Reading 1001 discussion
This topic is about
The Book of Daniel
1001 book reviews
>
The Book of Daniel, by E.L. Doctorow
date
newest »
newest »
Rating: 4+ starsAfter reading The Public Burning, I felt I needed to read this one right away, as it shows another perspective relating to the Rosenberg Trials. The former book was told from Nixon's perspective, while this one is told from the perspective of one of the couple's children. The names are changed, but the couple is very much the Rosenbergs. While I usually don't care for political novels, I found both this book and Coovers fascinating and well-written.
I found this book so upsetting- as it should be. The 'it could happen here, and it could happen again' aspect is made extremely clear and accessible to the imagination that by the time we hear of the parent's imprisonment, the last time the mother comes home before going away, their last meeting with the kids, and their execution it's downright terrifying. I felt it also dealt with the theme of trauma well, as explored through Susan's struggles with mental illness, and the way that Daniel is just ....awful. I found the parts of the book where he repeatedly coerces his wife into sex and gets off on how much it upsets her to be a bit triggering (I've been the victim in that situation before) but I thought its inclusion was important. Trauma often makes people worse people, not easy to empathize with victims. And even if his abusive tendencies are not related it still serves a good point- going through a tragic event doesn't suddenly make people a saint to lionize. I appreciated the complexity of this novel.
As well, I found the parts where Daniel contrasts the left and progressive movements of the 50s and 60s to be fascinating in ways I haven't always considered. The former was explicitly political, organized, while the latter was more socially based and more opposed to conventional party organization. It very much reminds me of that lyric from "revolution' by the Beatles that goes :
"You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You better free your mind instead"
And I have to say I'm with Daniel in his criticism of this aspect of the 60s progressivism in the hippy movement. I mean, there were anti-war groups and militias like the Black Panthers that were explicitly political, organized, and based on praxis. But, then you have this vague 'freedom' movement based mostly on people who were never really the victims of systemic abuse just wanting to defy social norms. Like what does 'free your mind instead' really mean ? How does that functionally change things? I would also hate those people if my parents were executed by the state and then some rich guy cosplaying as homeless suggested I do yoga lol.
I gave this one 5 stars.
With more than a nod to the story of the trial of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, this novel focuses on the children left behind. Daniel and Susan Isaacson's parents, members of the communist party in 1950s America, are arrested for suspected espionage. With both parents gone and their community in fear, Daniel and Susan are taken first to an aunt, then to a children's home, then to foster parents, and all the time they are sidelined, lied to, and used as pawns in the struggle. The focus of the book is not the trial or the parents but the damage this does to each of the children. It's a very powerful and disturbing story.
This was a dark and fascinating novel, based on the execution of the Rosenbergs - here called Paul and Rochelle Isaacson. Events are mainly seen through the perspective of their son Daniel, an unsurprisingly angry and embittered young man, who is dealing with his own trauma as well as the mental illness of his sister Susan. This was my first Doctorow and I found the writing brilliant, throwing names and places and fragments of action together as the action moves backwards and forwards in time to build up a picture of both the years of Cold War paranoia and the hippy culture of the Vietnam years. The fragmentary approach brilliantly mirrors the elusive nature of the truth in the case and the way the justice system conceals rather than illuminates it.
The personal fallout of political shenanigans is powerfully portrayed, as these vulnerable children are shunted about, taken to visit their parents in prison, put into The Shelter, fostered and adopted by alternately reluctant or well meaning individuals - the damage that follows them into adulthood is painful and really convincing, and Daniel’s quest to make sense of the affair is heartbreaking.
Doctorow is incisive in the way he dissects the history of the 50s and 60s and digs below the surface to exposé contradictions and hypocrisy. One typical example among many that I loved for its sharp observations was the analysis of Disneyland “One cannot tour Disneyland today without noticing its real achievement, which is the handling of crowds”
As I launched into this book with its horrible main character and its careening switching from topic to topic, voice to voice, cynicism to cynicism, I wondered where the writer of Ragtime was, with his amazing rhythm, and his ability to swing from voice to voice with grace. Then as it became clear this was a fictional account that reflected the Rosenberg trial and the dreadful decay of their children, all the hard jarring made sense and became, for me, the right way indeed to tell this story. Daniel throwing his son into the air higher and higher, a senile Mindish kissing Daniel at Disneyland the center of the non-factual world, and the culmination in "I will show YOU I can do an electrocution"....YOU, you the reader are also guilty of being a part of this sorry world.
Mod
I appreciate the points you've made in your review. Very thoughtful. I just could not like this book. But I am the minority.
Mod
This is not my first book by Doctorow but it is my least favorite. It is the story of what would happen to the children when their parents were arrested and executed by the US government during the Cold War hysteria. It is of course a story based on the Rosenbergs but the names are changed. The children, Daniel and his sister, Susan, are students during the sixties.
The book is written in 4 parts with Daniel the main narrator;
1. Memorial Day, 1967, Daniel is married and has a child; closes with dropping of Atom Bomb
2. Halloween, children and the trial of parents to start
3. Starfish; refers to his sister Susan, Daniel is protesting, sister is dying
4. Christmas; closing of the trial, funerals of the parents
I did not like this book much mostly because it is sexually violent and explicit and it is physically violent. Daniel is not a person you can like. I am not a communist nor even a progressive. The books explores the politics around the arrest and execution. It is not hard to believe that the government may have lied and misrepresented facts. I still dislike the ideology behind left, progressive politics because it is a lie and capitalism is not evil or good. People are evil or good.
Quotes: "Leo Crowley, Harry's Foreign Economic Administrator, tells Congressmen the theory behind this move: "If you create good governments in foreign countries, automatically you will have better markets for ourselves."
What I liked; in the section Christmas, Disneyland at Christmas. "There are numerous references, usually in the form of rides, exhits or setores to figures or works of our literary heritage." And other figures of history, legends, myths. It is possible to to interpret the Disney organization's relentless program of adaptation of literature, myth and legend, as an attempt to escape these dark and rowdy conclusions of the genre....many of these characters are dark and rowdy..." "Disneyland proposes is a technique of abbreviated shorthand culture for the masses..." "Its real achievement, handling of crowds." So many good tidbits here.
Achievement
1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die (2006/2008/2010/2012 Edition)
Guardian 1000 (State of the nation)
National Book Award finalist (1972.2 | Fiction, 1972)
ALA Notable Books for Adults (1971)
What did happen to the sons of the Rosenbergs; They were shifted around but eventually adopted. They both attended college. They had new last names and did not identify with their parents until later. Both boys were interested in politics especially politics of the left. They looked like hippies. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects.... Well, Robert maybe looks miserable. He's the older brother so would be Daniel in the book.
This is a brilliantly written examination of the personal ramifications of political action. The Daniel of the title tells his story of being a child of parents who are executed for treason. It is a story based on that of the Rosenbergs who were executed by the United States in 1953. It switches back and forth in time and between the first and third person in a way that is discombobulating to the reader, or in my case the listener. Gradually we understand the doubt surrounding the guilt of the couple, the horror of their deaths, and the heartbreaking damage done to their children. The book was published in 1971, but is still relevant, there are, after all, many places where the State exercises capital punishment. A thought provoking five star read.
It was only after reading this that I learnt the book is loosely based on the trial of the Rosenberg’s in the US a case which now it is conceded that while the husband was guilty it is more than likely the wife was innocent and her execution was a political not a judicial decision.
This book explores the effect of this trial on the children of the accused Daniel and Susan. The story is told by Daniel and switches between past and present and between first and third person narratives within the same paragraph. The reason for these switches is because we are reading Daniel’s account of his life and sometimes he seems to forget his role as narrator as firmly inserts himself in the story.
What happened to their parents has impacted both children with Daniel turning into a cruel and vindictive adult and while we might understand why given his past this reader doesn’t forgive him for it, he is a horrible person regardless of the past.
The book also explores the notions of politics and justice and how in this case justice has served politics and not the other way around. The couple never stood a chance, they had already been tried in the court of public opinion before they ever reached a real court and it is only themselves and their children who don’t appear to realise this.
An interesting and thorough look at the impact of the politics of fear and the need of a national enemy to unite public opinion. (side not this failed)
Doctorow also explores all the other possible scenarios relating to his fictional couple from them being completely innocent to them being guilty.
3 Stars – fascinating but in places long winded and some of the descriptive violence could be dropped as it didn’t add to the story.
This book explores the effect of this trial on the children of the accused Daniel and Susan. The story is told by Daniel and switches between past and present and between first and third person narratives within the same paragraph. The reason for these switches is because we are reading Daniel’s account of his life and sometimes he seems to forget his role as narrator as firmly inserts himself in the story.
What happened to their parents has impacted both children with Daniel turning into a cruel and vindictive adult and while we might understand why given his past this reader doesn’t forgive him for it, he is a horrible person regardless of the past.
The book also explores the notions of politics and justice and how in this case justice has served politics and not the other way around. The couple never stood a chance, they had already been tried in the court of public opinion before they ever reached a real court and it is only themselves and their children who don’t appear to realise this.
An interesting and thorough look at the impact of the politics of fear and the need of a national enemy to unite public opinion. (side not this failed)
Doctorow also explores all the other possible scenarios relating to his fictional couple from them being completely innocent to them being guilty.
3 Stars – fascinating but in places long winded and some of the descriptive violence could be dropped as it didn’t add to the story.
Mod
I really loved this book, not only for its themes, but for the way it was written and the open-ended answers to some of the same questions that lingered in the aftermath of the Rosenbergs trial in the 1950s. Some of the portrayals in the novel about the American political and judicial system are just as relevant today as they were in the 1950s and 1970s.
This is a dark novel, and a bit sobering when you consider some of what is going on currently in the US. This novel is in the 'it could happen here' subgenre, in that it is clearly geared towards convincing the reader that such cases as occurred in this book can happen again, here, now, in real life. It's not clear whether Doctorow in this book really thinks there is a way the reader could help prevent such things from happening though; maybe it is inevitable, and we should be watching our backs?
I gave this book 4 stars on Goodreads.