Thursday, July 30, 2009

Gilead

Although Marilynne Robinson's Gilead had been strongly recommended to me by two people whose literary opinions I value quite highly, I now admit my initial reluctance to read it. A epistolary novel about a preacher in 1950s Iowa just didn't sound like something that would grab me, I suppose. And although the first fifty or so pages were exquisitely written and sprinkled with gorgeously constructed sentences and sentiments, I'm not entirely positive I would have made is past those first fifty meandering pages has it not been for two things: this book club, and this passage:
I'm writing this in part to tell you that if you ever wonder what you've done in your life, and everyone does wonder sooner or later, you have been God's grace to me, a miracle, something more than a miracle. You may not remember me very well at all, and it may seem to you to be no great thing to have been the good child of an old man in a shabby little town you will no doubt leave behind. If only I had the words to tell you...You're just a nice-looking boy, a bit slight, well scrubbed and well mannered. All that is fine, but it's your existence I love you for, mainly. Existence seems to me now the most remarkable thing that could ever be imagined (52-53).
As corny as it sounds, I fell in love with John Ames (and, consequently, this novel) during this moment, a moment which encapsulated John's worldview for me: there is the potential for grace in everyone, beauty and joy can be present in even the most ordinary of things, and the mere existence of a person can be miraculous. (Of course this worldview is tested later in the novel with the return of Jack Boughton, but that's a topic for discussion, I suppose.) And after a few more glittering moments like the one above, I stopped searching for a plot - though one does eventually emerge - and started reveling in the way the novel was making me feel. Gilead is perhaps the single most loving thing I have ever read. For me, this book was a source of calm during a time in my life when it was sorely needed, and I am deeply thankful to have read it.

(And for the record, I'm not just saying these things because this book was my choice. I quite sincerely mean every single sappy word.)

But with that said, I also understand that this is an incredibly challenging novel in a lot of ways. Some readers take issue with the use of religion, others with the seemingly random narrative structure, and I'm sure a great many readers called it quits before the eventual plot began to reveal itself. And although I can (and will) defend all these criticisms, I can't fault anyone for having them. Gilead is an acquired taste, and one probably needs to be in a certain frame of mind to fully appreciate it.

So, in accordance to custom, I've posted below several questions for possible discussion. I hope you all get a chance to share your thoughts at some point soon, and please feel free to add a topic/question if you feel there is something I have overlooked. After all, there's quite a lot here to discuss.

5 comments:

  1. FYI I have the next book selected. I'll put a post up about it on Sunday.

    ReplyDelete
  2. We can't bust heads like we used to. But we have our ways. One trick is to tell stories that don't go anywhere. Like the time I caught the ferry to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for m'shoe. So I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt. Which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. Gimme five bees for a quarter, you'd say. Now where was I... oh yeah. The important thing was that I had an onion tied to my belt, which was the style at the time. You couldn't get white onions, because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...

    That was pretty much my experience reading Gilead.

    I did finish the whole book, because I hoped against hope that something would eventually happen and, admittedly, because I'd feel bad slamming a book I didn't actually finish. But this thread is for anyone with the courage to admit that this book sucked. Balls. Hard. From what I've read so far, folks have loved it. I offer a dissenting opinion, and no offense to those who liked it.

    Life's been a bit tough for me lately, which is what's taken me so long to respond to this book, and I had briefly considered just 'letting it go' but I not only feel the need to contribute, but also to make sure the future generations that read this blog know that the reaction was far from unanimous. In fact, for most of the book, my mind was getting distracted from the text by things I was going to post about how bad it was. This was the first book since A Passage to India that I found myself looking away from the page at the room around me, desperate to see ANYTHING else that wasn't this story.

    In a nutshell: this was a novel about people I don't care about, in a place I don't care about in a time I really didn't care about. Three strikes, and it's out. As I said, I kept hoping something would happen, and I disagree with the others who've posted before me, I don't think anything ever does. And Marilynne is no Quentin Tarantino- if you're going to shift time, there's a right way to do it, and a wrong way that ends up being a confusing jumbled mess. If Pulp Fiction was a 10 on a 1-10 scale being right, this book was a 3 at best. Not to mention when the "reveal" happens as to what Jack did, I thought something MUST be coming after. Maybe I've been jaded growing up in the last half of the 20th Century but I literally said out loud "that's it? You've got to be f#$%ing kidding me." In fact, what really kept me reading was the possible storylines I'd made up in my head, like maybe Jack's daughter with the poor family ended up being John Ames' young uneducated wife? Nope, didn't happen. I came up with that idea on the toilet, and that's a better story than what was presented. I'm sorry for ranting, I just really did not like this book.

    In the end, maybe I was just the wrong audience for it. The religiosity definitely got in the way for me, and I did not enjoy hearing the same stories over and over and over again (your dad gave you ashy bread and it was JUST LIKE COMMUNIONS OMGZ! I get it.) I really kept hoping that John Ames would just DIE and be incapable of finishing the journal, but Marilynne even robbed me of that enjoyment.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Structure-wise, Just as a quick side note, I also noticed at some point that the book went from epistolary to journal like, to just telling the story with the weird conceit of speaking less to the son and more to "the reader". This bothered me, but is the least of many concerns.

    But I did finish it. And unlike the Virgin Suicides, which I did not enjoy reading at all but once I was done had a real sense of "wow, I'm really glad I read that, even though the experience itself was not enjoyable" the only joy I got out of this book was bitching about it here. As crazy as the language and everything is in Snow Crash, I breezed through a hundred pages much easier than I did evecn 35 pages of Gilead. At least, no matter what else happens, I know I'll never have to pick it back up again.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Wow, Kevin. Well, since we're being brutally honest, I guess the only response I can muster right now is that I'm a little offended. I guess I shouldn't take it personally since I didn't write this book, but it would be nice if we could be respectful of the literature even if we don't like it. I, for one, haven't liked everything that's been chosen for me to read, but I like and respect each of you enough to share my opinions tactfully.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ugh. I know this is impossible, but please forget what I said yesterday, and mea culpa to everyone but especially Kevin. I know it's a lame excuse, but I had a record awful day yesterday and I made the bad decision to type when I should have just closed the computer and headed off to bed. Above all, I don't want anyone to think I don't value your opinions, even if those opinions are different from mine. Obviously we won't all agree on everything, and I neither expect nor want us to. I hope this can be an open forum where everyone feels free to discuss their feelings, and I'm very sorry if I made anyone feel as if they need to bite their tongue in the future. I still believe that criticism can be handled in a way that still respects the work (especially if its a work of merit), but it probably wasn't my place to open my mouth and say that. I guess I had my literature teacher pants on yesterday, but I'll be careful to take them off when we discuss Snow Crash. (But maybe please - no mental pictures...)

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.