Sin is the only note of vivid color that persists in the modern world. - Oscar Wilde
The main characters in Bonjour Tristesse take this idea of Wilde'sSin is the only note of vivid color that persists in the modern world. - Oscar Wilde
The main characters in Bonjour Tristesse take this idea of Wilde's to heart.
One of the strong points of this short work is how authentic it seems to the sensibilities of the subset of French culture it represents: the libertine.
The libertine is all for fun and all for themselves. Love is a passing activity to enjoy and then replace. Drinking and smoking are every day revelries. Basking in the French Mediterranean is an expected diversion that prevents the stagnation of a rather meaningless existence.
The book is a kind of commentary on the two societies represented: Anne is of the class of people that are for education, morality, and monogamy. Raymond and Cecile represent the indulgent libertines, selfish and slave to their desires; they revel in the immoral.
Cecile's idea of love is largely based on the way her father Raymond practices love. Raymond believes love is a joke, marriage is a sham, and passion is the true law. Pleasure is the emotion to strive for. Fidelity is not an attractive idea, but rather a shackle.
“For this was the round of love: fear which leads on desire, tenderness and fury, and that brutal anguish which triumphantly follows pleasure.”
As I was reading this quote from Cecile, I found myself thinking: this is not love, this plays at love. This interpretation of love masquerades as a kind of bond, but is only vulnerable lust, which is easily broken.
Anne also disagree's with Cecile's way of thinking and tries to help turn Cecile into an intelligent, feeling person, telling her: Your idea of love is rather primitive. Love is not a series of sensations, each one independent of the other..."
As you would expect, Cecile revolts against this perceived assault to her world view. As most teenagers do, Cecile believes her way of thinking is correct, yet we also see her questioning herself.
I realized that carelessness can govern our lives, but it does not provide us with any arguments in its defense.
The other thing Sagan shines at here is in her depiction of the French riviera. The coast is passionate, the ocean is kind and blue and wonderful, and the woods are peppered with hidden coves perfect for love making upon beds of pine needles. It feels almost like a French midsummers night dream; who is supposed to be with who, and will it come out right in the end?
“It's funny how fate, by introducing herself, loves to choose unworthy and mediocre faces”
This is the world Bonjour Tristesse transports you to: It is a world of excess, and diversions; it is one of fleeting joys and underlining sadness.
The writing is true to the mind of a seventeen year old girl, rebelling against her fathers proposed marriage, all the while falling head long into a sexual awakening. I hated the Cyril - Cecile relationship. He is 25 chasing after a 17 year old? A law student? Are there no woman his age to be interested in?
When this was published France was in uproar over the immoral life Sagan seemed to promote. The book was considered salacious, but also a triumph. For someone so young to have such an adult opinion on the morality of sexuality was unheard of.
There is complexity to the writing that makes me gasp at it being written by someone so young (Sagan was only a teenager herself when she wrote this). I wish I could read the original french and see if it seems as impressive as it does in the english translation.
The story is a toxic one, but it is authentically toxic: to Cecile as a character. I feel if Cecile was much older, I would roll my eyes and feel contempt for her choices, but as a teenager, all her decisions and preoccupations make sense. At her core, Cecile is simply mirroring the behavior of her father, seeking his love, and seeking love from partners in the only way she knows: by mirroring her fathers relationship.
This is not just a unique summer read, perfect for reading by the beach. Bonjour Tristesse is also a classic, and that isn't surprising due to the themes of sexual awakening, selfish pride, fidelity, identity, passion, duty vs temptation, fate vs freewill, and lust.
By the end of the novel Cecile has went through a whirlwind of changes, but has she changed? She has learned the weight of sadness, but I fear little else....more
“You confess that you read detective stories, Miss Grey. You must know that anyone who has a perfect alibi is always open to grave suspicion.” “Do you“You confess that you read detective stories, Miss Grey. You must know that anyone who has a perfect alibi is always open to grave suspicion.” “Do you think that real life is like that?” asked Katherine, smiling. “Why not? Fiction is founded on fact.” “But is rather superior to it,” suggested Katherine.
This series has become my comfort read. I adore Hercule Poirot. When his peculiar Egg-shaped head makes its appearance on the page I smile and sip my tea.
I've taken to reading these novels before bed, so i frequently find myself having to back track a few pages the next time I open them. As such I usually have my kindle, or a physical copy of a Christie work on my nightstand. For the last week, The Mystery of the Blue Train has been my after-work-wind-down companion.
Christie adapted this story from a short story titled "The Plymouth Express". I actually read that short story last year when I read Midwinter Murder: Fireside Tales from the Queen of Mystery and I was less than impressed. So I was impressed to see how Christie subverted all my expectations. Where the short story was flat, the novel is fleshed out, the characters interesting. The murderer(s) are the same as in the short story, so that is something to keep in mind if you decide to read the Hercule Poirot series out of order like I have been.
While the murder and the mystery does take place on a train, the majority of this novel jumps back and forth between England and France. The train journeys from London, passing Dover, Calais, Lyons, and finally Nice. The brilliance and romance of the French Riviera! Of the Provence region! As with such a romantic location, romance is afoot and intermingles with the murder mystery!
This novel jumps back and forth between multiple perspectives. The murder doesn't occur until around 25%, and the beginning is probably the slowest because Christie introduces many different characters including:
Mr. Van Aldin, who has recently purchased a very expensive set of rubies called "Heart of Fire" because of their reputation for passionate misfortunes. He gifts these to his daughter Ruth.
Ruth Kettering, who is unhappily married and has some secrets of her own.
Derek Kettering, who has his own secrets, and has extremely good or bad luck (depending on how you think about it).
Lady Katherine Grey , who has recently come into a fortune, and crosses paths with the Ketterings on the blue train.
While Katherine is reading a detective novel, she runs into Poirot, and as he says, they begin their own roman policier (detective story).
I have to say one of the things I really do appreciate is Christies use of french and other languages. I really enjoy looking up and learning new words! I'm teaching myself french at the moment so this is always a treat.
"From far behind them there came a long-drawn-out scream of an engine’s whistle. “That is that damned Blue Train,” said Lenox. “Trains are relentless things, aren’t they, Monsieur Poirot? People are murdered and die, but they go on just the same. I am talking nonsense, but you know what I mean.” “Yes, yes, I know. Life is like a train, Mademoiselle. It goes on. And it is a good thing that that is so.” “Why?” “Because the train gets to its journey’s end at last, and there is a proverb about that in your language, Mademoiselle.” “ ‘Journeys end in lovers meeting.’ ” Lenox laughed. “That is not going to be true for me.”
*added to the list of books that quote my favorite phrase in all of Shakespeare: Journeys end in lovers meeting*
This book is a part of my goal to read all the Hercule Poirot stories.
The Merchant of Venice stands out to me as the most difficult of Shakespeare's plays to initially get into. Once i got passed the introduction I foundThe Merchant of Venice stands out to me as the most difficult of Shakespeare's plays to initially get into. Once i got passed the introduction I found myself faced with a smart contrast between good and evil, tragedy and the tragic, what the heart wants and what it can afford, and the villains that we make. I learned a lot from The Merchant of Venice. Though the title belongs to Antonio, the story belongs to Shylock.
Shylock is a controversial character because the treatment of him is rooted in a deep, dark anti-semitism. Is he a villain, or is he a victim? His jewish faith is often the butt of a joke, or an insult. But he isn't the only one othered in this work. There are various incidences of racism and colorism on display in this work that in the 1600's would have been glanced over, mocked, used as entertainment.
Shylock takes center stage as the pivotal character of this work. This is Shylocks Tragedy, Antonio is plot dressing.
This is one of those plays where I hated the journey, but on reflection I learned so much from reading this, and I want to read it again in the future. I think I will appreciate it more upon rereading...more
**#7 In my scheme to read all of Shakespeare's work**
I really liked Much Ado About Nothing, in part because the play is a large part written in prose.**#7 In my scheme to read all of Shakespeare's work**
I really liked Much Ado About Nothing, in part because the play is a large part written in prose. It's like A Midsummer Night's Dream turned inside out. Unlike MND, We're not in a green world, but in a little provincial town of Messina. Love is still just as complicated, but the obstacles in Much Ado are less situational (lack of parental approval, blood feuds, mismatched social statuses) and more psychological — apropos men worrying about their women being unfaithful, effectively making cuckolds of them. Love makes fools of us — or does pride? This play tends to lean towards the latter.
Much Ado centers around two couples - Claudio & Hero and Beatrice & Benedick.
Hero is often present but silent in male centered scenes. She is the picture of a desirable renaissance woman - Seen but not heard. And yet for all of her desirable qualities, she is easily believed to have been unfaithful by those around her. Though her name bespeaks a strong character, her actual arc is disappointing. She ends up with a man that seems to be of a weak character, and remains silent in the defilement of her reputation.
Beatrice is one of my favorite Shakespearean heroines I've read so far. She's defined by her loquaciousness in a period where talkativeness in women was akin to being undesirable, unchaste and unmarriageable. And yet Beatrice's wit defines her as being a worthy partner for Benedick, rather than a hindrance. The barrier for this couple is their own apprehension towards marriage, and they overcome it with the help of others. Though their plot is really more of a subplot, or even an underplot, I enjoyed reading about them much more than Hero & Claudio.
Before I read this I only knew that Much Ado was a comedy. Now that I've read it I would classify it more as a tragicomedy, with tragedy always on the edge of the story. This was like reading Romeo & Juliet, but if R&J had survived in the end. ...more
The Castle of Otranto is the definition of unhinged behavior. From its conception, to the actual story, Otranto is a wild time. I did not expect to beThe Castle of Otranto is the definition of unhinged behavior. From its conception, to the actual story, Otranto is a wild time. I did not expect to be totally sucked into a book published in 1764, but then I found myself finishing this in one sitting.
With this novel, Walpole birthed an entire genre. While Otranto might not be great, without it we don’t have Frankenstein: The 1818 Text, Dracula,The Haunting of Hill House, Northanger Abbey. Otranto created the staples of the genre: creepy doors opening and shutting on their own, paintings moving, hidden rooms and tunnels leading to who knows where. We have the once revered castle made to be a place where horrors take place. I personally love the gothic genre, so I have to bow and clap for Walpole just for his influence alone.
I decided to read this book because of Northanger Abbey. If you've never read Northanger, it is Jane Austen's parody of the gothic genre. It is so fun, and the characters in it are obsessed with gothic novels. Otranto was one of the novels mentioned, and I've really been wanting to read all the novels Catherine talks about.
Let’s go back a bit, shall we?
History Walpole wrote this in an endeavor to marry two types of romance, saying it was "an attempt to blend the two kinds of romance, the ancient and the modern. In the former all was imagination and improbability: in the latter, nature is always intended to be.” The ancient focused on the imaginary, and the modern was focused on realism.
Basically he wanted to write about real people dealing with real problems (marital unhappiness, inability to have children, lovelessness, etc) and set that amid a backdrop of supernatural happenings. And while he's at it, he places them in a medieval castle, because thats just the kind of guy Walpole is. Look up his home, Strawberry Hill, and you'll see Walpole is all about castles. Add to that extreme melodrama that borders on satire, and you have The Castle of Otranto.
Now here’s the really genius part.
Despite being extremely proud of the work, Walpole created this whole mythology surrounding Otranto, published it under a pseudonym, claimed it was from like the 1200's and that it had been recently discovered and translated from Italian. People LOVED it, and of course Walpole decides to do away with the charade and let everyone know it was HE, Horace Walpole, son of a British Prime Minister, that wrote this seriously dramatic story unlike anything out at the time. Critics turned on him, and decried the novel. Poor Walpole.
Supposedly Walpole did this because he was shy and not sure how the work would be received, but I like to think he was just a advertising genius, because what better way to promote a book than this? Seriously, has anyone else ever done something like this? I love it.
Walpole said the idea for Otranto came to him when he had a nightmare similar to the plot of the story.
Plot The Castle of Otranto is set in Otranto Italy, in the medieval time period. From a few google searches, Otranto is this seaside town, filled with gorgeous architecture, so I can see why our architecture obsessed author chose this as his setting. Manfred is the prince of Otranto and is about to marry off his only son, Conrad, to a great match named Isabella so that his family line can continue to rule for years and years, yada yada.
Manfred is obsessed with bloodlines and having an heir. The only thing that matters to him is his lineage. He has a daughter Matilda, that is super saint-like and pretty much lets her dad treat her like trash, because gender roles. His wife, Hippolita is also the picture of what men back then would expect from their wives: she’s subservient, pious and deferential, but alas, she can’t provide Manfred with more children! So in his eyes she’s the worst wife ever and why oh why must he be stuck with her!
Then Conrad dies, and the whole plot is set in motion. Turns out there's this scary secret prophecy. Manfred couldn’t care less about his dead son and starts plotting to have more sons without really caring if the chosen woman wants to have his children.
Miscellany Catholicism plays a huge part in the plot, with the idea of catholic judgement and retribution being tied to the supernatural happenings.
Walpole seems to have been influenced a lot by Shakespeare with the ghosts having a similar mechanic to how Shakespeare treated the ghosts in Hamlet and Macbeth. They are all harbingers and portents from the heavens. He also makes use of misunderstandings, with many a plot point being carried forward because the characters misunderstand who they are talking to or what they are talking about. It reminded me a lot of As You Like It in that way.
At times the plot dives head long into humor. There were a few lines in particular that made me laugh out loud at the absurdity.
"Manfred could not support this act of pathetic piety. He dashed himself on the ground, and cursed the day he was born."
"The Princess Hippolita, without knowing what was the matter, but anxious for her son, swooned away."
"My dearest father, it is I, your daughter." Manfred, stepping back hastily, cried, "Begone! I do not want a daughter;" and flinging back abruptly, clapped the door against the terrified Matilda."
Conclusion This story has it all: a love triangle, betrayal, death, more betrayal, silly fights. I can only imagine how Walpole’s contemporaries felt reading this.
I picture ladies in drawing rooms giggling and clutching the book to their chests, gasping. I picture groups huddled together discussing the ghosts over fire light. I picture friends exploring houses and castles in the dark of night, searching for hidden passageways or other secrets. Walpole's Otranto opened up an entire world of imagination. This is one of those books that everyone would have been talking about at the time, because it was so different from anything available.
Even though it isn't perfect, Otranto is important because of all the great literature it spawned. For that alone it is worth a read. ...more
If you only read one Agatha Christie book in your lifetime, let it be this one.
I went into this with a healthy dose of skepticism. At this point I've If you only read one Agatha Christie book in your lifetime, let it be this one.
I went into this with a healthy dose of skepticism. At this point I've read 10 Christie works, most of them good, some of them bad.
The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is the best book by Christie I've read so far, and I do not know if any of her other work will be able to surpass this one.
I'd put off reading this one because a few years ago a friend was reading this and let it slip who the murderer was, and despite my best efforts to purge this information from my brain, it remained stuck in my memory. So I really was not sure if i would enjoy reading a mystery where the mystery was already revealed to me: but it didn't matter. Christie lays the story out in such a masterful way that reading it becomes a delight; seeing all the clues laid out before Poirot and the steps he takes to solve the crime are exciting.
In terms of Christies writing, she was at her best with this novel. The way that she inserted red herrings, clues, and foreshadowing were so delicately done as to not be overhanded or obvious. I could tell that she must have rewritten and restructured this many times to have it flawless and foolproof, no ends left undone.
Plot The Murder of Roger Ackroyd begins with the death of Mrs. Ferrars, Roger Ackroyds neighbor and presumed girlfriend. Dr. Sheppard (our narrator) examines Mrs. Ferrars and thinks the death is suspicious, but no suicide note is found so he moves on with his life. Dr. Sheppard lives with his nosey gossipy sister, and she is convinced that Mrs. Ferrars killed herself because of guilt. What does she think Mrs. Ferrars is guilty of, you might ask? She believes her guilty of murdering her first husband, Mr. Ferrars! This story begins with a lot of murder, suicide and intrigue and it isn't even the title murder!
Dr. Sheppard continues to mind his own business, but Roger Ackroyd confides in him that Mrs. Ferrars admitted to killing her husband, and claimed she was being blackmailed. When Ackroyd found out his love interest was a murderer, he did a really bad job of hiding his disgust, and as such Mrs. Ferrars offs herself, but not before mailing him a letter with her blackmailers name! Not long after this revelation. Ackroyd finds himself murdered, and Dr. Sheppard finds himself engrossed in the town scandal. Who killed who? and Why?
Meanwhile, Poirot is minding his own business: He's retired, and growing vegetable marrows. One days he gets exceedingly frustrated with the unruliness of his vegetable marrows and he throws one over the garden wall, striking his neighbor accidentally. Who is his poor neighbor? Dr. Sheppard!
An aside: (If you're like me and had no idea what exactly a vegetable marrow is, a quick google search revealed that Poirot himself is quite murderous! Vegetable marrows are squash that are from the same family as melons, cucumbers and courgettes. You're telling me Poirot could have killed Dr. Sheppard by head trauma related to being struck with an overly zealous squash?)
Poirot's apology is the stuff of legend:
"I demand of you a thousand pardons, monsieur. I am without defense. For some months now I cultivate the marrows. This morning suddenly I enrage myself with the marrows. I send them to promenade themselves - alas! not only mentally but physically. I seize the biggest. I hurl him over the wall. Monsieur, I am ashamed. I prostrate myself."
After this violent meeting, the two become intertwined, and investigate the murder together.
This novel has everything going for it, it's Poirot at his best, Christie perhaps at her best as well. It is as close to perfection as a mystery thriller can hope to come, and arguably the twist shaped detective and mystery fiction from its inception on. Christie broke the mold, the wheel, whatever you want to call it.
There is a reason that Christie is the most sold author in the world next to Shakespeare: Maybe it is because of the sheer quantity of work she has put out; or maybe its because in the stacks of stories there are a few (like this one) that shine bright like rare treasures.
This book is a part of my goal to read all the Hercule Poirot stories.
The Pickwick Papers is the first published work by Charles Dickens. Its' success skyrocketed Dickens to the forefront of English Literature at a time The Pickwick Papers is the first published work by Charles Dickens. Its' success skyrocketed Dickens to the forefront of English Literature at a time when England was hungry for new authors. It was originally serialized as monthly installments, with the first coming out in March of 1836, and the last completing in late 1837.
At the time of publication society in England was at a bit of an intellectual impasse, they wanted new literature, but they weren’t quite ready for anything difficult, they wanted something comforting and relatable, hence the decision made by publishers to create a monthly serial of stories surrounding a “nimrod” gentlemen's club in England. It would be something to look forward to, something that readers would relish returning to. But with that being said, Dickens had to be careful to slip in his on political and social agenda without overwhelming the reader (Especially in the beginning stages, as new readers are typically as fickle as newborn babies). Later, with his readers trust cemented, Dickens could more brashly dip his toes into subjects that deeply distressed him
Dickens didn’t dream of The Pickwick Papers being a novel until the work was well under way, and as such the beginning half of the work reads as a miscellany of non linear stories. It isn’t until halfway when Dickens finally begins to thread together a tale with a common event - Bardell v. Pickwick.
This is a work that wears many hats. It is at times a farce, a comedy, a satire, a scathing reproach of english ideals, a drama, a love story (in as much as a love story can be written by an inexperienced young man), a gentleman’s club, a coming of age story, an adventure, a supernatural ghost story, a fantasy, a philosophical ramble and a fever dream. Dickens tries them all on, and interchanges them as he likes. He tries on different motifs and twists them to his will, endlessly surprising readers of old and of new. This was a great beginning for Dickens because it allowed him to try on various styles, themes and genres, often at the same time. We could begin a chapter on a note of innocent farce and end on a note of humble introspection. TPWP was where he found himself as a writer, what worked and didn't work.
The Pickwick Papers was originally presented as an archive of actual stories from an actual club, edited by a narrator named Boz (a pen name chosen by Dickens, and first used in his “Sketches by Boz” that originally turned the progenitors of TPWP to Dickens). Englanders were enticed by these seemingly ~real~ fictional events. The mystique behind what was true and what was false allowed Dickens to really satirize his readers without causing offense, instead it incited a desire for change.
In fact, many things did change from the time of the first chapters publication to the last chapters culmination. We get the beginnings here of things we come now to recognize as “Dickensian”; Ie, a focus on social injustices through satire and other lenses, the horror of debtors prisons (look up Marshalsea & The Fleet if you want a deep dive into this), and the incongruous nature of the legal system. All of these topics come up again at some point in his other works.
We also get to see inklings of his works to come, such as a chapter so similar to A Christmas Carol and his other Christmas works that I hesitate to reveal much (i’ll just say that if you’re in a Christmas mood, please return to chapter 27 & 28). We get to see phrases that we associate now with Dickens such as “humbug”used as an insult to Mr. Pickwick in chapter one.
Many of the events in TPWP were influenced by Dickens on life. His time growing up in a debtors prison reflects Pickwick's experience in The Fleet Prison. We see a lot of Dickens in his characters, chiefly in Pickwick, the perpetual recorder– Dickens spent most of his own early life as a journalist recording other people's adventures (And oftener misadventures.) These experiences shaped him and culminated in his fierce reprisal towards social injustices.
There is a reason Dickens and Pickwick are still celebrated today. TPWP is an honest look at 1800’s England, a study of both culture, landscapes and history. Many of the jokes within are lost on readers today, and require the use of footnotes, but at the time they were both amusing as they were intelligent.
Though a success, it had its struggles: The original illustrator killed himself, the replacement illustrator had production issues, a death in Dickens' family delayed publication and sales diminished during these hardships.
In the introduction to my edition of The Pickwick Papers, the editor calls it a "messy masterpiece" and I think I have to agree with that statement. Like many early successes, Dickens came to regret the cult following TPWP gained in England, as he had long since moved on to more thematically deep and structurally sound works. TPWP felt immature to him in comparison. As such, in subsequent editions Dickens made copious changes and added to his ever growing list of errata. In my edition, many of Dickens' errata have been reverted.
Conclusion For my own experience, I have to admit that I at times felt like reading this was a slog. But I lend that more to the speed at which i read it, compared to the speed that I should have read it. I would recommend taking your time reading this one, and if possible reading it along the original publication schedule. The pacing can be inconsistent, and especially in the beginning the chapters can feel disjointed. Certain characters all but disappear, possibly due to Dickens' losing interest (Where exactly did Tupman and Snodgrass get off to?)
Women were only in the book as objects of romantic conquest and seemed to do little more than look pretty and faint frequently. Though, I do have to admit to having a guilty pleasure for jokes about predatory widows now thanks to Mr. Weller.
At the same time, I did find this to become a cozy read, and I was sad to close it when it was over. I spent many a cozy evening falling asleep with TPWP in my hands. I did enjoy these characters and their ridiculous antics, and this window into 1800 England felt like stepping through to another world. Dickens is masterful at turning motifs upside down and his fantastical chapters were my favorite (see chapters 14, 22, 28, 48). If you want to read about chairs turning into men, goblins chastising drunks in cemeteries, and old mail carts coming alive at night, look no further than these chapters. I genuinely laughed out loud in almost every chapter at some shenanigan or other, and for that I really have to commend Dickens.
And as Pickwick says at the end, reflecting both the author and the readers thoughts: "I shall never regret having devoted the greater part of two years to mixing with different varieties and shades of human character, frivolous as my pursuit of novelty may have appeared to many."
"Let us leave our old friend in one of those moments of unmixed happiness, of which, if we seek them, there are ever some to cheer our transitory existence here. There are dark shadows on the earth, but its lights are stronger in the contrast. Some men, like bats or owls, have better eyes for the darkness than for the light; we, who have no such optical powers, are better pleased to take our last parting look at the visionary companions of many solitary hours, when the brief sunshine of the world is blazing full upon them."
"It is the fate of most men who mingle with the world and attain even the prime of life, to make many real friends, and lose them in the course of nature. It is the fate of all authors or chroniclers to create imaginary friends, and lose them in the course of art."
This is my first time reading anything by Tolstoy, and so I was hesitant, afraid it would be too dense or difficult to parse through. That wasn’t the This is my first time reading anything by Tolstoy, and so I was hesitant, afraid it would be too dense or difficult to parse through. That wasn’t the case. Childhood, Boyhood, Youth is easy to read, the prose is rich and in some places comforting. Despite being written over one hundred and fifty years ago, it is remarkably relatable. This novel deals with issues of identity, spirituality, emotions, sexuality, classism, poverty and gender roles in 1800’s Russian society.
Childhood, Boyhood, Youth was the first work written by Tolstoy, and as a result it is flawed, but it is also beautiful. Each part was written about different stages of life, and was intended to culminate in the fourth movement Manhood. Unfortunately, the tetralogy was left unfinished, and so the impact of the story as whole is less effective. As a result, CBY is best dissected as a study of its parts, and not as the sum of its parts. For me, I found Boyhood to be the most well written, with Childhood coming in second, and Youth in a very firm last. CBY is a study of memories, emotions and identity that leave the reader with a sense they are watching the narrator grow up. It recalls images of our own childhoods, and the events that shaped us into who we are now.
First works are always interesting to read, because it shows you the authors roots, their beginnings, and with Tolstoy this is no difference. Already at this early stage in his career, it is clear he is a talented writer, but not yet adept at plot and characterization (Especially with his female characters). In some parts it feels clumsy, especially when the first person narration suddenly shifts without preamble –or arguably, necessity. As I have not read any other Tolstoy, I can’t compare this (yet) to his later works.
In this novel, we are following Nikolay Irtenev as he grows up in Russia. This story is mostly fiction, but it is heavily influenced by Tolstoy’s own life, and it’s hard to tell how much of what Nikolay experience is fiction and truth. Many of the characters share names of Tolstoy’s family members and friends. The narrator, Nikolay, is one of Tolstoy’s brothers names.
Tolstoy structured all three parts with brief chapters, leaving little pockets of memories for us to reflect on. It leaves the reader with the sense that they are peering into the narrators past, looking in on crucial moments that shaped him. Why is the narrator the way he is? Well, Tolstoy lays it all out on the page for us. It felt somewhat like that scene in Harry Potter and The Half-blood Prince when Harry uses the pensieve to view Dumbledore & Snape’s memories. (Yes, I can relate everything back to HP, it’s a problem I have)
Nikolay in childhood is curious, imaginative. Nikolay in boyhood is labile, anxious, and confused. Nikolay in youth is... well... prideful, pompous, and totally lost, whether he recognizes it or not. While it makes for a difficult read, weren’t most of us like this as we were young? Don’t we all look back on our past selves and think, ‘goodness, what was I thinking? Why did I act that way?’ Haven’t we all at one point or another wanted to reclaim that childhood innocence we once had?
CBY stands the test of time because the issues Nikolay faces –– identity, classism, gender roles, sexuality, parental expectations –– are all relatable today. Many of the situations he ends up in made me recall something similar from my own past. It’s remarkable to me that Tolstoy found a way for readers to find common ground with him, despite the barriers of time and culture.
While I had some issues with CBY, it gets a lot of things right.
What Tolstoy gets right with this first work is a depth of character emotions, that while frustrating, feel real, and relatable despite the passage of time. Nikolay may not always make sound choices, but his emotional response is written with a fresh honesty. Tolstoy doesn’t sugar coat Nikolay’s actions, he doesn’t force readers to like Nikolay. And for the most part, I didn’t like Nikolay, and I’m okay with that. He felt real because of his flaws. However, with a coming of age novel it helps to have a character with some redeeming factors... and Nikolay didn’t have any of that for me. I think that if he had finished the series, perhaps Nikolay would have been redeemed, but as for the ending of youth? We see none of that character progression. It feels regressive.
Overall, I enjoyed my reading of this novel. I enjoyed Childhood and Boyhood far more than Youth, and I wish that the series had been completed. I do think this is a valuable look at a writers beginning, especially for those interested in Tolstoy. As for me, I am reading through all of Tolstoy’s works, and starting with his humble beginnings will hopefully make my experience reading his greater works (War and Peace & Anna Karenina) more powerful. However, I don’t think this is a novel I would read again.
Last Note: One can glean some insight into how Manhood may have ended, by looking at Tolstoy’s own life. After failing at University, Tolstoy gets his life together, begins writing, and becomes a success. A similar fate may have been meant for Nikolay.
The Invisible Man is a book of many faces, for a story centered on a seemingly faceless man. When I started reading this I thought it was simply sci-fThe Invisible Man is a book of many faces, for a story centered on a seemingly faceless man. When I started reading this I thought it was simply sci-fi, but it was not long before I came upon my error –– It’s best to not judge a book based on what you’ve heard about it. Based on the cover alone I expected The Invisible Man to be dry, clinical even. This is a novel by HG Wells, considered to be one of the forefathers of Science Fiction, but this is also a horror novel, a social satire and even forays into slapstick comedy.
The invisible man begins in a whirl of fresh snow falling down from the sky, and an odd man yelling for a fire and a comfortable place to rest. In this way we are introduced to a British countryside cemented deeply in a world of winter. This quintessential introduction gives the reader a stark look into the world, and mind, of our main character. With this line we are introduced to a world fraught with snow and hardships and our characters search for warmth and comfort. With this line we wonder where our lone traveler has come from – and where he is going.
Throughout our time with The Invisible Man, we begin to ask ourselves questions about the world around us –– Are all men inherently evil? What would man do if he were all-powerful – immune to judgment?
We also discuss the danger of scientific advancement & the pursuit of knowledge as the forbidden fruit – are we as men meant to have the knowledge to commit despicable acts?
I’m a sucker for stories with large themes that encompass more than the bindings of their books. The Invisible man accomplished this in a burst of snowfall, leaving icy footfalls in its wake. This story left an impression on me, and for that I will remember it in the cold months ahead. ...more
Chopin was alienated for writing this. She was a pariah. The book was burned, it was taboo, it was sin. Chopin published it anyway. She was a widow, wiChopin was alienated for writing this. She was a pariah. The book was burned, it was taboo, it was sin. Chopin published it anyway. She was a widow, with children, and her options for making money were limited. She tried her hand at writing.
And she failed. And in her failure, a depression rose that according to some, killed her. But now, as is often the case, the story is taught in schools, is referenced in literature, is revered– but just as often, it is still hated.
I love a polarizing read!
The Awakening contains: Brave depictions of female sexuality & desire (in 1899!!!)
A journey to self discovery and defying social norms and gender roles.
Lush, melancholy and sensuous descriptions of Southern Louisiana! — I’ve never considered visiting, but reading this story has sparked a desire in me to take a little coastal Louisiana road trip.
The Awakening begins with glimmers of marital distaste:
"He reproached his wife with her inattention, her habitual neglect of the children. If it was not a mother’s place to look after children, whose on earth was it? He himself had his hands full with his brokerage business. He could not be in two places at once; making a living for his family on the street, and staying at home to see that no harm befell them. He talked in a monotonous, insistent way."
With moments like these, it is easy to see why Edna Pontellier and her husband are not happily married.
“She’s got some sort of notion in her head concerning the eternal rights of women; and-you understand-we meet in the morning at the breakfast table.”
The thing you must keep in mind while reading this is that it was published in 1899. 1899!
Divorce was not feasible then. Infidelity was a different beast then than it is now.
I did some research, because what is a reader without diving down deep rabbit holes and learning obscure facts about far flung topics.
At the time, Louisiana was predominantly Catholic. According to the catechisms, divorce is a sin that defies the natural order. At that time, divorce was so rare that it was almost myth. If someone did obtain a divorce, they would not be able to remarry under the catholic church.
And even if divorce was obtained, what was a woman to do? She would likely be shunned by society. Prostitution is an option, but that leads to even more shame. Would she be able to even see her children? Her children would be social pariahs, born of a woman that had both disavowed social norms and taken up with what would easily be perceived as unforgivable sin.
Women had few options.
Marriage was hardly a choice. You must marry, and for the most part, you married young. Before you really knew the world, before you really knew yourself. This is what happens to Edna Pontellier.
Chopin herself recognizes this when she writes:
"The trouble is,” sighed the Doctor, grasping her meaning intuitively, “that youth is given up to illusions. It seems to be a provision of Nature; a decoy to secure mothers for the race. And Nature takes no account of moral consequences, of arbitrary conditions which we create, and which we feel obliged to maintain at any cost.”
The entire novel is about the social, religious and moral shackles that society had placed on women. Edna turns twenty eight during the course of this novel. She finds herself questioning everything, her role, her dissatisfaction with her marriage, her guilt over not enjoying motherhoods responsibilities, her desire to be alone, to be free— to have her own life, her own desires, her own ambitions, outside of motherhood and being a housewife.
"She thought of Leonce and the children. They were a part of her life. But they need not have thought that they could possess her, body and soul."
The desire to be alone, to forge your own path, is an important theme in the Awakening. Edna struggles to reconcile this desire with her identity as a mother and wife, but ultimately, her true inner self becomes her guiding force. She does what she wants, when she wants. She loves who she loves.
"Why,” went on Edna, clasping her knees and looking up into Mademoiselle’s twisted face, “do you suppose a woman knows why she loves? Does she select? Does she say to herself: ‘Go to! Here is a distinguished statesman with presidential possibilities; I shall proceed to fall in love with him.’ Or, ‘I shall set my heart upon this musician, whose fame is on every tongue?’ Or, ‘This financier, who controls the world’s money markets?’
But no sojourn for self discovery is free of mistakes... and bad decisions.
Edna makes a lot of mistakes. She falls helplessly in love with a man she is not married to. A man that deserts her, because goodness do the men think they can make all the decisions for Edna. Even Robert does not grant Edna the opportunity for agency.
Then comes Alcee Arobin, a man that Edna feels lust for, but not love.
Bodily Autonomy is a theme here as well, with Edna finding her way towards making decisions with her body. She is able to take agency over her body and fate, and escape the oppression that hounded her.
The other thing to keep in mind while reading this is that: Chopin is not writing any of these characters to divine sympathy. I don't feel we are supposed to be sympathetic to any of them. I've seen a lot of reviews complaining about how selfish and unlikable Edna is. FINE, but an unlikeable narrator does not make an unlikeable story. Perhaps we should despise the social systems that cause women like Edna to have been placed in these positions. And while we are at it, Edna's decision in the end seems rather selfless to me. It saves her children from scandal, and provides the illusion that it could have been accidental. Is this choice a kindness, or is it an injury? I don't know. Chopin gives us morally grey characters and situations to ponder over.
It is not surprising that this book was reviled in 1899. It was everything that Catholic Louisiana society hated: Scandal, female agency, brazen descriptions of a woman's sexuality. And it is no wonder it is still despised by some today: A woman who shows little love towards her children is hard to stomach. But I ask, where is the same hatred towards her husband? Because he often neglects his family as well. He treats them as something to be possessed. Not something to be loved.
I love literature like this. For me, The Awakening stands with Charlotte Perkins Gilman's novella The Yellow Wall-paper and Other Stories, and Shirley Jackson's novel The Haunting of Hill House. It is another example of great literature with feminist leanings, but it also speaks of madness: Is Edna mad because she doesn't conform to society? Or if society mad for shackling her to oppressive expectations? Does her society cause her to become mad? OR, is she saner then she ever was?
Another classic I missed in school down! ✅ Though, I have to admit, I don’t think I would have enjoyed or appreciated this as a sophomore in high school. Sometimes, missing out on a book for a time is a small mercy....more
One of my all time favorites to read after Christmas, in anticipation of the New Year. A Doll's House is as transformative, empowering and relevant toOne of my all time favorites to read after Christmas, in anticipation of the New Year. A Doll's House is as transformative, empowering and relevant today as it was in 1879....more
"Confusion is a luxury which only the very, very young can possibly afford and you are not that young anymore."
For me, this is an example of the perfe"Confusion is a luxury which only the very, very young can possibly afford and you are not that young anymore."
For me, this is an example of the perfect novel. It is well rounded, important, endlessly open for discussion, cuts across boundaries, leaves everything bleeding on the pages. It is beautiful, destructive and instructive. So many quotes to learn from, so many quotes to live by.
"Nobody can stay in the garden of Eden." "Everyone, after all, goes down the same dark road––and the road has a trick of being most dark, most treacherous, when it seems most bright––and it's true that nobody stays in the garden of Eden." "Perhaps everybody has a garden of Eden. I don't know; but they have scarcely seen their garden before they see the flaming sword."
Langston Hughes said of Baldwin's writing that, "He uses words as the sea uses waves, to flow and beat, advance and retreat, rise and take a bow in disappearing… the thought becomes poetry and the poetry illuminates the thought."
This quote shows exactly what Baldwins writing is like: His prose isn't flowery purple prose, it cuts like a knife and is real and raw and at the same time it is vibrant and potent.
Giovanni's room is a tragic story of love and self loathing that is written like poetry and speaks to the heart of Paris from an American perspective. It is a story effused with the stench of cigarettes in lonely bars, the feeling of lust and first love, and the despair of making the wrong choice, and having to live with it. For our main character David (and for Giovanni), Paris is an escape from their problems, but there is no escape: new surroundings cannot change their inner selves. This novel is as much about self discovery as it is about self denial. David crosses an entire Ocean, and still finds himself dealing with the same problems. Deep down, David acknowledges that his flight from America was about more than finding himself –– it was about giving himself the space to truly fall. And fall he does.
Perhaps, as we say in America, I wanted to find myself. This is an interesting phrase, not current as far as I know in the language of any other people, which certainly does not mean what it says but betrays a nagging suspicion that something has been misplaced. I think now that if I had had any intimation that the self I was going to find would turn out to be only the same self from which I had spent so much time in flight, I would have stayed at home. But, again, I think I knew, at the very bottom of my heart, exactly what I was doing when I took the boat for France.
It is interesting to note that once David arrives in Paris, he almost immediately ensconces himself with in the gay community of France. He finds pride in his self restraint, looking down on the gay men around him, while repressing his own desires. As a character, David is really difficult to like. He continuously treats others around him horribly, all the while excusing his own behavior. He loves Giovanni, but treats him like trash, He "loves" Hella, but cheats on her and lies to her constantly. David is not a good person. But I don’t think he is bad either. I didn’t think any of this characters were bad, just shaped (and shamed) by society, religion, family.
When Baldwin showed this manuscript to his publisher, they told him to burn it. They said that it would alienate him from his black readers. Even in the face of this fear, this potential ruination of his reputation, Baldwin published Giovanni's room anyway. This work is groundbreaking because queer identity was not discussed, much less read about, when it was published.
There is so much to discuss with Giovanni's room: Queer identity, Shame, Self- deception, New world vs. Old world mentalities, Poverty, Homophobia, Masculinity, Femininity, Transphobia, Societal expectations, etc. One thing that is left out (seemingly), is race. All the characters, at first glance, are white. In an interview Baldwin said that he, "didn’t feel he could tackle at one time the dual agonies of racism and hatred of gay people" At the same time, Giovanni is Italian. There was a time when Italians were referred to as non white. Giovanni is first described as "dark and leonine." There is a current of racial relations running under the surface.
Speaking of currents, water is a huge in this novel. It symbolizes both the distance between David and well, everyone else, and also the idea of David's drowning in shame.
"I remember that life in that room seemed to be occurring beneath the sea."
Shame, temptation and identity are the biggest themes in this story. Giovanni's room becomes a tangible manifestation of their shared shame, their hidden relationship. David tries desperately to free himself from Giovannis room, an escape that mirrors his own desire to escape the shame he feels himself. David yearns to be free to be himself, but he still feels that to be himself is to be with a woman. Ultimately, he cannot live with his shame, and instead of blaming himself or society, he blames Giovanni. It is the only way I can explain the way he treats Giovanni, it is a kind of self hatred, lashing out at the object of his love, a kind of self defeating prophecy.
"Your father or mine, should have told us that not many people have ever died of love. But multitudes have perished, and are perishing every hour—and in the oddest places!—for the lack of it." And then: "Here comes your baby. Sois Sage. Sois chic."
And here my baby came indeed, through all that sunlight, his face flushed and his hair flying, his eyes, unbelievably, like morning stars.
Theres a discussion in the novel about the differences between the old world (Europe) and the New World (America). This is extremely interesting in the context of the post World war setting, and the homosexual identity of the characters. During the Nazi occupation of France, people accused of homosexuality were taken to concentration camps. Many died. As such, it isn't surprising that even in the post-war freedom, there is hesitance in being out in the day light, holding hands, kissing in public.
In France, homosexuality was decriminalized as early as 1791! In America the first state to "legalize" same-sex sexual acts was Illinois, in 1962. In 1967 the first nation wide law to "legalize" homosexuality was passed. I put "legalize" in quotation marks because these steps did very little to actually prevent the wrongful arrests of LGTBQ people. I did a little research, and found this Guardian article, Coming Out of The Dark Ages, that reports: "It didn't stop the arrests: between 1967 and 2003, 30,000 gay and bisexual men were convicted for behavior that would not have been a crime had their partner been a woman." That is a staggering figure.
This is relevant to the story because it shows the different worlds that David and Giovanni are both living in: David's shame is based on his own self preservation. In America he could quite literally lose his life for being openly gay. While in Paris gay men still seem to reserve their predilections for the night time hours, and dark, private places, the fear of death does not cling to them, in the same way it does David.
"Paris is old, is many centuries. You feel, in Paris, all the time to gone by."
"I don't see why the world is so new for Americans," said Giovanni. "After all, you are all merely emigrants. And you did not leave Europe so very long ago."
"The ocean is very wide," I said. "We have led different lives than you; things have happened to us there which have never happened here. Surely you can understand this would make us different people?"
I was also reminded of Hemingway saying:
”If you are lucky enough to have lived in Paris as a young man, then wherever you go for the rest of your life, it stays with you, for Paris is a moveable feast,” And in Baldwins story this is true, but the consequences are damning for the main character & life will never be the same.
The story is tragic but so hard to look away from, reading it is like devouring it, and for me Giovanni’s room is a moveable feast that will stay with me.
Initial Thoughts I’ve been busy this month with work, social engagements, travel plans, jury summons (lucky me).
My husband and I are traveling to London & Paris is the spring. I really enjoyed this depiction of Paris, and French language.
My reading has been limited, but every moment I could turn to Giovanni’s room, I was sickly happy to. This book is tragic, so it does feel a little macabre to enjoy the disaster.
I now want to read everything Baldwin has written....more
This is a skillful urban gothic tale, imbued with suspense and misdirection, set in the bleak backdrop of London. This is one of the first gothic workThis is a skillful urban gothic tale, imbued with suspense and misdirection, set in the bleak backdrop of London. This is one of the first gothic works set in an urban setting; its perpetually fog-covered London backdrop set the stage for writers like Oscar Wilde and Arthur Conan Doyle It also influenced early science fiction writers like H.G Wells.
Modern readers think they know the story of Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde, and while the twist is widely known to those that haven't actually read the story, the mechanics of the work are not. Because I knew the twist, I wasn't sure if I would enjoy the story: I was wrong. If you haven't read Stevenson's strange case because of similar fears, put those fears to bed and sit up with Jekyll and Hyde. This story is short but powerful, a tale that you can finish in an hour but hold with you for a lifetime.
Plot The story is told through the eyes of the lawyer, Mr. Utterson. His good friend, the upstanding Dr. Jekyll has entrusted him with his will. Mr. Utterson is baffled that Jekyll has left all of his fortune and belongings to a mysterious Mr. Hyde. While this at first bothers Mr. Utterson due to the strangeness of the request, his suspicions become enflamed when he learns more about the character of Mr. Hyde.
It offended him both as a lawyer and as a lover of the sane and customary sides of life. It was worse when it began to be clothed with detstable attributes; and out of the shifting, insubstantial mists that had so long baffled his eye, there leaped up the sudden, definite presentment of a fiend."
The more he learns, the more he becomes wrapped up in saving Jekyll's reputation, and ousting Hyde from his life. These suspicions and secrets lead to a revelation that shocked and chilled its first readers.
The story is told through various testimonies from ancillary characters that have observed Mr. Hyde's wrongdoings. Utterson takes all of these testimonies as truth. I liked that Stevenson approached the story this way, as it added a layer of mystery to Hyde, making him almost a creature of legend, echoing what he has become in not only the literary canon, but the worlds subconscious as a whole. Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde have tendrils that far reach the bounds of literature; the story effected and changed how psychology was viewed, how morality could be explained. The us vs them became the us versus ourselves. Inner and outer worlds collided. Stevenson did what all great literature has the power to do: he made his audience challenge their entire world view: what was true and what was not? Could the kindly doctor also hide within a darkness, a malice and disregard so strong it could burn everything it touched? And if this was true, what does that say about everyone else?
Character Utterson reminded me a lot of Lockwood from Wuthering Heights. Both characters operate as outsiders, inserting themselves into the story. When the story is at a close, you don't remember these characters, you remember their obsession.
We all know by now that Jekyll & Hyde are one and the same, representing good and evil. The problem with this, as Stevenson teases out through the narrative, is that one person cannot be all good and all evil. You cannot separate those two warring parts of the self (as Jekyll tried to do). A person can be a mixture of both, and ignoring this is detrimental. There is also a moral lesson in this, in that giving yourself up to darkness, to ill morality, leads to ruination of the soul.
Quotes/Idiosyncrasies/Misc
"Is it the mere radiance of a foul soul that thus transpires through, and transfigures, its clay continent. The last, I think; for O my poor old Henry Jekyll, if ever I read Satan's signature upon a face, it is on that of your new friend."
"my mind misgives me he is in deep waters!" what I would GIVE to use this as an epigraph one day. I have a document of quotes for just such an occasion, and this one makes the cut.
"Ay, I must put my shoulder to the wheel– if Jekyll will but let me,"
"It was a wild, cold, seasonable night of March, with a pale moon, lying on her back as though the wind had tilted her, and a flying wrack of the most diaphanous and lawny texture."
"Ah, it's an ill-conscience that's such an enemy to rest!" An interesting revelation, but true all the same.
If you like witticism and cutting remarks, Stevenson is fluent in this language: "about as emotional as a bagpipe"
This is the apotheosis of the work, the quote that lends both irony and foreshadowing to the story, for it is a lie. None of them hold this as a rule, unless it is a rule that is meant to be broken. Curiosity is dangerous. The first question of the story sets the motion of the plot. "You start a question, and it's like starting a stone. You sit quietly on top of a hill; and away the stones goes, starting others; and presently some bland old bird (the last you would have thought of) is knocked on the head in his own back garden and the family have to change their name. No sir, I make it a rule of mine: the more it looks like Queer Street, the less I ask."
Conclusion All of this is is to say– Is the case of Jekyll & Hyde so strange? The method (the powders, the scientific reaction) is strange, but the case itself is not. Good people hide dark things, everyone has secrets, and not everyone has the best intentions. Stevenson's tale illuminates the darkness hiding in the most unlikely places. This is a classic battle between good and evil, a parable as old as the story of Genesis, reaching forward in time, to the labyrinthine streets of London, wreaking havoc on readers in a bygone era, and wreaking still more havoc on readers today.
Stevensons work is valuable to me because these characters and this story changed the fabric of the traditional gothic story, it began asking questions of psychology and morality that needed to be considered, and it did all of this while spinning a yarn that is as tantalizing as it is mesmerizing.
Sometimes I read a work that makes me feel like the author must have been under the influence of some kind of magic, this is one of them....more
"Wherever books are burned, men also, in the end, are burned." – Henrich Heine
Overview Guy Montag is a fireman, but instead of putting fires out, he st"Wherever books are burned, men also, in the end, are burned." – Henrich Heine
Overview Guy Montag is a fireman, but instead of putting fires out, he starts them. When an alarm is called, he answers the call armed with kerosene ignorance and a burnt-on smile. F451 is a cautionary tale about the dangers of censorship, loss of individuality, and governmental control. It is a whisper on the wind of things to come if society does not listen, it is a scent of smoke carrying along in the dark, warning of destruction – Destruction of the individual, of society, of morality and of humanity. It is a siren, resounding in the darkness of the deepest recesses of the mind, that the past is to be revered and not forgotten – lest humanity devour itself, an ouroboros onto itself, creating an endless cycle of past mistakes. The old becoming new, wars recurring, problems being buried but never resolved.
A society that continues to devour it's on tail, is often one carrying the arrogant belief that the past is obsolete.
This is also a tale of Montag's turbulent descent into disillusionment and his quest to find out what is missing in his life. Montag's journey begins when he meets Clarisse McClellan, our herald and our catalyst. She not only sees the world but also questions everything around her. Clarisse opens his eyes to the world around him, and her senseless death ignites a crisis of conscious that leads him to begin rebelling against the firemen.
This book is rich in themes and meanings, and it is for this reason the text is widely taught in classrooms around the world. As Neil Gaiman says in his introduction, anyone who tells you this novel is about any one thing is wrong. This novel is not singularly about anything, it is plurally about everything. When reading this I found myself asking questions regarding technology/media, knowledge vs ignorance, individuality vs group think, war & rebellion, religion and even love –Fahrenheit 451 is as much a scathing reproach to a society revering ignorance as it is a love letter to literature.
But I digress. There is a lot to unpack here, and I could honestly write paragraph after paragraph dissecting lines of prose and literary allusions. I adore a book with depth, more than a book with breadth. Despite the simplicity of the plot, Bradbury leaves a lot unsaid, layers to be pondered, thought over and discussed.
"Even now he could feel the start of the long journey, the leave taking, the going away from the self he had been"
History of the text Bradbury wrote this in the basement library of the UCLA, paying 1 dime per half hour’s time, fueled by his own rage. He exiled himself for 9 days to the basement to finish the novel, only coming up for air long enough to peruse the stacks for inspiration when he needed a break from clacking the keys.
This was written in the 50’s during the hysteria of the Cold War. Despite being speculative future based fiction the societal norms of the 50’s still seep through – woman stay at home, men work, men are sent to war. While in the US at the time citizens were paranoid of the mere whisper of war, in Bradbury’s imagined society they are ignorant of it. The media feeds them just enough to keep them aware, and then sweeps away their problems with more parlor fun. f451 was also written during the height of the Mccarthy led hysteria, a rash of anti communist witch hunts where books deemed un-American were burned.
Historical Allusions/Influences Mccarthyism Library of Alexandria Oxford Martyrs of Anglicanism Good old Mary Tudor Holocaust Book burnings The Cold War
Loading...
