So as predicted, I did read When Breath Becomes Air in 2 days. And I do agree with the profound praise that the book has received: it is quite a remarkable read.
The book is the memoir of Paul Kalanithi, a young, talented Stanford neurosurgeon who goes from physician to patient when he discovers that he has stage IV lung cancer. But the book certainly isn't just that simple and it isn't just a recounting of his treatments and coping with the disease. It tells of his early studies and of how Paul decided to pursue neurosurgery even though he majored in literature. He explains his assessment that literature provides the rich account of human existence and that it would provide him with the tools to fully understand the pivotal question: what makes human life meaningful? It is a question/phrase that is used many times throughout the book and is certainly the crux that guided many of Paul's choices in life. And after graduation from undergrad, Paul comes to see that medicine will allow him to have direct experience with "meaning, life, and death," which literature cannot provide.
But it turns out that his diagnosis and facing his own mortality helps him understand these issues better than he ever did by removing a brain tumor or counseling patients and families who were suddenly faced with life and death situations and decisions. While he is clear that death was never something that he disacknowledged and that it was an ever-present topic during his medical studies and practice, knowing that he had a much more limited amount of time than expected put a significant shift in how he viewed his own mortality, and more importantly, his own humanity.
The book ends somewhat abruptly, and the epilogue by Paul's wife Lucy helps to explain the circumstances of his death, pursuing the completion of the book, and sharing her perspective of their relationship and his disease. While I was reading the book and the epilogue, it was strange too because I remember a lot of the stuff that Lucy had posted on Facebook while it was happening. I actually went back to look at posts and stuff from that time. And while the book ended around the time that Lucy and Paul's daughter was born, I knew that Paul had lived for a while after that (around 8 months), recalling that they had been chosen as part of a charity event to attend the Superbowl in Arizona in 2015 (as we all cheered on the Seahawks); Paul passed away about a month afterward. So the abrupt ending to the book probably meant that Paul only managed to write up through his daughter's birth.
The book is definitely cerebral and I think I appreciated the philosophical, biological, and literary examination of existence even more because I am also someone who works in science but is a fanatic lover of literature, and who also has aspirations of being a writer (at least in a different context than what my day job is). So maybe my take away should be a parallel: what am I waiting for? How do I know that I even have enough promised time to make it happen?
I would very much recommend the book and really think that it should be required reading for new medical students. There is so much reflection on understanding one's motivation and calling to be a physician in spite of the extraordinary rigors and life sacrifice it requires (Paul initially talks with a bit of resentment about how his father, a physician, was so often absent in his life, but then goes on to make exactly the same decision). But Paul also makes effective communication and empathy with his patients his focus of paramount importance, even though it was easy to get wrapped up in the other empty formalities of being a physician and lose sight of the patient as priority (a particularly poignant anecdote brings this concept home: a fellow resident was assigned to a 9 hour pancreatic cancer resectioning surgery after being up all night, which ended up being cancelled due to the discovery of metastases, and the resident is relieved about the cancellation, but realizes that her relief means something terrible for the patient).
While I never met Lucy's husband, his evaluation of life and death and its meaning and how he pursued them with aplomb during his too-short life was exceptional. It would have been wonderful to read more from such a talented writer and scholar, but we are certainly fortunate to have this book, which is profound, yet life-affirming.
So. Up next. Dare I do it...is Ulysses. The main reason is that the only other list book that I have in my possession is Macbeth. So it's a toss up at this point. I have 3 other non-list books that I could read, but I figure that since I have the time off, it might be a good beast to just dig into now. So we'll see how this goes. While I don't necessarily like reading 2 books at once, I may have to shift to others if this becomes a struggle (I'm having flashbacks to the agony that was Moby Dick). Wish me luck.
Saturday, December 10, 2016
Tuesday, December 6, 2016
"I'm Not Afraid Of Seeing Cordelia. I'm Afraid Of Being Cordelia. Because In Some Way We Changed Places, And I've Forgotten When"
Cat's Eye is immediately a book I wished I would have read during a college lit class. And maybe I say that because I have the remnants of reading The Robber Bride in a class that I mentioned previously. But in this case, it's because there is just so much. So much imagery, so many themes, so many very interesting ways in which the main character unfolds that I would have just loved to have talked through with others.
The novel is about Elaine, a fairly well-regarded painter now in her late 40s (or maybe early 50s...I don't think it was ever specifically stated) who has come back to her hometown of Toronto for a gallery retrospective of her work. The story goes back and forth between Elaine's current time in Toronto preparing for the exhibition and her childhood in the 1940s, where she grew up with a father who was an entomologist and whose mother took care of her and her older brother, and who don't necessarily represent the typical 1940s family. Therefore, Elaine was a bit different than other children, spending summers in the Canadian wilderness for her father's insect studies.
The main stories Elaine recounts of her childhood around the age of ~10 years old were that of her "friendship" with 3 other girls: Grace, Carol, and Cordelia. The 3 girls, however, were responsible for significant emotional abuse of Elaine. They criticize her every move for not being correct or good enough (and I mean every single thing she says, does, wears, etc) and report back to each other to "punish" her, all the while assuring Elaine that it's because she is their friend and they want to help her. They even trap her in a grave-like hole in the ground. (I knowingly admit that I haven't done a remotely adequate job of explaining how terribly the 3 girls treated Elaine, but trust me, it wasn't just mundane poking fun). All of this results in Elaine becomes a shell of a person: she feigns sickness all the time, she faints on command, she picks at her cuticles and pulls off the skin on her feet so she can hardly walk, and she truly believes that she is worthless, as she is constantly told. And while all 3 girls are culpable, Cordelia is the one who is certainly the ring leader. The abuse comes to a head when Cordelia throws Elaine's hat into a ravine that the children are forbidden to go into, and when Elaine goes to retrieve her hat, falls into the river and nearly freezes to death.
This is a turning point for Elaine though, as she suddenly realizes that she doesn't have to do what Cordelia and the other girls tell her to and that there was never anything about herself that needed to be improved; that it was, in a way, a game to the girls. Long after, Elaine realizes that it was really Cordelia who was the one experiencing the loneliness, weakness, and fear that she subjected Elaine to, stemming in part from her own family issues, particularly with her father.
Elaine spends much of the rest of her life - her relationships, her college studies, her career - recovering from these events, and in many ways, she becomes the aggressor. She becomes Cordelia. Her life continues to intersect with Cordelia at multiple times during high school and after. Cordelia, who fails out of school, attempts suicide, and is institutionalized for mental problems. And Elaine is cruel to her, and acknowledges this, and knows that she has guilt and remorse for how she is treating Cordelia, but she can't retract it or even understand why she is doing it. Similarly with her first husband, she is cruel, she knows it, can acknowledge on some level that she can be handling things differently, but doesn't. The portrait of Elaine told in the current timeline of the story isn't necessarily a likeable character. She is a curmudgeon who looks at everything with disdain and negativity. But as the full story of her childhood unfolds, the reader can gain an appreciation of how Elaine has become the person she is.
To me, one of the biggest impacts of this book was how much of it was related to the psychological. And I'm not talking about a psychological thriller, but in regards to the mental state of the characters, particularly Elaine and Cordelia. It is very clear that the bullying by the other girls affects Elaine for the rest of her life, and very much defines who she becomes, even though she represses many of the memories. A few times when talking with her mom about her childhood and her mom brings up how concerned she was for her in regards to her "friends", Elaine doesn't know what she's talking about. Her full memories of the abuse don't come to her until much later in life when going through mementos her mother has saved, which triggers it all. Elaine also hears voices, which specifically tell her to commit suicide. Elaine knows that it isn't real, but still acknowledges that she heard the voice speak, as plain as day. And the progression of Cordeila's character over time, from being a cruel bully to a shell of a person is almost the opposite progression of Elaine, but she experiences many of the same psychological issues (suicide attempt included).
The topic of religion also plays a significant role in the novel. Nearly all of Elaine's paintings are inspired by her childhood and many of them feature one of the 3 girls' mothers, Mrs. Smeath in scandalous and unflattering representations, often with religious themes. During the time when the girls were torturing Elaine, she was regularly going to church with Carol and her family, because her own family didn't go to church. And she seems to enjoy it, although she may not completely understand it. She learns all of the prayers and excels in the Sunday school lessons (although this is partly to try to please Carol and prevent more ostracizing). But one Sunday at Carol's house, she hears Mrs. Smeath and Carol's aunt talking about her and calling her a heathen, saying that it's because of her family, saying that the girls aren't being too hard on her, and that it serves her right and it's God's punishment. It's interesting that this moment becomes a significant pivot for her feelings on God and religion and so much of her hate going forward is fixated on Mrs. Smeath. While it is terrible that an adult would be complicit in what is being done to Elaine, I just found it a bit surprising that she doesn't fixate her anger (and subsequently her artwork) on the 3 girls who were actually abusing her. And many of Elaine's feelings about religion stem from this time.
One of the other critical aspects of the novel is that of feminism. This is really driven home a bit later in the novel when Elaine is establishing herself as a painter in roughly the mid to late 1960s (estimating from her age) and after she has her daughter. She attends meetings with small groups of women where they clearly are angry at the patriarchy and testify about all the ways that men keep them down. But Elaine is a reluctant participant in all of this, not just in the meetings, but of feminism all together. She never really feels like she identifies with women or sisterhood, but she seems to understand that she is a feminist, whether she's out on the front lines protesting or not.
There is really tons more that I could talk about with this novel. It was so rich and well-written. So much gorgeous imagery and lyrical writing. This is what modern novels should be. Certainly an inspiration that I will reflect on moving forward.
Next up, I'm going to take a quick pause from the lists to read When Breath Becomes Air by Paul Kalanitihi. I've had this book since almost when it came out earlier this year, but haven't read it yet. I have known the late Paul's wife, Lucy, since I was in elementary school. I was friends with Lucy and her twin Joanna all through elementary, middle, and high school. Paths diverged in college, and I can say that my relationship with the Goddard sisters is now mainly via Facebook. But I greatly admire Lucy's courage throughout the illness and death of her husband and her eloquence since then, sharing her and his story. I suspect I will read the book rather quickly...
Until next time. 231 to go.
The novel is about Elaine, a fairly well-regarded painter now in her late 40s (or maybe early 50s...I don't think it was ever specifically stated) who has come back to her hometown of Toronto for a gallery retrospective of her work. The story goes back and forth between Elaine's current time in Toronto preparing for the exhibition and her childhood in the 1940s, where she grew up with a father who was an entomologist and whose mother took care of her and her older brother, and who don't necessarily represent the typical 1940s family. Therefore, Elaine was a bit different than other children, spending summers in the Canadian wilderness for her father's insect studies.
The main stories Elaine recounts of her childhood around the age of ~10 years old were that of her "friendship" with 3 other girls: Grace, Carol, and Cordelia. The 3 girls, however, were responsible for significant emotional abuse of Elaine. They criticize her every move for not being correct or good enough (and I mean every single thing she says, does, wears, etc) and report back to each other to "punish" her, all the while assuring Elaine that it's because she is their friend and they want to help her. They even trap her in a grave-like hole in the ground. (I knowingly admit that I haven't done a remotely adequate job of explaining how terribly the 3 girls treated Elaine, but trust me, it wasn't just mundane poking fun). All of this results in Elaine becomes a shell of a person: she feigns sickness all the time, she faints on command, she picks at her cuticles and pulls off the skin on her feet so she can hardly walk, and she truly believes that she is worthless, as she is constantly told. And while all 3 girls are culpable, Cordelia is the one who is certainly the ring leader. The abuse comes to a head when Cordelia throws Elaine's hat into a ravine that the children are forbidden to go into, and when Elaine goes to retrieve her hat, falls into the river and nearly freezes to death.
This is a turning point for Elaine though, as she suddenly realizes that she doesn't have to do what Cordelia and the other girls tell her to and that there was never anything about herself that needed to be improved; that it was, in a way, a game to the girls. Long after, Elaine realizes that it was really Cordelia who was the one experiencing the loneliness, weakness, and fear that she subjected Elaine to, stemming in part from her own family issues, particularly with her father.
Elaine spends much of the rest of her life - her relationships, her college studies, her career - recovering from these events, and in many ways, she becomes the aggressor. She becomes Cordelia. Her life continues to intersect with Cordelia at multiple times during high school and after. Cordelia, who fails out of school, attempts suicide, and is institutionalized for mental problems. And Elaine is cruel to her, and acknowledges this, and knows that she has guilt and remorse for how she is treating Cordelia, but she can't retract it or even understand why she is doing it. Similarly with her first husband, she is cruel, she knows it, can acknowledge on some level that she can be handling things differently, but doesn't. The portrait of Elaine told in the current timeline of the story isn't necessarily a likeable character. She is a curmudgeon who looks at everything with disdain and negativity. But as the full story of her childhood unfolds, the reader can gain an appreciation of how Elaine has become the person she is.
To me, one of the biggest impacts of this book was how much of it was related to the psychological. And I'm not talking about a psychological thriller, but in regards to the mental state of the characters, particularly Elaine and Cordelia. It is very clear that the bullying by the other girls affects Elaine for the rest of her life, and very much defines who she becomes, even though she represses many of the memories. A few times when talking with her mom about her childhood and her mom brings up how concerned she was for her in regards to her "friends", Elaine doesn't know what she's talking about. Her full memories of the abuse don't come to her until much later in life when going through mementos her mother has saved, which triggers it all. Elaine also hears voices, which specifically tell her to commit suicide. Elaine knows that it isn't real, but still acknowledges that she heard the voice speak, as plain as day. And the progression of Cordeila's character over time, from being a cruel bully to a shell of a person is almost the opposite progression of Elaine, but she experiences many of the same psychological issues (suicide attempt included).
The topic of religion also plays a significant role in the novel. Nearly all of Elaine's paintings are inspired by her childhood and many of them feature one of the 3 girls' mothers, Mrs. Smeath in scandalous and unflattering representations, often with religious themes. During the time when the girls were torturing Elaine, she was regularly going to church with Carol and her family, because her own family didn't go to church. And she seems to enjoy it, although she may not completely understand it. She learns all of the prayers and excels in the Sunday school lessons (although this is partly to try to please Carol and prevent more ostracizing). But one Sunday at Carol's house, she hears Mrs. Smeath and Carol's aunt talking about her and calling her a heathen, saying that it's because of her family, saying that the girls aren't being too hard on her, and that it serves her right and it's God's punishment. It's interesting that this moment becomes a significant pivot for her feelings on God and religion and so much of her hate going forward is fixated on Mrs. Smeath. While it is terrible that an adult would be complicit in what is being done to Elaine, I just found it a bit surprising that she doesn't fixate her anger (and subsequently her artwork) on the 3 girls who were actually abusing her. And many of Elaine's feelings about religion stem from this time.
One of the other critical aspects of the novel is that of feminism. This is really driven home a bit later in the novel when Elaine is establishing herself as a painter in roughly the mid to late 1960s (estimating from her age) and after she has her daughter. She attends meetings with small groups of women where they clearly are angry at the patriarchy and testify about all the ways that men keep them down. But Elaine is a reluctant participant in all of this, not just in the meetings, but of feminism all together. She never really feels like she identifies with women or sisterhood, but she seems to understand that she is a feminist, whether she's out on the front lines protesting or not.
There is really tons more that I could talk about with this novel. It was so rich and well-written. So much gorgeous imagery and lyrical writing. This is what modern novels should be. Certainly an inspiration that I will reflect on moving forward.
Next up, I'm going to take a quick pause from the lists to read When Breath Becomes Air by Paul Kalanitihi. I've had this book since almost when it came out earlier this year, but haven't read it yet. I have known the late Paul's wife, Lucy, since I was in elementary school. I was friends with Lucy and her twin Joanna all through elementary, middle, and high school. Paths diverged in college, and I can say that my relationship with the Goddard sisters is now mainly via Facebook. But I greatly admire Lucy's courage throughout the illness and death of her husband and her eloquence since then, sharing her and his story. I suspect I will read the book rather quickly...
Until next time. 231 to go.
Sunday, December 4, 2016
"A Change Is As Good As Rest"
I quit my job just over a month ago; my last day was November 14th. My new employers initially wanted me to start on November 28th; however, I knew I was going to be out of town for a week and with Thanksgiving the week after, I wanted to have just 1 additional week before starting. So I suggested a start date of December 5th. Well, it turns out that December is a bad month at my new company to have new employees start due to workload and many folks being gone the latter half of the month with the holidays. So they suggested I start in January. So what I anticipated being a 3 week break before my new job has turned into a 7, possibly 8 week break. I was a little startled at first, but now that I've come around, holy shit ya'll, I have 8 mother truckin' weeks off bitches!!
I've never had this much time off...pretty much ever. There was a long span of time (about 9 months) right after I graduated from undergrad where I couldn't find a job and was unemployed. So I guess that's a longer period of time, but that was accompanied with so much defeat, anger, frustration, anxiety, and depression, that it's not like it really counted as "time off". Whereas this is legit, I-know-that-I'm-moving-on-to-something, ain't-got-shit-to-do, time off.
So have I spent this time hunkered down, ravaging through every book on my bookshelf that is on my to read list? Well, maybe only a little bit. But hey, I got a new bookshelf to put all of books on, so that's kind of sort of a little victory?
But seriously, I have been making good progress through Cat's Eye, and I am sure going to have a lot to say about this book. And even though it was written in the 1980s, there is such a relevance to many issues facing children today, I can't wait to wrap my thoughts around it all (and of course to see how the book finally pans out).
But I think once a get a few other things in order, then I'm really going to be able to enjoy more reading, and hopefully some productive writing as well. I'm sure that the next 4/5 weeks are going to fly by and this magical time of leisure will be nothing but a memory of fortunate circumstances giving me the gift of relaxation and free time. But believe me, I intend to make the absolute most of it!!
I've never had this much time off...pretty much ever. There was a long span of time (about 9 months) right after I graduated from undergrad where I couldn't find a job and was unemployed. So I guess that's a longer period of time, but that was accompanied with so much defeat, anger, frustration, anxiety, and depression, that it's not like it really counted as "time off". Whereas this is legit, I-know-that-I'm-moving-on-to-something, ain't-got-shit-to-do, time off.
So have I spent this time hunkered down, ravaging through every book on my bookshelf that is on my to read list? Well, maybe only a little bit. But hey, I got a new bookshelf to put all of books on, so that's kind of sort of a little victory?
But seriously, I have been making good progress through Cat's Eye, and I am sure going to have a lot to say about this book. And even though it was written in the 1980s, there is such a relevance to many issues facing children today, I can't wait to wrap my thoughts around it all (and of course to see how the book finally pans out).
But I think once a get a few other things in order, then I'm really going to be able to enjoy more reading, and hopefully some productive writing as well. I'm sure that the next 4/5 weeks are going to fly by and this magical time of leisure will be nothing but a memory of fortunate circumstances giving me the gift of relaxation and free time. But believe me, I intend to make the absolute most of it!!
Sunday, October 23, 2016
"Vanity And Pride Are Different Things, Though The Words Are Often Used Synonymously. A Person May Be Proud Without Being Vain. Pride Relates More To Our Opinion Of Ourselves; Vanity To What We Would Have Others Think Of Us"
I cannot explain exactly why, but I read Pride and Prejudice in less than a week. It wasn't as though I was all googly-eyed, lovey-dovey about the main relationship in the novel, between Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy. And I'm not going to go out and join a Jane Austen fan girl club or anything (which, from my understanding, there are many of).
But somehow, even though I've seen the movie and knew what happened, I couldn't put it down. I think it was mostly because I was completely drawn in by the language. And while the book is >200 years old, and the some of the language was certainly a bit different than today, it was still so easy to read the saucy sarcasm and biting words of Elizabeth. She is quite a character (literally and figuratively), and pretty surprising to find such an outspoken female character who bucked the trend of marrying to further one's standing and to satisfy one's family (ignoring the fact that, even though she didn't care for these things, in the end, she manages to capture the motherload of eligible bachelors to fulfill both of those ends). But she doesn't hesitate almost from the moment of meeting Mr. Darcy to tell him exactly what she thinks of him, often in a manner of extreme wit. Which again, I can't imagine women were often allowed to do in the early 1800s.
And the other thing that I very much appreciated about the novel was that it was easy to wrap my head around the themes presented. That, while not necessarily handed to the reader, it was easy to see the differing levels of pride and prejudice in Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth, primarily, and how they shift through the course of the novel. How Elizabeth very willingly admits to allowing her prejudice of Mr. Darcy cloud her opinion of him and Mr. Darcy even admits to allowing his social status to affect his opinions of Elizabeth and the rest of the Bennet family (more on that hot mess in a moment). And even pride and prejudice in many of the other minor characters to varying degrees certainly defined them in many ways (Mr. Collins, Charlotte Lucas, Lady Catherine, etc). It made everything in the novel so much more accessible to really understand the characters and how their initial perceptions of others and of themselves impacted all of their further actions when the prose often circled back to the concepts of pride and prejudice.
But let me just take a moment to say that I may have found one of the most villainous, loathsome characters that I have ever encountered: Mrs. Bennet, Elizabeth (and her sisters') mother. Ugh, I just couldn't stand anything that came out of the woman's mouth. While her 100% preoccupation was marrying off her daughters under the pretense of wanting good futures for them, it was really all about her own selfishness and vanity. She just wanted to parade her daughters about the county and brag about their matches. It had absolutely nothing to do with her actually caring about her daughters' happiness as much as it did about herself looking good on paper and being more impressive on a social scale. And the terrible, embarrassing things that she said to humiliate her daughters just made me want to punch her (and I kept found myself hoping that Elizabeth could be that ballsy of a character to just clock her mom in the jaw, but alas, she was still a well-bred, classy lady. Dammit). I can only hope that in Pride and Prejudice and Zombies that Mrs. Bennet was the first to be eaten alive, because bitch got on my nerves!
I'm actually a bit sad that I have no other Jane Austen books on any of my lists. Because I did find her writing to be quite charming and witty, and I would really have liked to see how Emma, Sense and Sensibility, or Mansfield Park are in regards to the type of writing encountered in Pride and Prejudice. Not to say that anything is preventing me from picking them up and reading, but I still have a long way to go with all of the other books on my docket!
So up next is Cat's Eye by Margaret Atwood. I read The Robber Bride as part of a literature class during my undergraduate degree at the University of Michigan, and I remember discussing the book in a lecture class of about 100 or so people. And the first person to speak and share his feelings about the novel was a guy who immediately said that he didn't like the book because it was "chick lit". And even at the time, this made me angry, and probably was the impetus for even starting these lists and pulling a list of the best works of literature of the 20th century by women writers (of which I am happy to see Margaret Atwood included on). I remember being so pleased when reading The Robber Bride because it addressed infidelity from a women's point of view in a way that I had never read before and it felt different and fresh and honest in a complete different way and being annoyed that just because it was female characters and issues told from a female's point of view that it was so readily dismissed as "chick lit". It still chaps my ass even now thinking about it 18 years or so later (jesus lord, I just dated myself). So I am very excited to get moving on Cat's Eye. Given the way I have been voraciously making my way through books lately, maybe I'll have this bad boy finished before Halloween.
Happy almost-end-of-October! 232 books left to read!
But somehow, even though I've seen the movie and knew what happened, I couldn't put it down. I think it was mostly because I was completely drawn in by the language. And while the book is >200 years old, and the some of the language was certainly a bit different than today, it was still so easy to read the saucy sarcasm and biting words of Elizabeth. She is quite a character (literally and figuratively), and pretty surprising to find such an outspoken female character who bucked the trend of marrying to further one's standing and to satisfy one's family (ignoring the fact that, even though she didn't care for these things, in the end, she manages to capture the motherload of eligible bachelors to fulfill both of those ends). But she doesn't hesitate almost from the moment of meeting Mr. Darcy to tell him exactly what she thinks of him, often in a manner of extreme wit. Which again, I can't imagine women were often allowed to do in the early 1800s.
And the other thing that I very much appreciated about the novel was that it was easy to wrap my head around the themes presented. That, while not necessarily handed to the reader, it was easy to see the differing levels of pride and prejudice in Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth, primarily, and how they shift through the course of the novel. How Elizabeth very willingly admits to allowing her prejudice of Mr. Darcy cloud her opinion of him and Mr. Darcy even admits to allowing his social status to affect his opinions of Elizabeth and the rest of the Bennet family (more on that hot mess in a moment). And even pride and prejudice in many of the other minor characters to varying degrees certainly defined them in many ways (Mr. Collins, Charlotte Lucas, Lady Catherine, etc). It made everything in the novel so much more accessible to really understand the characters and how their initial perceptions of others and of themselves impacted all of their further actions when the prose often circled back to the concepts of pride and prejudice.
But let me just take a moment to say that I may have found one of the most villainous, loathsome characters that I have ever encountered: Mrs. Bennet, Elizabeth (and her sisters') mother. Ugh, I just couldn't stand anything that came out of the woman's mouth. While her 100% preoccupation was marrying off her daughters under the pretense of wanting good futures for them, it was really all about her own selfishness and vanity. She just wanted to parade her daughters about the county and brag about their matches. It had absolutely nothing to do with her actually caring about her daughters' happiness as much as it did about herself looking good on paper and being more impressive on a social scale. And the terrible, embarrassing things that she said to humiliate her daughters just made me want to punch her (and I kept found myself hoping that Elizabeth could be that ballsy of a character to just clock her mom in the jaw, but alas, she was still a well-bred, classy lady. Dammit). I can only hope that in Pride and Prejudice and Zombies that Mrs. Bennet was the first to be eaten alive, because bitch got on my nerves!
I'm actually a bit sad that I have no other Jane Austen books on any of my lists. Because I did find her writing to be quite charming and witty, and I would really have liked to see how Emma, Sense and Sensibility, or Mansfield Park are in regards to the type of writing encountered in Pride and Prejudice. Not to say that anything is preventing me from picking them up and reading, but I still have a long way to go with all of the other books on my docket!
So up next is Cat's Eye by Margaret Atwood. I read The Robber Bride as part of a literature class during my undergraduate degree at the University of Michigan, and I remember discussing the book in a lecture class of about 100 or so people. And the first person to speak and share his feelings about the novel was a guy who immediately said that he didn't like the book because it was "chick lit". And even at the time, this made me angry, and probably was the impetus for even starting these lists and pulling a list of the best works of literature of the 20th century by women writers (of which I am happy to see Margaret Atwood included on). I remember being so pleased when reading The Robber Bride because it addressed infidelity from a women's point of view in a way that I had never read before and it felt different and fresh and honest in a complete different way and being annoyed that just because it was female characters and issues told from a female's point of view that it was so readily dismissed as "chick lit". It still chaps my ass even now thinking about it 18 years or so later (jesus lord, I just dated myself). So I am very excited to get moving on Cat's Eye. Given the way I have been voraciously making my way through books lately, maybe I'll have this bad boy finished before Halloween.
Happy almost-end-of-October! 232 books left to read!
Thursday, October 13, 2016
"The Holes In Your Life Are Permanent. You Have To Grow Around Them, Like Tree Roots Around Concrete; You Mold Yourselves Through The Gaps"
You know what is another good way to have nothing to do but read? Flying. I had a job interview in New Jersey on Monday and I forgot to bring Pride and Prejudice. I had it sitting on the dining room table but forgot to shove it in my bag. So in lieu of logging into one of my laptops to do work on the flight (yes, because of work, I travel with more than one laptop), I bought The Girl On The Train at the airport. And proceeded to read the entire thing in approximately 4 days. I mistakenly assumed that the book was the same author as Gone Girl, since there were so many comparisons made in the commercials for the movie. But it is actually the first novel written by Paula Hawkins.
As I've mentioned before, I'm a sucker for a good whodoneit. Which is why I always fly through books like this. The story is a about an alcoholic divorcee, Rachel, who rides the train to and from London every day while fantasizing about the lives of a couple whose house she sees on her daily commute. But then you find out that she used to live in a house only a couple doors down. And you learn that she has lost her job due to her drinking and is just riding the train to hide the fact that she was fired from her roommate. And then the woman that she watches from the train disappears and Rachel involves herself in the investigation and was actually in the area the night of her disappearance. So from there the story unfolds of Rachel, her ex-husband, his new wife, and the husband of the missing girl.
The main thing I liked about the writing of the book was the unreliability of Rachel and her memory from drinking and the way the author conveyed so much of her feelings and her shame. Because so much of it felt so accurate and honest. About the blackouts, and how drastically people change when they're drunk, and the struggle she would go through trying not to fall down the rabbit hole and start drinking again. Her spotty memory and severe emotional swings made you question her for sure, and wonder if she was capable of doing some terrible things. But also affected how you saw the other characters too. So I felt like that was a very clever lens through which to tell the story.
However, I did guess the end of the book. Not that it was super obvious, but I think if the reader figured out some of the hints early on, you could figure it out. I did like the book though overall, and am looking forward to seeing the movie (although side note: while I very much like Emily Blunt, I feel she was a bit miscast. The woman in the book was constantly described as heavy and definitely not attractive. So while they can try to ugly her up, Emily Blunt is still far too attractive to fit the description of the character in the book).
Now that I'm on a roll and reunited with Pride and Prejudice, I have a feeling that I'm going to fly through the rest of that one too. Long days spent doing nothing but reading? Could a girl ask for anything more??
As I've mentioned before, I'm a sucker for a good whodoneit. Which is why I always fly through books like this. The story is a about an alcoholic divorcee, Rachel, who rides the train to and from London every day while fantasizing about the lives of a couple whose house she sees on her daily commute. But then you find out that she used to live in a house only a couple doors down. And you learn that she has lost her job due to her drinking and is just riding the train to hide the fact that she was fired from her roommate. And then the woman that she watches from the train disappears and Rachel involves herself in the investigation and was actually in the area the night of her disappearance. So from there the story unfolds of Rachel, her ex-husband, his new wife, and the husband of the missing girl.
The main thing I liked about the writing of the book was the unreliability of Rachel and her memory from drinking and the way the author conveyed so much of her feelings and her shame. Because so much of it felt so accurate and honest. About the blackouts, and how drastically people change when they're drunk, and the struggle she would go through trying not to fall down the rabbit hole and start drinking again. Her spotty memory and severe emotional swings made you question her for sure, and wonder if she was capable of doing some terrible things. But also affected how you saw the other characters too. So I felt like that was a very clever lens through which to tell the story.
However, I did guess the end of the book. Not that it was super obvious, but I think if the reader figured out some of the hints early on, you could figure it out. I did like the book though overall, and am looking forward to seeing the movie (although side note: while I very much like Emily Blunt, I feel she was a bit miscast. The woman in the book was constantly described as heavy and definitely not attractive. So while they can try to ugly her up, Emily Blunt is still far too attractive to fit the description of the character in the book).
Now that I'm on a roll and reunited with Pride and Prejudice, I have a feeling that I'm going to fly through the rest of that one too. Long days spent doing nothing but reading? Could a girl ask for anything more??
Tuesday, October 4, 2016
"I Declare After All There Is No Enjoyment Like Reading! How Much Sooner One Tires of Any Thing Than Of A Book!'
So I turned 37 a couple weeks ago. And I'm willing to acknowledge that it's looking less and less feasible that I'll finish all of these books by the time I'm 40. Rather than going for my 40th birthday, I'm going to say that I'll give myself until the day before my 41st birthday (because I'll still be 40 and all...). So that gives me until September 13th, 2020, which is approximately 47 months. And with 233 books left, that gives me ~5 books a month. And as much as I love reading, I can't really clear 1 book a week (or slightly more!). So I'm willing to acknowledge that I'm a little more ambitious than might be realistic.
But that won't stop me from forging ahead. My biggest distraction, other than that whole working full time garbage, is wanting to read books that aren't on the list. Reading this type of literature is admittedly not always the most compelling content, so I always find myself at the bookstore with my hands impulsively going towards the new paperback fiction books. But that's ok. I can't just limit myself or I'd probably go crazy. Onward and upward.
But hey, you know what's good for reading? Jury duty! I sat in a room for an entire day sans cell phone and nothing else to do but read Pride and Prejudice (I may have snuck in a nap and some viewing of the movies they were showing). But man, everyone always complains about jury duty, but it kind of felt like an amazing, government imposed vacation. Sign me up for my civic duty more often! (I didn't end up getting chosen, or even interviewed, so I'm out of circulation for at least a year). The entire time I was reading Pride and Prejudice, all I kept thinking about were the actors who play the different roles in the movie. I think this seems to be a recurring theme for me for books that I know that movies exist for. But so far, I'm enjoying it very much! Hopefully I can continue to make progress like I have to read 5 books a month!
But that won't stop me from forging ahead. My biggest distraction, other than that whole working full time garbage, is wanting to read books that aren't on the list. Reading this type of literature is admittedly not always the most compelling content, so I always find myself at the bookstore with my hands impulsively going towards the new paperback fiction books. But that's ok. I can't just limit myself or I'd probably go crazy. Onward and upward.
But hey, you know what's good for reading? Jury duty! I sat in a room for an entire day sans cell phone and nothing else to do but read Pride and Prejudice (I may have snuck in a nap and some viewing of the movies they were showing). But man, everyone always complains about jury duty, but it kind of felt like an amazing, government imposed vacation. Sign me up for my civic duty more often! (I didn't end up getting chosen, or even interviewed, so I'm out of circulation for at least a year). The entire time I was reading Pride and Prejudice, all I kept thinking about were the actors who play the different roles in the movie. I think this seems to be a recurring theme for me for books that I know that movies exist for. But so far, I'm enjoying it very much! Hopefully I can continue to make progress like I have to read 5 books a month!
Sunday, October 2, 2016
"It Took A While Before The Message Seeped Into His Soul, But Once There, It Was There Forever: Things Are What They Are, And Whatever Will Be Will Be"
At first when I started reading The 100-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared, I was a little thrown off by the writing, as it felt a little simple and almost choppy in a way. I was aware that the book had been translated from Swedish, so I assumed that a lot of that was just a "lost in translation". But the more I got into the book, the more accustomed I got, and I now actually think that the writing was more intentional, with a lot of dry humor that came across as a bit blunt, but that still gave me a smile here and there from a subtle wry wit.
The best way I can describe this book is charming. It tells the story of a man (as the very literal title implies), explosive expert Allan Karlsson, who crawls out of the window of his old folk's home on his 100th birthday because he doesn't want to stay for his birthday party. And from there, after impulsively deciding to steal a suitcase at a bus station, Allan experiences a very interesting series of events that introduces him to a very colorful cast of characters while being hunted for a number of crimes. Interspersed with the main story of Allan at 100 years old is the story of Allan's life, including numerous anecdotes about his impact on many events of global history: affecting outcomes during the Spanish Civil War with General Franco, involvement in helping create the atom bomb at Los Alamos and his friendship with President Truman, affecting interactions with Mao Tse-tung and Chiang Kai-shek, walking over the Himalayas from China to Iran, giving nuclear information to the Russians, being detained in a Russian prison, lying his way into meeting Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il in North Korea, living in a hotel in Bali, and many many other adventures.
However, the main take-away from this book is really to live life to it's fullest, no matter your age. All of the things that Allan's character did at any age could have been done by anyone at any age (he blows up his own house at a young age and again at a very old age!). And the character of Allan has a very laid-back, non-intrusive approach to the events of his own life....like the title quote says, he kind of just accepts the events of his life as they are and moves forward through them, without much significant emotion in them; mostly just acknowledging the pleasant things that come his way (this largely revolves around drinking...drinking preferably high-end vodka).
So if you're looking for a relatively quick read (even given the nearly 400 pages) that will make you smile, and maybe give a little bit of a history lesson, then I would recommend this one.
So I'm back to the reading lists. Next up is Pride and Prejudice. Believe it or not, I've never ready any Jane Austen. I'll admit to having seen the movie of Pride and Prejudice with Keira Knightly, although I don't think I've actually seen it all the way through. So hopefully actually reading it will be enjoyable - I know I liked what I saw of the movie.
Off to it!
The best way I can describe this book is charming. It tells the story of a man (as the very literal title implies), explosive expert Allan Karlsson, who crawls out of the window of his old folk's home on his 100th birthday because he doesn't want to stay for his birthday party. And from there, after impulsively deciding to steal a suitcase at a bus station, Allan experiences a very interesting series of events that introduces him to a very colorful cast of characters while being hunted for a number of crimes. Interspersed with the main story of Allan at 100 years old is the story of Allan's life, including numerous anecdotes about his impact on many events of global history: affecting outcomes during the Spanish Civil War with General Franco, involvement in helping create the atom bomb at Los Alamos and his friendship with President Truman, affecting interactions with Mao Tse-tung and Chiang Kai-shek, walking over the Himalayas from China to Iran, giving nuclear information to the Russians, being detained in a Russian prison, lying his way into meeting Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il in North Korea, living in a hotel in Bali, and many many other adventures.
However, the main take-away from this book is really to live life to it's fullest, no matter your age. All of the things that Allan's character did at any age could have been done by anyone at any age (he blows up his own house at a young age and again at a very old age!). And the character of Allan has a very laid-back, non-intrusive approach to the events of his own life....like the title quote says, he kind of just accepts the events of his life as they are and moves forward through them, without much significant emotion in them; mostly just acknowledging the pleasant things that come his way (this largely revolves around drinking...drinking preferably high-end vodka).
So if you're looking for a relatively quick read (even given the nearly 400 pages) that will make you smile, and maybe give a little bit of a history lesson, then I would recommend this one.
So I'm back to the reading lists. Next up is Pride and Prejudice. Believe it or not, I've never ready any Jane Austen. I'll admit to having seen the movie of Pride and Prejudice with Keira Knightly, although I don't think I've actually seen it all the way through. So hopefully actually reading it will be enjoyable - I know I liked what I saw of the movie.
Off to it!
Sunday, August 14, 2016
"The Trick Was To Live, To Beat The Bastards, Survive The Mob And That Fateful Chaos, And Show Them All What A Man Can Do To Set Things Right, Once He Sets His Mind To It"
When we were on the plane flying back from my brother's wedding in San Diego, my boyfriend leaned over to me while I was reading Ironweed and said, "Well there's a depressing book." I asked if he had read it, but in fact, he had only seen the movie. I didn't realize that there had been a movie make of Ironweed, and with Jack Nicholson and Meryl Streep no less. How have I never even heard of this? And Tom Waits too? Geesh.
So Ironweed is about an alcoholic homeless drifter, Francis Phelan, who used to be a major league baseball player, returning to his hometown of Albany, New York in the late 1930s. I know, that should have been a pretty obvious clue there that this wasn't going to be a smiley, happy read. I don't know if there is a distinct plot, per se, but mostly narrates his experiences over a couple day span on Halloween and into a bitterly cold November. It tells of him trying to kick the hooch, getting odd jobs here and there to make a couple bucks, haunting the many places that him and the other bums frequent (from bars, to a mission to get soup and socks, to the apartment of another indigent couple where the one woman is sitting on a toilet with diarrhea in their living room the entire time, to a flea-infested flop house). It also tells of the complicated relationship between him and another bum, Helen, who have been in love for years, but living a very complicated life together.
The writing in this book was brilliant. I think I read the first chapter through about 4 times, because I was so perplexed with what was being said. The book starts with Francis working as a gravedigger, and some of the chapter includes interjections from the dead people in the cemetery. But the way it's written makes them seem as though they're active characters, commentating on Francis, and each other, on death, and eating weeds on their graves. And in fact, throughout the book, Francis is haunted by multiple other people who he has come across in his life. Which made me certainly question Francis' mental health; without necessarily being a shrink, I would guess that the character was intended to appear schizophrenic; because not only do these specters follow him around but it seems that at points Francis' own memory becomes blurred with reality. But more importantly, Francis is so very haunted by his past. The entire book really revolves around him being the product of his choices, and while Francis clearly feels great guilt for the things he has done, his inability to accept them and forgive himself has led him to the life he now leads.
Back to the writing of the book, there was one particular passage, that was probably one of the best, and most well-done sections that I've ever read. At one point, Francis, Helen, and another bum, Rudy, are in a bar and Helen has an opportunity to go up and sing on stage. Without giving too much away, it is a delightful moment of Helen remembering what a talented singer she was growing up and how much other people adored hearing her sing. Like the first chapter, I had to go back and re-read this section multiple times to make sure I was clear on what happened. And I don't know if I've ever read something that could have been so very difficult to convey, so successfully written.
While I generally liked the book, it was exactly as advertised (and as astutely pointed out by my boyfriend): a huge downer. Not that I expect all books that I read to be light and fluffy unicorns or anything, but yeah, there was a lot of darkness in this book. But most certainly one of the more unique novels I've read in a while. I know that there are other novels that William Kennedy has written about Albany, and some of the characters in Ironweed appear in those novels as well. While not necessarily on my list, I wouldn't be opposed to picking them up one day. But you know, I have a bit on my plate still.
So as noted in my previous post, my binge book buying has left me with quite a few non-list books to read, so on I go to The 100-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared by Jonas Jonasson. The book seems quite long, but for some reason, I have a much easier time getting through more current fiction than older stuff. I would imagine it's because of the contrast in language from then versus now, but hopefully this one is a good one!
233 to go.
So Ironweed is about an alcoholic homeless drifter, Francis Phelan, who used to be a major league baseball player, returning to his hometown of Albany, New York in the late 1930s. I know, that should have been a pretty obvious clue there that this wasn't going to be a smiley, happy read. I don't know if there is a distinct plot, per se, but mostly narrates his experiences over a couple day span on Halloween and into a bitterly cold November. It tells of him trying to kick the hooch, getting odd jobs here and there to make a couple bucks, haunting the many places that him and the other bums frequent (from bars, to a mission to get soup and socks, to the apartment of another indigent couple where the one woman is sitting on a toilet with diarrhea in their living room the entire time, to a flea-infested flop house). It also tells of the complicated relationship between him and another bum, Helen, who have been in love for years, but living a very complicated life together.
The writing in this book was brilliant. I think I read the first chapter through about 4 times, because I was so perplexed with what was being said. The book starts with Francis working as a gravedigger, and some of the chapter includes interjections from the dead people in the cemetery. But the way it's written makes them seem as though they're active characters, commentating on Francis, and each other, on death, and eating weeds on their graves. And in fact, throughout the book, Francis is haunted by multiple other people who he has come across in his life. Which made me certainly question Francis' mental health; without necessarily being a shrink, I would guess that the character was intended to appear schizophrenic; because not only do these specters follow him around but it seems that at points Francis' own memory becomes blurred with reality. But more importantly, Francis is so very haunted by his past. The entire book really revolves around him being the product of his choices, and while Francis clearly feels great guilt for the things he has done, his inability to accept them and forgive himself has led him to the life he now leads.
Back to the writing of the book, there was one particular passage, that was probably one of the best, and most well-done sections that I've ever read. At one point, Francis, Helen, and another bum, Rudy, are in a bar and Helen has an opportunity to go up and sing on stage. Without giving too much away, it is a delightful moment of Helen remembering what a talented singer she was growing up and how much other people adored hearing her sing. Like the first chapter, I had to go back and re-read this section multiple times to make sure I was clear on what happened. And I don't know if I've ever read something that could have been so very difficult to convey, so successfully written.
While I generally liked the book, it was exactly as advertised (and as astutely pointed out by my boyfriend): a huge downer. Not that I expect all books that I read to be light and fluffy unicorns or anything, but yeah, there was a lot of darkness in this book. But most certainly one of the more unique novels I've read in a while. I know that there are other novels that William Kennedy has written about Albany, and some of the characters in Ironweed appear in those novels as well. While not necessarily on my list, I wouldn't be opposed to picking them up one day. But you know, I have a bit on my plate still.
So as noted in my previous post, my binge book buying has left me with quite a few non-list books to read, so on I go to The 100-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared by Jonas Jonasson. The book seems quite long, but for some reason, I have a much easier time getting through more current fiction than older stuff. I would imagine it's because of the contrast in language from then versus now, but hopefully this one is a good one!
233 to go.
Sunday, July 10, 2016
"Some People Believe That Freedom Is Every Person's Right, But I Have Had To Fight For Mine. And It's Been a Long And Difficult Battle"
I admit to being an incredibly impulsive buyer of books. I still love going to bookstores. I do buy some books online, since some of the ones on my list are a bit difficult to find, but there's something about strolling around the tables and bookcases of books and being able to look at the covers, read the back and/or jacket, and flip through the actual book that I don't think is easily replaced by just looking at something online. Plus I'm impatient. I want to walk out of a store with a book in hand and getting it going as soon as I get home.
So I think it's physically impossible for me to leave a store with less than 3 books. So I've done some impulse buying and have a big ol' stack to get through. And most of them are not ones from my lists. So I took a quick break from the lists to read Sleep Tight by Rachel Abbott.
The book was actually on a list I pinned on Pinterest of 2014 must read books. And I literally read it in a week. I'm such a sucker for whodoneit books, especially when they're from the perspective of the detectives/investigators (I swear I have reconsidered career paths to change to be a detective. But that doesn't work without the whole actually becoming a police officer, which is definitely not for me). The book is about the disappearance of Olivia Brookes and her 3 children. There is an initial chapter about an incident 2 years prior to her disappearance where her husband, Robert, disappeared with the children only to be found at their normal family vacation spot, with Robert telling the police that he had told her where he was going and claiming that she forgot. So right off the bat, there is clearly something not going well with their marriage, but initially it's hard to tell who is the troubled one, the husband or wife. So 2 years later, now it's Robert who is the one dealing with his spouse's and his children's disappearance.
The book was a fine, quick read. It felt very similar to Gone Girl, with different chapters/sections of the book being written from the perspective of the husband and the wife, but in this case, additional chapters from the police and even the wife's friend. And even the storyline of the disappearing wife, suspected husband, and layers of marital discord weaved in was sooo very similar; I actually had to go back to my Pinterest list to see if it was a list of "If You Like Gone Girl, You Like These Books". It also reminded me of books I've read by Tana French, but with less psychological depth to the characters. Overall, a satisfying summer mystery book. I would consider going back to Rachel Abbott if I was looking for another similar whodoneit.
Next up in Ironweed by William Kennedy. I have absolutely no idea what this book is about other than the 4 sentence summary on the back of the book. I'd like to say that because it's a short-ish looking book that I'll be able to get through it quickly, but Lord knows that I've been deceived a lot, especially recently (I'm looking at you Gertrude Stein). But I'm looking forward to continued lazy weekend afternoons, lounging in the summer sun, absorbed in some good reads. It's been pretty damn perfect for it so far!
So I think it's physically impossible for me to leave a store with less than 3 books. So I've done some impulse buying and have a big ol' stack to get through. And most of them are not ones from my lists. So I took a quick break from the lists to read Sleep Tight by Rachel Abbott.
The book was actually on a list I pinned on Pinterest of 2014 must read books. And I literally read it in a week. I'm such a sucker for whodoneit books, especially when they're from the perspective of the detectives/investigators (I swear I have reconsidered career paths to change to be a detective. But that doesn't work without the whole actually becoming a police officer, which is definitely not for me). The book is about the disappearance of Olivia Brookes and her 3 children. There is an initial chapter about an incident 2 years prior to her disappearance where her husband, Robert, disappeared with the children only to be found at their normal family vacation spot, with Robert telling the police that he had told her where he was going and claiming that she forgot. So right off the bat, there is clearly something not going well with their marriage, but initially it's hard to tell who is the troubled one, the husband or wife. So 2 years later, now it's Robert who is the one dealing with his spouse's and his children's disappearance.
The book was a fine, quick read. It felt very similar to Gone Girl, with different chapters/sections of the book being written from the perspective of the husband and the wife, but in this case, additional chapters from the police and even the wife's friend. And even the storyline of the disappearing wife, suspected husband, and layers of marital discord weaved in was sooo very similar; I actually had to go back to my Pinterest list to see if it was a list of "If You Like Gone Girl, You Like These Books". It also reminded me of books I've read by Tana French, but with less psychological depth to the characters. Overall, a satisfying summer mystery book. I would consider going back to Rachel Abbott if I was looking for another similar whodoneit.
Next up in Ironweed by William Kennedy. I have absolutely no idea what this book is about other than the 4 sentence summary on the back of the book. I'd like to say that because it's a short-ish looking book that I'll be able to get through it quickly, but Lord knows that I've been deceived a lot, especially recently (I'm looking at you Gertrude Stein). But I'm looking forward to continued lazy weekend afternoons, lounging in the summer sun, absorbed in some good reads. It's been pretty damn perfect for it so far!
Tuesday, July 5, 2016
"When She Fell In Love It Was With A Perfect Fury Of Accumulated Dishonesty; She Became Instantly A Dealer In Second-Hand And Therefore Incalculable Emotions"
Hmmmm....so where to begin with Nightwood. I think that general overall puzzlement on where to even begin mirrors my overall puzzlement with the book itself.
I'll tell you what I was able to discern:
But as far as everything else, there is certainly a lot more I could say, but I have no real sense of whether or not any interpretation I have of the novel is even remotely close to what the intent of the text was. Many of the reviews I have read about the book have called it notoriously difficult to get through, and that might be the understatement of my book-reading year. At one point, I was reading certain passages of text out loud to my boyfriend, telling him that it all felt like a riddle that I was not nearly smart enough to figure out. His first response upon hearing what I read was that it reminded him of Burroughs, which is interesting given that Burroughs called it, "One of the greatest books of the 20th century." So certainly something of him responded to something in it. And just as a side note, Naked Lunch was the only book I have ever started reading and didn't bother to finish, if that tells you how I feel about non-linear writing.
But that's exactly where I struggled so much with this book: the language. I found myself continually wishing that I was reading it as part of a college lit class so that I could have others to discuss with, and tease apart each chapter/page/paragraph/sentence to try to make sense of it and come to better terms with it. But it often infuriated me, again, particularly Dr. O'Connor's monologues, because in some ways it felt very forced. That it was pseudo-intellectual jargony garbage spouted by one character that was more a means for the author to elevate non-sensical writing to some kind of higher level, "oooo...this is what smart people talk about" kind of content. HOWEVER, I am perfectly willing to acknowledge that I JUST DIDN'T GET IT. Certainly, there were some gorgeous morsels of text conveying philosophical thoughts or just statements on humanity that I loved, and I feel fairly certain that if I were to go back and read it for a second or third time that many of the themes and concepts about time and death and love and obsession would gel more in my little noodle and I would have a much greater appreciation for the novel. But as the other reviews indicated, it was notoriously difficult....sigh.
But I love that this book challenged me. That it puzzled me and made me feel dumb. That it made me want to read it again. That it made me want to look up every obscure reference to things like the palace of Nymphenburg, lying down with Nelly and falling into the arms of Gretchen (I can only assume that's not referring to "It's Gettin' Hot in Herre" Nelly), and the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. That in spite of looking all of these things up, it still didn't help me one iota to figure out how that reference made sense in the context of the doctor's diatribes.
So yes, sigh. I know a repeated sigh is not that illuminating to describe my feelings about the book, but a sigh is kind of all I can muster.
But to finish with one of those gems of prose that I latched on to and loved. I can only hope that if I come back to read this again one day, more will jump out at me to establish a deeper appreciation.
"In time everything is possible and in space everything forgivable; life is but the intermediary vice. There is eternity to blush in."
234 to go.
I'll tell you what I was able to discern:
- The story revolves around those who have "loved" a certain Robin Vote: her faux baron husband Felix, the very much in love but maniacally possessive Nora Frost, and the wickedly selfish Jenny Petherbridge. All of these characters are beyond obsessed with this woman, although, it's interesting that the reader doesn't really get a fair picture of why. None of the novel is told from Robin's point of view, so she is a bit of an enigma. The reader doesn't really get a chance to know her, other than the other characters' perceptions of her. And their perceptions of her are that she seems to want something but not want something. She doesn't want to belong to anyone but she doesn't want to be forgotten. She is aloof and easily loses interest.
- There is also one heck of a whack-a-doo, colorful, cross-dressing, intelligentsia, possibly transgender, often infuriating character, Dr. Matthew O'Connor, through which a large portion of the novel is told. Which is a bit misleading, because the good doctor doesn't actually narrate or describe the plot, but does a whooooole lot of pontificating. We're talking 40+ pages of monologues directed to one character. Which drove me a little bonkers (more on that in a moment).
- Apparently the book ends with Robin crawling around on the floor of a chapel, play-fighting with Nora's dog. Okie dokie smokey.
- In terms of LGBT themes, this book is clearly very far ahead of its time. While there is certainly a lot of text devoted to addressing why Robin is the way she is (and allusions to what and why the doctor is as well), and discussions about gender identity, the lesbian relationships between Robin and Nora and Robin and Jenny are handled in a very casual, this-is-how-we-roll kind of way. There isn't a lot of addressing how scandalous their relations may have actually been in the 1920s, so bravo to Ms. Barnes for creating such a dynamic for her characters.
But as far as everything else, there is certainly a lot more I could say, but I have no real sense of whether or not any interpretation I have of the novel is even remotely close to what the intent of the text was. Many of the reviews I have read about the book have called it notoriously difficult to get through, and that might be the understatement of my book-reading year. At one point, I was reading certain passages of text out loud to my boyfriend, telling him that it all felt like a riddle that I was not nearly smart enough to figure out. His first response upon hearing what I read was that it reminded him of Burroughs, which is interesting given that Burroughs called it, "One of the greatest books of the 20th century." So certainly something of him responded to something in it. And just as a side note, Naked Lunch was the only book I have ever started reading and didn't bother to finish, if that tells you how I feel about non-linear writing.
But that's exactly where I struggled so much with this book: the language. I found myself continually wishing that I was reading it as part of a college lit class so that I could have others to discuss with, and tease apart each chapter/page/paragraph/sentence to try to make sense of it and come to better terms with it. But it often infuriated me, again, particularly Dr. O'Connor's monologues, because in some ways it felt very forced. That it was pseudo-intellectual jargony garbage spouted by one character that was more a means for the author to elevate non-sensical writing to some kind of higher level, "oooo...this is what smart people talk about" kind of content. HOWEVER, I am perfectly willing to acknowledge that I JUST DIDN'T GET IT. Certainly, there were some gorgeous morsels of text conveying philosophical thoughts or just statements on humanity that I loved, and I feel fairly certain that if I were to go back and read it for a second or third time that many of the themes and concepts about time and death and love and obsession would gel more in my little noodle and I would have a much greater appreciation for the novel. But as the other reviews indicated, it was notoriously difficult....sigh.
But I love that this book challenged me. That it puzzled me and made me feel dumb. That it made me want to read it again. That it made me want to look up every obscure reference to things like the palace of Nymphenburg, lying down with Nelly and falling into the arms of Gretchen (I can only assume that's not referring to "It's Gettin' Hot in Herre" Nelly), and the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. That in spite of looking all of these things up, it still didn't help me one iota to figure out how that reference made sense in the context of the doctor's diatribes.
So yes, sigh. I know a repeated sigh is not that illuminating to describe my feelings about the book, but a sigh is kind of all I can muster.
But to finish with one of those gems of prose that I latched on to and loved. I can only hope that if I come back to read this again one day, more will jump out at me to establish a deeper appreciation.
"In time everything is possible and in space everything forgivable; life is but the intermediary vice. There is eternity to blush in."
234 to go.
Thursday, June 30, 2016
"The Thing About Being Catapulted Into A Whole New Life - Or At Least Shoved Up So Hard Against Someone Else's Life That You Might As Well Have Your Face Pressed Against Their Window - Is That It Forces You To Rethink Your Idea Of Who You Are"
So for my vacation reading, I opted for Me Before You by Jojo Moyes. And it turned out to be the perfect vacation read, except for 2 things: 1) me finishing it within a week of our 2 week vacation, and 2) me bawling my gdamn eyes out on more than one evening during our travels.
For those who haven't heard a lick about the book or movie, the story is of Louisa Clark, a girl who is perfectly content with her small-town life in an English town known primarily for tourist visits to the town's old castle during the summer months. But once she loses her job at the café she had worked at for years, she ends up taking a 6-month temporary job as a companion for a young man, Will Traynor, who had recently become quadriplegic. She is initially excited for the opportunity and wants to do everything she can to be a positive person to Will, however, he despises her. And pretty much despises life itself now, as prior to the accident, he lived his life to the fullest with a big time job and extreme sports in all corners of the globe. So he is very resentful of the life he feels was taken away.
Through a series of events, Will softens to Louisa but she soon discovers that the 6-month period of her employment is tied to the terminus date for when Will plans to complete a doctor assisted suicide in Switzerland. So she wants to do everything she can to make the last 6 months of his life as joyful and wonderful as possible, under the circumstances. And in the process discovers that she has a lot more drive than she ever gave herself credit for.
The writing in the book was certainly quality enough to make it good, quick read. And the characters were so well defined. There were many facets to Louisa that I enjoyed - she was such an effervescent character in spite of some situations in her past and the complexities of her family dynamics. And the author certainly did a good job of making you really not care for Will but slowly bring him back in as a likeable, and certainly, sympathetic character. However, whether the reader ultimately felt sympathy for Will is certainly the crux of the novel.
When I finished reading the book, in spite of my hysterical crying surprisingly not waking my boyfriend up at midnight in our London hotel, the first thing I wanted to do was to talk to someone else who had read the book. Because I needed to vent and get someone else's perspective on the ending. But limited by my lack of an international phone plan on my phone, and the fact that...oh...I WAS ON VACATION IN EUROPE, I had to settle for a little internet searching in some of the fleeting moments when we actually had wifi. And I think I came to a place where I was accepting of how it ended and still happy with where their relationship ended up.
I even scooted to the movie theatre last week to see Me Before You before it goes away from the theatre. And there were surprisingly more people there than I expected on a Thursday evening, much to my chagrin, as I knew this would require me to keep my sobbing in check. But no worry, when washing my hands in the restroom and looking up at my hot mess, disheveled face, red-rimmed eyes, and snotted nose, I'm sure I sufficiently got my cry on to get some turned heads in the theatre.... The movie was mostly faithful to the book, but there was 1 big plot omission that certainly did change the narrative of Louisa's character. But I can see why the author chose to leave it out for the movie (JoJo Moyes also wrote the screenplay for the movie). It would have been harder to reconcile the way Emilia Clarke plays the character versus some of the darker situations of the character in the book. But I was happy with the faithful portrayal. And yeah, the tears.
So long and short of the book and movie - keep the tissues handy. And try not to wake others up or disturb other movie-goers with your hard-to-keep-stifled sobs. It's no easy feat.
I'm most of the way through Nightwood by Djuna Barnes and hope to finish it while relaxing over the holiday weekend.
Have a happy 4th!
Oh, and certainly one of infinite joyful moments from our time in Paris, was being above to see 27 Rue de Fleurus. And even to think of the greatest writers and artists of the 20th century congregating here, was just too delightful for words!!
For those who haven't heard a lick about the book or movie, the story is of Louisa Clark, a girl who is perfectly content with her small-town life in an English town known primarily for tourist visits to the town's old castle during the summer months. But once she loses her job at the café she had worked at for years, she ends up taking a 6-month temporary job as a companion for a young man, Will Traynor, who had recently become quadriplegic. She is initially excited for the opportunity and wants to do everything she can to be a positive person to Will, however, he despises her. And pretty much despises life itself now, as prior to the accident, he lived his life to the fullest with a big time job and extreme sports in all corners of the globe. So he is very resentful of the life he feels was taken away.
Through a series of events, Will softens to Louisa but she soon discovers that the 6-month period of her employment is tied to the terminus date for when Will plans to complete a doctor assisted suicide in Switzerland. So she wants to do everything she can to make the last 6 months of his life as joyful and wonderful as possible, under the circumstances. And in the process discovers that she has a lot more drive than she ever gave herself credit for.
The writing in the book was certainly quality enough to make it good, quick read. And the characters were so well defined. There were many facets to Louisa that I enjoyed - she was such an effervescent character in spite of some situations in her past and the complexities of her family dynamics. And the author certainly did a good job of making you really not care for Will but slowly bring him back in as a likeable, and certainly, sympathetic character. However, whether the reader ultimately felt sympathy for Will is certainly the crux of the novel.
When I finished reading the book, in spite of my hysterical crying surprisingly not waking my boyfriend up at midnight in our London hotel, the first thing I wanted to do was to talk to someone else who had read the book. Because I needed to vent and get someone else's perspective on the ending. But limited by my lack of an international phone plan on my phone, and the fact that...oh...I WAS ON VACATION IN EUROPE, I had to settle for a little internet searching in some of the fleeting moments when we actually had wifi. And I think I came to a place where I was accepting of how it ended and still happy with where their relationship ended up.
I even scooted to the movie theatre last week to see Me Before You before it goes away from the theatre. And there were surprisingly more people there than I expected on a Thursday evening, much to my chagrin, as I knew this would require me to keep my sobbing in check. But no worry, when washing my hands in the restroom and looking up at my hot mess, disheveled face, red-rimmed eyes, and snotted nose, I'm sure I sufficiently got my cry on to get some turned heads in the theatre.... The movie was mostly faithful to the book, but there was 1 big plot omission that certainly did change the narrative of Louisa's character. But I can see why the author chose to leave it out for the movie (JoJo Moyes also wrote the screenplay for the movie). It would have been harder to reconcile the way Emilia Clarke plays the character versus some of the darker situations of the character in the book. But I was happy with the faithful portrayal. And yeah, the tears.
So long and short of the book and movie - keep the tissues handy. And try not to wake others up or disturb other movie-goers with your hard-to-keep-stifled sobs. It's no easy feat.
I'm most of the way through Nightwood by Djuna Barnes and hope to finish it while relaxing over the holiday weekend.
Have a happy 4th!
Oh, and certainly one of infinite joyful moments from our time in Paris, was being above to see 27 Rue de Fleurus. And even to think of the greatest writers and artists of the 20th century congregating here, was just too delightful for words!!
Sunday, May 15, 2016
"He Who Is Going To Be The Creator Of The Vibrant Line Knows That It Is Not Yet Created And If It Were It Would Not Exist By Itself, It Would Be Dependent Upon The Emotion Of The Object Which Compels The Vibration"
The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas took me far far longer to finish reading than it should have. For only 176 pages, 4 months is not going to keep me on track for completing any kind of book lists in a timely fashion.
And I certainly started out in a fervor. I adore modern art and have a strong fondness for Paris, so to be reading the stories of all of the artists that I love living in Paris in the early 20th century and to really hear how they knew each other, interacted, who bought whose paintings, etc, was just too fabulous for me. I absolutely love the idea of their home/salon at 27 rue de Fleurus being this hub for artists and writers. It was just so brilliant to read about how all of these icons were ushered into becoming well-known, especially knowing their status in the art world now, nearly 80 years after the novel was written. Picasso, Matisse, Cezanne, Braque, Duchamp, Man Ray, Gris, Rousseau, not to mention Hemingway, Ford Madox Ford, T.S Eliot, Ezra Pound, Fitzgerald. These names are institutions now. It also meant that it was super slow going at first too, because I had to look up every single artist and painting that was discussed. So certainly slow going.
But don't be fooled by the title; the autobiography is of Gertrude Stein, not of Alice Toklas. The book is written from the point of view of Alice, but is certainly alllll about Ms. Stein. And it's a clever approach. Because I feel as though, if it had been written in the first person about herself, some things would have made her seem a bit egotistical, but when written from the perspective of an observer, it feels more impartial, so it's easier to assert one's impact on the art world and one's literary prowess when it sounds like it is someone else's observation.
And while I was initially thrilled with reading all about the who's who of early 20th century literati Paris, lemme tell ya, it got old really quick. In a nutshell, the book is 90% name dropping. And while time has exulted some, it has not been kind to others. And while I certainly researched many of the individuals named, had I looked into all of them, I would be reading this book indefinitely. So the initial aspect of the book that I loved became the reason that I couldn't wait to be done with it.
And I don't know if Gertrude Stein's style of writing is necessarily my cup of tea. She has very long sentences often with commas and punctuation intentionally absent, usually requiring re-reading of a sentence to fully understand the intent. In her defense, Stein addresses her own manner of writing and the process behind it. So I can appreciate it a little more when reading the explanation around it, but it still felt unfocused to me. And again, based on her own descriptions of her writing methods, there is intent and so much labor behind each word, but I still had a hard time seeing that. It felt as though there was so much labor behind each word for it to still feel chaotic. And while Stein was a passionate grammatical purist, this didn't seem to lend itself to readability. I was a little disheartened to see that I still have another Gertrude Stein book left on my lists, Three Lives. It's probably going to be a minute before I put that in my queue. And I don't know if it was just the copy of the book that I have or if it was the author's intent, but there are tons of typos in the book. I am assuming that this has been kept consistent with the intended copy of the author, but it's possible that I just got a cheapy copy.
It seems appropriate that I finish this book only days before we're going to Paris. I have never been before, so in spite of my not necessarily being super crazy about this book, it really was perfect timing. We're not staying all that far from 27 rue de Fleurus, so I'm sure we'll need to at least walk by to see it. Also appropriately enough to continue on my Paris kick, I watched Midnight in Paris last night, which may as well be the encapsulation of Gertrude Stein's novel (at least the dynamic of the celebrated artists and writers of the 20s hanging out...not the whole time travelling part...). So all together, I don't know if I could possibly be more excited for this trip.
So when deciding which book to read next, I had already chosen Djuna Barnes' Nightwood. And was surprised to see her name dropped both in The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas and in Midnight in Paris. So I guess it seems good that I'm sticking to the same era. I'm also planning to bring another book with me, but I haven't decided yet: options are Me Before You (my mom and sister just raved about it), When Breath Becomes Air, or We Are Not Ourselves.
Leaving with one last quote from The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas that I rather liked. I hope to have some shake-ups on the horizon.
"You should have one absorbing occupation and as for the other things in life for full enjoyment you should only contemplate results."
235 to go.
And I certainly started out in a fervor. I adore modern art and have a strong fondness for Paris, so to be reading the stories of all of the artists that I love living in Paris in the early 20th century and to really hear how they knew each other, interacted, who bought whose paintings, etc, was just too fabulous for me. I absolutely love the idea of their home/salon at 27 rue de Fleurus being this hub for artists and writers. It was just so brilliant to read about how all of these icons were ushered into becoming well-known, especially knowing their status in the art world now, nearly 80 years after the novel was written. Picasso, Matisse, Cezanne, Braque, Duchamp, Man Ray, Gris, Rousseau, not to mention Hemingway, Ford Madox Ford, T.S Eliot, Ezra Pound, Fitzgerald. These names are institutions now. It also meant that it was super slow going at first too, because I had to look up every single artist and painting that was discussed. So certainly slow going.
But don't be fooled by the title; the autobiography is of Gertrude Stein, not of Alice Toklas. The book is written from the point of view of Alice, but is certainly alllll about Ms. Stein. And it's a clever approach. Because I feel as though, if it had been written in the first person about herself, some things would have made her seem a bit egotistical, but when written from the perspective of an observer, it feels more impartial, so it's easier to assert one's impact on the art world and one's literary prowess when it sounds like it is someone else's observation.
And while I was initially thrilled with reading all about the who's who of early 20th century literati Paris, lemme tell ya, it got old really quick. In a nutshell, the book is 90% name dropping. And while time has exulted some, it has not been kind to others. And while I certainly researched many of the individuals named, had I looked into all of them, I would be reading this book indefinitely. So the initial aspect of the book that I loved became the reason that I couldn't wait to be done with it.
And I don't know if Gertrude Stein's style of writing is necessarily my cup of tea. She has very long sentences often with commas and punctuation intentionally absent, usually requiring re-reading of a sentence to fully understand the intent. In her defense, Stein addresses her own manner of writing and the process behind it. So I can appreciate it a little more when reading the explanation around it, but it still felt unfocused to me. And again, based on her own descriptions of her writing methods, there is intent and so much labor behind each word, but I still had a hard time seeing that. It felt as though there was so much labor behind each word for it to still feel chaotic. And while Stein was a passionate grammatical purist, this didn't seem to lend itself to readability. I was a little disheartened to see that I still have another Gertrude Stein book left on my lists, Three Lives. It's probably going to be a minute before I put that in my queue. And I don't know if it was just the copy of the book that I have or if it was the author's intent, but there are tons of typos in the book. I am assuming that this has been kept consistent with the intended copy of the author, but it's possible that I just got a cheapy copy.
It seems appropriate that I finish this book only days before we're going to Paris. I have never been before, so in spite of my not necessarily being super crazy about this book, it really was perfect timing. We're not staying all that far from 27 rue de Fleurus, so I'm sure we'll need to at least walk by to see it. Also appropriately enough to continue on my Paris kick, I watched Midnight in Paris last night, which may as well be the encapsulation of Gertrude Stein's novel (at least the dynamic of the celebrated artists and writers of the 20s hanging out...not the whole time travelling part...). So all together, I don't know if I could possibly be more excited for this trip.
So when deciding which book to read next, I had already chosen Djuna Barnes' Nightwood. And was surprised to see her name dropped both in The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas and in Midnight in Paris. So I guess it seems good that I'm sticking to the same era. I'm also planning to bring another book with me, but I haven't decided yet: options are Me Before You (my mom and sister just raved about it), When Breath Becomes Air, or We Are Not Ourselves.
Leaving with one last quote from The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas that I rather liked. I hope to have some shake-ups on the horizon.
"You should have one absorbing occupation and as for the other things in life for full enjoyment you should only contemplate results."
235 to go.
Sunday, January 24, 2016
"Because In Some Men It Is In Them To Give Up Everything Personal At Some Time, Before It Ferments And Poisons - Throw It To Some Human Being Or Some Human Idea"
Everyone wants to feel connected to someone. Everyone wants to share what is in their innermost being to get it out there in the world. To have someone understand what is in their heart and really know and understand what moves them.
That is very much the key message of The Heart is a Lonely Hunter. But like the title implies, it doesn't always work out that well. That the heart may search for that person who understands them, but may never find it or may have an false comprehension of the other person.
The book tells the stories of 5 main characters living in a Southern mill town: Mister Singer, a deaf mute; Jake Blount, a drunken wanderer who wants to spread his strong socialist beliefs with others; Biff Branson, the somewhat detached owner of the local diner; Doctor Copeland, a black doctor whose life mission has been to try to uplift and empower other blacks to not accept the roles that white society has given them; and Mick Kelly, a spirited young teenager obsessed with music.
Initially, the story tells of Mister Singer and his friendship with another deaf mute, Antonapoulous, and their time living together and how devoted Mister Singer was to his friend. However, it is very clear even from the first tellings of this friendship that Antonapoulous doesn't really care about Mister Singer in the same way. He's a bit of a schlumpy, aloof, crude, character (I've never read the description of a character as "oily" so many times, and was always a bit grossed out at the description), but Mister Singer looks past all of this, heaping his devotion and adoration on his friend. (Side note: I suspected there was some amount of homosexual implications in the relationship of Mister Singer and Antonapoulous, but McCullers doesn't come out and say it explicitly. Which could have been due to the time it was written or could have just not been made explicit to allow the reader to draw their own conclusions about what kind of love Mister Singer had for his friend). However, Antonopoulous becomes sick which later manifests as mental changes as well. His cousin sends him away to a mental asylum, leaving Mister Singer heartbroken over missing his friend.
Mister Singer then becomes acquainted with the 4 other characters in the story, and they all seem to project onto Mister Singer whoever they want him to be. Because he cannot communicate with them other than writing short responses, all of their interactions with him are one-sided and they all believe that "he gets them" (with the exception of Biff. He's a bit more of a quiet observant of Mister Singer, rather than rapturous over him). But all the while, Mister Singer is really mostly puzzled by all of these folks - there are only a few chapters written from his perspective, so it was interesting to read about his character from the other characters' points of view, and see how much they idolized him without him ever really saying anything back to him. And then to hear it from his perspective when he really didn't understand any of them at all and really only wanted to see his friend who he missed so desperately.
I won't give away the end of the book, because I sure as hell didn't see it coming (I startled my b.f. today when I got to a certain part and yelled out "NO WAY!"), and there were multiple key episodes in the book that really swung the narrative. But again, all of the characters so wanted to not feel so isolated, and for some reason the deaf mute was the one they all turned to (which is so brilliant, right?).
There were so many other layers to this book: the delicate handling of race (I felt as though it was a very honest portrayal of how the different races saw each other and interacted), the loss of innocence of Mick, needing to believe in some kind of god or religion or principal. It was all done in such an emblematic way (so many objects, places, moments in the book stood for something else) with a really clear, straightforward writing style. I believe I have another book by Carson McCullers on my lists, so I'm looking forward to seeing how her writing style is within a different context (and it blows me away that this book was published when she was 23 years old).
So on I move to The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas by Gertrude Stein. This one should hopefully be a pretty quick read. But I've said that before and 6 months later gotten around to finishing it.
I still have to see Sophie's Choice too...that was on my to-do list over the holidays and it just didn't happen. I think there's a movie version of The Heart is a Lonely Hunter floating around out there with Alan Arkin, but I suspect it might be a bit difficult to locate. So I'll put that on my eventual to-do list as well.
236 to go. I'm feeling good about 2016...more progress will be made this year!
Post note: the file hosting page I tried out was not a good option, so I switched back to the previous one. So unfortunately, if you want to actually look at the lists, you'll probably have to create a login to do so. Booo....but that's the interwebs technology for you!
That is very much the key message of The Heart is a Lonely Hunter. But like the title implies, it doesn't always work out that well. That the heart may search for that person who understands them, but may never find it or may have an false comprehension of the other person.
The book tells the stories of 5 main characters living in a Southern mill town: Mister Singer, a deaf mute; Jake Blount, a drunken wanderer who wants to spread his strong socialist beliefs with others; Biff Branson, the somewhat detached owner of the local diner; Doctor Copeland, a black doctor whose life mission has been to try to uplift and empower other blacks to not accept the roles that white society has given them; and Mick Kelly, a spirited young teenager obsessed with music.
Initially, the story tells of Mister Singer and his friendship with another deaf mute, Antonapoulous, and their time living together and how devoted Mister Singer was to his friend. However, it is very clear even from the first tellings of this friendship that Antonapoulous doesn't really care about Mister Singer in the same way. He's a bit of a schlumpy, aloof, crude, character (I've never read the description of a character as "oily" so many times, and was always a bit grossed out at the description), but Mister Singer looks past all of this, heaping his devotion and adoration on his friend. (Side note: I suspected there was some amount of homosexual implications in the relationship of Mister Singer and Antonapoulous, but McCullers doesn't come out and say it explicitly. Which could have been due to the time it was written or could have just not been made explicit to allow the reader to draw their own conclusions about what kind of love Mister Singer had for his friend). However, Antonopoulous becomes sick which later manifests as mental changes as well. His cousin sends him away to a mental asylum, leaving Mister Singer heartbroken over missing his friend.
Mister Singer then becomes acquainted with the 4 other characters in the story, and they all seem to project onto Mister Singer whoever they want him to be. Because he cannot communicate with them other than writing short responses, all of their interactions with him are one-sided and they all believe that "he gets them" (with the exception of Biff. He's a bit more of a quiet observant of Mister Singer, rather than rapturous over him). But all the while, Mister Singer is really mostly puzzled by all of these folks - there are only a few chapters written from his perspective, so it was interesting to read about his character from the other characters' points of view, and see how much they idolized him without him ever really saying anything back to him. And then to hear it from his perspective when he really didn't understand any of them at all and really only wanted to see his friend who he missed so desperately.
I won't give away the end of the book, because I sure as hell didn't see it coming (I startled my b.f. today when I got to a certain part and yelled out "NO WAY!"), and there were multiple key episodes in the book that really swung the narrative. But again, all of the characters so wanted to not feel so isolated, and for some reason the deaf mute was the one they all turned to (which is so brilliant, right?).
There were so many other layers to this book: the delicate handling of race (I felt as though it was a very honest portrayal of how the different races saw each other and interacted), the loss of innocence of Mick, needing to believe in some kind of god or religion or principal. It was all done in such an emblematic way (so many objects, places, moments in the book stood for something else) with a really clear, straightforward writing style. I believe I have another book by Carson McCullers on my lists, so I'm looking forward to seeing how her writing style is within a different context (and it blows me away that this book was published when she was 23 years old).
So on I move to The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas by Gertrude Stein. This one should hopefully be a pretty quick read. But I've said that before and 6 months later gotten around to finishing it.
I still have to see Sophie's Choice too...that was on my to-do list over the holidays and it just didn't happen. I think there's a movie version of The Heart is a Lonely Hunter floating around out there with Alan Arkin, but I suspect it might be a bit difficult to locate. So I'll put that on my eventual to-do list as well.
236 to go. I'm feeling good about 2016...more progress will be made this year!
Post note: the file hosting page I tried out was not a good option, so I switched back to the previous one. So unfortunately, if you want to actually look at the lists, you'll probably have to create a login to do so. Booo....but that's the interwebs technology for you!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)