Reading 1001 discussion

Hey everyone, just putting up the second quarterly part of this year's annual.

This section includes Part 2 (December 1967-April 1968) + Appendix Part ii (Through Cresspahl’s Eyes) . Here are some questions for people to consider:

1. There is a section of the book (pg. 904 in my version) that mentions how even though “The New York Post” is considered a liberal publication it hardly has any POC employees at the top, and gives the statistics for that. What did you think of this section of the book and how it discusses the complexity of racism and implicit segregation?

2. After this section also includes the “Through Cresspahl’s Eyes” appendix. What purpose do you think it serves to the text, and did you like it?

3. A lot of different political figures and pieces from the American news at the time are described in this section: are there any you caught that you are familiar with? Did you learn about someone/something new this way?

4. During one of the dialogue portions, Annie says “You are responsible for what people see in you”. Do you agree with this? How does this either relate to or conflict with Gessine’s outer persona/internal life?

5. How do the dual settings of Pre WII Germany and the USA in the 1960s tie in together with the book’s themes? What is the author possibly saying by pairing them like this?

6. And finally how is the book going so far for you? Are you enjoying or not, and why?

discuss!

I've arrived at Dec 1, 1967 but no announcement that it is second part. But maybe my ebook doesn't have that???

I thought this was some great writing; "Yesterday's snowstorm cloaked the trees outside our window like sparkling white strangers, cleared the sky, and set a blinding mirror in Riverside Park for the now unobstructed sun.

It left behind a wind that wrote on everyone's bones that it was colder than six and half degrees below zero (20 F)." Now that last sentence is the reason to go to Florida in the winter.

1. There is a section of the book (pg. 904 in my version) that mentions how even though “The New York Post” is considered a liberal publication it hardly has any POC employees at the top, and gives the statistics for that. What did you think of this section of the book and how it discusses the complexity of racism and implicit segregation?

It smacked of "Do as I say, but don't do as I do". And the issue is still unresolved more than 50 years later, whether it is for POC, women, LGBTQI+, people with disabilities, etc. But, again, by catching the NYT with its pants down, the author reinforces the main theme of the book, which is to present reality as close as possible to the truth; not shying away from the uncomfortable issues or discussions of the time.

2. After this section also includes the “Through Cresspahl’s Eyes” appendix. What purpose do you think it serves to the text, and did you like it?

It worked like a palate cleanser in the middle of a 9-course degustation menu; it is a solid (but still incomplete) recap on who exactly is Heinrich Cresspahl and who are the people gravitating around his life, especially the people of Jerichow. A lot of it was offered in snippets throughout the first two parts, but here, it is condensed with some bits and pieces of new information. (Spoiler: it prepares the third part, where he figures prominently)

3. A lot of different political figures and pieces from the American news at the time are described in this section: are there any you caught that you are familiar with? Did you learn about someone/something new this way?

In Australia, we probably remember LBJ because of the infamous slogan "All the way with LBJ". However, I didn't know fully the context surrounding the 1968 elections, I couldn't recall some of the protagonists (RFK, McCarthy). I was probably more familiar with the state of affairs in Czechoslovakia in 1968, thanks to Milan Kundera, who references this period a lot in his novels. There has also been mention of Alexei Kosyguin (more in the third part) with respect to the situation in Czechoslovakia, but I am surprised that Brezhnev has not been mentioned so far.

6. And finally how is the book going so far for you? Are you enjoying or not, and why?

By that point, I am still giving it 4 stars. There are three things that I found particularly interesting:

- On page 681, when Gesine explains to Marie that Cresspahl might have been to New York for 6 days, the author gives us a wink about his role in one of Marie's replies: "That wouldn't feel right. It would fit too perfectly. First a random Robert Papenbrock in New York, then your father, and thirty years later here we are. It would be too contrived, like a novel."

- On page 829, when the Paepcke family receives presents from Alexander who is working clandestinely in Russia, the children get white raincoats that "felt unworn, smelled fresh from the factory, but there were sunflower seeds in the pockets." At the beginning of the Ukraine invasion, there were reports that some older women near the front were offering sunflower seeds to the Russian soldiers to put them in their pockets. The reason for this? So that flowers would grow where these soldiers would be buried. Should we infer the same meaning with the Alexander Paepcke story?

- The first two parts cover exactly 8 months, roughly 4 months each; each day's entry is relatively short. The last two parts cover exactly 4 months, split 2 months each; each day's entry is much longer. A question to answer at the end: why did the author use such a temporal structure and different weights for the daily entries?

Patrick wrote: "- On page 829, when the Paepcke family receives presents from Alexander who is working clandestinely in Russia, the children get white raincoats that "felt unworn, smelled fresh from the factory, but there were sunflower seeds in the pockets." At the beginning of the Ukraine invasion, there were reports that some older women near the front were offering sunflower seeds to the Russian soldiers to put them in their pockets. The reason for this? So that flowers would grow where these soldiers would be buried. Should we infer the same meaning with the Alexander Paepcke story?"

I haven't reached that far in the book yet, but that's so interesting and heart-wrenching.

With the racism and segregation question, I was thinking in terms of Francine's stay in Gesine and Marie's apartment. There is a lot about how African American people don't live on Riverside Drive (but do work there - the staff at the apartment block are Black). Marie seems ashamed of being associated with Francine - but this might be true if Francine were a White scholarship student living in poverty.

I have read through the month of April, including the Appendix to Part 2.

1. There is a section of the book (pg. 904 in my version) that mentions how even though “The New York Post” is considered a liberal publication it hardly has any POC employees at the top, and gives the statistics for that. What did you think of this section of the book and how it discusses the complexity of racism and implicit segregation?
As Patrick mentions, this was an issue then and continues to be an issue today in the US.
Also, I felt that Marie's relationship with Francine represents that complexity on a very personal level. She wants to support Francine but feels as if that support is hypocritical by virtue of her not really understanding Francine and Francine not really liking her. Further, how does she support Francine within the context of her white friend's unsympathetic response.
Another great moment of racial complexity is after MLK is shot and the door man in his most professional and polite way expresses to Gesine that if black rioters come to their building he will not stop them from hurting her and although he is appreciative of her expressed support for his pain at MLK's death, he flatly states: "Do you know what it means to be scared? You don't know anything. You're not black."
I found this section, with the convergence of the death of MLK and the following riots paralleled with the death of key characters at the end of WWII in Germany, to be one of the most engaging but also the most depressing. Marie's statement: "for the next time..." says it all. Heartbreaking and so true.

2. After this section also includes the “Through Cresspahl’s Eyes” appendix. What purpose do you think it serves to the text, and did you like it?
I don't know that I liked it so much as I needed it....it brought a great deal of chronological clarity to the snippets I had been reading all along. It was simply helpful and the clarity was a bit of fresh air.

3. A lot of different political figures and pieces from the American news at the time are described in this section: are there any you caught that you are familiar with? Did you learn about someone/something new this way?
Exactly the opposite of Patrick, I am learning for the first time all the international politics surrounding Czechoslovakia. I do know the date that the Soviets entered the country so that set up worked for me but I didn't really understand what was happening to bring that about. Also, I don't really understand what de Rosny is up to. However, I am very versed in some of the politics around the Vietnam War, how RFK and Johnson fought, why MLK death changed so much during that time.

4. During one of the dialogue portions, Annie says “You are responsible for what people see in you”. Do you agree with this? How does this either relate to or conflict with Gessine’s outer persona/internal life?
Gesine is a very internally focused and secretive person. She needs to consciously plan how to tell her daughter about her life growing up in Germany because it would not have come up in casual conversations. She is an ideal employee to her boss while not believing in his capitalist goals. She has very strict values and beliefs that she attempts to act upon but which, as Marie can clearly see, may be totally out of context in the current situation.
I do believe that you are responsible for the presence you put out there in the world. Conversely, people bring their own baggage to all their perceptions and you can not be responsible for those.

5. How do the dual settings of Pre WII Germany and the USA in the 1960s tie in together with the book’s themes? What is the author possibly saying by pairing them like this?
I believe that the author is aligning the disintegration of societies in such a way that we are made to see that the collapse of values and freedoms can happen anywhere and under any political system. I am not sure exactly about Czechoslovakia and how that fits in yet.

6. And finally how is the book going so far for you? Are you enjoying or not, and why?
Yes, I am enjoying it and look forward to the reading the rest.

I have a question, what is happening to Lisbeth?

I am up to January now and a couple of things have struck me in the last few days reading the first one was attitudes to rape and sexual assault which shows that not much has changed in all that time including comments about the police which is the UK is scarily true.

The other thing is Marie and her attitude towards anyone not like her even her parents are shocked by her beliefs.

I have finished part 2, which brings me to the end of the first of my two massive volumes published by NYRB. (The last dated entry in part 2 is April 19th, followed by a 20-page appendix 'Through Cresspahl's Eyes').

Warning: possibly some spoilers coming up.

Regarding Kristel's question, I am still not sure what happened to Lisbeth emotionally - I see what she did but not why, except that the court case was a trigger. I didn't understand exactly what happened there, what she had to do that bothered her so much. I hoped 'Through Cresspahl's Eyes' would enlighten me, but it seems to be something he doesn't want to discuss.

1968 was a year of a lot of upheaval. By the end of this section we have Martin Luther King's assassination and the unrest that followed it. I thought Gesine and Marie seemed very cut off from this, as if they are reading the news but are not touched by it, even though there is rioting in New York.

To me, being European, the historical event I think of first when I hear "1968" is the student protests in Paris in May. I expect this will be mentioned in part 3 at even more of a remove because it's so far away geographically.

In the last 100 pages or so, I felt I was losing touch with Gesine and Marie. I was more interested in the other two threads, the German story and the American news.

I'm rating this physical book 4 stars, but I would have struggled to get this far without the group. Thank you all for being here and discussing!

I plan to take a few weeks off and start part 3 towards the end of June.

I have now caught up again to "today" June 3rd, except of course it is 1968. This was a difficult section in terms of the events, both in 1968 and also at the end of the war in Europe with the British attempting to enlighten the Germans to what exactly they had done by parading bodies through the streets and the Russians attempting to educate the Germans regarding what corruption looks like under communism. Then I think the whole book is full of hard to comprehend events as is today's news.
I still have quite aways to go before the end of Part 3.

I am up to date with my chapters a day which for May takes us up to 18th January assuming I have been reading correctly LOL

And for June I am up to the 23rd January

I am February and reading Mondays on Monday, etc.

I've begun part 3 but there's no thread yet, so I'll post here.

Part 3 (starting April 20th) opens with a section focusing on Marie and her childhood, which made me feel a lot closer to both Gesine and Marie. Then there is a section on the banker de Rosny, but I couldn't work up much interest in him. We also begin to hear about events in Mecklenburg after the war, with the Russians coming to occupy Jerichow along with the rest of East Germany.

I was glad to pick this up again after a break of several weeks - it felt like meeting up with old friends.

Rosemary wrote: "I've begun part 3 but there's no thread yet, so I'll post here.

Part 3 (starting April 20th) opens with a section focusing on Marie and her childhood, which made me feel a lot closer to both Gesi..."

Yeah, I'm hoping to get pt 3 up this week, hopefully!

I am up to February 19th and my reading is a day ahead of the actual day not sure if that is correct or if I got lost somewhere but that is how I am keeping track.

So far the story is progressing along much the same lines as previously New York Times articles, focus on Nazi Germany and the relationship with Marie & Gesine.

The bit that has caught my attention in this monthly installment is the fire and who would have wanted to cause it and why and the death of Mrs Cresspahl.....

I am still in March. March 11th today, matching Monday for my Monday. I confess that I get a bit lost sometimes in the dialogue. Whose speaking, what is the setting, where, etc, etc. I don’t dislike it and I am hoping in the end it will all come together. I was very sad for the way Gesine lost her mother.

I've got to the end of part two, and I started to enjoy it a lot more than I did part one. I got more invested in the 'past' characters with the Germany storyline taking a more concrete shape and character story arches to follow. I also felt like a lost a lot of the connection that had been built with Marie and adult Gesine in this section, but we do learn a lot about her childhood in part two and I'm guessing part 3 will move on to her adolescence and maybe learn more about Marie's father, so I am looking forward to continuing but I might take a little break before diving back in.

I wasn't so keen on the appendix, I'm not sure what it really added, I didn't feel like I learnt anything new in that section or what purpose it served.

I feel like I have gotten used to the writing style and even though I'm not 100% on what is going on or who is talking in certain parts, I'm just accepting it and moving on because sometimes the clarity comes a few days later.

I didn't feel as though the appendix added anything to my understanding. Many of the characters I had forgotten, but as a record of the ghastly fates of so many people, it was unsettling.