Robbie’s Comments (group member since Jan 21, 2008)

Robbie’s comments from the Books I Want To Talk About group.

Meghan: You and I share much in common! I, too, have been divorced, and I was the one who was left. Like the author, when we separated, it was the first time I had ever lived alone. Even though I was devastated, I think I recognized, even at the time, that this was a time for me to figure out who I was and what I enjoyed. I'm not sure I gained the most from striving to be happy. What I really needed to learn was that I was a capable person, and I didn't need to lean so much on somebody else for everything. It took a long time to learn that! I remember in medical school, 4 years after the divorce, I was talking to a friend of mine and telling him how proud I was to have driven into Philadelphia at night to meet a friend for a movie. His response was *You *are* a grown woman, Robbie!" I think that was the first time I really understood that! I just thought I always needed someone for protection.

When I went to Italy, I discovered that the art, more than the food, was what affected me the most. I expected it to be the food, but the art stuff was just so new to me. (The food pleasure actually came in Greece!) I probably would have stayed in Florence or the Cinque Terre instead of Rome.

So, the divorce, recurring depression, and the need to nurture my spirit and independence are what I relate to most. Sure, Ms. Gilbert is self-indulgent and more privileges than most, but she acknowledges it. Most people could take the same journey of self-discovery, nurture of spirit and relationship with God on a much lower budget.

Several times during the book, I was reminded of Michele (from RGBC). She has lived such an adventurous life!

Do you think Waleran was still power hungry at the end? Yeah, I guess maybe he was. I was so blown over by his confession to Jack that I didn't notice much. Well he did get very ruffled about a look of pity...
Didn't Philip say that Waleran was basically a very pious man gone bad? (I think he meant pious in a good way.) I didn't really see that, did you? I mean, I thought he was good for about one paragraph when he was first introduced, but then his scheming was apparant.

I, too, enjoyed the details about the construction and planning of the cathedrals. To some degree, that was mostly all I expected from the book. I also didn't expect much spiritual insight. I think the little spirituality/theology that was worked in showed some good research on Follett's part.

I wonder how this cathedral/church/city/power interplay in the book (era) compares with what happens with churches today? We mentioned earlier about the auto industry and steel industry influencing development in the US. Seems like churches tend to follow development here--even to the extent of abandoning (being abandoned by?) the poorer communities.

I agree that the sex in the book was appropriate for painting a picture of the times, as well as for contrasting between different kinds of relationships. And, for showing how horrible William was in comparison to the "normal" warriors. Follett has certainly written sex scenes in other books that were more shocking to me--primarily because they occurred in a book I had given to my father. I really enjoyed Eye of the Needle when I read it many years ago. So, when A Dangerous Fortune came out, I bought it for my father, who likes mysteries. I didn't read it beforehand. D'oh!

I like Filbert. We'll call you Filbert!

Yo! Meghan! I need some discussion here! ;)

As I was driving to work this morning, I remembered about how surprised I was to learn how Philip's "miracle" of having so many people come work on his cathedral at just the right time harmed the farming communities so much. A great example of "the butterfly effect." The whole Kingsbridge community's ebbs and flows are so like what we see in US comminities. Cases in point, the auto industry in Michigan, Steel and Mining industries in Pittsburgh, California goldrush, etc. Some of these places have made comebacks in other industries. Aliena's rise and fall and rise again in pretty much the same industry seems to be an exception to the usual pattern.

I read it last summer. I almost picked it for my live bookclub, but thought someone else had already chosen it. Part of it takes place in Pittsburgh, very close to where I live.

I think the opposite of Pollyanna is "cynic", or maybe more accurately, "realist."

I'm not so sure I saw a different side of William in part six. He just got older and saw that he didn't get what he wanted. He still wanted the same things, and he still looked to the same methods to get them. He was still a scared child under it all. He was older, but neither wiser nor less evil. Perhaps if I were actually at the hanging, I would have felt some compassion for William then, but when I was reading the book, I had trouble identifying with Aliena in that aspect.

I got confused by Follett's method of mixing fact and fiction. Fortunately, my knowledge of history is poor so I just ended up reading this as purely fiction.

One of the surprises for me at the end of the book was Waleran's manner during his confession. I didn't expect him to seem repentant.

I don't really think of Pillars of the Earth as a spiritual book, but there are some passages that definitely spark thinking and discussion of spiritual issues. I'm actually lifting a quote from the book in my short (60 seconds) blurb on stewardship at church tomorrow. [paraphrase: Philip had to constantly remind himself that he enjoyed the help of God in his success, without which all of his efforts would have come to nothing.] Follett did a good job of showing the human-ness in his most devout characters. Perhaps he made his "evil" characters less human until after their falls.

Hmmm...well, we *are* thinking of getting a big freezer to put in the basement...

I thought the same thing about Remigius and was surprised Philip took him back. I thought it was a good "Christian" decision. That didn't really make me trust Remigius, but the Pollyanna in me hoped that Remigius would "turn good."

Yeah, Francis is a little more part of the "real world." We don't hear too much about his spirituality, though. He wants to be instrumental in who becomes leader. How is this better than what Waleran does? Is it because he doesn't seem to be promoting himself? His lack of materialism? Not involved in murder that we know of?

Has Waleran continued to pardon William?

How did you feel about Philip taking Remigius back? I thought it was a good example of mercy. But, it annoyed me that he seemed to take credit for it, rather than attributing it to God.

There are many ways in which Philip reminds me of my father-in-law, but for some reason, Philip doesn't annoy me as much. Maybe because I can close the book when I get tired of him.

Responding to question number 2, I would say that Philip believes it is God's will. It was interesting to read the part where Philip is interpreting the stumbling blocks to builing a cathedral at Shiring as proof of God's will to block the completion of that church. There were just as many, if not more, disasters involving his own cathedral building, but, with the exception of the falling of the roof, he didn't interpret those as God's will for the building to stop. It annoys me when someone says, "the answer is clear" when they are talking about God or God's will.

This section sure ended all tidy, didn't it?

Yes, I am enjoying the story! Fortunately, I'm on vacation now (well, really a conference, but it's in Florida, and they structure it so the sessions end around noon or a little after), so I've had some time to read. I think you're right about the Weeping Mary, especially since it's critical to have the statue go from heat to cool quickly. I had just hoped to see it in writing. The "crystals" also probably have someting to do with it, by cooling faster than the wood and concentrating the condensation there.

I think probably the Job story is represented in both the story of Kingsbridge and the story of Jack and Aliena. The author uses that to give the reader some hope for the future of the story.

I also see elements of David and Goliath--too transparent to be accidenetal--when Jack is using his sling and hits William right in the head with it, causing a retreat. Hmmm...is Jack destined to become king? Or, is one of his offspring going to be a "savior" of some sort?

Um, I've finished Part 4, but I've also had a few glasses of wine, so I'm not sure how hard I want to think right now. I may want to wait before I answer some of the above questions. One comment I wanted to make earlier was that I'm amazed how well the people communicated with each other about the different outcomes of battles, etc. What sort of intelligence processes did they have? It certainly would have been easy for someone to plant false information. Also, the power of the church was pretty amazing.

I was very happy when Aliena located Jack, and I almost wish the book had ended then! I like happy endings!

I think faith and religion always has been and always will be twisted to justify the plans and ambitions of man. Tough to say in any case what is the will of God and what is the will of man. Must they be separate? There is some place in the Bible (I'm no Biblical scholar) where they mention that God used for good what one meant for evil.

I don't think Waleran ever really uses his position to help William. I think he uses his position to improve his own position, and he makes William think that he is acting to help William.

Although I remain annoyed that Philip's inflexibility doesn't allow Jack and Aliena to live together, overall I am pleased that Philip does continue to pursue the will of God. That doesn't mean that he isn't influenced by his own ambition and will, and I have noticed that we don't hear as much of his inner debate regarding this, I still think that his behavior is on a more noble plain than many of the other characters.

I confess that I went to Wikipedia and was a little dissapointed to learn that Kingsbridge and the Kingsbridge cathedral are fictional. I also was disappointed that I didn't learn the mechanism of the Weeping Mary!

1. Somehow or other, I haven't really developed an opinion of King Stephen as a ruler, other than it was a dumb decision to keep fighting when the battle was pretty much decided.

2. Well, I admit I was surprised at first that Philip prayed for a certain outcome of the battle. This is almost a theological question, huh? As a good Presbyterian, I think we're supposed to pray more, "Thy will be done; help me to bring about your will" kinds of prayers. More Evangelical denominations, in my experience, tend more toward praying for very specific requests. I guess I would expect Philip to make a prayer more for being able to build the cathedral [to God's glory] and not necessarily pray for a certain strategy, such as the outcome of a battle.

3. I think Ellen was trying to protect both herself and Jack. Clearly, the memory was very painful for her. She was very young and very pregnant when it happened, and it seems she really didn't understand how it happened. And what young child would want to know about his father being hanged? Much better to just fantasize about him being a story-teller. Although, I suppose that it would have certainly been better for him to find out from Ellen than from Alfred. Still, I think she wanted to protect him.

......
I was really really angry at Philips ultimatum about Alfred and Jack, and at Tom's decision.

It's really amazing to me how people seem to recover so nicely from all of these horrible injuries!

As I was reading the early part of part III this morning, it occurred to me that Williams violence/fear of hell, is a manifestation of his adolescent stage of moral development.

Hmmm...I would say William has Anti-social Personality Disorder, maybe some obsessive-compulsive disorder. So far, I haven't noticed any hallucinations or delusions to suggest psychosis. (sorry, couldn't resist) In any case, your response would suggest you lean toward the "nurture" explanation.

I agree, I'm not very fond of Ellen either.

Just a gut feeling, but I suspect some of your responses are colored by things that happen later in the book. Not a complaint--it keeps me interested!

1. In a time when women were often considered subordinate, Regan Hamleigh and Ellen seem to operate outside of social norms. Why do you think this is? How are the two women similar? How do they differ?

Hmmm...well, I think they are both pretty smart. At least in Regan's case, probably smarter than her husband. She is certainly more ambitious than her husband. Being so physically unattractive, she probably isn't able to get what she wants in the usual manor of being cute and charming. What do you make of the boils? Severe acne? I don't think syphilis stays in the rash stage that long, and we would expect other manifestations over time. Shrug.

Ellen is more of a beauty, although described as unconventional in that regard. She seems to simply wish to be not dependent on others--she doesn't seem to need or want to manipulate others so much. I get a sense that she has been maligned by the social norms (e.g. watching the beheading of her lover at the beginning of the book), and that is at least a part of her choosing to live outside of them. She is very sensitive to the injustices of different standards of behavior, etc, because of one's "rank."

2. What do you make of William Hamleigh's penchant for violence, yet fear of hell? Is character a result of his upbringing and situation, or is he pure evil?

I think William's violent nature combined with a
fear of hell is not all that surprising. We certainly continue to see that today in people with all kinds of religious beliefs. Many people will report a belief in God or Jesus/Heaven and Hell, yet do not conform to the behavior others might equate with those beliefs.

As for the nature vs. nurture thing, I suggest referring to the Wicked thread from the RGBC, before the discussion degenerated to fries with mayonaise :)

3. There are many deals made in Kingsbridge. Does Philip always operate in the best interests of the Church, or does he make selfish bargains? If he continues to get what he wants, is he any better than Waleran Bigod?

I think Philip tries very hard to operate in the best interest of the church. He seems to be aware of the possibility of his actions being influenced by his pride and tries to keep that in check. That makes him human and thus earns him a few points in my book. He also is frugal with his money and tries to distribute it fairly. Certainly one could argue that placing such an emphasis on having the resources to build a cathedral is wrong, but he is at least trying to do the most he can with every penny spent on it. I liked how he worked with Aliena to help her get a fair price for her wool. That showed true compassion. Waleran seems obsessed with power, wealth and material goods, such as his own fancy clothes. He loses points with me for that. Philip's "scheming" seems to always be making sure that previous verbal agreements are upheld, as opposed to Waleran's which are typically efforts to break his agreements, resulting in a more favorable situation for himself. Philip's methods are non-violent, which is again more palatable to me. So, I would say yes, I think Philip is better than Waleran, at least at this point in the book.

Besides, that tune, someone should have trademarked the lyrics, "There's a place in France where the ladies wear no pants..."
Yes, that was so interesting to hear how that tune came about--another little tidbit I felt I just *had* to share with someone after reading the book.

Well, I'm amazed when I think about how much the world has changed, especially with computers, etc. just in the past 20 years! I often share with people how I went to a special seminar for honors psychology majors in college to learn how to use a mouse (really an intro to the Mac or windows or something.) Now, both of my kids started to use them at age two. The rapidly changing technology is probably what prevents an event like this from being planned and amazing people.

I think it did say explicitly in the book that Agnes was plain, or it may have even said things more like homely in meaning. Sorry, I don't have the book right here to reference.

Meghan, my husband is an architect. I really wanted him to read this, but he's not much of a reader. He was familiar with most of the big-name architects, of course. Still, I think the whole struggle in the designing process, politics, decision-making would be interesting for him to compare and contrast with modern-day architecture business.

As I was driving today, I was remembering how amazed I was at the transportation issues they had to deal with in the city and for this event in particular. Today, we need to think about parking and emissions and global warming and stuff. They had to think of what to do with tons of horse dung! I'm pretty sure it was this book that talked so much of the smells of the city, too. It's one thing to read the Little House on the Prairie books and think about travel by horse, but then to think about the cities, with sewage problems and just all the every day things people needed to take care of *before* electricity needed to be linked to every household. Back to the smells again, it made be wonder how in the world someone could live downwind from the slaughterhouse!