You'll love this one...!! A book club & more discussion

(my add links aren't working)
During the Feb 2012 Classics Toppler I'm going to be reading Ray Bradbury's influential literary science fiction novel The Martian Chronicles. It's not real long, and it's widely available in libraries, so please join us!

(Btw, when we finish reading isn't when I want to stop talking about it. If you read it later, jump in; I'll come back.)

I'm in!

The Martian Chronicles

I'm not very far into it yet since I was busy with another book.

I did notice that when he wrote this in 1946, he thought 1) by 1999 that Americans would be on an expedition to Mars and 2) all astronauts would be men. Interesting.

I've not started it yet but I probably will tonight, and will try to finish it tomorrow.

Yeah, in details like those it's pretty dated.

Ok, started. Wow, the Martian couple we meet in the second 'chapter' is pretty human, in a stereotypical way that irks the feminist in me. She's cleaning, he's reading/ working, right? And she dreams of having a kind of an affair, I guess, because the domesticity and her distracted husband are unsatisfying... is that how you read Bradbury's text?

He writes so poetically and elliptically I'm not always sure exactly what is happening....

What's interesting is that I just finished Winesburg, Ohio, another concise, poetical set of connected stories. I'll have to be very careful not to get myself confused (not about plot or characters or setting, but about style, theme, perspective kinds of things).

I'm so glad you're reading it too!

My thoughts exactly. Yes, that chapter irked me as well. Especially when the jealous husband manipulates her with guilt. I didn't understand why he would be so threatened by her having a dream. Dreams must often come true for them, and he wanted to prevent that by telling her how ridiculous she was. I hope the story goes back to them.

This is my first time reading anything by Ray Bradbury, and I am finding his descriptions are beautiful, poetic as you put it. A few times I have reread a sentence because I liked the imagery so much. On the other hand, maybe it's just me, but the dialogue and the simplemindedness of the Americans and the Martians is almost comedic. It feels in such contrast with the depth of his descriptions. I have a hunch the Martians aren't as simple as they appear.

This isn't the trip to Mars I had expected. :)

I agree - I want more. So, I guess it's time to go back and read! Thanks for your insights and I'll see you back here in a few hours, maybe.

Ok, I'm through August 2001. I'll stop there in case you're not caught up.

Boy, the Martians are sure have some interesting, and terrifying, reactions to our expeditions, eh? The second got destroyed almost by accident, the third met an absolutely horrifying fate....

But the fourth, ah. That poor Captain, torn between his conscience and his oath of service....

Interesting how, in real life, astronauts are elite, highly trained, presumably screened for intelligence and integrity, whereas Bradbury thinks they're almost as rough as '49er gold-miners or something. Especially in August 2001, he predicts that men will be reluctant to go?!

Of course, this was written pre-Sputnik. In the post-Sputnik era, almost everyone dreamed of being an astronaut, that I know of.

(I'll read something else until you say you're caught up.)

I am up to August 2002, but I won't have much time to read today until tonight. Thanks for pacing yourself with me!

When I remember when this was written it makes a little more sense. During WWII there wasn't much respect for other cultures or life in general, so I guess it was easy for people to accept that astronauts would have little respect for the Martian culture or even sorrow for the fact that an Earth disease had ended life on Mars. I was suspicious that the whole Martian extinction was a hallucination and that the Martians wanted to see how the astronauts reacted, a test that they failed. It's hard to know what is real and what is not in this book.

So was this originally published as separate stories?

What if by the end of today we both read up to August 2005? That's pg 118 in my version.

I'll do that, read to Aug. 2005.

Um, I agree that sometimes it's confusing what is real and what is not, for sure. But I do really think that the Martians are telepathic enough to set up the fake 'Home Town' that killed the third expedition, but that now they're really extinct.

I mean, I think that even without reading further.

Yes, some of the chapters were published in magazines as stories. Then (if I understand the notes in my edition correctly) the bridging pieces and the first story (and some others) were written. If you want to know more details just ask.

I'm still thinking about that assumed reluctance to explore, the presumption that just any old infantryman-type, like Biggs, can go up there. I mean, sure, in times of war we do stuff like lock up citizens of Japanese descent in Manzanar. And the tombs in Egypt were looted.

But there have always been careful archaeologists. And after WWII there was an increase in compassion and in interest in world harmony. I would've expected more people, more good people like Spender and the Captain, would have wanted to explore and emigrate.

Do you think Bradbury just disagrees with me? Or do you think he's working hard to make his point that humans are, on the whole, more like Biggs?

For that matter, is he just thinking about Americans, or all humans? In the bridge of August 2001 he does refer to 'men of Earth' and then he says 'when the United States shrinks to a misty island' - it's as if he hadn't even thought that maybe the Japanese, or the east Indians, or the Bantu, might behave differently than natives of "Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, or Montana."

I think that he could have explored the idea of other 'people of Earth' (women, Japanese, archaeologists, elite astronauts, etc.) more thoroughly and still made his point.

I'm becoming a bit less enamored of this than I expected to be. I wonder if it gained a reputation as being so amazing because it was read by a lot of people who read Literature but don't read SF. I'll want to discuss that more when we're done - I just wanted to throw out the idea now to tuck it into the backs of our minds.

One more question... you're almost a generation younger than I am. I remember when I was little that we all wanted to be astronauts. I was 6 when we landed on the moon. I don't remember seeing it on TV or anything, but I'm sure the quest and the success permeated the culture of my cousins and classmates, etc. When you were little, did kids want to grow up to be astronauts, or did they look forward to travelling to other worlds?

Oops, re my question in msg 15 about Earthmen equated with Americans, I see in Oct. 2002 he explains, briefly, his perspective on the supremacy of the US. Little does he know how enmeshed we are with international wars, still, and how we're not apart & free to pursue space as he implies.

And oh boy, in the paragraph above - "Everyone knew who the first women would be." Um, yuck?

Considering how bad the science is in this book (rain?!), I'm deciding to try to read it as a fable. Mars is a metaphor for another world - one for which Bradbury has defined the geology, climate, and other characteristics at will. Ditto Martians - heck they may as well be phantoms or minor gods.

Sorry, I'll try to shut up now and let you get a word in edgewise.

Love all your thoughts. I just got home and am eager to read! Gotta get my kids in bed first tho.

I just got to "Everyone knew who the first women would be." Is he implying what I think he is? Says in the front that he dedicated this book to his wife. So far, I'm not thinking he has the highest opinion of women. I wonder what his wife thought!

The most outrageous part was the trees growing after that rain. That solved the oxygen crisis. How convenient!

To answer your question, I don't really remember children talking about being an astronaut when they grew up. I wonder why. I never aspired to be one, but I always loved learning about the solar system and space. My son who is five loves outer space. He could tell you that people haven't been to Mars, but robots called Rovers have been. I think I need to plant the seed that he could be an astronaut, if he wanted.

It's sad that exploring space has lost is allure. Do you think so much science fiction could make reality less exciting? If there seemed to be any real mystery to discover on Mars, wouldn't we have been there by now? Last year I read Oxygen which was written in the nineties, well researched, set in 2012-2013, depicting NASA sending a team to Mars. The author said the technology is there for it to be a reality. Makes the current state of things pretty sad. I wonder if another country were to announce a plan to be first to Mars if the US would race them.

Did you really think Spender was a good person?

Well. Good questions - you're making me think hard!

I'll have to look at 'Oxygen.' I think that you've got a point about so much SF dampening enthusiasm - and also we're living with fabulous science-fictiony developments all the time. Even stuff like MP3 players was unimaginable 50-60 years ago.

I think that we know something about science are less interested in reading science-fiction with implausible science. Even quite some time ago Hal Clement is famous for having refused to write anything that couldn't be justified by science (no Faster Than Light travel, for example), and Isaac Asimov wrote a short story collection called Earth Is Room Enough. So, it's like we know we can't really do anything beyond the solar system, and the other planets don't have Little Green Men on them, so why bother?

That, and the realization that ordinary people can't get into space. The attitude - We've got hungry children on Earth, why should my taxpayer dollars send a few elite people out to other rocks?

I've heard China is building an ambitious space program... hmm.... but we do have to persuade people who still don't have jobs after the recession, you know?

Yes, re the first women. Camp followers, I think they're sometimes called.

Spender meant well. He was at the beginning of his adventure a good person. His motives to the Martians were good. Killing his crewmates, not so good. But one could argue he was driven into the kind of madness that made him sincerely believe he had to do it.

Yikes, it went from sexist to racist!

Not to get all political, but I agree. NASA cuts and other cuts are necessary. It doesn't stop me from being sad and hoping that I'll still see the day that man walks on Mars and stirs up red dust. Unless space travel becomes the latest exotic vacation spot for celebrities, I don't see the profit in it. There are much more important things going on down here. If there weren't an economic strangle going on and we did race with China to get to Mars first, I would imagine it would really unite our country.

Spender meant well, but Biggs wasn't a murderer, Spender was. My theory is that Spender realized that at the end and that's why he didn't move and the captain was able to shoot him. Biggs was ignorant and defiled a planet in ignorance. Spender was fully aware as he took lives. He meant well, but he also knew it was futile. Killing his crewmates was futile, and he did it. Which is the worse crime? (Not sure myself)

It is definitely a fable. When we are done we'll have to summarize the moral of the story. Bradbury may not be sexist or racist at all, but just trying to push our buttons and get us to think. Over 50 years later, it seems like it still works.

Oh, great thought - was Bradbury himself telling the story, or is a 'button-pushing' persona telling it... I do like books that are provocative, that make me think...

Part of me is still not happy with this reading experience, though. I hope we can finish soonish. :)

Should we try to finish today?

I'm not in love with it either. I've felt very detached from all the characters, and the science fiction has been weak.

Sure, let's go for it. Hopefully it'll all come together, or at least the ideas will, by the end.

Fable, allegory, poem, horror story, tragedy... Dunno how to describe the book. Well, it is indeed provocative. The story about Tom was impressive - and heartbreaking.

And then it was followed by the bit about people going back to Earth because of war... huh? I imagine Bradbury's making a point about loyalty to one's home? I, personally, don't see it. He and I just don't see eye-to-eye.

I finished it last night, but have no idea how many stars to give it. The story about Tom was heartbreaking and those characters felt real. I'm thinking that was the best piece of the whole book.

Let me know when you are done. I honestly don't know what to think of Ray Bradbury and why everyone likes his works.

Ok I'm done. I've not decided how I'll rate or review it.

(sorry I missed you, Judy :)

What the hey? I had a whole thing typed up about themes etc. Arg!

Ok, the thing about Bradbury is that Dandelion Wine was amazing. Most of his short story vignettes are pretty darn powerful. And if one can get past the sexism, the bad science, the weird ideas (that, for instance, people like Sam the hot-dog vendor will be typical colonists), one can see some resonate themes in here.

For example. It is true that it is wrong to disrespect other peoples' cultures, by shooting up their cities and vomiting on the floors of their community halls. It is true that the identities of some 'people' of any culture are shaped by the other people around them, and they die for trying to be 'Tom' to some and 'Lavinia' to others. It is true that many of us are vulgar (Sam the hot-dog vendor) and short-sighted (those on Earth who waged war) and racist (Sam Teece).

And it's true that there is hope, that there are people like Grandpa Quartermain and, yes, Spender, who gave not only his life but also his sanity, and, in his own way, Walter Gripp.

I think there's a lot to think about in here. Probably more so for younger people, and for the people who were reading it when it was new, but I'm sure glad we read it together. I wound up giving it 4 stars.

Oh, and some of the images will haunt me for a long time. Again, I prefer to read Bradbury's short stories, and even to approach this book as a loose-ish collection of short stories. That way I can appreciate bits like this, from 'There will come Soft Rains'- "The entire west face of the house was black, save for five places...." (I don't even want to tyupe the rest.)

One very short story that he's famous for, that isn't part of novel, that you may have read (it was in a textbook in Jr High when I was a kid) is All Summer in a Day. That's the kind of thing that makes him famous, respected, and beloved.

Hi Judy. Bye Judy :)

This was my first Buddy Read on Good Reads and I think I'll try to do more. I think I'd have been more perplexed without you, Cheryl!

I'll write a review over the weekend.

I don't think Ray Bradbury has a very high opinion of women. This irritates me enough that I will hesitate from reading more of his work. The chapter with the racist characters was (I believe) just those character and not coming from Bradbury. However, the slant toward women was so fluently throughout, it was coming from his perspective. I haven't yet read the reviews on here of the book, but I'm sure any woman who reads this will pick up on it. Some people may shrug it off as dated, but it irks me no matter when it was written. Science Fiction should be forward thinking, right? This was a pessimist view of the future where women follow men around, and men just simply aren't very bright.

I'll try to find more egalitarian SF to recommend to you. But the fact is, most of the stuff from the pulp age was sexist. And most stuff from the bra-burning age was metaphysical and weird, imo.

I also benefited from this buddy read and look forward to more in the group. :)

It's not that I can't get past the sexism, but for some reason it bugs me now more than it probably would have earlier in my life. Past few years I've had to take on being a single mom and dealing with some bad experiences with men, so I guess this hits a fresh nerve with me.

Bradbury writes delicious sentences that really created some horrific scenes in my imagination. I can't completely overlook the sexism, but I did greatly enjoy his style.

Do you think I should give Dandelion Wine or Farenheit 451 a chance?

The first, yes. The second is really quite weird.

I totally respect your pov. You're absolutely right to be annoyed at sexism and also to express frustration that 'forward-thinking' SF writers are sometimes the most obtuse of all. But in the early days of the pulp stories, Asimov et al were writing more about adventures & rockets & boy stuff.

Which reminds me, Dandelion Wine is full of boy stuff. Since you're extra sensitive right now, (understandably so), I recommend you wait a while.

I've got a bunch of Joanna Russ on my (owned) shelves - she's supposed to be a feminist - I'll try to read some of it soonish and let you know if you might like it.

I'm going to do a little digging around, too. I know there's some good SF for enlightened women out there - but none comes to mind right now. After the Toppler is over, ok? :)

Amended - light bulb - James Alan Gardner has some well-drawn female main characters. I read some of the 'Expendable' series before I joined goodreads, and need to re-read them before I can talk about them much, but another GR friend, who is a feminist, has been loving them.

This was fun, Cheryl! Please recommend away!

I've got a note to myself to do the bit of research required. When I do, I'll start another thread - I'm sure we're not the only ones interested in SF that's respectful of women.