Elizabeth’s Comments (group member since Feb 02, 2017)

Elizabeth’s comments from the Around the World in 80 Books group.

Regarding books by indigenous authors from Australasia: I've tagged The Swan Book by Alexis Wright, The Bone People by Keri Hulme, and Mullumbimby by Melissa Lucashenko. Only the last one appears to be available in ebook format.

Sounds good. Maybe we could go by continent but skip ones that seem more obscure (like South America focusing on Argentina but skipping Venezuela) for now. It will be best for me if we either pick books that have Kindle versions available or have several months advance notice so I can order next time I'm in the US. Also happy to start with Other Russias, I just finished reading it. :)

I'll be pretty busy next semester (teaching my first class), but I'm happy to continue as well. Maybe every other month would be more manageable? One request is to focus on books that are easier to find, since it may be difficult to locate obscure English books in Amsterdam. I just got my copy of Other Russias shipped to me in the US while I was back over break. Looking forward to reading it soon.

Also: Completely agree on the Westernization of China being a major theme. Not sure about Sylvia's point 3. At least when it comes to communication I attributed this to a combination of poor translation of dialogue (see above) and some cultural differences.

Overall enjoyed this book! Although it was tricky to understand at parts, which is basically Sylvia's point 1. My take was that I simply didn't have the cultural context to understand many of the nuances, which made it tough especially since many stories focus on subtle social constraints (particularly faced by women) in Chinese society in the 30s and 40s. (Just one example of me lacking the context for this read: I didn't know what a cangue is and had to look it up.) I also wonder about the translation, in particular much of the dialogue seemed stiff to me and I feel like it would have read quite differently in the original version.

Some other thoughts:
* I loved Chang's beautiful imagery, especially when she mixed Western and traditional Chinese metaphors (ballet on one page, a lacquered tray as a balcony on another).
* Love in a Fallen City was also my favorite story. While it does touch on marriage/courting norms it is lighter on the complicated social dynamics (which are more heavily scrutinized in the other stories), and thus seemed more comprehensible to an outsider. Perhaps this is part of the reason it stood out to me. I'm also a bit ashamed how little I knew about this history.
* The focus on the politics and economics of marriage reminded me of Jane Austen.
* Related to this, most of the characters whose struggles Chang depicts have a certain level of privilege/social standing even if they have fallen. I suppose this reflects Chang's own background.

Loved this graphic novel! I checked it out from the library and read it way ahead of time since I’m not sure what the book (in English) situation will be like once I move to Amsterdam. Dropping some thoughts here while it’s still fresh in my mind:

* First book I’ve read that covers the First Indochina War in addition to the Vietnam War. I also think it did a good job with some nuances of colonialism (and not just French, also Japanese). Even though Bui’s family (especially on her mother’s side) was quite privileged, they also had to suck up to the French (like in the story of her father going nearly mad having to pretend to defer to a mediocre boss).
* LOVED the use of shadows in the art to represent the lingering effects of her family’s refugee trauma on her own life as a first generation immigrant: The darkness in her house in the US, her father’s long shadow in a chair, the part where she stands in her father’s literal shadow, the night sky as they’re escaping by a boat, etc.
* It was an interesting choice to have the art be red and black (and white) but no other colors.
* Appreciated learning some of the back story of that iconic Pulitzer Prize-winning photo “Saigon Execution” from the Vietnam War. The situation (including the war overall) was much more complicated than many Americans have been led to believe.
* Great depiction of the scariness of birthing and certain aspects like how breast feeding is not automatic and needs to be learned (which sadly is not widely discussed, especially not in literature).
* The graphic novel format was great for this story. It really adds to see the boats, the immigration photos, etc. (and it's impressively vivid given that she was either not born yet or too young to remember the details through much of it). Beautiful and consistent art. Her drawings of herself (even as a small child) look so accurate, and you can really see the resemblance with her mother!
* Reminded me a lot of Fun Home (because of the analysis of both mother and father and Bui’s relationship with each, in graphic novel format) and The Latehomecomer recommended by Cait. :)

Quick update. I'm reading a different book right now which cites the following statistic in a chapter on homosexuality: "In a 1981 study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, AIDS patients with an average age of 35 years reported an average of 60 sex partners per year, or approximately 1,000 lifetime partners." The book notes that homosexual men tend to have many more partners than people in exclusively heterosexual relationships. So I'm coming around to believing Arenas more (although there still may be a bit of exaggeration/bragging involved) and just accepting this as something pretty far from my personal experience. I think Sylvia is right that the part about his mother's extreme chastity is more likely him misunderstanding *her* perspective.

Don't be too hard on yourself Cait! This was definitely a difficult read and I can understand why many people would have trouble getting through it.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Sylvia! I think you're exactly right in calling these "exploits." Like you, I was also trying to understand what made this so off-putting for me compared to other books that tackle difficult/taboo topics (a recent example from my own reading: The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison). I decided there's a big difference between invoking taboo topics to make a point (e.g. incest in The Bluest Eye exposes the horrors of cyclic abuse resulting from slavery/racism), versus the way Arenas mentions them in a matter-of-fact manner or is even (possibly?) exaggerating/bragging.

I didn't at first pick up on the language surrounding "fairies" but I think you're right that it is offensive. Your comment makes me think back to the part where he compared all the women in his life to witches (one of the examples of passing misogyny - yikes!) and then added to the list of witches a few of these "fairies."

I finished and I have some mixed feelings about this book, which I found simultaneously fascinating and disturbing. Some thoughts:

* Too much sex for me (including bestiality/incest/sex with minors, as Cait mentions). And I have to say, I didn’t really buy it. 5,000 encounters before the 70’s? The way Arenas writes, it is as if every trip on Cuban public transportation was a giant homosexual orgy, under a regime that was sending people they caught engaging in such behaviors to concentration camps. And he writes “everyone” who grew up in the countryside was having encounters with animals, yet his mother was leading a chaste life of sexual frustration after his father left? I wonder if this was exaggerated for a reason, e.g. to provoke the regime. Although admittedly this is quite far from my personal experience. (Also FYI, the second half of the book had less of this, although it is still quite graphic including descriptions of horrible conditions in jail and multiple murders.)
* Because the sexual content felt exaggerated, I was left with the impression that Arenas is a somewhat unreliable narrator. I found this frustrating, even though I don’t doubt the severity of his oppression and the horrible conditions in Cuba.
* There are a number of parallels with The Return: The intricate descriptions of the sea and the prison, the way the government brought together writers for the purpose of monitoring/censoring them, the assassinations abroad, etc.
* Also many parallels with readings about North Korea. Most striking to me: The way your “friends” and many people around you were often informers, so you couldn’t trust anyone — a psychological tactic often used by authoritarian regimes. Also having to book a train months in advance to see your family nearby (reminds me of a story in Bandi’s The Accusation). And much more.
* It’s amazing how Arenas persevered in the face of censorship, risking imprisonment and rewriting entire novels multiple times repeatedly after they were captured by censors.
* I did not know that Gabriel Garcia Marquez was a supporter/friend of Castro.
* Interesting to read Arenas's view of the differences between homosexuality in Cuba (where he says it was more accepted for heterosexual men to engage in relations with other men) and the US.
* Interesting to read Arenas’s critique of capitalism after arriving in the US. He did not just escape communism and embrace “freedom.” The quote that sticks with me: “The difference between the communist and capitalist systems is that, although both give you a kick in the ass, in the communist system you have to applaud, while in the capitalist system you can scream. And I came here to scream.” He has a pretty critical assessment of NYC, and I agree with the capitalistic flaws he notes although I wouldn’t go so far as saying it has no culture.
* Interesting to read Arenas’s critique of the far left in the US; his sense that it was fashionable to support Castro in certain circles and how speaking out against the regime actually hurt his career (e.g. made professors take his work off their syllabus).
* The last few chapters give a perspective of the struggles Arenas faced as a refugee torn from his home, even after he has "escaped" from the oppression.
* Some other flaws: Passing instances of misogyny, he keeps pointing out the color of people’s skin as the only description of them, and altogether too many characters to keep track of.

I was also unable to finish this one (first book in my "dnf" shelf on Goodreads). I'll also try reading a different Venezuelan book eventually, although I'm a bit swamped at the moment!

I'm happy to do Vietnam :)

How about doing a book on Soviet Russia too? Regardless, this plan sounds good to me. I'd be happy to do the poll for Vietnam or basically any of them. Also: I'm going to be moving to Europe around the end of August/early September which will likely be quite hectic, so there's a possibility I'll miss one around that time. But you shouldn't feel held up by me.

Also: One thing in particular that I learned from this book that I previously didn't know much about is the conflict between the Lebanese army and Palestinian refugees, including the Ein al-Rummanah bus massacre. I also did not know much about the divisions between East and West Beirut (and the green line/how dangerous it was for Palestinians to cross into the east side).

I just read this today since I'm heading out on another long trip out of the country. Don't want to be worrying about lugging and losing library books! It's a really quick read, I actually read it in one sitting. I liked it. There are obviously a lot of similarities to Persepolis, although it's shorter. I think that makes it more accessible, although I did end up wishing some parts had been further developed. Seeing the drawing with the bomb labeled "Made in USA" really struck me. The end was also a good reminder about the sacrifice made in studying abroad as a stateless person, since your visa doesn't guarantee re-entry to the place your family is living. That's something I certainly didn't have to worry about when deciding on college, a privilege I took for granted at the time.

Basically, this is one family's immigration story. I think it's really important to listen to such stories. At the same time, you see a just particular piece of the larger conflict. The Israel-Palestinian conflict is complicated, and it will take many stories to get a well-rounded view (for example, last year I read a collection of essays by Raja Shehadeh about living in the West Bank during the occupation, which is a very different yet equally important picture compared to being in the Palestinian diaspora).

I look forward to seeing what you guys have to say about it! Not sure how much I'll be able to contribute to the conversation once I'm traveling, but I'll definitely look to follow along. I'll chime in if I can.

I was still holding out hope somehow that there would be some reckoning at the end for Dona Ines' reprehensible views and behaviors, but based on your comments it sounds like this is expecting too much. I completely agree that it's one thing to have racist/sexist/etc. characters (as exist in reality) and quite another to leave those views completely unchallenged.

I've been struggling with this book and I'm still not finished. While I try to be open to reading other perspectives, the racism and brutality is a bit over the top for me. Beyond the fact I really can't relate at all to the narrator, I think the intergenerational format makes it tough to read since as soon as you get to know a character they disappear. I haven't found a character to latch on to. I think this format can be quite tricky and a book like Pachinko made it work, but here I don't think it's done in an engaging way. That being said, I think this book is useful for getting a sense of Venezuelan history, and for that reason I will keep trying to finish to the end.

Also: I was thinking about how there would likely be pushback against publishing a book like this in the US. The fact it's so celebrated in South America suggests some cultural differences with regards to "political correctness." (Side note: I usually avoid using that phrase because of its negative connotation; my own view is that it's generally a good thing that people are getting more aware of the nuances of hurtful prejudices and biases. So apply something like that phrase but without the bad connotation.)

Content warning: Narrator is extremely racist.

#1: I was really lucky to have a "great books" curriculum in college that hit a number of such foundational books. But the problem was that we covered each in one class. So we had say 2-3 days to read all of Marx on top of the physics major. Definitely did not do it properly! One of my life goals is to go back and read these books properly. There's a book called "Great Books" by David Denby that (if I remember correctly and have the right book) has some fun descriptions of an alum from Columbia doing just that. I might follow along with it!

#2: It's shocking how poorly these topics are often treated in school, popular books and beyond. I'm reminded of a (very recent) book on the history of Amsterdam I read last year which was built around the thesis "Amsterdam is the most liberal city in the world," and while discussing the golden age only had a couple of lines on slavery and colonialism. Looking back at my review, I see that I noticed this and pointed it out as a criticism (seems important to discuss the contradiction of having a "tolerance" that is built on a foundation of other people's oppression) but I think my response would have been much stronger if I had been writing the review after reading this book. So that's a concrete way that this book had a great impact on my point of view.

I agree with you Becki but I think I was trying to get at something slightly different. When I think of “developed” what often comes to mind is having cities built up with more skyscrapers, having more things automated and more industrialization — there are major positives to this especially when it comes to improved health care and public facilities (water, sanitation, etc.), but it’s also the case that a higher per capita wealth doesn’t necessarily filter down to those who need it most. And maybe there are other ways of fixing issues by distributing wealth better (as you point out). I guess my confusion depends on the precise definition of “developed” versus not, which is a bit murky (to me) in the first chapter although he seems to settle on an economic definition, even a per capita one on pg. 15 after warning about how this may be misleading if there are vast inequalities in wealth. It just seems like this “development” is not necessarily in one to one correspondence with having the largest percentage of poverty, which I would have thought to be a better measure of societal issues.

Rereading the first chapter it seems that Rodney has a (Marxist) view of society as a progression of different stages of increasing development which lead increasing wealth but also increasing inequality, which finally get evened out in the last stage of socialism when the total wealth is redistributed. But reading it today, this last bit of course seems naive.

Thanks for sharing that syllabus, it looks awesome!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Becki! That’s a really good point that he was writing from Africa at a time when information was not so easily distributed. I’m also sorry to hear about your fiancee's bad experience in his college class.

A few more things I thought of on my end:

The beginning really reminded me of Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi. One of the things I really like about that book was that it presented a picture of the slave trade within Africa, something I’ve rarely seen in other fiction books about slavery. I thought she did a really good job driving home the point that this was yet another tool used for exploitation by the Europeans.

I was also thinking a lot throughout about Chimamanda Ngozi Adiche and in particular her “danger of a single story” TED talk. While I think Rodney did a good job trying to be factual about the historical realities within Africa (rather than just present the most dire picture) I do think you could come out of this book with a negative view of Africa. Yes there are very real issues due to this exploitation but it doesn’t mean everything is bad. I’m glad I also had a chance to read Chimamanda’s portrayal of middle class life in Nigeria for balance.

In general I’m also skeptical of taking developed vs. developing as a proxy for good vs. bad. I just got back from Vietnam which is a developing country and while I can’t claim to understand what it’s like to live there from a few days view as an outsider (for an extreme example: tourists in North Korea coming back saying it’s actually nice and not so bad, precisely because they’ve been shown a very curated view of life there), Ho Chi Minh City seemed to have many strengths (e.g. entrepreneurial spirit, work life balance, nice food culture including widely available fresh herbs and real juice). Bangkok is more developed (Thailand was never colonized) but with its big mall complexes seemed to have lost something as well. This is not to discount the struggles of people who are in poverty and hungry, although a quick search shows that the US has a higher percentage of poverty than Vietnam (of course a good portion of the US number is the long term effect of the exploitation of slaves brought here). The percentage of poverty in Africa is much higher than in either Vietnam or the US, and clearly this is connected to the many horrible exploitations Rodney described, but I’m not sure it’s quite the same as “developing” even though one effect of those exploitations was in delaying the development of those countries. I would be curious to hear what you all think about this.