Late 19th/early 20th-century radical, Emma Goldman was an early advocate of birth control, workers' unions and women's rights. Horrified by the outcom...moreLate 19th/early 20th-century radical, Emma Goldman was an early advocate of birth control, workers' unions and women's rights. Horrified by the outcome of the Haymarket Riots in Chicago, Emma helped a group of radicals change the way workers were treated, subsequently putting her on a political blacklist and treated as a criminal in any anarchist movement that occurred throughout the country. Outspoken and confident in her beliefs regarding birth control and free love, she was the target for many anti-anarchism groups (aren't they all?) and was incarcerated herself.
Self-educated and motivated, Emma later went on to write her autobiography, Living My Life, which turned into about 650+ pages of her history, beliefs, actions and relationships. Anarchism and Other Essays, at approximately 270 pages, is a collection of her some of her oral and printed arguments surrounding feminism and the rights of the common working men and women. Published in 1910 Emma has continued (even long after her death) to be misunderstood for her life's work (incorrectly believed to be an advocate of violence first and foremost) and often goes unread today.
Additional suggested reading: Living My Life, Emma Goldman Prison Memoirs of an Anarchist, Alexander Berkman(less)
Last fall my boyfriend and I went to DC and Baltimore for a mini-break - I had been to Baltimore before but hadn't been able to do some of the things...moreLast fall my boyfriend and I went to DC and Baltimore for a mini-break - I had been to Baltimore before but hadn't been able to do some of the things I wanted because the first time I went I was visiting my BFF who was there for the annual ALA convention. I hopped a Greyhound and rode down to visit her for the weekend and while we did a lot, there was a lot we missed because we didn't have a vehicle. Whatever we accomplished was the result of a lot of hoofin' it. I also hadn't done my homework before I went to Baltimore, figuring she wouldn't have time to do much and I just planned to see what I could find. It wasn't really until I got back home that I realized I missed out on possibly the best bookstore ever: Red Emma's Bookstore Coffeehouse, appropriately named after Emma Goldman, rebel woman.
So in the fall I made it a point to be sure that we located this place. I've had a longtime mental affair with Emma and try to read anything I can get my hands on, and I figured if anyone would have a wealth of Goldman memorabilia and paraphernalia it would be a bookstore/coffeehouse named after her.
Harumph.
I'm not going to attack the bookstore so much as just whine some more about how sad their section on anarchist literature was. There were a couple books by and about Goldman, but nothing that you wouldn't find in a regular store, online, or in a library. A quick look for books on or about Alexander Berkman was even more worthless. I don't remember them even having his book, Prison Memoirs of an Anarchist, in stock. And the employees were the worst. They were rude and inattentive and clearly not interested in anything they were doing or any questions their customers might ask. It was too affected. They were young and thought they were cool because they worked in a radical bookstore/coffeehouse, but their emo hairstyles and expensive cell phones gave them away. Red Emma would be disgusted if she could see them.
(Side note: This bookstore/coffeehouse was literally down the street and around the corner from the hotel my BFF and I stayed at the first time I was in Baltimore. How annoying is that?)
Anytime I'm in a used bookstore now, I always take a look in the politics section to see if there's anything Goldman/Berkman related. Generally not. But this particular book I found at Caliban Books here locally, and I found it in the biography section under Goldman. I squealed when I saw it, and it was mine for $10. It's in pretty decent shape too, I might add. 1975 publication date, and someone clearly thought highly enough of it to have it wrapped in Mylar to protect it from the elements, so it's shiny and clean. I like it.
It's a collection of letters between Emma and Alexander as promised in the subtitle, but it also includes letters to and from other people as well. It's divided into different chapters/themes, and the letters within each chapter reflect the theme of that section. On one hand this is nice as far as keeping focus during the reading - if all of the letters in one section are about the politics of anarchism and violence (despite popular belief, violence was not a primary goal or vision of anarchy), then it's easier to follow the thread of logic throughout the letters. On the other hand, chronologically it can be difficult to follow as each section covers letters from the same period. So one can read a letter from Goldman to Berkman in November 1935 in the second chapter, "Communism and the Intellectuals", and then find oneself reading a letter from Berkman to Goldman in November 1935 three chapters later in "Living the Revolution". This disrupts the continuity and actually can be distracting.
Still, their messages are fascinating. Possibly the most interesting chapter is "Women and Men", a collection of letters regarding relationships. Berkman was in a relationship with a woman 30 years his junior who was from the middle class. This woman, Emmy, apparently had issues with Emma because of her former relationship with Berkman back in the day. The letters between Emma and Emmy are my personal favorites, and the ones where Emma calls Alexander out for his concern of his comrade's views of Emmy. She basically told him to grow a pair. Emma Goldman is known for her advocating birth control and free love and often is viewed as being a cold, heartless bitch of a lover. These letters show a somewhat softer side of Emma at times, one which includes her longstanding love, praise, and adoration of Berkman, and this is a side that is not usually discussed in biographies of them. Anarchists aren't supposed to be soft and cuddly I guess.
On a local note, there's I think only one mention of Berkman's attempt to assassinate Henry Clay Frick (whose mansion still stands not far from my house), and that was in passing in one of their letters in which it was possible that Frick was behind their deportation from America. If not him, then maybe that other loser, J. Edgar Hoover. I don't recall there being any discussion in the letters about the Homestead Strike which was disappointing to me since that's what I'm interested in learning more about at this point. Still, this is a great collection for anyone who wants to know more about either Goldman or Berkman in their own words about things they didn't necessarily deem worthy enough to discuss in their memoirs.(less)
The basic premise is that Žižek's book deals with "the four horsemen of the coming apocalypse" - the worldwide ecological crisis, imbalances within th...moreThe basic premise is that Žižek's book deals with "the four horsemen of the coming apocalypse" - the worldwide ecological crisis, imbalances within the economic system, the biogenetic revolution, and exploding social divisions and ruptures. That's exactly what it says on the back of the book. Sounds pretty interesting. I thought, if anything, the structure of the book would be primarily about the "four horsemen".
Instead what Žižek did was structure his book based on the Kübler-Ross model. In other words, the five stages of grieving: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Okay. Interesting concept. According to Žižek what is meant to be grieved, the loss in question, is capitalism. I suppose if I'm digging for an actual thesis (which I'm sure is in there somewhere) the death of capitalism is what is leading to the end of the world as we know it. Mmmkay... I'm almost still on board. But this Žižek guy is pretty much out of his mind, and everyone seems to be in agreement on that fact.
I disagree that every point he made in the different chapters based on the stages of grieving really had that much to do with the individual stages of grieving. Someone in our book club group had written down several examples to show how they do fit, but even he admits he didn't catch that on his first reading. (Yes, this crazy guy read this book twice.) My argument is (and usually always will be) that these sorts of issues should be relatively easily identifiable on the first reading. If it's not, something's missing. And that's what I feel happened here.
There are some individual words of serious wisdom here. I wrote down several notes of interest, and there are plenty of specific topics I wish Žižek would have expanded upon or clarified. Instead he sort of threw them out there with no real sense of resolution or interest in resolving his statements. Žižek referenced a lot of seemingly interesting other articles and literature, all of which appears to me to be more fascinating than what Žižek himself got out of it.
Also? He's a shitty Marxist. Apparently Marxism is an entirely arbitrary word and has an even more arbitrary definition, which immediately negates what being a Marxist is. Just sayin. There's really no gray area in Marxism, so for Žižek to find some gray area is a bit suspect. Sure, take some ideas from Marxism, take some ideas from Lacan and Hegel, put it all together and then come up with a new name for your beliefs. Maybe it's just an issue of semantics, but this is exactly where semantics are important.
The only solution Žižek posited in this book is that Communism is the only way to save us, but at the same time agreed he wasn't entirely sure how to make that happen. Seems he just wanted to throw the idea out there and hope some kids take the idea, run with it, and figure out how to make it happen. Sort of like a schizophrenic handbook of sorts. Otherwise the book just ends, with no real conclusion. I read the paperback edition so there is an Afterword which actually clarifies a lot of issues and fills in a lot of holes he had left with the original text - but the one guy in our group who read the hardcover version missed out. His edition just ended after the chapter on Acceptance. When I look at it from that perspective I realize how sudden that would seem. Incomplete, even.
I have other issues too, like how it appears (based on only this one reading of Žižek so far) that he's really interested in serving his own career, which is ironic considering all that he has to say about capitalism. He claims what he is discussing is all of global importance, but this is a very Western-centric book. He focuses on Western society which certainly isn't global. One could argue that Western society is the dominant society, but that's not what Žižek suggests in the beginning, and that's certainly not what is suggested by the book cover.
I cannot get over just how misleading the book cover is.
The Kübler-Ross model structure is misleading as well. Perhaps if Žižek had published each chapter individually things would have been different. If he had thrown out small tracts like his beloved Communist Manifesto, I'd probably feel differently. I think how this book itself could have been improved is if he structured it as the four horsemen of the coming apocalypse based on his initial theory. Those could have been his chapters. The five stages of grieving could easily have been added throughout to give a little extra spice; as it was, there was too much spice and not enough cohesion and texture in the meat.
Žižek is way media-oriented - his interest lies in the media (film, news stories, radio, etc.) which is important especially in this day and age. But I don't think he recognized nearly enough the fact that the media is a corrupt organization just as is everything else.
Again, this is all based on one reading of one of his books. There are plenty of others, and I'll check them out. There's really no rush. He's interested in speaking to the elite, and I'm certainly not the elite. Whether or not I read his books is entirely inconsequential. There are plenty of other people out there who are interested in giving their money to promote him, and that's where he's going to pander his wares.(less)
On the back of my edition of this book, Alfred Kazin blurbed in Esquire:
One of the few novels in any language that renders the full horror of Hitler's
...moreOn the back of my edition of this book, Alfred Kazin blurbed in Esquire:
One of the few novels in any language that renders the full horror of Hitler's war, the war that never gets into the books... Morante brings the war back in scenes of a whole neighborhood including its children and domestic pets, scrounging for food, life, and the air itself inside bomb shelters and deportation trains. She brings it all back by emphasizing the intense love between members of the same family, between a child and a dog, the connection between the happy daily sacrifice for those we love and our inability to save by love those caught in the other daily machinery that is called history.
I'm not sure I could improve upon this description.
This book touched me in ways I didn't expect, which is probably why it has a place on this 100 Most Meaningful Books of All Time list. I had a little difficulty getting into the story at first, but in retrospect I think that had more to do with everything else I was reading at the time and the lack of attention I was able to devote just to this book. Once I focused on it, it rocked my world.
This is a beautiful story, in all its heartbreaking glory. I cried a few times, and let it be known that I'm not much of a crier when I read. It's not just the people who are affected by war, and Morante actually touches upon that here by writing of animals and pets with such heart and compassion.
The story focuses primarily on timid Ida and her two sons, Nino and Useppe, but they are merely characters in a larger play of war. They could be anyone, they were anyone in Rome during the war. This humanity makes it easy to relate. Additionally, each chapter (which actually is each year between 1941 and 1947) begins with a quick (1-2 pages) breakdown of what happened that year in the war, around the world, etc. This is a sometimes glaring reminder that even though this is a story, it is based on all-too-real facts. These things did happen. No matter how involved one gets in reading the story, Morante comes back to remind us not to forget the reality.
The story continues after the war, and it's debatable that the story changes significantly in theme and mood. It's not quite as evident as the difference between the first and second season of Twin Peaks, but it is there. Much like Twin Peaks, it didn't really bother me. It's still all connected. It's still important. One could argue that all the talk of anarchy and revolution, particularly the heavy-handedness, that takes place after the war in this story is a chore to read, but that's one of the areas where my Nerditude kicks in and I have a good time.
There are so many layers to this story that I wish I could pick apart forever, but the more I talk about it, the less meaning it gives to it all. Highly recommended with a big fat LOVE sticker stamped across the cover.
Incidentally I found that Lily Tuck wrote a biography of Morante a few years back (Woman of Rome: A Life of Elsa Morante) that looks incredibly exciting. She was married to Alberto Moravia, whom I have not had a chance to read (yet), but already I know that must have been a fascinating relationship.(less)
For Thanksgiving 2010 I spent the day finishing up Infinite Jest. For a while there I thought maybe I'd always try to finish up some sort of behemoth...moreFor Thanksgiving 2010 I spent the day finishing up Infinite Jest. For a while there I thought maybe I'd always try to finish up some sort of behemoth on Thanksgiving day, since the day to me means staying in my jammies and watching The Godfather on TV while I read. The food involved can easily be made while reading or the Boyfriend steps up and makes the yummies. But then last year I went with a a shorter book choice which I was able to read all on Thanksgiving. Boy, was that a mistake.
But then it so happened that I wasn't able to finish this book when I had anticipated (which was about a month ago), so it wound up getting to be close to Thanksgiving. Could I finish it off on Turkey Day? You challenging me??
Yeah, I finished it today. And it feels good. It's a different kind of feeling than what I experienced with Infinite Jest. A Suitable Boy is another whopper of a book, but even the parts I didn't necessarily understand still made more sense to me than most parts of Infinite Jest. Infinite Jest was work, albeit a fun flavor of work most of the time. A Suitable Boy felt like I was in a different country (hello, India!), totally immersed in the culture.
When I get right down to it, that's what I have loved about A Suitable Boy - the flavor dripping from each page. This isn't just a story; it's an experience. The reader experiences the music, the food, the costumes, the scents, the emotions, the politics, and the family dynamics. I can't remember the last time I read a book with so many layers. I started out reading this alongside Freedom at Midnight, hoping that book would help me understand some of the politics I didn't know much about going into it. And it did, probably more than I had originally expected.
At first my biggest question was why Seth decided to write a book about the Republic of India in 1952, when it seems the logical (maybe laziest? easiest?) starting point should have been 1947, during the Partition. But then a couple things became obvious to me. One was that 1952 was an important year too, it was an election year. Anyone who pays attention to politics in our own country knows just how important an election year is, and just how effing crazy everything gets. That's not exclusive just to the United States. Now imagine it's the first national election after gaining independence. Yeah, that sounds crazy-making.
The other thing that became obvious was what I read in the author bio at the beginning of the book (which, for some reason, I didn't read at first). Vikram Seth himself was born 1952. Now, maybe that's just a coincidence, but maybe it's not. Maybe Seth was writing his own personal history in these 1400+ pages. It's evident to me he poured his heart and soul into this work. Seems to me this was an important novel for him to write. Makes sense to me.
Somewhere in all this political turmoil and unrest is a love story, or a few different love stories. There's a huge genealogy here - the family tree at the beginning of the book helps considerably, but an understanding of the entire tree is not completely necessary in enjoying the book. The chapters flow by easily, it's not a difficult read, aside from the fact that the book itself breaks your wrists as you hold it. As one reads, the genealogy comes together on its own. My point is, don't stress about it.
I was most invested in Lata's story since that's where the title comes from and also I am a girl and sometimes find myself drawn towards other girls in literature. Lata and I have had completely different upbringings and family dynamics, but I can still relate to her on some level. She's an interesting character, and I believe she's the first woman in her family to have a sense of - and desire for - independence. Finding 'a suitable boy' and getting married is not her goal in life, not at this point. She's educated, going to college, she gets a part in a school play, she has some love interest(s), she's doing her own thing. She's doing her.
But society isn't ready for that. With all of the changes the society is going through, fully independent women is not quite where it is yet in 1952. Lata's family isn't thrilled with it and ultimately Lata needs to make a decision with how she will proceed.
Seth makes it all seem absolutely riveting. I don't know what else to say.
Rumor has it (although I think it's beyond rumor stage at this point) that Seth is working on a sequel, A Suitable Girl. If it's anything as wonderful as A Suitable Boy I think we're all in for a treat. If, however, as I fear, he's just banking on the popularity of A Suitable Boy... then it could be quite the loser and snoozer. But he's won me over with this one and I will be excited to see what comes next. And, because I'm a serious nerd, I hope it's as much a whopper of a book as this one.
"Oh, I don't know how it grew to be so long," said Amit. "I'm very undisciplined. But I too hate long books: the better, the worse. If they're bad, they merely make me pant with the effort of holding them up for a few minutes. But if they're good, I turn into a social moron for days, refusing to go out of my room, scowling and growling at interruptions, ignoring weddings and funerals, and making enemies out of friends. I still bear the scars of Middlemarch." (p 1370-71)
I go long periods of time without reading any graphic novels, and then when I do I wonder why I take so long between them.
In my house, literature and...moreI go long periods of time without reading any graphic novels, and then when I do I wonder why I take so long between them.
In my house, literature and art are the two prevalent features. When we travel, we search for bookstores and art museums. We spend more time in art museums in other countries than we do in their shops, and we wouldn't want it any other way. Some people travel to shop; we travel to experience.
This graphic novel brings those two worlds together with the additional bonus of history as well. The illustrations are rough around the edges which I rather enjoyed - visually this is an impressive book as the reader has to look closely to see the images within the images. Both the story and the artwork played well off each other. While I appreciated the historical aspect (Hitler's rise to power), I was more drawn to the present-day character of Louise and wanted even more of her. But that's just how I am - never quite happy with what is there, always gotta want something more.
I've read some complaints of this being pretentious, but it didn't bug me. Art, history, politics - all important aspects of our world, and calling it pretentious doesn't make it go away. Deal with it. Take a stand.
So thanks to David Lester (yes, the same guitarist for Mecca Normal) for bringing me back to the world of graphic novels without disappointing me.(less)
There are some books one reads that hit the reader in some place the reader didn't know existed until the book just discov...more
Literature isn't innocent.
There are some books one reads that hit the reader in some place the reader didn't know existed until the book just discovered it; where the reader feels s/he knows the characters so well, like they've interacted before, which is impossible because these are characters, not real flesh-and-blood people that the reader encountered through their life's journey; where the reader is so completely heartbroken that the author has died so young because there would have been so many more amazing stories and adventures to come.
This is one of those books. For me.
2666 blew my brains out. But that was more in that I am still thinking about it, still puzzling it out, wondering what it all means; whereas with The Savage Detectives, which also blew my brains out, it was done in a more artistically holyfuckingshitthisisamazing way. I can't say one is better than the other. They're connected, I'm sure, in ways that we haven't even figured out yet because Bolaño died before all the pieces of the puzzle could be layed out. I want to read and re-read both books and try to piece it all together, but realize that what I really want to do with either one of those books is just to jump in at random and read passages. Because it's like fucking poetry. Gritty, dirty, raunchy poetry.
One review I saw early on compared this book (or the author himself) to Murakami and Bukowski. Meh. I'm currently reading 1Q84, and you know what's missing from Murakami? The grit. He's not a gritty writer. Bukowski knew grit, but this is different. This is... Bolaño put himself out there on paper in this book, more so than even in 2666 in my opinion. This is his sweat, his blood, his tears, his bile, his excrement, his cum. His writing was dirty and raunchy in a completely non-dirty and non-raunchy way, where it feels more like poetry than anything.
While it's more annoying for me to admit, this is more Kerouac than Murakami. I hate to say it only because I didn't care for On the Road all that much - but the similarities are there between the authors. Both vagabonds, both nomadic spirits. But I felt that Bolaño was real, his experiences more authentic, less posed. I have no desire to sit and pick Kerouac's brain, but would give my left tit for the opportunity to do so with Bolaño. He did what Kerouac wanted to do and he did what Murakami wishes he could do with his writing. Bolaño was a master. I've just decided. Period.
This book makes me want to find the vagabonds from my past and talk to them about this book and Bolaño. They're still out there somewhere. I like to think Bolaño is as well.(less)
Loading...
