fiction files redux discussion
Short Story Group Reads
>
Joyce Carol Oates' Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been
Mod
Mod
Mod
This story is badass...as well as Oates's best work. I taught this in a student teaching classroom. The kids really got into it.Unfortunately, I won't be in on this discussion much, as I'm traveling around India this month. Though I do have some things to say about the work:
Joyce Carol Oates got the inspiration to write this story after listening to Dylan's "It's All Over Now, Baby Blue" and reading about Charles Schmidt, "The Pied Piper of Tucson" who got in tight with social groups of teenagers and killed some of them. Others helped him cover it up. See where those come into play with Ellie I believe his name is in the car with Arnold Friend and Connie. Which do these two represent? The killed or the co-conspirators.
Also, beware of references to the devil when it comes to Arnold Friend! If you drop the "R" from his first and last name, you get "An old Fiend"...indeed, the OLDEST of fiends. Hopefully someone can count the ultimate number of devil references! I don't have the story with me.
Another thing I thought was amazing about this story is how Oates manages to convey how those poppy, insincere love songs make people do really stupid things. I believe that's why Joyce Carol Oates dedicated this story to Bob Dylan, because he was doing the exact opposite of what the musical trend was at that time. I love how Arnold seduces Connie with song lyrics and she can't quite figure out where she heard those words before (on the radio?). I believe Oates is saying a really important thing about how people can be deluded into believing that people feel a certain way when they're really just reciting what they've heard somewhere before and they saw it work.
Hopefully I started us on a good and multi-leveled note here. That may be my last contribution, so forgive me!
Mod
Yeah, there is the caught up in the moment feeling to her actions, perhaps the lack of impulse control.
I can remember swooning over a boy who might quote a certain song or poem at a certain moment, and definitely shaking my head afterward, wondering what happened. Now I laugh at it - sing me some Dylan or read me some Byron and I'm yours? Wow. I hope I'm a teensy bit smarter than that now.
Her initial reaction to him was so spot on that I was thinking, why on earth are you even talking to this guy who just pulled up to your house like he's known you for years?! Jeeeez!
I thought that the buildup of sheer terror was - well, that's what kicked me in the gut.
I also wonder if men respond differently, or parents, to this story.
OK, sorry I'll save it for January... :)
Ry wrote: "This story is badass...as well as Oates's best work. I taught this in a student teaching classroom. The kids really got into it.Unfortunately, I won't be in on this discussion much, as I'm trav..."
Oh wow, I didn't realize that the discussion isn't scheduled until January. I'm a bit of an ass, so I will certainly be joining this discussion in January!
Mod
You gave me a ton of food for thought on the re-read!
I read this in English Lit many moons ago. Our professor was a little too excited about the story and I wondered why - until I learned of the background and the news stories around it. What stayed with me, though, was how the girl or victim responded to A. Friend. I'll be reading this agian. It's been a while.
Mod
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_...
And the lyrics to It's All Over Now, Baby Blue (1963)
http://www.bobdylan.com/#/songs/its-a...
You must leave now, take what you need, you think will last.
But whatever you wish to keep, you better grab it fast.
Yonder stands your orphan with his gun,
Crying like a fire in the sun.
Look out the saints are comin' through
And it's all over now, Baby Blue.
The highway is for gamblers, better use your sense.
Take what you have gathered from coincidence.
The empty-handed painter from your streets
Is drawing crazy patterns on your sheets.
This sky, too, is folding under you
And it's all over now, Baby Blue.
All your seasick sailors, they are rowing home.
All your reindeer armies, are all going home.
The lover who just walked out your door
Has taken all his blankets from the floor.
The carpet, too, is moving under you
And it's all over now, Baby Blue.
Leave your stepping stones behind, something calls for you.
Forget the dead you've left, they will not follow you.
The vagabond who's rapping at your door
Is standing in the clothes that you once wore.
Strike another match, go start anew
And it's all over now, Baby Blue.
Mod
I've read a fair amount of Oates' work. Mostly novels, some poetry, but I think a whole year could be spent just reading her oeuvre and you still might not get through it.
Oddly, I hadn't read this story. It had a bit of the qualities of When We Were The Mulvaneys and Because It Is Bitter, And Because It Is My Heart, among others, but in this condensed form what struck me most was the building sense of terror.
SPOILER!!!
At first it all seems so mundane, so normal, so every day - and then when he shows up at her home and it becomes clear he's been following her, spying on her - my heart sunk to my stomach. I thought, don't go, don't go, don't leave the house... I was so scared for her but thought, no, she might be able to escape this... and then the threats. This teenage girl sacrifices herself for her family, and I think she knows she is going to die.
It's the inevitability of what's going to happen to her - the shocking nature of his language with her - it was simply terrifying.
So that's where I'll start. Surely I'm not the only person who was terrified?
Shel wrote: "So I'll kick this discussion off a bit early with some general responses to this story.I've read a fair amount of Oates' work. Mostly novels, some poetry, but I think a whole year could be spent ..."
In this story I saw an enormous inspiration derived from the stories of Flannery O'Connor, particularly the violence-induced epiphanies that seem to color the endings of almost all O'Connor stories, e.g. "Everything that Rises Must Converge" and "A Good Man is Hard to Find".
I was definitely afraid for Connie as well when I read this. The interesting thing to me is how the character of Connie is presented to us and how this makes us dislike her in the beginning. She's fake, nasty, and tells lies to her parents. However, when she is put in danger, we suddenly find ourselves feeling for her and fearing for her. It's amazing to me how Oates can turn this unlikeable character into someone who is redeemable.
I feel this story, at its heart, is a story of coming of age or maturation. Of course, this isn't a heart-warming instance of maturation, but Connie's selfless choice shows a marked maturation from the selfishness that dominated her personality in what came before in the story. Nowhere is this maturation of Connie more apparent than at the very end where Connie makes the choice to go with Arnold Friend, rather than risk her family's safety. The selfish character of Connie before her epiphany and ultimate decision is one of the things that makes this story so meaningful to me.
Mod
Satan being ever-present and all-knowing, like A. Friend is - he knows exactly where the rest of her family is and seems even to know what they are doing at that moment. He is at first seductive, and only when the seduction doesn't work does he become terrifying. The turning point being, when he told her what he was going to do to her - other stuff being scary, but this is where it turned for me:
"Yes, I'm your lover. You don't know what that is but you will," he said. "I know that too. I know all about you. But look: it's real nice and you couldn't ask for nobody better than me, or more polite. I always keep my word. I'll tell you how it is, I'm always nice at first, the first time. I'll hold you so tight you won't think you have to try to get away or pretend anything because you'll know you can't. And I'll come inside you where it's all secret and you'll give in to me and you'll love me."
(Let me caveat my opinion by saying I have a pathetic amount of religious education. Everything I know is self-taught. No indoctrination, and therefore no deep understanding, of nearly any seminal religious concept, inhabit my psyche. But I am rolling with Ry's mention of the references to the devil and Flannery O'Connor.)
You could argue, I suppose, that Connie was a child and therefore not subject to judgment for her sins, but I think we are meant to judge her for wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony. Even though as I was reading it I was thinking, well, she sounds pretty superficial but not abnormally so for a teenage girl.
Now I'm going to go back and re-read the story and see what else I can think of to generate discussion.
I never straight-on-thought-about A. Friend as THE devil, but in the back of my mind, it was there. I've known people, men, who came on to little girls and I felt that they were influenced by evil. And like most villains, they don't believe that what they are doing is wrong. I think Connie was old enough to know sin, and to know better. And when he showed up, she matured by great measure. No matter what she said or did, her family was her greatest treasure.
Shelby wrote: "So, in reading over these posts and perhaps unduly influenced by Tom Waits' Devil in The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus, I am thinking that this story is something of a modern day (?) morality play a..."About the modern day morality play, I think that the interesting thing is the motives that go into Connnie's decision. And I think these motives determine what to make of it. Through this story, we see Connie change. Ultimately, she does not want to be with Arnold Friend--she wants him to get as far away as possible from her and her family. So the fact that in her terror, she makes a self-sacrificing act, makes her a kind of saint or martyr, rather than being the superficial girl from the beginning of the story. The story seems to communicate to us that its not only the choices we make, but also our motivations for our choices that make us who we are. The Connie that would have given into A.Friend's seduction for sexual pleasure or exploration is a totally different Connie from the one who gives into Friend's seduction to save her family. I like the subtlety of this idea and certainly think that its a correct notion.
Before going into this next part, let me say that my religious education is entirely self-taught as well. I'm an atheist by trade, but my education in religion has been directed by Milton, Thomas Aquinas, Dante, and Goethe. Others as well, but those are the majors.
*Evidence for Arnold Friend as The Devil*
1. Arnold Friend--take out the R's and it becomes An old Fiend.
2. Add up the numbers on the side of the car--69! And it has been said in places that The Devil was the one who invented 69-ing, which I find funny, but its appropriate for this discussion.
3. Arnold's face is described as being mask-like. As we have been told many times over, the Devil takes many guises, which is also reflected by his varied vocal patterns when he gets angry.
4. The boots he wears. Friend seems to wobble on his boots, one of which is bent at a right angle which indicates a possible cloven hoof--this same detail is used to make an allusion to Faulkner's "Barn Burning" with another Devil-figure, Abner Snopes.
5. Friend's seemingly omniscient vision is another example of how he could be the Devil--though to be fair, unfallen angels also have some form of omniscience, as well as God and the Devil.
6. Another interesting thing is where Friend bangs on Connie's door. For this, one must look at the Bob Dylan song that inspired this story. The lyric I'm thinking of goes "The vagabond who is rapping at your door is standing in the clothes that you once wore." The ultimate vagabond, Satan, is standing in which clothes that who wore? Could the "you" be the reader, as a reference to the fact that Satan is wearing human skin and posing as one of us? Could the "you" be Connie and this is representing Connie's shift from a person who was in the "devil's pocket" (a later phrase used by Bob Dylan in his Gospel days) to someone who in a minute will become a martyr and be on the path of righteousness?
Once again, let me conclude this with the fact that I'm an atheist and am only following where the logic of the story seems to be taking me! Please let me hear your comments!
Wow, you guys are awesome. Lots of great information. Oh, another thing I was thinking about was how satan loves to tempt you with something that you want. The way he tempted Jesus on the mount (but all of the cities in the world weren't his to give). He doesn't give a rat's ass about what's best for you. He just wants to hook his claws into you. Everyone has the power to say no. But Connie felt powerless.
Bonita wrote: "Wow, you guys are awesome. Lots of great information. Oh, another thing I was thinking about was how satan loves to tempt you with something that you want. The way he tempted Jesus on the mount (bu..."An interesting thing about the power to say no in this story is that it seems like saying yes is the only way to find victory here. If Connie had said no, her family would have paid the price for her decisions. Instead of fighting against Friend's temptation, she gives into it, but not for her own benefit. She does it for her family. So its not just the temptation to give in to Satan that is at work here, but also the temptation to save herself or to save her family. And who is to say which is the correct choice when you consider which way Satan is trying to lead her? He still gets what he wants in the end, doesn't he? So was the correct thing to do really to say no to Friend and risk her family's harm? Which is a bigger duty, to reject the devil or to follow your own feelings? In other words, would it have been more right to simply say no to Friend or was she right in saying yes to save her family? Oates seems to say that one's motives are more important than simply what side the devil is on. If you and the devil are on the same side, even in a twisted and once in a lifetime situation, why not say yes if it serves the bigger moral purpose of saving others? Jesus said that the greatest act that someone could do is to give one's life for another. It's amazing how convoluted this line of logic could become in this situation, because Connie says yes to Friend (evil) in order to save her family. This is not a simple cut and dried morality tale, which is why I love it.
Agreed. I might have made the same decision. And she was thinking of her family first. Young women are so vunerable and easily persuaded - it's horrible and tragic and as a reader you want to look away but you can't.I wonder what the family would have thought (of Connie) when they came home and found the house empty.
Mod
Morality turned on its head.
Painful. Contradictory.
Mod
Okay, I have a question real quick... If all characters should have some flaws, and if all villians should have some small amount of goodness in them, then?
I can't find anything good about Arnold Friend. Do you think he has a good side?
Bonita, I don't see a good side to him either.In my opinion, this was not a very good short story. I felt like the characters were too one dimensional, both the good ones and bad ones.
It's not a particularly bad story either. But if this is the best JC Oates story, then I'm gonna have to declare that she's not for me. It didn't do anything for me other than make me watch a car wreck. I didn't get anything from watching the horrible thing unfold before my eyes. Convince me otherwise?
Well, I liked that I could immediately identify with Conny. I know that kind of girl who checks the mirror every hour and how some girls will act differently away from home, esp. at that age. Really, the ultimate reason I was interested in the story was finding out that it was based on something that really happened in Arizona. And the link Shel provided with the real Charles Schimd. Really interesting. I'm always curious to know why anyone would turn into a weirdo. Are they born like that? Is it the way they grew up? Circumstance? You know, or are they just born that way.
Oates has a way of making me want to keep reading. But still, I felt dirty after reading this one. Not a subject I would want to read about again.
Ry said: "An interesting thing about the power to say no in this story is that it seems like saying yes is the only way to find victory here. If Connie had said no, her family would have paid the price for her decisions."How so? I don't recall Arnold or his friend being heavily armed or anything. Perhaps they would be able to beat up the family anyway... but I highly doubt it. Their ultimate goal isn't to get into a fight. It's to seduce this young girl. So it seems that as soon as the neighbors hear any kind of commotion or brawl, Arnold and his friend would probably hightail out of there before the cops arrived.
Also: what did everybody think of Arnold's promise: "Soon as you touch the phone I don't need to keep my promise and can come inside. You won't want that."
It seems like he doesn't have to make any kind of promise, if he were just any old criminal. Which convinces me that Arnold is psycho and has this kind of inner-moral-code that only makes sense to him. It's not okay to break my promise, but it is okay to use force if she touches the phone, etc.
I see that we don't have any books in common. Hm... I take it you don't read horror?
Jimmy wrote: "Ry said: "An interesting thing about the power to say no in this story is that it seems like saying yes is the only way to find victory here. If Connie had said no, her family would have paid the p..."There's no conclusive proof here that her family would have paid the price. The only thing that matters in the question about what would have happened to Connie's family is the perception that Connie has about what would happen. Because Connie perceives a threat to her family, she willingly sacrifices herself so that, in her perception, her family will be spared harm. That's why her sacrifice is so significant--not because its definite that her family would have been harmed, but because Connie perceived her family's danger and chose to act to avert it. This goes with what I was talking about earlier regarding motives being what is important when considering the worth of our choices.
Regarding Arnold's promise: I don't know if you ever heard the old adage that the devil doesn't come inside unless you invite him in. Connie's attempt to reach the phone might have been a reference to that saying.
I think the fact that there is only one multi-dimensional character, Connie, brings the focus of the story onto Connie and makes it a morality tale. The important thing about this story, however, is that its a morality tale with grey area, not black and white. We could analyze all the implications of Connie's choice relative to what Arnold Friend stands for or Ellie or why music is so prominently featured as a catalyst for encouraging Connie to do certain things. I see this story as very in line with Faulkner's "Barn Burning"...now read that and tell me there's not only one character who is fully fleshed out--and once again that character who is fully fleshed out is the one who has to make the decision that the whole story revolves around. I see this story as being more about abstract choice than about people. The idea of choice is much better presented than the actual characters.
Mod
It is true that there is never an explicit threat.
I've read a fair amount of JCO and a lot of her work has young girls in peril - but a lot of it also has those girls either fighting back, or fighting back to themselves after being victimized. This story left me with no hope for her.
In truth we are left at the end of this story to guess at the potentially gruesome outcome.
It is a morality play with grey, I think you're right, Ry.
I'm a bit confused about the role of Ellie.
Why is he even there?
"Him, he's crazy," he said. "Ain't he a riot? He's a nut, a real character." Ellie was still listening to the music. His sunglasses told nothing about what he was thinking. He wore a bright orange shirt unbuttoned halfway to show his chest, which was a pale, bluish chest and not muscular like Arnold Friend's. His shirt collar was turned up all around and the very tips of the collar pointed out past his chin as if they were protecting him. He was pressing the transistor radio up against his ear and sat there in a kind of daze, right in the sun.
"He's kinda strange," Connie said.
"Hey, she says you're kinda strange! Kinda strange!" Arnold Friend cried. He pounded on the car to get Ellie's attention. Ellie turned for the first time and Connie saw with shock that he wasn't a kid either—he had a fair, hairless face, cheeks reddened slightly as if the veins grew too close to the surface of his skin, the face of a forty-year-old baby. Connie felt a wave of dizziness rise in her at this sight and she stared at him as if waiting for something to change the shock of the moment, make it all right again. Ellie's lips kept shaping words, mumbling along with the words blasting in his ear.
Mod
At first with the arrival of Friend I got the sense that it wasn't going to be good but it didn't hit me until Connie realized that Friend and Ellie were both older and not kids. That for me is when the terror began.
At this point I read through the story with eagerly and with great speed so I have likely missed a number of things. Perhaps I will read it again after work tomorrow.
w/r/t religion and this story: I have some religious background having attended a catholic school through 5th grade. However I remembering thinking as a fourth grader that it was bullshit and have been an atheist ever since. That being said I always enjoy the biblical influence on literature and this story certainly seems full of it.
All the talk about Connie and her sacrifice I thought reflects Jesus' sacrificing his life for humanity just on a much smaller scale. The thing is that Connie surrenders to the devil which knowing nothing of JCO's beliefs or other works makes me wonder exactly what significance to attribute to Connie's sacrifice.
I think you are definitely onto something Ry when you mention Connie being purposefully the only multidimensional character. This seems to make perfect sense.
The combination of everyone's remarks (and the story itself) leads me to believe that this story was quite consciously crafted as a morality tale.
and as for Ellie I am not quite sure of a reason for his inclusion. Maybe a possibility for his inclusion come to me sometime over the next day or so.
Regarding Arnold's promise: I don't know if you ever heard the old adage that the devil doesn't come inside unless you invite him in. Connie's attempt to reach the phone might have been a reference to that saying. wow, I totally missed that.
I'm a bit confused about the role of Ellie.
Why is he even there?
Yeah, I was wondering about that too until I read Dan's comment about Connie being the only multi-dimensional character. So it was intentional, of course, but why?
And do you think JCO included the music to maybe add to the feel of "those days," and set the tone of suduction... and because the real Charles Schimd was called the Pied Piper of Tuscon?
Mod
I think this story has so many edges and does so much in such a short space, which is why it's considered one of her best.
Every word is steeped with intention - every image, like a poem - at some point we hear that the mirrored sunglasses on Friend reflect the whole world in miniature. To me that was about how he sees the world in relation to him, even if he's not Satan.
I still wish though, that Arnold had as least one good thing about him. That way, at least, he would have seemed more human. (But I guess that wasn't the point, was it.)Yeah, I really liked that image of the small world... and how Connie's house seemed to feel smaller.
I'm curious to know how this short story compares to JCO's other short stories...
Bonita wrote: "Regarding Arnold's promise: I don't know if you ever heard the old adage that the devil doesn't come inside unless you invite him in. Connie's attempt to reach the phone might have been a reference..."I think Ellie might have been another reference to the story of Charles Schmid, whose accomplices in his murders were a bunch of kids from a high school in Tucson, Arizona. Ellie might be one of Friend/Schmid's accomplices. If you want a little bit of hope added to Oates' story, a couple of Schmid's accomplices ended up turning him in, so maybe Arnold Friend will get turned in as well. But I don't know how likely that is.
It seemed to me that Ellie didn't care what Arnold did one way or the other. So, while submerged in the story, I wasn't thinking along those lines. If Arnold had persued Connie alone, it would still have been scary for her. But with the added friend as "back-up" I think it added to her terror. My son has a short fuse but a big heart (and would never intentionally hurt a girl.) I always tell him to remember that a man is three-times stronger than a girl. And to always be gentle with a young lady. He knows he's physically strong, but I don't think he realizes the difference between the physical strength of men and women.
Maybe Ellie's character was there to up the stakes?
Even if he didn't do much of anything. He was present. One stalker is scary enough. But there is power in numbers.
I promised myself I wasn't going to read everybody else's comments before I wrote mine, but I couldn't help myself. I'm sorta blinded by all the insight. I must say first that I have never liked Joyce Carol Oates, other than a teeny, tiny spark of resonance with that weird story about the kid who throws that blue ball over a wall into an abandoned garden. I guess what I'm finding I like about her is that she does creepy really, really well.Ry, I totally agree about the Flannery O'Connor connection, especially the parallels between Arnold and The Misfit in A Good Man is Hard to Find. The Misfit had two accomplices, as I recall - Hiram and Bobby Lee, who are more directly involved in actually enacting the evil deeds than Ellie is. The Misfit also has some weird issues with his feet and ankles as I recall: no socks, red, scratched ankles, and some odd, two-toned shoes.
Regarding the development of Connie's character, I thought that Oates' physical descriptions were interesting, almost setting Connie up as inviting or deserving what happened to her, especially the part about looking one way at home and quite another way when she went out. The compasisons to June were also interesting, since June is dropped pretty quickly from the story line.
One last thought: the naming of Arnold "Friend" was masterful on Oates' part. Thinking of him as a friend makes all the more slimy. Yep, she has the creepy thing down pat.
Martha wrote: "tiny spark of resonance with that weird story about the kid who throws that blue ball over a wall into an abandoned garden..."What's the title? Sounds interesting.
I think the Misfit wore clothes that weren't his or didn't fit him quite right.
Yeah, about Connie's character. It made you wonder if Oates wanted you to think about those pretty girls. Are they in more danger than the plain Junes?
Bonita wrote: What's the title? Sounds interesting.
It's called "The Sky-Blue Ball," and it's in Avalanches and Other Stories. I'd love to know what you think about it.
Mod
Patrick wrote: "I remembered that my older brother talked about what happened to a neighborhood kid who showed his genitals to a neighborhood girl behind the shed at his house, and I asked him what his reaction wo..."This makes me think of that movie A Time to Kill.
Mod
I want to pick up on this theme from Ry's earlier post and unpack it a bit. If only my coffee were ready to drink I might be able to say more about this, but I will think more and post later.
Although I'd also like to say that, Patrick, if the other stuff I've read by JCO is any indication, the father would suffer in his powerless state, wanting to find and kill, but unable to do so for a variety of reasons, and the anger would eat him from the inside out.
Ry - I agree. One thing I've found about her characters is the ownership, lack thereof, and the shifts in intention all seem paramount.
That may be why I like her so much. The intentions are rarely what I expect them to be. Maybe that's why she writes horror so well.
Care to elaborate on your thoughts of intention/action?
Patrick wrote: "I remembered that my older brother talked about what happened to a neighborhood kid who showed his genitals to a neighborhood girl behind the shed at his house, and I asked him what his reaction wo..."That's a weird reaction. Kids do the "show me yours and i'll show you mine" thing all the time. I'm sure you've done it too. If we're not talking about anything done by force, and if the other kid is around the same age (i.e. not an adult), then I see nothing wrong with this kind of childhood curiosity.
Mod
maybe he was hiding behind the shed to avoid your brother?
Mod
Mod
Regarding the development of Connie's character, I thought that Oates' physical descriptions were interesting, almost setting Connie up as inviting or deserving what happened to her, especially the part about looking one way at home and quite another way when she went out. The compasisons to June were also interesting, since June is dropped pretty quickly from the story line.
I think SmartyKate's point here is interesting about the connection between Flannery and JCO. I totally see it. In A Good Man Is Hard to Find, my stomach always turns so quickly and thoroughly, even though I've read the story a hundred times (and bought this extremely cool pulp fiction version of it at Chicago's Lit Fair).
Who else might we connect her to? I mean, since we're reading Faulkner and all...
I think his stripping people to the bone, and lack of connection and understanding, is something that links these two writers, perhaps.
Shame doesn't imply wrongdoing. Especially, little kids... they see adults hide dirty magazines, so they can sometimes automatically assume something like "naked bodies = bad" even though they don't know why. Not saying this is the case here, but our society makes kids shameful of their bodies when that is not always the correct response, and it definitely doesn't automatically imply any kind of wrong-doing I think, at least in my mind. Sorry for the tangent, story people ;)
Mod
Who else might we connect her to? I mean, since we're reading Faulkner and all... I see where you're going, Shel, but I don't get the creepy, nasty, evil feeling from Faulkner (except maybe Sanctuary) that I do from this story. The characters that come to mind for me are McCarthy's Judge in Blood Meridian or Lester Ballard in Child of God. Those are extreme examples, I know, but the embryo of exactly that sort of creepiness exists in this story for me. One example of redemption from a slide into evil (on a more positive note) is Thomas McGuane's short story "The Sportsmen." Not sure whether anyone here has read it, but the final image of the two young men in that story has stayed with me for years.
Patrick, do you have any recommendations for further JCO reading? I hated the boxing book, and I can't remember the other novel that I started and eventually put down. Should I stick with her short stories?
Mod
fiction files redux
Books mentioned in this topic
Howl’s Moving Castle (other topics)Howl’s Moving Castle (other topics)
Also, with the holidays coming up, I think it might be best to start up our short story group again in the second week of January. If people really want to get going sooner, I'm game - not much going on for me except maybe a move to a new home - but I'm trying to make sure we re-start at a time when people have more time in general to participate.
I will adjust the calendar accordingly. But I think this will be our first one. And it says it's "for Bob Dylan" -- so this should be fun.
http://www.usfca.edu/~southerr/works/...