The Good Earth is a book, written by an American author who had traveled extensively in China (her husband worked there), about a somewhat idealized idea of the Chinese farmer before and after the Chinese Revolution. It is the story of a man, Wang Lung, who was born into a poor farming family, as he attempts to deal with the ups and downs of farming in China; he deals with famine, flood, lazy relatives, social expectations, etc. to create a life for himself, supported by a strong, albeit unattractive, wife O-Lan.
I personally really enjoyed this book, although my personal attachment to it ebbed and flowed a bit. In general, Buck tells a great story but seems to over-idealize the life of the Chinese farmer. There was a lot of opportunity during this time period to actually say something about Chinese societal practices--foot binding, arranged marriage, slavery--that Buck just didn't take advantage of. I guess, considering that the novel was first published in 1931, there was still the issue really educating Americans about Chinese practices and culture. This was, of course, still the time when the U.S. looked to Asia with a good deal of fear and prejudice, and I think this book's main social purpose was to educate, but there was still so much there that could have been talked about. Buck's over-obsession with the idea of the "land" being one's only source of stability seemed to me to be a very American ideal that was included more to reach American audiences than to really capture Chinese culture. It seemed like more of a connecting message to extremely capitalistic Americans in the 30s rather than a real example of Chinese ideas of personal property in the land.
The one thing, however, that Buck succeeded expertly well on was definitely the family dynamics and social expectations among the Chinese during this time period. The seemingly incompatible ideals of beauty and duty for women, I think, was made rather clear. There never was the perfect woman in this novel--either the woman was ugly but resourceful and made contributions to the family's wealth (O-Lan) or the woman was beautiful but asked only for more riches without contributing more than her pretty face (Lotus). These two disparate female characters arise over and over in this novel. In addition, there seems to always be a conflict between social expectations and personal desires, particularly in relation to Wang Lung's uncle who seems to take advantage of family obligation without contributing much. Again, I think that Buck's recounting of these social issues and expectations opened up plenty of room for some social criticism, which may or may not have been appropriate for the audience at the time. Still, it was a generally good story with fantastic characters. There was just something in the novel that kept me from really connecting and reacting emotionally to what these characters are going through. Perhaps it was because I picked up on oversimplification and idealism within the recounting of the ideal farming life in China.
My rating: 9/10
Up next: absolutely positively not sure. I'll keep you updated though :)
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Monday, July 20, 2009
What is the What by Dave Eggers
I absolutely adored this book. I found it to be an extremely honest and heartbreaking story of a young Sudanese Lost Boy as he walked hundreds of miles to get out of war-torn Sudan only to fall victim to regime change in Ethiopia and eventually goes to a refugee camp in Kenya. He eventually is chosen by the UN's resettlement program to go to the United States. It's definitely a novel; the main character in the book is very closely based on the life of his namesake: Valentino Achak Deng. Still, Eggers and Deng came to the conclusion, due to their recognition of Deng's potentially-faulty memory regarding the order of events and so on as well as their understanding that it's generally impossible to remember conversations and dialogue from that long ago. I found that Deng and Eggers' assertion that this book is fiction to be very honest; in addition, it also allows you to read and really absorb the story without having to doubt the validity of everything that happened.
There is one element of this novel that I'd really like to focus on: the depictions of the U.S. and the Sudanese refugee situation in this country. I read quite a few reviews on sites like Amazon and others, and it seems most people are frustrated by Deng's complaining about the problems he and other refugees have faced in the U.S.: cultural differences, inability to find jobs that actually meet expenses, ageism within the college admission process (Deng recounts an admission officer speaking off of the record about the potential of admissions people not wanting a 27-year-old living on campus with 18-year-old girls), being victims of crimes, etc. I think people expected to see a good-bad dichotomy between the U.S. and Sudan, and when Deng dared to state that life in the U.S. was not easy, I think he broke away a bit from this expectation, leading to some anger among readers. Personally, I believe that the criticisms of the U.S. system of placing refugees, supporting them for 6 months, then leaving them to fend mostly for themselves is generally problematic. Deng benefited from learning English in the refugee camps, but most refugees coming into the U.S. don't have English education and, moreover, have some serious emotional and mental problems that they should be able to deal with before having to necessarily find a job, education, and affordable housing (made even more difficult by the policy of sending refugees to cities -- extremely high housing prices are everywhere in major cities).
In general, I thought this book was fantastic. Several times I had to stop reading and just absorb what was happening; my general idealism tends to take some major hits when I read about the horrible things that some human beings can do to others in the name of religion, cultural warfare, and general ignorance. In this novel, it goes both ways; Eggers is almost as equally critical of the government as he is of the rebel forces (although, he seems to disfavor the Sudanese government forces more), because neither side is absolutely innocent in these crises. And Deng's experiences are somewhat better -- although he still witnesses death and horrible tragedy -- because he successfully evaded being a child soldier in the conflict. I really hope to supplement this book by a memoir or some other non-fiction about the Lost Boys of Sudan, finding the similarities and differences between the two approaches. But generally What is the What is totally worth the read.
My rating: 9.5/10
Up next: The Good Earth by Pearl S. Buck
There is one element of this novel that I'd really like to focus on: the depictions of the U.S. and the Sudanese refugee situation in this country. I read quite a few reviews on sites like Amazon and others, and it seems most people are frustrated by Deng's complaining about the problems he and other refugees have faced in the U.S.: cultural differences, inability to find jobs that actually meet expenses, ageism within the college admission process (Deng recounts an admission officer speaking off of the record about the potential of admissions people not wanting a 27-year-old living on campus with 18-year-old girls), being victims of crimes, etc. I think people expected to see a good-bad dichotomy between the U.S. and Sudan, and when Deng dared to state that life in the U.S. was not easy, I think he broke away a bit from this expectation, leading to some anger among readers. Personally, I believe that the criticisms of the U.S. system of placing refugees, supporting them for 6 months, then leaving them to fend mostly for themselves is generally problematic. Deng benefited from learning English in the refugee camps, but most refugees coming into the U.S. don't have English education and, moreover, have some serious emotional and mental problems that they should be able to deal with before having to necessarily find a job, education, and affordable housing (made even more difficult by the policy of sending refugees to cities -- extremely high housing prices are everywhere in major cities).
In general, I thought this book was fantastic. Several times I had to stop reading and just absorb what was happening; my general idealism tends to take some major hits when I read about the horrible things that some human beings can do to others in the name of religion, cultural warfare, and general ignorance. In this novel, it goes both ways; Eggers is almost as equally critical of the government as he is of the rebel forces (although, he seems to disfavor the Sudanese government forces more), because neither side is absolutely innocent in these crises. And Deng's experiences are somewhat better -- although he still witnesses death and horrible tragedy -- because he successfully evaded being a child soldier in the conflict. I really hope to supplement this book by a memoir or some other non-fiction about the Lost Boys of Sudan, finding the similarities and differences between the two approaches. But generally What is the What is totally worth the read.
My rating: 9.5/10
Up next: The Good Earth by Pearl S. Buck
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
The Boleyn Inheritance by Philippa Gregory
Like I said in my last post, I needed a bit of a break from the "serious" novels typically listed in the 1,001 Books list; I'm really in the mood for good summer reading, particularly since my days are now filled with endless job applications. I'm just looking to my books as a bit of a break, and I'm comfortable with how much I typically read to be able to have intelligent conversations about books if needed in interviews (plus, I'm still reading enough "serious" material to be totally telling the truth when I answer the "so what are you reading" question with a respectable literary novel). The Boleyn Inheritance provided just the break I needed.
I'm a huge Philippa Gregory fan. I think she does a fantastic job capturing what I imagine to be the mix of grandeur, conniving personalities, and genuine fear in Tudor England. The Boleyn Inheritance acts as a sort of sequel to the made-into-movie The Other Boleyn Girl. It traces the three wives of Henry VIII following Anne Boleyn: Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, and Katherine Howard, focusing mostly on the last two (oddly, there's a serious lack of research interest in the second "survivor" of Henry VIII's lack of wedded bliss: Catherine Parr). I find it refreshing that this book goes beyond the caricatured personalities -- "fat and ugly" for Anne of Cleves and "stupid" for Katherine Howard -- and really tries to understand who these women might have been and how they unwittingly got involved in the intrigues of men at court. Gregory is quite honestly a feminist in these novels; she underhandedly suggests that if women had any sort of power apart from their uncles/husbands/fathers or were allowed to make decisions themselves during this time, all the fear and jealousy and power grabs would not have existed. Because, really, who can fault either Anne or Katherine for being repulsed by a man decades their senior? And who can blame them for looking elsewhere for "real" love relationships? Hell, Henry was well-known for his affairs and flirtations regardless of his own marital status. The feminist statements are not as annoying or blatant as some can be; Gregory makes valid points about these women tied to Henry VIII despite their youth, inexperience, and inability to deal with the king's tempers and whims. It shows that these women wanted to make their own decisions -- and likely would have made excellent ones -- but were stuck in impossible situations. Gregory shows that Anne of Cleves was actually a quite independent woman who had to carefully negotiate Henry's tempers to save herself from his axe; and Katherine was obviously a girl too young and vulnerable to protect herself among the selfish and power-hungry Tudor court. These women were not just stupid, fat, and ugly; they were people who Henry cast aside in order to further his own will. I honestly believe that it was not the women's fault that Henry VIII only had weak sons; he was an old sick man likely unable to produce an heir. And Gregory does a fantastic job trying to tease out their personalities based on what little evidence historians have gathered about Henry's women.
Another thing about this book (or at least this edition of the book) is that Gregory clearly explains which parts of the book are based in fact/archival evidence and which are based in her imagination. It's rather refreshing considering some of the hack-job historical fiction out there (coughDanBrowncough). It gives Gregory's fiction some clarity that is much appreciated by this history lover.
My rating: 9/10
I've since started What is the What, by Dave Eggers, about the Lost Boys of Sudan. I would imagine I'll finish it (or at least get a good deal finished) at the beach next week. It's a little dark for a beach read but I enjoy Eggers' style so far; plus, his willingness to call this historically-based novel due to fading memories and not-necessarily-accurate dialogue is refreshing as well. Following this one, I think I'll look to some non-fiction and go from there.
I'm a huge Philippa Gregory fan. I think she does a fantastic job capturing what I imagine to be the mix of grandeur, conniving personalities, and genuine fear in Tudor England. The Boleyn Inheritance acts as a sort of sequel to the made-into-movie The Other Boleyn Girl. It traces the three wives of Henry VIII following Anne Boleyn: Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, and Katherine Howard, focusing mostly on the last two (oddly, there's a serious lack of research interest in the second "survivor" of Henry VIII's lack of wedded bliss: Catherine Parr). I find it refreshing that this book goes beyond the caricatured personalities -- "fat and ugly" for Anne of Cleves and "stupid" for Katherine Howard -- and really tries to understand who these women might have been and how they unwittingly got involved in the intrigues of men at court. Gregory is quite honestly a feminist in these novels; she underhandedly suggests that if women had any sort of power apart from their uncles/husbands/fathers or were allowed to make decisions themselves during this time, all the fear and jealousy and power grabs would not have existed. Because, really, who can fault either Anne or Katherine for being repulsed by a man decades their senior? And who can blame them for looking elsewhere for "real" love relationships? Hell, Henry was well-known for his affairs and flirtations regardless of his own marital status. The feminist statements are not as annoying or blatant as some can be; Gregory makes valid points about these women tied to Henry VIII despite their youth, inexperience, and inability to deal with the king's tempers and whims. It shows that these women wanted to make their own decisions -- and likely would have made excellent ones -- but were stuck in impossible situations. Gregory shows that Anne of Cleves was actually a quite independent woman who had to carefully negotiate Henry's tempers to save herself from his axe; and Katherine was obviously a girl too young and vulnerable to protect herself among the selfish and power-hungry Tudor court. These women were not just stupid, fat, and ugly; they were people who Henry cast aside in order to further his own will. I honestly believe that it was not the women's fault that Henry VIII only had weak sons; he was an old sick man likely unable to produce an heir. And Gregory does a fantastic job trying to tease out their personalities based on what little evidence historians have gathered about Henry's women.
Another thing about this book (or at least this edition of the book) is that Gregory clearly explains which parts of the book are based in fact/archival evidence and which are based in her imagination. It's rather refreshing considering some of the hack-job historical fiction out there (coughDanBrowncough). It gives Gregory's fiction some clarity that is much appreciated by this history lover.
My rating: 9/10
I've since started What is the What, by Dave Eggers, about the Lost Boys of Sudan. I would imagine I'll finish it (or at least get a good deal finished) at the beach next week. It's a little dark for a beach read but I enjoy Eggers' style so far; plus, his willingness to call this historically-based novel due to fading memories and not-necessarily-accurate dialogue is refreshing as well. Following this one, I think I'll look to some non-fiction and go from there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)