Capitol Hill Blue Forums Misc. Topics Book, Movie & Podcast Reviews my own book page

Currently about 130+ pages into "Suite Francaise" by Irene Nemirovsky. The book is interesting - a portrait of France during the German occupation, as told through the lives of a few specific women - but it is at least as interesting for the story behind it. The book was lost for some 60 or more years, because the author was arrested in 1942, and died in Auschwitz.

This is the only novel I've ever come across that describes a war while the war is ongoing, with no knowledge of how it ends. I'm sure such things exist, I've just not seen them.

There are a couple of appendices in this edition, so although the book is quite large, the actual novel is about 350 pages. So far I'm finding it well worth the read.

I've been meaning to stop reading David Halberstam's The Best and the Brightest for about the past two hundred pages, but like that damn pink rabbit I just keep going and going and going. My reason for reading it at all was an attempt to understand the occupation of Iraq in light of what was apparently not learned during the Vietnam War. In many ways the comparison is apples to oranges, but just as apples and oranges are both fruit, the occupation of Iraq and the war in Vietnam are both occasions of Americans fighting to bring democracy to "unenlightened" countries—whether they want it or not.

Similarities occurred in philosophies leading to each conflict. When Robert Kennedy decided to run for president, his announcement speech contained the following: "At stake is not simply the leadership of our party, and even our own country, it is our right to the moral leadership of this planet." (page 41) The words drew ire from many, sounding much like the view that initially led to our involvement in Vietnam. Now fifty years later, as we rush to topple the evil Saddam and bring democracy to the Middle East, are we not reaching for the same pipe dream? I know. Issues such as oil and 9-11 play significant roles now, but I can't help but see a similarity.

Another striking similarity, at least IMHO, is the discrepancy between official (military, governmental) reports about what is happening in Iraq/Vietnam and what the media report. In the 1960s and 1970s it turned out the media were right. Guess we'll have to wait for a final tally regarding Iraq.

The sections on Dean Rusk interested me, but only in a way that had very little to do with US involvement in Vietnam. I was in high school at the time and remembered that at one point Rusk had offered Kennedy his resignation. I asked my father, a DC lawyer, why Rusk had done so. Because, my father explained, Rusk's daughter had married a (then) Negro. Again I wanted more information. My father explained that when a member of a cabinet member's family does something "shameful," offering to resign is the right thing to do. Shameful? It bothered me then; it bothers me now. And it sure didn't take much to bring the memory to the surface. I have to admit, though, that a few pages later I formed a slightly different impression of Rusk. Seems that his ancestors had fought for the Confederacy. Then, even in the 1950s when asked to fill out clearance forms, he listed them as relatives who had attempted to overthrow the government. I guess his offer to resign came from the same "place."

Now I'll consider my adventures with The Best and the Brightest at an end. (page 435 out of 670) It's a well-researched and well-written book, but it has answered the question I had—Yes, in my opinion a close look at Vietnam should have kept us out of Iraq—but that's what I wanted to find. I will, however, keep the book and consider finishing it someday. But I probably never will.

Crosscut by Meg Gardiner was a Stephen King recommendation—actually it was a rather confusing Stephen King recommendation—at least it confused me. My memory is that he first read Meg Gardiner's work flying over to England where, I'm sure he said, she had quite a following. I'm pretty sure he also said she was exclisovely published in England, but I had no trouble finding her available online. I mention all this because I figured she was a British writer. Imagine my surprise when Crosscut turned out to be set in California. I checked her bio. Turns out she is American—at least raised here—but she and her family now live Cobham, Surrey. Maybe we're having a blossoming of ex-patriot horror writers.

None of which has anything to do with Crosscut, which did turn out to be pretty much of a page turner. Ten or so years prior to the book' action, a government program went really wrong, and an explosion, which was to set matters right, exposed some youngsters on a field trip to an experimental drug. Now it's class reunion time, and the government roosters have come home to roost—a roosting disturbed by an out-of-control serial killer. The plot is action-packed and suspenseful. Occasionally I had trouble keeping track of who was who, but Gardiner is a nice writer in that she reminds the reader of characters' actions as well as names. Never once did I have that lost-in-a-Russian-novel, everyone-has-at-least-three-names feeling.

The book is fairly grizzly—my thinking is that's why it wound up on Stephen King's plate—but only occasionally stomach-turning. My stomach suffered more during my first reading of 'Salem's Lot.

Will I give Gardiner another try? King recommended starting with China Lake, the first of a series in which Crosscut is, I believe, number four. Right now I don't know. The unread shelf is pretty full, and nothing in Crosscut made me ready to order all she has written. C+, B- at best.

Update. I love it when I question some detail a writer I like has possibly gotten wrong and I turn out to be the one who is wrong. The situation came up in The Kite Runner when the author made reference to Pacino's accent Godfather I and I figured he had to mean Brando. The following is from graypanther on another site:


I sit* corrected.

*Bit of wheelchair humor there.

I have a question to pose to Martha and her friends who read this site. It involves whether I should continue reading a book I have started.

I purchased Patricia Cornwall's newest Kate Scarpetta novel. I used to love to read her books. Her heroine is a strong, independent, self-sufficient woman.

I know there is horrible sadism in the world. The first two pages of this new book describes a sadist toying with his victim. She is in a freezing vat of ice water and her nipples are puckered....o.k., the mention of pouty or puckered nipples is usually a deal-breaker for me. I just think it is so gratituous.

How can an author who is not a sadist think up such unspeakable events and then write them down? And how will I feel about myself if I continue to read this creepy stuff.

I stopped reading a paper back a short while ago because it had a grusome beginning chapter. Mr. BamaMama said that actually the rest of the book wasn't in that vein and he actually enjoyed the story.

Should I make myself get past these first pages to find out what the Scarpetta clan is up to?

Kathy Albers

Has anyone read MOCKINGBIRD? I understand it is a book about Harper Lee and Truman Capote and their writing collaborations.

I had the pleasure of playing bridge last Friday night with a good friend of Nell's (Harper Lee). The bridge substitute's name was Lurleane or something similar. She said she and Nell exchange greeting cards and such.

Our local newspaper, The Huntsville Times, in the last year wrote a long detailed story about the reclusive Ms. Lee. My bridge opponent cut it out and mailed it to her "Nell." She received back a witty card that said the famous author was grateful to receive the article in the Huntsville Inquirer. She went on to say that she had learned quite a few things about her life that were previously unknown even to herself. "One thing I did discover, was that I indeed DID write TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD.

I think I'll purchase and read MOCKINGBIRD.

I, myself, know the editor of our neighborhood newsletter!!!

Kathy

I'm going to presume a bit, and comment.

Kathy, I don't think anyone can really answer that question (should I read this) except you.

About a year ago I got snagged by some AM Homes short stories, and decided to read her longer stuff. That included a book called "The End of Alice," which was one of the most disturbing books I've ever read. According to the Library Journal on Amazon.com, "Homes's purpose seems to be to force the reader into a kind of Dostoevskian identification with the blackest and most perverse elements of human nature."

It did that, and I learned something from reading it - although whether I could ever put what I learned into words, I don't know, and if I did know, I doubt I'd tell anyone. I doubt I'll ever read it again.

I think, for me, the line gets drawn in part by the intent of the author - is s/he trying to entertain me/make money, or is s/he working on a more literary basis, is there some element of art, and is it one that interests me?

I will not read grotesqueries (is that a word?) that are poorly written. I will not read them if their intent is to entertain, because I'm not entertained. In short, I have to have a good reason to read disturbing material...but whether my reasons would come anywhere near yours, I don't know.

I won't read anything about the Donner Party. I had been a fourth grader in CA and "studied" them as part of state history. Every year when my family and I would make a one-day excursion from Lake Tahoe to Reno we'd drive over the Donner Pass and stop at the statue.

Fast-forward to the late 1970s. I'd started writing, wondered if anything in the Donner experence would make interesting material, and checked two books out of the library. I didn't finish reading them but still had worse-then-usual insomnia for two months. My husband monitored my reading for a year.

That said, I think I'll go look for "The End of Alice" and maybe the new Cornwall book. At least no one has lied to me about them.

I first read Kurt Vonnegut's The Sirens of Titan about an eon ago, and for the past decade a niggling little voice has been saying I should read it again. Turns out the voice was right. Sirens of Titan has answers. The entire history of mankind is explained, and earthlings worship at the Church of God, the Utterly Indifferent. We need to be reminded often of how complexly simple it all really is.

Please read some reviews first, Martha - especially if you're prone to sleepless nights. When I say "disturbing," I mean deeply disturbing. And for what it's worth, I speak as one who's had no major life traumas. If I had...oh boy.