Book freaks discussion

This topic is about
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Monthly Book Read Talk
>
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Gorfo
(new)
Apr 01, 2012 05:54AM

reply
|
flag

You might be interested in watching the Jack Nicholson movie of this book after finishing reading and discussing. It won the Oscar in all top 5 categories.



I had seen the movie years ago and even though it was wonderful, I regret not reading the book first. I think the ending would've come as quite a shock. I will definitely be borrowing it from the library to watch next week, though!


http://www.amazon.com/One-Flew-Over-C...






Stick with it, Gorfo. It took me a while to get into it, too!

Haha thanks! Will do!


If you allow men to use you for your own purposes, they will use you for theirs.
message 20:
by
aPriL does feral sometimes
(last edited May 20, 2012 03:51AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars

It's 2012, and I see now the book is not as black and white as I thought. It's complex, nuanced, balanced and flawed. I've given it five stars because it's so close to perfect in its structure, but it certainly is perfect in the exploration of the dual nature of people in general, that internal battle between our immature and destructive animal natures and our mostly equal desire for civilized, safe and dependable order. The Head Nurse is not evil, and McMurphy is not a angelic righteous man. While the symbolism runs deep in the novel so that every main character also represents an abstract facet of being human, the actual protagonists feel very flesh and blood like real people. It is not a political book against being bourgeois, but rather, I think, a book that reluctantly acknowledges that for a healthy society, both the impulse for ordinary self-control, and the need for play, wildness and lack of self-control are necessary for mental health. It is a dramatic book that takes place in a pressurized bottle so its overheated, but I think it is an accurate representation of the human impulses that swing real societies back and forth between peaceful order and necessary adjustments for progressive good.
It really a great book, both as a plain thriller genre story that is exciting, and as a metafictional, multi-layered classic exploring the bigger issues of being human.
My only quibble is the book most definitely comes off anti-women, although how bad in that direction is arguable. Most classical literature and art uses as meta-symbol the sexes to show opposing forces of nature: women are usually the force of simplicity, quiet maintenance of the status quo, creation, propagation or moral purity, men are symbolic usually of strength, power, authority, wisdom, purpose, war, destruction. Classical Greek literature codified the symbolic protocols behind writing we use up to today. It IS sexist, but it was not considered immoral because it was accepted as true in the past. In the case of this book though, while Kesey was following literary traditions of Great Literature, i think he also had too much fun writing the part of Ratched as a bitch.
Anyway, these are my opinions.

It's been a long time since I read this book, but as I remember it, I think the story showed the blurred lines between what is considered sane and what is 'abnormal,' especially within a society/environment that is itself questionable when it comes to mental health standards.
Since when I read it sexism was still the accepted norm for most literature, I don't remember feeling as if Kesey had maligned women in general... but certainly Nurse Ratched was characterized as a bitch. Her general position of being in charge and in a power struggle with the men (as well as the violence that ended in her inability to speak) in retrospect could be as you say -- Kesey's hostility toward women given free rein.
Your complaint about Kesey's sexism has given me pause to reconsider...
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.