Sarah’s Comments (group member since Mar 01, 2019)

Sarah’s comments from the Lehman book club group.

So.... No one read Dad's book :( and he recommends not doing so. I'll take this one down, and we're on to a new selection for December and January. I think one book for those two months sounds good, because people might not want to read too much over the holiday.

Also, I'm going to be "reading" this one via audiobook on amazon's audible. If you'd like you can use my login to listen. If someone needs a reading schedule.... you'll have to do it your own self.

Stay calm, but the November book is also a Dad selection. Anyone who wants to participate in November, the book is: Too Like the Lightning. Happy reading, and I still plan on my ultimate feelings on Gulag, and I'll post something on 2001 after Philip and I re-watch the movie tomorrow.

https://youtu.be/usvTKSwv78E

Not sure if goodreads will let me post the link, but it's above. At 30 minutes the interview with Smirnoff starts. Really worth a listen.

I just heard an interview with Yakov Smirnoff, a comedian who escaped the Soviet Union in the 70s. He was a comedian in the Soviet Union, but he had to submit all of his material to the government for approval, so he talked about trying to write jokes that the government wouldn't understand, but the audience would, and he told one:

An ant and an elephant got married, and their wedding night was so wonderful that the elephant died, so the ant started complaining, "I got one night of bliss, but now I have to spend the rest of my life digging this grave."

Made it into the beginning of week 2 last night. I found the description of the family that pulls out photographs of the dead on the anniversary of Stalin's death very powerful, as well as the inclusion of the photographs that Solzhenitsyn has collected. I can look a the photographs and imagine that they're just people, and I was moved.

Also, I thought the first paragraph on 132 was very good. I finally saw a spark of life and emotion from Solzhenitsyn. I understand that he is trying to be more "dispassionate" in order to make the work more credible, but there is a balance there between credibility and impact. If the book is too dispassionate then you lose something.

As Mom and I discussed on the phone, I think the personal perspective could be really powerful, but Solzhenitsyn actually shies away from using it fully. As much as he talks about personal experiences, he hasn't revealed much about his own mental state or feelings during this period of his life. Don't get me wrong, I'm enjoying the book. I'm learning a lot, and I find it very disturbing, but I can see the potential for more.

No... Just geographically challenged. BTW, just started the chapter "First Cell, First Love." I find it compelling and interesting how the book vacillates between a philosophical analysis of human nature and a very intimate first hand experience. A logical person may say that the first hand (and second hand) experiences are not valid arguments for a philosophical discussion because it's impossible to tell if they're representative of a wider experience, but when documentation has been limited and destroyed, the personal experience is all that is left. Also, no matter the argument, a personal experience is more compelling. There is something more memorable and certainly more moving about a first hand telling. Just some of the thoughts that have been going through my mind while reading. Philip said he's reading the book as more of a plot driven type story than as a history, primarily because it's a first hand experience. I understand the point, though I'm not sure I agree.

Great minds think alike! I also thought this was a geographical location...

I just finished reading the foreword by Applebaum. I have to say, it made very clear how woefully ignorant I am of almost every element of Russian history. I highly recommend reading the brief foreword, if you haven't already.

My prediction is that while this book is going to shine a light on some of the worst aspects of human nature, there will also be interesting and uplifting moments where the better aspects of our natures will be discussed. The foreword mentions a prolific underground publishing ring in Russia, as well as Radio Liberty, it talks about the secret copies of the Gulag Archipelago carefully passed around from person to person. There is something romantically wonderful about the ultimately uncrushable spirit of mankind, of the individual. Maybe our better natures will ultimately elevate the species. One can only hope. For the contradictory idea I'll mention this quote: " 'The Gulag Archipelago' helped create the world that we live in today--a world in which Soviet communism is no longer held up as anybody's political ideal."

Here is a reading (and posting) schedule:

Week 1 (through Saturday Sept. 7): Read through pg 121 or, for those with different editions, through Part I Ch 8 - The Law as Child. This averages 17.3 pages per day.

Week 2 (Sat 14th): pg 238 (through Part III Ch 9 - The Trusties) average 16.7 pages per day.

Week 3 (Sat 21): pg 343 (through Part V Ch 1 - The Doomed) average 15 pgs per day.

Week 4 (Sat 28): Finish! average 18.4 pages per day

The Gulag Archipelago is our September book. Hopefully we all are able to get through it a little easier than The Prince... Tomorrow, or the next day, I'll devise a rough schedule so that we can have discussions that align with the schedule, even if we read it at different paces. Good luck, and happy reading!

I am just getting back to The Prince. Looking forward to finishing this one, to be honest! But also looking forward to seeing what anyone else has to say. Remember, first one finished gets to pick the next book!

My prevailing feeling, after finishing the book, is disappointment. I think there was a lot of really good storytelling, but also some pretty bad storytelling. I don't think the book was served by the 1984 comparison because the reader came to the book with certain expectations that molded the reading experience. I mean that the reader was searching for something throughout the book, and the reader also draws conclusions they may not have (and in my opinion probably shouldn't) because of the comparison.

I think the better story is one of creation, and this idea is only touched on and pushed aside in a forced story of socialism. I think what Tengo and Aomame created is an idea, represented by their dota. There's a prevailing theme of balance that never really plays itself out, and a theme about mothers/daughters, creators/created. He touches on interesting ideas of codependency and responsibility in relationships, of the need for people to follow someone else sometimes, but all of these ideas that seemed like they moved Murakami more, and would have moved us more because of that, are pushed aside in Murakami's admiration of other literary work. Too bad.

Finished the book today. Will write my thoughts tomorrow when I have a chance to sit for more than 2 minutes.

Mom, earlier you mentioned that you were having trouble picking the book up but not having trouble progressing through your reading once you had started. I, too, have had that problem. In my case I think it was because the reader is still in the dark as to the ultimate purpose of the book, and we had just passed a kind of climax (the death of Leader) which left the reader feeling a bit aimless.

Interesting hypothesis about the NKH technology connection. NKH subscriptions seem to be a voluntary involvement in a widespread government control of all televised news media. I have wondered if 1Q84 is meant more as a balance for 1984 than as a re-imagining. I don't think we'll know until the very end. I do think there is a ton of emphasis on balance. The numbers are mirrored on the pages, the "shadow of your heart" aspect, the viewer and the receiver, the active and the reactive, law vs morality... I suspect the message might be one of trying to find a balance between socialism and capitalism, but that's just a hypothesis.

New book: The Prince. We will begin June 1!

Mom, I think they are both in the same reality, somehow, because Tengo, in discussing Fuka Eri's situation with the professor, referenced the police shooting that lead to the police uniform change.

Mom,
Interesting thoughts. I think an important distinction to make is that neither Aomame, nor Tengo are actual narrators of their own stories, instead we have a limited (meaning focused on one person) third person narration. I would say that makes Tengo and Aomame's reliability as story tellers less important. I could believe that the story is being made up, after all, we don't know who the narrator is, but I think it's not possible for it to be made up by one of the main characters. I don't have a defense for this belief, other than that it would be too imbalanced, and I think this book is very interested in balance.

I think you've noticed something interesting: the desirea la rge swath of the populace shares, to escape from their own humdrum lives, and the power of fiction to provide a form of escape. I think that may be part of the socialist concept that I feel must be waiting in the wings. People's desire for a different life will lead them down a bad path, maybe the path of socialism.

I would say that Tengo is fundamentally a weak person (and Aomame is fundamentally a strong person) which is why he has agreed to rewrite Fuka-Eri's book. He wanted to, and no one else had a problem with it. It tells us several times that Tengo likes his desires (in all things) to be guided by someone else, which makes me think that it is very believable that he would rewrite Air Chrysalis. Someone told him to, he wanted to, no one (except a moral voice he obviously doesn't listen very hard to) told him not to. Every reader has to approach a story with their own thoughts guiding them, but I didn't find Tengo's actions clumsily done. I think if he were the kind of person to stand on moral high ground, he wouldn't be the kind of person to enter into relationships with former students or with people who are married. He is definitely a "go with the flow" kind of person.

I think you have unknowingly touched on something important when you talk about Aomame's confidence. I think she is the balance for Tengo. Aomame's "mantra" is "don't hesitate," do what you think is right, no matter what the rules are, and no matter what the consequences are. Her idea of "right" may be skewed, but she is acting 100% in accordance with her moral compass. Tengo on the other hand... And yet, Tengo has, from society's view, done nothing all that bad. A very interesting juxtaposition.

As far as the bizarre sexual encounter Aomame has with Ayumi: I think it is important to note that sexual encounters in the book start off strange and get more strange and more uncomfortable as you go along. The first sexual encounter described is the memory Tengo has of his mother. It is an uncomfortable memory to be privy to, a strange act for a (presumably) lactating mother with a taboo partner in front of a taboo audience, but, putting discomfort aside, it's not really that unusual. You say, "ew... gross," but people have affairs all the time. The next encounter is also somewhat taboo. Aomame and her high school friend having a lesbian encounter. Again, it feels like we shouldn't be privy to it, it seems a little taboo, but is it really that unusual? The next encounter ends with Aomame contemplating murder. We are now somewhat outside the realm of "normal," but after all, she doesn't act on it. We also see Tengo with his married girlfriend, while immoral, this isn't exactly unusual, and for now, the graduation of Tengo's sexual encounters plateaus, while Aomame's escalates. Aomame is probably date raped, and seems not to care, she also encounters multiple people who have been sexually violated as children. There is a graduation to a type of prostitution. I don't want to go on too far, because I'm not sure how far you've read. I think Aomame's devaluation of sex is definitely supposed to make us uncomfortable. I think her relationship with the opposite sex indicates a devaluation of men, in general. I think we are supposed to understand that we are dealing with a character who is so damaged that she doesn't even notice some of the terrible things around her, or how terrible her own actions are. I think we are looking at a completely autonomous person who lives outside of relationships, and may be a narcissist.

I also think we are being forced to confront an uncomfortable aspect of society, and that is the devaluation of sexual relationships in general, and that it is being so graphically described in an effort to make the reader uncomfortable, and ask themselves, "Okay, where do I draw the line?"

I like the Twilight Zone strangeness of your hypothesis, and while it does seem poetic, I don't think it will hold up in the end. It would bring a kind of pointlessness to the book that I don't anticipate. I think we are supposed to be struggling, at this point with the sharp division between the "real" and the "strange," but in the world that's been created for us the strange things are also real. I am not totally confident in that assessment, but it is how I am approaching the book at this point.

I enjoyed hearing what you had to say, Mom, and it made me think more about my own interpretation of the book.

I really enjoyed this line in the book: "he stood out like a centipede in the sugar bowl."