Ian McEwan, SWEET TOOTH

We were seven potlucking chez Phoebe to discuss Ian McEwan's SWEET TOOTH: Maren, Phoebe, Robin (starving for cheese, chocolate, and wine after her Asian adventures), Michel, Hélène (who had suggested the book), Cynthia, and Mark (a big McEwan enthusiast).

A general vote of thanks to Hélène for this selection: it gave everyone something to dig the teeth into.

Robin, who actually attended Cambridge not long after the novel's protagonist, was able to confirm the atmosphere and limitations described as absolutely spot on (as well as clarifying the meaning of receiving a First, Second, or Third, grammar school versus public school, and other arcana).

Michel was enthusiastic over the classically well-made overarching structure of the book and its drame cornélien of duty versus love.

Maren brought a perspective from the other side of the Iron Curtain -- the extent of the Cold War fear of the USSR described in the book was surprising to her. She was slightly frustrated by the transformation of the intrigue from espionage to romance. She also felt that the protagonist underwent shifts of mood and direction that defied reader belief or involvement -- possibly explained by the twist at the end.

Phoebe COULD NOT get her head around the Monty Hall problem and could see no difference between the two short stories constructed around it (one incorrectly, one correctly -- OR SO IT WAS CLAIMED). Explanations capable of penetrating her thick skull will be entertained with sobbing gratitude.

Mark has kindly furnished detailed explanations, after reading which Phoebe threw in the towel. http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-monty-hall-problem/

Another gripe: it seemed (per Phoebe and, with reservations, Robin) that the novel's literary and historical references, allusions, and intertextuality had their eyes far too much on the gallery (or the lecture amphitheater), unlike works by, let us say, Nabokov or Angus Wilson, who use their own lexicon for their own ends without worrying about the gracious distribution of pedagogic goodies.

July's selection is THE AGE OF INNOCENCE by Edith Wharton. Should we skip an August meeting? Many exciting book possibilities were raised for the future -- please email them in (with preferred month, if you have one) and we can continue filling the calendar and sourcing our books. Cynthia has already risen to the challenge with a selection for either August (if we do indeed meet) or, failing that, October: LE TESTAMENT FRANCAIS by Andrei Makine, which I've added to the Agenda.

Related viewing: Alan Bennett's AN ENGLISHMAN ABROAD (Guy Burgess): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsdexDZgr-8

-- Phoebe

Mavis Gallant, OVERHEAD IN A BALLOON

We were a petite comité indeed at Les Editeurs – only Maren, Michel, and Phoebe to discuss the late Mavis Gallant’s OVERHEAD IN A BALLOON.

Since I selected The Book That Decimated the Book Club, I’ll draft the minutes. First, I’ll admit that after naming it, I wondered if I should have chosen a different Gallant, possibly HOME TRUTHS (which Maren presciently began reading after OIAB). I wondered if OIAB was too “special”: too distanced, too caustic, dealing with too limited a milieu. But I couldn’t resist images like the white boot kicking from the bushes in the Bois or lines like “’She died in his arms,’ wrote Grippes in an unusually confidential letter to Prism, ‘though not without a struggle.’”

Michel found the historical ambiance unbelievable – disappointing me, because it FELT real to me, and I was hoping for native confirmation. He graciously conceded that he might simply have read too fast and missed certain points. Part of the issue, for him, was the nature of a short story collection, which for him doesn’t allow the mind to really acclimate and become sensitized to the fictional milieu as it would in a novel.

Maren agreed on the short story problem. She also felt that the settings and characters were limited – “more writers writing about writers.”

All three of us agreed that the most involving stories were the Magdalena series, for a number of reasons. There was a continuity among them that made them a kind of peephole novel, with glimpses of a single story at various times, from various perspectives. The issues – survival in wartime, love, marriage, loyalty, selfishness and sacrifice – were less rarefied than those of other stories. Gallant’s use of details to convey entire worlds – the contrasted luggage of Magdalena and her young husband on the train – was especially well deployed. I loved the Colettish atmosphere of Magdalena’s Quai Voltaire apartment.

I was especially struck by the way the bottom sometimes drops out of a story, the brittle surface breaking: the memory of Algerian torture in “Luc’s Father,” Magdalena’s saying she “knew what [the Jewish star] was like” at the end of “A Recollection.” Or the matter-of-fact way Grippes waits in a café while the police beat up a pickpocket in his apartment house lobby.

I forgot to mention – even though conversation turned to the American Library in Paris! – that I once heard Gallant read the story “Grippes and Poche” there. There was a Q&A session afterwards, and someone asked why she decided to move to Paris. She said because of reading about it in books. I asked which, and she harrumphed a bit, then said, “Colette.”

Here’s a nice article on Gallant:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/19/books/mavis-gallant-short-story-writer-dies-at-91.html

-- Phoebe

Eduardo Agualuso, THE BOOK OF CHAMELEONS

4:1 in terms of appreciation. For Caroline a bad, stilted translation spoiled the joy of reading and it could be resumed as hard work for her to get through it. Others admitted, that it was difficult to get into the book, because it was not very logical or easy to understand at the beginning and irritating to a point that some read the beginning several times in order to get into the book.

According to Myriam Agualuso's other books are also tending to a more dreamy, non-realistic style. This book is very rich in allusions in many directions and hence destined for literature studies? There came up the word "pretentious" on which several people agreed, but one could also find thoughtful phrases and interesting quotations.

Robin asked the question of Why so many dreams? Do they lead to a higher level of explanation that the reader couldn't have understood otherwise?

Maybe not, although they do provide a communication channel for the gecko to share with other humans and express himself as a human being again.

Maren provided an insightful Alternative explanation: Dreams (trances) are a founding part of the African animist religions Candomblé and Umbanda. In these faiths, dreaming can be compared to travelling and conversations/exchanges with all types of creatures during such travels constitute an important element of expression of these religions.

Candomblé and Umbanda were brought to Brazil by the (soon to become) slaves from the African west coast and have evolved in South America ever since. Interestingly, they are now supposedly much more active in Brazil than in their original countries.  

(Researched after the meeting: "Umbanda" means "traditional medecine" in the Angolan languages Kimbundu and Umbundu.)

There was the question of Félix' profession and people asking for his services, wishing to leave their own past behind and start a new life, the possibility to chose their own history and references. Of course we mentioned all the opportunities such a change presents, but we did not think of the losses and especially the loss of identity also related to such a change.

This seems to be today even one of the country's major topics in a larger scale, when taking into account some effects and impacts of their colonial past (thanks to Myriam for sharing her insights):

- People dress themselves in rather western style, you won't see women in traditional clothing as in other African countries.

- Portuguese has become the native tongue for many people and trying to learn the local ("tribal") languages is not uncommon.

Many thanks to Myriam for her slide show with images from Angola! We did realize that we do not know very much about history and the current situation of this country. So Myriam's shared first hand experiences about life in Angola were very helpful!

Funny also how much one's reception of the historical background of a book depends on the personal education and background. Whereas Robin rather could relate to the colonial references in the book, Maren got reminded of the proganda text books in East Germany and the supporting slogans for "socialist" Angola after independence in 1975 which was a context entirely out of sight for the "westerner" members of the group.

Maren & Myriam

Peter Hoeg, THE ELEPHANT KEEPER'S CHILDREN

Many thanks to Phoebe for a fabulous feast of pizza and other goodies on Thursday evening.  We were seven, (Phoebe, Robin, Maren, Caroline, Michel, Mark and myself), all huddled around the famous circular table chez Phoebe, to discuss The Elephant Keeper’s Children, by Peter Hoeg, suggested by Robin.

Suffice it to say, there were no weak opinions shared about the book:  each of us either really liked it or could not even finish it, and I would estimate the opinions were fairly evenly divided.  (4 really enjoyed;  3 could not finish it.)  Those who thought favorably were able to find humor in the zany plot, with the ‘too-intelligent-to-be-taken-seriously” adolescent narrators, as well as the questionable image painted of the world’s major organized religions via the main storyline.  The critics found the humor and teen-aged hijinks too trying on their patience.   Robin pointed out how well the author described and in turn criticized the Danish middle class and also the royalty.  She also recommended his other works which some have read and enjoyed, but found quite different to this particular one.

Cynthia

Alice Munro, DEAR LIFE

We were seven this time around Amanda’s table: Amanda, Cynthia, Helen, Phoebe, newcomer Thibault, Michel and Maren.

The book had a very positive reception; only Michel liked it less, but we did not really get to know why – or he didn’t get the chance amongst all the praising and the lively discussion... ;-)

Other Munro books were even more praised; “Dear Life” was understood as a rather loose collection of some short stories quickly set up to respond to an end of life review.

I myself was somewhat afraid – and, as we learned, I was not the only one – that it would be difficult to discuss short stories. So many characters, changing stories and perspectives... How to cover this all in one discussion? A novel lets one follow the characters and their developments over many pages. How can one relate in the time of a few pages to story and characters? But there was no fear necessary. As Amanda put it: Alice Munro is considered, amongst authors, as one of the best living writers; her short stories are as rich as a novel can be. We saw that ourselves. Rarely have personal stories surfaced as often as this time during a book discussion. We were touched by one or another phrase incrusted itself in our minds, and the discussion started.

Caroline’s splendid written contribution (get well soon!) made a beautiful jumping-off place.

·       I was very conscious of the importance of houses/homes in these short stories, and particularly their demolition or conversion. Is this a recurring theme in her work, a symbol or an autobiographical allusion?
·       The mother/daughter relationships seem, at the very least, tense. One assumes this is autobiographical but I haven’t been able to find out. Or maybe there is a tendency to assume, although she is careful to say the opposite, that everything is autobiographical in this possibly final work. I see her eldest daughter has written a book about her relationship to her mother, which would give an interesting slant.
·       I liked her portrayal of laid-back, hippy husbands/partners (particularly the one she suspects of leaving her for an old flame). Although she doesn’t identify with the stepfather of the girl who drowns, who is by his own admission too stoned to go and help and then refuses to have anything to do with his biological child, she seems to be saying that he did at least live by his principles. One gets the feeling that Munro admires this; that she would like to do the same but doesn’t quite dare. In the final story, she does achieve this, however: “I did not go home for my mother's last illness or for her funeral. I had two small children and nobody in Vancouver to leave them with. We could barely have afforded the trip, and my husband had a contempt for formal behavior, but why blame it on him? I felt the same.”  

Phoebe disagreed in some measure with the last point. To her, the important phrase is I had two small children; the narrator chooses to consider their needs (as her own mother did not), even over those of her mother (in reaction to the mother). Phoebe made a parallel with the death of Père Goriot, when he is abandoned on his deathbed by his adored daughters, who, through the way he brought them up, must fight for the future of their own children.

A gender discussion also for “Gravel”: Is the narrator a boy or a girl, brother or sister of Caro? It was intriguing: The interpretation and reception depended on the gender of the reader. Women tended to read the stories from a girl’s point of view, men from a boy’s.

We came at several moments back to the story of the TB clinic (“Amundsen”). What could women do and expect at that time? How free were they to decide for their own?

Conclusion: We need as one of the next assignments an Edith Wharton novel! And another meeting with short stories!

Also much discussed was the story "Train": It tells the life from a men's perspective. We discussed if his difficulty with intimacy was the origin of his strange relation to people around him or did his performing problem become an intimacy problem.

Phoebe & Maren

Philip Roth, AMERICAN PASTORAL

We've been 8 this time at Vincent's: Amanda, Caroline, Cynthia, Maren, Michel, Phoebe and our two newcomers, Amélie and Mark. And no, it's not been the one in New York, but the one here in Paris - probably equally good as the Vincent's in the book, minus the Baked Ziti.

Well, of course the discussion could not start without a special remark to the Newark "homies" amongst us, who of course did not keep to themselves interesting stories and details about their former home city. (As example: The overpass where he found Merry is exactly the same today.)

Pratically everybody was stunned by Philip Roth's AMERICAN PASTORAL, although not everybody acknowledged to have enjoyed reading it. Hugh and difficult to digest or as Michel put it: As though it is wonderfully written, there's no way out for any of the characters of getting hurt and devastated, it's just ... depressing. There were also several questions about the structure and the general setting: Irritation about the fact that it is knowingly and intentionally set up as an invention, enjoyment starting only when Swede's story begins (so what do we need all the settings around for?), the impression that the whole diner party was not necessary to make the story a complete story, annoyance that the book does not include the Swede's life with his second wife...
We felt that there were so many topics to pick up, that it was just impossible discuss all the different aspects in just one evening. So we went on coming up with events and questions.

It was a clear statement: Such a thing as blowing up the post office of the village would have meant the end of the relation between Caroline and her daughter. There was nevertheless much understanding for the protective feelings and actions of the Swede to save his daughter, for the good Swede. One could almost sense an admiration for the will to and the actual continuation of the goodness by this man. At least, it was never really put in question although the question hung in the air: Can goodness be a bad thing?
Merry's relation with the Swede: Given the good person he was, could he have done anything differently to bring up and save Merry? In the end we agreed: Merry would have been much better off regarding her final state, if she would have been arrested by the FBI.  We also understood Swede’s brother, Jerry’s instinct to run back and take her home by force.
Everybody loved the Swede's father and his brother: Genuine characters who did not need kindness to confirm and complete their personalities. We also equally did NOT like Marcia, the wife of Swede’s high school buddy, who even the narrator admits is all talk and no action.
At different occasions the question of "criticism" popped up: The narrator's, Nathan Zuckerman, criticism of Swede…or was it Merry's criticism on her father and thus the "old style" America; Philip Roth's criticizing through Nathan Zuckerman of the Vietnam-post-Kennedy- means Johnson's- and Nixon's-America; Dawn, the New Jersey beauty (which is, as the non-Americans discovered, a cultural reference on its own already!), never quite accepted as a working class girl. Well, we didn't get to a common view and understanding. Or wouldn't there be any criticism at all and Philip Roth is just plainly giving us a 360° view on what was and did happen in America during the Sixties and Seventies?  This remained an open question. 
Several times we raised the question about Rita Cohen: What was her role, why did she continue to pop up in the story, did she really have a connection with Merry? Well, this, too, remained unanswered.
And we came to the movie question: Apparently there are preparations ongoing to make a film out of the book in Hollywood, but according to our Hollywood insider we will not see it before long on the screen. Besides, our movie experts agreed that "I married a Communist" would be the best amongst Philip Roth's novels to turn into a movie.

Cynthia & Maren

Christmas greetings from Laos !

Happy Christmas to everyone!

Looking through my pictures, there is nothing Christmassy, and lots of photos of concrete buildings streaked with damp. So this is fireworks coming from the Thai side of the Mekong - I was on the Lao side of the river, in Tha Khek.

Bises à tous,
Robin

Georg Orwell, BURMESE DAYS

Once again another wonderful book meeting took place on Thurs, 19th December.  Six of us were in attendance (Michel, Phoebe, Helen, Maren, Caroline, Cynthia) at a great place found by Caroline:  Le Bouillon des Colonies.  We were the only table there the entire night, which was a pity, so please encourage your friends to try it out !
The book discussion meandered and stopped and re-started, but overall it was a success.  Those of us who read Burmese Days did enjoy it, although Maren was only luke-warm about it.  We generally seemed to be strongly in favor of Orwell's other writings, with the notable exception being Helen, who was put off from Orwell by her high school reading assignments which she didn't enjoy.  We agreed Burmese Days was less political and didactic than his other writings (indeed it was his first novel) but he still managed to send a bit of a moral message critical of the colonials via the character of Flory.
We all got a strong feeling for life in colonial Burma and felt that the descriptions and metaphors were really well done.  The characters, too, were well described and seemed to represent good stereotypes of the people we could imagine living in that place and time.   This was particularly true of Elizabeth, whose character provoked yet another lively debate à la Alice Adams:  young women with no career, trade, and basically no alternative besides marriage do deserve our sympathy.  On this we all agree.  But does that feeling of desperation excuse bad behavior, contempt for the poor, etc?  It is not easy to determine where the frontier lies, but clearly Elizabeth made Alice look like a Girl Scout.

Besides Flory, there were few really sympathetic characters in the novel.  We could not even agree on the doctor, who was too over-the-top in his slavish admiration for the British.  Flory even at times seemed to lack the full courage he needed throughout the story.  But the single most truly evil character, U Po Kyin, raised the interesting question about whether the very presence of a colonial power will inevitably create people like U Po Kyin, who exploit it and use it as a weapon for their own profit.   I don't believe we ever did resolve that debate.

Cynthia

Yasmina Khadra, THE ATTACK

This time our meeting place was a restaurant, Mezze du Liban, which turned out to be an ideal choice for a meeting: warm reception, wonderful food and not too loud, which made it easy to have a proper conversation. Michel, Helen, Robin, Caroline, Cynthia and Maren were all in attendance.
Everybody was enthusiastic about the book, although there were a few criticisms of the quality of Khadra’s writing style, and it certainly stimulated discussion.

An unexpected and enriching aspect was the fact that the book had already been made into a movie (directed by an Israeli) and our group turned out to be made up of readers only, readers and viewers and viewers only. The movie seems to be well known in Israel and Helen had actually been able to discuss it with some young Israelis she’d met that day. We were therefore able to juxtapose a number of points, particularly as there were some important differences. In the movie, Amin sees a video of his wife Sihem just before the attack, in which she seems to be having second thoughts, whereas in the book all he receives is a very short letter which seems to demonstrate her total commitment to the cause. There is also a significant discrepancy between the two endings: in the book he dies, in the movie he doesn’t. The major difference however was the fact that in the movie Sihem was a Christian, whereas in the book one always assumes, naturally enough, that she is a Muslim. But we all agreed that oppression, no matter what religion one belongs to, will create violence. As Cynthia experienced during her journey to the West Bank, everyone there identifies themselves as Palestinian and/or Arab and no one as Muslim/Christian/Jew – the unifying identification in this region is nationality, not religion. 

Here are a few of the other points raised:

• We all agreed that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict seems insoluble, and thought it unlikely that anything would be resolved, at least in our lifetimes. One of the strengths of the book was to see it through the eyes of an Arab living as a naturalized Israeli.

• But this fact actually puts him Amin in a frail position, of which he is probably not even aware: it means he has to excel in all domains, professionally and personally, to prove his integration within Israeli society (at the highest level, by moving in well-regarded social circles, living in a residential and expensive neighborhood, going on expensive holidays etc.). He is exposed to offenses, open and hidden, intended and not intended, which he has to accept with calm and understanding. And probably most important, it cuts him off from his own cultural background. One error on his side, even if it is not intended or of his own making, and it will be turned against him. For the Israeli world he is and always will be an Arab.

• Amin leaves his family to become a doctor. With this act he leaves behind not just his family but a whole tradition. Can this be considered as betrayal, even if he follows his father's wish? Or is this a simple loss of identity? A denial? He is not anymore a member of the Arab world, but has become a member of Israeli society. What place is there for him when he is rejected by the society he has tried to make his own?

• In order to try and retrace Sihem’s geographical and psychological itinerary, he has to go back to his own roots and question his own feelings and motivations too. In the end do we feel he has understood and even forgiven her? We mustn’t forget that his job is to save lives). And more widely, is there any way an act such as this can be justified? 

• Is it possible to really know somebody? Cynthia and Caroline felt there was nothing they didn’t know about their husbands. And yet Amin apparently did not really know his wife or at least not well enough – or was he not paying sufficient attention to her needs and real preoccupations?

• Does the fact that the suicide bomber here is a woman make a difference? What makes women become suicide bombers? Desperation? A desire to be equal to men? What about the old saying (thank you, Helen, for quoting your grandmother): “Women are there to clean up the mess when men have finished?” This led us to mention the first female police members in Afghanistan (who don’t wear a veil!) and to the fact that Israeli women have to do military service. Caroline recalled that one of the terrorists in the recent Nairobi shopping mall terrorist attack was a (British) woman and also pointed out that in the Moscow theatre hostage crisis, all the Chechen suicide bombers were women. In the case of the atrocities committed by Mohammed Merah in France in 2012 his mother was certainly aware, if not instrumental, in the killings (although in this case Maren wondered if she had any other choice). 

• We found that all the locations were very vividly described. Tel Aviv was shown as a modern and organized city where one can make a good and comfortable living, in contrast with the chaos reigning in Palestine, just the other side of the Wall. 

• And just for the record, Yasmina Khadra intends to stand as the next Algerian President (presumably under his real name, Mohammed Moulessehoul – his pseudonym is actually his wife’s name!).

All in all we had a very interesting and lively discussion! Thanks to Caroline for this choice!

Caroline & Cynthia

Amos Oz, A TALE OF LOVE AND DARKNESS

Many thanks to Amanda for having us over on Thursday 10th October.   The meeting was surely a success – good discussion, good food, good company !  :o)

Although most of us agreed upon having a hard time reading Amos Oz's A Tale of Love and Darkness, we found many positive aspects in the book. Most if not all of us found it a bit too long with many descriptions/repetitions which did not necessarily bring much added value. Consequently, not everybody made it to the end before the meeting. We also agreed that it would have been very helpful to have a family tree or some kind of index of the individuals, friends, friends-of-friends, relatives-of friends-of-relatives-of-neighbors…. even famous historical characters became confused.  We were often a bit lost with the appearances/disappearances/reappearances of many characters throughout the book. Many had read other books (novels) by Oz before and found them easier to read.  But overall, we agreed A Tale of Love and Darkness was a good choice, and we did appreciate the witty passages, wishing the author could have kept it up throughout the full length of the book.  Everyone found the subject matter extremely interesting, and it is obvious that the situation between Israel and Palestine never fails to stimulate debate and conversation.

While initially Amanda could not recall why she recommended the book, she was able to realize while discussing for a bit that she found the pioneer spirit of the first settlers quite interesting, and indeed it paralleled a bit the experience of North American pioneers. She also noted the relations between the heavily trained intellectuals from East Europe, and the strong, sun-tanned Israelis, born on their own land, building it up with their hands and singing. The contrast between the ones, having everything lost and barely able to support their families, and others, the dynamic pioneers, was interesting. It explained also the enormous disappointment and difficulty that the Eastern Europeans had assimilating and accepting (in the case of the mother, especially) that they had to start over, and that their education was necessarily not going to help them to succeed.

Michel noted how he got a real practical education from reading the book, because his travels to the region in recent times paint only one picture, with Palestinians often looking like victims. The book helped show some of the history which explains perhaps a bit of the Israeli point of view, which a snapshot of the current situation cannot accurately show us. One thing we all easily accepted which was clearly expressed in the book: The British do tend to make a bit of a mess of things when they leave their colonies behind.

Perhaps the strongest debate was on whether the mother or the father was worthy of sympathy. Most believed the mother was sympathetic but two of us thought the father, while annoying as hell, was indeed a sympathetic character and that the mother had to have known what she was getting herself into by marrying him in the first place. The story of the suicide itself was quite built up throughout the book and some found it deeply moving, others thought it was a bit anticlimactic. We also did not really find the narrator very likeable as a child. One could argue that everyone was suffering and struggling, trying his best, and therefore everyone was deserving of sympathy. 

Please feel free to forward us your comments as well !

Cynthia & Maren

Chimamanda Ngozie Adichie, HALF OF A YELLOW SUN

There were 6 of us meeting at Maren’s place on Thursday 12th for a delicious Croque-Monsieur night: Cynthia, Robin, Maren, Myriam, Michel and a newcomer, Florence.

After a round of chitchat related to the various experiences  of the bookclub members over the summer holidays the discussion turned to the book which brought us together that night. ‘Half of a Yellow Sun’ (HoaYS) by Nigerian female author Chimamanda Ngozie Adichie.

The background and reasons for my choice is the interest I grew in African literature when I moved to Angola for work some years ago and was trying to get a feel  of the place. I realised then how African literature was both flourishing and varied in style but also drastically underrepresented in the international literature market.

I first read HoaYS in that context, and was enchanted by the voice and personality of its young author, Chimamanda Adichie.  A woman I said I would love to meet (the bookclub assembly joined in and suggested we invite Chimamanda for tea and biscuits at a later bookclub session).

Most present that day said they enjoyed reading the novel, whilst Florence mentioned she remained neutral to it, not disliking it although it did not win her over either.

Michel mirrored the novel’s structure by launching the discussion on the central character of Ugwu. The novel starts with the arrival of Ugwu in his master’s house on the Nsukka campus, and he provides the pivot to the story, a sort of witness, as we follow his personal development throughout the novel. Robin mentioned how the reader grows fond of Ugwu and Cynthia asked our reactions to the ‘act’ (gangrape) that Ugwu is involved in during his military days.

We also discussed the characters of the twin sisters Olanna and Kainene, and agreed that their being twins did not bring anything to the novel, and the story may not be different had they been introduced as mere sisters rather than twins.

Maren pointed that the food/cooking and sex themes provide for important and lively scenes of the novel, and are written in a style that made them feel very natural and a ‘true part of life’. No unnecessary taboo and no spoiling the fun.

We also discussed how the author’s style was effective in keeping the reader going, although the atmosphere grows gloomier as the Biafran war progresses, by going back and forth between detailed descriptions and ordinary domestic activities. (Olanna who interrupts her introspection to blow the baby’s nose).

Robin had noted a few quotes she wished to share with us, one being a great illustration of the author’s feminist thinking. Interestingly  this feminist view was part of a line by the upcountry aunty, supposedly not literate and no suffragette herself, but an independent woman all the same.

The quote that Robin read to us is a perfect illustration of the feminist positions that Chimamanda developed in one of her several talks available on Youtube (‘We should all be feminists’. Accessible here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg3umXU_qWc).

We unfortunately did not have time to listen to the High Life music that Olanna is so fond of. So here is a link to try it out on Youtube : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOluwt5FSVM

>>> Also, it seems that a ‘HoaYS movie is expected to come out before the end of the year. We said we’d keep an eye out for it. Maybe a good reason for a bookclub outing ?

Myriam

More recommendations by Myriam:

Other recommended talks by Chimamanda: (yes, yes,  I got to select the book AND draft the Minutes, ah,ah ! So additional promotion for Chimamanda…)

‘The danger of a single story’ or why we should look for information beyond the basic clichés that we usually encounter.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Ihs241zeg

A talk on her recent book Americanah, where her life in the US, multicultural societies and the author’s obsession with hairstyle are being discussed.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n8LtRi2i8c



Thanks also to Michel for this summary and appreciation of "Half of a Yellow Sun":

Olanna is a perfect woman. Well educated, intelligent, " illogically pretty". Her romance with Odenigbo is an ideal one. They live  apart from the rest of the country, in  an oasis where theoreticians can talk, have drinks , imagine the world. Ugwu is fascinated by Master and Olanna. He wants to own them, almost worships them. Over the years he will start to teach, the way they do, and put together the book that should have been written by Richard. As this " blue eyed, fair haired" Englishman  deeply fell in love with Kainene, Olanna's twin sister, the loop is looped. Our characters are expected to be good : they like, admire, support and respect each others.

But the fairy tale cannot go on. Mother casts a spell over Olanna,  who " did not suck her mother's breasts".Odenigbo makes a village girl pregnant. Olanna leaves him, although she will come back later. But she also faults. Our characters are not ideal. They are fallible. Why did she choose the shy Richard to take revenge? It is her sister who is hurt:: " you fucked my lover" ! While until the end Olanna and Richard will share their guilt ,the determined and strong Kainene will surpass the hardship.

Are the characters  performing onstage? Each chapter begins with  the name of character and tells a bit of  that character's story. The narrative becomes chopped off  while the reader finds himself  ten years or so forward immersed  into the brutal racial war. Unbearable pictures of the war: the aunt's and uncle's corpses lying on the ground, the little girl's head in a calabash, or the body of the  house boy that continues to run  beheaded. The play becomes more confused. Olanna takes care of "Baby". Only later will we find out that Baby is Odenigbo's child and that Olanna has decided to keep the child.

But the war subdues everything. The family ( Odenigbo-Olanna-Baby- Ugwu) has got  to leave. This is the start of a lengthy exodus: Abba, Umuahia,  Orlu  . The war creates splits within the Odenigbo-Olanna couple: all Haussas are complicit in the massacre of the Igbos, including Olanna's former lover, an unacceptable proposition. Yet, the war also bring the characters more closely together.  Biafra, a new country is born. They, as all Igbos, strongly believe in Biafra's victory against the Nigerian vandals.

During the first times of the war, enthralled by their credo, our heroes remain   knit together. Odenigbo is active with Biafran organisations. He goes in the interior to educate the people. Olanna teaches the children. Kainene urges Richard to write press articles to support Biafra. Ugwu also teaches . Later he will start to write  " The world was silent ...". Eventually,Olanna marries Odenigbo. Yet the hardships of the war end up  fragmenting  the couple. When his mother is killed, Odenigbo becomes depressed, openly alcoholic. Ultimately he is likely to have slept with a refugee girl. Olanna will not pardon, keep him aloof. Their love story is dead, as many Biafrans are dead.

Not only death is around but  also  hatred ( "All Igbo women deserve to be raped") while children are starving. Enrolled by force in the Biafran army, Ugwu is forced to rape a Biafran girl. He will be haunted by "the hate in her eyes as she lay on her back on the dirty floor".  Olanna  has no more  food for Baby. Kainene decides to trade with the ennemy to buy protein tablets for Baby. She will not come back. Richard will not console himself. And, although the war is over, Olanna can only keep crying, in Odenigbo's arms eventually.

Booth Tarkington, ALICE ADAMS

Rather than creating a new post, I'll just update the pre-meeting one:

Booth Tarkington is a favorite of mine. He really seems to have fallen out of currency, so I’m always happy to introduce him to new readers. He was a popular and prolific author in the first half of the 20th century, winning the Pulitzer twice, for THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS and ALICE ADAMS. His PENROD books, about a pre-WWI boyhood, used to be standard children’s literature (although their language and style, not to mention unreconstructed racial attitudes, make them adults-only fare today).

I’m fascinated by people’s reaction to Alice Adams herself – people leap to attack or defend her as a person, rather than a character in a book. Always fun at a roundtable!

Tarkington is a very cinematic writer – although he didn’t write directly for the screen, and isn’t averse to entering characters’ minds, he does tend to give you the story in actions and images, e.g. Alice’s violets. He may well be best known today as the author of the source novel for Orson Welles’s mutilated masterpiece THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS. The 1935 film adaptation of ALICE ADAMS is very interesting (aside from perfect casting of Katherine Hepburn and a great Hattie McDaniel cameo) because it follows the book faithfully up to the very end, then slaps on a Hollywood ending (as opposed to the much more interesting and cinematic ending of the book) at the last minute. Perhaps a screening is in order?

Tarkington is great on environments – especially in AMBERSONS, but also here, he shows/tells how a city changes over the years, how neighborhoods come down in the world building by building, how the city spreads into the surrounding country. (Movies again: I’d be fascinated to see how this could be done with today’s CGI.) He’s also a regionalist – while the term wasn’t invented then, it’s nice to have a story set in “flyover country.”

Isn’t it amazing to think that ALICE ADAMS and THE GREAT GATSBY were written and set so few years apart? They’re both about strivers reinventing themselves, but what a difference!

Poor Alice Adams didn’t get much love from those assembled – nor did ALICE ADAMS. (I’ve started reading HALF OF A YELLOW SUN, and I admit the contrast was jarring.) Michel made an interesting comparison to Austen, what with the fluttering mother and the push to advantageous matrimony, while pointing out the very American “money is family” motif. Phoebe went on at length about the weird jester/truthteller/Greek chorus role played by “colored” [very much sic] characters in Tarkington’s works.

Esprit d’escalier (also known as “she who writes the minutes gets the last word”) here, my apologies:  there was fairly heated argument over Alice’s refusal to acknowledge that she did NOT have a place in the world she wanted to belong to, together with thundering condemnation of her way of embroidering the truth. I’m reminded of the reaction to Renée in LA CUREE – there seems to be an expectation that the protagonist obtain, absolutely ex nihilo, standards and resources belonging to our world rather than hers. All responsibility is placed on her shoulders, with no thought given to the shaping force of environment. Don’t forget that Alice Adams is 22 – effectively 18, since she hasn’t gone to college and has pretty much been in suspended animation since she left high school. (Department of “How far have we come, really?”: Has anyone seen FRANCES HA, whose protagonist is 27 and lives in NYC in the 21st century?) To the Comments for ripostes!

Dépit d’escalier, no apologies: Are you nuts? Frank Dowling is horrible.

                                                                                                                                      -- Phoebe