I was sort of excited to read the Handmaids Tale, because pretty much everyone who graduated from Williamsville North read it. Based on the fact that I was in the advanced English class and had certain teachers, I somehow managed to graduate high-school without having read this one.
Basically, set at some indeterminable point in the future, the Constitution is suspended the the US becomes the Republic of Gilead which is taken over by the religious right. And of course, because it's the religious right, sex is dirty and there are women appointed to do the dirty work of bearing children of the old impotent white men... the Handmaids. The novel is the personal narrative of one handmaid, Offred ("Of Fred" - get it?) as she reminisces about when she used to have a husband, kid, and normal life and navigates her way through attempting to become pregnant and all of the other craziness that is Gilead.
As a woman this novel really offended my sense of how things in this world are. From a very simplistic point of view, the main message that Atwood is trying to convey is that "white men are the source of evil". I looked up a few discussion boards and forums (just to see what other people thought were the main discussion points for this novel) and none of them really came out and said "white men are the source of evil", but sort of danced around it by talking about oppression of women, sexual freedom, etc.
To date, I can't recall any significant times that I've been told "no" due to the fact that I am a female. In this day an age, a girl can get an education, go to graduate school, and work in a large professional services firm and never have the feeling that she is being held back or somehow disenfranchised due to the fact that she is a female. She also is free to enjoy all of the pleasures of this world.... including the company of men. Since I'm in the working phase of my life right now, I look around and see that my company has lots of programs and women's networking circles. I've been matched up with some very strong female mentors, and in some ways, I feel as if though the women in the office and are connected to each other better than the men are. During my education, I never really felt as if though the fact that I was a female was holding me back - I won scholarships, I was elected to student government, I majored in a challenging major that traditionally has been mostly male, etc.
But anyway, back to Atwood and my highschool. I don't think that this book is appropriate to be teaching to suburban primarily white high school students for several reasons. The first is that the educators refuse to explicitly address the main point of the novel, which is "white men are the source evil" (can you imagine the parent phone calls that this one would get?) which is insulting their students intelligence and ability to reason. It's also not appropriate to make children think that their fathers, the ones who bring home half of the family income are somehow going to cause a social plague.
The second is that the main point of the novel (white men are the source of evil) is somewhat irrelevant in this day and age. Now, before all of you out there reading this get your underwear all in a knot, realize that I am saying this as someone who is "pro-female". I believe that women should be treated as equals to men, meaning exactly that, equality. And I think that equality comes with a level playing field. I also have found it to be true that If you are smart and work hard, you can get ahead - no matter if you pee standing up or sitting down. Yes, historically women and other minorities have not been afforded the same opportunities as the white male and women have a whole mess of issues that they have to worry about such as balancing a family and a career, etc based upon historical gender roles that most people seem to fall into. But, in this day and age, a lot of that has changed as employers have put in programs for working mothers, schools have offered scholarships, you read newsweek articles about how "stay at home dads" are increasing in numbers, etc. To preach to American high school student that this archaic nonsense is way that the world still is or is at risk of becoming in the United States, where the novel is set, when they haven't even had a chance to see how things are for themselves, is indoctrinating them with a preconceived notion that is false.
I'm going to mark this as a "good book", not because I particularly enjoyed it, or think that the point of it is relevant, but because it enraged me so much. And at the end of the day, if a book makes you feel anything, it's good.
Moral of the story: "You go Girl. And you go Boy too".
July 29, 2007
July 19, 2007
Summer in Baden Baden
I wanted to enjoy this book. I really did. Leonard Tsypkin, a Russian doctor wrote only one novel, as a homage to one of his favorite Russian authors, Fyodor Dostoevsky. Tsypkin died in obscurity, and unpublished. After this death, Summer in Baden Baden was discovered and became noteworthy enough to make it onto the 1001 list.
Tsypkin writes the story of Fydor and his second wife Anna living in Baden Baden, Germany after Dostoevsky has left Russia, with significant debt and suffering from debilitating epilepsy. The themes of the novel are similar to the themes of most Russian novels, gambling debt, addiction, sex, and paranoia. Another thing that is very interesting to me is that Tsypkin was Jewish and spent most of his life being persecuted for his religious beliefs, however his novel captures Anna and Fyodor's raging antisemitism.
You can't help but feel bad for Anna, whose husband walks all over her and is downright abusive as they have retreated to Baden Baden to regroup and put their lives back in order. Anna is the one who spends her money to support them, Anna is the one who sits by his bedside when he has epileptic fits, and Anna is the one who endures his barbs.
The main reason that I didn't like this novel was that it was difficult to read. I think that there just isn't a very good English translation of this novel. I have to give Tsypkin the benefit of the doubt and assume that his prose is actually readable in his native language. I've read other Russians before... Dostoevsky and Tolstoy and have found their stories to be engaging. But then again, they also used things called "paragraphs" and "dialog". The translation abandons all of these normal conventions, and is pages and pages of dense block prose. I think that I missed a lot of what what was being said due to the fact that it was so incredibly hard to make my way through.
Moral of the story: If it's a Russian, get a good translation.
Tsypkin writes the story of Fydor and his second wife Anna living in Baden Baden, Germany after Dostoevsky has left Russia, with significant debt and suffering from debilitating epilepsy. The themes of the novel are similar to the themes of most Russian novels, gambling debt, addiction, sex, and paranoia. Another thing that is very interesting to me is that Tsypkin was Jewish and spent most of his life being persecuted for his religious beliefs, however his novel captures Anna and Fyodor's raging antisemitism.
You can't help but feel bad for Anna, whose husband walks all over her and is downright abusive as they have retreated to Baden Baden to regroup and put their lives back in order. Anna is the one who spends her money to support them, Anna is the one who sits by his bedside when he has epileptic fits, and Anna is the one who endures his barbs.
The main reason that I didn't like this novel was that it was difficult to read. I think that there just isn't a very good English translation of this novel. I have to give Tsypkin the benefit of the doubt and assume that his prose is actually readable in his native language. I've read other Russians before... Dostoevsky and Tolstoy and have found their stories to be engaging. But then again, they also used things called "paragraphs" and "dialog". The translation abandons all of these normal conventions, and is pages and pages of dense block prose. I think that I missed a lot of what what was being said due to the fact that it was so incredibly hard to make my way through.
Moral of the story: If it's a Russian, get a good translation.
July 12, 2007
Aesops Fables
Just as a program note, I am a wee bit behind on book blogging. I'm hoping that I will catch up and my "to read" list will be a legitimate list rather than a "books that must be blogged about".
When it comes to 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die, Phillll and I have had several strategy related conversations. Does it make sense to do them in order? Should we plow through the longest ones first, and save the short ones for when we are on our death beds? What about reverse order? I've sort of decided that I'm going to read whatever strikes my fancy at the moment, which means that the summers will be full of dense Russian novels, and the winters will be books from the 20th century.
After one of these strategy conversations, I decided that I might as well tackle the very first book on the list, Aesops Fables. I ended up buying this one on itunes and burning it onto four 80 minute cd's which I listened to on the way to work. The way that the fables are structured is that they are a series of short parables, which end with a statement that pretty much sums up the moral of the story.
Initially, I was a bit leery of this book, thinking that anything penned around 625 BC wasn't probably going to have much relevance to modern day life. But it turns out that ole Aesop did have a few gems of wisdom despite the fact that his text is ancient. The fables are about basic things that we sometimes forget in todays hectic world. Saying Please and Thank You. Not Keeping Company with Asses. Putting all of Your Eggs in One Basket. Never Trust Your Enemy. An Ounce of Prevention is Worth a Pound of Cure. Slow and Steady Wins the Race.
A lot of the morals at the end of the fables have endured to the point where they've become common expressions. It was really interesting to listen to the fables as a whole, because it provided the orgin of many modern phrases, some of which are listed above.
After listening to them for a while to, you got to know the characters pretty well. For the most part, if a fable started out with a wolf, you knew something bad was going to go down. Same for jackals. Asses were pretty much just there, and it wasn't really a surprise that the tortoise won the race by going slow and steady.
It made me start to think about how the world would be a much nicer place to be if everyone were to listen to the fables and actually pay attention to the lessons that they are trying to teach us. Perhaps we would treat each other with a bit more respect. Perhaps we would be more cautious about making friends with those who are in reality our enemies. I can't help but think that the decline of the US's image abroad couldn't be helped with some good ole fashioned Aesop inspired common sense. But then again, it is possible that I'm wrong all together - it's too late for all of humanity. Afterall Aesop did say:
A singing bird was confined in a cage which hung outside a window,
and had a way of singing at night when all other birds were asleep.
One night a Bat came and clung to the bars of the cage, and asked
the Bird why she was silent by day and sang only at night. "I have a
very good reason for doing so," said the Bird. "It was once when I was
singing in the daytime that a fowler was attracted by my voice, and
set his nets for me and caught me. Since then I have never sung except
by night." But the Bat replied, "It is no use your doing that now when
you are a prisoner: if only you had done so before you were caught,
you might still have been free."
"Precautions are useless after the crisis."
When it comes to 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die, Phillll and I have had several strategy related conversations. Does it make sense to do them in order? Should we plow through the longest ones first, and save the short ones for when we are on our death beds? What about reverse order? I've sort of decided that I'm going to read whatever strikes my fancy at the moment, which means that the summers will be full of dense Russian novels, and the winters will be books from the 20th century.
After one of these strategy conversations, I decided that I might as well tackle the very first book on the list, Aesops Fables. I ended up buying this one on itunes and burning it onto four 80 minute cd's which I listened to on the way to work. The way that the fables are structured is that they are a series of short parables, which end with a statement that pretty much sums up the moral of the story.
Initially, I was a bit leery of this book, thinking that anything penned around 625 BC wasn't probably going to have much relevance to modern day life. But it turns out that ole Aesop did have a few gems of wisdom despite the fact that his text is ancient. The fables are about basic things that we sometimes forget in todays hectic world. Saying Please and Thank You. Not Keeping Company with Asses. Putting all of Your Eggs in One Basket. Never Trust Your Enemy. An Ounce of Prevention is Worth a Pound of Cure. Slow and Steady Wins the Race.
A lot of the morals at the end of the fables have endured to the point where they've become common expressions. It was really interesting to listen to the fables as a whole, because it provided the orgin of many modern phrases, some of which are listed above.
After listening to them for a while to, you got to know the characters pretty well. For the most part, if a fable started out with a wolf, you knew something bad was going to go down. Same for jackals. Asses were pretty much just there, and it wasn't really a surprise that the tortoise won the race by going slow and steady.
It made me start to think about how the world would be a much nicer place to be if everyone were to listen to the fables and actually pay attention to the lessons that they are trying to teach us. Perhaps we would treat each other with a bit more respect. Perhaps we would be more cautious about making friends with those who are in reality our enemies. I can't help but think that the decline of the US's image abroad couldn't be helped with some good ole fashioned Aesop inspired common sense. But then again, it is possible that I'm wrong all together - it's too late for all of humanity. Afterall Aesop did say:
A singing bird was confined in a cage which hung outside a window,
and had a way of singing at night when all other birds were asleep.
One night a Bat came and clung to the bars of the cage, and asked
the Bird why she was silent by day and sang only at night. "I have a
very good reason for doing so," said the Bird. "It was once when I was
singing in the daytime that a fowler was attracted by my voice, and
set his nets for me and caught me. Since then I have never sung except
by night." But the Bat replied, "It is no use your doing that now when
you are a prisoner: if only you had done so before you were caught,
you might still have been free."
"Precautions are useless after the crisis."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)