Introducing Dana’s Literary Trivia

Share

Just for the hell of it, I am introducing a new weekly trivia question. I’m going to put it on Fridays, but for this first one, to get things rolling, I’ll post it today. If you think you know the answer, comment on this entry. Maybe I can figure out a way to reward the person who answers the most trivia questions correctly for a period of time (a free book from my Bookcrossing bookshelf maybe?). For now, if you are the first to comment with the correct answer, I’ll update the trivia entry with a credit to you. If no one gets it after a week, I’ll update the trivia question entry with a diatribe about what losers you guys are. Maybe.

Here it is *drumroll*:

What was the original title of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s classic novel The Great Gatsby?

Answer: Trimalchio in West Egg. Credit goes to my brother-in-law Riceman, who knew more about Gatsby’s working titles than I did.


Share

More English Teachers Behaving Badly

Share

The other day I mentioned this bizarre propensity of English teachers to do outlandish and insane things to make the news to a colleague (and English teacher)… every time you hear about a teacher going psycho, it seems to be an English teacher. He paused, clearly thinking about it for a moment. Then he looked up and said, “By God, you’re right!”

Here are a couple more:

This Kansas English professor killed his wife.

This Massachusetts high school teacher had sex with a 16-year-old male student.

In other news on a personal level, I have graded all my finals and figured final semester averages for all my classes. I just need to finish writing my personal narratives about each student and I’ll be ready to turn in my grades. Woot!


Share

Literary Snobbery

Share

Okay. I’m coming clean. I’ve become a literary snob. It’s getting in the way of my enjoyment of Lalita Tademy’s family history saga Cane River, but that’s something I’ll probably explain in more detail once I finish and review the book.

I used to read romance novels. I really did. I’m not sure I can read another one. It isn’t that they aren’t fun. They are. But if we’re truly honest, we’ll admit to ourselves that they’re literary junk food. I mean, I wouldn’t turn down the opportunity to have Nora Roberts’ career. I’m not an idiot. But I wonder if she won’t be as forgotten as her forbears — Barbara Cartland is slipping away into the mists, the old gal.

Why have I become a literary snob? Well, I think it is due in part to Allconsuming.net, a website which tracks book discussion in weblogs as well as giving bloggers a way to identify which books they are reading for their readers. If you scroll down a bit and look at the sidebar on the right, you’ll see I’m currently reading the aforementioned Cane River and Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness. Why am I reading this? I mean, the only people who read this book are those hapless souls forced prodded and cajoled into reading by sadistic well-meaning English teachers? Nah. I guess not. I guess it started with The Poisonwood Bible, which I reviewed not long ago. I know I read Heart of Darkness in college — British Literature from 1700 to the Present (a sophomore lit. course). I strolled to the classroom next door and asked Randal if he had read The Poisonwood Bible. He had not. So I recommended it enthusiastically. Then I asked him if he teaches Heart of Darkness. He said, yes, he did. I mentioned I thought the books were similar. He reminded me that Heart of Darkness is not merely a tale about the horrors of colonialism, but the true evil of mankind laid bare. And I said something else, and Randal disagreed. I started feeling outgunned, because it had been around 14 years since I read the book, and I didn’t remember details like he did. I decided I’d better read it again. I remembered hating it 14 years ago. I have had difficulty putting it down since I borrowed from Randal this morning. Man. How could I have hated this book?

I guess it boils down to this: I am 33. I’m not 19. In the last five years or so, with so many works of literature under my belt, my analysis skills seem to be much sharper. Age and maturity have taught me what to pull out of a book. It’s funny, because when I was 25, I was having a conversation with a classmate (I was a senior in college after quitting for three years when Sarah was born, then going back). This classmate was 30. I remarked at some point upon how well-read he was. He said, in what I thought at the time was a very exasperated tone, “I’m also a lot older than you.” Well, “a lot” is stretching things. But there is definitely something about being over 30 that makes me look at reading and books differently. I guess not everyone feels this way. My mom is in her 50s and happily reading mysteries. She inhales books. I owe my love of reading to her example.

I am thinking as I write, trying to put my finger on what’s different. I came to the conclusion that I have become a literary snob for a few reasons: 1) I want to learn things only Literature with a capital L can teach me; 2) I have had to read so many books — some classics — that I hadn’t yet read in preparation to teach them; and 3) I’ve come to the conclusion that life is too short to waste on bad writing. There are some really good books out there.

I remarked to Steve the other day, in reference to The Poisonwood Bible, that it is funny how inocuous books seem: a pretty jacket, a catchy title — you little suspect that reading the pages might change your life.

I have been scouring Wikipedia’s articles about the Congo. I even added references to the Further Reading section of this article about the History of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Let me underscore, capitalize, and repeat to anyone who has ever known me: I have never, ever wanted to go to Africa. I just had no interest. In fact, sometimes it bothered me that I had no interest in Africa. But since I read The Poisonwood Bible, I am fascinated by this country formerly known as Zaire. I look for it on globes and maps when I am out — ah, yes, that one is recent because it’s not labeled Zaire except in parentheses under the restored if somewhat altered title THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO to distinguish it from the Republic of the Congo. The former was colonized by Belgium and known then as “the Belgian Congo” and the latter colonized by the French and known as “the French Congo.”

I stand so my face is about three inches from the map so I can read all the tiny print, and I trace my finger down the Congo River, trying to figure out where Kingsolver’s village of Kilanga might be. Just like Charlie Marlow, who recalls looking at “blank” spaces on the map:

But there was one yet — the biggest — the most blank, so to speak — that I had a hankering after.

True, by this time it was not a blank space any more. It had got filled since my boyhood with rivers and lakes and names. It has ceased to be a blank space of delightful mystery — a white patch for a boy to dream gloriously over. It had become a place of darkness. But there was in it one river especially, a mighty big river that you could see on the map, resembling an immense snake uncoiled, with its head in the sea, its body at rest curving afar over a vast country and its tail lost in the depths of the land. And as I looked at the map of it in a shop-window it fascinated me as a snake would a bird — a silly little bird.

Yes, I thought when I read that, I know what you mean, Marlow. Me too. When I was a girl, Zaire was a blank space on a map, far away, with funny-sounding cities. Then when I was older, it was the home of poverty, children with swollen bellies, and the most horrible pestilences known to man — AIDS and Ebola. Now when I look at the map, I see something more familiar. I think of the destruction wrought there in the name of diamonds and ivory as well as well-meaning missionaries and doctors. It’s real, and I can almost smell it. I am scared to go, but I almost want to see it, too.

I guess that’s the sort of place literary snobbery can take you.


Share

New Radio Blog Tunes

Share

It has been over two months since I last changed my radio blog. I’ve upgraded to version 2.0 (or is it 2.1 — who cares?). This “edition” is an homage to the voices of men. I usually post links to Amazon so you can purchase the CD’s if you like. I am too tired to do that right now. If you want to find out more about the songs, it shouldn’t be too hard. I can help you if you get really stuck. I point out that Jeff Buckley was so good I put him on there twice. Ray LaMontagne is, I think, new on the scene. He’s kind of Otis Redding, kind of Mick Hucknall. If you question Billy Joel’s presence, I can only say he sang every part of the harmony on this recording, which I think is pretty impressive. Plus the kids at school sang it the other day with two of the Judaics teachers, and it was just so much fun.


Share

More Proof that English Teachers Are Nuts

Share

This time, it’s a female middle school Language Arts teacher (that middle schoolese for English) who *ahem* wed a former female student in a pagan ceremony. Okay.

Links:
The Washington Times story

WOOD -TV, Grand Rapids, MI.
The Detroit Free Press story

And like I said, teaching grammar makes you go insane.


Share

The Poisonwood Bible

Share

Steve said the other day that I am voracious reader. That is both true and not true. I think I do read every day, but it takes me a very long time to read. He explained that he meant I always have a book going; I may not read two or three books at once, as he does, but I’m always reading something. If that is voracious, then I agree. However, if a voracious reader greedily devours books, then I can’t agree. I savor them. I like to roll their words around on my tongue and taste them.

I have just finished The Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingsolver. I cannot tell you how long I’ve been reading it. It seems like months. But this is not a book that you can read casually. You need to devote what time you have to it. Finally, you need to devote time you don’t have to it. I asked Steve if he could remember reading a book and thinking it was destined to be a Classic. By that, I mean we will be studying it in schools. It will survive the ages as an important work of literature. It will be To Kill a Mockingbird, Moby-Dick, or, perhaps most appropriately, Heart of Darkness, for it is to that last which it owes the most. I must admit that I don’t often reach the conclusion while I’m reading a contemporary novel that it will reach the status of the great novels of the past and become a part of the fabric of our culture. I know this novel will. It is deep and rich. It is complex. I think every American should read it. Since it was published in 1998, it may take some time before the educational establishment recognizes this book for what it is, but mark my words: this book will be required reading for your children, if it isn’t for you.

The back-of-the-book jacket blurb is not such a bad place to start:

The Poisonwood Bible is a story told by the wife and four daughters of Nathan Price, a fierce, evangelical Baptist who takes his family and mission to the Belgian Congo in 1959. They carry with them everything they believe they will need from home, but soon find out that all of it — from garden seeds to Scripture — is calamitously transformed on African soil. What follows is a suspenseful epic of one family’s tragic undoing and remarkable reconstruction over the course of three decades in postcolonial Africa. The novel is set against one of the most dramatic political chronicles of the twentieth century: the Congo’s fight for independence from Belgium, the murder of its first elected prime minister, the CIA coup to install his replacement, and the insidious progress of a world economic order that robs the fledgling African nation of its autonomy. Taking its place alongside the classic words of postcolonial literature, this ambitious novel establishes Kingsolver as one of the most thoughtful and daring of modern writers.

Kingsolver has posted an excerpt on her website. It will give you a flavor for the rich poetry of her prose. So many sentences in this book I read several times in order to truly taste them, let them roll over my tongue. The descriptions are lavish: I had no trouble picturing the settings, from the village of Kilanga, to Kinshasa; from the Equatorial Hotel in the French Congo to Sanderling Island, Georgia.

Nathan leads his family from Bethlehem, Georgia (which I had NO trouble picturing since I used to live maybe five miles from Bethlehem in Winder) to the Belgian Congo, which became Zaire from 1971-1997. If I had one problem with the book, it was the simple reference to Bethlehem High School. It bothered me for a time until I realized why Kingsolver invented the school. As far as I know, such a school never existed. I student-taught at the only high school in Barrow County at the time, Winder-Barrow High School, in 1996-1997. Since that time, another high school has been built. I did some research, and I cannot determine if there was a Bethlehem High School in the late 1950s. There doesn’t seem to be any information to indicate that there was. However, I understand why Kingsolver invented one. Not to invent Bethlehem High School would have distracted her readers unfamiliar with Barrow County, Georgia. I am sure it isn’t that she didn’t do her research — that she plainly does. I think she is judicious about which details are important, and explaining that the girls went to Winder-Barrow High School and why instead of a fictional Bethlehem High School would have taken up space on a trifle.

Of the novel, Kingsolver said:

England has a strong tradition of postcolonial literature but here in the U.S., we can hardly even say the word “postcolonial.” We like to think we’re the good guys. So we persist in our denial, and live with a legacy of exploitation and racial arrogance that continues to tear people apart, in a million large and small ways.

This story, Kingsolver maintains, is an allegory. I need to file that away for the next time my students ask me if writers mean to use symbolism or we’re just inventing stuff the writer didn’t intend. Nathan Price and his daughters each represent different responses to America’s role in raping the Congo. Kingsolver says that Nathan represents the “historical attitude”:

The Prices carry into Africa a whole collection of beliefs about religion, technology, health, politics, and agriculture, just as industrialized nations have often carried these beliefs into the developing world in an extremely arrogant way, very certain of being right (even to the point of destroying local ideas, religion and leadership), even when it turns out-as it does in this novel-that those attitudes are useless, offensive or inapplicable. I knew most of my readers would feel unsympathetic to that arrogance. We didn’t make the awful decisions our government imposed on Africa. We didn’t call for the assassination of Lumumba; we hardly even knew about it. We just inherited these decisions, and now have to reconcile them with our sense of who we are. We’re the captive witnesses, just like the wife and daughters of Nathan Price. Male or female, we are not like him. That is what I wanted to write about. We got pulled into this mess but we don’t identify with that arrogant voice. It’s not his story. It’s ours.

Each of the female characters that tell the story represent different reactions or responses to America’s involvement in the Congo’s struggles for independence:

The four sisters and Orleanna represent five separate philosophical positions, not just in their family but also in my political examination of the world. This novel is asking, basically, “What did we do to Africa, and how do we feel about it?” It’s a huge question. I’d be insulting my readers to offer only one answer. There are a hundred different answers along a continuum, with absolute paralyzing guilt on the one end and “What, me worry? I didn’t do it!” on the other end. Orleanna is the paralyzed one here, and Rachel is “What, me worry?” Leah, Adah, and Ruth May take other positions in between, having to do with social activism, empirical analysis, and spirituality, respectively.

It is in the climactic moment when Price blood is shed that each character takes her role. Rachel is maddening in her refusal to be changed by all that she has seen, but she still has some keen insights to offer. Her name means “ewe,” and like so many of the sheep in America, she denies we are complicit in any wrongdoing. Leah is outraged upon awakening to the injustices of the world and wants to change them. Adah is the scientist, examining the evidence with an empirical eye, if not an entirely cold eye. Orleanna begs forgiveness — before she was paralyzed to stop — to question Nathan or simply to leave him, ensuring her children’s safety. She is unable to act until it is “too late.” Ruth May is unwavering in her faith in her father and his religion: “Whither thou goest, I will go” — just like the biblical Ruth for which she is named.

Just like Orleanna, I dreaded the climactic death that would set the Prices’ feet in motion upon their particular paths. It was as inevitable as the political events it paralleled. Now, like Orleanna, I find myself wanting forgiveness.

The Bean Trees, the last book by Kingsolver which I read and reviewed, was also political. Kingsolver wants us to think and challenge ourselves and our government.

This story came from passion, culpability, anger and a long-term fascination with Africa, and my belief that what happened to the Congo is one of the most important political parables of our century. I’ve been thinking about this story for as long as I’ve had eyes and a heart. I live in a countery [sic] that has done awful things, all over the world, in my name. You can’t miss that. I didn’t make those decisions, but I have benefited from them materially. I live in a society that grew prosperous from exploiting others.

Kingsolver said she hoped the book would make her readers laugh a little at times, cry at others. I did this and more. It really made me think. This novel is so dense I cannot possibly compress it for you. You just need to read it.

Note: Kingsolver quotes were all taken from her website.


Share

Beth Stroud

Share

Methodist jury convicts lesbian minister of violating church law (free registration required).

Her name is Beth Stroud. I think you should read her Coming Out Sermon. Before I read that, I said to myself, well, what did she expect? Methodists aren’t Southern Baptists, but they’re not liberal, either. In the South, there is not much difference between Baptists and Methodists. It would seem one major difference is that women can be ordained ministers. I don’t know her congregation, but it surprised me that they were supportive. In the face of so much homophobia, especially in — and it pains me to say this — our churches, I was surprised to find that they backed her after she came out and wanted her to continue in her duties. Down here, she would be lucky not to be run out of town on a rail.

I have read the Bible on homosexuality, and I must admit, I find it ambiguous. I am not going to stand on my soapbox and declare that homosexuality is wrong or that it is a choice. Frankly, I don’t think it is either one, but the truth is, I don’t know. What I do know is that homosexuals are people who deserve the same rights as heterosexuals. They are not disgusting or depraved any more than anyone is. In short, if homosexuality is wrong, then it is one of many “wrongs” committed by men. It always disturbed me that someone close to me — a person in my life who is the most vehemently outspoken and prejudiced against homosexuals — is the very person who has committed adultery more than once.

Jesus said something about those without sin casting the first stone… There was also something about worrying so much about the speck in another’s eye and not seeing the plank in your own…

We are studying Transcendentalism in school. When I was in college, my English 101 professor and I struck up a friendship of sorts. I was interested in a fellow English major, and sometimes I would sit outside in the hallway of the English department, waiting for him to get out of class so we could walk, talk, go on adventures. One day, Dr. Sell crouched down to my level, teetering on her heels. She cocked her head and asked me what I was doing. I told her. That was how we connected. I started visiting her office. She had a ceramic sign in her office that said “Shalom!” I never knew if she was actually Jewish or not. She shared her office with another professor whose name escapes me. We had chats about life and literature. Sometimes love. When it became clear that my crush wasn’t panning out, Dr. Sell tried to set me up with her son, an agriculture major. She didn’t understand him. Why on earth, she wondered, would he want to be a farmer? He scored a 4 on the Regent’s Exam, for crying out loud! Out of respect for her, I decided to humor her. I wrote him a letter of introduction. He came down to visit, but I don’t remember whether it was specifically to meet me or not. We had no connection at all, though we sat in Dr. Sell’s office in awkward quiet, smiled weakly, and tried not to check our watches. Later, when Dr. Sell and I discussed the failed love connection, she confided that he felt I was a bit too much like her. I told I thought it was telling him I was a Transcendentalist that scared him off. She laughed and agreed.

Well, maybe I am a Transcendentalist. At least a bit. I am not sure that we are all connected by some cosmic Over-Soul, but I don’t discount the possibility. However, I do believe God is manifest in Nature, and it is in Nature that I feel His presence. Not in church. The one time I felt most connected to God was on a hike, by myself, in the Colorado Rockies. To me, He is there, in His creation. And, I suppose, if I am to believe that, I should believe He is inside of us, too. We are His creation as well. Is an Over-Soul, then, so far out of the realm of possibility? And if that is so, how do we explain the evil that men do to each other? Is God present inside an evil man? Is he absent in a man who is basically a good, decent person, but happens to be homosexual?

These are questions you have to answer for yourselves, I guess. I don’t have any answers today. The only conclusions I have drawn are that Beth Stroud has very strong faith and experienced a calling to the minstry. On the other hand, her church disagrees with allowing “self-avowed, practicing homosexuals” in the clergy.

I’m not Atticus Finch, but where this issue is concerned, I feel like we all need to “walk around in someone else’s skin.” Or maybe we could just stand on the Radley porch, like Scout. Maybe just standing on the porch would be enough.

Beth Stroud

Shalom, Beth.


Share

Go Demons!

Share

My alma mater, Warner Robins High School, defeated Statesboro to win the state AAAA football championship. Last time they did that, it was in 1988, a few months before I started going to school there.

Read the AJC article (free registration required).

Is it only me, or is it kind of funny that the Demons stomped the Blue Devils in the Bible Belt’s most popular pastime besides church (and possibly mud-bogging and cow-tipping).


Share