My 20 books

I wanted to read this semester. And I did.

I read 20 books start to finish on this tour. Some of them I had read before. The majority, however, were first-timers. The only requirement was reading all the way through--no skimming.

I don't know how you feel when you finish a book, but I want to talk about it. If I hated it, I want to say so. If I loved it, I want to say so. What I require (or long for) is someone who, even if they have not read the book, is knowledgeable enough about books to listen to what I thought. They can argue with me, or agree with me I don't care which.

There wasn't anyone like that on my trip, so I forced myself to write. I started all of these on the trip, and finished some of them on the trip and some after.

Here are my 20 short essays (in order of reading) on what I read and what I thought. Enjoy.

1. "The Illustrated Man" Ray Bradbury

My previous knowledge of Bradbury was only "Fahrenheit 451". Oh, and one other essay on how public schools were "Fahrenheit 451" even while they were reading it.

If you are unfamiliar with the title, it's because it's a collection of his futuristic sci-fi short stories.

I don't care for sci-fi much. It's not a lesser genre--I know that. It's just a personality thing. The present and I are content. The future and I will be content only when it becomes the present.

These were good though. I was ready to leave the future before I finished the book, but if that was because they were starting to sound alike, or because I just don't like sci-fi that much is something I don't think I'll ever know.

My favorite was the 1st and I think the 7th. I would re-read some of them certainly, but others I am content to leave (how I usually feel about most short-story sets) where they belong--comfortably in the future.

2. "Welcome to the Monkey House" Kurt Vonnegut

This is a collection of Vonnegut's short stories. It was my first experience with Vonnegut, and I can assure you I will return.

I had always heard there was a reason people reacted strongly against the actual short story "Welcome to the Monkey House", but when I read it, it was shockingly easy to see why.

I loved his language--his crisp short words. And I was startled by the beauty of his love story about him and his wife. You know it's a good author when you burst out laughing in his forward.

I re-read them again (my two favorites) when I got home. I wanted to see if it was just my then-current situation that made me enjoy them so much. Sometimes people have that strange desire: to make everything they read be about them--an unwise and ultimately useless decision. But when I re-read them again, I realized this was quality writing.

I'm going back to Vonnegut--you couldn't keep me away. I've heard his novels sound different than his short stories. I don't know why. Why mess with sarcastic random perfection?

3. "The Age of Innocence" Edith Wharton

Oh, I loved this book.Wharton is a great writer, and she contrived some fascinating character's for this book.

The Countess:
She's painted so tragically. The horrible marriage, the world-weary and yet still hopeful, the loyalty to those who feel no loyalty towards her, the fateful love, and the fighting to survive in her world.

May:
She's innocent. She's naive. She's sheltered. She's the perfect contrast to The Countess. You feel helpless when you see her. She was created to live in one form of society, and is unable to function anywhere else. And yet, that helpless, innocent girl knows how to do one thing--and she knows how to do it well.

Newland Archer:
What a fascinating character! He's choosing an innocent wife because he wants to open her eyes to the greater, deeper and broader things of life. He, in essence, wants to change her to be as wise as he is. He knows there's more than what she's been told her whole life, and he wants to show it to her. He knows his society does not believe in the equality of men and women. He wants to show May women should have equality starting with her in their marriage. And yet, the idea of the equality of men and women was not even his own--an important realization.
His reaction to The Countess and their subsequent relationship is fascinating, passionate, and irresistible. And his greatest strength turns out to be, of course, his greatest weakness.

We have currently two views on late Victorian/Early American society.

1: They were all frigid and Protestant

2: They were all made to look frigid by their society, but were all at heart hot-blooded, passionate bodice-rippers.

This book shows neither of those. All it shows are humans with feelings, beliefs, and ideals who see the flaws in their society and want to change it.

The whole "change" issue is one we'll certainly be revisiting in-depth in the future.

4. "A Room with a View" E.M. Forester

This was the most delightful book. I think delightful is probably the best term. I fell utterly in love with this book, and want to read it again. The prose was perfect and brilliant. I read every single word. This book made me long to know more about art, books and music so I could laugh even harder at everything Forester was making fun of.

I loved these characters, and Cecil is a charm unlike any other.

Also, who knew chapter titles could be so wonderful?

5. "Ordinary People" Judith Guest

Can you scream depression any louder? Guest looks at a middle-class family whose lives are torn apart by a freak accident. The brother, father and mother all learn to deal with the aftermath of the accident, and what their subsequent relationships to each other are now.

Conrad, Calvin and Beth are all characters with which we feel drawn too. You can relate to a certain aspect of how each feels grief, and how each either reaches out, or pushes away.

The book takes turns telling the story from either Conrad, Calvin or Beth's viewpoint.

The psychiatrist does play a role, but not as vital as I was expecting. He serves only as a impetus to get the other characters to act truthfully.

Another interesting topic was how each character had a different "truth" about the accident, and how they were holding the other characters responsible for their actions because of their belief in that truth. It followed through better than I thought it could.

I enjoyed the book. I wouldn't read it again, but I enjoyed it.

6. "The Giver" Lois Lowry

If you want an easy way to start reading dystopia's, "The Giver" is the way to go.

Written from a child's perspective, "The Giver" follows Jonas as he turns the all-important 12 when he will receive his job for the rest of his life. He is given the job "Receiver of Memory" the one who learns from the giver all there is to know about life outside the colony.

Once Jonas has learned, he must choose what to do with this knowledge that others cannot and do not have.

I read this out loud to my group. They enjoyed it. There are logical leaps in the story, but I was willing to overlook them.

As dystopia's go, it's certainly not the best. As children's books go, there's better out there. But for people who have never considered a dystopian lifestyle, this is an easy way to get them started.

7. "The Prisoner of Zenda" Anthony Hope

I read this in one sitting, and found it to be utterly enjoyable. The quick pace, witty phrases, over-the-top setting, and hopeless and forbidden love all serve to make the story an easy read.

Rudolf was funny. Seriously funny.

8. "The Chosen" Chaim Potok

I'm not sure what I expected when I sat down to read "The Chosen". I wish I could go back in time, figure out what I was thinking it would be, write it down, and then start the book for the first time. Whatever I expected it was certainly not what I got.

The story is written from Reuven Malter's perspective. He is the son of a teacher and scholar of the modern methods of Judaism. Danny, the boy who becomes his friend, is the son of the Hasidic rabbi.

Jewish culture has never been a drawing point for me. I understand the differences between Orthodox Jews and Hasidic Jews, but I've never felt drawn to learn more about either group. This book made me want to know more.

The book was constantly surprising, and yet still comfortable. It starts simply, with the baseball game, but progresses with such sure-footedness. I always felt as if the book knew exactly where it was going, and was going to get there safely. I had complete trust in the author. To put it simply, this book had purpose.

The scene where Reuven meets Danny's father, Rev. Issac Saunders, is incredible. Also, when Reuven is privileged enough to see Reb Saunders "tutor" his son in the theology of Hasidism. I remember reading the book voraciously, trying to understand why Reb Saunders raised his son "in silence", and when I reached the argument being blown away by how beautiful and terrible it all was.

As characters go there are few, but each one is painted so specifically they fill every part of the story.

Reuven as he struggles with choosing his life path, being a friend, respecting and learning from his father, and being confused by Reb Saunders. Reuven learns important lessons about friendship (as do they all) but his, I think, were the most deeply felt.

Danny as the utter genius. His discovery of Freud, his ravenous reading of anything in the public library, his meeting of a man who assists him in his choices, his struggle to respect and love his father, all while not understanding. Danny's struggle is obviously whether he must take the path his father has chosen for him. Not a new plot device, by any means, but one that works better than I've ever seen it done before.

David Malter as the scholar. The one who wants his son Reuven to succeed in whatever he chooses. The "unorthodox and modern" viewpoints which end up destroying his son's friendship. His reaching out to Danny in a way that both Reuven and Danny are surprised by. But his subtle and unbreakable knowledge about what both Reuven and Danny need.

And Reb Saunders as the unlikable, non-understandable, and unwilling father of Danny.
He is a character to fear, but also to respect. You must respect a character who is thoughtful. And when he finally chooses to make everything clear, you realize he went about it the only way he knew how, and you still continue to respect. In the end, you feel for him in a way you never thought possible.

I want to read it again. If only to see what I think now that I have expectations--I have a feeling I won't be let down.

9. "Strong Poison" Dorothy Sayers

Note: Someday, I won't have a choice, and all my feelings about Sayers, Peter and Harriet will come spilling forth. But it is not this day--here is a very brief overview of four of the greatest books you will ever read and the greatest couple I've ever seen.

The perfect beginning. You don't read these for the mysteries--you read them for those two special people. An attraction which could so easily been looked over is begun and you begin to see a glimmer of something very wonderful.

10. "Have His Carcase" Dorothy Sayers

A vastly important interlude. Their one argument makes all the code-breaking and tide time tables worth it. I re-read the argument three times before I went on, and I still didn't have enough of it. I don't think I ever will. It makes absolute perfect sense. The dress like claret is pretty good too.

11. "Gaudy Night" Dorothy Sayers

The stunning conclusion. I mean this with every fiber of my being: I will never get over the perfectness of this book. I can't describe it because there aren't words. All I can say is it's perfect. And I can't give you lines because there are far too many. All I can say is it's perfect.

12. "Busmann's Honeymoon" Dorothy Sayers

The aftermath. You learn important things about each of them. But, if you're honest with yourself, you don't need this book. They deal with their problems with the character they've both displayed in the previous books. But we expected nothing less from them.

13. "Dadddy Long-Legs" Jean Webster

I hope everyone at some point in their life can take the 45 minutes required to read this novel, and sit down and read it. Yes, you know what's going to happen. But this book does it well. From the drawings, to the letters, to the very end, you can't help but smile.

14. "Dear Enemy" Jean Webster

This was the second time I read "Dear Enemy" and it will probably be the last. While I love "Daddy Long-Legs" and will be quite happy to read it again in future years, I was left unimpressed by "Dear Enemy". I'm not sure why. I know it is some people's favorite of the two, but I would take Jervis any day.

It's not bad writing. It's just not as good as DLL.

15. "All the Kings Men" Robert Penn Warren

This is a well-written book. Don't plan to read it by splitting it up into chapters. There are few chapters and tons of pages. It is completely worth the time.

The classic film chooses to focus on a corrupt politician. I foolishly thought the book would do the same.

I thought Stark, the dirty politician, had to be the focus of the story. Obviously, Stark would be seen through another pair of eyes--probably the protagonist, Jack Burden, who would be, by the end, disillusioned as to the state of American politics.
We've all read that book and seen that movie before. I just thought this was the first one to do it well.

What shocked me is Stark isn't the story--he's nowhere near the story. He's simply a figurehead to showcase Burden's corruption. He's a symbol for how Burden has had to forgo morals to work for Stark. And how Burden's still very absolute morals--his questioning for truth, his personal issues against the governor, his in with Anne, Adam and Tiny--can survive while working for Stark.

That's the story--not how low Stark can go, not how betrayed Burden can be, not how gullible people can be, but how floundering Jack can get, how disgusting a life set on one earthly ambition is, and ultimately how painful the absence of right truth (confusing phrase I know, but read the book) can be. That's what it's about.

How did all the filmmakers get it wrong? How did they come away from that book seeing only Stark? How can they believe Stark is the main character? All I can see is Burden, Irwin, The Young Executive, Adam disillusioned, and Anne, Burden standing between Anne, Stark and Lucy, Stark and Sadie, Burden with Irwin, Burden with Adam, Burden with Anne, and Stark and Burden over and over and over again.

I highly recommend this book.

16. "Sunday's at Tiffany's" James Patterson

There's no excuse for this book being on this list. Just look at what it's sandwiched in between. I am currently bowing my head in shame. See we were in a home, and I had nothing to do, and I'll read anything, and...never mind I know there's no excuse.

A girl on our team brought it and proclaimed it wonderful. I read it and am proclaiming it worthless.

James Patterson and I don't have much chance of ever being friends. Seriously? An imaginary childhood friend--that's so lame it's sad.

I don't apologize though for reading the Discussion Questions in the back. I could never apologize for something that brought me such joy.

17. "Brideshead Revisited" Evelyn Waugh

So, this was a very well-written book. My favorite part is the subtitle
"The Sacred and Profane Memories of Captain Charles Ryder". It made me laugh.

The writing is superb. Waugh, apparently, hated the book after he wrote it, but I can't understand why.

And yes, I can see where everyone freaks out about Sebastian Flyte. I personally feel you should be a little more concerned with Anthony.

My favorite part was when Rex, Julia's soon-to-be husband, tries to convert to Catholicism. Waugh was definitely a Catholic, and you can see him trying to be slightly didactic in his explanations of this deeply Catholic family. Rex comes in and makes a mockery of his catechism lessons with Cordelia's help.

Julia and Rex's end comes unsurprisingly. And Ryder and Julia follow in form. I think what drew me to this book was Waugh's story-telling ability. It was constantly fascinating, and not boringly retrospective.

I would watch the adaptation of this, not the Matthew Goode one, the Anthony Andrews one.

18. "The Catcher in the Rye" J.D. Salinger

I've got to say I was horribly unimpressed by this book. Yes, it was the first time I've read it, and maybe, had I read it earlier in life, I would have been more impressed, but somehow I doubt it.

No wonder Salinger disappeared. If that book was all people cared about in your life, wouldn't you want to disappear?

The book is achingly and painfully childlike. Its hero is an angsty teenager with no attention for anyone else's needs but his own.

I guess what most people like about it is his honesty--about people, work and life.

And he is honest, but his honesty is only honesty with himself. He tells only himself what he really thinks, and answers all others with lies and cliches.

His honesty is an inward honesty, and is that really something new? Are we not all utterly honest in our minds about who is stupid, who flatters, who is ugly, who is beautiful, and who, in our minds, is ultimately useless?

Maybe I was just unimpressed by the only honestly he could deal with was inward honesty not outward. And really, is that even honesty anymore?

You should read it, but that's not saying much--I think you should read everything.

And pity Salinger--he's got to live with living off of that book for the rest of his life.

What a humiliation.

19. "Tender is the Night" F. Scott Fitzgerald

I know Fitzgerald took pride in ruining American idealism, he took pleasure in smashing those glowing hopes. But in "Tender is the Night" Fitzgerald destroys lives.

The first book is about Rosemary. Her issues with her mother, meeting Nicole and Dick Diver, consequently falling in love with Dick, and the beginning of their relationship.

The second book tells Nicole and Dick's story. How Dick met Nicole, her insanity, Dick's "mastery" of her insanity (such an interesting section), their relationship, and how Rosemary then affects their relationship.

The third book is how Dick and Nicole deal with the aftermath of Rosemary, Nicole's loss of sanity, Tom as the irresistible force of goodness, and Nicole and Dick's subsequent end.

It was a great book. I loved Fitzgerald's prose. His sentences were longer, and they each took such delightful turns. His painting of Nicole and Dick was perfection. They were "That Couple". I originally thought Rosemary was sub-standard and I didn't understand why and how she would make it through the whole book. Imagine my surprise when I realized we would focus on the far more interesting characters of Dick and Nicole.

I appreciated the book. And I learned a new word, a totally, amazing, awesome word which I still haven't had a chance to use in real life because it means something pretty specific.

The end was good--genuinely good.

20. "Reading Lolita in Tehran" Azar Nafisi

I'm not sure how to explain this book. Let me start by giving you some background.

Azar Nafisi was a professor of English Literature at the University of Tehran. She is Iranian by birth, spent her early childhood and beginning teenage years in Iran, and then moved to America for her undergrad and Ph.D in English and American Literature. She moved back to Iran in 1979 and remained there until 1997 when she returned to the United States.

During her time in Tehran, she taught at the University but after awhile she refused to wear the mandatory veil, and she did not go back to teaching. She started a book club from her home which ran from 1995-1997. She invited 7 girls to come weekly and discuss books. The book is about that book club.

The book is split up into 4 sections: Lolita, Gatsby, James, and Austen.

Lolita (the section, not the book) tells of the formation of the book club. The impetus to start the book club, and the plan for the club. We meet each of the 7 girls and begin to learn about their lives through their learning about the books. I loved how each girl became a vivid picture and how each time her words were recorded, you felt like you knew her and how she differed from the others.

They discuss "Lolita", but more than that they discuss Nabakov. Nafisi has written a study of Nabakov's works, and she knows much about him. She knows his writing style, and his world so clearly. And while she explains to these girls, she also explains to us. It felt almost like being in an Literature class. They deal with "Invitation to a Beheading" and "One Thousand and One Nights" to help them better understand "Lolita". They see parallels between their lives and their "jailer's lives", and you see the parallels, but it stops short of preaching them.

Gatsby was one of my favorite sections. It is set years before the book club even begins. It starts when Nafisi has just begun teaching at The University of Tehran. When she begins to teach "The Great Gatsby" she has a student protest. Gatsby is immoral, a bad man, out for only himself, and adulterous, what right does she have to teach this horrible book? She allows this student and her other students to "put "The Great Gatsby" on trial". They have a prosecutor, a defendant, a judge, and a jury. It was fascinating watching them all delve deeper and deeper into the story to produce factual evidence to prove their point.

[A wonderful person recently mentioned how often people, when discussing books, will "prove" their point by simply saying "This is what I think it's saying". That is, once again, making the book be about yourself. To prove your point truthfully you must be able to draw from the book phrases, sentences, and descriptions to back up your statements. Then and only then have you allowed the book to say what it wants to say]

The whole class is involved, and it makes for a fascinating read. My favorite part in the whole section is when she describes American idealism to a bunch of Iranian students. It made me think.

James happens when Nafisi is expelled from the University. They read "Daisy Miller" and I bought a copy of "Daisy Miller" while I was reading this book, so I could read it as soon as I finished this book. The way they talked about it made me long to read it.

The best part about this section is it is here where she meets her "magician". A fascinating man with important things to say. I recognized her necessity to find someone to talk to. Her descriptions of their conversations were fascinating, and his words were always insightful.

Austen is the end. It technically comes after Lolita. The book club reads "Pride and Prejudice" and it is then that Nafisi, her husband and children decide to leave Iran. While reading "Pride and Prejudice" each of the girls in the club become even more real as they discuss men, love, marriages, and sex. How they reacted to some things was surprising to me, and other things were universal. And when one girl makes plans to escape Iran, you see how it has to end.

This book was so good. It remained on the "New York Times Bestsellers List" for 117 weeks. One reviewer commented one how it was a mixture between memoir and literary criticism. I loved hearing how she described books that I already loved (she loves Peter, Harriet and Dorothy Sayers by the way). Quite simply, I was sad when it was over. When I read her Epilogue I wondered how her girls were doing. How they survived either in Iran or here. And I loved books more, and that's saying a lot.




Did you make it? Through all of them? I think this is by far the longest post I have ever written. But it was about books, so what did you expect? It should, at least, make up for some of the past few months, right?

Happy New Year. I look forward to spending even more time with you this next year.