Book Club Update

Even Monsters Deserve a Nice Name

It's Halloween, let's talk monsters!

For Book Club this month, we read Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. Before I get into my book rant, I'll fill you in on a few details of the author's life. Her biography is arguably more scandalous than the book's plot.

Mary Wollstencraft Shelley was the daughter of a famous feminist and a well known author who were too hip to get married. Her mom died shortly after her birth, so Mary grew up with her dad, her mean stepmom, her mom's daughter from a previous relationship (an affair with a soldier), her stepmother's kids from her previous relationship, and dad and stepmom's new kid. Mary was the poor brown-headed stepchild. As a teen, she met and started a relationship with poet Percy Bysshe Shelley. Percy was already married to another woman, but why let that stop the magic. Mary and Percy ran away to Paris and when they returned to England, both Mary and Percy's wife were pregnant. Mrs. Shelley (the first one) was unhappy, she sued for alimony and custody of their kids, but eventually drowned herself, allowing Mary and Percy to be married. The new Mr. and Mrs. Shelley suffered the loss of their first daughter, only one child survived to adulthood. Also, Mary's sister dies. Oh, and shortly after that, Percy fell into an Italian lake and drowned at age 29.  

Onto the book.

It's a story within a story and different characters get to play narrator at different points. The novels is both gothic and romantic, with some seemingly never-ending descriptions of nature and light and feeling.  The meat of the novel concerns the young Swede, Victor Frankenstein. He looses his mother, becomes consumed with thoughts of death and the essence of life, goes off to college and emerges a scientist. He decides to make a man, just because, he makes the man/monster. Man comes alive, Frankenstein freaks out and runs away abandoning his creation. His creature learns to walk and talk and read, he is badly mistreated, he goes on a murderous rampage, Frankenstein vows vengeance on his creation. Excitement ensues. Here's a better annotation

There are 235 entries just in the Oakland library catalog for the term Frankenstein. Many of the books and movies that refer to Frankenstein is the name of the monster, not it's creator. Which brings me to the topic of names. Remember in Roots, when Kunta Kinte's master tries to make him own the name "Toby" and Kunta refuses (it was bad)? Or when the Empress of Fantasia begins to fade and die until Bastian saves her and the whole empire by giving her a name. (And, yes, I did just make a Roots and Neverending Story reference in a post about Frankenstein.) Your name helps you form your identity, it lets others identify you. It's almost as if you're not real without a name. Frankenstein not only abandoned his creation, but, in not naming him, he refused to acknowledge Creature's existence. Dirty and wrong, Victor.

Creature is feared for his ugliness, he's badly beaten and spit upon, and, while he does go on a small killing spree, he has a low opinion of himself, he just wants to be loved, he needed a name. The book doesn't have too many sympathetic characters. In my opinion, Victor Frankenstein was a mad scientist, and a bit of a spoiled brat, driven even more mad by his experiment-gone-awry. His creature was literally a nameless man-child who probably should have known better, but has still captured my sympathies. 

Are you Team Victor or Team Creature?

Submitted 31 October 2014, by Jenera Burton, Piedmont Ave branch

THE PORTRAIT OF A LADY by Henry James: From the Lakeview Book Club

The Portrait of a Lady Henry James's grandfather immigrated to the United States in 1789 and was a successful venture capitalist, who owned a canal and made a fortune. The grandfather had 3 wives and 16 children.

Henry's father inherited wealth and was a philosopher. There were five children in the family. Henry was the second child. His sister was an invalid, who only lived to her early 40s. Henry traveled extensively with his family.

Henry was not the only famous James from that family. His brother William was the very famous psychologist. It is said that William wrote psychology as if it were fiction, and Henry wrote fiction as if it were psychology. Both William and Henry were Calvinists, but we didn't see evidence of a religious point of view in this novel.

Portrait of a Lady is considered to be the best of the novels of Henry James. Henry's insight into the lives and emotions of his characters is stunning. His use of language is lyrical. Susan cited where Isabel sees a private conversation taking place between Ms. Merle and Mr. Osmond as the peak psychological scene of hidden meaning where the reader is left in suspense to figure out what the two villains were plotting.

That observation launched us into a discussion of Ms. Merle. We all had mixed feelings about her. Yes, she was evil, but since James didn't really explain all the steps that led her to be that way, we wondered if she were driven to her malevolent choices by her lot in life. Some thought she was a sad character.  In fact, we noted that James leaves us with many, many questions. One person pointed out that James used an ellipsis plot device of skipping over steps in the plot, leaving them unaddressed intentionally. One of the plot points we wanted to know more about was Isabel’s relationship with Goodwood before she moved to Europe. Also, why did she reject him before the book even started? What happened to Ms. Merle’s husband? Was he alive or dead? How did Pansy end up in Osmond’s care? What were the circumstances of Osmond’s and Ms. Merle’s affair? How did the death of Isabelle’s child affect Isabelle and Osmond? After hundreds of pages of delicious writing and detailed description, we wanted to know more!

One person mentioned that Ms. Merle's name meant black bird. That observation led us to Ms. Gemini, who was described as a bird with a beaklike nose, which led us to the deliberate and descriptive choices of names. Mr. Goodwood, who we all liked, seemed the most masculine of Isabel's suitors and his name gave rise to chuckles. Another example of a name that has a meaning is Isabel, who "is a belle."

We found Ms. Gemini very interesting. Though she seemed like a dimwit at times with her scattered conversations, she knew the dirt and had lived through difficult times with her philandering husband. She eventually laid out the truth to Isabelle regarding Ms. Merle and Osmond.

The character of Ms. Stackpole was interesting to us. She truly was an independent woman, self-supporting and free to travel, yet her character, though perhaps less flawed in some ways than Isabel’s, seemed somewhat superficial. She provided some comic relief and insights that were ignored by Isabel.

The history and politics of the world at the time did not intrude on the insulated world of the wealthy and near wealthy expatriates. The Civil War in the United States was taking place during James’ life, yet there is never a reference to that upheaval and carnage. That surprised us.

We also wondered why James chose a female to be a protagonist for his novel. One member of our group thought that James identified with the lot of the female world. For men at that time, the typical choices in life were business, military or religious life. James, a writer, was in the world of the arts, often perceived as more feminine choice.

We wondered about Osmond’s courtship of Isabel. Did he really find her desirable for anything more than her money? Though we get to know Osmond as a miserly, controlling and an emotionally abusive husband and father, we noted that he had charm when he needed it. In fact Isabel thought he was “poor, noble and lonely.”  He thought that Isabel would settle into a submissive role after marriage. Though Isabel certainly tried to be a submissive dutiful wife, ultimately, we thought she would break with Osmond in a stark and final way.

We discussed how the major characters were introduced to us through descriptions of their homes. The description that felt the most unsettling was Osmond’s house. It was dark and filled with his collection of art work and left one with the feeling that once inside, there was no escape. Isabelle became a piece of property of Osmond's, the same as his valuable pieces of art.

We noted that Pansy’s true love, Rosier, was also a collector of fine art. In order to prove to Osmond that he had enough wealth to marry Pansy, he sold his entire collection. Instead of being impressed by the wealth, Osmond was pleased that those pieces of art were now available for purchase!  Pansy was also part of Osmond’s collection.

Isabelle changed considerably from the beginning to the end of the novel, a span of around five years. She was self-centered, independent and naïve. Over time she learned to distrust Merle, upon whom she relied to show her the way of the European world and society. She came to understand that she was used by Merle and her husband. She was strong enough at the beginning to reject suitors who did not appeal to her, but was naïve enough to not understand the malevolent nature of Osmond and Merle, even after being warned about them. Ultimately she understood that Osmond truly hated her. We thought that Isabel needed the betrayal in order to grow. By the end of the novel Isabel defied Osmond by seeing the dying Touchett. She was her strongest there. 

It was interesting to us how James resolved the lives of the suitors. Goodwood, who never stopped loving Isabel, ultimately married  someone else, much to the chagrin of our heroine. Warburton, who was probably 40 years older than Pansy, courted her. We thought he did this to be near Isabel, perhaps putting a subtly incestuous vibe on the possible union.

Ralph Touchett and the narrator seemed to understand the most about all aspects of the story. Ralph loved his cousin Isabel and perhaps was in love with her, but he seemed to be asexual, perhaps because of his illness. He set into motion all the possibilities in Isabel's life by seeing that she became wealthy through inheritance. He lived long enough to see Isabel marry Osmond and to provide Osmond with the funds he needed to continue collecting art and to support the lovely Pansy. In other words, ironically, Isabel helped Osmond the same way Ralph helped her.

This novel was serialized in The Atlantic Monthly. Every chapter ended in suspense and anticipation for the reader. The novel ended the same way, frustrating all of us. In spite of two different endings in different editions, we will, alas, never find out if Isabelle regains her independence, rescues her stepdaughter and at long last finds true love. Perhaps James’ unresolved endings are more realistic than our desire for closure and happy endings. After all, we are all flawed. Fate intrudes. We make poor decisions. We reap the consequences of those decisions and move on. None of us ever really knows what comes next. Do we really want to know?

Obviously this novel struck a harmonic chord with us all. Many  We were all moved and caught up in this gripping story. Henry James’ Portrait of a Lady confirms why a classic earns that name.

Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth by Reza Aslan.....The Lakeview Book Club Update

Our discussion leader did an outstanding job in presenting the background story on Zealot.

Dr. Reza Aslan is a non-religious American whose family emigrated from Iran to the United States when he was a child. His family was Muslim. He was invited to go to a Christian summer camp and became a Christian, because it attracted him emotionally and helped him feel he belonged. He was a practicing Evangelical Christian for some years. He was later educated by Jesuits and investigated the historical Jesus, finding that he could no longer be Christian. He studied Islam and found that he was attracted to it intellectually.

In his book about Jesus, he pulled from the few historical records of the time and from the social history of the era. In his research he discovered that much we have all been taught about the life of Jesus does not correspond to the real history of the times. He points out that three fourths of the New Testament was written by Paul, who did not know Jesus and had a perspective different than the Apostles. Aslan defined the concept of Messiah in terms of Judaism. No Jew at that time or in the present would define Jesus as a messiah. Messiah was a royal title, NOT a religious title.

The difference between Jesus and other preachers of the era was that although many performed miracles, Jesus never charged money for the service. Jesus focused on the disenfranchised, the poverty stricken and the exploited Jews of Palestine.

The first gospels were written in 72-75 AD over 40 years after Jesus died. James, the brother of Jesus, took over the management of the followers and focused on the laws of Moses, since at that time all the followers were Jews. (We noted that Catholics are taught that Jesus had no brother, whereas the Gospels mention James as his brother.)

Later when Paul became involved, there was a split between Paul and James. Paul was a product of Rome, spoke Greek and was literate, three qualities that James did not have. Since Paul wrote, his interpretation of the life of Jesus is the one that has had the most influence and has been more lasting.

Paul claims he was the 1st Apostle and he geared his message to the Jews in the Roman Empire.

A little background: Judaism was temple centered before Jesus. The first temple was destroyed in 586 B.C. The second temple was destroyed in 70 A.D by the Romans. The Romans destroyed it, because of the constant rebellious acts against the power of Rome. Tens of thousands of Jews were killed in 70 A.D. and others dispersed. Those Jews were no longer in Israel and in a temple centered life. Eventually many of them were less culturally affiliated with the Judaism of Israel and more drawn to other beliefs, some of those being Christianity.

Aslan points out that Jesus never said he was the Son of God. Jesus, however, was a revolutionary, as in preaching in a way that ultimately would undermine the power of Rome. He was crucified and crucifixion was the execution reserved for sedition. The sign on his cross labeled his crime as Jesus' claiming that he was the King of the Jews. The leaders of the temple were making a lot of money and Jesus' teachings were a direct threat to the temple leader's ways of supporting themselves in the style they liked.

As Paul gained a following of Gentiles (non-Jews) after the death of Jesus, Gentile men could join and not have to be circumcised. There was also no need of a temple and its priests to absolve people of their sins, because "Jesus died for our sins."

In the oral culture of the time there were two elements, "Fact" and "Truth." Fact was not as important as Truth. Truth was the tradition. For example, there was no massacre of first born sons during the early childhood of Jesus. Another example is that Pontius Pilate didn't have the exchange with the crowd of Jews, where the Jews took responsibility for killing Jesus. Paul had to absolve the Romans of guilt for Jesus' death, since he was preaching in a Roman world. After 70 A.D., the generation of non-Jewish followers of Christianity outnumbered the Jewish Christians. It made more sense for Paul to blame the Jews for Jesus's death.

There are other sources that point to other possible historical interpretations of Jesus's life. In the book, How Jesus Became God there is a reference to a papyrus document that mentions that Jesus had a wife.

Before Paul, Judaism and Christianity was only for Jews. The Jews held that they were chosen by God and that infuriated the non-Jews around them.

Another non-truth shows that Jesus was not truly from the House of David. His father Joseph was from the House of David. Jesus was considered at the time to be the illegitimate son of Mary, which would make him a person of ridicule, so his lineage was marked from Joseph's family.

We discussed how some of the issues over which people are currently fighting in the Middle East sound very similar to the issues in Jesus's time, such as power and religious zealotry.

Aslan pointed out that Jesus was in fact a zealot. His Palm Sunday ride into town on a donkey was actually provoking the establishment to retribution. It was a revolutionary act of rebellion, because at that time only Kings rode donkey's in processions. He rode into town with the trappings of a King! It was, therefore, an overt threat to the system.

It was pointed out that if you take all the writings from the Bible attributed to James, Jesus's brother, it amounts to the total of three pages and those pages show the Jesus we would most likely want to know.

One member of our group, who is Hindu, described the evolution of Hindu stories and how they have also changed over time to reflect what people needed to hear to understand reality in the light of belief. She said there are 400 basic Hindu stories that have all changed over time. We can see that the stories about Jesus also changed.

The writer, Alan Dundee, says there are 22 things that make a hero and Jesus has 19 of them, virgin birth, miracles, etc.

We all thought this book was thought provoking and certainly had a new take on the story of Jesus, that he was a Zealot and a candidate to be the King of Jews.

It was Jesus' followers who witnessed his resurrection and the believers of that event, which in turn made the religion expand. Paul's letters all over the new Christian world unified those beliefs among the new followers with gentile origins.

St. Stephan declared that Jesus was the Son of Man while Stephan was being martyred, in effect saying that Jesus of the actual Son of God, equal to God!

That belief was made official when Emperor Constantine, a few hundred years later, called for the Bishops of Rome to make a unified decision on the beliefs of Christianity, hence the creation of the Nician Creed and throwing out of the Bible books which were controversial or did not mesh with what the group at that time believed. This paved the way for the persecutions of heresy and for future rules about what to believe.

We discussed a very popular book that came out in the 1970s that a few of us read at that time, called The Passover Plot, which is by a Jewish Rabbi explaining what he thought of Jesus. There were some correlations Zealot. I recommend trying that one, also, if you liked Zealot.

What a ride! We had a hard time leaving after our discussion. It was truly exciting to share with others how this book affected us.

Our discussion leader emailed an addendum of points she forgot to make that night. She said that Aslan made these points during some fascinating interviews she found online on YouTube. She said:

"I remember some questions that were asked about what Reza Aslan's wish was for the people who read his book. Aslan stated that "faith" and "history" are two separate ways of knowing something. Faith concerns what is *possible* and History concerns what is *likely.* The Jesus of history became more relatable to Aslan than the Christ of faith, so he stopped "believing in the creed." He said that people have a choice of how they can view Jesus.

Aslan also said that his book attempts to reveal the historical Jesus to provide a sense of who Jesus was and why he was perhaps the most important man who ever lived. Aslan tried to peel back the layers of myth, interpretation, legend, dogma, theology and doctrine that have been placed upon Jesus for millennia. He said that Biblical scholars already know the information he presents in his book.

Aslan said that religion is far more a matter of identity than a matter of beliefs and practices. Living in revolutionary Iran showed him the power of religion and how it can transform a society for good or bad. He stated that after studying the religions of the world it is hard to take any one religion seriously. He said that it's not that Islam is true and correct and other religions are not true, but the language of Islam feels more comfortable to him."

We liked this history, which often read like a novel. We recommend it to anyone interested in a new view of the life of Jesus.

Happy Reading!

Lakeview Book Club Update: The 100-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared by Jonas Jonasson

The seven off us, including new member liked the book, even if it wasn't our typical type of book we usually choose to read. Not everyone finished it. A few thought it slowed down in the middle. We all found parts that made us really laugh, some of us more than others. There was a great deal of laughter during the meeting as we discussed some of the sillier and surprising elements.
 
One member thought the plot was predictable and the humor was because of the way the events were described. That member noted that the translator had to have been exceptionally good.
 
We wondered if Jonas Jonasson was really that funny in real life. (I figure he has to be.)
 
Mr. Jonasson, born in 1961, was a journalist who at one time owned a large publication, which he sold so he could write his novel. This novel has been made into a movie. OPL does not own it. I'll have to recommend it. He is currently writing another novel called An Alphabet Who Knew How to Count (the working title).
 
Here is an interview in English (the titles are in German) with the author:
 
 
We went around the circle and talked about what we liked and what we didn't like, but mostly we just mentioned the parts that made us laugh.
 
There was a difference of opinion as to whether our hero, Allan, had knowingly stolen the suitcase of money.
 
Many loved the historical parts, which made us question if anything remotely like what was described actually happened.
 
We talked about how many people from other countries know more about our history than many Americans. We think that Mr. Jonasson really knows his history.
 
We read some sections aloud to each other and laughed all over again.
 
Some elements we really liked:
Allan walking out in slippers and taking the suitcase, because the man at the bus station had greasy hair and was rude.
The elephant sitting on the car and squashing the bad guy.
The coven of characters explaining to the police what "really" happened and Beauty feigning innocent ears and an aversion to salty language (she cussed a blue streak).
The Bibles were the solution.
The strange other deaths of the bad guys...in the freezer, etc.
The attribution of the "death" smell on the railroad push cart to the 100-Year-Old Man, who, after all, while not actually dead, had to be very near to death due to his age.
The body in the barrel being "alive," because his jewelry and identification resurrected in Djibouti.
The drinking bouts with Stalin and Truman.
Madame Chiang Kai-Shek manipulating the Chinese debacle
The escape from Russia through Korea
Allan giving the solution to building the atom bomb.
That the final group of Allen's followers consisted of police, bad guys, quirky friends and an elephant.
Allan marrying Einstein's dumber bother's Philippino wife, who was beautiful and not bright, but became the country's leader.
We liked that he escaped "the home," and thought the description of the home's administrator Alice was really good.
 
While this book was not not everyone's cup of tea, we all got a few good laughs out of it. Many of us got way more than that.
 
I'm waiting for his next book.
Happy Reading!

The Return of the Native by Thomas Hardy, Notes from the Lakeview Book Club

We started with a few interesting facts about Thomas Hardy, who like the "Native" in his novel, loved his "heath" wilderness and rual community more than any other place he could choose to live. Hardy has said that he never wanted to grow up. He wanted to stay in the world he lived in when he was 6 years old. Many can relate to that from time to time.

Thomas Hardy was born in 1840 and died in 1928. He lived 88 years! During those years life changed drastically in his world, with major industrialization, the changes brought to rural life. The major big thinkers, Freud, Marx, Darwin, Einstein changed the world. Two major authors of his time were Mark Twain and Charles Dickens.
For a person who loved his roots, his wilderness, his neighbors, the outside world was alien to him. This was a theme in this wonderful classic. Hardy's wife was probably very much like Eustasia, strong willed, beautiful and someone who did not like the world Hardy chose.
When the public did not embrace his novels the way he wished, he switched to poetry. In this novel, in a footnote, at the end, he even complains bitterly that he did not want to make a happy ending. It didn't fit the story. The publishers insisted, because of public pressure from the serialization of this novel in magazines before it was published in novel form.
 
The Return of the Native is really a tragedy. Hardy is often compared to Shakespeare, and surely the complexity of this tragedy has Shakespearean elements.
There was quite a range of opinions on this title. A few of us loved it from the start and charged through savoring the language, the descriptions of nature, the characterizations, the surprising plot, the strange "happy" ending. Others never really got into it, finding the language arcane and difficult, the dialects hard to embrace, the characters in some respects one-sided and the combination of all of that made a few not finish it.
 
There was another set of members within our group, who found it difficult to get into, but then found it very rewarding, liking what ones who loved it savored. We noted that Hardy included comments that were of current events and past history that readers of that era and some now might not know, unless highly educated. Many of us were googling words and we had never heard before. Several of us looked up furse, which are reedy bushes, which the poor people cut to burn for fuel. We commented how Hardy pointed out the class differences, mentioning that wealthy people could burn hard wood! We saw Clym descend into poverty and how he embraced it. Hardy obviously loved his poverty class friends, using their own dialect in the novel. One member of our group actually got the Cliff Notes so she could understand what they were saying! That's dedication!
 
A few never got into it. They thought the characters were unsympathetic or unengaging. They also could not relate to the plot.
 
Part of the difficulty of understanding the plot and decisions the characters made was that these decisions were set in Victorian times. Scandal was just an easy mistake about the timing of a marriage or who spends time with whom. We compared it to The House of Mirth which also focused on the tragedy of decisions made against the norm.
We were asked to name our favorite character. For several of us it was the Heath, an ocean of nature that changed from nurturing and lush to cold or extremely hot and deadly. The Heath changed as the story changed, mysterious, sensual, harsh, unforgiving, beautiful and loving.
We also mentioned the Aunt as a strong attractive character. A few wondered at her changing her mind over Thomasin's wedding and her son, Clym's wedding after making strong objections. We thought, after discussing it, that is was indeed believable for the aunt to forgive them. It was the dichotomy of Victorian rules versus a mother's love, with mother's love eventually winning.
Most of us liked Eustasia, even though she was selfish, convinced of her beauty, arrogant and alienated from the community. She was REAL! She was foolish! She was smart. She was young! She was driven by boredom and a dream of Paris and all that entailed. She thought Clym would take her away from the "backwater" world! She thought she could change him, in spite of Clym telling her he would not go back to Paris. We thought that if she could have gone to Paris on her own, which she was planning, that she would have succeeded. She was driven! Though she didn't have the freedom modern women have, she would probably have found a rich husband or sponsor to keep her in style.
We commented that all of the characters lived in their heads and did not understand the motives of the people around them. Hardy has fatalism and desolation in his novels.
All of us liked the Reddleman, Diggery! His was a mysterious role of changing the destinies of the people around him. He recouped the gambling debt, he protected the niece and the aunt's servant and he did it all in secret.
It was pointed out that drama has three elements: Time, Place and Action. For this novel the time was exactly one year, the place was the mysterious/murderous and beautiful heath and action was the many disastrous decisions our main characters made.
We wanted to know what the underlying theme was. One member said it was, "We have little control over the world. We are delusional!" We agreed that this was the theme and we agreed it was true!
We thought the death scene was very dramatic. One wonders if the Hardy's rural community had a waterfall driven whirlpool who claimed lovers.
Another thought she felt the same about The Return of the Native now as she did when she read it as an undergraduate. Other classics, she finds different, such as The Leopard by Giuseppi Di Lampedusa, which is written about what is lost when society changes. Di Lampedusa was at the end of a long rich life, full of war and many harsh changes. Hardy was 38 when Return of the Native was published. It has a younger person's sensibility and focus on mismatched love.
We ended with commenting about how the happy conclusion had the wedding and a carriage driver hired from a larger community who wanted to know after seen the poverty of the area, "Why do you want to live here?" For some of us we understood that this stark rural community had everything anyone would want, friends, relatives, drama, beauty and peace. Who would want more? Maybe Eustasia.
 
Happy Reading!

Shipping News by Annie Proulx, Notes from the Lakeview Book Club

First A Little About Annie Proulx:

She was born August 22, 1935 in Connecticut, Educated in history in Vermont and currently lives in Wyoming.

She won the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award for The Shipping News. She won PEN/Faulkner Award for her first novel, Postcards. She is the first woman to win the PEN/Faulkner Award!

A free spirit, she has divorced three times and has raised alone her three sons and one daughter. She lived many years in small towns in Vermont.

Most of her writing has been nonfiction. She has written both short and long nonfiction. Her controversial and critically acclaimed novella Brokeback Mountain was both a book and a film.

What we thought:

Like The Return of the Native, The Shipping News has “Nature” as a major character. Annie Proulx did a great amount of research, living many times in Newfoundland for months at a time. This showed in the exquisite details of the beauty of that stark, lonely, bleak and transcendent world. From the sparkling water shining as with diamonds at a glowing rainbow sunset, to slate gray, storm-tossed seas hiding its victims! Her knowledge of the details of boats, shipping, fishing and everything related to the ocean community enriched every part of her work.

Our group seemed to universally like or LOVE this book. Some had read it more than once and still really liked it the second time. The only negative comments were about the writing style, which sometimes had sentence fragments or long, run-on sentences. Others disagreed, thinking that these style “rule-breakers” enhanced the rhythm and texture of the narrative. Others didn’t even notice the unconventional style.

A few of us commented that, at first, the main character, Quoyle, his abused early life, his willingness to take abuse, his lack of confidence, made him very unsympathetic. A few wondered about reading on, but kept at it, then, it all changed!

Petal's violent death, his kidnapped very young daughters' close encounter with possible sex slavery, the joint suicide of his parents, the hostile rejection of his brother, and job loss, suddenly thrust our kind, loving, sweet-natured anti-hero into chaos with no future......that is, until his Aunt showed up for the funeral.

His Aunt's down-to-earth sense of reality and belief in redemption from adversity, led them to Newfoundland to try a new life in the harsh sea town, in the ancestral home which was filled with specters of Quoyle ancestors’ century long secrets.

What transpired there was amazing. While still afflicted with hardship, gradually all the characters transformed! The readers could barely see the changes as they occurred. We loved how Annie Proulx pitted each character's weakness, including the peripheral characters, against what that character hated or feared most. Quoyle wrote The Shipping News and he was afraid of water and hated boats. One man, abused as a child, wrote of the local sex crimes. An old bachelor wrote about home decorating and cleaning tips.

We loved the chapter headings from The Ashley Book of Knots. They were symbolic clues of the developments in the coming chapter. We loved the names! Each was such a unique Dickensian invention. Humor was evident throughout, but subtle. We would find ourselves chuckling over made-up newspaper headlines, then immediately pulled back into the plot.

One theme was sexual identity and sexual deviance. Our homegrown newspaper contained all the stories of incest and other sexual abuse they could find. The Aunt, a major character, whose actions saved them all, kept her same-sex relationships secret.

In fact, we loved all the characters, except maybe Petal, the evil wife of Quoyle, who was dispatched by the author early in the book. Without Petal, Quoyle would never have grown. This proves that all adversity, at least adversity in novels, is there for a reason. :>

All the characters were quirky, strong in their own way, honorable, likeable, solid and interesting. We tried to see if we could think of any other novel where all the characters were so engaging and strangely weird and wonderful! One member of our group mentioned Kent Haruf's Plainsong. We all agreed.

We loved the intensity of the dangerous and suspenseful scenes, such as the cheap speedboat capsizing and Guy Quoyle almost drowning, and also, the wind-storm blowing away the ancestral home. We even really liked the historical description of the pirate, inbred family of Quoyles pulling their enormous house across the frozen bay with the angry jeering villagers pursuing! What an image!

We loved the drunken "good-bye" party that destroyed one newspaperman’s trailer home and sank his hand crafted solid boat, which prevented him (temporarily) from leaving. He was loved THAT much!

We noted the themes of the changing economy and even global warming! This book was written long before global warming was widely discussed. Proulx talked of government changes that directly put people out of work, then started companies to rescue those out of work. Those new companies then immediately failed due to poor planning. In contrast the locals found ways to continue in smaller ways, helping each other and still satisfying their deep love of the sea. This was how the newspaper was started!

Bunny, Quoyle’s older daughter, was understandably emotionally disturbed after her trials. She was also "sensitive" to the strangeness of the past and the current mysterious events around her, (the white dog, the dream of the house flying away) yet she slowly and quietly evolved into a normal child. We loved that.

Quoyle's and Wave's transformation from passive, ungainly people into leaders in the community and into confident lovers was so gratifying to the reader. They both clung to loving memories of their deceased spouses only to reveal to each other later that both spouses were cheaters and abusers!

We talked about the scene at the end of the book where Quoyle, after achieving success in his community and acquiring the true love of his life, examines himself in a mirror after a shower. Approaching middle age, his stomach protruding, a loaf of a man, tall, heavy, with tree trunk legs, facial features grouped in the center of his face, thick red hair all over, Quoyle realized he was probably at his prime and he liked what he saw! It was a redemptive moment making the reader smile and almost bringing out happy tears.

We liked the end, which affirmed that winds called by magic knots can blow evil away, the dead can rise again and most importantly, true love can come gradually without obsession and pain.

Annie Proulx deserved her prizes for The Shipping News!

Lakeview Book Club Update: Flight Behavior by Barbara Kingsolver

Flight Behavior Barbara Kingsolver

There were eleven of us, including two new members, one who said she had been trying to get here for two years!

A little background about Barbara Kingsolver. She was born in 1955 in Annapolis, Maryland. She was raised in eastern Kentucky, where her options were to be a farmer or a farmer's wife. She knew she wanted out! She has a B.A. in biology and graduate degrees in biology and ecology. During her college years she also took writing courses, but she had been making up stories for her family since she was a child. Obviously, this story rings so true, because the themes and events have been an intimate part of her life.

Insomnia led her to write The Bean Trees, her first book. Her style was honed with journalism writing and science writing. She is aware of the need to compel in the reader to turn every page. All of her novels have been very popular and that was validated last night.

We all liked this book! Some loved it. One of our longtime members said she has read every book that Kingsolver has written and has loved each one better than the one before. When asked why, she noted that the writing style is vivid. The story is alive. Our member glowed with enthusiasm :> She said that Kingsolver's Prodigal Summer also deals with ecology. She liked the underlying messages.

We went around our circle and each shared a little. I wondered that there would be enough to say among the 11 of us. Once we read a book that everyone LOVED and found little to say other than it was really, really good :>

That was not the case here, people have much to say and most all of it was different. What follows is sort of the stream of comments in no particular order:

General comments about why we liked this book were:

The rich scientific theories she put in this novel, educating us, almost without us realizing it, i.e. the writing style was filled with beautiful prose. (one member read it twice!) Other comments were that it was hilarious, filled with symbolism, such as the "flight," Delarobia's flight away from her unsatisfying life and the flight of the endangered butterflies! Whether human or creature, the environment didn't fit.

There was suspense. The mother-in-law, Hester, and daughter-in-law, Delarobia, had similar crises at young ages that directed the stunted courses of their lives. The secret of the mother-in-law and her judgment of the daughter-in-law caused the tension and suspense. The secret was that the pastor of their church was actually the child given up for adoption by the mother-in-law at the insistence of her husband. The father of the pastor was not the husband. He is unknown to us.

The parents appeared almost unkind to Delarobia and Cub, but when we finally understood the history of the family secret, the behavior made more sense to us. The mother, Hester, stifled her grief of losing her son and moved on with her life. She was able later to join her given-away-son's church. Her son never knew she was the mother. We thought that most likely the unknown man who loved her before she married, was probably the love of her life. Hester never accepted Delarobia, because she knew that Delarobia was smarter than Cub. Delarobia had married Cub, because she was pregnant. Hester, therefore, figured Delarobia "had one foot out of the door," and would leave them all before long. As it turned out, Hester was correct, later, rather than sooner.

We mentioned the folk story of the butterflies being the souls of children who have died and we found that touching. We liked Delarobia's children, the budding scientist Preston and the free, strong spirit, Cathy. We commented on the killing of the lamb and how Delarobia mastered that skill. Life on a farm puts life and death in perspective.

The prose was beautiful, colorful, but two members had a few minor criticisms. One was that the male characters were not as fully developed as the women in the book. We would have liked to have known more about how they became how they were. In other words the men characters were a little flat. That member liked the comparisons of the haves and have-nots in the book. When people from the outside came to teach our down-to-earth farming people how to conserve resources by traveling less in airplanes, our rural people noted that they never fly and can barely buy gas for their cars or tractors. One set of ladies were knitting and selling sweaters to raise money to save the endangered butterflies and one person in the book thought they were knitting sweaters "for the butterflies."

We liked how the anguish of the mismatched marriage was described. We could feel and understand Delarobia's unease. We discussed why she had not left the marriage before when her baby, who caused her teenage marriage, died. The reason was she had no family and no way to live support herself. It made sense at that time to stay, but she was bored, bored, bored. She focused her angst by obsessing about the visiting scientist Ovid, but, thankfully, did not stray.

We figured that Delarobia had arrested development, getting pregnant as a teenager and going into a busy farmwife marriage with two children coming soon after. She had raging hormones and craved a stimulating man, a true romance. The book starts with her escapade to meet her much younger lover-to-be, with his sexy tool belt, the man who could fulfill her! This man turned out to be the randy, community lothario who was soon romancing humorous Dovey! It was a Good thing that God, Climate Change and Floods in Mexico, sent the butterflies as a miracle to distract Delarobia from her intended sin. She didn't even figure out, at first, that the flaming trees were actually millions of monarch butterflies. She was so vain she left her glasses at home, thinking her face without glasses and her uncomfortable high heeled boots would make her more sexy to her intended lover! Thank you butterflies! We really didn't want her character to "stray."

The TV reporter was manipulative and caused problems in the community. Our scientist, Ovid, finally stated the TRUTH of the situation, but did not want to lose face with other scientists, by stating the truth which is controversial. He was, however, going to get an Award for his work and he comments about it, "Yeah, a purple heart." We could feel his pain and ours as we saw, that although this is partially fiction, it could become real. One member mentioned how the Washington logging has destroyed the Seattle shores.

The consequences of the weather shift is frightening. One member commented that although conservative Christians, as in "don't put science before God," may lean toward the conservative/business oriented stance on ecological issues. Once they see, however, that God's beautiful creatures are disappearing, they may change their views.

We liked that Ovid's happy marriage stifled Delarobia's obsession over him as a possible romantic partner.

We liked the character, Dovey. She was a humorous element that kept the story light, when it was getting heavy.

Some questioned the authenticity of Delarobia's husband, Cub. He was passive and ignorant, but sweet and reliable. Some of us have known people like that and found him very believable. He was "too good" to cheat on Delarobia, even though the town promiscuous lady was circling him, yet was it just that he was too dumb? That's what Delarobia thought. Some of us thought he was a weak man, but an honorable man, serving his wife, his parents and his children.

Money seemed to be a large pressure on this community. The levels of poverty were examined. A few members thought the detailed shopping excursion to the used items store went on too long, but we liked that what came from that was the episode where Preston negotiated a purchase of an entire old encyclopedia set for one dollar!

Some of us noted the pace seemed slow, then all of a sudden there were only a few chapters left and huge amounts of plot to resolve. Some didn't like that some issues were not really resolved. We liked how Delarobia explained the divorce to Preston and that the divorce didn't seem contentious, but why didn't Kingsolver let us see more about the interaction between Cub and Delarobia, when they were figuring out how to end their marriage? In other words the ending seemed a tiny rushed.

We did like that in some ways the ending seemed hopeful, hopeful about the butterflies, hopeful about the new lives for Delarobia and her children and that they would return and bring what they learned back with them to the community that loved them and needed them.

We learned about butterflies and climate change, complicated lives filled with secrets and unbreakable rules being broken over and over. We learned about the TRUTH and the manipulation of it, about gradations of rural poverty and rural wisdom. We liked the people in this book, even if we didn't want to!

Barbara Kingsolver did a GREAT JOB!