Bailey's/Orange Women's Fiction Group discussion

Here is our book for the new year! It's a war-based book.
Here is a link to an article about it
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014...

I think this one is quite controversial!

My audio copy has arrived - anyone else ready?

Thanks for the link. It sounds like um, um, not a book I can read at this time. I think I'll sit this one out.

i won't be joining in on this one either. i hope it will be a great read for those taking part! have fun!

Jennifer wrote: "i won't be joining in on this one either. i hope it will be a great read for those taking part! have fun!"

fun? That brought a chuckle.

hi diane!! :)

well, sure -- even if a book deals with difficult topics, the discussions can still be very enjoyable, and add to a read. i consider it fun. we read a war-themed novel in another group, this past november. it was fantastic. the novel (The Wars) was really tough in some parts, and utterly heartbreaking in others. but - wow! the discussions we had were a highlight of my reading year! so i am hoping the same for this read, in this group, for those participating. :)

Jennifer wrote: "hi diane!! :)

well, sure -- even if a book deals with difficult topics, the discussions can still be very enjoyable, and add to a read. i consider it fun. we read a war-themed novel in another gr..."
Jennier, you do have a point.

happy New Year to Everyone!

We shall see - those of us taking up the challenge this time round!! If its not for you no worries - but tell us what you are reading in the thread for other reads - always a useful thread to read.
Now I have finished the All the Birds one I can start this.

I read this one last April and I probably won't read it again, but I will be interested to hear what people think of it.

I've just started this. I know very little about it (other than noting the comment about 'violent' on the front cover). Now having red Diane's comments, I thought I'd best not read The Guardian article till a bit further through the book...

Happy New Year - looking forward to participating in the group through 2015.

I'm about a third of the way through this and I'm finding it an easy read so far. I'm enjoying it, despite some of the confronting and disturbing aspects of war and what people do, or think is okay.

It addresses some of the obvious questions about war - such as how leaders keep people/societies committed to a cause when many individuals struggle to understand the point of what they're being put through.

I wasn't aware of the marriage bureau arrangements that operated during WW2. I've found this concept intriguing and will take the time to learn more (as someone suggested it's worth looking at the video on the book's homepage). It seems very specific to wartime - to marry someone you don't know to get some leave... I'm also wondering how much this was a part of a ploy to involve more people in the Nazi party? I'll read on and see what happens.

I generally don't warm much to wartime stories, but I'm finding the two angles interesting -- on the homefront and on the front line. It's also interesting to get a perspective on how people were drawn into the ideologies of the Nazis and willing to commit such atrocities.

It was part of Nazi policy to encourage Aryans to marry and have children and to prevent 'defectives' from doing so. I think the marriage bureau was part of that policy. I had not heard about people marrying by proxy before this book.

I think some of the violence in the book is shocking because it is done by such ordinary people. Peter is neither a fanatical Nazi or mentally unstable, he is not even a particularly enthusiastic soldier.

I too didnt know about this marriage policy Janine - and I am finding it good going too. There's so many undercurrents between Peter and Katarina and also implied levels of commitment (or not ) to the Nazi cause - so everyone has to be so careful about who/what to say and to what extent.

Well I've now finished this book. I thought it was good and that the author took a very sensitive subject and handled it well. I struggled about two thirds through and found the frontline and the dialogue intensely repetitive. But I suspect that was intentional and partly fitting with the repetitiveness of their role.

For the moment, other than saying that I found it traumatic and disturbing, I will hold off on further comments till others have finished and are ready to discuss further.

I've now read the article in The Guardian and I'm glad I held off on reading it till I finished the book. The selected quotes used and the images the reviewer draws are quite selective, and I'm not convinced that they reflect the complexity of what the author achieves in the book.

Janine, I read the book in September and would love to discuss further with spoiler tags if you like - I see that Val has read it too.

Penny, thanks for posting that link to the Helen Dunmore article, which I found very interesting - I really enjoy Dunmore's own novels, so it was good to see her take on this.

I read it fairly early last year and so don't remember all the details. I am now undecided whether to read it again or not. I did not like it much at the time, but I can see why she wrote it the way she did.

Judy, you can discuss anything you want to, but just put 'spoiler' tags around things which might give too much away to anyone who has not read far with it yet.

Here are another couple of links on this novel - one is to the publisher's reading group guide, which includes some questions that might be interesting to talk about.

There are some spoilers in the last few questions.

https://www.allenandunwin.com/_upload...

The other is to an interview with the author where she talks about her inspiration for the novel - some of this is the same as in the reading guide but I still found it very interesting. I didn't notice any spoilers in this (apologies if there are any I missed!), but it still probably makes more sense after reading the novel.

http://www.writing.ie/interviews/the-...

Judy wrote: "Janine, I read the book in September and would love to discuss further with spoiler tags if you like - I see that Val has read it too.

Penny, thanks for posting that link to the Helen Dunmore arti..."

I'm keen to discuss it further too, Judy. And using spoilers is a good idea. I think, though, they don't show on the GR app. The functionality of the app often frustrates me, so I tend to use the internet version of GR over the app.

Thanks for the links to the reading group guide and the interview. I found them both really interesting. It's useful to get a sense of what motivated Audrey Magee to write about WW2 and from this particular angle.

I have so many views about the questions in the guide you provided, it's hard to know where to start! Val already touched on the writing style, and I noticed that question in the guide around that. I think the style suited the nature of the book and I agreed with Val (I think?) who made reference to the author's journalistic background and the writing style. I thought that the author worked well with that simple, scaled back style and that it was well suited to the nature of the story. I was surprised to read that she'd included a lot more detail in earlier drafts and then cut it all out. I'm glad she did! I still thought it became quite repetitive in the frontline story.

I'll certainly give further thought to the questions in the Allen & Unwin guide and add to the discussion (with spoilers where necessary). On the whole, though, as I've indicated I enjoyed the start and as it progressed found it a very challenging read. But it's one that's really stayed with me and over the past week I've found myself drawn to some WW2 resistance movies! Eg. a Danish one titled 'Flame and Citron' and a French one titled 'Female Agents'. This might be a lead in to my thoughts on the question about 'choice' and does anyone have a choice in those circumstances...? And what are the consequences of exercising choice (which Katherina did later attempt to do).

Looking forward to hearing other comments on this interesting book.

Janine, thanks for your stimulating comments. I found the simple style made the book compelling to read and in many ways suited the horrific subject matter well - the facts are so dreadful that they speak for themselves.

And yet... at time I did find that matter-of-factness frustrating, because I wanted to know more about how the main characters felt about their experiences, not just a description of what they did. Although, of course, it is their actions that they must be judged by.

(view spoiler)[ This especially applies to Peter. I found it rather disconcerting that in the first part of the book he seems quite sympathetic, a tired soldier who enjoys comradeship with his comrades, and who treats Katharina with respect and tenderness. Then suddenly he is going out on the streets and beating up Jewish children - and it is just described in the same matter-of-fact style, without really explaining how he justifies it to himself.

It seems like too much of a jump and I found it difficult to believe in him as a character. I realise that the writer was in a very difficult situation here - if she showed him acting out of fear for himself and his family, she might seem to be making excuses for this brutal Nazi. Also, none of us can possibly understand such actions anyway. But I've recently read a great novel about life in Nazi Germany, Every Man Dies Alone by Hans Fallada, who had lived under the regime, where he describes characters committing acts of brutality and really shows all the different aspects of their thoughts, veering from fear to greed to anger, self-indulgence, bullying etc. Many of his characters also seem to spend the whole time drunk. Compared to that, Magee's portrayal of Peter once he becomes a Nazi seemed a bit thin to me... although I did still find the novel compelling.

I found Katharina more believable, maybe because she doesn't actually commit violent acts herself, but "just" shuts her eyes to what is happening and believes what she is told, in effect brainwashing herself. There are little scenes like the one where a Jewish mother talks to her about her pushchair and for a moment Katharina realises what she is doing, but then quickly dismisses the thought. (hide spoiler)]

Janine, thanks for the film recommendations - I'm also interested in seeing films about the Resistance. One I thought was very good was the German film Sophie Scholl : The Last Days.

I have finished too so am up for any discussion. I too think this type of 'reportive' writing suits the context of the book - but it also makes for a very different read than many other books about the war as it keeps emotions and motive to one side. Like you say Judy there are flashes of almost acknowledging that what they are doing is wrong but they cant quite make that leap. And yet Mrs Sachs seems to have understood more than the Spinells. I wanted to slap Katharina at times as she seemed so easily placated with Jewish leftovers to which she felt entitled. Until of course the system begins to fail her and her family she doesnt question any of it.
What about the soldier sections? Some of them are quite gruesome but they again illustrate the futility of the individual soldier stuck in the 'war machine.' I found Gunter Spinnel sickening and would have happily seen him dumped in the middle of Stalingrad. But he seemed to simply adjust his thinking for a moment and carry on, each time there was another family disaster he didnt give much weight to it at all. The way the parents give up Katharina to the Russians was just mind-numbing - as if they had been turned into robots. Katharina at least seems to come out of the whole experience with some integrity in that she sticks by her son and will not endanger him further. Perhaps we would all behave badly if placed into those kinds of no win situations where all that you think of is survival.
For the men soldiers it is literally survival from one day to the next but for the Spinnells initially at least its about social climbing and German superiority. The mother begins to question it but Gunter never does - its like he is blind.
In some ways it is the levels of acceptance and wilfull turning away from knowledge of what is happening that make this book so traumatic. I wonder if the restrained writing was a conscious decision to distance the reader from the content in order to make it bearable to read?

There seem to be a lot more books where the main characters resist the Nazi regime and anyone who does support it is the villain of the story. The main characters in this one all support the regime, but rarely seem to think about it. They do things or things happen to them, but it is all a bit too detached for me to care about them.

I agree that the repetitiveness of the writing on the frontline adds to the sense of futility for the soldiers. The sense of futility increases over time and that is possibly where the repetitiveness came in. Another town, another battle, another search for food, another occasion to brutalise town people... It was interesting how the views of the soldiers (particularly Peter) changed over time.

Back on the home front, I was equally as dumbfounded and horrified by some of the decisions made by the Spinnell family - particularly Gunther. I thought the reality of PTSD and war was handled really well - but the shocking response of the father to Johannes was really challenging. Even the mother, Esther, couldn't accept his attitude to 'sacrifice'. Yet when it came to her daughter vs herself with the Russians, Esther quickly made the sacrifice to save her own skill over her daughter's.

The consumerism and desire for fine foods, wine, clothing and other goods was an interesting undercurrent too.

Dr Weinart, in particular, was very challenging to come to terms with. And I think his character was portrayed effectively . He certainly got to me -- particularly when he refused the medication for the child, with the most illogical, irrational argument. The inconsistency in promoting the Aryan race became very evident at that point.

Having read the background to Audrey Magee's motivation for writing the book, I can understand what she's trying to get her head around. The confrontation between the old woman and the young Jewish man, the frustration and disbelief at how the old woman just accepted (or claimed to not know or understand) the regime. Yet as Penny commented, how can we fully understand what we all might do if confronted with the risk of death, torture, or being ostracised if faced with the choice of conforming or resisting...?

Getting my head around such complacency and/or acceptance that ultimately resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent people is what probably led me to revisit the resistance stories. It's heartening to know that some people were so courageous and put their lives on the line to resist or undermine what they felt wrong.

My final thought (!) -- Peter and Katharina. I felt it was a moment of unexpected infatuation that enabled them both to capture and hold an image or a concept they could believe in... even when their faith in the regime had dissipated. And interestingly the possibilities of love for another person and the future this represented seemed more enduring in this situation than their love for their country.

Janine - I agree with everything you have said. What I will remember most from this book is the total detachment from reality that the characters portray. I wonder if the German people did do a collective 'ostrich in the sand' act and never fully understood what their leaders were doing. There were Germans who tried to murder Hitler and obviously many brave people tried their best to help locally but I think as a nation, the majority went along with what was happening either fully consciously or as an ostrich.

I also cant relate that well to the anti-semitism. Now, in my life, I couldnt care less what religion others choose - they have the right to choose it. Yet back then it seems that the pervading, accepted view of thinking, educated people was to hate Jews. I have recently read Robert Harris' book An Officer and a Spy which is a fictional account of the real events of the Dreyfuss affair in France. It's astounding the anti-semitic behaviour there too - it seems to have infected much of the French establishment at the time too.
OOH - yes how I hated Dr Weinart - and the fact that he was a German doctor somehow makes him even more sinister and vile!

Dr Weinart is more the stereotypical 'nasty Nazi' than most of the characters, he believes in the racial policies. The majority of people probably did go along with whatever the leadership said and did not think about it, just as Peter and the Spinells did.
There were attempts to kill or overthrow Hitler, but they were mainly by people inside the leadership and more about the war than the treatment of Jews (early on because he was taking the country into a war and later because he would not accept that Germany was losing it).
I wonder if people would have gone on supporting the regime and its policies if either there had not been a war or if Germany had won it. Condemnation of Germany by other countries was mainly after the war, although the persecution of Jews was known about before it, so I also wonder if that condemnation would have been muted. (No country went into the war to save the Jews, although Denmark did save its by evacuating them to neutral Sweden when Germany invaded.)

Val - did you see channel 4's documentary on the filming of the liberation of the camps? I had to cover my eyes in places and then kept waking up all night from some of the images. The film was retracted at the time as being too graphic. I had seen stuff before but nothing like that.

I could only watch part of it Penny. It made me throw up.

yes - now part of me wishes I had never seen it - I didnt watch right to the end - I couldnt.

I haven't read any posts in this topic yet. Just wanted to pop in and say, as usual I am late to the game. :) I am starting to read The Undertaking tonight. I will come back and read the posts and share my thoughts once I've read the book.

Sorry I didn't join this discussion earlier. I read this book a while ago. I struggled with my review because while I found it to be a well written book and a book that brought up important discussion points, I found the characters' casual acceptance of the Final Solution and the policies of Hitler more upsetting than some of the very graphic writings I have read.
The attitude of feeling like they deserved to just take over the homes and possessions of the Jews, and that gave no thought to what happened to them or why was appalling. That they could sleep in beds people had been yanked out of and wear their clothes and feel totally justified - ugh!
It was so upsetting to see how people could just turn on the former friends, colleagues, and neighbors just because the government decrees them evil or lesser than. I felt no sympathy for any of the characters in this book, wanted suffering and death for them all - and that made me feel awful!

The thing that REALLY upset me was reading some of the other reviews on GR where the comments ranged from "a great romance" to "not enough romance - too much war" etc. It seemed obvious that the author's choice to be subtle when portraying the extent of Nazi anti-semitism backfired to the point that some readers didn't even realize that this was a major theme of the book! That just made me sick.

So for me this was a powerful reading experience, but not a pleasant one. The author is clearly talented, I will be very interested to see what comes next!

Michelle, I agree with everything you said and thanks for the book suggestions! The Book Thief is a favorite of mine and I made sure my teenage daughters read it. All the Light is on my nightstand!

I also agree with your point about young people (and people who are raised in cultures that deny the Holocaust, or any historical or present atrocity). There needs to be a record, and for some it needs to be a new book, not something their parents read. For me, I think every High School student should have to read Night. Then they can enter the discussion.

I like books about ordinary people in times of war or crisis, because I always ask myself "what would you do?"; would I have risked death, my family etc, to do the right thing?

Those books are so important because they highlight the courage of those who step forward and risk everything. It is equally important to read about those who are so easy convinced to buy into the hysteria and accept that a whole set of people, usually people they know, often people they are close too, are now the enemy and deserve to die! Think of the Congo, Somalia, Iraq, - any war really, etc where former friends slaughter, rape and torture one another...we need to understand how this can happen to hopefully come to a place where it will stop happening. We need to expose the banality of evil and push people, especially young people to think, to question.

I too need to read about the righteous and the courageous to maintain some faith in humanity- that is why such books are so important. We need to show that standing up for what is right is worth the personal sacrifice. These books offset the horror of books like The Undertaking where people, normal, "good" people, can so easily turn off their morality, their compass for what is right and wrong and profit from evil. These books are not "fun" but they are so important and must continue to be written and read!

Ruthie wrote: "Michelle, I agree with everything you said and thanks for the book suggestions! The Book Thief is a favorite of mine and I made sure my teenage daughters read it. All the Light is on my nightstand!..."

The questions you pose are really important, Ruthie. And they're some of the issues I was left grappling with after The Undertaking. I agree that these types of books must continue to be written and read.

Ruthie - you expressed your POV very well and helped put into words some of the feelings that I was left with. I think as you say it was the total acceptance that they had a right to take things over and that they were superior. Sometimes it takes a while after you have finished reading to really work out what you feel and what you are, sort of, left with.

I finished reading the book in the last couple of days. I found it to be very well written and engaging. I kept picking it back up. Just before this I read Doctor Zhivago which I didn't want to keep picking back up. While I also found Doctor Zhivago to be engaging, sometimes it veered off to much into discussing details of battles and political maneuverings, which wasn't quite my thing.

The Undertaking was unique in that the protganist was fighting for the German army in World War II and helped the Nazis to relocate some of the Jews in Germany, yet the author didn't portray him as "the bad guy". The only obvious bad guy in the book was the doctor.

The part where the doctor wouldn't provide antibiotics crushed me. Ugh, that would be horrible as a parent, knowing that a doctor had the meds to help your sick child but wouldn't give them to you because you aren't "high ranking in the party."

Katharina is also not drawn as a truly sympathetic character. She is so willing to accept the new apartment, cakes, clothing, jewelry etc. that come at the expense of relocating Jewish residents or confiscating their goods.