A Constellation of Vital Phenomena - Day 4 (November 2013)

[Deborah]

This is specifically for discussion of section four of A Constellation of Vital Phenomena.

[Daniel]

The title makes another appearance in this section, but seeing it through Sonja's eyes gives it a very different sense:

"Life: a constellation of vital phenomena — organization, irritability, movement, growth, reproduction, adaptation."

My impression is that Natasha's perspective was more personal, leaning towards a biological or even spiritual concept. When Sonja reads it through the retrospective lens of Natasha's life, however, the definition becomes more sociological - as though the words were defining the Chechen people as a whole.

Any other opinions or perspectives from others? Did the title ultimately work for you?

[Hanne]

Just finished the book. I kept wondering how he was going to pull this all together, leaving somewhat of hope after a heavy few chapters. I think what he did was really good - bringing Havaa to Sonja as the one ultimately 'brought' by her sister, and having Dokka know that his daughter was safe.
I liked the 'in x number of years the girl will...' additions while Sonja is grilling Havaa about her sister. I'm glad Marra is giving us an actual ending.

Having finished just minutes ago, it still has to sink in and i'm not sure i'm ready for the big questions this book raises. But to answer Daniel, i do think Sonja reads it much more philosophically than Natasha intended when she circled it, yes.
And more hopeful as well, if those are the vital components of life, then Sonja can do it. While perhaps Natasha circled it more towards what she was missing for her own short term survival.

I might change my mind on this over the next 24 hours though. It all still needs to sink in.

[LindaJ^]

I do not remember my perspective of the title changing the second time it appeared. But by the end, I could see that it captured the essence on the book. I am struck by how much adaptation the characters had to make to live. Some, like Ula, were unable to adapt, to the changens the Chechynan wars wrought. But so many of the others were able to do so. Dokka was able to adapt to having no fingers.

I do agree with Daniel that when Sonja reread it towards the end, she was reading it through the lens of what the years had brought since she returned to Chechnya after the first war and she saw it as a definition for what the people of Chechnya had done/were doing to survive. If Natasha had survived, she would likely have perceived it quite differently too.

[Jason]

Just finished the book. I'm thoroughly satisfied with it and will recommend it. I think all of the lives in the book are these constellations that he consistently makes asides to inform us about. All of the souvenirs in Havaa's suitcase at the end are the constellations of the lives of refugees. The future-telling asides complete the constellation for each and every character, minor and major. I think it ends quite beautifully even in the midst of immense tragedy for some of the heroes.

From an educational angle, I was glad to learn something about Chechnya and the wars there. I don't think I could have even claimed there were actual wars there before reading the book. I thought it was an ethnic uprising that executed some terrorist acts in Russia. Typical American ignorance.

[Jenny (Reading Envy)]

I think this was a great book. I don't think my interpretation of "Life" changed, but I liked that reading it became something that the sisters shared. It's sad that Sonja will never know, but I'm glad I as a reader know what happened to her sister.

I liked how the author gave us different characters' futures throughout the book. I felt like that served to make it seem less hopeless and less tragic, although the novel was both still very much those things. I guess it was just nice to affirm that life went on, at least for some people, even if they had made bad decisions or been in bad situations.

[Daniel]

Following up on some comments from the previous thread, does anyone see intentional symmetry in the sexual nature of the atrocities committed against both Ramzan and Natasha?

[LindaJ^]

Good question Daniel and great comments on the prior discussion question where it came up. The experiences of both were horrific but I do not consider Ramzan's sexual in the same way as Natasha's. Natasha was used/sold as a sex toy. I did not get the impression that Ramzan was sexually abused. However, I see a symmetry between the mental impact of the experiences on Ramzan and Natasha. Both found it difficult to resume their lives and neither would talk about what happened to them. However, Natasha was the stronger one. While she could not ask Sonja for help, she was not going to stay when she realized she was or soon would be addicted again. And, rather than allow herself to be again used sexually, she chose to die. She could not have known what that chose would mean for Dokka and Ackmed. Ramzan, however, allowed his fear of physical pain to win.

I think there was more symmetry between Ramzan's loss and Dokka's loss.

[Hanne]

I was ready to say that I didn't see parallels either, except perhaps that they both happen to them by other people from a position of power. But one is held captive, and what happens to him is like denigration, purely to make it obvious that the other party is seeing 'him' not even as a human being, but as a toy to be used for their entertainment to kill time.

Describing it like that made me realize there is perhaps some parallel, because Natasha is being used as a toy for other people's pleasure too. But she fled voluntarily, out of desperation and a naieve belief that people will help her, and she's exploited for that.

So yes, there is a parallel, but the motivation and the starting points are very different. One had a choice, the other didn't.

[Daniel]

Linda wrote: "I did not get the impression that Ramzan was sexually abused."

Not abused, no. I agree on that point, and I appreciate how you rephrased the issue as "mental impact." That has a much more inclusive ring to it. While I agree with everything you say, I also want to strike out a little farther on the issue of Ramzan in this regard.

Ramzan was not sexually abused, but he was definitely sexually tortured. While browsing the internet for supplementary information on this topic, I stumbled across this fascinating article titled "Sexual Torture of Men in Croatia and Other Conflict Situations: An Open Secret" (link: http://www.kit.nl/net/KIT_Publicaties... ). It describes male sexual torture as "...full or partial castration, genital beatings and electroshock." The authors also point out how "gender stereotypes" make it difficult to address male sexual torture.

On a less academic note, I would also argue that we males have a tendency to illogically conflate sexuality with power. It's why the term "emasculation" carries such loaded metaphorical and literary imagery.

So coming back full circle, I completely agree with you that the experiences of these two characters cannot be compared (nor should they, really). In the same hand, their story lines seem extremely connected despite being so different. Perhaps Ramzan is simply the foil through which Natasha's strength can be clearly seen, but even the fact that neither can talk to their family about their personal tragedies suggests to me that Marra could have been intending something deeper...

[Jenny (Reading Envy)]

I felt that the reason Ramzan didn't talk to his was more out of protection, maybe.

[LindaJ^]

Daniel, thank you for that link. I would agree that Ramzan was sexually tortured but Natasha was not - she was sexually abused. I admit to not having seen much about sexual torture of males, while I have recently been seen/heard quite a bit about slave trafficking that included a lot about women being forced to act as prostitutes. See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/phillip.... I think that is what happened to Natasha. Perhaps Marra wanted to raise our consciousness about both of these. I think you are right that Ramzan is more than a foil to so show Natasha's strenght.

For me, Ramzan is the most complex character. His father realizes that he did not care for him as he should have. Do you thing Ramzan knew that Ackmed was his half brother?

[Daniel]

Linda wrote: "Perhaps Marra wanted to raise our consciousness about both of these."

That's my suspicion as well. After all, if you're raising awareness about the greater picture regarding Chechnya, it only makes sense to tackle issues like sexual trafficking and sexual torture of which the larger audience might not be aware.

At the risk of having discussion run rampant, I'm going to try response questions to multiple comments above.

Hanne: I love how you detail coming to that conclusion. You say that Ramzan is the only one held captive, but could we perhaps say that Natasha is held captive as well? Not with physical chains, to be sure, but can we see metaphorical chains as equally binding? (And I think Linda's link from HuffPo could suggest that as well).

Jenny: An interesting take. Out of curiosity, protection for whom? I think we could read that as being for either him or his father. I would also venture to say that Natasha isn't talking as a means of self-protection as well. Thoughts?

Linda: I wavered back and forth about Ramzan knowing. If so, it would certainly explain why he always seemed to be sleighting Akhmed. In the end, I read enough hints to believe that he knew. There was just too much of a silent beat when he talked with his father. What did you think, and did it add some sort of subtext for you?

[LindaJ^]

Daniel, the Khassan/Ramzan relationship caught my attention. I got the impression that Khassan seemed to think that his failure to nuture Ramzan was part of what caused Ramzan to become a collaborator/informant. I think Ramzan always wanted more attention from his father and that perhaps that was a small part of why he became an informant -- to get insulin for his father and gain his attention. Instead, he was just ignored even more. I agree that there are some hints/under currents that he knew about Akhmed (although none that Akhmed knew), but there are also ones that he did not. If he knew, why was it so hard for him to give Akhmed up? Or, did it crystalize for him when Khassan asked him not to give up Akhmed and Havaa?

[Lily]

The challenges of retaining sanity in these war-torn conditions struck me for almost each of these characters, even Khassan's dementia at 88, nine years later. (Her youth seemed to help protect Haava; even Sonya struggled as she brought her energy and her years of discipline to the fore again and again.)