21st Century Literature discussion
This topic is about
Early Warning
2015 Book Discussions
>
Some Luck - Early Warning (June 2015)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Portia
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Nov 16, 2015 08:01AM
Early Warning is the second book of Jane Smiley's Last Hundred Years trilogy. I really enjoyed this book and would love to discuss it, as well as the final book, Golden Age: A Novel. Would anyone else like to join in?
reply
|
flag
Here is what is written inside the front cover. As expected, it's pretty gushy and definitely needs some editing (lots of commas and some grammatical errors not down to my typing), but it will give you the idea.FULL DISCLOSURE: this books covers the first thirty years of the lives of the Boomers, give or take, so I have a personal interest in it.
Early Warning opens in 1953 with the Langdon family at a crossroads. Their stalwart patriarch, Walter, who with his wife, Rosanna, sustained their farm for three decades, has suddenly died, leaving their five children, now adults, looking to the future. Only one will remain in Iowa to work the land, while the others scatter to Washington, D.C., California, and everywhere in between.
As the country moves out of post-World War II optimism through the darker landscape of the Cold War and the social and sexual revolutions of the 1960s and 1970s, and then into the unprecedented wealth -- for some -- of the early 1980s, the Langdon children each follow[s] a different path in a rapidly changing world. And they now have children of their own: twin boys who are best friends and vicious rivals; a girl whose rebellious spirit takes her to the notorious People Temple in San Francisco [think Kool Ade, note mine]; a golden boy who drops out of college to fight in Vietnam -- leaving behind a secret legacy that will send shock waves through the Langdon family into the next generation.
Capturing a transformative period through richly drawn characters we come to know and care deeply for, Early Warning continues Smiley's extraordinary epic trilogy, a gorgeously told saga that began with Some Luck and will span a century in America. But it also stands entirely on its own as an engrossing story of the challenges -- and rewards -- of family and home, even the most turbulent of times, all while showcasing a beloved writer at the height of her considerable powers.
I'd also like to make a point on whether readers "care deeply" about the Langdons. A number of readers of the previous book complained that Smiley didn't give them a character to care for. Some believe that is part and particle of The Iowa Writers' Center Style, that a writer should present a story not not engage the reader's emotions. The decision I reached is that the main character, and the one I came to care about, is the Twentieth Century itself. The Langdons are merely the vehicle Smiley uses to describe it, not unlike the color of a character's hair or eyes, height, body type, voice, etc.So, would anyone like to comment?
Portia wrote: "Some believe that is part and particle of The Iowa Writers' Center Style, that a writer should present a story not to engage the reader's emotions...."What does that mean? A journalistic style? Just the facts, m'am? ....
I had not heard this before and am curious about the drivers/philosophies/teachers behind it. Is it in contrast to other writers' centers?
(What you say fits Some Luck, I'd be inclined to agree. Not so certain about Thousand Acres, towards which I personally had some very strong personal emotions that I know color my reading of the story. I haven't read Early Warning yet.)
What I understand "that" to mean is each writing center fosters its own style. I will need to look this up to be perfectly factual but there was a philosophy of writing in the mid-twentieth century at Columbia that insisted nothing a novelist wrote had any bearing on his/her personal experience. (If anyone knows this off the top if his/her head, please jump in!). I can't remember the professor's name so I can't google him, Help appreciated!This group's discussion of Some Luck goes in to much more detail. I recommend it.
Portia wrote: "This group's discussion of Some Luck goes in to much more detail. I recommend it. ."Been there, done that, Portia. (I think I was the one who initially nominated SL. I'll grant you there are probably things I have forgotten from the discussion.)
Portia wrote: "...there was a philosophy of writing in the mid-twentieth century at Columbia that insisted nothing a novelist wrote had any bearing on his/her personal experience...."Or was it a theory of criticism that his/her personal experience had no bearing on the reading/value of what was written -- i.e., the text's value/story could/should be considered totally devoid of the biography of the author? Or are we mixing apples and oranges in trying to communicate to each other?
Just went looking for some background on theories of criticism and of writing. So far, have found this summary on criticism:http://www.studentguide.org/the-major...
Side comment: "Close reading describes, in literary criticism, the careful, sustained interpretation of a brief passage of text. Such a reading places great emphasis on the single particular over the general, paying close attention to individual words, syntax, and the order in which sentences and ideas unfold as they are read."
That somehow sounds similar to the emphasis you describe at Iowa on the writing side.
Haven't found anything yet on schools of writing. Certainly, "show", rather than "tell" suggestions abound, although often those get fuzzy upon application.
Here is one of the threads on independence between writer and text:
'The Death of the Author (French: La mort de l'auteur) is a 1967 essay by the French literary critic and theorist Roland Barthes. Barthes's essay argues against traditional literary criticism's practice of incorporating the intentions and biographical context of an author in an interpretation of a text, and instead argues that writing and creator are unrelated."
Discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_o...
Hopefully there are some writer/English lit types around to point us in useful directions, or maybe it is just time to let this line of exploration expire and get back to the story line of Early Warning.
(Lionel Trilling was one of the great critics at Columbia, but I haven't so far been able to link his views into this discussion.)
Lily, I hate to be a party pooper, but this discussion is about the second book in Jane Smiley's trilogy.Didn't Marc start a thread on literature a few months ago? I think these posts of yours, while interesting and valuable, would be much better appreciated and discussed in that thread. I really don't want to turn this thread into a discussion of Roland Barthes and Lionel Trilling, though I am sure others would appreciate the opportunity to discuss all this with you.
Perhaps you might open that same thread?
Portia wrote: "Perhaps you might open that same thread? ..."No. I only wanted to understand "that a writer should present a story not to engage the reader's emotions." @3 That seemed such a startling writing philosophy to me, as basic as emotions are to human reactions. (I do understand letting the emotions arise/derive from the story rather than telling the reader what emotions to have.)
As I said at @9, "maybe it is just time to let this line of exploration expire and get back to the story line of Early Warning." As you say @10, it is!
Portia wrote: "I'd also like to make a point on whether readers "care deeply" about the Langdons. A number of readers of the previous book complained that Smiley didn't give them a character to care for. Some bel..."I liked both Some Luck and Early Warning. I think that was, at least in part, because, as you note, they concerned the Twentieth Century. I got to relive my formative years in Early Warning - especially Vietnam and the protests against the war and the Civil Rights movement. I was passionate on the anti-war topic - Kent State was burned into my consciousness. So that leads me to agree that the 20th Century is a significant character in Early Warning. Some of the individuals I liked, some I sympathized with, and some I disliked but all reminded me of real people I knew. Perhaps this trilogy mark will be its broad portrayal of America as it changes through the 20th century into the 21st.
You're exactly right, Linda. Golden Age: A Novel ends in 2020, 100 years from the beginning of Some Luck. Smiley had to take a bit of a risk with the next 5 years, but I'm sure it will be fine. When you wrote "all reminded me of real people I knew" I think that was exactly Smiley's goal. When I was reading it, I kept wondering which character was going to be involved with which historical event, e.g., who is going to Vietnam, who is going to drink Kool Ade, etc. She really kept my interest.I keep shuffling my schedule so I can get to reading Golden Age: A Novel. "No Luck"! for me yet. Maybe T-Giving weekend -- use it as an excuse for "away" time ;-)
Portia wrote: "You're exactly right, Linda. Golden Age: A Novel ends in 2020, 100 years from the beginning of Some Luck. Smiley had to take a bit of a risk with the next 5 years, b..."Same for me. Golden Age is on my shelf and perhaps will be my treat when I return from my current travels "down under" and before I again head off for distant shores.
Mod
Smiley was born in 1949 (I in 1951). Her second book starts in 1953 and goes til 1985. This is my life! And hers. And that is the Boomer Generation (or is that the Pepsi generation?). Anyway, she has Boomers I know flipping the pages to see which character goes to Vietnam (and does he make it home), who drinks Jim Jones' koolade, who gets the job on the government contract. All these things matter BUT the next gen is coming of age, so I'm sure X and later will be well represented. I'm just a smidg prejudiced here ;-)
Mod
Thanks, Marc. I am a bit enthusiastic, aren't I?;-)
Mod
Does one of the characters drink Jim Jones' koolade?!!
A couple of the characters get involved with Jim Jones' group. Just as one of the characters gets sent to Vietnam, etc.
Marc wrote: "Being enthusiastic about books is one of life's great joys :DDoes one of the characters drink Jim Jones' koolade?!!"
As I remember it, the 3 individuals we met involved with Rev Jones avoided the kool ade through different interventions. It was an interesting piece of the story. Also fascinating for me were the twins, the drugs, and the look at Wall Street in the 80s.
I thought Smiley did a good job of creating tension in the Koolade thread. I didn't know until I knew how that would fall out.
Portia wrote: "I thought Smiley did a good job of creating tension in the Koolade thread. I didn't know until I knew how that would fall out."I agree. Good tension there and I was rather surprised at its resolution.
21st Century Literature
Books mentioned in this topic
Golden Age (other topics)Some Luck (other topics)
Golden Age (other topics)
Some Luck (other topics)
Some Luck (other topics)
More...
