Where is LOVE IN THE TIME OF CHOLERA set?

Dear All,

In response to our discussion this evening on where exactly Love in the Time of Cholera is set, I think the city is based on Cartagena and Baranquilla, cities on the Colombian carribean coast. As for the river Magdalena, it's the river that has its mouth on this coast and comes from the south. Attached is a photo of a boat I saw last year on the river Magdalena, from which you can make up your own minds as to whether you think the boats have changed much in the last century.

Regards,
Clare

(c) Clare Pearson

Gabriel Garcia Marquez, LOVE IN THE TIME OF CHOLERA

We met at Juanchito - a proposal of Caroline (Thank you again!), and I think nobody was disappointed by the tasty and copious dishes we were served.

The seven of us (Caroline, Cynthia, Clare, Michel, Mark, Maren and Robin) mostly liked, if not to say, loved the book. Only Clare was hesitating if she likes in general books which give away the end at the very beginning. In the end she gave in to the general very positive reception of the book and showed thumbs up. The only criticism heard concerned the structure of the book. The very long chapters were not very much appreciated for several reasons.

Some interesting points came up during the discussion, only to mention some here:

The setting: We could not find a compromise on where exactly the story is taking place. 

The setting in time was also somewhat difficult to grasp for Maren. The book covers a large period during which many technical changes introduced into society, but socially it does not change that much. Old fortunes are mentioned, founded during the exploration era and which are now fading or the use of grandma's petticoats, balls, life as well in cities as on haziendas give a strange mixture with travels in baloons and electricity.  

• Cynthia found an article stating that the city very closely resembled Cartagena, and that it took place 1880-1930
  
• Also remarkable were the very vivid descriptions of colours and odours; one could almost see and smell, feel like being there. But, besides the famous eggplant, there was not much about food or cooking in the book.
  
• When mentioning the humour present everywhere, even if sometimes subtle, everybody started citing its favourite passages. It was really something palpable for everybody.
  
• The names of the people were somewhat funny or at least unusual. To give some examples: Transito, the pope's names, even Florentino sounds unsual to Westerner's ears.
  
• We didn't find the explanation why Fermina Daza is called throughout the book by her maiden's name, very well knowing that the naming conventions in hispanic countries are complicated (combination of parent's names which change at mariage).
  
• Clare reminded as that in Spanish the word "Cholera" stands for the disease and for "anger". So how to understand the book when translating the title as "Love in the Times of Anger"? Or should love be considered as a kind of incurable disease?
  
• The most discussed character was Florentino. And this not out of sympathy but he was the most interesting. Although his saintly love for Fermina, he provoked also bad things for his acquaintances. Maybe he could be understood as a victim of love. But how sane is to be obsessed with one single woman over decades and nevertheless consume women lightheartedly through all the years? And speaking of which: the sanitary disaster of STDs does not seem to have a big impact on Florentino, although Caroline deciphered the mention of 5 different incidents. Which seems not too bad for 622 documented contacts over the 50 years.
  
• What's the moral to take from the book, asked Clare. Or how Maren put it: Meandering all the time amongst the different lifes, where does it go to in the end?
  Not much of an answer was found to it, except eventually by Cynthia, who mentioned the difficulties to find the balance between what one desires and to be content with what one has - if ever such a balance is achievable / attainable.

 

 Maren & Cynthia

J.M.G. LeClezio, DESERT

First things first: the venue. Riad Nejma was quite a luxurious setting for the meeting, and for sure no one left hungry. Definitely a six-thumbs-up rating, and thanks to Caroline for the suggestion. And speaking of six, we were Caroline, Robin, Michel, Clare, Mark, Cynthia.

Michel recommended Desert, by J.M.G. Leclezio when we were discussing Nobel prize winners in autumn. He found the writing beautiful and poetic, having read it in French twice and once in English. His concern about whether the English translation was able to capture the language’s beauty was debated throughout the evening. Caroline, who very much appreciates Leclezio, also found the language beautiful, but did not think this was his very best novel. Robin enjoyed the book but did not think the English translation was very beautiful, as the language seemed flat to her and noted that he often reused the same word several times in the same description. She did, however, think many of the descriptions were wonderful (e.g., the boy who died running from the police after stealing from cars). Clare took on the challenge of the French version and absolutely agreed that the language was very poetic. Mark initially found it difficult to get into the book, then felt the stories began to carry themselves, making the reader feel as if he were with the characters in the two main story lines.  Essentially that the writing made the reader feel what the characters felt, and gave a strong appreciation of people living under that type of stress.  He did believe that the English translation maintained a good degree of the beauty of the language (e.g., the blind warrior walking away from the sheik after having been “cured”). Cynthia felt that the English version was perhaps longer than it needed to be (perhaps because of the translation) but that it was extremely well done, with vivid descriptions of the lives of everyone in both stories. And yes, she was thirsty reading the desert stories!

Regarding the two intertwined stories, we were not sure precisely how they were related. It was stated that Lalla was a descendent of the blue men, but how? Was it the sheik’s wife, also named Lalla, who was the connection? Also it bears noting that there were two confusing elements, perhaps the price one pays for the poetry. First, what was the relationship between Nour and the sheik? And his father? We felt it was not clear whom Nour was following early on in the book. Secondly, the notion of time seemed a bit off. The sudden move of Lalla to Marseille, the aunt already being established there, Lalla’s mastery of French and her subsequent return all took place within 9 months?! That didn’t seem realistic to most of us.

Indeed more than the words were different between the two translations; even the physical page layout was different. In the French version, one story had the narrower column on the page and the other the full page. The English version presented the two stories identically on the page.  I’m not sure if this would have made a difference had we known.

The setting and the era in history was also an interesting part of the discussion, and some related movies/exhibitions were suggested:

• Suggested movies
  The Wind and the Lion (Sean Connery/Candace Bergen) and
  Fort Saganne (Gerard Depardieu/Catherine Deneuve)

• Suggested exhibition
  Indigo exhibition in Paris at the library:  http://www.paris-bibliotheques.org/expositions/indigo/

Cynthia

 

Joan Didion, A BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER

Thank you for this enjoyable meeting! The five of us (Catherine, Clare, Robin, Michel and Maren) discussed Joan Didion's A BOOK OF COMMON  PRAYER in the as always welcoming "Les Editeurs".

The appreciation of writing and content was not shared equally. While Catherine and Robin were entirely taken in (both long time fans of Joan Didion, Robin even drew up a family tree for the Mendanas), Michel liked the book in general, but not especially the writing. And Maren appreciated the writing, but not what it said. Clare will decide when she has finished the book :-)

The writing was compared and related to Philip Roth, and this not only because of the book's theme (see American Pastoral, on the agenda in January 2014), but also in its form. Robin admired her ability to master both, being short and poignant as well as composing descriptive but comprehensible sentences long as a paragraph.

Apparently it is not easy to feel connected with any of the book's characters. Maybe some of us could have some sympathy with the narrator, Grace and Charlotte's second husband, Leonard. But in general the reader stayed in a position similar to Grace's: An observer and outsider.
Of course the main caracter, Charlotte, was most discussed. The ethereal woman who knows how to break a chicken's neck with bare hands. A character difficult to fathom for Maren, who lacks the experience of diplomatic cocktail parties and constant travellers, a world rich in "Charlottes" according to Catherine. Even more mysterious: Grace. What draws her to Charlotte? And why does she want to be a witness?

Robin shared many details about Joan Didion's life and from there we drifted into politics, its actors in history and today, English and American political commentators - in short: a real crash course for non-native English speakers! Thank you!

Maren

Elena Ferrante, MY BRILLIANT FRIEND

Thank you for the wonderful meeting last Thursday in Geoffroy L'Olive's "pizza paradise"... ;-)
This time we were six plus one, after Helen's mystery star guest entry later in the evening.

There were loads of praise for the book. And this to a point that those who did not read it expressed their intention to read it even after the book club. Amanda read it twice, and then the full trilogy; Michel wants to read it again; Cynthia herself and according to her report also Catherine are longing for the second book - so Elena Ferrente has definetly some fans in our book club. But not only: Caroline, who shortly before the meeting sent her comments by email, didn't like it that much (see her arguments in the message which will be put on the blog as
comments - maybe we can have a discussion in the blog then?).

The book was noted by Amanda as being interesting, an easy read, yet well-done, although Michel and Maren admitted to have sometimes difficulties to follow the various characters.

Different psychological aspects mentioned in the book marked the readers: the "dissolving margins" and the very detailed childhood memories which allow to go back to one's own thinking of that time. Also the knowledge and authentic description of the changes from girl to woman made us women agree that the author cannot be a man despite the ongoing speculations because of her secretiveness. But we await the final information on the author¹s real identity.

The secrecy of the author brought up also some questions about how much of her description of life in Naples is fiction or not. Our own travel impressions mingled with the imaginary
impression of an Italian city in the 50s. Naples is described as being a very poor, very violent place, even among loved ones and particularly in the 50s. Recall the gunfire after the fireworks.

We discussed the nature of the plebs, and how if you don¹t have anyone really interested in your life you cannot easily escape a life of poverty/lack of opportunity.  We drew parallels to today¹s world not being much different, but also contrasted the theoretical (yet more difficult to achieve lately) American dream vs. the French notion that if you are born poor/uneducated you are not going to gain respect even after you attend a grande école. Also we noted that in this culture
women had to be protected as property, young men would become violent just to protect their honor.

Cynthia & Maren

 

Timothy Mo, THE REDUNDANCY OF COURAGE

While Clare’s fabulous meeting minutes in November have no doubt raised the bar, we’re back to reality without her at the keyboard.  Inspired by Clare, I will include a note on the restaurant, Indonesia.  Most quite enjoyed the food, good and efficient service, great location, no grumblings over the prices.   And it could not have been a more appropriate venue considering the book in question, Timothy Mo’s The Redundancy of Courage.

We were 9 at the meeting:  Amanda, Caroline, Catherine (new joiner from Cynthia’s other dying book club), Clare, Michel, Mark, Robin, Maren, Cynthia.   Relatively strong opinions evenly divided:  4 of us loved the book, and 4 had varying reasons for not enjoying it. (one did not read it, but thankfully joined us anyway).  To summarize:

Robin, who recommended the book, found it well-written and particularly liked the way Mo was able to describe the details of the war — for example, how to construct and install the mines.  Ironically, this is what both Maren, (who couldn’t finish the entire book) and Caroline both disliked.  Caroline particularly thought it dragged on and on during the war scenes and needed better editing.  Maren did not see the point in all the description.  Cynthia, one of the big fans of the novel, mentioned originally not understanding why the war scenes were so long but ultimately thought they were a vehicle to further develop the characters in the book.  Catherine, who deserves extra credit for having found out about the meeting less than a week before, happened to have read most of Timothy Mo’s work while living in Hong Kong, and was also a big fan.   Only Robin has read more of his books than Catherine, and both agreed that this was his best for having captured so well the moment in history, the people, the culture, etc.

Clare did not dislike the book, but found it gruesomely real enough to have a hard time with the subject matter.   Michel seemed just fed up with the negativity, also commenting more on the subject matter being depressing, than the quality of the book.  Mark — who shares an apartment with the author of these minutes — could not stop singing the praises of this book the entire time he was reading it, yet at the meeting was only remembered for having said at one point, “Ah, yes, I really enjoyed it.”  One suspects this may have something to do with Clare showing an interest in horses, which of course means that Mark is not allowed to sit next to Clare at the next meeting.  This now makes two people not allowed to sit next to Mark, the other being Robin, because the two of them tend to discuss war books/movies all through the meetings.  Which, incidentally, is how we wound up with this selection for December, chosen at the October meeting.    So perhaps in the end it isn’t such a bad thing letting them sit together, as it turned out to be a very good book discussion, indeed.  Bravo, Robin.

One may have gathered by now that Amanda was the attendee who had not read the book, and it is interesting to note that she arrived when there were mostly fans of the book discussing it and had asked to borrow it to read it over Christmas break.  As the discussion went on, however, she realized it would not be a light holiday read and decided against it.  Further proof that we were a very evenly divided group!

Cynthia

Ernest Hemingway, A MOVEABLE FEAST

LOCATION:   L'epoque bistro, 81 rue Cardinal Lemoine,   
                      opposite number 74 where Hemingway lived for just over a year in Paris
MEAL:           Fast service, well priced ice cream, reasonable wine selection

BOOK CRITIQUE:
There were mixed reviews of the book. Some found it slightly depressing, that Hemingway didn’t appreciate his good fortune to be able to sit in cafés, drink some wine, write and meet fellow writers and artists such as Scott Fitzgerald, Gertrude Stein, Picasso. Hemingway appeared rather spoilt in his attitude to his life in Paris and Michel thought that the ‘I want, I get’ attitude seemed to dominate. To quote Cynthia; “what a bunch of spoilt brats!” Hemingway had inherited some money, didn’t have to earn money immediately but this lucky period (monetary wise) doesn’t come across in the book. Michel thought that wine and food dominated the book and this wasn’t always so positive.

Others thought that the book had humour in it. Maren really liked the humour that came across in certain passages, such as the description of the child in the bar. Hemingway was positive about Paris, for example his description of him wanting to enjoy the light in the café. Megan liked his attention to detail in his descriptions of places in Paris which makes Paris beautiful. Beautiful being a frequently used word by Hemingway in this book.  He seems to like to use beautiful to describe things, places and people.

Robin introduced the concept that Hemingway invented linear prose, writing in a style which is straight to the point. Hemingway wrote about what he knew about, unlike writers like Annie Proulx who likes to write about things she doesn’t know about. Robin liked the story of the trip from Lyon to Paris because it was not really a story in itself but a great anecdote. Robin and Cynthia thought there were some very good portraits of people, especially the ones of Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald.

Other points of discussion about the book were that it was a little haphazard, the stories didn’t really follow on. Clare said that she liked more guidance in books for things to follow on and hadn’t found it in this book. Megan said that, in contrast to this book, Alice Munro in her collections of short stories is very good at having recurring characters that link the stories together more. Michel said that for all Hemingway’s love of women in life he doesn’t write about them too much in this book. Gertrude Stein is different because she couldn’t be considered as a possible conquest for Hemingway. Clare raised the point as to whether the recurring theme of hunger in the book was a metaphor for hunger in other areas of Hemingway’s life, not just food.

Cynthia had read the book twice. The first time, she thought; “Wow, a great book” and then rereading it a year ago, thought quite differently. We concluded that thoughts on books can depend alot on when you read them.

In conjunction with A Moveable Feast some people had also read “The Paris Wife” and seemed to have more of an insight into Hemingway’s time in Paris; his love for his first wife, his affairs, the true financial situation of the Hemingways.

Clare

Andrei Makine, LE TESTAMENT FRANCAIS / DREAMS OF MY RUSSIAN SUMMERS

Well, the fireplace wasn't lit up this time at the Auberge du Clou when the six of us (Cynthia, Marc, Robin, Michel, Caroline and Maren) gathered for Andrei Makine's LE TESTAMENT FRANCAIS / DREAMS OF MY RUSSIAN SUMMERS. On the contrary, there were even windows open to let in the tender late summer / early October breeze…

As most of us are not living in their native country a very obvious question was if we could relate to the experience of Alyosha - being stuck in between of two worlds, not belonging to one or another and being alienated to both. Well, we didn't share this exact experience. Apparently it makes a difference having well grown up in and identifying with one country and leaving it later on from feeling alienated in the very beginning. What's different now for some of us is that we are just feeling like visitors when we travel back to our home country.

Another discussion point was about the writing. There were different opinions: From enjoying it to not enjoying it to "sounds still like another Russian author" (what he is indeed, not only in style, but it seems also in soul - even if he is writing in French).  We had both, readers of the French original and the English translation, and wondered if the translation was in for this difference because readers of the English translation enjoyed it more.  While all agreed that he did sound like he was trying to imitate the historical Russian authors, the readers of the French translation felt that he was not entirely successful.  

We talked about the irritating jumps. There were several of those, which contributed for Caroline to the feeling that the characters were not very well drawn, or at least incomplete.

There might have been quite some more points to discuss, but the discussion on siege books took all over  – our December book was amongst them! And, by the way, we learned that Stalingrad is today called Volgograd. We also tried to decide if LE TESTAMENT FRANCAIS would make a good movie, but thought it would be quite huge and expensive, given the time span / number of casts, sets, etc. We did, though, imagine the Russian scenes being somewhat like Dr Zhivago, and indeed all agreed that Julie Christie was still lovely !  :o)

We talked about a lot of books which one reads but does not consider suitable for a book club. So the idea was born to display them on the blog. Have a look: There's a new page allowing you to post all the books you liked and would like to propose to other readers. Maybe with a short comment?

Maren & Cynthia

John Williams, STONER

After the mandatory update on past travels/vacations and future plans, Caroline wondered if there would be sufficient material to discuss John William's STONER, which all three of us enjoyed. An unfounded fear, as was revealed throughout the evening. 
Amongst the discussed topics:
We admired how beautifully it was written; not a word too much, everything in its right place; the work of an excellent editor and the result of the fact that John Williams was a literary scholar? 
Especially the parts when Katherine and Stoner have to quit and his dying scene were mentioned as very touching. John Williams succeeds in bringing the reader emotionally close to Stoner. All of us felt Stoner’s wish for personal happiness and being helpless about his fights and losses. Caroline and Maren admitted an impulse to shake Stoner at times because he had a tendency to let things wash over him.   
Was he a courageous man? Although he actually does not defy social norms in general, Robin and Maren defended that he is a courageous man following his convictions where he is able to – not enlisting in the First World War was at that time a strong personal decision. Caroline was not altogether sure that his refusal to enlist stemmed from courage, given his reaction when his students enlisted during the Second World War, which was primarily one of irritation.
We talked about Stoner's passion: literature, and not teaching - as we found out. 
We couldn't agree entirely on Stoner's responsibility in the feud with Lomax: Caroline held him also partly responsible for the enmity on account of his stubbornness, while Maren defended his fight for the only passion which never betrayed him. 
His descriptions of academic life, a closed world with feuds, ambitions and rivalries carried on over decades is entirely believable (in Robin’s experience).
There was also a question of possible abuse in Edith's early life, thinking of her reaction to her father's death (she burns everything which reminds her of him). Or was it just that she holds his professional failures - and thus himself - responsible for her mismatched marriage? We were wondering about this marriage and how it survived. 
Apparently the book is an editorial phenomenon: almost entirely ignored when it was first published, it seems to be widely read now, especially in Europe. Is this because Stoner is a European character more than American? We didn't come to a conclusion on that question.

Maren, Robin, Caroline

Edith Wharton, THE AGE OF INNOCENCE

The weather outside was frightful – reminiscent of our ODD WOMEN July meeting, similarly chill and drippy – but Amanda’s hôtel privé was, as usual, delightful. She was hostess to Cynthia and Mark, Michel, Maren, and Phoebe for a discussion of Edith Wharton’s THE AGE OF INNOCENCE.

The verdict on the book was five enthusiastic thumbs up, with only Mark, who simply couldn’t get into it, abstaining. (He seemed abashed and said he might give it another try.) As usual, I missed a lot of points in the crisscrossing discussion, so please use the comments to fill in.

 We loved the detail (Phoebe noting that it was the sort of book it’s fun to read with Google open to look up furniture, clothing, and painters as they’re mentioned – her new favorite is Carolus Duran). Cynthia was especially fond of the humor as Wharton looked back on the angels-on-a-pin New York society of the 1870s. We remarked on how little her protagonists had to do – a point underlined by Wharton in contrasting it with the society of only thirty years later. Maren reminded us of those invisible workers who made it possible for the protagonists to lead their unoccupied lives. The diminuendo ending reminded Michel of Flaubert’s EDUCATION SENTIMENTALE.

This opened the floodgates to all sorts of possibilities for future selections – yes, EDUCATION SENTIMENTALE and MADAME BOVARY, but also Wharton’s friend Henry James and PORTRAIT OF A LADY, THE WINGS OF THE DOVE, THE TURN OF THE SCREW … reflect, select, and pick your months, please !

 We’ll be taking August off and resuming in September with John Williams’ STONER.

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