Loads of Repression and More Than Enough Crazy

We haven't had rain in weeks. So since Lee and its effects have decided to dump on us this morning, I am NOT complaining. In fact, I'm taking it as a cue to lie on the couch all morning and read, read, read. I thought before I dug too far into my current book, I should do some posting about my experience with Jane Austen's Persuasion.  One of my many, many lists is a (completely arbitrary) 50 Books that I Must Read List. Persuasion occupies a spot on that list, so imagine my delight when a book club that I am a part of decided to read it as its monthly selection. Two birds with one stone? Yes, please.  Especially when it comes to Jane Austen.  As I've mentioned before, I'm not a HUGE Austen fan. In fact, she almost got a spot on my Anti-List. But knowing that I would be reading Persuasion very shortly, I decided to keep her off the first installment of said list Just. In. Case.

{image}

In hindsight, I'm pleased that I did. Having finished the book several weeks ago, I can report that I actually enjoyed it. If you haven't read the book, I won't spoil it too, too much. But, in the spirit of discussing it let me give you a little bit of a play by play.  The story centers around Anne Elliot. Like so many of Austen's female characters, Anne is unmarried and slowly entering an age where her world finds that unfortunate.  Of course there is a love story involved in the plot - this is Austen after all. And of course there is much hemming and hawing, uncertainty of the other's emotion and loads of repression en route to true love. But, thankfully for my taste, the love story isn't the only thing happening in Persuasion.

Where I think Austen really excels is in her presentation of the wack-a-doos that surround Anne.  Anne's pompous father, her mentally unstable and frivolous sisters and the remaining eccentric cast of characters that fill the pages of Persuasion are what kept me engrossed in this book.  Austen does crazy well. Her prose avoids out right judgementalism while still clearly communicating her characters' flaws. Her persuasive character descriptions are subtle and detached enough to allow the reader to come to her own conclusion.  She never outright accuses a character, but allows each one just enough rope to hang themselves. It is genteel and finely disguised cattiness. And that is where I found Austen's writing to teeter on the brink of brilliance.  Austen is funny.  And my reading of Persuasion reminded me of that.

Now, despite my distaste for Austen's books in the past, I've always been a fan of their screen adaptations. As my friend Carrie has said, Austen should have been a screenwriter. Her stories, I would argue, are MUCH better on the big and small screen than on paper. But, all that may change.  For the first time, I actually enjoyed READING Austen's work. Hallelujah! Perhaps it's the newly found patience I am developing. Perhaps, Persuasion is just a better book than those others I've tried. Perhaps it was the force feeding and peer pressure applied by Lexi. Who knows? All I can say is that I am willing to give Ms. Austen another try.  And I can definitely recommend Persuasion. If you haven't already read it and even if you aren't an Austen fan, try it. You just might find yourself as pleasantly surprised as I am.

Are you an Austen fan?

From Pity to Awe

Months ago I picked up Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro at the library. I read the first chapter before bed one night and got really, really confused. I wasn’t expecting a sci-fi-esque book and I didn’t have the patience or energy to figure out what the heck this narrator was talking about. So, I put it down in favor of the book club selections I was “required” to read.

Source: quitecheekygirl.blogspot.com via Molly on Pinterest

Last week, when I finally went back to Ishiguro’s book I had a very different response.

The second time around, from page one; I could not put the novel down. I devoured it in just a few days (yes, yes, I know I'm a sloooooooooooooooooow reader). I was immediately drawn to the conversational tone of the narrator. Kathy is such a tease, pulling you through the book with bits and pieces of what is to come. Her constant hinting at what she assumes we already fully understand is a brilliant way of involving her reader in the mysterious goings on.

Source: fstage.com via Molly on Pinterest

And there is plenty of mystery of Never Let Me Go. Here, I won’t spoil that mystery for those who haven’t had the pleasure of reading this brilliant novel.

{This next semi-ambiguous paragraph is for those who have read it… if you haven’t skip on down to, “Welcome back”}

Politics aside, this reader couldn’t help but question the ethics of the treatment of these students. But, I agree with Ishiguro when he says that there are much more interesting questions in Never Let Me Go than the obvious ones. For me, the most glaring sadness of the novel was the quiet acceptance with which the students marched toward their fate. As I read the novel, my heart broke over and over again. In discussing the book with a friend, we wondered, “Why didn’t they just run away?” I looked at their willing participation and acceptance as weakness. I pitied them. But as I write this review, I find my perspective changing for two simple reasons. First, the inevitability of the students’ futures didn’t keep them from investing in relationships, enjoying their surroundings and embracing creativity. And second, their unfair lot in life didn’t keep them from nobly fulfilling their purpose. Perhaps they were fortunate to have never known any other option. This ignorance allowed the students to escape feelings of entitlement. None lived life echoing, “It isn’t fair.” None suffered from that crippling “more, more, more” disease I find myself falling victim to so often. Suddenly my perspective on the novel and these characters has changed. I no longer pity them. Now I'm in awe of their selfless sacrifice. Perhaps it’s a different side to the same coin, but instead of feeling sad for them I want to live my life more like they do. (Alright I'm bringing those who haven’t read it back in.)

Source: imdb.com via Molly on Pinterest

Welcome back to all of you who haven’t read the book. In case you’d like to skip the reading all together (which I DO NOT suggest) and instead just head to Redbox, I'm happy to report that I’ve also seen the movie recently. (As a side note, I think I’ve decided to try and read only books with movie adaptations. I'm doing this strictly so that I can sound like a hipster and I say, “Oh, man the book was so much better.”) While there were some minor (in my opinion) changes to the story and perhaps a slight reinterpretation of the “message” of the novel, all in all the film was really great. Directed by Mark Romanek (One Hour Photo) the film was visually quite beautiful. Carey Mulligan and Andrew Garfield, who played two of the film’s three main characters, were particularly good. And the screenwriter Alex Garland, who also wrote one of my favorite books, The Beach, did a commendable job of translating Ishiguro’s story into a film script. Perhaps after having his own novel butchered for the screen he was particularly careful to preserve the integrity of the novel. Like most film adaptations, much had to be dropped in order to keep the movie at a tolerable length (I assume). But Garland managed to protect the beauty of the novel without chopping it to bits. And though the film’s final scene raises a question never touched upon in my reading of the novel, it wasn’t so far out of left field that it seemed out of place. In fact, it opened a whole new avenue of reflection for me.

Source: anomalousmaterial.com via Molly on Pinterest

I anticipate that both this novel and the film will be pieces that I carry with me for some time. Pregnant with ethical questions and memorable examples of great story-telling, both the novel Never Let Me Go and its film adaptation will have me chewing on their messages well into the future. I enthusiastically recommend both!

Your turn! Have you read it? Have you seen it?

Sooo, tell me what you thought!

The Comfort of Foma

It's Book Club Blogger Day!

On tap this month is Kurt Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle courtesy of the lovely and ooooooh so bookishly minded Andrea of The Lighthouse Keeper fame.  If there is one person in the blogosphere responsible for making my "to read" list a mile long, it is Andrea.  So when you're in the market for some great book suggestions (and also your daily dose of just plain pretty images), The Lighthouse Keeper is where it's at... consider yourself warned.

Now, on to my review. (IF you can really call what you are about to read a review.  And I'm not sure you can.)

Several months ago as part of my attempt to complete My 50 Must Reads I tackled Slaughterhouse Five.  When I put the finished book down for the last time I struggled with knowing how to write an appropriate "review."  And when I say I struggled, I mean I struggled for weeks.  This was my first experience with the writings of Kurt Vonnegut.  I felt completely unable to appropriately put into words what I thought about his writing style or the book itself.  I was blocked. It wasn't that I didn't know whether or not I liked it or whether or not I would recommend it.  The answer to those questions was simple, I did and I would. But I couldn't quite put my finger on what I wanted to say and so I just kept my mouth shut.

Enter Cat's Cradle.

Once again, I've read the book.  I enjoyed it.  I would recommend it.  But write  review on it? I'm intimidated.  I've discovered that Vonnegut's work does what many have tried to do but rarely succeed.  Vonnegut shuts me up.  He has a knack for leaving me at a loss for words. Unfortunately for you, my commitment to BCB trumps my scattered thoughts and inability to nail a coherent opinion about Vonnegut's writing. Try to contain your enthusiasm and buckle up I'm not sure where this is headed.

I can say, after my second Vonnegut experience, I'm starting to understand why I'm hesitant to write about my reading experience.  Basically, after reading his books I'm uncertain about my own opinions. My thoughts are all over the place. His biting wit and literary point of view intimidate me.  I finish a book and think I know what he's trying to "say." But I'm never 100% sure.  I keep waiting for him to clearly fall on one side of an argument, any argument, but he never does.  Instead, he skewers both sides.  No one and no point of view is safe or sacred.  Vonnegut is an equal opportunity satirist. I find that pleasantly uncomfortable as a reader because suddenly there is no longer easy clarity.  I'm forced to question who I am and what I believe. His books make me work for it.  And to make the work a bit more difficult, his narrators do NOT seem to be trustworthy.  I'm never sure if I'm supposed to be rooting for them or against them. I constantly question whether what they are saying is insightful or just plain nonsense.  There's a clever playfulness to the prose that hints, "Perhaps the presented truth isn't truth at all."

My confusion hasn't been lessened by the fact that each of these books dealt with charged topics - war, politics, spirituality and the condition of the human heart.  These are subjects where as a reader, I expect the author to voice a solid opinion. But neither book made a crystal clear declaration {to me} where Vonnegut the author stood.  Instead I came away from both novels believing Vonnegut was just trying to tell me that, "This life is utterly ridiculous and is only further complicated by the complex insanity of the human beings with whom we interact."  He seems to scream, "NEITHER SIDE IS RIGHT. STOP TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT!" I can't help but wonder if Vonnegut's ultimate goal is simply to lampoon any attempt we humans make to understand, clarify, or fully comprehend life.  Is it perhaps that his stand is that we should never take a firm stand?

On the surface it would seem as though the theme of Cat's Cradle is the ridiculousness of faith and the naïveté of those who subscribe to any organized religion or scientifically based worldview.  Yet the book's dedication reads, "Nothing in this book is true.  'Live by the foma (harmless untruths) that make you brave and kind and healthy and happy.' The Books of Bokonon. I:5."  Does anyone else recognize the paradox he's suggesting?  He's basically saying, "Hitch your pony to a wagon you know is probably going nowhere."  What???  That is just crazy talk. Right? 

But here's the thing.  I kind of love it.

Vonnegut's writing appeals to that part of me that remains unsure about life.  He celebrates the truth that we are most wise when we recognize how ignorant we are.  Cat's Cradle is the celebration of faith without logical certainty.  More accurately, I read it as the celebration of faith in what's totally illogical.  But, I didn't come to that conclusion easily.  And still as I write this, I'm not sure that is what Vonnegut was trying to say.  But it turns out, that uncertainty is precisely why I enjoyed the book.  Reading Vonnegut, for me, has been less about what he's saying and more about the process of figuring out what I'm hearing him say.

Well, so much for being at a loss for words...

If you're curious what others have to say about Cat's Cradle you should check out The Daily Snapshot for the Book Club Blogger's reviews.

But as long as you're here, what's your take on Vonnegut? Love him? Hate him? And why???????