On Monday, the 28th, I finished Ernest Hemingway's For Whom the Bell Tolls. "Bell" is, on the surface, a book about three days in the life of a band of anti-fascist guerrillas during the Spanish Civil War. More than that though, the book is an exploration of what complex creatures human beings are. Even good people are capable of doing ghastly things, given certain circumstances. Moreover, the book examines the motivations of many characters and you get a real feeling for why they're fighting in the civil war, even though they were never trained soldiers.
The main character is Robert Jordan, an American university instructor who has come to Spain to fight against the fascists. Even if one wanted to forget Robert Jordan's name, it would be impossible, since Hemingway writes out Robert Jordan's name in full on nearly every page of the book. It's my biggest criticism of the book, but realize that this is minor. But I digress. Jordan's experience in the civil war is as a dynamiter. As such, he's sent by the communist (anti-fascist) General Staff behind the fascist lines to meet up with a guerrilla band led by a man named Pablo. Jordan's orders though, essentially send the band on a suicide mission to blow up a bridge at the start of a Republic offensive. From here, we learn how Jordan reconciles placing himself and these other people (who, for the most part, he likes very much) in mortal danger for a "greater cause." We also learn how many of the band found themselves in this situation and why they fight. Jordan does have a romantic interest, which at first I thought was trite, but then I realized that it was important for Jordan to have more at stake than just himself and his life. For the story to have greater weight, he had to be willing to sacrifice the life of someone he loved.
We also learn how bureaucracy, petty politics, and general incompetence put all of the guerrilla band in danger (in some cases more than danger). Fighting for ideology, fighting for your home, fighting for your government, fighting for murdered friends and family, fighting for the Spanish people...all seem to be legitimate reasons to be engaged in the civil war, but they all come with a terrible cost.
As an aside, I found it interesting that Hemingway devoted several pages to the story of how Robert Jordan's father killed himself with a pistol. Considering that Hemingway was later a gunshot suicide, I wonder if he thought about suicide for much of his life.
Hemingway's main characters seem extremely "real." Perhaps it's because his dialogue was so good. He interspersed Spanish into the English text and it really seemed to bring the characters to life. Also, his descriptions of the forested mountain territory of Spain really placed you, the reader, in the action. The occasional change of point-of-view from a Jordan to an omniscient narrator to another character and then back to Jordan was sometimes jarring, but in all it gave a more complete picture of the situation the characters found themselves, and thus benefited the story. In sum, it's abundantly clear to me why For Whom the Bell Tolls is considered an American classic.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Monday, April 14, 2008
Confederacy of Dunces
So I finished Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole last night. Frankly, I'm disappointed. I was expecting big things and all I got was an ok book. Pulitzer Prize, Shmulitzer Prize, says I.
Dunces chronicles a few turbulent weeks in the life of Ignatius J. Reilly, jobless medieval scholar who lives in his tiny room in his mother's tiny house. It should be mentioned that Ignatius' great intelligence is only matched by his enormous physical bulk, complete disdain for others, enhanced self-opinion, and unmatched hypochondria. Due to a series of odd circumstances, Ignatius finds himself having to look for a job in his home town of New Orleans. Toole takes us from job to job, introducing us to fabulously weird characters whose lives all seem to be intertwined at the end, mainly because of Ignatius' fabulous failures.
Ignatius, while the main character, is not a sympathetic character. Funny to laugh at, yes, but not funny. I don't think he can even be properly termed an anti-hero. The other characters are spectacularly unique, especially Burma Jones. The character studies of Ignatius and Jones are the real strengths of this book. Sure it's got some funny moments, but I didn't find it riotously funny like many of the critics did. The dialogue is also a strong point of the book. The characters really do "sound" like "real people." I find that this is often very difficult for writers to master and Toole does an excellent job of it.
Despite the strengths mentioned above, I didn't find the story all that funny or compelling. Certainly there were funny scenes, but the book wasn't all that funny. I didn't want anything good or bad to happen to Ignatius, I just wanted him to go away. Less Ignatius and more Burma Jones would have made for a better book. The multiple characters all crossing paths at one time or another is always a fun trope, but I've seen it done a lot better in other works.
Of course part of the book's cachet is the tragic circumstances of its publishing. Toole had been deceased, a suicide, long before the novel was ever published. His mother found the manuscript and sent it to the Dean of Southern Literature, Walker Percy. Percy loved the book and got it published. Indeed, it's sad that Toole couldn't have lived to see his work gain accolades. Dunces is certainly a good read, but in no way would I consider it a classic.
Dunces chronicles a few turbulent weeks in the life of Ignatius J. Reilly, jobless medieval scholar who lives in his tiny room in his mother's tiny house. It should be mentioned that Ignatius' great intelligence is only matched by his enormous physical bulk, complete disdain for others, enhanced self-opinion, and unmatched hypochondria. Due to a series of odd circumstances, Ignatius finds himself having to look for a job in his home town of New Orleans. Toole takes us from job to job, introducing us to fabulously weird characters whose lives all seem to be intertwined at the end, mainly because of Ignatius' fabulous failures.
Ignatius, while the main character, is not a sympathetic character. Funny to laugh at, yes, but not funny. I don't think he can even be properly termed an anti-hero. The other characters are spectacularly unique, especially Burma Jones. The character studies of Ignatius and Jones are the real strengths of this book. Sure it's got some funny moments, but I didn't find it riotously funny like many of the critics did. The dialogue is also a strong point of the book. The characters really do "sound" like "real people." I find that this is often very difficult for writers to master and Toole does an excellent job of it.
Despite the strengths mentioned above, I didn't find the story all that funny or compelling. Certainly there were funny scenes, but the book wasn't all that funny. I didn't want anything good or bad to happen to Ignatius, I just wanted him to go away. Less Ignatius and more Burma Jones would have made for a better book. The multiple characters all crossing paths at one time or another is always a fun trope, but I've seen it done a lot better in other works.
Of course part of the book's cachet is the tragic circumstances of its publishing. Toole had been deceased, a suicide, long before the novel was ever published. His mother found the manuscript and sent it to the Dean of Southern Literature, Walker Percy. Percy loved the book and got it published. Indeed, it's sad that Toole couldn't have lived to see his work gain accolades. Dunces is certainly a good read, but in no way would I consider it a classic.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Deliverance by James Dickey
Let me start off by saying that I've seen the movie Deliverance a few times, and it certainly burns in one's memory. I don't know how one can ever forget the scene of Ned Beatty being raped by vicious hillbillies. Rough stuff. On to the book.
Deliverance details the canoeing trip of 4 upper middle-class Atlanta men. Seemingly a dull idea for a book (the anomie of the middle class, yadda, yadda, yadda), James Dickey turns it into a magnificent story. The men of the book, Ed Gentry (our narrator), Lewis, Bobby, and Drew, are all fairly well off friends who at Lewis's urging, decide to go on a canoe trip on a wild river in rural north Georgia. At least from Ed's perspective, he needs to find something different and break away for a while from the mundane office life and do something different. One can assume that the others feel the same way. So our intrepid canoeists head to the river...and everything goes wrong.
They start by meeting rough and tumble hayseed-types who they're make fun of and talk down to, yet at the same time are afraid of. And it's clear that the country folk don't like these city slickers very much at all. Once they get the canoes in the river, it's clear that most of the main characters don't know what they're doing and have no business being on such a difficult river. Other problems erupt when they come across a couple of armed hillbillies. Suffice it to say that things go very poorly for at least one of the members of the group. To say much more about the plot would be to give away what makes this book great: the story.
Dickey gives us a story of man versus nature and man versus his primal self. He makes us examine what getting back to nature really means. Should one even want to go back to nature? While she's beautiful, Mother Nature is heartless as well. On the other hand, Dickey explains the exhilaration of living life so on the edge and so in the moment. The story is so incredibly compelling that it's very hard to put the book down. No doubt this is an American Classic.
Deliverance details the canoeing trip of 4 upper middle-class Atlanta men. Seemingly a dull idea for a book (the anomie of the middle class, yadda, yadda, yadda), James Dickey turns it into a magnificent story. The men of the book, Ed Gentry (our narrator), Lewis, Bobby, and Drew, are all fairly well off friends who at Lewis's urging, decide to go on a canoe trip on a wild river in rural north Georgia. At least from Ed's perspective, he needs to find something different and break away for a while from the mundane office life and do something different. One can assume that the others feel the same way. So our intrepid canoeists head to the river...and everything goes wrong.
They start by meeting rough and tumble hayseed-types who they're make fun of and talk down to, yet at the same time are afraid of. And it's clear that the country folk don't like these city slickers very much at all. Once they get the canoes in the river, it's clear that most of the main characters don't know what they're doing and have no business being on such a difficult river. Other problems erupt when they come across a couple of armed hillbillies. Suffice it to say that things go very poorly for at least one of the members of the group. To say much more about the plot would be to give away what makes this book great: the story.
Dickey gives us a story of man versus nature and man versus his primal self. He makes us examine what getting back to nature really means. Should one even want to go back to nature? While she's beautiful, Mother Nature is heartless as well. On the other hand, Dickey explains the exhilaration of living life so on the edge and so in the moment. The story is so incredibly compelling that it's very hard to put the book down. No doubt this is an American Classic.
Friday, March 28, 2008
The Strange Career of Jim Crow by C. Vann Woodward
I actually finished this book on March 25 or 26.
In The Strange Career of Jim Crow, Woodward traces the history of Jim Crow laws, segregation, and the Civil Rights movement from Reconstruction through (in this edition) the early 1970s. It's an ambitious undertaking for a slim volume. However, rightfully so, the book is considered a classic. Woodward's writing is clear and direct. He addresses the subtleties of the historical themes and situations without drifting off into nebulous academic tangents. This is, indeed, one of the best examples of historical writing that I've ever read (and given my several years in grad school for U.S. history, I've read a lot of them).
Woodward, starts, rather naturally, with the Reconstruction Era. He demonstrates that while freedmen didn't have it great, things were certainly better than they had been in slavery and better than they would become in the Jim Crow era. African-Americans were participating in government, working alongside whites, and yes, even riding in the same train cars. This, was, unfortunately, to change. The future of the South was determined by a disputed presidential contest between a New Yorker, Samuel Tilden, and an Ohioan, Rutherford Hayes. Tilden, the Democrat, led in the popular vote and apparently the electoral college. However there were disputes about the electoral votes of several Southern states. In what was often called "the Corrupt Bargain," Hayes was awarded all of the contested electoral votes and the presidency in exchange for declaring an end to Reconstruction and withdrawing all Union troops from the south. The negative consequences of this Corrupt Bargain for African-Americans were enormous.
Woodward then takes us through the history of how the segregationist Jim Crow laws evolved from the white supremacist thoughts of the power structures in the south. Further, and perhaps more importantly, Woodward elaborates on viable alternatives to Jim Crow that while not ideal, were certainly superior. He explains how these other options gained prominence but were ultimately co-opted or outright defeated by the Jim Crow supporters. For me, this was probably the best section of the book. I think we all need to be reminded that nothing in history was inevitable. The Union didn't have to win the Civil war, the Allies didn't have to win WWII, and on and on. There are always political, military, social, and other forces at work that influence events. There is no "march of history." Oftentimes, things could have been very different. In this instance, if it hadn't been for political deal making in Washington, a real Reconstruction of the South might have happened, almost surely improving race relations and certainly would have been a better situation for African-Americans. Also, the other alternatives to the Jim Crow system may well have been better for America. We'll never know, but we should know that people had the ability to prevent this horrible system from coming into law.
The next section deals with Jim Crow laws at length. I don't see any reason to expound upon them here, but suffice it to say that these segregationist and racist laws were an abomination, especially in what is supposed to be a democratic and freedom-loving nation. Woodward also details the "great migration" of African-Americans out of the south and into northern urban centers. He demonstrates here that while segregation and racism weren't codified in the north, they certainly existed. Woodward makes a very cogent point in this section by linking Jim Crow to U.S. imperialism. Jim Crow laws at home expanded and took root as the U.S. gained in empire overseas. Woodward draws a clear connection in the attitudes that informed Jim Crow also informed the U.S. taking up the "white man's burden."
Next is the Civil Rights Movement that came about as a result of African-Americans being denied these basic rights due to Jim Crow laws and general societal racism. Woodward details the major players and events, from Brown v. the Board of Education, to MLK, SNCC, CORE, the NAACP, and seemingly all of the big actors and events. For Woodward, the success of the Civil Rights Movement culminated in the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Of course, there was still more work to do, but the Voting Rights Act was certainly landmark legislation that ended Jim Crow in law, if not in "real life."
Finally, the book concludes by talking about the race riots that occurred later in the 1960s. He writes about how despite the end of Jim Crow, America was, in the words of the President's Commission on Racial Disorders in 1968, "moving toward two societies, one black, one white - separate and unequal." So despite the successes of the Civil Rights Movement and the end of Jim Crow, race problems still abounded and these American wounds have still not healed.
In The Strange Career of Jim Crow, Woodward traces the history of Jim Crow laws, segregation, and the Civil Rights movement from Reconstruction through (in this edition) the early 1970s. It's an ambitious undertaking for a slim volume. However, rightfully so, the book is considered a classic. Woodward's writing is clear and direct. He addresses the subtleties of the historical themes and situations without drifting off into nebulous academic tangents. This is, indeed, one of the best examples of historical writing that I've ever read (and given my several years in grad school for U.S. history, I've read a lot of them).
Woodward, starts, rather naturally, with the Reconstruction Era. He demonstrates that while freedmen didn't have it great, things were certainly better than they had been in slavery and better than they would become in the Jim Crow era. African-Americans were participating in government, working alongside whites, and yes, even riding in the same train cars. This, was, unfortunately, to change. The future of the South was determined by a disputed presidential contest between a New Yorker, Samuel Tilden, and an Ohioan, Rutherford Hayes. Tilden, the Democrat, led in the popular vote and apparently the electoral college. However there were disputes about the electoral votes of several Southern states. In what was often called "the Corrupt Bargain," Hayes was awarded all of the contested electoral votes and the presidency in exchange for declaring an end to Reconstruction and withdrawing all Union troops from the south. The negative consequences of this Corrupt Bargain for African-Americans were enormous.
Woodward then takes us through the history of how the segregationist Jim Crow laws evolved from the white supremacist thoughts of the power structures in the south. Further, and perhaps more importantly, Woodward elaborates on viable alternatives to Jim Crow that while not ideal, were certainly superior. He explains how these other options gained prominence but were ultimately co-opted or outright defeated by the Jim Crow supporters. For me, this was probably the best section of the book. I think we all need to be reminded that nothing in history was inevitable. The Union didn't have to win the Civil war, the Allies didn't have to win WWII, and on and on. There are always political, military, social, and other forces at work that influence events. There is no "march of history." Oftentimes, things could have been very different. In this instance, if it hadn't been for political deal making in Washington, a real Reconstruction of the South might have happened, almost surely improving race relations and certainly would have been a better situation for African-Americans. Also, the other alternatives to the Jim Crow system may well have been better for America. We'll never know, but we should know that people had the ability to prevent this horrible system from coming into law.
The next section deals with Jim Crow laws at length. I don't see any reason to expound upon them here, but suffice it to say that these segregationist and racist laws were an abomination, especially in what is supposed to be a democratic and freedom-loving nation. Woodward also details the "great migration" of African-Americans out of the south and into northern urban centers. He demonstrates here that while segregation and racism weren't codified in the north, they certainly existed. Woodward makes a very cogent point in this section by linking Jim Crow to U.S. imperialism. Jim Crow laws at home expanded and took root as the U.S. gained in empire overseas. Woodward draws a clear connection in the attitudes that informed Jim Crow also informed the U.S. taking up the "white man's burden."
Next is the Civil Rights Movement that came about as a result of African-Americans being denied these basic rights due to Jim Crow laws and general societal racism. Woodward details the major players and events, from Brown v. the Board of Education, to MLK, SNCC, CORE, the NAACP, and seemingly all of the big actors and events. For Woodward, the success of the Civil Rights Movement culminated in the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Of course, there was still more work to do, but the Voting Rights Act was certainly landmark legislation that ended Jim Crow in law, if not in "real life."
Finally, the book concludes by talking about the race riots that occurred later in the 1960s. He writes about how despite the end of Jim Crow, America was, in the words of the President's Commission on Racial Disorders in 1968, "moving toward two societies, one black, one white - separate and unequal." So despite the successes of the Civil Rights Movement and the end of Jim Crow, race problems still abounded and these American wounds have still not healed.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy
Blood Meridian puts me in the mind of the Thomas Hobbes quote about the life of man being solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short. Life is cheap in this book, regardless of race, ethnicity, or national origin.
The main character remains nameless throughout the book; he's simply referred to as "the kid." The kid is born in Tennessee, and leaves home for the West in 1849 without any plan. He travels to Texas and then into Mexico, falling in with bands of soldiers of fortune and then Indian scalp hunters. The Glanton Gang (the scalp hunters) include in their midst, the strange figure of the judge. The judge is a mammoth albino who has a high intelligence and a thirst for blood to match. It's never quite clear what the role of the judge is, but he seems to be everywhere at once and have control over situations that otherwise seem untenable. I tend to think he's a stand-in for Satan (particularly after he was able to make explosives out of brimstone found in the desert). The kid manages to avoid death while with the Glanton Gang and in the immediate aftermath. The story ends with the kid's death 28 years later, when the chickens, at long last, come home to roost.
McCormac's book is not for the squeamish or faint of heart. It puts the lie to the John Wayne version of the old west. Acts of incredible violence are the norm and people aren't ever neatly scrubbed and wearing clean clothes. Just as an example, two babies are killed when the Glanton Gang raids a camp. Not killed simply and easily, but killed by a man taking hold of a heel of each and bashing their skulls together. The native Americans aren't characterized as simple victims either; they're just as brutal. In on scene, the gang comes across a group that was slaughtered by Indians. Again though, not just killed. Killed but with the flourish of chopping their genitals off and stuffing them in their mouths. McCarthy's raw prose makes you realize that the "good old days" weren't actually good at all.
On the surface, it's a book about the American Old West. At a deeper level, I think it's more about how we're all not too far removed from the beasts and that civilization is a pretty thin veneer. In fact, once you cross the paper thin meridian into the west, law and order are just words. The law of the jungle prevails in the "evening redness in the west."
In summary, I'd rate this book as excellent, but I'd say it falls short of the great or classic label.
The main character remains nameless throughout the book; he's simply referred to as "the kid." The kid is born in Tennessee, and leaves home for the West in 1849 without any plan. He travels to Texas and then into Mexico, falling in with bands of soldiers of fortune and then Indian scalp hunters. The Glanton Gang (the scalp hunters) include in their midst, the strange figure of the judge. The judge is a mammoth albino who has a high intelligence and a thirst for blood to match. It's never quite clear what the role of the judge is, but he seems to be everywhere at once and have control over situations that otherwise seem untenable. I tend to think he's a stand-in for Satan (particularly after he was able to make explosives out of brimstone found in the desert). The kid manages to avoid death while with the Glanton Gang and in the immediate aftermath. The story ends with the kid's death 28 years later, when the chickens, at long last, come home to roost.
McCormac's book is not for the squeamish or faint of heart. It puts the lie to the John Wayne version of the old west. Acts of incredible violence are the norm and people aren't ever neatly scrubbed and wearing clean clothes. Just as an example, two babies are killed when the Glanton Gang raids a camp. Not killed simply and easily, but killed by a man taking hold of a heel of each and bashing their skulls together. The native Americans aren't characterized as simple victims either; they're just as brutal. In on scene, the gang comes across a group that was slaughtered by Indians. Again though, not just killed. Killed but with the flourish of chopping their genitals off and stuffing them in their mouths. McCarthy's raw prose makes you realize that the "good old days" weren't actually good at all.
On the surface, it's a book about the American Old West. At a deeper level, I think it's more about how we're all not too far removed from the beasts and that civilization is a pretty thin veneer. In fact, once you cross the paper thin meridian into the west, law and order are just words. The law of the jungle prevails in the "evening redness in the west."
In summary, I'd rate this book as excellent, but I'd say it falls short of the great or classic label.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Finished Blood Meridian Last Night
I finished reading Blood Meridian last night. Don't know when I'll get to the write up since I'm out of town this weekend.
Up next, The Strange Career of Jim Crow by C. Vann Woodward.
Up next, The Strange Career of Jim Crow by C. Vann Woodward.
Monday, March 3, 2008
1st March update
About 70% of the way through Blood Meridian. Hopefully finish up by Wednesday.
So far only 4 books read. Of course, I did get a late start (Jan. 20). So 4 books in 43 days so far...roughly 1 book every 11 days. Assuming I finish Blood Meridian on Wednesday, it'll be 5 in 45 for 1 book every 9 days. On Thursday, there will be 300 days left in the year. Which means if I keep up the current pace, I'll read 33.33 more books by December 31, putting me 1.33 over the total. It'll be rough, because I've got some large books out there to read yet, but it's nice to know the game is still competitive.
So far only 4 books read. Of course, I did get a late start (Jan. 20). So 4 books in 43 days so far...roughly 1 book every 11 days. Assuming I finish Blood Meridian on Wednesday, it'll be 5 in 45 for 1 book every 9 days. On Thursday, there will be 300 days left in the year. Which means if I keep up the current pace, I'll read 33.33 more books by December 31, putting me 1.33 over the total. It'll be rough, because I've got some large books out there to read yet, but it's nice to know the game is still competitive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)