torture, manipulation and control that were exhibited by different characters, but particularly by Rasheed toward Mariam and Laila. We discussed whether oppressive regimes cause this type of behavior or whether, perhaps, they simply condone it and allow it to flourish. Would Rasheed have been essentially the same type of person if he were living in a different culture? We also noted that there were times when Mariam seemed flattered by things Rasheed did that we considered abusive or oppressive (requiring her to wear a burka or to shut herself in her room when company came over, for instance). We wondered if Stockholm syndrome might be at play or if Mariam viewed these things as a show of respect.

We also discussed the meaning of the title and its significance in the novel. We decided the author is saying that the people of Afghanistan are points of hope and love in an otherwise horrible situation. Each one must decide whether they will continue to hope and fight to improve the situation in their country or let it cripple them. Throughout the book, Hosseini shows glimmers of hope and goodness, particularly with Laila's children.

Aside from the characters and themes of the book, we also talked about a number of thoughts to which the book led us.

Is ideology primarily a tool for gaining power? How did Rasheed's behavior support that theory?
Why has Afghanistan experienced such political turmoil for so long? What external forces and other circumstances have contributed to this? Is it likely to change? What would have to happen to make the country stable?
How might Afghanistan and the Middle East as a whole be different today if the USSR had remained in power in Afghanistan? How would everyone, including the US, have been better or worse off?
How have lack of consistent education, prevalence of cheap heroin, religious fundamentalism and lack of access to unbiased information contributed to Afghanistan's instability and to the outlook of its people?
How do culture and tolerance differ from one mid-eastern country to another? From one western country to another? Is it human nature to form prejudicial views about people from other cultures?

After reading this book, many of us realized how very little we really knew about Afghanistan, its political history and the effects of the constant turmoil on the people who live there. I think we're all a little wiser for having read it.

Next month, the book will be City of Thieves by David Benioff, an adventure story both humorous and grim, set during the Nazi siege of Leningrad. We'll be meeting on the third Wednesday (11/18) rather than the second Wednesday, due to the holiday.

September Meeting Recap

2009-09-09T14:40:00.000-07:00

We had our first meeting of the new school year this morning. Thanks for coming, to all those who were able to make it.

Notes from today's meeting
I think the idea of reading three books on a similar theme went over well, though a few of us (me, for instance) had some trouble remembering what we read back in June. Generally speaking, people enjoyed Wodehouse and Twain much more than Stevenson. Several of us found The Wrong Box rather dark and felt the writing style was forced, though a couple people found it humorous and enjoyed it.

We discussed the different viewpoints of the authors regarding social and moral issues and how those viewpoints were reflected in their writing styles. Twain was very outspoken regarding social issues, Wodehouse avoided even thinking about such things, and Stevenson held the view that moral issues had no place in romantic literature, though in his later books he grappled with those issues anyway. We also discussed the theme of status, and how status or perception of status affects a character's level of power. And then we discussed a bit how The Prince and the Pauper compares to Dickens' Great Expectations, which made several of us decide we must re-read Great Expectations now.

What we'll be reading next
We voted for the next bunch of reads this morning, and this is how it turned out:

November: City of Thieves by David Benioff
December: People of the Book by Geraldine Brooks
January: The Shuttle by Frances Hodgson Burnett

And for our next meeting on October 14th we're reading A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini, and Kathryn will be leading that discussion (Thanks Kathryn!). We also have a leader for January's discussion of The Shuttle (Thanks Tonya!), and December's discussion of People of the Book (Thanks Geri!) but still need someone to lead for November, so if anyone's interested please let me know.

Play Date and Book Exchange

2009-07-08T20:27:00.000-07:00

Well, we all had a great time at the park today...once we got everyone to the right park. The kids had fun playing and we grown-ups got to catch up. And best of all, we all came home with new books to read.

The next play date/book exchange will be at 10:00 on Wednesday August 12th. Please note, we're meeting at COSTEAU PARK ON THE CORNER OF COSTEAU AND ALICIA PARKWAY IN LAGUNA HILLS.

Potluck Books--The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society

2009-07-01T19:19:00.000-07:00

Welcome to the first in a series (hopefully) of reviews of the books that were exchanged at June's potluck and book exchange. The book I brought home with me that day was The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, a novel by Mary Ann Shaffer and Annie Barrows. And here's what I thought of the book, without giving anything away.

The novel is set in 1946 post-occupation Guernsey, one of the Channel Islands. Juliet Ashton, an English writer, has received a letter from a resident of Guernsey, Dawsey Adams, who is a founding member of the Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society. Juliet is intrigued by the society and how it came to be, and by the stories of the Nazi occupation related to her by Dawsey and other society members. She believes she has the beginnings of her next article and travels to Guernsey to meet and interview the society members and others who lived through the occupation and to write their story.

The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society is a unique book in a number of respects. It is written entirely in the format of letters--personal correspondence between Juliet and her friends, acquaintances and business associates. This gives the novel a very personal feel, and we are able to see things from the points of view of many different characters. Another unique aspect of the book is that it was written by one author, with revisions made after her death by a second author. Unfortunately, I felt this gave the book a somewhat disjointed feel. There were passages in which the writing style changed noticeably, which detracted from the overall cohesiveness of the book. Lastly, this book is somewhat unusual in that the authors use a wide range of literature to reveal things about the characters reading the books. We learn about characters in part by learning what books they chose to read and why they chose to read them.

One critic summed the book up as "a small masterpiece about love, war, and the immeasurable sustenance to be found in good books and good friends." I'm not sure I'd go so far as to call it a masterpiece, but it was a great pleasure to read and a moving story about love, heroism, and how literature can bring out the best in us and bind us together, even in the most difficult of circumstances, regardless of cultural or social differences. And, as an added bonus, I discovered some real gems among the books the islanders read, such as the poetry of Rainer Maria Rilke, which I'm now reading.

Summer Reads

2009-06-20T16:39:00.001-07:00

We're trying something new this summer--reading a set of three books with a common theme. The books for September are A Damsel in Distress by P. G. Wodehouse, The Wrong Box by Robert Louis Stevenson and Lloyd Osbourne, and The Prince and the Pauper by Mark Twain. All three are short humorous novels that deal with the theme of mistaken identity. We'll be meeting at 9:00 on September 9th at Barnes and Noble in Aliso Viejo.

A Damsel in Distress is one of Wodehouse's earlier novels about Belpher Castle, the idyllic home of the aristocratic Marshmoreton family. In the story, golf-loving American composer George Bevan falls in love with a mysterious young lady who takes refuge in his taxicab one day. When he tracks her down to Belpher Castle, mistaken identity leads to all manner of brouhaha... Wodehouse was born in Surrey, England but moved to Long Island and later became an American citizen. He published more than ninety books and twenty film scripts and collaborated on more than thirty plays and musical comedies in a career that spanned more than seventy years. His novels and short stories often feature nitwitted aristocrats, tyrannical relatives, young love in bloom, and hilarious misunderstandings. He is widely lauded as the greatest British humorist of the 20th century.

The Wrong Box was written by Robert Louis Stevenson with his stepson Lloyd Osborne. It is a black comedy, turning on mistaken identity and the disappearance of a corpse. In this intriguing work, the Finsbury family has long been involved in a Tontine--a scheme in which subscribers invest money in a fund which then falls to the last survivor. Now there are only two aging brothers standing between Morris and John Finsbury and their fortune. A railway accident appears to dispose of one, and then the farce begins. Robert Louis Stevenson was one of the most-read adventure novelists of the late 1800s. Among his most popular books were Kidnapped (1886), The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1886), and Treasure Island (1883). The Wrong Box was a departure from his more typical novels and was the first of three novels that Stevenson co-wrote with Osbourne.

In Mark Twain's The Prince and the Pauper, two boys in sixteenth-century England trade clothing one afternoon and, as a result, trade lives as well. The adventure begins when the prince discovers a bruise on Tom's hand and rushes out of the palace, paying no heed to the way he is dressed, to rebuke the guard. The guard, believing that the prince is the pauper, immediately puts him out of the gates, and thus the stage is set for Edward Tudor to experience the life of a commoner and for Tom Canty to live the life of a real-life prince. Mark Twain was one of America's foremost realists and humorists, and usually wrote of things he knew about from firsthand experience. Though The Prince and the Pauper is not based on personal experience, Twain uses the experiences of two young boys gradually losing their innocence, as he did in both Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn. In this novel he also addresses nobility and royalty, political divisions which he enjoyed deriding, and social injustice.

If you're having trouble finding A Damsel in Distress or The Wrong Box, they are both available through online booksellers and can be read online at Bookrags.