Life of Pi

May’s Selection: Life of Pi

This is a book I tried to read once before, but I got stuck because I was listening to the audiobook on a long road trip and I didn’t know what the word “tarpaulin” meant.  There’s an entire section wherein a tarpaulin plays a rather critical role, and I was like, “Whaaa???”  Thanks to the power of The Almighty Google, I now know that a tarpaulin is a “heavy-duty waterproof cloth, originally of tarred canvas” (oooooh! makes so much sense now!), so I can finally finish what I’ve been told is a spectacular book.  :)

From the Amazon.com review…

Yann Martel’s imaginative and unforgettable Life of Pi is a magical reading experience, an endless blue expanse of storytelling about adventure, survival, and ultimately, faith. The precocious son of a zookeeper, 16-year-old Pi Patel is raised in Pondicherry, India, where he tries on various faiths for size, attracting “religions the way a dog attracts fleas.” Planning a move to Canada, his father packs up the family and their menagerie and they hitch a ride on an enormous freighter. After a harrowing shipwreck, Pi finds himself adrift in the Pacific Ocean, trapped on a 26-foot lifeboat with a wounded zebra, a spotted hyena, a seasick orangutan, and a 450-pound Bengal tiger named Richard Parker … It sounds like a colorful setup, but these wild beasts don’t burst into song as if co-starring in an anthropomorphized Disney feature. … In rich, hallucinatory passages, Pi recounts the harrowing journey as the days blur together, elegantly cataloging the endless passage of time and his struggles to survive.

IMPORTANT DETAILS…

CONTENT ADVISORY: I think this one is pretty tame

DISCUSSION LEADER: Katie

WHERE TO FIND IT: Amazon.com (Kindle version available); library; bookstore.  It’s a best-seller so it’s pretty widely available.

Comments { 0 }
Mens-Wedding-Rings

April’s Discussion: Committed by Elizabeth Gilbert

I’d like to welcome my dear friend, Laura Craner, as our discussion leader this month!  Laura is a fantastic writer, thinker, blogger, and critical reader.  Her review of Committed should provide some awesome conversation fodder!

I don’t know about the rest of you, but Elizabeth Gilbert’s memoir, Eat, Pray, Love, read a lot like an ennui-infused woman’s fever dreams: a sort of mousy-yet-modern every-woman character in a frustrating relationship gets completely depressed and instead having to stick it out gets to leave her husband, nosh out on Italian food, have a complete mental breakdown while doing real yoga with real Yogis in India, and then manages to meet an independently wealthy man who whose only desire is to sleep with her, cook for her, and call her beautiful. And then, like every romance novel from Jane Austen to Danielle Steele, it ends with a neat little “happily ever after” while the couple is still in the infatuation phase. It was a picture—and a fairly desirable one—of a modern woman’s assertion of self over family and community (especially because the assertion of herself ended up giving her a new and improved version of family and community). It was exactly what the oppressed and repressed main character in Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s “The Yellow Wallpaper” would have done if she could have scratched her way out of the darn stuff.

But what happened after the novelty of the romantic tryst wears off? Was Gilbert successful in purging her self-flagellating and self-absorbing demons? Could she truly commit to another person and not just herself? And, if she could, would it be worth it? I mean, she learned to love herself; so what? How does that self-love interact with the vital relationships around her? These were the questions inherent in the ending of Eat, Pray, Love and the questions Gilbert was forced to face in her follow-up, Committed: a skeptic makes peace with marriage.**

Committed was an entirely different book.Yes, it was a memoir and, yes, it was all about Gilbert and her dreamy Felipe but it was also somewhat offensive and at times infuriating. Gilbert takes strong stances on hot-button political and religious issues and spends more time philosophizing. Most of the book takes place not in Bali, but in the nooks and crannies of the Third World—a sure-fire death knell for the afterglow. But when you get past all that you might, like I did, find yourself *ahem* agreeing with her.

The part that surprised me the most was at the end when Gilbert makes the case for the family as the most subversive unit of society. Now, I’m used to hearing about the family as the fundamental unit of society, but subversive? Seriously?

Yes. Seriously. As in private, rebellious, overthrow-the-government kind of subversion. She wrote, “Couples in nonarranged marriages join together for deeply private reasons, and because those couples create such secret lives for themselves within their union, they are innately threatening to anybody who wants to rule the world. . . authority figures, much to their frustration, have never  been able to entirely control, or even monitor, the most secret intimacies that pass between two people who sleep together on a regular basis. . . marriage represents a kind of liberty of the heart and none of that business [can] be tolerated within an enslaved population” (256-257).  So you want to be counter-culture? You want to stick it to The Man? Get married.  After all, “only the family has continued through history and still continues . . . the family is enduring” (256).

As a sort of staid, married-for-over-a-decade, stay-at-home, thirty-year-old mommy this makes me feel kind of awesome.  It gives me hope that all the effort and sacrifices that my own long-term relationship requires(along with all the good times) is actually adding up to something. It is only in the unique context of a marriage relationship that you can “border on the miraculous” and “experience[the] very earthbound, domesticated, dirt-under-the-fingernails gift of difficult, long-term, daily forgiveness . . . [eventually] creating a big enough space within your consciousness to hold and accept someone’s contradictions” (131). The potential to perform this “kind of divine act” (131) and to be the recipient of it is challenging and amazing and awe-inspiring to me.  It isn’t just the happily ever after moment that makes falling in love worth it. The long-term commitment is just as important.

(If only us darn porcupines can figure it out!)

Watch Porcupine Love on PBS. See more from This Emotional Life.

What parts of the book did you find yourself agreeing with? What parts shed light on your qualms about marriage? What observations resonated with your experiences with marriage and motherhood? What about the red coat metaphor (pp161-164); have we as a society advanced enough so that women can create families and marriages that don’t require such deep and heart-rending sacrifices?  And is it acceptable if/when women still do sacrifice that way or does it reflect a deeper inequality?

** (Note: that is the original subtitle for the book. After the massive and unanticipated success of Eat, Pray, Love the book was republished with the subtitle “A Love Story”.  Now if that isn’t fodder for discussion, I don’t know what is!)

Comments { 9 }
committed

April’s Selection: Committed by Elizabeth Gilbert

This month, I’m excited to have a good friend of mine, Laura, leading our discussion!  Laura is a wonderful writer, blogger, and thinker.  I approached her about it a couple of weeks ago, and she was kind enough to agree.  She suggested we pick up Committed by Elizabeth Gilbert for our discussion.

Committed is the follow-up to Eat, Pray, Love, which both Laura and I agreed was okay, but pretty self-indulgent.  Laura said that Committed is much more thought-provoking than Gilbert’s previous book, and will provide loads of fodder for discussion.  I’m excited, because I’ve been curious to read it, and now I have the perfect excuse!  :-)

From the Booklist description…

Sure it garnered starred reviews, but who knew that Gilbert’s memoir about her quest for psychic healing, Eat, Pray, Love (2006), would become what she describes as a “megajumbo international best-seller”? Or that she would be in demand as a relationship guru? Or that her relationship with Felipe, the Brazilian businessman she fell in love with in Bali, would get so complicated? … As post-traumatic-divorce syndrome sufferers, they swore never to remarry, but marry they must if they want to be together in the States. … Gilbert tries to banish her fears by embarking on a crash course in the history, practice, and meaning of marriage. … Ultimately, she tells an irresistibly romantic tale spiked with unusual and resonant insights into love and marriage.

IMPORTANT DETAILS…

CONTENT ADVISORY: I don’t know if this counts, but there are some political thoughts that some of our regulars might not agree with.  :-)

DISCUSSION LEADER: Laura

WHERE TO FIND IT: Amazon.com (Kindle version available); library; bookstore.  It’s a best-seller so it’s pretty widely available.

Comments { 0 }
March’s Discussion: The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis

March’s Discussion: The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis

I am really excited to have this discussion this month.  I enjoyed this book a whole bunch.  A quick note that I talk a lot of Mormon in this review.  I can’t help it, ‘cuz I am one.  :-)   It’s also more personal than you might expect a book club review to be.  But it struck so close to home, that I can’t really talk about it without opening up a bit about myself.  It just feels like I couldn’t do the book justice otherwise.  I hope that’s okay with everyone.  :-)

A bit of background before we get started: I take religion really seriously.  Like, excessively seriously.  And one thing that has always troubled me is the idea of hell.  In fact, I lose sleep over it – sometimes a lot of sleep.  I get stuck in a storm of swirling questions, such as: Am I going to hell?  And if so, why?  And if not, why not?  And either way, who is? And why does there have to be hell in the first place?  Is there really hell?  And if so, does that make God evil?  And if He’s evil, should I worship Him?  But if not, will I go to hell?  Is it worth it to worship an evil God just to avoid hell?  And so on.

You can see you can really go the rounds on this one.  (Well, I can, anyway…)  :-)

Leave it to C.S. Lewis, my number one theologial crush of all time, to present thought-provoking insights that change the paradigm and ask better, more important questions about the nature of life, love, freedom, and salvation.  I can’t begin to cover all of it in a format like this, but I will share some themes and ideas that resonated most with me reading this book.  And I’m super excited to hear what you have to say!

1. Freedom

I’ve been thinking about freedom A LOT lately.  (I even posted about it on my personal blog, before I took a break from religious blogging for Lent [this totally doesn't count, 'cuz it's a book club].)  Human freedom is foundational to Lewis’s justifcation for hell.  Hell exists, because evil must be an option for there to be real freedom — and real freedom is the only thing that makes goodness worthwhile.  As Lewis said in The Case for Christianity, one of his apologetic works…

Free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having.

(For Mormon-types, you might notice that this parallels the “opposition in all things” argument found in 2 Nephi 2.) But because there is freedom, there is also a risk: that people will choose evil and decide to stay in hell.

I liked that in The Great Divorce, hell isn’t compulsory; in other words, at any point, the damned could leave if they really wanted to.  This lines up with my own personal views on progression between Kingdoms (again, getting into some Mormon stuff here; and I know this is a somewhat controversial position, but for now it is the only way I can see God as truly Just).  Of course, for the most part, the damned don’t leave.  But they are free to, and that is critical.

The alternative — that all are saved, with or without their consent – is unacceptable, as George MacDonald (who was a real person, by the way, and whose writings had a profound influence on C.S. Lewis) tells our narrator:

There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, in the end, ‘Thy will be done.’

In other words, our freedom is so important, so sacred, that God will honor our choices to the bitter end — for God will change no one against their will, and Hell must not be allowed to “veto” Heaven.

2. The Nature of the Damned

I was struck by the subtle jealousies, vanities, and deceptions of the damned.  Among the many damned souls we met along the way were…

  • Working-class folks demanding their “rights”
  • Liberal theologians
  • Conspiracy theorists
  • Jealous lovers
  • Artists who couldn’t give up fame and recognition
  • Grieving, possessive mothers

Painfully, I recognized myself in most of them.  I realized that I have tendencies to make my own desires into “false gods.”  I thought about what I am tempted to cling to instead of God.

I found it interesting that there was just one case of salvation.  And it came from someone who had been imprisoned by lust.  Mormons tend to think of lust and other “sins of the flesh” as the “worst” kind, but here Lewis makes the argument that they are actually often easier to let go of.  As the MacDonald character says,

There is but one good; that is God.  Everything else is good when it looks to Him and bad when it turns from Him.  And the higher and mightier it is in the natural order, the more demoniac it will be if it rebels.  It’s not out of bad mice or bad fleas you make demons, but of out of bad archangels.  The false religion of lust is baser than the false religion of mother-love or patriotism or art: but lust is less likely to be made into a religion.

The transformation of the Ghost enslaved by lust to a Real Person, and the Lusty Lizard to a Stallion, was the most moving moment of the book for me.  I found myself weeping audibly.  I have my own Thorn in the Flesh – perhaps not lust (not that I never lust; helloooo, Adam Levine) ;-)  – but deep struggles that have arisen because of the frailty of mortality.  The idea of it being destroyed and reborn as something that I will master, instead of the other way around, was one of the most hope-filled thoughts I have ever encountered.

3. Becoming Real

This is a theme you can find all throughout C.S. Lewis’s works.  (Most comprehensively in Till We Have Faces, a beautiful book that you need to read this instant, if you haven’t yet.)  I believe it has something to do with the idea that all the false gods we set up for ourselves are counterfeit, so if we live for them, instead of the Real God, we will fade away.  Note, too, the level of self-deception present in all the damned.  They will not let go of their pride, their insecurity, their anger, their jealousy.  Yet all of the Saved say that they, too, had to let go of what they had been clinging to; that none of them had arrived fully Real; but that being with God had made them so.  I love the idea of becoming more Real the more I unite with Christ and desire Him.

4. Love

Finally, I was thrilled by the descriptions of Real Love that were found throughout this book.  I believe that Love is the heart of the gospel and the essence of Heaven.  An exchange that moved me deeply…

“You mean,” said the Tragedian, “you mean — you did not love me truly in the old days?”

“Only in a  poor sort of way,” she answered.  “…There was a little real love in it.  But what we called love down there was mostly the craving to be loved.  In the main I loved you for my own sake: because I needed you.”

“And now!” said the Tragedian with a hackneyed gesture of despair. “Now you need me no more!”

“But of course not!” said the Lady; and her smile made me wonder how the phantoms could refrain from crying out with joy.

“What needs could I have,” she said, “now that I have all? … I am in Love Himself. … You shall be the same.  Come and see.  We shall have no need for one another now: we can begin to love truly.”

I desire to live in Love.  I had a very profound realization recently: that many of the choices I’ve made in my life have come from craving to be loved, and from fear that I wouldn’t be.  Blessedly, it was accompanied by another realization: that I am loved.  That I will always be loved.  This frees me to begin to let go of jealousy, fear, pride, anger, and all the other traps of the damned.  This frees me to become more Real.

1 Corinthians 13 describes Real Love so beautifully that I want to share it here (using the NIV, just for kicks):

Love is patient, love is kind.  It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always preserves.

Love never fails.

Well, those are some of my thoughts and reflections after reading this book.  What a wonderful piece of work!  What thoughts do you have?  What were your favorite parts?  What realizations did you have as you read? Any comments on what I’ve shared here?  I look forward to a great discussion.  :-)

Comments { 9 }
the-great-divorce

March’s Selection: The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis

Well. After February’s somewhat discouraging read, I thought it was time for something a bit more uplifting (not only that, a friend of mine has been asking me to read this book for about four months now).  :-)

Our selection is C.S. Lewis’s The Great Divorce, a novel about a bus ride from hell to heaven.  It is in this book that Lewis makes the profound observation that “the gates of Hell are locked from the inside” — an insight that has had revolutionary repercussions for Christians in his day…and ours.

The book is short — less than 150 pages long — but it’s a favorite of many people I admire.  Plus, C.S. Lewis is a thinker who has made a profound impact on my life, so I’m very excited.

From the review on Amazon.com…

The book’s primary message is presented with almost oblique tidiness–”There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, in the end, ‘Thy will be done.’” However, the narrator’s descriptions of sin and temptation will hit quite close to home for many readers. Lewis has a genius for describing the intricacies of vanity and self-deception, and this book is tremendously persistent in forcing its reader to consider the ultimate consequences of everyday pettiness.

IMPORTANT DETAILS…

CONTENT ADVISORY: I don’t imagine there’s anything explicit, but it does deal with some weighty themes.

DISCUSSION LEADER: Katie L.

WHERE TO FIND IT: Amazon.com (Kindle version available), your local library, most bookstores carry a decent selection of Lewis’s work

Comments { 3 }
February’s Discussion: Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut

February’s Discussion: Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut

Review by Katie R.

After I finished Slaughterhouse Five I was totally confused.  Maybe you were too?  I had read (maybe in the bio in my book or someplace) that Kurt Vonnegut really had been a soldier who had seen the burning of Dresden.  So, was this book his attempt to fit that cruel scene somewhere into his world?  Did he really have delusions like this in order to make sense of things?  Maybe he found some of the philosophies in his book true, but needed to illustrate them?  Maybe he just liked to sell books and intrigue people to learn of his story?  Does anyone have further thoughts on this? I think this is why I found myself interested in the book.   Being the dedicated scholar that I am, and finding myself intrigued when I finished the book, I hopped on Wikipedia.  Without detail, Vonnegut had a pretty crazy life; including attempted suicide, his mother’s death by suicide, his sister’s death from cancer, her husband dying the same week in a train accident, not to mention being a POW and witnessing the firebombing of Dresden.  It made me more curious about the purpose of the book.

Did anyone else think that perhaps Vonnegut got the name Tralfamordians from ‘Trafalgar Square’ and ‘Mordor’ from Lord of the Rings?  Probably not, but that’s what it made me think of.

What about the way the plot skipped around in time?  It was similar to some memoirs in that regard (Katie L), except totally bizarre and off the wall.  What do you think about the concept that all things are happening at all times?  The Tralfamadorians said there was no free will and all things were happening at all times.  We have agency but Heavenly Father always knows what we are going to do.  How does that work?  (It was a comparison that came to mind when I was reading.)  Obviously, there are events that Billy travels to that are unreal.  Or totally crazy.  Does the satire in the book make the fire bombings less central?  Less impacting?  It felt sort of like reading Poe or something where the dark humor made me forget the reality of what I was reading.

Do you know what the saddest part of the plot was to me?  The part of the plot where Billy Pilgrim was so apathetic about his wife and his family.  She was so happy to have someone love her.  He never seems to feel anything about her.  Sad.

This is one of those books that is a modern classic.  It is also one of those books that has been banned in classrooms and libraries.  It obviously has the bizarre, and sexual language and a scene.  I also found it interesting that part of its banning was because it used the word ‘fairies’ to describe gay men and pointed out that they were one of the first groups targeted by the Nazis.  Politically incorrect on a few levels.  What would you think about your kids reading it in the classroom (like in high school … prob not preschool)?

The last little thing I wanted to touch on is also the first thing in the book; the title.  The official title is SLAUGHTERHOUSE-FIVE, OR THE CHILDREN’S CRUSADE: A DUTY DANCE WITH DEATH.  I didn’t really understand that the full title until I read it.  After the narrator explains what the children’s crusade was and his friend’s wife makes him explain his view on the war I liked it so much more.  It put more meaning into the entire book for me.  Wikipedia says that Kurt Vonnegut is quoted to say that he was the narrator voice in the book.

That’s it for now.  I want to hear other people’s thoughts!

Comments { 5 }
slaughterhouse-five

February’s Selection: Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut

Slaughterhouse-Five is a modern American classic, ranked the 18th greatest novel of the 20th Century by Modern Library.  It is an absurdist piece, about a man named Billy Pilgrim who becomes “unstuck in time” after being abducted by aliens.  The novel is alternatively titled: Slaughterhouse-Five, or The Children’s Crusade: A Duty Dance with Death, by Kurt Vonnegut, a Fourth-Generation German-American Now Living in Easy Circumstances on Cape Cod [and Smoking Too Much], Who, as an American Infantry Scout Hors de Combat, as a Prisoner of War, Witnessed the Fire Bombing of Dresden, Germany, ‘The Florence of the Elbe,’ a Long Time Ago, and Survived to Tell the Tale. This Is a Novel Somewhat in the Telegraphic Schizophrenic Manner of Tales of the Planet Tralfamadore, Where the Flying Saucers Come From. Peace.

In its 1969 review, The New York Times said of Slaughterhouse-Five:

A highly imaginative, often funny, nearly psychedelic story…It sounds crazy. It sounds like a fantastic last-ditch effort to make sense of a lunatic universe. But there is so much more to this book. It is very tough and very funny; it is sad and delightful; and it works.

I’m definitely excited to be reading it this month!

IMPORTANT DETAILS…

CONTENT ADVISORY: PG-13.  Some language, brief “PG-13″ sex scene, war themes

DISCUSSION LEADER: Katie R.

WHERE TO FIND IT: Amazon.com (Kindle version available), your local library, I have a couple of copies (email me if you want to borrow one!), and most bookstores still carry it

Comments { 0 }
January’s Discussion:  The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making

January’s Discussion: The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making

I loved Catherynne M. Valente’s THE GIRL WHO CIRCUMNAVIGATED FAIRYLAND IN A SHIP OF HER OWN MAKING from the first sentence:

Once upon a time, a girl named September grew very tired indeed of her parents’ house, where she washed the same pink-and-yellow teacups and matching gravy boats every day, slept on the same embroidered pillow, and played with the same small and amiable dog. 

Actually, I loved it from the title of Chapter 1, “Exeunt on a Leopard,” which is followed by this charming epigraph:  “In Which a Girl Named September Is Spirited Off by Means of a Leopard, Learns the Rules of Fairyland, and Solves a Puzzle.”  I just love this kind of whimsy in stories.  And THE GIRL WHO CIRCUMNAVIGATED FAIRYLAND (which I will now refer to as FAIRYLAND, because it’s so dangdably tedious to type out) is chock full of whimsy.

After reading the first couple of pages of this book, I decided I needed to write down some of my favorite quotes.  I soon gave up, because in the first ten pages, I had written five quotes.  And I was even being picky.  So I stopped writing quotes, except when I absolutely had to, which I often did….

Let’s sample one of the quotes I took down, shall we?

I suppose you think you know what autumn looks like.  Even if you live in the Los Angeles dreamed of by September’s schoolmates, you have surely seen postcards of the kind of autumn I mean.  The trees go all red and blazing orange and gold, and wood fires burn at night so that everything smells of crisp branches.  The world rolls about delightedly in a heap of cider and candy and apples and pumpkins, and cold stars rush by through wispy, ragged clouds, past a moon like a bony knee.  You have, no doubt, experienced a Halloween or two (p. 129).

Really, this is one of the most gorgeously-written books I have ever picked up.  Reading it was like eating fudge.  And I do love fudge.

However, too much fudge can get tiresome.

While there was so much to enjoy in this book, I will admit that after a while, I got sick of the dream-like plot where it seemed like anything could and did happen.  This almost felt like irresponsible writing until I realized that this was a stylistic tool.  I love the kind of tightly-woven story where, while I’m in the middle of reading the book, it feels like the story simply must happen the way it’s happening.  I didn’t feel that way about FAIRYLAND until the end of the book, which pulled together all loose, seemingly-nonsensical threads.  While I appreciated that the dream-like quality was essential to the style in which Valente chose to write, I never once wondered—really wondered—what would happen next.  I figured it would be something dream-like and fun.  But I wasn’t concerned for the characters.  I was just a witness to the story, when I prefer to be invested in the story.

I did eventually slow my reading pace in the hopes that coming up for air would “cleanse my palette” of all the “fudge.”  It did seem to help.  When I set the book down for a couple of days and then went back to it, I enjoyed it so much more.  And please, don’t get me wrong.  I did enjoy FAIRYLAND.  I enjoyed taking in the rich writing in bits, and I valued the methods Valente employed to capture the particular style in which FAIRYLAND was written.  And the characters were just plain charming.

Neil Gaiman “blurbed” this book, saying that it was “A glorious balancing act between modernism and the Victorian fairy tale, done with heart and wisdom.”  Much of modernist literature is characterized by the abandonment of the ornamental writing style of the Victorian era.  While I do think Valente’s writing style in FAIRYLAND has a Victorian whimsy to it that makes it read like J.M. Barrie’s PETER PAN, I agree with Gaiman that it isn’t verbose.  Passages that deserve loads of attention because of their meaty (or fudgy) nature are given in a very matter-of-fact manner.  It’s whimsical writing, but it’s also quick.  There is no languishing in the loveliness of the language.

Despite the focus on language and the fast pace of this story (that’s ironic, isn’t it?), Valente’s characters are surprisingly well-rounded.  Valente accomplishes this by delivering bits of information about each character in a manner that doesn’t slow the story (except for when she wants it to slow the story, as in the case of Chapter IX, “Saturday’s Story,” and in Chapter XIX, “Clocks”).  For example, when a fairy named Calpurnia Farthing, tells September that the only way to reach the Autumn Provinces quickly is to whip her velocipede (a bicycle that acts a lot like a bison), Penny, a precocious changeling, protests.  And September’s new friend Saturday, “who knew a thing or two about whipping” (emphasis added; p. 126) says, “Penny, you don’t have to do a thing.”  It’s that kind of deft move—inserting backstory (in this case, Saturday’s backstory) in a way that doesn’t interfere with the forward progression of the story and even enhances the story—that gives Valente’s characters depth.  Another great example is near the end of the book, when the Marquess reveals her backstory and Valente makes it all the more real when she has the Marquess say, “Let this be a place where no one has to be dragged home, screaming, to a field full of tomatoes and a father’s fists!”

It is also worth noting that time, in the story, has a different meaning from time as we (and September) know it.  The seasons are treated as locations on a map.  September, her Wyvern friend Ell, and Saturday and destined for the Autumn Provinces, and Calpurnia Farthing takes them as far as the equinox.  The very fact that Saturday’s name is the last day of the week and September’s name is a month—a month that, as Calpurnia says, “Is the beginning of death” (p. 131)—further complicates the idea of time having a unique meaning.  Names are important in FAIRYLAND, too.  Ell, whose real name is A-Through-L, possesses a name that is more a measure of distance, or an idea, than an actual name.  And Penny, the changeling, was once named Molly.  Calpurnia shares a name with the wife of Julius Caesar—a woman who saw her husband’s death in a dream before it happened.  The Calpurnia of FAIRYLAND “feel[s] a powerful urge to tell [September] to be careful” (p. 131).  And near the end of the book, September discovers the Marquess’s old clock, which reveals her true name:  Maud Elizabeth Smythe.  September says, “True names have power…But I never told anyone my true name.  The Green Wind told me not to.  I didn’t understand what he meant, but I do now.”  The idea that true names have power isn’t a new one, but it’s an enduring one.

The strongest theme in the story, to me, was what it meant to have a heart—and, in particular, to love.

When the Green Wind came for September, she didn’t wave goodbye to Omaha or her mother because, as the narrator explains, “All children are heartless.  They have not grown a heart yet, which is why they can climb tall trees and say shocking things and leap so very high that grown-up hearts flutter in terror.  Hearts weigh quite a lot.  That is why it takes so long to grow one” (p. 4).

The Marquess says much the same thing to September:  “You are selfish, after all, and heartless, like all children” (p. 220).

However, Calpurnia Farthing (who really plays a comparatively small role in the story) understands a child’s capacity to love.  She tells Saturday that “The riddle of the Ravished [which is what September, who will one day become romantically involved with Saturday, is]…is that they must always go down into the black naked and lonesome.  But they cannot come back up into the light alone” (note in [brackets] added; p. 132).

The above quotes from the narrator and the Marquess about children being heartless is the kind of “Fact About Children” or “Wise Observation on Some Element of Life” that a reader can often find in classic children’s stories, such as PETER PAN, THE WONDERFUL WIZARD OF OZ (where the heroine is from Kansas, but could as easily be from Nebraska), and even ALICE IN WONDERLAND (though that particular story isn’t quite as rife with Quotable Quotes as the other two—or perhaps that which is of a philosophical nature is delivered less obviously).

So, finally (this review is getting really long), here are some Quotable Quotes from PETER PAN and THE WONDERFUL WIZARD OF OZ.  I chose these quotes because they are about hearts and they really illustrate the style that I believe Valente was after when she wrote FAIRYLAND.  They are very similar to quotes from FAIRYLAND that I’ve already shared.  I think of this as Valente’s “nod” to two wonderful, classic children’s stories.

From PETER PAN:

Off we skip like the most heartless things in the world, which is what children are, but so attractive; and we have an entirely selfish time; and then when we have need of special attention we nobly return for it, confident that we shall be embraced instead of smacked.

and…

Children are gay and innocent and heartless.

From THE WONDERFUL WIZARD OF OZ:

A heart is not judged by how much you love; but by how much you are loved by others.

and…

Hearts will never be practical until they can be made unbreakable.

and…

Once I had brains, and a heart also; so, having tried them both, I should much rather have a heart.

Comments { 10 }
circumnavigatedfairy

January Selection: The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making by Catherynne M. Valente

Not long ago, on my favorite book review website, Bookshop Talk (hosted by our very own Kim, I might add), this review happened.  It’s for a book with a very long title: The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairlyand in a Ship of Her Own Making.  It intrigued me.  Then a bit later, lady luck smiled on me and I won a drawing on the same website. I got to pick a free book, and that’s the one I chose, because I remembered how intrigued I was by the review!

However, it’s been sitting on my bookshelf for a few months, since I haven’t gotten around to reading it...until now.  Because it’s our January selection!

From the starred Publisher’s Weekly review:

This is a kind of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz by way of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland — it’s the sort of book one doesn’t want to end.

Also, here is a nifty YouTube trailer about it:

Right?  Intrigued.

IMPORTANT DETAILS

CONTENT ADVISORY: According to the Bookshop Talk review linked to above, it’s pretty tame.

DISCUSSION LEADER: Kim

WHERE TO FIND IT: Amazon.com, your local library, I have a copy — if you’re in town, email me and you can borrow it when I’m done!

Comments { 0 }
December’s Discussion: Hercule Poirot’s Christmas

December’s Discussion: Hercule Poirot’s Christmas

This is the first mystery I’ve read since I devoured all things Nancy Drew as a kid.  I really enjoyed it.  I’m certainly not a skilled or experienced mystery reader — and I totally missed whodunit — but there were a few things about the reading experience that delighted me.  I’ll cover those first, then talk about a couple of things that weren’t my favorite.

1) An engaging cast of characters.  I really enjoyed all the characters in Hercule Poirot’s Christmas.  Simeon was despicable, George was irritating, Harry was reckless, David was sympathetic.  The wives were, perhaps, a little less distinctly drawn, with the exceptions of maybe Hilda and Lydia — both of whom I really liked.  Poirot was loveable.  For a moment I wondered if he would get on my nerves, but he really grew on me.  I loved how he used his in-depth understanding of human nature to solve the case.

2) The experience of trying to put the pieces together.  Many books are passive reads: you take what the author is giving you, absorb the message and the meaning of the work.  This was a much more active experience.  I found myself trying to track all the details (missed a bunch of them!), get inside the characters’ heads, and even get inside the author’s head — of course Christie won’t go with the most obvious choice; I have to suspect someone who is least suspected.  (I will say that it was this more than anything that lead me to suspect the wrong characters!)  It was a lot of fun watching Poirot interact with the characters and figure out who committed the crime.  I felt like his assistant, which was a great time.  :-)

3) The structure.  I don’t know much about mystery, but it seemed to me that this was a well-crafted one.  I felt like information came out at a swift, steady pace; that the story was always moving.  At the end, though, there was still room for a surprise or two.  It was fun and satisfying to read.

4) The dialogue.  Katie Rice pointed this out to me in an email, but she said she loved how the characters all talked like they came from an Oscar Wilde piece.  There was a bit of that lavishness in the dialogue, and it was great.

Now for a couple of things I wasn’t so sure about…

1) Formulaic? Because I haven’t read a lot of mysteries, I had a great experience with this one.  I wonder, though, if I read a lot, would I get bored by what seems like it might be a pretty formulaic genre?  I mean, I guess all genres have stock formulas to a certain extent — wondering if mystery is more or less tedious in this regard?  Any mystery lovers out there want to weigh in on this?

2) Suspense? This might be another case of me not totally understanding the genre, but I wondered if it wouldn’t have been possible to throw a bit more suspense into the story.   With one exception, no one (besides the murder victim, I guess), was ever in any real danger.  I might have liked to feel as though the stakes were raised a bit.

All in all, I really enjoyed this book and am so glad we read it!  Hope everyone’s holidays have been happy and bright and WAY less murder-y than what we read about here!  :-)

Comments { 4 }