A Good Man is Hard to Find

A couple months ago, when that “which author’s fiction are you” quiz was going around, this was my result:

Which Author’s Fiction are You?


Flannery O’Connor wrote your book. Not much escapes your notice.
Take this quiz!




I was highly embarrassed; I had never read Flannery O’Connor, and didn’t want to link to something that I hadn’t read. Now, thanks to the online bookgroup, I can now say: I’m not sure I want Flannery O’Connor writing my story.

I say that mostly because her stories, at first glance, are harsh, violent and, well, depressing. I hope my life isn’t like her Southern characters… they are often banal, pathetic, racist. They grate on the nerves, on the psyche: what on earth is redeeming about any of them?

Yet, I found as I was reading, that I related to and liked several of these stories. The first — A Good Man is Hard to Find — is a horrible way (for me) to start a book: a banal picture of a family taking a vacation, which ends in the violent deaths of said family. I was about ready to give up on O’Connor after that one. (I’m still not sure if I see the “redemption” and “grace” that’s supposed to be in that particular story.) But, feeling a desire to be a part of the discussion, I kept reading. I found I actually liked “A Stroke of Good Fortune”; I identified with the main character’s desire to be something more than the way she was raised, though I thought denying that she was pregnant was a pretty drastic way to do so. I liked “A Late Encounter with the Enemy”: I thought the ending was particularly ironic, which made me smile. The rest of them… well, I have to admit that I didn’t get them. Some of them I didn’t get more than others (“The River”, in particular), but I’m lost as to the whole Christian allegory that she’s supposed to have written about.

I guess she may just be over my head. At the very least, she’ll make for good book group discussion, right? (And maybe I’ll even learn a thing or two in the process.)

And Now Back to Our Regularly Scheduled Program

Thanks to everyone for all the birthday wishes. Yes, he really is wonderful (most of the time). And no, I don’t plan on giving him up. 😀

My birthday was nice. I got a surprise phone call from a dear friend whom I haven’t seen in four years and spent a while chatting with her. And while I didn’t get a “buttload of books” like Andi wished, I did win two from Book Binge. I wasn’t the original winner, but she never responded, so whomever she is I have her to thank for my two “birthday” books. I originally chose the two Judith McNaught books, but I realized that reading 1400 pages in two weeks — on top of everything else — was a bit much, so Holly very nicely let me switch. I chose Colleen Gleason‘s Gardella vampire books, which have been on my TBR list for a while now anyway. I also received Cinder Edna (which is really hard for me to say) from a good friend here in Kansas. It’s a delightful alternative telling of Cinderella… it’s nice to know I’m not to old for picture books!

Other than that, we just had a little party at home. I made my cake, a chocolate-marshmallow confection that was a bit too sweet for my taste. (Good to know; I’ve been meaning to try out that recipe for a while.) Here’s the bonfire I had to blow out (we only had a 3 number candle, so we attempted to make a 5 out of regular candles):

And I got a lovely pair of earrings from my girls, money from my in-laws, and this from my parents:

So it was a very nice birthday.

Now back to what we usually do around here.

My Birthday Girl Woman

Hello Friends of Melissa (hereafter FOM),

This is the DH writing (I believe that’s what she calls me, right?). Why am I writing here? Why am I intruding upon her personal cyberspace? Because tomorrow is Melissa’s 35th birthday, and sneaking onto her blog and posting a birthday note to her, and to all you FOM, is one of the few things I can imagine that might, just might, surprise her. And Melissa loves surprises, even though they also drive her nuts.

I’m not going to embarrass her or anyone else here. Melissa’s done a few of those “five things you never would have guessed about me” memes after all, and thus there probably isn’t really very much left unsaid that I could scandalize her with here anyway. (Well, no, that’s not really true; there are some things about her which I suspect haven’t been mentioned on this blog, and I suppose I could write about those. But I won’t because, this is a family-family website and all. I mean, her and my Mom are both regular readers.) So instead, I’ll go the maudlin and appreciative route.

Melissa’s been writing out her thoughts and opinions of books on this website for nearly three years now. She started out thinking that blogging was just a somewhat more efficient way to do what she was already doing on our old website–namely, just keeping track of books she’d read, maybe including brief reviews of them for the sake of reminder her of what she thought. She never imagined she’d ever have, y’know, readers herself…and when all you FOM started to show up, she really didn’t know what do with you. But she caught on soon enough. And she caught something more too: a vision of herself, of her future, and of a contribution she could make to others. She’s mentioned this before here, but let me just say it again: this blog helped her, as we slowly brought the whole “growing family” stage of our lives to an end and started working on just keeping the kids growing and adequately fed, figure out what she loved to do, what she was good at, what she had to offer as her 30s and 40s loomed before her. For some reason (maybe because of all the time she spent hanging out with my friends when we were first married and went off to graduate school) Melissa spent years often feeling like the young and inexperienced one in any given crowd; this blog, and all of you, helped her see her own grown-up and educated and competent self a little more clearly. So thanks for all that, on this auspicious occasion.

And 35 is fairly auspicious, I think. Maybe not as auspicious as turning 40, but it’s getting there. Halfway to the Biblical three-score plus ten, anyway. I hit that mark a few years back, and just about every day I’m reminded of all the reasons I have to be grateful for Melissa for being my companion up through that point, and now beyond it. There’s been some rough years along with the good ones, that’s for certain; but through it all she’s been kind, loving, (mostly) forgiving, and my best friend, as well as still the most attractive woman I know. I don’t want to even pretend to be able to predict what accomplishments and insights her next 35 years will bring to her, but I’m excited by them nonetheless, because I know she’ll share them with me and our children…and knowing her, probably with all of you, too. Because that’s the sort of person she is.

Melissa doesn’t post many pictures of herself here, I don’t believe, which is too bad, because she’s a looker. Anyway, here’s a recent photo of her, as usual maintaining her dignity even as her DH unceremoniously mauls her. Sorry if it’s a little fuzzy, Melissa; it’s 11:55pm, and I can’t quite figure out how to work the scanner.

Oh, and happy birthday.

Love,
Me

September Bookworms Carnival: Class is in Session

Welcome to the September Bookworms Carnival!

Our theme, this month, is classics (new or old). I picked this theme because it’s back to school time for many of us, whether it’s kids going back to grade school, or starting a university program ourselves. Because of that, I decided to style the carnival like a college course catalog. Below you’ll find the courses that are offered, and the selected reading for each course. (And yes, for curiosity’s sake, they are REAL college courses I borrowed from the catalogs of a couple of universities.)

Enough blathering. On with the carnival.

ENG 201: Introduction to Literature
An overview of the best literature has to offer. Cami (Turpin Family Blog) offers up her ten favorite classics, spanning both the continents and the centuries.

ENG 210: World Masterpieces
Major world civilizations as see through literature. Nymeth, at Things Mean A Lot, finally got around to reading The Odyssey, and found that she thoroughly enjoyed it. The status of The Last Summer, by Boris Pasternak (of Dr. Zhivago fame) as a classic is questioned by John at Book Mine Set. And Jan (Jan’s Journal) delves into the world of Franz Kafka, reading and reviewing several of his works.

ENG 211: British Literature
Selected readings from medieval times to present. Chris at book-o-rama reviewed one of her favorite authors’ works: George Eliot’s The Mill on the Floss. I read Jane Eyre and decided that I like Charlotte Brontë much better than her sister Emily. Ann at Patternings read Stella Gibbons’ novel Cold Comfort Farm, and found it a delightful parody of Hardy, Lawrence and Mary Webb with superb comic timing. Eva at A Striped Armchair posts her thoughts on a few classics: The Eustace Diamonds, The Scarlett Pimpernell, and Candide (which I know isn’t British, but bear with me here.) Lostcheerio (The Harpoonist) bucks the tendency for people to like everything by Jane Austen and expresses her frustration with Ann Wentworth and Persuasion here. Last-minute addition: Becky (Becky’s Book Reviews) reflects on her relationship with Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein.

ENG 221: American Literature
Selected readings from Puritan times to present. Karen (Misadventures of an Aussie Mom) and Nyssaneala (Book Haven) both weighed in on Harper Lee’s classic, To Kill a Mockingbird. Suzanne at Adventures in Daily Living read, and was surprised she liked, John Gardner’s classic, Grendel. Gautami tripathy at My Own Little Reading Room focused on an F. Scott Fitzgerald work, Tender is the Night. Jan (Jan’s Journal, again) reviewed Richard Halliburton’s lesser known work, The Royal Road to Romance, and highly recommends it. Last-minute addition: Annie (reading is my superpower) reviews Memoirs of an Ex-Prom Queen, a 1970s feminist classic and finds it hopelessly depressing, even if 30 is the new 20.

ENG 305: Critical Reading
Analyzing the meaning of classic and what constitutes a classic work. Corrine at Littlest Bird and Heather (Litter of Leaves) each muse on what defines a “classic work”.

ENG 335: Young Adult Literature
Reading and discussing specific works of middle-grade and young adult literature. Jeremy, at Jeremy’s Consumer’s Corner, proposes The Spiderwick Chronicles as a series that will appeal to children of all ages. Valentina (Valentina’s Room) read Lois Lowry’s Newbery-winning classic, The Giver, and decided that while it was a quick read, it was anything but simple. Last-minute additions: Dewey (the hidden side of a leaf) reviews the 1923 Newbery-winning The Voyages of Dr. Dolittle. Annie at reading is my superpower reflects on the death of Madeleine L’Engle with a series of quotes from her books.

ENG 470: Special Topics in English
This term we will be discussing Fantasy Classics. Alatáriël, at One Blog to Rule them All (which is devoted to Lord of the Rings, itself a classic), asks the question that many a fantasy fan has asked: Narnia or Middle Earth? Olli at Pieces of Speculative Fiction lists his Top 10 classic fantasy novels. Suzanne (Adventures in Daily Living, again) read the latest novel set in Middle Earth, Tolkein’s Children of Hurin. She found that while it was a slow starter, it eventually picked up and was worth the time spent reading it.

Bookstore
If you’re wondering about how to get your hands on a classic, Annette at Homeschooling Journey has a list of links to free literature textbooks.

The next carnival will be hosted at This is the Life. Her theme is Thrills and Chills: Spooky Books That Keep You Up at Night. Deadline for submissions is October 12.

The Inheritance

An Open Memo to Publishers and Literary Scholars

RE: Dead Authors’ Unpublished Works

Dear Sirs and Madams:

I have just finished what has been promoted as Louisa May Alcott’s “first novel written at seventeen” and as “the book ‘Jo’ wrote”. If I understand the Afterword correctly, this novel was discovered intact among Alcott’s papers. I imagine the scholars who discovered this were incredibly excited and thought that the rest of the reading public would be awestruck at a “new” Alcott novel.

I hate to say this, since Alcott is a respected author, but: it was horrible. Maudlin. Trite. The characters were mere caricatures. (Noble True Love, Long-Suffering Poor Governess, Prideful and Haughty High-born Lady, Older Haughty Lady Who Learns a Lesson, Less-Worthy Love Interest, etc.) The plot was predictable and underdeveloped. Sure, there was some intellectual curiosity about it: one could tell, reading the book, that Alcott’s early influences were Dickens, Austen and the Bronte sisters. But really, the manuscript should have been left where it was found: in the red notebook among her papers.

As you well know, the process a book takes from an idea to publication is a long and arduous one. Many revisions and edits are necessary to make a good final draft. When an author has died, that process cannot be completed, for obvious reasons. Thereby, any works that are published after said authors death can never be as good as anything that author published in life. (There are exceptions, true, but they are rare.) While you may think that fans of the author may want, for completion’s sake, to read everything that author ever wrote, please refrain from publishing unfinished works. We really don’t want to remember Lloyd Alexander or Madeline L’Engle (or any other deceased author for that matter) for the first drafts of novels they had saved on their computer drives; we want to remember them for the works they finished and polished and published and won awards for.

I am sorry for this aberration in Alcott’s published repertoire. It would be much better for the reading public to read and enjoy her original published works, the ones in which she had control of the writing process, and ignore this travesty.

Thank you.

Specials

I finally got around to reading the third in the Uglies Trilogy by Scott Westerfield. And, like Pretties, I didn’t enjoy it nearly as much as I did Uglies, though I thought Westerfield did a good job tying up all loose ends and giving the story a decent punch at the end. (At least there’s no cliffhanger at the end of this one.) I’m not even going to try and review this book without spoilers. So if you are even remotely interested in reading this one, and you have a problem with spoilers… stop now.

I really disliked Tally for a great deal of the book. Like at the beginning of Pretties, she was completely controlled by what she had become, in this case, one of the Special Circumstances. At one point, though, I realized that I was supposed to dislike Tally. Or rather, I was supposed to dislike what Tally had become, what Dr. Cable had made her in to. Once I made this realization, I could deal with Tally: her snobbery, her insecurity, her need to be “icy”. (Though she did get better as the book went on.) But, I also disliked Shay. Was it just me, or did anyone else see parallels to drug use in this book? Shay was addicted (like a drug user) to cutting herself and very controlling of the people and situations around her. (She’d get really mean if things didn’t go her way.) Her friendship with Tally was superficial and controlling as well. The problem was that I disliked her so much that I wasn’t entirely convinced by her change and remorse in the end. Why would Tally even consider giving Shay yet another chance? How do we know that Shay’s change is real, complete? We don’t; and because of that, I distrusted it.

Speaking of change and remorse, Dr. Cable completely threw me for a loop. I’d been expecting some of it; she’s been the “bad guy” all along — controlling the town to extreme ends. I didn’t expect her to attack another city, though I suppose it wasn’t completely far-fetched. (I did like the line which went something like — I couldn’t find it to get it exactly — “All cities had given up war; it’s just that some cities had given it up more than others). But, I found it really hard to hate her because she had been lurking in the background for most of the books. As a result, the final confrontation between Tally and Dr. Cable at the end just completely fell flat. And after that… well, I understand it, but just because I understand it doesn’t mean I thought it made sense.

Which brings me to the ending. It was… okay. I guess I couldn’t have expected much better; how do you fully resolve a story like the one Westerfield created here? But, it kind of fell flat. After all the struggling Tally did in all three books — against the way she was brought up and against the subsequent operations — what more did I want from her? I don’t know. So, to quietly slink off into the wild with her first love is probably the best ending anyway. I just wasn’t fully satisfied by it.

All that said, though, Westerfield has created a very interesting and very compelling world. Uglies is a brilliant book, and the other two are still good, if flawed, reads. And since I did enjoy myself with these three, I’ll be picking up Extras as soon as the library gets a copy.

Eggs

Jerry Spinelli has written books that I’ve really liked; I thoroughly enjoyed both Stargirl and Maniac Magee. So I was looking forward to reading Eggs, Spinelli’s almost latest book. (Love, Stargirl just came out, too.) While I respect Spinelli’s writing, and while I admire that he’s willing to tackle a subject like dealing with human fragility in the face of death of a loved one, I’m not sure I liked this book all that much.

I’m not saying I disliked it, though. I think what I had was a complete non-reaction. It was neither here nor there; it was neither liked nor disliked. It just was. (Maybe that’s appropriate?)

Anyway. David, a 9 year old boy (who didn’t act like a 9 year-old in my opinion) whose mother has recently died, hates life. Hates that his grandmother is trying to make him make friends. Hates that his father is always gone to his job in Connecticut (“200 miles away!”). Hates his new town. Just hates. (It’s actually pretty grumpy reading.) Until he meets Primrose, a 13-year-old girl with family problems of her own. She is annoyed by her mom, who is, by all accounts, pretty out of it. Neither of them wants a friendship, yet they end up as friends. Neither of them wants to admit that they need the other, so they spend most of the book fighting. (There’s a lot of arguing and fighting in this book. I suppose that’s typical.) And in the end, they realize, well, that life is okay.

And that’s pretty much the whole plot. Since there wasn’t much story, I really wanted to like the characters. But I didn’t particularly like David; he was too grumpy, too mean, his emotions too raw for me. I liked Primrose better, but not by much. She also was quite mean, often teasing and provoking David for no apparent reason. I felt sorry for David’s grandmother and Primrose’s mom. The mother-figures in this book were either spineless or crazy, which bothered me. The only character I really liked was Refrigerator John; he was at least interesting, though I can’t say why. He didn’t really do anything; he was just there as a sounding board for Primrose and David. And an effective one at that.

There really isn’t much more to say about this one. I was complaining to M about David always being grumpy and mean, and she told me that “9-year-old boys are just jerks, Mom.” So, maybe it’s an accurate portrayal of a kid going through the grief process. I just wanted a more enjoyable and compelling one.

The Outermost House

There are some books that one can sit and read for hours and hours. This book, by Henry Beston, is not one of those books. I tried, I really did. But every time I read more than, oh, 5 pages, I started drifting off. It’s not that this book is boring; it’s far from that. It’s very lyrical, almost poetic (it made me think of Inkling!), but it is a book that, for me, is best handled in small doses.

In 1924, Beston, at the age of 36, decided (on almost a whim) to spend a year living in the beach house he had built as a sometime summer residence on the Atlantic side of Cape Cod. This book, published four years later, is not a true chronology of his year; it’s more like musings in chronological order. It’s a naturalist book; he loves nature, loves to observe and spend time in nature. He writes, early on:

The world to-day is sick to its thin blood for lack of elemental things, for fire before the hands, for water welling from the earth, for air, for the dear earth itself underfoot. In my world of beach and dune these elemental presences lived and had their being and under their arch moved an incomparable pageant of nature and the year.

I had to constantly remind myself that I was reading a book nearly 80 years old, and not some Wendell Berry book. It is a very Berry-esque book, something I could imagine Berry writing if he had grown up by the sea instead of Kentucky. Another quote, that reminded me of Berry:

The sky this afternoon is a harmony of universal blue, bordered with a surf rim of snowiest blue-white. Far out at sea, in the northeast and near the horizon, is a pool of the loveliest blue I have ever seen here — a light blue, a petal blue, a blue of the emperor’s gown in a Chinese fairy tale. If you would see waves at their best, come on such a day, when the ocean reflects a lovely sky, and the wind is light and onshore; plan to arrive in the afternoon so that you will have the sun facing the breakers. Come early, for the glints on the waves are most beautiful and interesting when the light is oblique and high.

It’s also a birding book; he loves birds and spends pages following their migratory, feeding and mating habits. I think I felt a little wistful about this; I’ve never really been interested in birds (birdwatching is probably forever tied to a very difficult and painful birding section of my 7th-grade science class), but I could still sense the reverence and awe Beston had for these creatures. While not a birdwatcher, I could understand the interest birds do have for some people.

The most interesting chapter, to me, was Midwinter, when Beston describes the horrible, difficult, destructive winter of that year. It was the worst winter Cape Cod had seen in decades; Beston writes that many ships were capsized, many lives were lost (I’d write how many ships and lives, but the numbers escape me now). He lived through it, snug in his well-built house. But, he describes the heroic efforts of the guards at the Nauset Station lighthouse; the coping of the seafaring communities — how they would take the ship scrap back to their houses, while mourning the loss of life, and use it as part of their daily lives; the sheer determination of the sailors on the wrecked ship (one lone survivor of one wreck, ended up heading back out to sea because it was “the only thing he knew”).

He writes at the beginning of the chapter: “A year indoors is a journey along a paper calendar; a year in outer nature is the accomplishment of a tremendous ritual.” There are more quotes I could write, about the destructiveness of humans on the ocean, about the sense of smell, about springtime at the beach; but I’ll leave off here. I envy all those who live even remotely near an ocean; I’ve long felt that I’m happiest when I’m near great bodies of water. (I’m not saying that I don’t like Kansas, or that I’m not happy here; I just feel incomplete, on some level.) So, I’m glad I read this book, if only because it let me experience living near the ocean if only for just a little while.

One last quote:

Whatever attitude to human existence you fashion for yourself, know that it is valid only if it be the shadow of an attitude to Nature. A human life, so often likened to a spectacle upon a stage, is more justly a ritual. The ancient values of dignity, beauty and poetry which sustain it are of Nature’s inspiration; they are born of the mystery and beauty of the world. Do no dishonour to the earth lest you dishonour the spirit of man… Touch the earth, love the earth, honour the earth, her plains, her valleys, her hills, and her seas; rest your spirit in her solitary places.

Jane Eyre

I’ve been telling people that I’m “re-reading” Jane Eyre, that I hadn’t read it since 8th grade, but I realized a few chapters into it that I’ve never read this one by Charlotte Brontë (I think it was Ethan Frome I read in 8th grade….). And it’s about time I did.

I really have the movie, and the adoration of the movie by my fellow book bloggers, to thank. If there had never been a Masterpiece Theater movie, and if y’all hadn’t raved about it, I wouldn’t have gotten it from the library, watched it with M, loved it, and then read the book.

Since you all know the plot, I’ll just leave you with some observations:

1) I like Charlotte better than Emily. I read Wuthering Heights several years back and HATED it. (Sorry to all you Heathcliff lovers out there.) It was like watching a train wreck. Horrible, but you can’t tear yourself away. I think I must have assumed that all Brontë sisters were alike, and so I thought Jane Eyre would be monumentally depressing. It wasn’t. It truly is a wonderful love story. Not as simplistic as The Blue Castle, but just as wonderful. I think my annoyance of Eclipse is hereby purged.

2) St. John Rivers is a jerk. Mr. Rochester may be gruff, may be impulsive and may be arrogant, but he is not a jerk. I was seething at St. John when he went off on Jane trying to convince her to marry him. Humph. She said no; deal with it, man.

3) I liked Jane. A lot. She was sensible, practical, intelligent and kind. She’s a remarkable, admirable heroine. In short, someone I want my girls to grow up like. (Just without the aunt that hates them. ) I like what Erica Jong said about her in the introduction:

Jane may be the first heroine in fiction to know that she needs her own identity more than she needs marriage. Her determination not to relinquish selfhood for love could well belong to a contemporary heroine.

I don’t know about the contemporary heroine part; she’s a lot more selfless than contemporary heroines. But she does have a self-awareness and goodness about her that demands respect and admiration. In Jane, Charlotte came up with a remarkable, and memorable, character.

I know the Brontë sisters have been compared to Jane Austen, but I’m not sure there’s really a comparison. Austen wrote social commentary in the form of love stories; I don’t think Charlotte was really making a commentary on society in Jane Eyre (though I suppose it could be read as such). I think she was just writing a gripping love story, a tale of someone who overcame all odds to find happiness in her life.

And isn’t that one of the best stories to tell?